Liberal defences of nationalism have become prevalent since the mid-1980’s. Curiously, they have largely neglected the fact that nationalism is primarily about land. Should liberals throw up their hands in despair when confronting conflicting claims stemming from incommensurable national narratives and holy texts? Should they dismiss conflicting demands that stem solely from particular cultures, religions and mythologies in favour of a supposedly neutral set of guidelines? Does history matter? Should ancient injustices interest us today? Should we care who reached the territory first and who were its prior inhabitants? Should principles of utility play a part in resolving territorial disputes? Was John Locke right to argue that the utilisation of land counts in favour of its acquisition? And should western style settlement projects work in favour or against a nation’s territorial demands? When and how should principles ofequality and equal distribution come into play?. Systematic method of approaching international territorial disputes A set of orderly general guidelines for the evaluation and arbitration of territorial disputes Places the territorial issue at the head of the liberal-nationalist agenda INDICE: From the contents Preface. 1. Introduction. 2. Collective Rights. 3. ‘Historical Rights’. 4. Corrective Justice. 5. The Supersession Thesis. 6. Efficiency. 7. Settlement. 8. Global Justice and Equal Distribution. Conclusions. Bibliography. Index.
- ISBN: 978-1-4020-9261-9
- Editorial: Springer
- Encuadernacion: Rústica
- Páginas: 260
- Fecha Publicación: 01/11/2008
- Nº Volúmenes: 1
- Idioma: Inglés