{"title":"盎格鲁-苏格兰人权大分歧","authors":"A. Struthers","doi":"10.3366/scot.2022.0395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There arguably exists something of a great human rights divide stretching across the ninety-six miles of the Anglo-Scottish border from the Solway Firth on the west coast to the town of Lamberton in the east. As Scotland appears to take impressive strides forward in human rights implementation, England seems to lag ever further behind international best practice. But how can two countries so closely linked in central governance display such seemingly divergent attitudes and approaches to human rights? This article seeks to explore this apparent polarisation in more detail and to investigate the factors that might be underlying it. In particular, it questions whether Scotland is more progressive when it comes to human rights because the people are more accepting of human rights as a concept worth upholding, or whether this ostensible national acceptance of human rights is instead clever political posturing on the part of the Scottish Government to paint a picture of a country that differs to such an extent from its southern neighbour that it really ought to be independent.","PeriodicalId":43295,"journal":{"name":"Scottish Affairs","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Great Anglo-Scottish Human Rights Divide\",\"authors\":\"A. Struthers\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/scot.2022.0395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There arguably exists something of a great human rights divide stretching across the ninety-six miles of the Anglo-Scottish border from the Solway Firth on the west coast to the town of Lamberton in the east. As Scotland appears to take impressive strides forward in human rights implementation, England seems to lag ever further behind international best practice. But how can two countries so closely linked in central governance display such seemingly divergent attitudes and approaches to human rights? This article seeks to explore this apparent polarisation in more detail and to investigate the factors that might be underlying it. In particular, it questions whether Scotland is more progressive when it comes to human rights because the people are more accepting of human rights as a concept worth upholding, or whether this ostensible national acceptance of human rights is instead clever political posturing on the part of the Scottish Government to paint a picture of a country that differs to such an extent from its southern neighbour that it really ought to be independent.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scottish Affairs\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scottish Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/scot.2022.0395\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scottish Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/scot.2022.0395","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
There arguably exists something of a great human rights divide stretching across the ninety-six miles of the Anglo-Scottish border from the Solway Firth on the west coast to the town of Lamberton in the east. As Scotland appears to take impressive strides forward in human rights implementation, England seems to lag ever further behind international best practice. But how can two countries so closely linked in central governance display such seemingly divergent attitudes and approaches to human rights? This article seeks to explore this apparent polarisation in more detail and to investigate the factors that might be underlying it. In particular, it questions whether Scotland is more progressive when it comes to human rights because the people are more accepting of human rights as a concept worth upholding, or whether this ostensible national acceptance of human rights is instead clever political posturing on the part of the Scottish Government to paint a picture of a country that differs to such an extent from its southern neighbour that it really ought to be independent.
期刊介绍:
Scottish Affairs, founded in 1992, is the leading forum for debate on Scottish current affairs. Its predecessor was Scottish Government Yearbooks, published by the University of Edinburgh''s ''Unit for the Study of Government in Scotland'' between 1976 and 1992. The movement towards the setting up the Scottish Parliament in the 1990s, and then the debate in and around the Parliament since 1999, brought the need for a new analysis of Scottish politics, policy and society. Scottish Affairs provides that opportunity. Fully peer-reviewed, it publishes articles on matters of concern to people who are interested in the development of Scotland, often setting current affairs in an international or historical context, and in a context of debates about culture and identity. This includes articles about similarly placed small nations and regions throughout Europe and beyond. The articles are authoritative and rigorous without being technical and pedantic. No subject area is excluded, but all articles pay attention to the social and political context of their topics. Thus Scottish Affairs takes up a position between informed journalism and academic analysis, and provides a forum for dialogue between the two. The readers and contributors include journalists, politicians, civil servants, business people, academics, and people in general who take an informed interest in current affairs.