DOCSLIB.ORG

A Human Rights Guide for Researching Racial and Religious Discrimination

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Human Rights Guide for Researching Racial and Religious Discrimination A HUMAN RIGHTS GUIDE FOR RESEARCHING RACIAL AND RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION IN COUNTERTERRORISM IN EUROPE © 2021 Amnesty International and the Open Society Foundations This publication is available as a PDF on the Amnesty International and Open Society Foundations websites under a Creative Commons license that allows copying and distributing the publication, only in its entirety, as long as it is attributed to Amnesty International and the Open Society Foundations and used for noncommercial educational or public policy purposes. Photographs may not be used separately from the publication. A Human Rights Guide for Researching Racial and Religious Discrimination in Counter-Terrorism in Europe Table of Contents Glossary of frequently used acronyms 7 Foreword Tendayi Achiume and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin 8 Foreword Momodou Malcolm Jallow 10 Acknowledgements 11 1. Introduction 12 1.1. Background 12 1.2. The guide 15 1.2.1. Why is there a need for this guide? 15 1.2.2. How was the guide developed? 16 1.2.3. Organisation of this guide 16 1.2.4. Who should use this guide? 17 2. Discrimination: legal standards and key definitions 22 2.1. Legal standards 22 2.1.1. The principle of equality and non-discrimination 22 2.1.2. International and regional legal instruments 23 2.1.3. The prohibition on discrimination in the counter-terrorism context 27 2.2. Defining discrimination 29 2.2.1. Elements of discrimination 29 2.2.1.1. ‘Any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference’ or ‘less favourable treatment’ 29 2.2.1.2. Based on prohibited grounds 30 2.2.1.3. Without objective and reasonable justification 31 2.2.1.4. Relevance of intent 32 2.2.2. Forms of discrimination 32 2.2.2.1. Direct discrimination 32 2.2.2.2. Indirect discrimination 33 2.2.2.3. Multiple, intersectional, and systemic discrimination 33 2.2.2.4. Harassment 35 2.2.3. Ethnic profiling 37 4 3. Demonstrating discrimination in the counter-terrorism context 39 3.1. Introduction 39 3.2. What needs to be demonstrated? 39 3.2.1. Less favourable treatment 39 3.2.2. Based on prohibited grounds 40 3.2.2.1. Race and religion–counter-terrorism and Muslims in Europe 40 3.2.2.2. Other grounds of discrimination in the counter-terrorism context 44 3.2.2.3. A causal link 47 3.2.3. Without objective and reasonable justification 47 3.2.3.1. Level of scrutiny 48 3.2.3.2. Legitimate aim 48 3.2.3.3. Appropriateness 49 3.2.3.4. Necessity 51 3.2.3.5. Proportionality 52 3.2.4. Burden of proof 53 3.3. How to demonstrate discrimination 54 3.3.1. Introduction 54 3.3.2. Laws and policies that explicitly target certain groups 55 3.3.2.1. Application in the counter-terrorism context 56 3.3.3. Comparators 56 3.3.3.1. Application to the counter-terrorism context 58 3.3.4. Use of stereotypes 62 3.3.4.1. Application in the counter-terrorism context 65 3.3.5. General context 66 3.3.5.1. Application in the counter-terrorism context 67 3.3.6. Sources 68 3.3.6.1. Interviews 68 3.3.6.2. Documentary evidence 70 3.3.6.3. Statements by authorities 72 3.3.6.4. Quantitative data 78 3.3.6.5. Testing and observation 85 5 4. Challenges 88 4.1. The ‘common sense’ defence 88 4.2. Lack of available evidence 90 4.3. Non-disclosure of evidence on national security grounds 92 4.4. Limited oversight and accountability in the counter-terrorism context 98 4.5. Structural nature of discrimination 100 5. Conclusion and key recommendations 102 5.1. Human rights organisations, researchers, and advocates 102 5.2. Oversight and accountability mechanisms 104 Annex 1: Non-discrimination provisions in international and regional legal instruments 105 Annex 2: Relevant handbooks and research guides on discrimination law 107 6 Glossary of frequently used acronyms CEDAW UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women CERD UN Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination CESCR UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union ECHR European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ECtHR European Court of Human Rights ECRI European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance EU European Union FRA EU Agency for Fundamental Rights HRC UN Human Rights Committee IACtHR Inter-American Court of Human Rights ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ICERD International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination IGO Intergovernmental Organisation NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NHRI National Human Rights Institution ODIHR OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights OHCHR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe UN United Nations 7 Foreword harms they experienced as a result of these state measures. Furthermore, racialized national We consider it an honour and privilege to write security and counter-terrorism frameworks have the foreword to this timely and necessary human all but neglected threats from extreme right-wing, rights research guide. Human rights protections white supremacist groups and individuals. remain precarious and fragile across the globe, but never more so than in geographies that many have We are both profoundly aware that crisis enables considered guardians for rights and safe places for states to take measures whose effects fall ideas, norms, and practices of rights particularly heaviest on those who are marginal and perceived for the most vulnerable. Producing this guide to as ‘other’ in society. Racial, ethnic, and religious address the perniciousness of discrimination minorities are particularly vulnerable to direct on racial, ethnic, religious ,and national origin and indirect targeting from security and counter- bases in the European counter-terrorism context terrorism measures. Notably, these are often underscores the extent to which assumptions the same communities that have well-founded about where rights are ‘safe’ and where they are histories of mistrust, abuse, and