首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Social Economics >Philosophical foundations for Indigenous economic and political rights
【24h】

Philosophical foundations for Indigenous economic and political rights

机译:土着经济和政治权利的哲学基础

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine some influential accounts of the basis for Indigenous rights, consider their strengths and weaknesses, and ascertain whether and in what degree they support effective self-government and self-determination for Indigenous people. Design/methodology/approach The paper begins with a brief discussion of the emergence of specifically Indigenous rights, the significance of self-determination as a means of improving the economic and social conditions of communities, and the problem such rights pose for late 20th versions of egalitarian liberalism. It then examines the liberal culturalist argument for minority rights developed by Will Kymlicka, before turning to James Tully’s elaboration of the historical approach to the justification of Indigenous rights that draws on the tradition of treaty relations in North American colonialism. Finally, it outlines a third approach based on the political liberalism of John Rawls. Findings The conditions of legitimate government set out in Rawls’ political liberalism are a better way to provide normative foundations for Indigenous rights in contemporary postcolonial democracies. Research limitations/implications The discussion of Indigenous rights is confined to those countries established by colonization with largely British political institutions and populations. The arguments for Indigenous rights are confined to those advanced within the liberal tradition of political thought. Originality/value Some of the criticisms of the liberal culturalist argument and of Tully’s approach are original. The case for Indigenous rights based in the legitimacy requirements of political liberalism is original and based on conceptual work by the author.
机译:目的本文的目的是审查土着权利基础的一些有影响力的账户,考虑其优势和劣势,并确定他们是否在何种程度上支持有效的自治和自治的土着人民。设计/方法论/方法本文始于简要讨论特定土着权利的出现,自我决定的意义作为改善社区经济和社会条件的手段,以及第20届版本的问题造成的问题平均自由主义。然后,它检查了Will Kymlicka的少数群体权利的自由文化主义论点,然后在詹姆斯·塔利的阐述了拟订了北美殖民主义条约关系传统的历史方法的阐述之前。最后,它概述了基于John Rawls的政治自由主义的第三种方法。调查结果在罗尔斯的政治自由主义中阐述了合法政府的条件是提供当代殖民民主国家当代土着权利的规范基础的更好方法。研究限制/含义对土着权利的讨论被限制在殖民化与主要英国政治机构和人口所建立的国家。土着权利的论点仅限于政治思想的自由主义传统中的人。原创性/价值一些对自由文化主义者论点和塔利的方法的批评是原创的。基于政治自由主义合法性要求的土着权利的案例是原创的,并根据作者的概念工作。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号