Papers by Anna Moltchanova
Springer eBooks, 2009
In the previous chapter, I defined a nation as a group of people whose members self-identify with... more In the previous chapter, I defined a nation as a group of people whose members self-identify with a political culture of a certain kind. This political culture is related to the group’s shared goal of maintaining or acquiring collective agency that would enable it to control its political future. I also established that nations have the capacity of being free in relation to other similar agents and thus of holding a primary moral right. The self-identification component in my definition of nationhood is designed to exclude vacuous political cultures in transitional or oppressive societies, but it is these societies that most need claims to self-determination on their territory to be regulated.
The Journal of Value Inquiry, 2015
Many liberal democracies are re-evaluating their commitment to multiculturalism. It was pronounce... more Many liberal democracies are re-evaluating their commitment to multiculturalism. It was pronounced a failure, for example, by both the British and German Prime Ministers. 1 In Britain, in particular, multiculturalism is widely believed to have been responsible for domestic terrorism. 2 This turn of events is problematic. When immigrants' values are perceived by the native-born group as culturally unreasonable and theologically alien, the cohesion of a liberal-democratic polity and, consequently, the legitimacy of its government over its minority members are in jeopardy. I explain why this is the case by reconceptualising the debate on immigrant inclusion in liberal democracies in terms of social ontology. I agree with Raimo Tuomela that a social group exists when the members of the group respect and promote the norms, practices and traditions of the group, or what he calls ''the ethos'' of the group (it also includes the group's constitutive goals, values, beliefs, and standards). 3 I consider individual motivation in following the rules that govern public life and frame my discussion utilizing the notions of we-mode and I-mode cooperation put forward by Tuomela. 4 I show that when a certain mode of exercising intention in action (the we-mode) is never available for some group members, the inequality in A. Moltchanova (&)
Springer eBooks, 2009
In today's world, national borders seem irrelevant when it comes to international crime and terro... more In today's world, national borders seem irrelevant when it comes to international crime and terrorism. Likewise, human rights, poverty, inequality, democracy, development, trade, bioethics, hunger, war and peace are all issues of global rather than national justice. The fact that mass demonstrations are organized whenever the world's governments and politicians gather to discuss such major international issues is testimony to a widespread appeal for justice around the world. Discussions of global justice are not limited to the fields of political philosophy and political theory. In fact, research concerning global justice quite often requires an interdisciplinary approach. It involves aspects of ethics, law, human rights, international relations, sociology, economics, public health, and ecology. Springer's new series Studies in Global Justice up that interdisciplinary perspective. The series brings together outstanding monographs and anthologies that deal with both basic normative theorizing and its institutional applications. The volumes in the series discuss such aspects of global justice as the scope of social justice, the moral significance of borders, global inequality and poverty, the justification and content of human rights, the aims and methods of development, global environmental justice, global bioethics, the global institutional order and the justice of intervention and war. Volumes in this series will prove of great relevance to researchers, educators and students, as well as politicians, policy-makers and government officials.
Journal of Social Philosophy, 2011
... Hassan Bousetta and Dirk Jacobs, Multiculturalism, Citizenship and Islam in Problematic Enco... more ... Hassan Bousetta and Dirk Jacobs, Multiculturalism, Citizenship and Islam in Problematic Encounters in Belgium, in Multiculturalism, Muslims, and Citizenship, ed. Tariq Modood, Anna Triandafyllidou, and Ricard Zapata-Barrero (London: Routledge, 2006), 2336 at 29. 20 ...