maltreatment not are often regrettably unfounded. from those agents of the state whose powers are augmented and enabled by counter-terrorism law We recognise that many European states have and practice. As this guide amply demonstrates, experienced profound security challenges legacies of harm and mistrust provide the in recent decades and that the violence and bedrock upon which new patterns of injustice and harm caused by terrorism have been painful discrimination are layered. for individuals, families, and communities. Yet, the response to these security challenges has The guide meticulously documents that countering been fraught and, in many contexts, harmful terrorism, which remains undefined, has been not only to individuals and communities but on a growth trajectory in Europe with no end in to the rule of law and to democracy itself. In sight. It compromises ever-expanding criminal particular, both our mandates have observed law, increasingly regulates the pre-criminal that the harms of security responses and arenas, engages administrative systems, and counter-terrorism measures are not felt equally finds its way into the capillaries of everyday life by all who call Europe their home. Rather, the from health access, to classrooms, to houses of costs of securitization and counter-terrorism worship. The breadth of places where counter- have had identifiable and disparate impact on terrorism regulation is applied reaches from certain historically and socially marginalized air to shore and sea. In these multiplicities of groups perceived as ‘threats’ to national places not all people are treated equally, and security. The resurgence of ethnonationalist discriminatory practice flourishes, enabled by populist movements across Europe, among political discourses of ‘othering’ and of ‘suspect’ other trends, has further unjustly cemented the communities where suspicion is reserved for treatment of certain racial, ethnic, and religious minority racial, ethnic, and religious communities. minority groups as dangerous ‘outsiders.’ As a The guide rightly identifies and catalogues the result, too often a counter-terrorism apparatus discriminatory impacts on Muslim communities that is facially neutral has resulted in human and those perceived to be Muslim, and most rights violations on a racially and religiously saliently provides a concrete roadmap of the discriminatory basis. Counter-terrorism measures patterns, prevalence, and systematic nature of have been at the forefront of marginalizing, discrimination. In doing so, the guide fills an stigmatizing, and rendering further inequalities evident gap given the willingness or inability of upon individuals, groups, and communities states to name and specify these experiences who are generally ill-equipped to challenge the as racism and xenophobia, or more concretely 8 to acknowledge their systemic, embedded, and The protection of human rights is essential to often intersectional nature. Particularly, the guide keep societies safe and secure. The vibrancy, provides the tools to apply antidiscrimination inclusion, and protection of racial, ethnic, and law to the counter-terrorism field, offering a religious minorities is a litmus test on the health missing link that will be invaluable for those at of a democracy. Counter-terrorism shortcuts the frontlines of pushing back against counter- and nullification of rights cast long shadows terrorism using a human rights frame. on the rule of law. This guide offers practical solutions to expose and call to account the We hope that the guide will be taken up on the discriminatory harms of excessive and misdirected ground by civil society actors including human counter-terrorism. We commend the work and rights organisations and defenders, faith groups, affirm its value. humanitarians, and researchers to expand their existing toolkits so as to challenge systemic Tendayi Achiume discrimination that racial, ethnic, and religious Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of minorities experience because of a normalized racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and (and accelerating) counter-terrorism architecture related intolerance across Europe.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Global Alliance for Open Society
    INTRODUCTION A Global Alliance for Open Society The goal of the Soros foundations network throughout the world is to transform closed societies into open ones and to protect and expand the values of existing open societies. In pursuit of this mission, the Open Society Institute (OSI) and the foundations established and supported by George Soros seek to strengthen open society principles and practices against authoritarian regimes and the negative consequences of globalization. The Soros network supports efforts in civil society, education, media, public health, and human and women’s rights, as well as social, legal, and economic reform. 6 SOROS FOUNDATIONS NETWORK | 2001 REPORT Our foundations and programs operate in more than ࡯ national government aid agencies, including the 50 countries in Central and Eastern Europe, the former United States Agency for International Soviet Union, Africa, Southeast Asia, Latin America, and Development (USAID), Britain’s Department for the United States. International Development (DFID), the Swedish The Soros foundations network supports the concept International Development Cooperation Agency of open society, which, at its most fundamental level, is (SIDA), the Canadian International Development based on the recognition that people act on imperfect Agency (CIDA), the Dutch MATRA program, the knowledge and that no one is in possession of the ultimate Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation truth. In practice, an open society is characterized by the (SDC), the German Foreign Ministry, and a num- rule of law; respect for human rights, minorities, and ber of Austrian government agencies, including minority opinions; democratically elected governments; a the ministries of education and foreign affairs, market economy in which business and government are that operate bilaterally; separate; and a thriving civil society.
