What do you think?
Rate this book
عن حق الإنسان في الهيمنة
هذا الكتاب هو ترجمة محمود محمد الحرثاني لكتاب نيكولا بيروجيني ونيف غوردن The Human Right To Dominate. لا تنحصر قضية هذا الكتاب المركزية في وجود خطاب حقوق الإنسان في المنطقة أو عدم وجوده، إنما تعالج كيفية توثيق الحكومات والشعوب انتهاكات حقوق الإنسان، وكيفية نبذها هذه الانتهاكات، وطريقة تجييشها الحقوق في سياقات العنف السياسي والهيمنة والإمبريالية الجديدة والاستعمار الجديد.
يحاول الكتاب (320 صفحة بالقطع الوسط، موثقًا ومفهرسًا) معالجة هذه المسألة بتحليل الأنموذج الإسرائيلي الذي يصوّره مؤيدوه بأنه الديمقراطية "الوحيدة" في الشرق الأوسط. وعلى الرغم من أن كثرًا انتقدوا هذا التوصيف، فإن ما هو حديث وجديد نسبيًا هو أن إسرائيل تحاول الحفاظ على وضعها الدولي باعتبارها ديمقراطية ليبرالية، من خلال تطويع خطاب حقوق الإنسان، على الرغم من سجلها المشين في انتهاك هذه الحقوق.
تناقضات وتهديد
في مقدمة الكتاب، عن "حق الإنسان" في الهيمنة، يتناول بيروجيني وغوردن ضروب تطويع حقوق الإنسان، ومسألة مناهضة الأنموذج الهيدروليكي لحقوق الإنسان، وحقوق الإنسان والدولة. وفي الفصل الأول، تناقضات حقوق الإنسان، لمحة تاريخية عن حقوق الإنسان في إسرائيل، وتبيان كيف أن حقوق الإنسان عميقة الارتهان للدولة؛ وتوصيف للصلة بين تأسيس النظام الدولي لحقوق الإنسان وإنشاء دولة إسرائيل، حيث يُبيّن المؤلفان أن الحلفاء نظروا إلى قيام إسرائيل باعتبارها وجهًا من أوجه تعويض حقوق إنسانية بسبب جرائم مروعة تعرض لها اليهود في أوروبا. يعرّج المؤلفان على محاكمة آيخمان لتوضيح كيف أن ما يُسمى خطاب حقوق الإنسان العالمي خضع للتأميم في إسرائيل، وكيف أن حقوق الإنسان المتأثرة بالتطلع إلى العالمية لم تعد إلى الظهور في إسرائيل - فلسطين إلا بعد اندلاع الانتفاضة الأولى (1987).
أما في الفصل الثاني، تهديد حقوق الإنسان، فيوصحان كيف بدأ النظر إلى حركة حقوق الإنسان بوصفها تهديدًا في إسرائيل، مع توصيف ردة الفعل الرسمية على هذا التهديد، ثم يشرحان كيف بدأ الفاعلون الإسرائيليون المحافظون تأطير منظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الليبرالية باعتبارها تهديدًا للأمن القومي، ليس من أجل رفض حقوق الإنسان لمجرد الرفض، لكن من أجل مواجهة محاولات المنظمات الليبرالية التخفيف من عنف الدولة والحد منه، ومن أجل إضفاء الشرعية في النهاية على الحرب العسكرية الإسرائيلية.
قتل واستعمار
في الفصل الثالث، حق الإنسان في القتل، يصف بيروجيني وغوردن التقارب بين الجيش الإسرائيلي والمسؤولين الحكوميين ومراكز البحوث الأمنية من جهة، ومنظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الليبرالية من جهة أخرى. وبالتركيز على الحملات العسكرية التي شنّتها إسرائيل على قطاع غزة، يبيّنان كيف تستخدم إسرائيل القانون الدولي الإنساني لشرعنة قتل المدنيين الفلسطينيين وتبريره، ثم يوضحان أن منظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الليبرالية تتبنّى القانون الدولي على نحو يُرَشد استخدام العنف القاتل ضد الفلسطينيين.
