Emancipatory Idealism: A Utopian Focal Goal of International Law

Mawar, Deepak

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-64789-6_2

Deepak Mawar³

Part of the book series: Philosophy, Public Policy, and Transnational Law ((PPPTL))

405 Accesses

Abstract

The utopian concept, emancipatory idealism is introduced in this chapter. Emancipatory idealists argue that the protection of individuals and groups from modes of oppression, such as war or crimes against humanity, is of paramount importance for the sake of civilisational development, be it on a technological or societal level. Ultimately, emancipatory idealism is an umbrella concept that provides a justification as to why other idealist concepts such as human rights and human dignity should be sought after. Using the works of Hegel, Critical Theorists, Phillip Allot and Anne Peters the substance of emancipatory idealism is explored in order to suggest that when the central aims of the concepts have been sought after, the international legal system has undergone some of its most positive developments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 89.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 119.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 119.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
E.H. Carr, Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations, (1964), 11.
2.
Ibid., at 11–12.
3.
Ibid., at 12.
4.
Ibid., at 11.
5.
P. Capps, Human Dignity and the Foundations of International Law, (2009), 77.
6.
Ibid., at 77–78.
7.
Ibid., at 78.
8.
Ibid.
9.
Ibid., at 80.
10.
N. Duxbury, Patterns of American Jurisprudence, (1995), 174.
11.
Capps, supra note 5, at 81.
12.
Ibid., 81. However to be more specific this argument is made in H Lasswell’s introduction to M. McDougal and F. Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order: The Legal Regulation of International Coercion, (1961).
13.
H. Lasswell and M. McDougal, ‘Criteria for a Theory about Law’ (1970–71) 44 S. Cal. L. Rev. 362, at 374.
14.
Ibid., at 374–375.
15.
Capps, supra note 5, at 82.
16.
O. Schacter, ‘Human Dignity as a Normative Concept’, (October 1983) 77.4 American Journal of International Law 848, at 849.
17.
P. Singer, Hegel: A Very Short Introduction, (2001), 12.
18.
Ibid., at 15.
19.
Rosenkranz & Hall. ‘Hegel’s Philosophy of History’, (October 1872) 6:4 The Journal of Speculative Philosophy 340, at 341.
20.
Ibid., at 341.
21.
Ibid., at 344.
22.
Ibid., at 344.
23.
S. Dellavalle, ‘The Plurality of States and the World Order of Reason: On Hegel’s Understanding of International Law and Relations’, in N. Bhuta, A. Pagden & B. Straumann (eds.), System, Order and International Law: The Early History of International Legal Thought from Machiavelli to Hegel, (2017), at 353.
24.
Ibid.
25.
Ibid., 352. See also Hermann Heller, Hegel und der nationale Machtstaatsgedanke in Deutschland (1921); Friedrich Meinecke, Weltbürgertum und Nationalstaat, (1922), 278.
26.
S. Avineri, Hegel’s Theory of the Modern State, (2003), 178.
27.
G.W.F. Hegel, Philosophy of Right, trans. S.W Dyde, (2001), at 136, para 156.
28.
H. Jaeger, ‘Hegel’s Reluctant Realism and the Transnationalism of Civil Society’, (2002) 28 Review of International Studies 497, at 502.
29.
Hegel, supra note 27, at 136, para 157.
30.
Jaeger, supra note 28, at 502.
31.
Hegel, supra note 27, at 194–195, para 257.
32.
Ibid., 195, at para 258.
33.
T. Brooks, ‘Between Statism and Cosmopolitanism: Hegel and the Possibility of Global Justice, in A. Buchwater (ed.), Hegel and Global Justice, (2012), at 66.
34.
Hegel, supra note 27, at 265.
35.
S.V. Hicks, International Law and the Possibility of Just World Order, (1999), 8.
36.
Ibid., at 8.
37.
Ibid., at 9. See also R. Schacht, ‘Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, and the Future of Self-Alienation’, (April, 1991) 28.2 American Philosophy Quarterly 125, 131–132.
38.
Dellavalle, supra note 23, at 356.
39.
Ibid., at 355.
40.