    [Show full text]
  • The Attacks OPEN SOCIETY NEWS EDITOR’S NOTE
    OPEN SOCIETY SOROS FOUNDATIONS NETWORK NEWS WINTER | 2002 NEWS After the Attacks OPEN SOCIETY NEWS EDITOR’S NOTE WINTER 2002 SOROS FOUNDATIONS NETWORK The September 11 terrorist attacks on America and the war in Afghanistan have prompted a host of responses from individuals, organizations, and CHAIRMAN George Soros governments around the world. For the Soros foundations network, the PRESIDENT aftermath of September 11 has had a resounding impact in areas ranging from Aryeh Neier the protection of immigrants in the United States to the promotion of human EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT Stewart J. Paperin rights in Uzbekistan. VICE PRESIDENT Deborah Harding SENIOR POLICY ADVISOR This issue of OSN examines some of the key areas of concern that have Laura Silber DEPUTY DIRECTOR emerged since September 11 to call attention to the importance of protecting James Goldston and strengthening open society values in this time of crisis. DIRECTOR OF U. S . PROGRAMS Gara LaMarche DIRECTOR OF NETWORK PROGRAMS By including materials from the “After the Attacks” section of the Soros website Elizabeth Lorant EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OSI– BUDAPEST (www.soros.org), this issue of OSN also highlights the many ways the Soros Katalin E. Koncz network is helping the public understand the ramifications of September 11. Open Society News In addition to essays and editorials by prominent open society advocates, the EDITOR “After the Attacks” section on the web features forums and discussions with William Kramer leading policymakers, experts, and activists. It also provides information about ASSISTANT EDITOR Sarah Miller-Davenport where and how people can get help in dealing with the sadness, anger, and CONTRIBUTING EDITOR Ari Korpivaara confusion created by terrorism and war.
    [Show full text]
  • RESTORING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP Restoring American Leadership
    RESTORING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP Restoring American Leadership The United States today faces a daunting array of international crises and simmering transnational problems. The current administration has committed itself to “effective multilateralism” and a world in which strong alliances play a key role in solving transnational challenges. | Cooperative Restoring American Leadership provides analysis and 13 COOPERA recommendations on 13 critical issues from international cooperation in the war on terror to curbing proliferation Steps of nuclear weapons to advancing the rights of women across the globe. Each paper offers a specific set of recommendations for action by the president consistent TIVE STEPS TO ADV with his stated values. Restoring American Leadership is to Advance Global Progress offered as a constructive contribution to the ongoing debate about how America can best assert responsible leadership in a new era. ANCE GLOBAL PROGRESS 13 Open Society Institute | Security and Peace Institute Open Society Institute | Security and Peace Institute Restoring American Leadership Cooperative Steps 13to Advance Global Progress Open Society Institute | Security and Peace Institute Copyright © 2005 by Open Society Institute and The Century Foundation All rights reserved. No part of this publication can be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior permission of the publishers. This book is cosponsored by the Open Society Institute, a private operating and grantmaking foundation which aims to shape public policy to promote democratic governance, human rights, and economic, legal, and social reform, and by the Security and Peace Institute (SPI), a joint initiative of the Center for American Progress and The Century Foundation, which works to advance a responsible U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Black Lives Matter: Eliminating Racial Inequity in the Criminal Justice
    BLACK LIVES MATTER: ELIMINATING RACIAL INEQUITY IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM For more information, contact: This report was written by Nazgol Ghandnoosh, Ph.D., Research Analyst at The Sentencing Project. The report draws on a 2014 publication The Sentencing Project of The Sentencing Project, Incorporating Racial Equity into Criminal 1705 DeSales Street NW Justice Reform. 