Tuesday, May 12, 2009

New interest in legal/philosophical theories and principles

Today is the second time in the last couple of weeks I found my self going through dozens wikipedia pages and online articles regarding legal and philosphopical theories and principles. I like to apply thought from these ideas to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Since there are so many, I'll try to discuss a limited amount of them and what its analytical application to the conflict might produce and my critic of all this. It will be hard to limit how much I discuss each day because they are all related.

So here is my first attempt at the task I mentioned above.

Many activists critical of Israel cite numerous UN resolutions and "international law." I and many Israelis have come to the conclusion that the UN and the many of the bodies within are not worthy of the conformity of individuals and the governments that represent them. Here is why:
  1. The United Nations is a collection of governments. Such organization has its strengths and its weaknesses. One of these weaknesses is that not every member is truly represenatitive of the people residing under its sovereignty. In simpler terms, they are not democratic.
  2. In order for me to respect the UN as an authority, I must see some proof that this "social contract" will provide social and political order. I have not seen the UN attempt to secure these things sufficiently in all member states.
  3. The UN uses language of rights to cloak political goals giving them positive connotations. For example, the UN Human Rights Council and Anti-Racism confrences where human rights violations and racism were not condemned but were displayed front and center.
I haven't cited any specific theories yet but the last two points above come from my reading of this wikipedia article (regarding point 2) and this wikipedia article(regarding piont 3).

No comments: