In this article, I examine the view that there is a human right to democracy, and consider why we should regard this issue as decisive in solving the problems of foreign interference in the protection of human rights....In this article, I examine the view that there is a human right to democracy, and consider why we should regard this issue as decisive in solving the problems of foreign interference in the protection of human rights. I also note that there has been almost no discussion about the holder of the human right to democracy, that is, who is to hold this right. After comparing John Rawls＇ argument against the human right to democracy and Thomas Christiano＇s argument for it and showing similarities and critical differences among their arguments, I insist that we ought to be sensitive when proclaiming that democracy--be it a minimally egalitarian democracy or a more exacting one--is a universal value. We have sufficient cause to consider carefully not only the political circumstances but also the political infrastructure of the country before we proceed to an even limited intervention in the name of the protection of a human right to democracy. If the human right to democracy is not just a right to vote, but a right to the whole process of establishment and enjoyment of democracy, it should be understood as a group right that pertains to a human population that legitimately claims political self-determination. Any human population that insists on the democratic self-determination of their political will is both able and entitled to establish and administer democratic institutions, regardless of the diversity of its ascribed or cultural characteristics. The establishment of such a group with a firm political identity should be considered as the political infrastructure to claim and exercise the human right to democracy.展开更多
Two prevailing ＂traditional＂ notions of human rights also cause the current skeptical mood concerning human rights. Either human rights are seen in a morally exaggerated way as ＂trump cards＂ in political negotiati...Two prevailing ＂traditional＂ notions of human rights also cause the current skeptical mood concerning human rights. Either human rights are seen in a morally exaggerated way as ＂trump cards＂ in political negotiations, or they are pruned back to a purely juridical level, absorbed into legal instances that accord them at most the rank of constitutional rights. In contrast to this, the author defends a political conception of human rights that overcomes the problems besetting both conceptions, but without having to sacrifice their critical, normative content or a realistic role for human rights in international politics. A political conception of human rights assumes, the author argues firstly, that human rights grow out of concrete experiences of injustice and are the product of political struggles. Human rights are, secondly, placeholders for the public thematization of oppression, humiliation, marginalization, and despotism. A third characteristic feature of a political conception of human rights is that human rights raise claims to a rule system that permits access to the freedoms and resources formulated by human rights. And finally, the obligations imposed by human rights are not duties of assistance but institutional duties to realize the conditions for exercising human rights. Human rights, the author concludes, can be ＂used＂ by any person to criticize existing ordering structures and can be activated for political purposes directed to the common good.展开更多
文摘In this article, I examine the view that there is a human right to democracy, and consider why we should regard this issue as decisive in solving the problems of foreign interference in the protection of human rights. I also note that there has been almost no discussion about the holder of the human right to democracy, that is, who is to hold this right. After comparing John Rawls＇ argument against the human right to democracy and Thomas Christiano＇s argument for it and showing similarities and critical differences among their arguments, I insist that we ought to be sensitive when proclaiming that democracy--be it a minimally egalitarian democracy or a more exacting one--is a universal value. We have sufficient cause to consider carefully not only the political circumstances but also the political infrastructure of the country before we proceed to an even limited intervention in the name of the protection of a human right to democracy. If the human right to democracy is not just a right to vote, but a right to the whole process of establishment and enjoyment of democracy, it should be understood as a group right that pertains to a human population that legitimately claims political self-determination. Any human population that insists on the democratic self-determination of their political will is both able and entitled to establish and administer democratic institutions, regardless of the diversity of its ascribed or cultural characteristics. The establishment of such a group with a firm political identity should be considered as the political infrastructure to claim and exercise the human right to democracy.
文摘Two prevailing ＂traditional＂ notions of human rights also cause the current skeptical mood concerning human rights. Either human rights are seen in a morally exaggerated way as ＂trump cards＂ in political negotiations, or they are pruned back to a purely juridical level, absorbed into legal instances that accord them at most the rank of constitutional rights. In contrast to this, the author defends a political conception of human rights that overcomes the problems besetting both conceptions, but without having to sacrifice their critical, normative content or a realistic role for human rights in international politics. A political conception of human rights assumes, the author argues firstly, that human rights grow out of concrete experiences of injustice and are the product of political struggles. Human rights are, secondly, placeholders for the public thematization of oppression, humiliation, marginalization, and despotism. A third characteristic feature of a political conception of human rights is that human rights raise claims to a rule system that permits access to the freedoms and resources formulated by human rights. And finally, the obligations imposed by human rights are not duties of assistance but institutional duties to realize the conditions for exercising human rights. Human rights, the author concludes, can be ＂used＂ by any person to criticize existing ordering structures and can be activated for political purposes directed to the common good.