أما في الفصل الرابع، حق الإنسان في أن يستعمر، فيصفان ظهور منظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الاستيطانية، وكيف أنها تستخدم خطاب حقوق الإنسان لتعزيز السلب الاستعماري، سواء في الأراضي الفلسطينية المحتلة أم في إسرائيل. وهنا يظهران كيف يتم ذلك الشكل من أشكال "حركة حقوق الإنسان" في فضاء سياسي وقانوني واستراتيجي من التقارب مع منظمات غير حكومية ليبرالية، تدعم توفير حقوق الإنسان للفلسطينيين.
وفي الخاتمة، ماذا بقي من حقوق الإنسان؟، يتأمل المؤلفان في ما إذا كانت حقوق الإنسان قابلة بعد للاستخدام على نحو يناهض الهيمنة بعد أن طُوّعت لتعزيز هذه الهيمنة. وبعيدًا من رفض حقوق الإنسان الإمكانات السياسية الكامنة فيها لتصحيح المظالم الاجتماعية، يريان أن حقوق الإنسان يمكن أن تكون أداة فاعلة لتعزيز العدالة.
موقع المركز العربي للأبحاث ودراسة السياسات: http://www.dohainstitute.org
يحاول الكتاب (320 صفحة بالقطع الوسط، موثقًا ومفهرسًا) معالجة هذه المسألة بتحليل الأنموذج الإسرائيلي الذي يصوّره مؤيدوه بأنه الديمقراطية "الوحيدة" في الشرق الأوسط. وعلى الرغم من أن كثرًا انتقدوا هذا التوصيف، فإن ما هو حديث وجديد نسبيًا هو أن إسرائيل تحاول الحفاظ على وضعها الدولي باعتبارها ديمقراطية ليبرالية، من خلال تطويع خطاب حقوق الإنسان، على الرغم من سجلها المشين في انتهاك هذه الحقوق.
تناقضات وتهديد
في مقدمة الكتاب، عن "حق الإنسان" في الهيمنة، يتناول بيروجيني وغوردن ضروب تطويع حقوق الإنسان، ومسألة مناهضة الأنموذج الهيدروليكي لحقوق الإنسان، وحقوق الإنسان والدولة. وفي الفصل الأول، تناقضات حقوق الإنسان، لمحة تاريخية عن حقوق الإنسان في إسرائيل، وتبيان كيف أن حقوق الإنسان عميقة الارتهان للدولة؛ وتوصيف للصلة بين تأسيس النظام الدولي لحقوق الإنسان وإنشاء دولة إسرائيل، حيث يُبيّن المؤلفان أن الحلفاء نظروا إلى قيام إسرائيل باعتبارها وجهًا من أوجه تعويض حقوق إنسانية بسبب جرائم مروعة تعرض لها اليهود في أوروبا. يعرّج المؤلفان على محاكمة آيخمان لتوضيح كيف أن ما يُسمى خطاب حقوق الإنسان العالمي خضع للتأميم في إسرائيل، وكيف أن حقوق الإنسان المتأثرة بالتطلع إلى العالمية لم تعد إلى الظهور في إسرائيل - فلسطين إلا بعد اندلاع الانتفاضة الأولى (1987).
أما في الفصل الثاني، تهديد حقوق الإنسان، فيوصحان كيف بدأ النظر إلى حركة حقوق الإنسان بوصفها تهديدًا في إسرائيل، مع توصيف ردة الفعل الرسمية على هذا التهديد، ثم يشرحان كيف بدأ الفاعلون الإسرائيليون المحافظون تأطير منظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الليبرالية باعتبارها تهديدًا للأمن القومي، ليس من أجل رفض حقوق الإنسان لمجرد الرفض، لكن من أجل مواجهة محاولات المنظمات الليبرالية التخفيف من عنف الدولة والحد منه، ومن أجل إضفاء الشرعية في النهاية على الحرب العسكرية الإسرائيلية.
قتل واستعمار
في الفصل الثالث، حق الإنسان في القتل، يصف بيروجيني وغوردن التقارب بين الجيش الإسرائيلي والمسؤولين الحكوميين ومراكز البحوث الأمنية من جهة، ومنظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الليبرالية من جهة أخرى. وبالتركيز على الحملات العسكرية التي شنّتها إسرائيل على قطاع غزة، يبيّنان كيف تستخدم إسرائيل القانون الدولي الإنساني لشرعنة قتل المدنيين الفلسطينيين وتبريره، ثم يوضحان أن منظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الليبرالية تتبنّى القانون الدولي على نحو يُرَشد استخدام العنف القاتل ضد الفلسطينيين.