G.W.F. Hegel, ‘Vorlesungen über Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft. Heidelberg 1817/18. Nachgeschrieben von P. Wannenmann’, in Claudia Becker et al. (eds.), Vorlesungen: Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte, vol. 1 (1983), 254; trans. G.W.F. Hegel, Lectures on Natural Right and Political Science, trans. J. Michael Steward and Peter C. Hodgson (1995).
41.
Dellavalle, supra note 23, at 356.
42.
Hicks, supra note 35 at 18. See also S. Avineri, Hegel’s Theory of the Modern State, (2003), 194–207.
43.
Ibid., at 16. See also A.A. Wood, Hegel’s Ethical Thought, (1990), 204.
44.
R. Fine, ‘Contra Leviathan, Hegel’s Contribution to Cosmopolitan Critique’, in A. Buchwater(ed.), Hegel and Global Justice, (2012), at 50.
45.
Hicks, supra note 35, at 16.
46.
To analyse the turn of several prominent Critical Theorist to a more negative approach social philosophy see S. Brincat, ‘On the Methods of Critical Theory: Advancing the Project of Emancipation beyond the Early Frankfurt School’, at 219: ‘While the early work of the Frankfurt School (FS) had expressed considerable hope for the eventual emancipation of humankind, the historical experiences of the defeat of the working class in Europe, the deformation of the Soviet Union, the rise of fascism, and the growth of the Western culture industry are all believed to have contributed to a brooding pessimism that ultimately culminated in a turn to religious metaphysics as a possible locus of negation (Horkheimer) or a retreat into aesthetics (Adorno). If one were to read isolated passages from the Adorno’s Minima Moralia, Horkheimer’s late essays, or even the whole text of the Dialectic of Enlightenment, one could be forgiven for assuming that society was perched on the edge of a precipice; like the sword of Damocles, hanging ever so precariously above society was the threat of totalitarian decay that seemed nigh inevitable.’
47.
L. Corchia, ‘The Frankfurt School and the Young Habermas: Traces of an Intellectual Path (1956–1964)’ (2015) 15.2 Journal of Classical Sociology 191, at 192.
48.
D. Kennedy, ‘Critical Theory, Structuralism and Contemporary Legal Scholarship’, (1985–1986) 21.2 New England Law Review 209, at 211.
49.
Ibid.
50.
Max Horkheimer, ‘On the Concept of Philosophy’, in W. Schirmacher (ed.), German 20th Century Philosophy: The Frankfurt School, (2000), at 7. See also S. Brincat, ‘On the Methods of Critical Theory: Advancing the Project of Emancipation Beyond the Early Frankfurt School’, (2011) 26.2 International Relations 218, at 220.
51.
S. Brincat, ‘On the Methods of Critical Theory: Advancing the Project of Emancipation Beyond the Early Frankfurt School’, (2011) 26.2 International Relations 218, at 221.
52.
M. Horkheimer, ‘The Latest Attack on Metaphysics’, in Critical Theory: Selected Essays, (1972), at 161–162.
53.
J.G. Finlayson, ‘Adorno on the Ethical and Ineffable’, (2002) 10.1 European Journal of Philosophy 1, at 2.
54.
C. Kaltofen, ‘Engaging Adorno: Critical Security Studies After Emancipation’, (2013) 44.1 Security Dialogue 37, at 43.
55.
Ibid.
56.
T.W. Adorno, Probleme der Moralphilosophie, (1963), 260.
57.
J. Bayliss, S. Smith, & P. Owens, Globalisation of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, (2011), 141.
58.
Ibid., at 141.
59.
Ibid.
60.
A. Linklater, ‘The Question of the Next Stage in International Relations Theory: A Critical-Theoretical Point of View’, (March 1992) 21 Millennium: Journal of International Studies 77, at 79.
61.
J. Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of Society, (1979), chapters 3–4.
62.
Linklater, supra note 60, at 89.
63.
Ibid., at 89.
64.
Ibid., at 90.
65.
Ibid., at 93.
66.
Ibid., at 93.
67.
Ibid., at 93.
68.
See E.T. Achiume, ‘Putting Racial Equality into the Global Human Rights Agenda’, (2018) 15 International Journal on Human Rights 141 & W.F. Felice, ‘The UN Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination’, (2002) 24.1 Human Rights Quarterly 205. These texts detail the impact of discrimination to the various groups in focus, demonstrating how such groups are restricted from a stable political, economic and social environment.
69.
C. Bob, ‘“Dalit Rights Are Human Rights”: Caste Discrimination, International Activism, and the Construction of a New Human Rights Issue’, (2007) 29 Human Rights Quarterly 167, at 173.
