Human Rights and the Defense of Liberal Democracy

In recent issues of the Journal of Religious Ethics (2006, 2007), David Little has defended the contemporary regime of international human rights against what he thinks of as the relativizing influences of the genealogical “just-so” story told by Jeffrey Stout in his Democracy and Tradition (2004)....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Langlois, Anthony J. (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Wiley-Blackwell 2007
In: Journal of religious ethics
Jahr: 2007, Band: 35, Heft: 4, Seiten: 731-750
Online Zugang: Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang
Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallele Ausgabe:Nicht-Elektronisch
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In recent issues of the Journal of Religious Ethics (2006, 2007), David Little has defended the contemporary regime of international human rights against what he thinks of as the relativizing influences of the genealogical “just-so” story told by Jeffrey Stout in his Democracy and Tradition (2004). I argue that Stout is correct about just-so stories, and that Little does not go far enough in his reclamation of liberalism against Stout's “new traditionalists.” The main weaknesses of Little's approach are his insistence on the idea that human rights are to be thought of as natural rights, and that these in turn are to be thought of as self-evident and self-justifying. I argue that they are neither: they come to us via a Stoutian just-so story, and that as part of a broader reclamation of liberalism, they can continue to serve as the basis for the kind of international liberal constitutionalism that Little advocates.
ISSN:1467-9795
Enthält:Enthalten in: Journal of religious ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9795.2007.00330.x