A Theory of Crimes Against Humanity

Abstract

The answer I offer in this Article is that crimes against humanity assault one particular aspect of human being, namely our character as political animals. We are creatures whose nature compels us to live socially, but who cannot do so without artificial political organization that inevitably poses threats to our well-being, and, at the limit, to our very survival. Crimes against humanity represent the worst of those threats; they are the limiting case of politics gone cancerous. Precisely because we cannot live without politics, we exist under the permanent threat that politics will turn cancerous and the indispensable institutions of organized political life will destroy us. That is why all humankind shares an interest in repressing these crimes. The theory that I aim to defend here consists of two propositions: that "humanity" in the label "crimes against humanity" refers to our nature as political animals, and that these crimes pose a universal threat that all humankind shares an interest in repressing.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,619

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-04-08

Downloads
61 (#343,580)

6 months
9 (#449,254)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Luban
Georgetown University

Citations of this work

Corporate Moral Responsibility.Amy J. Sepinwall - 2016 - Philosophy Compass 11 (1):3-13.
Endangering humanity: an international crime?Catriona McKinnon - 2017 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 47 (2-3):395-415.
Impunity and Hope.Tony Reeves - 2019 - Ratio Juris 32 (4):415-438.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references