Today's world is post-colonial and post-Cold War. These twin characteristics explain why international society is also riddled with the two major forms of injustice which Nancy Fraser identified as afflicting national societies. First, the economic and social disparities between states caused outcry in the 1950s when the first steps were taken towards decolonisation. These inequalities, to which a number of emerging states now contribute, are still glaring and still pose the problem of the gap between formal equality and true equality. Second, international society is increasingly confronted with culture- and identity-related claims, stretching the dividing line between equality and difference. The less-favoured states, those that feel stigmatised, but also native peoples, ethnic groups, minorities and women now aspire to both legal recognition of their equal dignity and the protection of their identities and cultures. Some even seek reparation for injustices arising from the past violation of their identities and the confiscation of their property or land. In answer to these two forms of claim, the subjects of international society have come up with two types of remedy encapsulated in legal rules: the law of development and the law of recognition. These two sets of rights are neither wholly autonomous and individualised branches of law nor formalised sets of rules. They are imperfect and have their dark side. Yet they can be seen as the first milestones towards what might become a fairer international society; one that is both equitable (as an answer to socio-economic injustice) and decent (as an answer to cultural injustice). This book explores this evolution in international society, setting it in historical perspective and examining its presuppositions and implications.

We've been told, again and again, that life is unfair. But what if we're wrong simply to resign ourselves to this situation? Drawing on the evidence from our evolutionary history and the emergent science of human nature, this title shows that we have an innate sense of fairness.

This book provides a comprehensive explanation of what the right to a fair trial means in practice under international law. Focus on factual scenarios that practitioners may, it brings together sources and cases that define the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings.

With the eclipse of the New Right, politicians now admit that society is in crisis. Something must be done, but, explain the authors, governments will fail again unless they shake off the economic orthodoxy that is now one of the problems rather than the means to a solution. This book investigates the roots of the problem, both historically and theoretically. Dr Michael Hudson draws on archaeology and history, from Bronze Age Mesopotamia through Rome to Byzantium, to show how a destructive virus crept into the body politic. This led to a breakdown in man's relation to the environment and divided society into a wealthy ruling oligarchy and an impoverished majority.

Many in the United States feel that the nation’s current level of economic inequality is unfair and that capitalism is not working for 90% of the population. Yet some inequality is inevitable. The question is: What level of inequality is fair? Mainstream economics has offered little guidance on fairness and the ideal distribution of income. Political philosophy, meanwhile, has much to say about fairness yet relies on qualitative theories that cannot be verified by empirical data. To address inequality, we need to know what the goal is—and for this, we need a quantitative, testable theory of fairness for free-market capitalism. How Much Inequality Is Fair? synthesizes concepts from economics, political philosophy, game theory, information theory, statistical mechanics, and systems engineering into a mathematical framework for a fair free-market society. The key to this framework is the insight that maximizing fairness means maximizing entropy, which makes it possible to determine the fairest possible level of pay inequality. The framework therefore provides a moral justification for capitalism in mathematical terms. Venkat Venkatasubramanian also compares his theory’s predictions to actual inequality data from various countries—showing, for instance, that Scandinavia has near-ideal fairness, while the United States is markedly unfair—and discusses the theory’s implications for tax policy, social programs, and executive compensation.