70.
See National Human Rights Commission, Central and State Authorities Urged to Prevent Atrocities against SCs: NHRC Releases Report on Atrocities Against SCs, available at http://www.nhrc.nic.in/disparchive.asp?fno=837 (2004).
71.
Bob, supra note 69, at 169.
72.
J. Spring, The Universal Right to Education: Justification, Definition, and Guidelines, (2000), 2.
73.
Ibid., at 1.
74.
P. Allott, Eunomia: A New Order for a New World, (2001), 304, para16.18.
75.
Ibid., at 303, para16.16.
76.
Ibid.
77.
Ibid.
78.
Ibid., at 254, para14.1.
79.
Ibid., 254–255, at para14.3.
80.
I. Scobbie, ‘Slouching Towards the Holy City: Some Weeds for Phillip Allott’, (2005) 16.2 EJIL 299, at 300.
81.
P. Allott, The Health of Nations: The Society and Law Beyond the State, (2002), 33, para1.62.
82.
Allott, supra note 74, at 265, para15.13.
83.
Ibid.¸ at 254, para14.1.
84.
Ibid., at 303, para16.17.
85.
Ibid., at 304, para16.18.
86.
Ibid., at 387, para18.30.
87.
Ibid.
88.
A. Peters, ‘Humanity as the A and Ω of Sovereignty’, (2009) 20.3 EJIL 513, at 514.
89.
Ibid.
90.
A. Peters, ‘The Merits of Global Constitutionalism’, (2009) 16 Ind. J. Global Legal Studies 397, at 399. See also, P. Allott, ‘Intergovernmental Societies and the Idea of Constitutionalism’, in Jean-Marc Coicaud & Veijo Heiskanen (eds.), The Legitimacy of International Organisations, (2001), at 92.
91.
P. Weil, ‘Towards Relative Normativity in International Law?’ (1983) 77.3 The American Journal of International Law 413, at 418. See also R. Ago, ‘Pluralism and the Origins of the International Community’, (1977) 3 Italian Yearbook of International Law 3; R. Ago, ‘The First International Communities in the Mediterranean World’, (1982) 53 British Yearbook of International Law 213; P. Weil, ‘Le Judaïsme et le développement du droit international’, (1975) 151 Recueil de Cours 253.
92.
Ibid.
93.
Ibid., at 419.
94.
SS Lotus case (France v. Turkey), PCIJ Rep Series A No 10, at 18.
95.
Weil, supra note 91, at 419.
96.
Ibid., at 418–419.
97.
A.V. Verdross, ‘On the Concept of International Law’, (1949) 43.3 American Journal of International Law 435, at 437.
98.
Ibid., at 439.
99.
Ibid.
100.
Ibid.
101.
Ibid., at 436.
102.
L. Oppenheim, ‘The Science of International Law: Its Task and Method’, (1908) 2.2 American Journal of International Law 313, at 316. See also B. Kingsbury, ‘Legal Positivism as Normative Politics: International Society, Balance and Power’, (2002) 13 EJIL 401, at 402.
103.
A. Carty, ‘Why Theory? The Implications for International Law Teaching’, in P. Allott, A. Carty, M. Koskenniemi, & C. Warbrick (eds.), Theory and International Law: An Introduction, (1991) 75, at 80.
104.
L. Oppenheim, International Law, vol. 1 (1st ed., 1905), 73–75. See also Kingsbury, supra note 94, at 407.
105.
Kingsbury, supra note 102, at 409.
106.
Ibid., at 409.
107.
Ibid. See also L. Oppenheim, International Law, vol.1 (2nd ed. 1911), 93.
108.
Ibid., at 217.
109.
Oppenheim, supra note 104, at 34.
110.
Ibid.
111.
Ibid., at 269.
112.
Ibid.
113.
I. Scobbie, ‘A View of Delft: Some Thought About Thinking About International Law’, in M. Evans (ed.), International Law, (2018), at 75.
114.
Allott, supra note 74, at 243, para13.105.
115.
Ibid.¸ at 247, para13.105(13).
116.
A. Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, (1998), 137.
117.
Ibid., at 137–138.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Dickson Poon School of Law, King’s College London, London, UK
Deepak Mawar

Authors

Deepak Mawar
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deepak Mawar .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mawar, D. (2021). Emancipatory Idealism: A Utopian Focal Goal of International Law. In: States Undermining International Law. Philosophy, Public Policy, and Transnational Law. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64789-6_2

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64789-6_2
Published: 21 January 2021
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-64788-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-64789-6
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics