Thesis Chapters by Thomas C . Adriaenssens
The 1820s Revisited: the Monroe Doctrine through European Eyes, 2018
This thesis focuses on the European reception of Monroe’s 1823 message, the ‘Monroe Doctrine’, wi... more This thesis focuses on the European reception of Monroe’s 1823 message, the ‘Monroe Doctrine’, within its international context. It will emphasize how preconceived notions significantly complemented the information the public and politicians received about distant events, but also how those preconceived notions colored (shaped) the perception of these very events. A case will be made that the European reaction on the Monroe Doctrine must be seen (1) in the light of the collapse of the Spanish monarchy in the Americas, referred to as the ‘Spanish Question’ by contemporaries, (2) in the light of the fragile peace that had returned to Europe during the Restoration, and (3) as the culmination of a series of diplomatic moves of the United States vis-à-vis Spanish America. Despite using the term Europe, this paper only discusses the so-called ‘Great Powers’ (in 1815-1825 Russia, England, France, Austria and Prussia) while focusing on the Dutch and Russian reaction on the Monroe Doctrine. Let’s look at the Dutch example. Because the Netherlands were not a Great Power, the Monroe Doctrine was not send to the Dutch government. The Dutch government had to learn it through the papers, like the rest of Europe. A such, public opinion, the papers’ view of the doctrine and how it was applied, was decisive for Dutch America policy. The Dutch government could only interpret the consequences of the Doctrine based on the general impression the Dutch public had of pre1824 American Foreign Policy, the publication of the address in the papers and a few subsequent articles. Because information was scarce, impression, preconceived notions, had to fill up the holes of knowledge. The King and many of his ministers therefor believed that the Doctrine was no problem for Dutch plans in the Americas. They believed that American policy was aimed at Russia and the Holy Alliance, and in an informal alliance with England. They believed that it only applied for the Great Powers and that a minor colonial acquisition for the sake of building a canal was not a problem due to its commercial nature. The American government apparently did nothing to dispel this idea. That’s why it is possible to say that the Monroe Doctrine
encouraged Dutch colonial plans. This thesis focused on Russia too, because the Russian side has often been misinterpreted in research on the Monroe Doctrine. Conservatives in French, Austria, Prussia and Spain distrusted the liberal tendencies of the Russian tsar. Likewise, the British were distrustful of the Russians and saw them as their main adversaries. This way of thinking spread through British papers to the United States as well. Both the Tsar and the Dutch King followed a mostly liberal domestic policy aimed at strengthening their country. Many researchers used sources biased by a conservative or Anglo-American liberal view to research Russia’s foreign policy. The results were negative. In contrast, Dutch (and German) sources are overwhelmingly positive of the Tsar’s policy. As a reappraisal of Tsar Alexander I’s foreign policy, this thesis argues that the Tsar used the threat of force to dissuade radical liberals and at the same time encourage compromise. These threats were directed towards
South-America, and here the Monroe Doctrine interfered. But Russia’s goals in the Americas were achieved regardless. Therefor this thesis concludes that (1) these reactions contrasted sharply with the American perception of Europe and rather reflected the hopes and anxieties of Europe itself, that (2) American foreign policy inadvertently encouraged Dutch ‘colonialism’ in the second half of the 1820s, and that, for the Russians, (3) America was a side show of the Russian attempt to stabilize Europe by an overt display of their readiness to use force.
Papers by Thomas C . Adriaenssens
Korea Legislation Research Institute Journal of Law and Legislation , 2024
South Korea has been ruled by authoritarian regimes for most of its post war history, until democ... more South Korea has been ruled by authoritarian regimes for most of its post war history, until democratization in the late 1980s. During this period, violence by the state against its citizens was common. Although the 2005 Framework Act on Settling the Past set up a Truth Commission to investigate and shed light on past wrongdoings, it lacked provisions on compensation. This forced victims to either litigate for redress or mobilize politically for the enactment of compensation laws. For many victims, rules of evidence and the statute of limitations frustrated attempts to find justice through the courts, resulting in an emphasis on redress legislation over litigation. Yet, such legislation often limited itself to specific incidents or categories of victims and thereby disadvantaged other victims.
