Hendrik Simon – författare

The history of war is also a history of its justification. The contributions to this book argue that the justification of war rarely happens as empty propaganda. While it is directed at mobilizing support and reducing resistance, it is not purely instrumental. Rather, the justification of force is part of an incessant struggle over what is to count as justifiable behaviour in a given historical constellation of power, interests, and norms. This way, the justificationof specific wars interacts with international order as a normative frame of reference for dealing with conflict. The justification of war shapes this order, and is being shaped by it.As the justification of specific wars entails a critique of war in general, the use of force in international relations has always been accompanied by political and scholarly discourses on its appropriateness. In much of the pertinent literature the dominating focus is on theoretical or conceptual debates as a mirror of how international normative orders evolve. In contrast, the focus of the present volume is on theory and political practice as sources for the re- and de-construction of the wayin which the justification of war and international order interact.With contributions from international law, history, and international relations, and from Western and non-Western perspectives, this book offers a unique collection of papers exploring the continuities and changes in war discourses as they respond to and shape normative orders from early modern times to the present.

The history of war is also a history of its justification. The contributions to this book argue that the justification of war rarely happens as empty propaganda. While it is directed at mobilizing support and reducing resistance, it is not purely instrumental. Rather, the justification of force is part of an incessant struggle over what is to count as justifiable behaviour in a given historical constellation of power, interests, and norms. This way, the justificationof specific wars interacts with international order as a normative frame of reference for dealing with conflict. The justification of war shapes this order, and is being shaped by it.As the justification of specific wars entails a critique of war in general, the use of force in international relations has always been accompanied by political and scholarly discourses on its appropriateness. In much of the pertinent literature the dominating focus is on theoretical or conceptual debates as a mirror of how international normative orders evolve. In contrast, the focus of the present volume is on theory and political practice as sources for the re- and de-construction of the wayin which the justification of war and international order interact.With contributions from international law, history, and international relations, and from Western and non-Western perspectives, this book offers a unique collection of papers exploring the continuities and changes in war discourses as they respond to and shape normative orders from early modern times to the present.

The nineteenth century has been understood as an age in which states could wage war against each other if they deemed it politically necessary. According to this narrative, it was not until the establishment of the League of Nations, the Kellogg-Briand Pact, and the UN Charter that the ''free right to go to war'' (liberum ius ad bellum) was gradually outlawed. Better times dawned as this anarchy of waging war ended, resulting in radical transformations of international law and politics. However, as a ''free right to go to war'' has never been empirically proven, this story of progress is puzzling. In A Century of Anarchy?: War, Normativity, and the Birth of Modern International Order, Hendrik Simon challenges this narrative by outlining a genealogy of modern war justifications and drawing on scientific, political, and public discourses. He argues that liberum ius ad bellum is an invention created by realist legal scholars in Imperial Germany who argued against the mainstream of European liberalism and, paradoxically, that the now forgotten Sonderweg reading was universalized in international historiographies after the World Wars. A Century of Anarchy? is a compelling read for historians, jurists, political theorists, international relations scholars, and anyone interested in understanding the emergence of the modern international order. In this groundbreaking work, Simon not only artfully deconstructs the myth of liberum ius ad bellum but also traces the political and theoretical roots of the modern prohibition of war to the long nineteenth century (1789-1918).

The nineteenth century has been understood as an age in which states could wage war against each other if they deemed it politically necessary. According to this narrative, it was not until the establishment of the League of Nations, the Kellogg-Briand Pact, and the UN Charter that the ''free right to go to war'' (liberum ius ad bellum) was gradually outlawed. Better times dawned as this anarchy of waging war ended, resulting in radical transformations of international law and politics. However, as a ''free right to go to war'' has never been empirically proven, this story of progress is puzzling. In A Century of Anarchy?: War, Normativity, and the Birth of Modern International Order, Hendrik Simon challenges this narrative by outlining a genealogy of modern war justifications and drawing on scientific, political, and public discourses. He argues that liberum ius ad bellum is an invention created by realist legal scholars in Imperial Germany who argued against the mainstream of European liberalism and, paradoxically, that the now forgotten Sonderweg reading was universalized in international historiographies after the World Wars. A Century of Anarchy? is a compelling read for historians, jurists, political theorists, international relations scholars, and anyone interested in understanding the emergence of the modern international order. In this groundbreaking work, Simon not only artfully deconstructs the myth of liberum ius ad bellum but also traces the political and theoretical roots of the modern prohibition of war to the long nineteenth century (1789-1918).