أما في الفصل الرابع، حق الإنسان في أن يستعمر، فيصفان ظهور منظمات حقوق الإنسان غير الحكومية الاستيطانية، وكيف أنها تستخدم خطاب حقوق الإنسان لتعزيز السلب الاستعماري، سواء في الأراضي الفلسطينية المحتلة أم في إسرائيل. وهنا يظهران كيف يتم ذلك الشكل من أشكال "حركة حقوق الإنسان" في فضاء سياسي وقانوني واستراتيجي من التقارب مع منظمات غير حكومية ليبرالية، تدعم توفير حقوق الإنسان للفلسطينيين.
وفي الخاتمة، ماذا بقي من حقوق الإنسان؟، يتأمل المؤلفان في ما إذا كانت حقوق الإنسان قابلة بعد للاستخدام على نحو يناهض الهيمنة بعد أن طُوّعت لتعزيز هذه الهيمنة. وبعيدًا من رفض حقوق الإنسان الإمكانات السياسية الكامنة فيها لتصحيح المظالم الاجتماعية، يريان أن حقوق الإنسان يمكن أن تكون أداة فاعلة لتعزيز العدالة.
موقع المركز العربي للأبحاث ودراسة السياسات: http://www.dohainstitute.org
320 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 2015
10 people are currently reading
320 people want to read
About the author
Nicola Perugini
15 books7 followersNicola Perugini is Senior Lecturer in International Relations at the University of Edinburgh. He is the coauthor of The Human Right to Dominate.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
March 5, 2024
Libro breve e denso, ma molto efficace, sa provocare valide riflessioni anche quando dice cose non proprio condivisibili.
Suo pregio principale è mettere in discussione e quindi mettere sull'attenti quando ci si trova di fronte a discorsi che parlano di oppressi e oppressori, vittime e carnefici, persecutori e perseguitati, per riflettere su quanto queste categorie possano essere molto più malleabili e scivolose di quanto si creda e non vadano sempre accolte in maniera ingenua.
Se il focus del libro, dopo una breve introduzione teorica e generale, è sulla questione palestinese, l'approccio che propone può essere applicato ad altre situazioni politiche e non solo, anche a situazioni più circoscritte che diventano comunque argomento del discorso mediatico, in cui il discorso pubblico spinge a incasellare dei gruppi umani nelle categorie di chi opprime e chi è oppresso. Quindi, anche se il libro assume una posizione molto netta sul suo caso di studio, la lettura può comunque aiutare a porsi dei dubbî su altri casi, grandi e piccoli che siano.
Il libro sconta un po' il difetto di un'eccessiva teoricità, di un richiamarsi ai principî e di un linguaggio non sempre immediato, tutte cose tipiche delle pubblicazioni che parlano il linguaggio chiuso dell'accademia, ma poi riporta fatti ed esempî, sa tornare alla concretezza e a confrontarsi con la realtà. Molto attuale (purtroppo) da questo punto di vista il capitolo sull'uso degli scudi umani nei conflitti armati.
Nelle conclusioni si percepisce il collocamento degli autori in un'area politica ben precisa. E qui mi chiedo se, nell'entusiasmo combattivo con cui assaltano quello che chiamano "dominio", gli autori finiscano tra quelli capaci di vedere solo il dominio a stelle e strisce, certo criticabilissimo in molti suoi aspetti, ma poi rimangano ciechi di fronti ad altri dominí altrettanto se non di più discutibili: quello cinese, quello russo, quello delle teocrazie islamiche, e altri ancora.
Suo pregio principale è mettere in discussione e quindi mettere sull'attenti quando ci si trova di fronte a discorsi che parlano di oppressi e oppressori, vittime e carnefici, persecutori e perseguitati, per riflettere su quanto queste categorie possano essere molto più malleabili e scivolose di quanto si creda e non vadano sempre accolte in maniera ingenua.
Se il focus del libro, dopo una breve introduzione teorica e generale, è sulla questione palestinese, l'approccio che propone può essere applicato ad altre situazioni politiche e non solo, anche a situazioni più circoscritte che diventano comunque argomento del discorso mediatico, in cui il discorso pubblico spinge a incasellare dei gruppi umani nelle categorie di chi opprime e chi è oppresso. Quindi, anche se il libro assume una posizione molto netta sul suo caso di studio, la lettura può comunque aiutare a porsi dei dubbî su altri casi, grandi e piccoli che siano.
