Limits to tolerance: Tribal social order versus human rights

In a globalized world, there are clear differences in ideologies that are usually not spelled out. The paper follows the approach prescribed by Ben David’s “Victim’s Victimology” (2000) and applies a classical approach to ideologies in social sciences by W.B. Miller (1973). The main subject of th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kirchhoff Ferdinand Gerd, Khan Nazia
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Victimology Society of Serbia and Prometej-Beograd 2012-01-01
Series:Temida
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/1450-6637/2012/1450-66371202181K.pdf
Description
Summary:In a globalized world, there are clear differences in ideologies that are usually not spelled out. The paper follows the approach prescribed by Ben David’s “Victim’s Victimology” (2000) and applies a classical approach to ideologies in social sciences by W.B. Miller (1973). The main subject of this paper is the difference between local order ideology and human rights ideology. The aim is to show that formal social control is determined or influenced by these different ideologies. The authors analyze four cases of victimization of women in different social settings , in Sudan (2012), Canada (2012), India (1985) and in Pakistan (2002). In all these cases the local order ideology clashes with a human rights ideology. Limits to tolerance must be clear.
ISSN:1450-6637