The nineteenth century has been understood as an age in which states could wage war against each other if they deemed it politically necessary. According to this narrative, it was not until the establishment of the League of Nations, the Kellogg-Briand Pact, and the UN Charter that the 'free right to go to war' (liberum ius ad bellum) was gradually outlawed. Better times dawned as this anarchy of waging war ended, resulting in radical transformations of international law and politics.However, as a 'free right to go to war' has never been empirically proven, this story of progress is puzzling. In A Century of Anarchy?: War, Normativity, and the Birth of Modern International Order, Hendrik Simon challenges this narrative by outlining a genealogy of modern war justifications and drawing on scientific, political, and public discourses. He argues that liberum ius ad bellum is an invention created by realist legal scholars in Imperial Germany who argued against the mainstream of European liberalism and, paradoxically, that the now forgotten Sonderweg reading was universalized in international historiographies after the World Wars.A Century of Anarchy? is a compelling read for historians, jurists, political theorists, international relations scholars, and anyone interested in understanding the emergence of the modern international order. In this groundbreaking work, Simon not only artfully deconstructs the myth of liberum ius ad bellum but also traces the political and theoretical roots of the modern prohibition of war to the long nineteenth century (1789-1918).

The history of war is also a history of its justification. The contributions to this book argue that the justification of war rarely happens as empty propaganda. While it is directed at mobilizing support and reducing resistance, it is not purely instrumental. Rather, the justification of force is part of an incessant struggle over what is to count as justifiable behaviour in a given historical constellation of power, interests, and norms. This way, the justification of specific wars interacts with international order as a normative frame of reference for dealing with conflict. The justification of war shapes this order, and is being shaped by it. As the justification of specific wars entails a critique of war in general, the use of force in international relations has always been accompanied by political and scholarly discourses on its appropriateness. In much of the pertinent literature the dominating focus is on theoretical or conceptual debates as a mirror of how international normative orders evolve. In contrast, the focus of the present volume is on theory and political practice as sources for the re- and de-construction of the way in which the justification of war and international order interact. With contributions from international law, history, and international relations, and from Western and non-Western perspectives, this book offers a unique collection of papers exploring the continuities and changes in war discourses as they respond to and shape normative orders from early modern times to the present.

Ein leidenschaftliches Plädoyer für die Stärke des Rechts gegen das Recht des Stärkeren»Der Krieg ist zurück in Europa!«, heißt es – und mit ihm die Angst. Müssen wir wieder die Sprache der Machtpolitik lernen, um den Frieden zu sichern? Stehen wir wirklich vor dem Ende der regelbasierten Ordnung?Der preisgekrönte Friedensforscher Hendrik Simon bezieht in dieser hitzigen Debatte klar Stellung: Krieg war nie bloße Politik, er musste stets gerechtfertigt werden.Simon zerlegt die Argumente der »Realpolitiker« und zeigt anhand historischer und aktueller Beispiele – von der US-Außenpolitik bis zum russischen Angriff auf die Ukraine –, warum das Völkerrecht keine naive Träumerei ist, sondern unser wichtigster Schutzschild gegen Willkür.Eine brillante, verständliche Analyse, die Orientierung in unsicheren Zeiten bietet und Mut macht, das Recht entschieden gegen die Macht zu verteidigen.

This book covers the development of mathematical competences in childhood. The possible difficulties when building these competences are described, as are the criteria qualifying calculation difficulties or dyslexia.The second part of the work places its emphasis on comprehensive practical methods of furthering children -developing basic mathematical skills and reducing the mathematics anxiety.Finally advice to implement these methods at school, other institutions and at home is given.

Studienarbeit aus dem Jahr 2023 im Fachbereich Führung und Personal - Sonstiges, Note: 1,3, Universität der Künste Berlin, Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: Diese Arbeit behandelt das Thema Servant Leadership und den Einfluss der Teamgröße auf dessen Anwendung in Organisationen. Zunächst wird in Kapitel 2 eine Einführung in die theoretischen Grundlagen gegeben, wobei die Definition und Prinzipien von Servant Leadership sowie die Bedeutung der Teamgröße in Organisationen erläutert werden. In Kapitel 3 wird untersucht, wie die Teamgröße die Anwendung von Servant Leadership beeinflusst. Hierbei werden Aspekte wie effektive Kommunikation und Beziehungsmanagement, Entscheidungsfindung und Problemlösung sowie Autonomie und Verantwortung im Team betrachtet.Kapitel 4 widmet sich der Analyse empirischer Studien und Fallbeispiele. Es werden Untersuchungsmethoden und Datenerhebung sowie die Analyse von Fallstudien dargelegt, bevor eine Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse präsentiert wird. Abschließend werden in Kapitel 5 Schlussfolgerungen und Implikationen für die Praxis gezogen. Dabei werden Empfehlungen für die optimale Teamgröße im Kontext von Servant Leadership gegeben und Limitationen der Arbeit sowie ein Ausblick auf zukünftige Forschung diskutiert.