Unlike previous research, this work approached redress legislation holistically. It aimed to provide an overview of compensation laws for victims of domestic state violence during South Korea’s authoritarian period (roughly 1948-1993). It first formulated criteria to assess which victims could, to what extent, achieve redress through compensation law. It then used these criteria to find sixteen relevant acts and ordinances to analyze. It found that these laws could function to restrict access to redress by limiting government liability, lacked uniform terminology, and did not treat like cases alike. It also observed that the current configuration of compensation legislation suggests a hierarchy of victimhood that disadvantages non-ideal victims like women, people with disabilities, people with non-physical injuries, and workers.
Korea Legislation Research Institute Journal of Law and Legislation, 2022
Like many other jurisdictions, South Korea’s disability welfare law implicitly contains a hierarc... more Like many other jurisdictions, South Korea’s disability welfare law implicitly contains a hierarchy of disabilities that categorizes people based on the cause of their disability. This hierarchy is not only visible in differences in benefit levels, but also in the priority with which certain disability welfare legislation was enacted for certain groups. Disability legal studies tend to focus on anti-discrimination legislation. However, discrimination and a lack of social support are two sides of the same problem that can keep people disabled.
Disability legal studies furthermore mainly concern itself with AngloAmerican jurisdictions. Therefore, an analysis of the development of disability welfare law in an Asian jurisdiction would be a welcome addition.
This paper takes a historical approach to outline how and under what circumstances disability welfare law has developed along hierarchical lines in South Korea. In chronological order, this paper discusses Disability Income Support during early modernity (before 1948), post-colonial Korea (1948-1987), the era of Democratization (1987-2000), and the post-2000s when the disability rights movement began to campaign for general disability income support. This research concludes that disability income support law in South Korea reflects a hierarchy of disability dependent on a person’s perceived contribution to Korea’s political and economic independence, with ‘people of national merit’ and those formally employed by large firms on top. This research also concludes that the continuous expansion of the scope of ‘people of national merit’ as a welfare recipient category, combined with the paradigm of ‘productive welfare’ or ‘workfare,’ has delayed the introduction of disability welfare law for the general disabled population, especially for people with mental disabilities.
Korea Legislation Research Institute Journal of Law and Legislation, 2021
Both the Netherlands and South Korea have statutory severance pay that is similar in form(ula) bu... more Both the Netherlands and South Korea have statutory severance pay that is similar in form(ula) but differs in purpose. Dutch severance pay originated as compensation for unfair dismissal calculated by a judge on a case-by-case basis.
This became more standardized, resulting in a formula that is nearly identical to Korea’s, although the reason for termination is still a factor in Dutch severance pay. While the Netherlands has been standardizing severance pay, Korea has been trying to replace it with a retirement pension plan system. The reason why one jurisdiction tries to abolish an institution that another jurisdiction is developing lies in severance pay’s perceived purpose. Dutch severance pay has originally been conceptualized as dismissal protection. Korean severance pay has been instituted in the 1960s as a substitute for retirement benefits. This research argues that instead of its social function the perceived purpose of severance pay – what it ought to do – has been leading in the reform debate.
The central question this research tries to answer is, therefore, how severance pay’s perceived purpose has influenced its development in the Netherlands and South Korea. This is an important question because the initial choice for a certain policy (change) causes intellectual path dependence. After giving a functional definition of severance pay, this paper compares severance pay law in Korea and the Netherlands based on an analysis of its historical development.
It concludes that the perceived purpose was one major factor limiting the way legal scholars and policymakers approached the reform debate, especially when it came to the choice for alternatives to consider and legal systems to compare.
