Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Little work has been done on the nexus between international law and inernational relations theory. Neither international lawyers nor social scientists have sustained interest in the issues. This paper will try to move beyond the often ad hoc, situation specific discussions of events to examine principles and power relate in practice over time.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The polluter pays principle (PPP) has been part of the environmental policy discourse and policy toolkit for more than two decades. Institutions such as the EU and countries like the Netherlands and Germany have made it a cornerstone of their environmenta

Publication Type: Proceeding
Abstract: One of the primary questions in the field of political communication is the extent to which the news media in Western countries provide sufficient time and space for oppositional forces to be heard. The amount of access granted to oppositional forces varies among countries and it is useful to consider the variables that can explain such difference. The Politics-Media-Politics (PMP) principle claims that political variations lead to variations in media performance that then lead to changes in the political process. It is argued that one of the most important political variables influencing oppositional access is the nature of the nature of a country's party system. The party systems in Israel and the United States represent polar opposite systems in that Israel is a polarized multi-party system and the U.S. is a two party system. Data was collected based on news stories about major political waves that took place in the two countries during three different years. While oppositional voices tended to dominate these debates in Israel, they were much less likely to be heard in the American press.

Publication Type: Proceeding
Abstract: What political principles should Kantians adopt in the twenty-first century? For Kant scholars such as Allen W. Wood — co-general editor of the Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant and prominent advocate of Kant’s ethical thought — the answer is clear: Kant’s principles, rightly understood. For other Kantians, however, philosophers should heed Kant’s advice in his essay on Enlightenment and courageously invent new principles. This essay draws upon the writings of John Rawls and Gilles Deleuze — preeminent Kant scholars and political theorists in Anglo-American and Continental philosophy, respectively — to support the latter thesis. Initially, I examine Wood’s exposition and defense of Kant’s principles in his essay, “The Supreme Principle of Morality.” Then, I consider Rawls’s analysis and reworking of Kantian constructivism in his essays and lectures on Kant as well as in Political Liberalism. Next, I examine Deleuze’s interpretation and use of Kantian constructivism in What is Philosophy? and A Thousand Plateaus. Finally, I advance two claims why Kantians should invent new principles rather than retain Kant’s. Philosophically, Kantians may advance stronger theories by incorporating the criticisms of Kant’s principles made by such philosophers as Hegel, Dewey, Nietzsche, and Bergson; and politically, Kantians may articulate more timely theories by adapting Kant’s principles to the conditions of late-modernity. The debate over Kantian principles affects whether philosophers view Kant scholarship as practical philosophy itself or as a preparatory exercise for the task of generating new principles. The debate also impacts whether Kant’s heirs on the Left retain the ideals of the Enlightenment or confidently invent new ones.