Il libro sconta un po' il difetto di un'eccessiva teoricità, di un richiamarsi ai principî e di un linguaggio non sempre immediato, tutte cose tipiche delle pubblicazioni che parlano il linguaggio chiuso dell'accademia, ma poi riporta fatti ed esempî, sa tornare alla concretezza e a confrontarsi con la realtà. Molto attuale (purtroppo) da questo punto di vista il capitolo sull'uso degli scudi umani nei conflitti armati.
Nelle conclusioni si percepisce il collocamento degli autori in un'area politica ben precisa. E qui mi chiedo se, nell'entusiasmo combattivo con cui assaltano quello che chiamano "dominio", gli autori finiscano tra quelli capaci di vedere solo il dominio a stelle e strisce, certo criticabilissimo in molti suoi aspetti, ma poi rimangano ciechi di fronti ad altri dominí altrettanto se non di più discutibili: quello cinese, quello russo, quello delle teocrazie islamiche, e altri ancora.
December 28, 2025
جنبًا إلى جنب مع كتب "غزة: بحث في استشهادها" لفلنكستيّن و"اليوم نبني الجسور وغدًا نرمي القنابل" لبيتر غيل و" الدروع البشريّة" لهذان الكاتبان.. يُعد هذا الكتاب مُهمًا في لفت النظر على القضايا التاريخية والسياسيّة التي نعايّش يوميّاتها ولكن من منظور قانوني يتعلق بسيميّاء اللغة القانونية في المؤسسات الدولية وكيف تتعاطى مع القضايا المُثارة بطريقة أشبه بالآية القرآنية -ولقد آتيّناك سبعًا من المثاني- وتُعد القضية الفلسطينية هي محور هذا الكتاب لتطبيق الكاتبان فكرتهما عن تطور مفهوم حقوق الإنسان وكيف انتهى بها الحال إلى أن تنتهي لتلك المفارقة اللغوية المُدهشة التي يحملها عنوان الكتاب ذاته "حق الإنسان في -الهيّمنة-" وفي سيّاق ذلك يتعرض الكاتبان لسياقات عمل وتطورات منظومات المجتمع المدني، وتطور ظاهرة "الأنجزة" وكيف أصبح "الأنجوزيّ" يُعبر عن طبقة جديدة جعلت من حقوق الإنسان حكرًا على نخبة معيّنة تمتلك حق الكلام نيّابة عن المقهورين
September 26, 2021
The Human Right to Dominate is a critique of human rights arguing that human rights are used across the political spectrum to legitimise colonialism, killing and domination. Using predominantly case studies from the occupation of Palestine, Perugini and Gordon give examples of how liberal NGOs confer legitimacy to the state of Israel by appealing to their courts. These NGOs provide examples of violations of international humanitarian law to the courts, such as indiscriminate bombing of civilians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The narrow horizon of this approach is to urge for lawful killing to be carried out with all necessary precautions instead. In practice, this means that the law privileges the colonial force because of their access to more sophisticated weapons.
Israel is able to symbolically respond to these individual cases by paying reparations and choosing a scapegoat to punish, distracting from the larger pattern of domination which remains unchallenged, and making them seem lawful and legitimate in international eyes. Through their isolation and putting through the legal framework, rights violations become normalised and routine. The convergence of NGOs and the perpetrators as part of the system of occupation provides Israel with a method of gauging how far they can push things at any given time. It is like that tweet from dril, somehow always apropos:
Furthermore, more conservative parties are able to retaliate against the so-called politicisation of human rights, arguing that this kind of 'lawfare' is a threat to the state of Israel and position themselves as victims, repurposing human rights to protect their settler sovereignty.
Since the years of the Oslo peace process, many conservative settler NGOs have been established in Israel such as Yesha for Human Rights and Regavim, who aim to use the tactics of liberal NGOs to maintain Jewish settlement in the occupied territories. When Israel's police evicted Jewish settlements in the West Bank, these NGOs spread the rhetoric that framed settlers to be the victims of displacement. They invert the relationship between coloniser and colonised to make their domination look like self-defense. Although these groups are fighting against the government, they are ultimately aligned with them in their mutual desire to expand the colonial project.