Uploads
Thesis Chapters by Thomas C . Adriaenssens
encouraged Dutch colonial plans. This thesis focused on Russia too, because the Russian side has often been misinterpreted in research on the Monroe Doctrine. Conservatives in French, Austria, Prussia and Spain distrusted the liberal tendencies of the Russian tsar. Likewise, the British were distrustful of the Russians and saw them as their main adversaries. This way of thinking spread through British papers to the United States as well. Both the Tsar and the Dutch King followed a mostly liberal domestic policy aimed at strengthening their country. Many researchers used sources biased by a conservative or Anglo-American liberal view to research Russia’s foreign policy. The results were negative. In contrast, Dutch (and German) sources are overwhelmingly positive of the Tsar’s policy. As a reappraisal of Tsar Alexander I’s foreign policy, this thesis argues that the Tsar used the threat of force to dissuade radical liberals and at the same time encourage compromise. These threats were directed towards
South-America, and here the Monroe Doctrine interfered. But Russia’s goals in the Americas were achieved regardless. Therefor this thesis concludes that (1) these reactions contrasted sharply with the American perception of Europe and rather reflected the hopes and anxieties of Europe itself, that (2) American foreign policy inadvertently encouraged Dutch ‘colonialism’ in the second half of the 1820s, and that, for the Russians, (3) America was a side show of the Russian attempt to stabilize Europe by an overt display of their readiness to use force.
Papers by Thomas C . Adriaenssens
Unlike previous research, this work approached redress legislation holistically. It aimed to provide an overview of compensation laws for victims of domestic state violence during South Korea’s authoritarian period (roughly 1948-1993). It first formulated criteria to assess which victims could, to what extent, achieve redress through compensation law. It then used these criteria to find sixteen relevant acts and ordinances to analyze. It found that these laws could function to restrict access to redress by limiting government liability, lacked uniform terminology, and did not treat like cases alike. It also observed that the current configuration of compensation legislation suggests a hierarchy of victimhood that disadvantages non-ideal victims like women, people with disabilities, people with non-physical injuries, and workers.
Disability legal studies furthermore mainly concern itself with AngloAmerican jurisdictions. Therefore, an analysis of the development of disability welfare law in an Asian jurisdiction would be a welcome addition.
This paper takes a historical approach to outline how and under what circumstances disability welfare law has developed along hierarchical lines in South Korea. In chronological order, this paper discusses Disability Income Support during early modernity (before 1948), post-colonial Korea (1948-1987), the era of Democratization (1987-2000), and the post-2000s when the disability rights movement began to campaign for general disability income support. This research concludes that disability income support law in South Korea reflects a hierarchy of disability dependent on a person’s perceived contribution to Korea’s political and economic independence, with ‘people of national merit’ and those formally employed by large firms on top. This research also concludes that the continuous expansion of the scope of ‘people of national merit’ as a welfare recipient category, combined with the paradigm of ‘productive welfare’ or ‘workfare,’ has delayed the introduction of disability welfare law for the general disabled population, especially for people with mental disabilities.
This became more standardized, resulting in a formula that is nearly identical to Korea’s, although the reason for termination is still a factor in Dutch severance pay. While the Netherlands has been standardizing severance pay, Korea has been trying to replace it with a retirement pension plan system. The reason why one jurisdiction tries to abolish an institution that another jurisdiction is developing lies in severance pay’s perceived purpose. Dutch severance pay has originally been conceptualized as dismissal protection. Korean severance pay has been instituted in the 1960s as a substitute for retirement benefits. This research argues that instead of its social function the perceived purpose of severance pay – what it ought to do – has been leading in the reform debate.
The central question this research tries to answer is, therefore, how severance pay’s perceived purpose has influenced its development in the Netherlands and South Korea. This is an important question because the initial choice for a certain policy (change) causes intellectual path dependence. After giving a functional definition of severance pay, this paper compares severance pay law in Korea and the Netherlands based on an analysis of its historical development.
