Untitled Essay, Research Paper

Law: an Overview Human nature consists of three basic constituents. These are to populate, to propagate and to rule. If Humanity was left without any other parametric quantities, this natural province of being would regulate its behaviour. Fortunately, there are parametric quantities that exist. These parametric quantities are jurisprudence. The subject of this paper addresses the type of jurisprudence that operates in making possible boundaries for the behaviour of provinces. This jurisprudence is called the Law of Nations or international jurisprudence. Patrick Moynihan, a senator from New York, has written a book on this topic called On the Law of Nations. His book argues that provinces need international jurisprudence to supervise their actions and to keep order. He besides notes the frequent goings provinces do from international jurisprudence. This essay will reflect his supplication to return to the norms that international jurisprudence provides ; it will besides discourse and place the moral quandary that are present with international jurisprudence and its relationship with provinces. The term & # 8220 ; laisser aller & # 8221 ; or & # 8220 ; allowing travel & # 8221 ; is used by Friedrich Nietzsche to depict this province of nature, in which adult male resides abstractedly of jurisprudence. His usage of the term represents the battle morality rewards against nature and ground. He equates morality in any signifier, with & # 8220 ; dictatorship and unreason. & # 8221 ; Nietzsche proposes that adult male & # 8217 ; s natural being be, in kernel, nihilistic. Logically, the political entity known as the province, created by adult male will inherit these traits. Therefore, the decision is that the creative activity and establishment of international jurisprudence are in direct misdemeanor to nature. However, international jurisprudence exists and provinces & # 8220 ; by and large & # 8221 ; submit themselves to it. . Since most of this jurisprudence is derived from statute norms of provinces, the term entry can be used. There is a ill service committed to humanity when the jurisprudence is broken, non merely to those who are weaker in the planetary community but to the jurisprudence itself. A violent raping of the jurisprudence is committed when it is taken in an a La carte signifier. The changeless shifting back and Forth from international jurisprudence to nature creates an incoherent system and a footing for naming the reversion to the natural province, immorality. In this scene & # 8220 ; illegal & # 8221 ; one-sided action is immoral. Conversely, the attachment to the jurisprudence is every bit immoral. This decision is drawn from the virtuousness of unity. Either have a committedness to follow with morality or wholly abstain from a hypocritical signifier of serving the jurisprudence with words and no conformance. Consistency, is an highly of import factor of a system of jurisprudence. Moynihan argues that the United State has begun to track a way taking off from its attachment to international jurisprudence. & # 8220 ; There is clear grounds that the United States is traveling off from its long established concern for and protagonism of international legal norms of province behavior. & # 8221 ; The deduction of the United States & # 8217 ; going is highly distressing. The diminution of universalism in universe political relations can be seen through the illustration of the United States. Moynihan has no problem in happening illustrations I

n recent history to support his argument. During the Bush Administration two examples are cited of unilateral action condoned by the United States, which are violations of international law. The first is the precedent allowing the Federal Bureau of Investigation apprehend fugitives of United States law anywhere around the world. This violates the principles of sovereignty and jurisdiction. The second example is the United States’ raid on the home of the Nicaraguan embassador in Panama. This clearly violates the idea of extraterritorality. These actions are interpreted to be in violation to the very law that the United States constitution promises to up hold. Because of these actions and many others that are frequently taking place all around the globe, an underlying disregard for law in the international community exists. One could conclude that there is no real international law but international suggestion. The moral dilemma does not exist in an isolated location, such as the United States. This is a wide spread enigma that confronts political thinkers of today. The existence of an operational universal system in a predominated arena of nationalism is nearly impossible. The two systems have been shifting since the Treaty of Westphalia, according to Hans Morganthau. He argues that nations are now “the standard-bearers of ethical systems, each of them of national origin and each of them claiming and aspiring to provide a supranational framework moral standards . . . ” This powerful argument proposes that the framework has changed. There has been a shift from that common ground to something self-interested. The reason for the shift is nationalism. Each state maintains that they have the moral system which should be universally accepted; thus, only satisfying that part of the international law that is right for them. This gives us international law a la carte and consequently, not a viable system at all. International law exists as hybrid system of law. Unfortunately, consistency is a problem. If this was the case in law on a domestic level there are concessions for enforcement. The international community has no such institution nor stipulation for uniform compliance to its law. This creates a dilemma, how can a grouping of people whose nature is self-interested behave morally without encouragement from a compulsory mechanism? This essay reflects the ideas argued by Patrick Moynihan in the book, On the Law of Nations. Furthermore, it argues the notion of morality in the international community, that either there is complete surrender to its principles or total abstinence in participation. Perhaps one day a solution will arise to successfully solve the dilemmas the world faces in obtaining a world of order. A world where the law is not based on mere custom but a legislature empowered to create laws that are binding to all states. Having a system that allows for enforcement and interpretation of the law will benefit the now chaotic world that hangs on the thread of sanity over the abyss of annihilation.