The equivalent logic of torture and terrorism: The legal regulation of moral monstrosity

Abstract
Paradoxically, justifications for State torture and non-State terrorism are strikingly similar, often drawing on the same underlying logic, reasoning, ethics, politics, ideology and philosophy. This chapter explores the range of claims, justifications and excuses which have been invoked to support arguments for torture and terrorism, including ideas about the defence of human rights, asymmetry of power, the simultaneous antiquity and malleability of the law, and exceptional doctrines such as 'necessity'. While the absolute prohibition of torture in international law is appropriate and ought to be defended, by contrast there are considerable inadequacies in the legal regulation of terrorism, resulting in the complicity of international law in repressing legitimate struggles against political oppression.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,357
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Only published papers are available at libraries
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA

    No citations found.

    Similar books and articles
    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2009-01-28

    Total downloads

    24 ( #60,979 of 1,088,427 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #69,601 of 1,088,427 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.