Search results

Outlines the Libertarian framework of rights and obligations in abortion. Argues that abortion is homicide based upon the scientific and philosophic evidence available and disputes further points believed by abortion proponents.

In response to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights from 2011, several governments are enacting laws against exploitation in global supply chains. Such a legislative proposal is problematic in several respects. The authors aim to discuss these problems from an ethical perspective to provide a theoretical basis for law-setting and management decisions.

The paper studies the question based on an ethical framework with a libertarian focus.

From the perspective of a property rights-based ethics such a proposal prohibits voluntary exchanges and, thereby, a fundamental human right. From a utilitarian perspective it diminishes the utility of the parties of a potential exchange, because they cannot engage an exchange that they want to make. Moreover, it does not only shift an original state task to companies, but also tries to enforce specific values which are not shared all over the world, in third countries. In addition, it creates considerable restrictions on foreign procurement markets for domestic companies, which counteract the actual objective of the law.

The research provides managers with a moral compass regarding their supply chain decisions based on property rights ethics and utilitarian considerations. Based on that, they can weigh the arguments and make an informed decision. The paper is limited to these approaches that are often neglected in the public debate.

The authors’ comprehensive discussion from the perspective of libertarian ethics can be helpful for managers in their decision-making.

Supply chain acts have important social implications for people in developing countries as well as companies and consumers in Western countries. This study offers a comprehensive discussion from the perspective of libertarian ethics and can be helpful for entrepreneurs and managers in their decision-making.

The paper intends to encourage researchers from different disciplines to discuss the ethics of supply chain acts and to reflect governmental plans to transform the UN Guiding Principles in national law. It provides managers with a moral compass regarding their supply chain decisions based on property rights ethics and utilitarian considerations. Based on that, they can weigh the arguments and make an informed decision.

The recent reform in Norway on the gender composition of boards of directors in public firms, requiring boards to have at least 40 per cent of each gender, inevitably raises general questions concerning state regulation of property rights. What are the normative limits to state intervention? And more practically: how far could and should such interventions go? The question may be approached from several angles. The line followed here is to look into recent history in two Scandinavian countries – the most state-friendly of all existing democracies – to explore the differences between political interventions which have gained a high degree of legitimacy and those that failed or were never put into practice. In the discussion, both economic efficiency and normative concerns are evoked. Successful reforms introducing employee representatives into health and security committees, as well as to the boards of enterprises, are contrasted to the failed cases of quasi-nationalization of commercial banks in Norway and the wage-earner funds in Sweden. These results throw light on possible democratic justification and political viability of the gender quota reform.

Civic engagement means more than formal participation in the political process. Students can experience civic life across campus in ways that may not jump off the page as being relevant on first reading. Whether in the classroom through intentionally designed curricular experiences or through participating in a student organization focused on civic engagement, higher education should be helping develop students as active, participatory citizens. This chapter aims to provide the first look at how students across the United States are organizing on college campuses to participate in the political process.

Purpose – This chapter has three general purposes: to trace Canada’s hate speech laws from their policy inception to their current state; to identify the importance that media and mass communication have played in the creation and development of Canada’s hate speech laws; and to demonstrate the critical relationship that media has had to significant legal cases on hate speech. Methodology/Approach – This chapter historically maps the policy development of and legal challenges to Canada’s hate speech laws. It takes directed notice of the relationship of media and mass communication to the development and implementation of those laws. It engages with libertarian and egalitarian arguments on free speech throughout the chapter testing these ideas through an examination of the legal cases cited. Findings – Canadian legislators and courts have long grappled with the balancing of rights with respect to the issue of “hate speech.” Advances in mass communication technology have added intricate challenges to that legal balancing. Awareness of media’s allure to hatemongers and racial extremists and of media’s protean characteristics make regulation of its hateful content a continuous legal challenge. Canada’s greatest challenge yet to the regulation of hate speech will be its adaptive response to the growing phenomenon of online hate. Originality/Value – This chapter highlights the little recognized prescient statements made by the Cohen Committee about the allure of media and the dangers of its technological advancements in Canadian free speech debates. Providing a comprehensive survey of Canada’s “hate speech” laws, it recognizes the importance that advancements in mass communication have played in the creation and development of Canada’s “hate speech” laws.

The purpose of the present paper is to test this premise of no positive obligations against a challenging critique that can be made of it. To wit, abandonment of babies. That is, does the mother who abandons her baby have the positive obligation to at least place it “on the church steps”, e.g. notify all other potential care givers of the fact that unless one of them comes forward with an offer to take in the infant, it will die? If so, then there is at least one positive obligation in the libertarian philosophy; if not, then, at least at the outset, the libertarian claim to be generally utilitarian must be greatly attenuated. At best, there would now be an exception to the previously impermeable principle of no positive obligations; at worst, one exception tends to leads another, posing the risk that the premise will be fatally compromised, which can undermine the entire philosophical edifice.

Aims to question whether political principles, for example, those of socialism or libertarianism, have lasting significance.Design/methodology/approach – Lays out a case for the stability of at least one variety of political principle, namely that of libertarianism or classical liberalism and argues that the normative version of these positions does manage to have lasting stability and significance.Findings – There is much that is true that people do not necessarily attend to – including certain principles of political life. It may well be true that everybody has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, yet many of us reject this fact. Even judges and Supreme Court justices often fail to rule in a manner consistent with these principles.Originality/value – Provides insights concerning the nature of political and ethical principles.

In the aftermath of the Enron scandal, the critics of free enterprise have blamed this system for inflated and out of control executive salaries, particularly those of the chief executive officer (CEO). The present paper defends the marketplace against these charges. In section I we argue that the market has passed the Enron test with flying colors. Section II gives the background of the financial situation relating to CEO salaries. Sections III and IV are devoted to, respectively, the tax court and the appellate court; section V looks at the reaction of the former to the latter; and in section VI we defend the “independent investor” test. We look at this issue from a political economic perspective in section VII and conclude in section VIII.

The purpose of this paper is to explain the virtues (despite Moellendorf's criticisms) of the geoliberal framework of social justice, which assumes that people have rights to themselves and that all people have equal rights to natural opportunities.

After describing geoliberalism, the paper responds to Moellendorf's arguments, enlarging on the issues that arise.

Geoliberalism withstands Moellendorf's criticisms.

People can advocate geoliberal institutions in good conscience.

The paper provides principled, succinct responses to concerns people may have had about geoliberalism.