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 Cover photo by Brendan Smialowski of Getty Images showing Congressional staff during a walkout at the Capitol in December 2014. (202) 628-0871 The Sentencing Project is a national non-profit organization engaged sentencingproject.org in research and advocacy on criminal justice issues. Our work is twitter.com/sentencingproj supported by many individual donors and contributions from the facebook.com/thesentencingproject following: Atlantic Philanthropies Morton K. and Jane Blaustein Foundation craigslist Charitable Fund Ford Foundation Bernard F. and Alva B. Gimbel Foundation General Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church JK Irwin Foundation Open Society Foundations Overbrook Foundation Public Welfare Foundation Rail Down Charitable Trust David Rockefeller Fund Elizabeth B. and Arthur E. Roswell Foundation Tikva Grassroots Empowerment Fund of Tides Foundation Wallace Global Fund Working Assets/CREDO Copyright © 2015 by The Sentencing Project. Reproduction of this document in full or in part, and in print or electronic format, only by permission of The Sentencing Project. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 3 I. Uneven Policing in Ferguson and New York City 6 II. A Cascade of Racial Disparities Throughout the Criminal Justice System 10 III. Causes of Disparities 13 A. Differential crime rates 13 B. Four key sources of unwarranted racial disparities in criminal justice outcomes 15 IV.
    [Show full text]
  • Soros Foundations Network Report
    2 0 0 7 OSI MISSION SOROS FOUNDATIONS NETWORK REPORT C O V E R P H O T O G R A P H Y Burmese monks, normally the picture of calm The Open Society Institute works to build vibrant and reflection, became symbols of resistance in and tolerant democracies whose governments SOROS FOUNDATIONS NETWORK REPORT 2007 2007 when they joined demonstrations against are accountable to their citizens. To achieve its the military government’s huge price hikes mission, OSI seeks to shape public policies that on fuel and subsequently the regime’s violent assure greater fairness in political, legal, and crackdown on the protestors. Thousands of economic systems and safeguard fundamental monks were arrested and jailed. The Democratic rights. On a local level, OSI implements a range Voice of Burma, an Open Society Institute of initiatives to advance justice, education, grantee, helped journalists smuggle stories out public health, and independent media. At the of Burma. OSI continues to raise international same time, OSI builds alliances across borders awareness of conditions in Burma and to support and continents on issues such as corruption organizations seeking to transform Burma from and freedom of information. OSI places a high a closed to an open society. more on page 91 priority on protecting and improving the lives of marginalized people and communities. more on page 143 www.soros.org SOROS FOUNDATIONS NETWORK REPORT 2007 Promoting vibrant and tolerant democracies whose governments are accountable to their citizens ABOUT THIS REPORT The Open Society Institute and the Soros foundations network spent approximately $440,000,000 in 2007 on improving policy and helping people to live in open, democratic societies.
    [Show full text]
  • Emergency Funds in Europe and the United States
    EMERGENCY FUNDS IN EUROPE AND THE UNITED STATES RESPONDING TO THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS SUSTAINING EDUCATION FOSTERING DEVELOPMENT HELPING RECOVERY ENGAGING COMMUNITIES INTERVENING IN A TIME OF CRISIS THE OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS work around the world to build strong and tolerant democracies. For nearly 30 years this work has focused on enabling lasting change. Some- times a crisis is so acute, its impact on people’s lives and on a region’s stability so immediate, it requires an emergency intervention. Europe, and before that the United States, have been hard hit by the global financial crisis. The Open Society Foundations responded to the su!ering caused by the economic collapse by providing emergency funds to essential services and civil society organizations in Europe and the United States. It is not the first time Europeans and Americans have confronted such a situation and it is not the first time the Open Society Foundations have used emergency funds to ease the pain and turmoil that can accompany economic crisis. (Top) In Budapest, Hungary, homeless people sleep on a sidewalk. ©BELA DOKA"ANZENBERGER"REDUX (Bottom) The kitchen at Vifania, a reintegration center run by the Social Partnership with funding from the Emergency Fund and the International Renaissance Foundation. Vifania o!ers, food, shelter, and classes to homeless people, drug users, and the elderly. Kyiv, Ukraine, 2011. ©OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS"VIOREL URSU 1 2 THE EMERGENCY FUND FOR EUROPE IN "##$, THE OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS established the Emergency Fund to tackle some of the most pressing social and economic issues aris- ing from the financial crisis a#ecting countries in Eastern Europe and beyond.