Despite those who would frame human rights as being universal (applying to all humans innately) and apolitical, the subject of human rights is always being created and recreated by whoever wields them. The argument of the book is not that human rights are inherently good or bad, or only able to do good or bad, but that to use them to empower the weak, one needs strategies which can use them to undermine greater systems of power.
Israel is able to symbolically respond to these individual cases by paying reparations and choosing a scapegoat to punish, distracting from the larger pattern of domination which remains unchallenged, and making them seem lawful and legitimate in international eyes. Through their isolation and putting through the legal framework, rights violations become normalised and routine. The convergence of NGOs and the perpetrators as part of the system of occupation provides Israel with a method of gauging how far they can push things at any given time. It is like that tweet from dril, somehow always apropos:
turning a big dial taht says "Racism" on it and constantly looking back at the audience for approval like a contestant on the price is right
Furthermore, more conservative parties are able to retaliate against the so-called politicisation of human rights, arguing that this kind of 'lawfare' is a threat to the state of Israel and position themselves as victims, repurposing human rights to protect their settler sovereignty.
Since the years of the Oslo peace process, many conservative settler NGOs have been established in Israel such as Yesha for Human Rights and Regavim, who aim to use the tactics of liberal NGOs to maintain Jewish settlement in the occupied territories. When Israel's police evicted Jewish settlements in the West Bank, these NGOs spread the rhetoric that framed settlers to be the victims of displacement. They invert the relationship between coloniser and colonised to make their domination look like self-defense. Although these groups are fighting against the government, they are ultimately aligned with them in their mutual desire to expand the colonial project.
Despite those who would frame human rights as being universal (applying to all humans innately) and apolitical, the subject of human rights is always being created and recreated by whoever wields them. The argument of the book is not that human rights are inherently good or bad, or only able to do good or bad, but that to use them to empower the weak, one needs strategies which can use them to undermine greater systems of power.
November 16, 2018
This book suggests a new understanding of human rights rhetoric. Almost everyone takes human rights for granted as it advocates the oppressed and resist domination and hegemony. The authors challenge this view in the book and deconstruct the conventional perception of human rights, and rather suggest that human rights rhetoric is now completely inverted and deployed to advance political agenda. To illustrate their view, they apply this theory on Palestine/Israel conflict.
The authors demonstrate that Jews had no state to advocate their rights in the past, and that was culminated with the genocide committed against them before and during the World War II by the Nazi who striped their rights. Jews employed this discourse to spur the sympathy and attention of the International community, which brokered with the British - who by then were colonizing Palestine- about an alternative home for Jews. The UN sent representatives to Europe to observe closely the living conditions of Jews who were scattered in refugee camps across Europe. A report was written and concluded that Jews have to be evacuated to Palestine, after a consent from Britain who agreed on their migration.
In 1947, the UN made the partition plan which gave 43% of the land to Palestinians, and 57% to Jews. Following that, the state of Israel was established in 1948 and thus they had a legal body who will advocate their rights now on, unlike in the past. Israel has constantly employed the Holocaust discourse to expand their state and legitimate the killing of Palestine. The Holocaust trope is often raised when actions are taken against Israel, which rarely happens. For instance, when some UN representatives demanded that Israel should withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, some Israeli officials protested that a comeback to the past is tragic, referring to the Holocaust.
The emergence of nation states represents a radical change in the course of human rights because, ever since the state is the body which is solely entitled to ensure the application of human rights. That is a challenge, because state is the absolute power which can enforce laws, change them when it sees necessary, escape from applying them when it sees necessary. It is the power which decide who live and who dies, and thus the rights to live is confined the state. The state is the only entity who can kill without being questioned, but it will question others who implement killing, because states had social contracts with their citizens.
Jews, after the foundation of their state, have become citizens with rights. They have a comprehensive state with institutions to advocate them. Jews have often inverted human rights to advance national and political benefits for their own and marginalized Palestinians who are the indigenous inhabitants of the land. For instance, settlers have established their own NGOs to defend any attempt to demolish their houses in the West Bank, of these NGOs are Yesh and Regavim. When the Israeli police interfere to demolish these illegal houses, these organizations interfere and invert the discourse, describing the construction of Palestinian houses is illegal since they are built on a Jewish land. They described the demolition of settlers’ houses as an ethnic cleansing of settlers. In parallel with that, other organizations that were established to counter these illegality of building houses on a Palestinian land such as Peace Now, have used the same rhetoric of human rights to deconstruct the allegations of settlers.