Studies in Global Justice, 2009
When those of us armed with a typical liberal sense of right and wrong read historical accounts o... more When those of us armed with a typical liberal sense of right and wrong read historical accounts of liberation movements directed against either domestic tyrants or colonizers, we intuitively agree that the oppressed peoples deserved their freedom, because they deserved to govern themselves. But what lies behind our intuition? How do we establish that the oppressed are a people and explain why they deserve this freedom? Furthermore, groups with internationally recognized governments sometimes oppress their members in the name of their right to self-determination, as do groups whose internal organization is neither properly institutionalized nor internationally endorsed. Thus while self-determination, especially qualified as a "moral" right, may seem fine as a general rule, in its application it is potentially dangerous and destabilizing, and even contrary to human rights. The questions that need to be answered to unpack our intuition concerning self-determination are very basic: Does a moral right to self-determination exist? If so, who holds the right? This chapter begins to examine these questions by first considering the current international norms that control self-determination and then looking at the various theories that attempt to provide a moral foundation for the regulation of relations among different types of national groups. In the course of this brief survey, I discuss the ways in which major theoretical accounts of self-determination can be modified to deal with substate nationalism and identify the areas in which my approach to nationhood and self-determination can be particularly useful. I continue the discussion concerning who holds group rights in the next chapter. Current International Norms Both the Charter of the United Nations and several subsequent UN documents identify the moral right of "all peoples to self-determination." The United Nations was created in part to "develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples." 1 UN resolution 1514, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights reiterate that "all peoples have the right to self-determination" and that "by virtue of that right they freely
Journal of Social Philosophy, 2022
The paper focuses on one among several types of mechanisms that disadvantage marginalized group m... more The paper focuses on one among several types of mechanisms that disadvantage marginalized group members who have been included in positions that purport to give them equal status within an institution. Specifically, I consider cases in which marginalized group members’ performances are incorporated into institutional functioning, but aren’t credited to the performers on the merits of their performance. I show how the type of group interactions I consider is best reflected by constructing a modified version of the traditional view of institutional status functions. My approach advances an account of the patterns of oppression spelled out by feminist critiques regarding how the performances of individuals from historically underrepresented and disadvantaged groups are attributed to these individuals. My view captures what feminist critiques don’t explicitly attend to—that is, the discrepancy between the degraded or missing attribution of the outcome of marginalized group members' performances and the full or near full incorporation of the outcome that signals they did perform their functions according to the rules.
Political Studies Review, 2016
Throughout, this book is a crisp, analytical and well-ordered moral argument that supports the pe... more Throughout, this book is a crisp, analytical and well-ordered moral argument that supports the permissive use of emerging technologies of genetic choice within liberal democracies. Adjoined to this is the argument that a disproportionate fear of these technologies threatens liberal tolerance itself. There are particular ways in which the author succeeds in making his case. By eschewing the common error of making overblown assertions when writing about technology, the author achieves a nuanced position between the stale technology utopianism/pessimism dichotomy. Crucial to this is Russell Blackford’s strategy whereby he offers generous yet critical assessments of the common arguments against enhancement technologies (such as violations against nature and the autonomy of genetically engineered children) before objecting to them, which supports his argument strongly. The way this is done without being blithely dismissive of his opponents should be appreciated. Furthermore, the book achieves some interesting theoretical heights, particularly in chapter 3 where liberal equality is spun on its head in favour of compulsory genetic enhancement. Finally, it is often the case with books about politics and technology that they are inconclusive; often with disappointing democratic platitudes. However, this book excels in being able to build an argument that leads naturally towards a final chapter of comprehensive policy recommendations that support the use of technologies of genetic choice. This does so much more than simply say that we should be democratic; it shows how. Within the contours of liberal political theory, the book stands up well. However, there is a feeling that the book perhaps skirts the deeper issues of human nature and subjectivity-typical objections. This is reflected in the selection of reviewed literature. However, although in fairness the author makes no claims in relation to these issues, this book is arguably at odds with the resurgence of these themes in other areas of political thought that tackle technology. This book is an effective and original contribution to the political theory of technology. Liberal scholars and policy-makers are the obvious readership, who will be pleased with its careful navigation of a thorny ethical issue. Yet, I think it should also find itself a place on the shelves of post-humanist and ontopolitical scholars for providing an auspicious counterposition. Ironically, these are the positions with which the book does not engage.
Journal of Social Philosophy
Groups, Norms and Practices
The Culture of the Gift in Eighteenth-Century England, 2009
Uploads
Papers by Anna Moltchanova