This chapter examines the implications of cosmopolitanism for the subfield of political sociology. Owing to its roots in ongoing debates on how globalization has altered power relations in the contemporary world, cosmopolitanism cuts across the subfield of political sociology in instructive ways. Though interdisciplinary in nature, cosmopolitan research contains important insights for the sociological study of politics at the global, national, and local levels (Archibugi 2003; Brown and Held 2010). While this chapter focuses on how cosmopolitanism contributes to our understanding of world citizenship, global governance, and human rights, it nonetheless points to the roles of states (in their foreign and domestic policies) and civil society actors, including social movement organizations (SMOs) and NGOs, in advancing (or blocking) cosmopolitan objectives.

In the context of ongoing debates on social scientific rigor and ethical commitments, this chapter examines growing interest in human rights in the university system in the United States, the institutionalization of the sociology of human rights as a field of research, teaching, and service, and the implications of the nascent field for interpreting major documents in the human rights canon. It argues for the need to revise the Constitution of the United States in reference to the cutting-edge human rights norms that find expression not only in the classics of the human rights canon. When placed in the trajectory of Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment thought, the US Constitution appears as both a forerunner and a laggard in its stance on human rights. The chapter points to the widespread veneration of the "Founding Fathers" and the concomitant fetishization of the constitution—both of which figure prominently in the political culture of the United States—as factors that inhibit discussion of comprehensive constitutional reform.

beck push for moving beyond ordinary job creation efforts to focus on creating high quality jobs. Topel examines aspects of the ethos that underlies ‘‘traditional communality’’ and their usefulness in the current context (p. 205). Yossi Katz and John C. Lehr, in an essay on women in Hutterite society, and Michal Palgi, in an essay on feminism and communal life, point to the role that gender equality plays within movements to help sustain their strength. Maria Fölling-Albers and Ben-Rafael explore lessons which the kibbutz and/or kibbutz education have for the resilience of communality. In sum, The Communal Idea in the 21st Century lives up to its promise to explore the continued relevance of the communal idea across disciplinary borders. Authors inspire hope that it remains a promising solution to the social ills associated with neoliberalism and modern capitalism. Though the essays range in quality and depth, this book offers scholars from a wide set of disciplines the space to engage with the interdisciplinary debate about the collective idea in the twenty-first century. Given the focus many of the contributors place on concrete actions and ongoing strategies, the text will particularly appeal to those interested in bridging the gap between academia and activism in the face of social and global challenges like environmental decline, economic insecurity, poverty, bigotry, and violent conflict.

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewsBorders among Activists: International NGOs in the United States, Britain, and France. By Sarah S. Stroup. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2012. Pp. x+246. $39.95.Mark FrezzoMark FrezzoUniversity of Mississippi Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmailPrint SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Journal of Sociology Volume 118, Number 6May 2013 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/669637 Views: 52Total views on this site For permission to reuse a book review printed in the American Journal of Sociology, please contact [email protected].PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Mark Frezzo The University of Mississippi ______________________________________________________ This symposium is based on a Special Session at the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association (ASA), held in Las Vegas on August 21, 2011. Sponsored by the ASA and Sociologists Without Borders (SSF), the session evaluated the significance of the “Statement Affirming and Expanding the Commitment of the American Sociological Association to Human Rights” (2009) for research, teaching, and service in the discipline. In this light, the essential contents of the text merit reflection:

Sociologists Without Borders (SSF) has played a key role in the Science and Human Rights Coalition (SHRC) of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. This Coalition, which consists of nearly fifty scientific organizations, seeks to advance the human right to benefit from scientific progress and its application. This article critically evaluates SSF’s role in the SHRC. After providing background on the work, organization, and objectives of the Coalition, this article then elaborates on how sociologists, particularly representatives of the American Sociological Association and SSF, have collaborated with other scientists on various projects designed to implement this human right. These collaborative efforts give reason for hope. They suggest that science is being used to work towards greater equality and justice, and that SSF plays a positive role in this effort through its alliance with the SHRC

This article examines the uses and limitations of the prevailing classificatory schema in the field of human rights—a tripartite framework that delineates first-generation civil and political rights ensuring liberty, second-generation economic and social rights promoting equality, and third-generation group and cultural rights supporting solidarity. When applied strictly, the framework runs the risk of reifying the three categories, exaggerating the impact of the European Enlightenment on contemporary norms, and overlooking the historical contexts in which rights-claims emerge. Though useful for analytic and pedagogical purposes, the existing paradigm fails to capture the full spectrum of human rights violations and solutions in the contemporary world. More precisely, it fails to account for the intersections among different types of rights. To the end of renovating the paradigm, this article advances the principles of holism, globalism, and historicism as tools for human rights educators.