It concludes that the perceived purpose was one major factor limiting the way legal scholars and policymakers approached the reform debate, especially when it came to the choice for alternatives to consider and legal systems to compare.
encouraged Dutch colonial plans. This thesis focused on Russia too, because the Russian side has often been misinterpreted in research on the Monroe Doctrine. Conservatives in French, Austria, Prussia and Spain distrusted the liberal tendencies of the Russian tsar. Likewise, the British were distrustful of the Russians and saw them as their main adversaries. This way of thinking spread through British papers to the United States as well. Both the Tsar and the Dutch King followed a mostly liberal domestic policy aimed at strengthening their country. Many researchers used sources biased by a conservative or Anglo-American liberal view to research Russia’s foreign policy. The results were negative. In contrast, Dutch (and German) sources are overwhelmingly positive of the Tsar’s policy. As a reappraisal of Tsar Alexander I’s foreign policy, this thesis argues that the Tsar used the threat of force to dissuade radical liberals and at the same time encourage compromise. These threats were directed towards
South-America, and here the Monroe Doctrine interfered. But Russia’s goals in the Americas were achieved regardless. Therefor this thesis concludes that (1) these reactions contrasted sharply with the American perception of Europe and rather reflected the hopes and anxieties of Europe itself, that (2) American foreign policy inadvertently encouraged Dutch ‘colonialism’ in the second half of the 1820s, and that, for the Russians, (3) America was a side show of the Russian attempt to stabilize Europe by an overt display of their readiness to use force.
Unlike previous research, this work approached redress legislation holistically. It aimed to provide an overview of compensation laws for victims of domestic state violence during South Korea’s authoritarian period (roughly 1948-1993). It first formulated criteria to assess which victims could, to what extent, achieve redress through compensation law. It then used these criteria to find sixteen relevant acts and ordinances to analyze. It found that these laws could function to restrict access to redress by limiting government liability, lacked uniform terminology, and did not treat like cases alike. It also observed that the current configuration of compensation legislation suggests a hierarchy of victimhood that disadvantages non-ideal victims like women, people with disabilities, people with non-physical injuries, and workers.
Disability legal studies furthermore mainly concern itself with AngloAmerican jurisdictions. Therefore, an analysis of the development of disability welfare law in an Asian jurisdiction would be a welcome addition.
This paper takes a historical approach to outline how and under what circumstances disability welfare law has developed along hierarchical lines in South Korea. In chronological order, this paper discusses Disability Income Support during early modernity (before 1948), post-colonial Korea (1948-1987), the era of Democratization (1987-2000), and the post-2000s when the disability rights movement began to campaign for general disability income support. This research concludes that disability income support law in South Korea reflects a hierarchy of disability dependent on a person’s perceived contribution to Korea’s political and economic independence, with ‘people of national merit’ and those formally employed by large firms on top. This research also concludes that the continuous expansion of the scope of ‘people of national merit’ as a welfare recipient category, combined with the paradigm of ‘productive welfare’ or ‘workfare,’ has delayed the introduction of disability welfare law for the general disabled population, especially for people with mental disabilities.
This became more standardized, resulting in a formula that is nearly identical to Korea’s, although the reason for termination is still a factor in Dutch severance pay. While the Netherlands has been standardizing severance pay, Korea has been trying to replace it with a retirement pension plan system. The reason why one jurisdiction tries to abolish an institution that another jurisdiction is developing lies in severance pay’s perceived purpose. Dutch severance pay has originally been conceptualized as dismissal protection. Korean severance pay has been instituted in the 1960s as a substitute for retirement benefits. This research argues that instead of its social function the perceived purpose of severance pay – what it ought to do – has been leading in the reform debate.
The central question this research tries to answer is, therefore, how severance pay’s perceived purpose has influenced its development in the Netherlands and South Korea. This is an important question because the initial choice for a certain policy (change) causes intellectual path dependence. After giving a functional definition of severance pay, this paper compares severance pay law in Korea and the Netherlands based on an analysis of its historical development.
It concludes that the perceived purpose was one major factor limiting the way legal scholars and policymakers approached the reform debate, especially when it came to the choice for alternatives to consider and legal systems to compare.