    [Show full text]
  • The Open Society Foundations and George Soros
    THE OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS AND GEORGE SOROS A BRIEF HISTORY The Open Society Foundations were founded by George Soros, one of the world’s foremost philanthropists, who has given away over $32 billion of a personal fortune made in the financial markets. Open Society has supported individuals and organizations across the globe fighting for freedom of expression, transparency, accountable government, and for societies that promote justice and equality. This giving has often focused on those who face discrimination purely for who they are, such as Europe’s Roma people, and others pushed to the margins of mainstream society. Soros has experienced such intolerance first-hand. Born in Hungary in 1930, he lived through the Nazi occupation, which resulted in the murder of over 500,000 Hungarian Jews. In 1947, as the Communists took power, Soros left Budapest for London and then emigrated to the United States, entering the world of finance and investments where he made his fortune. Soros began his philanthropy in 1979, giving scholarships to black South Africans living under apartheid. In the 1980s, he helped promote the open exchange of ideas in Communist Hungary; after the fall of the Berlin Wall, he sought to strengthen democratic practice and institutions across Eastern and Central Europe. With the Cold War over, he extended his philanthropy to the United States, and to Africa, Asia, and Latin America, supporting a vast array of new efforts to create more accountable, transparent, and democratic societies. 2019 BUDGET BY SECTOR Democratic
    [Show full text]
  • Education Policy Centers Network
    EducationEducation PolicyPolicy CentersCenters NetworkNetwork NEWSLETTER Issue 9, June 2005 http://epc.objectis.net Inside this issue: EDITORIAL Editorial International Conference on Curriculum Reform and Implemen- International Conference on tation in the 21st Century Curriculum Reform and Implementation in the 21st Century News from Countries: By Esin Aksay and Batuhan Aydagül • Hungary Education Reform Initiative, Turkey • Kosovo • Montenegro “Educational transformations are always the result and the symptom of the social transformations • Romania in terms of which they are to be explained. For a people to feel at any given moment the need to change its educational system, it is necessary that new ideas and needs have emerged for which • Slovakia the old system is no longer adequate. But these needs and ideas do not arise spontaneously ¹…” • Uzbekistan (Emil Durkheim) International Organizations Education transformation is highly dependent on continuous curriculum reform. Reform should be • OSI ESP based on comprehensive and well-designed plans as well as on persistent efforts of policy makers • European Commission and stakeholders to implement it successfully. This process could be further enlightened if sup- • World Bank ported through studies and conferences that promote intellectual exchanges. New projects & initiatives With these aspirations in mind, the Board of Education of the Turkish Ministry of National Educa- tion hosted the International Conference on Curriculum Reform and Implementation in the EPC Under the Spot Light 21st Century together with the Education Reform Initiative, Delegation of the European Commis- Education Reform Initiative sion to Turkey and World Bank in Istanbul on 8-10 June 2005. The conference attracted inter- TURKEY ested policy-makers, analysts, scholars, experts, teachers and representatives from NGO’s and international organizations in more than 10 countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Hungarian Grantees 2015
    OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS – OUR HUNGARIAN GRANTEES 2015 The Open Society Foundations have been present in Hungary for 30 years, supporting organizations and individuals who play an active role in defending demo- cratic values, minority rights, freedom of the media and quality education for all. We are proud to present here the organizations we supported in Hungary in 2015. 2015 was chosen as this allows review of a year in full; complete information for 2016 is not yet available. This brief publication aims to provide insight on our work in Hungary where the Open Society Foundations has supported civil society for over 30 years. A note on terminology: we define “Hungarian grantees” as organiza- tions based in Hungary and/or organizations with significant activities in Hungary. Regional grants awarded to entities based in Hungary but with no specific compo- nent addressing Hungary are not included in this publication. This document presents grants awarded in 2015. The total amount of the grant is listed. The grant duration can vary between one and 36 months, continuing the grant activity beyond 2015 in some cases. 1 EARLY CHILDHOOD & EDUCATION Igazgyöngy Foundation Miradouro Ltd. From inception, Open Society has been active in promoting access to quality education for all, This grant supports the Igazgyöngy Foundation’s skill The purpose of the grant is to create a training and in emphasizing the importance of getting children into school early. Today, we support Hungarian development efforts through artistic activities with package for the educational use of the film organizations that provide mentoring and tutoring for students from underprivileged backgrounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Network of Education Policy Centers Directory
