Michael Ignatieff draws on his extensive experience as a writer and commentator on world affairs to present a penetrating account of the successes, failures, and prospects of the human rights revolution. Since the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, this revolution has brought the world moral progress and broken the nation-state's monopoly on the conduct of international affairs. But it has also faced challenges. Ignatieff argues that human rights activists have rightly drawn criticism from Asia, (...) the Islamic world, and within the West itself for being overambitious and unwilling to accept limits. It is now time, he writes, for activists to embrace a more modest agenda and to reestablish the balance between the rights of states and the rights of citizens.Ignatieff begins by examining the politics of human rights, assessing when it is appropriate to use the fact of human rights abuse to justify intervention in other countries. He then explores the ideas that underpin human rights, warning that human rights must not become an idolatry. In the spirit of Isaiah Berlin, he argues that human rights can command universal assent only if they are designed to protect and enhance the capacity of individuals to lead the lives they wish. By embracing this approach and recognizing that state sovereignty is the best guarantee against chaos, Ignatieff concludes, Western nations will have a better chance of extending the real progress of the past fifty years. Throughout, Ignatieff balances idealism with a sure sense of practical reality earned from his years of travel in zones of war and political turmoil around the globe.Based on the Tanner Lectures that Ignatieff delivered at Princeton University's Center for Human Values in 2000, the book includes two chapters by Ignatieff, an introduction by Amy Gutmann, comments by four leading scholars--K. Anthony Appiah, David A. Hollinger, Thomas W. Laqueur, and Diane F. Orentlicher--and a response by Ignatieff. (shrink)

"These essays make a splendid book. Ignatieff's lectures are engaging and vigorous; they also combine some rather striking ideas with savvy perceptions about actual domestic and international politics.

This thought provoking book uncovers a crisis in the political imagination, a wide-spread failure to provide the passionate sense of community "in which our need for belonging can be met." Seeking the answers to fundamental questions, Michael Ignatieff writes vividly both about ideas and about the people who tried to live by them—from Augustine to Bosch, from Rosseau to Simone Weil. Incisive and moving, The Needs of Strangers returns philosophy to its proper place, as a guide to the art of (...) being human. (shrink)

Must we fight terrorism with terror and torture with torture? Must we sacrifice civil liberty to protect public safety?In the age of terrorism Michael Ignatieff argues that we must not shrink from the use of violence. But its use - in a liberal democracy - must be measured. And we must not fool ourselves that whatever we do in the name of freedom and democracy is good. We may need to kill to fight the greater evil of terrorism, but we (...) must never pretend that doing so is anything better than a lesser evil.In making this case, Ignatieff traces the modern history of terrorism and counter-terrorism, from the nihilists of Czarist Russia and the militias of Weimar Germany to the IRA and the unprecedented menace of Al Qaeda. He shows how the most potent response to terror has been force, decisive and direct, yet restrained. The public scrutiny and political ethics that motivate restraint also give democracy its strongest weapon: the moral power to endure when vengeance and hatred are spent. (shrink)

Wealth and Virtue reassesses the remarkable contribution of the Scottish Enlightenment to the formation of modern economics and to theories of capitalism. Its unique range indicates the scope of the Scottish intellectual achievement of the eighteenth century and explores the process by which the boundaries between economic thought, jurisprudence, moral philosophy and theoretical history came to be established. Dealing not only with major figures like Hume and Smith, there are also studies of lesser known thinkers like Andrew Fletcher, Gershom Carmichael, (...) Lord Kames and John Millar as well as of Locke in the light of eighteenth century social theory, the intellectual culture of the University of Edinburgh in the middle of the eighteenth century and of the performance of the Scottish economy on the eve of the publication of the Wealth of Nations. While the scholarly emphasis is on the rigorous historical reconstruction of both theory and context, Wealth and Virtue directly addresses itself to modern political theorists and economists and throws light on a number of major focal points of controversy in legal and political philosophy. (shrink)

"Cover " -- "Title Page " -- "Copyright " -- "Dedication" -- "Contents" -- "Introduction: Moral Globalization and Its Discontents" -- "1. Jackson Heights, New York: Diversity Plaza" -- "2. Los Angeles: The Moral Operating Systems of Global Cities" -- "3. Rio de Janeiro: Order, Corruption, and Public Trust" -- "4. Bosnia: War and Reconciliation" -- "5. Myanmar: The Politics of Moral Narrative" -- "6. Fukushima: Resilience and the Unimaginable" -- "7. South Africa: After the Rainbow" -- "Conclusion: Human Rights, (...) Global Ethics, and the Ordinary Virtues" -- "Notes" -- "Acknowledgments. (shrink)

Isaiah Berlin refused to write an autobiography, but he agreed to talk about himself - and so for ten years, he allowed Michael Ignatieff to interview him. Isaiah Berlin (1909-97) was one of the greatest and most humane of modern philosophers; historian of the Russian intellgentisia biographer of Marx, pioneering scholar of the Romantic movement and defender of the liberal idea of freedom. His own life was caught up in the most powerful currents of the century. The son of a (...) Riga timber merchant, he witnessed the Russian Revolution, was plunged into suburban school life and the ferment of 1930s Oxford; he became part of the British intellectual establishment During the war, he as at the heart of Anglo-American diplomacy in Washington; afterwards in Moscow he saw the grim despair of Stalinism. The book is full of memorable meetings - with Virginia Woolf and Sigmund Freud, with Churchill, with Boris Pasternak and Anna Akhmatova. Yet Ignatieff is not afraid to delve into Berlin's conflicts: his jewish idealism, his deep aspirations. This is a work of great subtelty and penetration, exhilarating and intimate, powerful and profound. (shrink)