On the other hand, the authors explained how Israel employed international law, especially Geneva convention to justify killing. They constantly misuse Human Shielding and apply it erroneously. Israel suggest that Hamas hide its weaponry in houses, mosques, tunnels and hospitals which means everywhere in Gaza. Therefore, Hamas is using these places as human shields, which permits Israel to target them because that does correspond with Geneva convention, which prohibits applying human shielding in wars. This law puts Gaza as a whole under Israeli targeting lawfully.
I can keep writing for many hours about this interesting book. In conclusion, authors pointed out that International Human Rights organizations such as Amnesty and HRW are reinforcing domination and hegemony. HRW’s mandate, for instance, does not shed light on violations that are made by the US such as the drone attacks conducted in Yemen and Afghanistan. There are no clear standards and rules for the use of drones, which is considered lawful by HR organization since it targets precisely. The authors condemn these orgs because the reduced the range of human rights to professionals only. only those with background in human rights and experts have the privilege to speak on behalf of the vulnerable, and those oppressed are excluded by these orgs, there voice is not heard. The authors suggest that these orgs are rather reinforcing domination because states always can manipulate laws to advance political agenda. They conclude that the system should be challenged, because old successful movements succeeded because they challenged the system and deconstructed it. The change of law may change reality for a short term, but the change of the system is fundamental for a long-term change.
July 16, 2021
An interesting case study approach, using Palestine, to showcase and explicate how the discourse on human rights operates in the global arena. Far from what is purported, that "more human rights equals less domination", the authors demonstrate that it is much more complicated than that and that the human rights discourse has been adopted by both the right-wing and liberal NGOs and actors to further domination in the context of Palestine and collude with the State.
I found this book to be accessible for the most part but the short length of the book probably contributed to the authors having to keep things succinct and brief. The concluding chapter was successful in tying it all together and addressing the "so what?" question and offers some good frameworks for thinking about human rights and the extent to which they can be salvaged from their current dilapidated state.
I found this book to be accessible for the most part but the short length of the book probably contributed to the authors having to keep things succinct and brief. The concluding chapter was successful in tying it all together and addressing the "so what?" question and offers some good frameworks for thinking about human rights and the extent to which they can be salvaged from their current dilapidated state.
November 30, 2025
Deeply fascinating, well-researched, well-written. Felt like it needed another chapter or two.
Read
August 13, 2015http://rabble.ca/books/reviews/2015/0...
Review by Azeezah Kanji
For many of us, human rights are somewhat like puppies: fluffy, benevolent things, a source of unalloyed happiness and good (although perhaps somewhat lacking in the tooth department). All upsides, no downsides; the world is an incontestably better place with them in it.
Critical scholarship on human rights, however, raises a host of serious questions about the ability of human rights to achieve or promote justice.
Are human rights actually a valuable tool for the marginalized? Or are they simply another weapon in the arsenal of the powerful?
How do we understand the invocation of human rights in support of military ventures in Afghanistan and Iraq (especially given the long history of appeals to international law to rationalize colonialism and warfare)?
Read more here: http://rabble.ca/books/reviews/2015/0...
Review by Azeezah Kanji
For many of us, human rights are somewhat like puppies: fluffy, benevolent things, a source of unalloyed happiness and good (although perhaps somewhat lacking in the tooth department). All upsides, no downsides; the world is an incontestably better place with them in it.
Critical scholarship on human rights, however, raises a host of serious questions about the ability of human rights to achieve or promote justice.
Are human rights actually a valuable tool for the marginalized? Or are they simply another weapon in the arsenal of the powerful?
How do we understand the invocation of human rights in support of military ventures in Afghanistan and Iraq (especially given the long history of appeals to international law to rationalize colonialism and warfare)?
Read more here: http://rabble.ca/books/reviews/2015/0...
Read
December 1, 2018An eye-opening and immensely thought-provoking, new conceptualisation of the human rights discourse and its appropriation by a legalist framework centred on professionalisation.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews