In the controversy over female genital mutilation, Congress was quick to condemn practices throughout Africa and the Middle East and to take action criminalizing the practice domestically. Yet at the same time, it bluntly dismissed Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch when they pointed out human rights violations closer to home in the form of the disproportionately high rate of the imposition of capital punishment on black men, and the disempowerment of poor women under new draconian welfare rules. The irony of the United States' international condemnation of types of activities in which it engages within its own borders is not lost on Third World critics.Moral Imperialism sets out to bring an international human rights framework to the analysis of current international and domestic legal, political, and cultural crises. It explores the United States' moral supremacy during a time of clear domestic shortcomings and asks whether insisting that other nations adhere to norms that derive from dominant U.S. culture and history may harm societies—both within and outside of the U.S.—with radically different cultures and histories.Contributors include Beverly Greene, Kevin Johnson, M. Patricia Fernandez Kelly, Holly Maguigan, Boaventura De Sousa Santos, Saskia Sassen, and Eric Yamamoto.

In the controversy over female genital mutilation, Congress was quick to condemn practices throughout Africa and the Middle East and to take action criminalizing the practice domestically. Yet at the same time, it bluntly dismissed Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch when they pointed out human rights violations closer to home in the form of the disproportionately high rate of the imposition of capital punishment on black men, and the disempowerment of poor women under new draconian welfare rules. The irony of the United States' international condemnation of types of activities in which it engages within its own borders is not lost on Third World critics.Moral Imperialism sets out to bring an international human rights framework to the analysis of current international and domestic legal, political, and cultural crises. It explores the United States' moral supremacy during a time of clear domestic shortcomings and asks whether insisting that other nations adhere to norms that derive from dominant U.S. culture and history may harm societies—both within and outside of the U.S.—with radically different cultures and histories.Contributors include Beverly Greene, Kevin Johnson, M. Patricia Fernandez Kelly, Holly Maguigan, Boaventura De Sousa Santos, Saskia Sassen, and Eric Yamamoto.

Documents Annex: http://www.nyupress.org/justtradeannex/index.htmlIt is generally assumed that pro-trade laws are not good for human rights, and legislation that protects human rights hampers vibrant international trade. In a bold departure from this canon, Just Trade makes a case for reaching a middleground between these two fields, acknowledging their coexistence and the significant points at which they overlap. Using actual examples from many of the thirty-five nations of the Western Hemisphere, the authors—one a human rights scholar and the other a trade law expert—carefully combine their knowledge to examine human rights policiesthroughout the world, never overlooking the very real human rights problems that arise from international trade. However, instead of viewing the two kinds of law as isolated, polar, and sometimes hostile opposites, Berta Esperanza Hernández-Truyol and Stephen J. Powell make powerful suggestions for how these intersections may be navigated to promote an international marketplace that embraces both liberal trade andliberal protection of human rights.

In the controversy over female genital mutilation, Congress was quick to condemn practices throughout Africa and the Middle East and to take action criminalizing the practice domestically. Yet at the same time, it bluntly dismissed Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch when they pointed out human rights violations closer to home in the form of the disproportionately high rate of the imposition of capital punishment on black men, and the disempowerment of poor women under new draconian welfare rules. The irony of the United States' international condemnation of types of activities in which it engages within its own borders is not lost on Third World critics.Moral Imperialism sets out to bring an international human rights framework to the analysis of current international and domestic legal, political, and cultural crises. It explores the United States' moral supremacy during a time of clear domestic shortcomings and asks whether insisting that other nations adhere to norms that derive from dominant U.S. culture and history may harm societies—both within and outside of the U.S.—with radically different cultures and histories.Contributors include Beverly Greene, Kevin Johnson, M. Patricia Fernandez Kelly, Holly Maguigan, Boaventura De Sousa Santos, Saskia Sassen, and Eric Yamamoto.

In the controversy over female genital mutilation, Congress was quick to condemn practices throughout Africa and the Middle East and to take action criminalizing the practice domestically. Yet at the same time, it bluntly dismissed Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch when they pointed out human rights violations closer to home in the form of the disproportionately high rate of the imposition of capital punishment on black men, and the disempowerment of poor women under new draconian welfare rules. The irony of the United States' international condemnation of types of activities in which it engages within its own borders is not lost on Third World critics.Moral Imperialism sets out to bring an international human rights framework to the analysis of current international and domestic legal, political, and cultural crises. It explores the United States' moral supremacy during a time of clear domestic shortcomings and asks whether insisting that other nations adhere to norms that derive from dominant U.S. culture and history may harm societies—both within and outside of the U.S.—with radically different cultures and histories.Contributors include Beverly Greene, Kevin Johnson, M. Patricia Fernandez Kelly, Holly Maguigan, Boaventura De Sousa Santos, Saskia Sassen, and Eric Yamamoto.

Documents Annex: http://www.nyupress.org/justtradeannex/index.htmlIt is generally assumed that pro-trade laws are not good for human rights, and legislation that protects human rights hampers vibrant international trade. In a bold departure from this canon, Just Trade makes a case for reaching a middleground between these two fields, acknowledging their coexistence and the significant points at which they overlap. Using actual examples from many of the thirty-five nations of the Western Hemisphere, the authors—one a human rights scholar and the other a trade law expert—carefully combine their knowledge to examine human rights policiesthroughout the world, never overlooking the very real human rights problems that arise from international trade. However, instead of viewing the two kinds of law as isolated, polar, and sometimes hostile opposites, Berta Esperanza Hernández-Truyol and Stephen J. Powell make powerful suggestions for how these intersections may be navigated to promote an international marketplace that embraces both liberal trade andliberal protection of human rights.