“Reimagining a global ethic” is a project worthy of Andrew Carnegie and of the Carnegie Council's upcoming commemoration of his founding gift in 1914. As a collaborative research project stretching forward over the next three years, it ought to be integrative and reconciliatory: that is, it must try to understand the globalization of ethics that has accompanied the globalization of commerce and communications and to figure out what ethical values human beings share across all our differences of race, religion, ethnicity, (...) national identity, and material wealth. When human beings do disagree morally, the search for a global ethic becomes an attempt to elucidate by analysis what exactly people are disagreeing about, so that, after arguing out our differences, we can either agree to disagree or work together to find common ground. Finding common ground on large ethical matters and understanding more deeply why, in some instances, we remain at odds with each other is worthwhile in itself, but it might also further Andrew Carnegie's original goal in founding the Council, which was to reduce the amount of conflict and violence in the world. (shrink)

Ignatieff beschrijft de betekenis van het religieuze begrip afgoderij voor een seculiere humanist. Hij omschrijft het begrip afgoderij als metafoor, stelt de vraag op welke wijze de metafoor van de afgoderij in de seculiere maatschappij voortleeft, en verbindt het begrip afgoderij aan het begrip dat mensen zichzelf vereren.

De totalitaire machten van de twintigste eeuw wilden zich meester maken van de eeuwige nagedachtenis. Daarom moest zelfs de herinnering aan de Sowjet-terreur en aan de genocide van Nazi-Duitsland worden uitgewist. De dichters waren de enigen, die zich hiertegen met succes hebben weten te verzetten. In Rusland was het Nadjezda Mandelstam die het verboden oeuvre van haar omgebrachte man Osip uit het hoofd leerde en daarmee bewaarde en hetzelfde deden Lidya Tsaiowskaja en Anna Achmatowa met hun eigen werken. De heldhaftige (...) herinnering heeft een hoge prijs gevraagd, maar uiteindelijk heeft de poëzie de macht van de staatsterreur overwonnen. (shrink)

‘De popularisering van de hoge cultuur is tegenwoordig de rechtvaardiging van de cultuur als zodanig. Als iets goed is, als iets nobel is, moet het gedeeld worden, en wel zo breed mogelijk. Natuurlijk is de democratisering van de hoge humanistische cultuur in een kapitalistische beschaving problematisch. [...]Toch is het onzin om te veronderstellen dat we een verhevener en humanistischer publieke cultuur zouden hebben als we niet meer zouden proberen de toegang tot ons erfgoed te verbreden. Een democratische toegang tot de (...) humanistische cultuur lijkt hoe dan ook een goede zaak, ook als we niet zeker weten tot op welke hoogte deze toegang de geest verheft.’. (shrink)

Loven is het verheerlijken en aanbidden van wat ons bevattingsvermogen en begrip te boven gaat. Dat maakt het een religieuze aangelegenheid: het voorwerp van lof is transcendent, blijvend en troostrijk. Wanneer het over menselijke, imperfecte zaken gaat, zoals de politiek, weten we dat we lof moeten behoeden voor afgoderij. Daarom spreken we in die context in plaats van aanbidding over loven als begrensde rechtvaardiging, als een rationele afweging. In de politiek klinken geen lofzangen. De taal van de politiek moet de (...) spreektaal van het volk zijn over het hier en nu, de echte wereld van de mogelijkheden, niet het transcendente hiernamaals. Het is een menselijke wereld waar we vat op hebben, waar we elkaar in de ogen kunnen zien, vanuit rationele overwegingen waardering kunnen toekennen en onthouden, in plaats van op onze knieën neer te vallen en eer te betonen aan een rechtvaardigheid en genade die ons begrip te boven gaat. Politiek is een realistische ontgoocheling voor en door het volk en dat is precies wat haar zo waardevol maakt. (shrink)

Ignatieff reageert op het essay 'Een tijd van wangeloof' van Nicola Chiaromonte en ziet de hedendaagse cultuur in het licht van een optimistisch gestemd liberalisme. Volgens hem is er geen maat meer voor wat goed is, bestaat er alleen nog maar een maat voor het kwaad. Wreedheid ziet hij als het grootste kwaad en de mensenrechten zijn nodig om ons tegen deze wreedheid te beschermen.

With the 2003 invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq, the most controversial question in world politics fast became whether the United States stands within the order of international law or outside it. Does America still play by the rules it helped create? American Exceptionalism and Human Rights addresses this question as it applies to U.S. behavior in relation to international human rights. With essays by eleven leading experts in such fields as international relations and international law, it seeks to show (...) and explain how America's approach to human rights differs from that of most other Western nations. In his introduction, Michael Ignatieff identifies three main types of exceptionalism: exemptionalism ; double standards ; and legal isolationism. The contributors use Ignatieff's essay as a jumping-off point to discuss specific types of exceptionalism--America's approach to capital punishment and to free speech, for example--or to explore the social, cultural, and institutional roots of exceptionalism.These essays--most of which appear in print here for the first time, and all of which have been revised or updated since being presented in a year-long lecture series on American exceptionalism at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government--are by Stanley Hoffmann, Paul Kahn, Harold Koh, Frank Michelman, Andrew Moravcsik, John Ruggie, Frederick Schauer, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Carol Steiker, and Cass Sunstein. (shrink)