This article explores the dilemmas of the sociology of human rights - a growing field of academic research. Sociologists are increasingly conceptualizing poverty, global economic inequality, and social inequalities of race, class, gender, and sexual orientation not as social problems, but rather as human rights abuses. The shift of emphasis from the social problems perspective to the human rights perspective demands a different set of remedies from IGOs, national governments, and local authorities. Whereas in the past sociologists tended either to recommend modifications to social policies or to propose large-scale social transformation, they now find themselves advocating the implementation of human rights on the global, national, and local levels. This has brought sociologists into the area of global governance. The process of delineating an explicitly sociological perspective on human rights is impeded by two overlapping dilemmas: (1) the tension between an approach that emphasizes the analysis of 'rights effects' on the global, national, and local levels and an approach that stresses the advocacy of rights as a palliative for social inequalities; and (2) the tension between an interdisciplinary vision, in which sociology would join other disciplines in illuminating human rights and a unidisciplinary vision, in which sociologists and their allies would push for a unified social science founded on human rights.

This guide accompanies the following article: Mark Frezzo, ‘Sociology and Human Rights in the Post Development Era’, Sociology Compass 5/3 (2011): 203–214, 10.1111/j.1751‐9020.2011.00361.x.Author’s introductionThe founding of the Thematic Group on Human Rights and Global Justice in the International Sociological Association in 2006 and the Section on the Sociology of Human Rights in the American Sociological Association in 2008 testify to the emergence of the sociology of human rights as a distinct field of research and teaching. In a nutshell, the field involves the analysis of (a) the social conditions under which human rights treaties and laws are drafted, debated, implemented, and enforced, and (b) the manner in which human rights treaties and laws constrain and/or enable nation‐states, societies, communities, and individuals. This entails explaining the social impact of a series of United Nations documents: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), which created a framework for the implementation of human rights across the world; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), which outlined first‐generation rights to liberty and security of the person; and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1966), which outlined second‐generation rights to equality and third‐generation rights to solidarity. In the postwar period, these documents became important reference points not only for the UN and its member nations, but also for national liberation movements in the global South. More recently, these documents have guided the undertakings of non‐governmental organizations (including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch) and social movement organizations in responding to poverty, inequality, exclusion, and environmental degradation. In sum, the sociology of human rights draws on such fields as the sociology of law, development sociology, political economy, environmental sociology, organizational sociology, and social movement research in explaining ‘rights effects’.Author recommendsWhile Micheline Ishay’s The History of Human Rights: From Ancient Times to the Globalization Era (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2008) offers the authoritative account of the origins and evolution of human rights doctrine, Judith Blau and Alberto Moncada’s Human Rights: A Primer (Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2009) serves as an excellent introduction to cutting‐edge thinking on economic, social, cultural, and environmental rights in the present day.Jackie Smith’s Social Movements for Global Democracy (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007) and Clifford Bob’s edited volume, The International Struggle for Human Rights (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008) explain how popular movements in the age globalization have reinterpreted old rights, invented new rights, and, in the process, forged transnational coalitions with non‐governmental organizations and, in some cases, with UN agencies.Roland Burke’s Decolonization and the Evolution of International Human Rights (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010) offers great insights into the role of the global South – or what used to be known as the ‘Third World’– in reinterpreting and expanding the human rights canon.Online materialsIn analyzing the reinterpretation of the human rights canon, sociologists examine a number of primary sources from the UN: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm). More recently, the World Social Forum’s Charter of Principles (http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/main.php?id_menu=4&cd_language=2) has become an important touchstone for social movement organizations challenging neoliberalism.In the last few years, scholars have made substantial progress in institutionalizing the social scientific study of human rights. This mission statements of the Thematic Group on Human Rights and Global Justice in the International Sociological Association (http://www.isa‐sociology.org/tg03.htm) and the Section on the Sociology of Human Rights in the American Sociological Association (http://www.asanet.org/sections/humanrights.cfm) capture the essence of the sociology of human rights. In 2009, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), which represents all of the social and natural science disciplines in the US, launched its Science and Human Rights Program (http://shr.aaas.org/) to promote human rights through scientific discovery. The program’s