I agree with many of the theses advanced by Darrel Moellendorf in his important book. The book covers just about every single issue in international ethics: an individualist theory of sovereignty; an essentially Rawlsian philosophical methodology; the justice of immigration and trade controls; the justice of intervention and war; and a theory of global equality of opportunity. Moellendorf proposes a world of liberal separate states (similar to my own proposal)1 but committed to a scheme of non-statist global redistribution run by a sort of international agency. He thus joins other liberal commentators who have reacted to John Rawls’ rejection of principles of global socioeconomic justice.2 As is well known, Rawls’ principles of international justice are anti-cosmopolitan, not just in the sense that worries Moellendorf, that is, of eschewing global redistribution of wealth, but also in the area of human rights, where Rawls has essentially renounced global liberalism.3 Moellendorf believes, like those other liberal critics, that Rawls is wrong and justice requires transfers of wealth from citizens in rich countries to those in poor countries.
Fernando R. Tesón
Rick Turner and the End of the Durban Moment
radical notions put forward during the Durban moment. Rob Lambert gives a typical summary of this popular interpretation, as follows: ‘The ideas of internal democracy, participation, power and methods of resistance transformed South African trade unionism
Intergenerational Democracy and the Political Epidemiology of COVID-19
. In modern mass politics involving millions of people, it is rarely the case that a purely non-political health-based decision is made. It is even rarer that a decision with no political trade-offs is even possible. Indeed, public health policies
Contested Rationalities of Time in the Theory and Practice of Work
At the beginning of the twenty-first century work has attained a new local and global quality. Localised and individualised efficiency deals are established where previously standards would have been set nationally and bargained for collectively. At the same time, work is negotiated in the context of a global labour market and global competition: the world, not nations, is the market where labour is traded and the fate of much future work sealed. Electronic communication, low transport costs and deregulated, unrestricted trade dissolved many of the boundaries that used to delimit the competition for work on the one hand, the negotiations over conditions on the other. Since the leading industrial nations have committed themselves to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the rules set out by the World Trade Organisation (WTO), it is difficult for any nation to extricate itself from the logic of the competitive global market. ‘At a world level’, as Hans-Peter Martin and Harald Schumann (1997: 7) point out, ‘more than 40,000 transnational corporations of varying shapes and sizes play off their own employees (as well as different nation states) against one another.’ There are always workers somewhere else able and willing to do the job cheaper than North Americans or North/West Europeans.
Few dispute the notion that the rapid development of industrialising economies in Asia and Latin America, new information technologies, liberalisation of trade, and global financial markets have contributed to the emergence of a truly global economy in the past ten years. Neither do they dispute that national economies almost everywhere in the world have become increasingly less ‘national’. Most countries’ foreign trade has increased, and in many, foreign investment and payment on foreign debt have become more prevalent than in the past. Labour movements also appear to be increasing, especially the movement of highly skilled labour. But does this mean that nation-states have decreased influence over the definition of economic and social life? Does globalisation imply the demise of the nation-state?
The nature of health care, a multifaceted system of reimbursements, subsidies, levels of care, and trade-offs between economics, values and social goods, makes it both a problematic area of policy and critical to the well-being of society. In the United States, provision of health care is not a right as in some countries, but occurs as a function of a complex set of cross-subsidized mechanisms that, according to some analysts, exclude from coverage those who may be in the most need of it. Accordingly, this article examines some of the issues involved in making decisions on how to justly expand health insurance.
Saskia van Genugten
In 2009, the renowned Italian author Claudio Magris received the
Frankfurter Book Trade Peace Prize. As an engaged political writer,
his acceptance speech inescapably entailed a message. He called
upon Europe to be cautious. He warned against political populism. He
emphasized the existence of “invisible barriers” between immigrants
and natives in the major European cities. He called upon his country
of origin in particular, stating that, “as an Italian patriot,” he hoped
that his country would “not again be seen as a pioneer for the wrong
reasons: after all we invented fascism in Europe."
Globalism makes news every day, yet world trade is hardly greater today than 30 years ago; it is the movement of capital that is far greater now, thanks to technology. The irresistible force for one world is not the United Nations, ever an arena for the contest of national interests, but money, particularly the United States dollar, which is an unofficial world currency, often with more influence than U.S. foreign policy. One of the results of monetary globalism is to make national reserve and international banks all the more important.
The Greek Course of International Women's Day, 1924–2010
This article examines the history of International Women's Day (IWD) in Greece from its first celebration in 1924 until 2010. IWD was introduced in Greece by the KKE (Communist Party of Greece) and remained a communist ritual for fifty years. After the fall of the military dictatorship in 1974, the anniversary gradually acquired a wide acceptance and has since been adopted by feminist groups and organizations, trade unions, and parties from the entire political spectrum. The article follows the transformations of the celebration, explores its nebulous genealogy and the myths about its origins, and discusses its impressive ability to survive in diverse socio-political contexts.
Lucio Baccaro and Marco Simoni
After months of intense debate, the referendum on Article 18 of the
Workers’ Statute was held on 15–16 June 2003. The aim of the referendum
was to extend to all workers, independent of the size of the
firm, so-called real protection, that is, the right to reinstatement in case
of unjustified dismissal.1 The result was clear once the polls were
closed and even before the votes were counted. Only 25.7 percent of
eligible voters took part, a significant amount less than the required 50
percent quorum. It meant that the 10 million votes (87.4 percent of voters)
in favor of extending Article 18 had no legislative impact.2 The fact
that the vote was not validated could lead to the conclusion that the
event was insignificant. However, it provides an opportunity to look at
the dynamics between trade unions and politics in recent years, especially
with respect to the debates over labor market flexibility and legislative
proposals of the center-right government. Moreover, the
referendum contributed both to the accentuation of divisions between
the major trade union confederations (CGIL, CISL, and UIL) during the
campaign and then to their attenuation following the vote. Finally, the
referendum, perhaps, brought to a conclusion a two-year struggle for
the representation of labor. It strengthened the traditional ruling group
of the Ulivo and Communist Refoundation while weakening that of
Sergio Cofferati, the spiritual leader of the wider left extending from
the Margherita to the No Global and girotondi movements.