Law and Ethics of Human Rights 2 (1):54-87 (2008)
|Abstract||This paper presents the metaphysics of liberal rights reasoning on one hand and that of demographic reasoning on the other, as exemplifying two worldviews that both compete and complement each other in the contemporary German public debate on demographic decline. First, this essay outlines the way in which liberal theorists of various outlooks, perfectionist and neutralist alike, assume that a wide range of rights serves not only the interests of those individuals who possess them, but that it constitutes the foundations of a just and stable political order in general and therefore is to the advantage of everyone. Second, the essay explains how demographic reasoning questions the assumption of harmony shared by the liberal approaches. Third, it provides an impression of the way in which demographic arguments have been deployed in the public sphere in Germany in the last few years. These arguments associate the autonomy of women with the demise of Germany. They claim that by encouraging women to pursue self-realization as self-interested individuals, the modern secular ethos of Germany as a democratic welfare society may be self-destructive in the long run, since it leads to sub-replacement fertility. Finally, the essay stresses that liberal and demographic perspectives share a “blindness” of historical events. In response, the conclusion brings history back in, by historicizing both demographic reasoning and demographic developments in Germany, with the aim of defusing some of the anxieties that may have been aroused by the current debate.|
|Keywords||demography liberal rights Germany Women's rights fertility history|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gila Stopler (2008). A Feminist Perspective on Natality Policies in Multicultural Societies. Law and Ethics of Human Rights 2 (1):1-40.
Erol Kuyurtar (2007). Are Cultural Group Rights Against Individual Rights? The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 3:51-59.
Zhidas Daskalovski (2002). Neutrality, Liberal Nation Building and Minority Cultural Rights. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 5 (3):27-50.
Larry May (1986). Corporate Property Rights. Journal of Business Ethics 5 (3):225 - 232.
Michael J. Monahan (2010). Liberalism and the Challenge of Race. Social Theory and Practice 36 (4):689-704.
Donald Nikkel, Rethinking Restrictions: A Liberal Approach to Minority Rights and Aboriginal Education.
Yaacov Ben-Shemesh (2008). Immigration Rights and the Demographic Consideration. Law and Ethics of Human Rights 2 (1):1-34.
Saladin Meckled-Garcia (2004). International Justice, Human Rights and Neutrality. Res Publica 10 (2).
Kurt von Schuschnigg (1958). The Church, Germany, and the Natural Law. Thought 33 (3):339-360.
Pilhong Hwang (2003). Liberal Pornographic Rights. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2):225-240.
Lisa Schwartzman (1999). Liberal Rights Theory and Social Inequality: A Feminist Critique. Hypatia 14 (2):26-47.
Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2012). The Political Rights of Anti-Liberal-Democratic Groups. Law and Philosophy 31 (3):269-297.
Filiz Kartal (2006). The Rights-Bearing Citizen as a Problematic Actor of Liberal Politics. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 2:159-163.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads2 ( #245,904 of 722,778 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?