俄罗斯的主权、人权和民主哲学

M. Antonov
{"title":"俄罗斯的主权、人权和民主哲学","authors":"M. Antonov","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2309369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the correlation between the concepts of sovereignty, human rights, and democracy in Russian legal and political debate, analyzing this correlation in the context of Russian philosophical discourse. It argues that sovereignty is often used as a powerful argument which allows the overruling of international humanitarian standards and the formal constitutional guarantees of human rights. This conflict between sovereignty and human rights also recurs in other countries, and many legal scholars demand the revision or even abandonment of the concept of sovereignty. In Russia this conflict is aggravated by some characteristic features of the traditional mentality which frequently favors statism and collective interests over individual ones, and by the state building a “power vertical” subordinating regional and other particularistic interests to the central power. These features and policies are studied in the context of the Slavophile-Westernizer philosophical divide. This divide reveals the pros and contras put forward by the Russian supporters of the isolationist (conservative) policy throughout contemporary history, and especially in the sovereignty debates in recent years. The Russian Constitution contains many declaratory statements about human rights and democracy, but their formulations are vague and have little concrete effect in court battles where the application of international humanitarian law is counterbalanced by the concerns of the protection of sovereignty. These concerns coincide with isolationist and authoritarian policies, which led in 2006 to their amalgamation into the concept of “sovereign democracy.” This concept is considered in this paper to be a recurrence of the Russian conservative tradition. Even though the concept in its literal meaning has been abandoned by its author and supporters, most of its ideas are still on the cusp of the official political discourse which reproduces the pivotal axes of the Russian political philosophy of the 19th century","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Philosophy of Sovereignty, Human Rights, and Democracy in Russia\",\"authors\":\"M. Antonov\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2309369\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines the correlation between the concepts of sovereignty, human rights, and democracy in Russian legal and political debate, analyzing this correlation in the context of Russian philosophical discourse. It argues that sovereignty is often used as a powerful argument which allows the overruling of international humanitarian standards and the formal constitutional guarantees of human rights. This conflict between sovereignty and human rights also recurs in other countries, and many legal scholars demand the revision or even abandonment of the concept of sovereignty. In Russia this conflict is aggravated by some characteristic features of the traditional mentality which frequently favors statism and collective interests over individual ones, and by the state building a “power vertical” subordinating regional and other particularistic interests to the central power. These features and policies are studied in the context of the Slavophile-Westernizer philosophical divide. This divide reveals the pros and contras put forward by the Russian supporters of the isolationist (conservative) policy throughout contemporary history, and especially in the sovereignty debates in recent years. The Russian Constitution contains many declaratory statements about human rights and democracy, but their formulations are vague and have little concrete effect in court battles where the application of international humanitarian law is counterbalanced by the concerns of the protection of sovereignty. These concerns coincide with isolationist and authoritarian policies, which led in 2006 to their amalgamation into the concept of “sovereign democracy.” This concept is considered in this paper to be a recurrence of the Russian conservative tradition. Even though the concept in its literal meaning has been abandoned by its author and supporters, most of its ideas are still on the cusp of the official political discourse which reproduces the pivotal axes of the Russian political philosophy of the 19th century\",\"PeriodicalId\":106035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2309369\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2309369","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

本文考察了俄罗斯法律和政治辩论中主权、人权和民主概念之间的相关性,并在俄罗斯哲学话语的背景下分析了这种相关性。它认为,主权经常被用作强有力的论据,从而可以推翻国际人道主义标准和对人权的正式宪法保障。这种主权与人权的冲突在其他国家也时有发生,许多法学家要求修改甚至放弃主权概念。在俄罗斯,由于传统思维的一些特点,即经常倾向于国家主义和集体利益而不是个人利益,以及国家建立了一种“权力垂直”,使地区和其他特殊利益服从于中央权力,这种冲突加剧了。这些特征和政策是在斯拉夫-西化哲学分歧的背景下研究的。这种分歧揭示了俄罗斯孤立主义(保守主义)政策的支持者在当代历史上提出的赞成和反对意见,特别是在近年来的主权辩论中。《俄罗斯宪法》载有许多关于人权和民主的宣言性声明,但其表述含糊不清,在法庭斗争中几乎没有具体效果,因为在法庭斗争中,国际人道主义法的适用与保护主权的关切相平衡。这些担忧与孤立主义和威权主义政策不期而合,导致它们在2006年被合并为“主权民主”的概念。这一概念在本文中被认为是俄罗斯保守传统的再现。尽管这个概念的字面意义已经被它的作者和支持者抛弃了,但它的大部分思想仍然处于官方政治话语的风口浪尖,再现了19世纪俄罗斯政治哲学的关键轴心
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Philosophy of Sovereignty, Human Rights, and Democracy in Russia
This paper examines the correlation between the concepts of sovereignty, human rights, and democracy in Russian legal and political debate, analyzing this correlation in the context of Russian philosophical discourse. It argues that sovereignty is often used as a powerful argument which allows the overruling of international humanitarian standards and the formal constitutional guarantees of human rights. This conflict between sovereignty and human rights also recurs in other countries, and many legal scholars demand the revision or even abandonment of the concept of sovereignty. In Russia this conflict is aggravated by some characteristic features of the traditional mentality which frequently favors statism and collective interests over individual ones, and by the state building a “power vertical” subordinating regional and other particularistic interests to the central power. These features and policies are studied in the context of the Slavophile-Westernizer philosophical divide. This divide reveals the pros and contras put forward by the Russian supporters of the isolationist (conservative) policy throughout contemporary history, and especially in the sovereignty debates in recent years. The Russian Constitution contains many declaratory statements about human rights and democracy, but their formulations are vague and have little concrete effect in court battles where the application of international humanitarian law is counterbalanced by the concerns of the protection of sovereignty. These concerns coincide with isolationist and authoritarian policies, which led in 2006 to their amalgamation into the concept of “sovereign democracy.” This concept is considered in this paper to be a recurrence of the Russian conservative tradition. Even though the concept in its literal meaning has been abandoned by its author and supporters, most of its ideas are still on the cusp of the official political discourse which reproduces the pivotal axes of the Russian political philosophy of the 19th century
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Social Protection Instruments and Women Workers in the Informal Economy: A Southern African Perspective Using the Risk-Based Approach To Curb Modern Slavery in the Supply Chain: The Anglo American and Marks and Spencer Example From Creative Destruction to Destructive Creation Economic Analysis of Ethnic Conflicts Why Is Law Central to Public Policy Process in Global South?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1