website contains a wealth of information on AAAS activities in four areas: Engaging Scientists (http://shr.aaas.org/Programs/program_engaging.htm), Applying Science (http://shr.aaas.org/Programs/program_applying.htm), Conduct of Science (http://shr.aaas.org/Programs/program_conduct.htm), and Science as a Human Right (http://shr.aaas.org/Programs/program_article15.htm).Sample syllabus: sociology of human rightsCourse descriptionIn recent years, sociologists have joined legal scholars, political scientists, and philosophers in debating the nature and scope of human rights. In keeping with their training, sociologists explore the social conditions under which human rights legislation is drafted, interpreted, enforced, and violated. In addition, sociologists examine how the conferral of rights affects the conduct of societies, communities, and individuals. In the process of explaining how rights—understood as claims made on governments and other institutions—‘circulate’ among different social actors, this course examines a series of questions. How has the concept of human rights evolved from the Enlightenment to the present day? How have inter‐governmental organizations (IGOs), non‐governmental organizations (NGOs), and social movement organizations (SMOs) promoted human rights? What is the connection between human rights and democracy? What are the prospects for a rights regime on a global scale?Course objectivesThis course introduces students to the sociology of human rights – a growing field in academia. In becoming conversant in the scholarly debates on human rights, students will acquire a technical vocabulary: first‐generation rights (pertaining to liberty); second‐generation rights (pertaining to equality); and third‐generation rights (pertaining to solidarity). In addition, students will learn to apply the tools of sociology to the following phenomena: Historical conflicts over human rights. Networks of IGOs, NGOs, and movements pushing for new rights. Advocacy of human rights and processes of democratization. Proposals for a human rights regime on a global scale. Course readings Donnelly, Jack (2003). Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. Ishay, Micheline (2004). The History of Human Rights: From Ancient Times to the Globalization Era. Course schedule Week 1: What is the sociology of human rights? Discussion of Syllabus and Objectives. Introduction to the Study of Human Rights. Week 2: Human rights in the enlightenment and the industrial revolution Discussion of Reading: Ishay, 1–14 and 63–116, 117–72. Week 3: Human rights in the 20th century Discussion of Reading: Ishay, 173–244. Week 4: Globalization, human rights, and social movements Discussion of Reading: Ishay, 245–314. Week 5: Human rights in the 21st century Discussion of Reading: Ishay, 315–55. Week 6: Defining rights Discussion of Reading: Donnelly, 7–37. Week 7: Group rights Discussion of Reading: Donnelly, 89–106 and 204–41. Week 8: Global human rights regime? Discussion of Reading: Donnelly, 127–54. Weeks 9 and 10: Implementing human rights in the ‘Real World’ Class Project on human rights, development, and global governance. Focus questions Explain the three generations of human rights. Be sure to cover the following themes: liberty, equality, and solidarity; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1966). Explain the debate on universalism and relativism. Why is the debate important? Explain Ishay’s argument about the role of social movements in promoting human rights. In light of Ishay’s book, what it your assessment of the prospects for a more robust and enforceable human rights framework? How would you go about deepening human rights on a global scale? How does Donnelly’s theoretical analysis of human rights relate to Ishay’s historical analysis of human rights? To what extent are they complementary? How does Donnelly handle the debate on universalism and relativism? How does Donnelly explain group rights? How does he handle the problem of self‐determination? In your view, how has Donnelly contributed to the sociology of human rights? In light of Donnelly’s work, what are your expectations and hopes for the sociology of human rights?

Building on a world-historical analysis of post-Fordism, the communications revolution, neoliberalism, and the changing status of the United Nations Organization (UN), this article contextualizes three prominent disputes in the academic field of global studies: the debate on the definition, scope, and applicability of human rights; the debate on the successes and failures of the development project; and the debate on the origins, evolution, and future of global governance. In the process, this article argues that the existence of separate literatures on human rights, development, and global governance has obscured a significant and troubling question: How might one intervene in the process of transferring state-functions to the global and local levels? Cutting across the boundary between international relations (with its emphasis on the evolution of the interstate system) and macro-historical sociology (with its focus on the evolution of the world-economy and global society), this normative question is consistent with the mission of global studies-a domain that rejects both value-neutrality and its polar opposite, cultural relativism in favor of such normative concerns as "equality" and "justice." In addition, this question has been posed not only by a spectrum of social movements, the Zapatista Solidarity Network, and the World Social Forum (WSF), but also in such NGOs as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and, even more surprisingly, in the UN-the most prominent off shoot of US hegemony and the centerpiece of the global governance system. The paradoxical status of the UN as both an ostensible advocate of participatory democracy and the fulcrum of a hierarchical interstate system is symptomatic of a sea change in the contemporary world.