Kantian Theory of International Law

Teson and Kant both believe that multinationalistic transaction must be grounded in normative value, determine which put the individual human being and his liberties at the warmness of political concerns.

Peace, to Kant, is vital not simply because it means the absence of war. Peace is vital because it means that individual rights are much(prenominal) likely to be cling toed than they would be in a state of war in which states and their victory or foiling are the only things that matter. Kant believes that multinational relations must be establish on the liberal values of "just, democratic states" because such a democratic community of nations "is the best guarantee for world-wide peace because internal freedom at home is causally related to peaceful behavior abroad" (55). "Freedom and causal agent" (102) are the building blocks of an ethical and just world vagabond in Kant's speculation. It might be argued that Kant is too idealistic, that he ignores the special roles that brutal power and self-interest play in international relations. For example, in this paraphrase of Kant from Teson, we read:

"The end of states and governments is to benefit, serve and protect their components, human beings; and the end of international law must too be to benefit, serve, and protect human beings, and not its components, states and governments. Respect for states is notwithstanding derivative of respect for persons. In this way, the notion of state sovereignty is redefined: the

So while Teson admits that Kant's theory is indeed idealistic, he argues effectively that there is a key for such idealism in the rattlingm of international politics. In item, he argues that international law will lead to great in justice globally and nationally if it continues to operate on the dualistic standard of statism. Statism asks only for justice at home at best, but asks only for order on the global level. If this ascend continues, the amoral international emphasis on order over justice will eventually spread to states as well.

Such values "should underlie the relations among nations" (57-58), but in fact they very much do not, except where these values happen to coincide with the inquire for the state to survive above all. Kant, however, recognizes the difference between the real world and the ideal world. He argues that the dualism must be contumacious on the side of justice and freedom. Kant argues that the genuineness of states should be based not on power but on the sermon of individuals. He advocates an international organization with the authority to ostracize nations which go through brute force to their own or other people, as Teson writes:

A cynical critique of Kant would say that international relations are carried out by nations that are always self-interested. The fact is that nations do follow liberal ideals at times, both because they discern to do so and because they are forced to do so by their own people or by remote force. We should not give up on the hope that international relations can become more liberal, more just, more peaceful, more freedom-oriented.

sovereignty of the state is dependent upon the state's domestic legitimacy; and therefore the principles of international justice must be harmonious with the principles of internal justice (54).

Law, ethics, reason, freedom, justice, and individual rights are all start together in Kant's the
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!