    NETWORK OF EDUCATION POLICY CENTERS DIRECTORY 2004 © 2004 Education Policy Centers Edited by the Centre for Educational Policy Analysis – Budapest. Supported by the Education Support Program of the Open Society Institute – Budapest. Printed in Hungary, October 2004 Design and Layout by: János Mészáros TABLE OF CONTENTS The Network of Education Policy Centers . 4 Albania Center for Democratic Education . 7 Armenia Education and Training Unit . 11 Croatia Center for Educational Research and Development . 14 Czech Republic Institute for Social and Economic Analyses . 17 Estonia PRAXIS Center for Policy Studies . 20 Georgia International Institute for Education Policy, Planning & Management . 24 Hungary Centre for Educational Policy Analysis . 31 Kosovo Kosova Education Center . 33 Kyrgyzstan Center for Public Policy . 36 Foundation 'Education Initiatives Support' . 39 Latvia PROVIDUS Center for Public Policy . 43 Lithuania Center for Education Policy . 48 Moldova Institute for Public Policy . 50 Poland The Institute of Public Affairs – Education Policy Program . 54 Romania Center Education 2000+ . 59 Russia Center for Educational Policy Studies . 66 Serbia Educational Reform Circles . 73 Slovakia Center for Education Policy . 77 Slovak Governance Institute . 81 Slovenia Center for Educational Policy Studies . 85 Tajikistan PULSE Educational Reforms Support Unit . 88 Turkey Education Reform Initiative . 92 Ukraine Center for Educational Policy . 95 Educational Studies Center . 99 International Centre for Policy Studies . 102 THE NETWORK OF
    [Show full text]
  • George Soros at Central European University on October 26, 2009
    Transcript: General Theory of Reflexivity The following is a transcript of a lecture given by George Soros at Central European University on October 26, 2009. In the course of my life, I have developed a conceptual framework which has helped me both to make money as a hedge fund manager and to spend money as a policy oriented philanthropist. But the framework itself is not about money, it is about the relationship between thinking and reality, a subject that has been extensively studied by philosophers from early on. I started developing my philosophy as a student at the London School of Economics in the late 1950s. I took my final exams one year early and I had a year to fill before I was qualified to receive my degree. I could choose my tutor and I chose Karl Popper, the Viennese-born philosopher whose book The Open Society and Its Enemies had made a profound impression on me. In his books Popper argued that the empirical truth cannot be known with absolute certainty. Even scientific laws can't be verified beyond a shadow of a doubt: they can only be falsified by testing. One failed test is enough to falsify, but no amount of conforming instances is sufficient to verify. Scientific laws are hypothetical in character and their truth remains subject to testing. Ideologies which claim to be in possession of the ultimate truth are making a false claim; therefore, they can be imposed on society only by force. This applies to Communism, Fascism and National Socialism alike. All these ideologies lead to repression.
    [Show full text]
  • Highlights from Over 30 Years of the Open Society Foundations in Hungary
    OPEN SOCIETY IN HUNGARY HIGHLIGHTS FROM OVER 30 YEARS OF THE OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS IN HUNGARY Today, the Open Society Foundations fund hundreds of groups all around the world who share our vision of a more just world where everyone has equal opportunities and protections, and where everyone can have a say in how they are governed. This work, which now extends to more than 100 countries, began in 1984 in Hungary, when George Soros, the hugely successful Budapest-born investor, set up his first philanthropic foundation in what was then a Communist country. Over the coming years, the development of what was called the Hungarian Soros Foundation reflected the dramatic political events that unfolded in Hungary, and helped set the priorities that guide the Open Society Foundations today. HOW DID THE OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATION START IN HUNGARY? In 1984, Hungary was still a one-party state, controlled by a Communist Party that was flirting with free market reforms. Soros believed that the Communist system was doomed to fail, and sought to help Hungary prepare for a democratic future. In its earliest days, the new foundation, known as the Soros Foundation until 2007, set out to identify and fund reform-minded organizations that were organized along participatory lines, outside direct party control, such as self-governing forums of university students. George Soros signing papers establishing the foundation in Hungary, 1984 2 WHAT WERE THE FOUNDATION’S EARLIEST EFFORTS IN HUNGARY? During the 1980s, in the pre-internet era, Hungary’s Communist authorities strictly controlled photocopiers as a way of controlling the dissemination of information.
    [Show full text]