Worth what we decide: a defense of the right to leisure

One of the most routinely philosophically and politically attacked sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is article 24: 'Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.' Defending against th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The international journal of human rights 2013-03, Vol.17 (3), p.329-349
Hauptverfasser: Richards, David L., Carbonetti, Benjamin C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 349
container_issue 3
container_start_page 329
container_title The international journal of human rights
container_volume 17
creator Richards, David L.
Carbonetti, Benjamin C.
description One of the most routinely philosophically and politically attacked sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is article 24: 'Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.' Defending against these attacks is important. For example, only the USA and Somalia, among UN member states, are not parties to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). One reason for the USA's status is political opposition to CRC article 31, which maintains 'States parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure...' Our article defends article 24 from well-known criticisms. We maintain rights are social constructs and, as evidence of social construction, we provide a genealogy of article 24. We also address the social psychology of rest/leisure and trends in actual state practice.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/13642987.2012.720976
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1322713757</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1322713757</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-fea1c5e01159a8f88fb40b1894b66c4cb406829d593e313f0bc68332bfcd976e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtLxDAUhYso-PwHLgJu3HS8eTQPNyLiCwQ3iu5Cmt44lU6jSYdh_r0toxsX4uqeC985cDhFcUxhRkHDGeVSMKPVjAFlM8XAKLlV7FElRAkVf90e9YiUE7Nb7Of8DsCYUbBXqJeYhjlZzd1AVkga9G2D58SNKmCfkcRAhjmS1L7NBzJE0mGblwkPi53guoxH3_egeL65frq6Kx8eb--vLh9KLwwbyoCO-gqB0so4HbQOtYCaaiNqKb3w4yc1M01lOHLKA9Reas5ZHXwzlkB-UJxucj9S_FxiHuyizR67zvUYl9lSznRFAbT5D8oU5apS_0CphAqknFJPfqHvcZn6sfNEMS5AV2ykxIbyKeacMNiP1C5cWlsKdtrI_mxkp43sZqPRdrGxtX2IaeFWMXWNHdy6iykk1_s2W_5nwhf19pRL</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1312340852</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Worth what we decide: a defense of the right to leisure</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Richards, David L. ; Carbonetti, Benjamin C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Richards, David L. ; Carbonetti, Benjamin C.</creatorcontrib><description>One of the most routinely philosophically and politically attacked sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is article 24: 'Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.' Defending against these attacks is important. For example, only the USA and Somalia, among UN member states, are not parties to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). One reason for the USA's status is political opposition to CRC article 31, which maintains 'States parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure...' Our article defends article 24 from well-known criticisms. We maintain rights are social constructs and, as evidence of social construction, we provide a genealogy of article 24. We also address the social psychology of rest/leisure and trends in actual state practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1364-2987</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-053X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2012.720976</identifier><identifier>CODEN: IJHRF6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Routledge</publisher><subject>Adequate Rest and Leisure ; Congresses and Conventions ; Criticism ; Holidays ; Hours of work ; Human rights ; International Law ; International organizations ; Leisure ; Philosophy ; Political Opposition ; Politics ; Right Wing Politics ; Social construction ; Social psychology ; Somalia ; U.S.A ; UN Conventions ; United Nations ; United States of America ; Universal Declaration of Human Rights</subject><ispartof>The international journal of human rights, 2013-03, Vol.17 (3), p.329-349</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2013</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd. 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-fea1c5e01159a8f88fb40b1894b66c4cb406829d593e313f0bc68332bfcd976e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-fea1c5e01159a8f88fb40b1894b66c4cb406829d593e313f0bc68332bfcd976e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Richards, David L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carbonetti, Benjamin C.</creatorcontrib><title>Worth what we decide: a defense of the right to leisure</title><title>The international journal of human rights</title><description>One of the most routinely philosophically and politically attacked sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is article 24: 'Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.' Defending against these attacks is important. For example, only the USA and Somalia, among UN member states, are not parties to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). One reason for the USA's status is political opposition to CRC article 31, which maintains 'States parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure...' Our article defends article 24 from well-known criticisms. We maintain rights are social constructs and, as evidence of social construction, we provide a genealogy of article 24. We also address the social psychology of rest/leisure and trends in actual state practice.</description><subject>Adequate Rest and Leisure</subject><subject>Congresses and Conventions</subject><subject>Criticism</subject><subject>Holidays</subject><subject>Hours of work</subject><subject>Human rights</subject><subject>International Law</subject><subject>International organizations</subject><subject>Leisure</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Political Opposition</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Right Wing Politics</subject><subject>Social construction</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><subject>Somalia</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>UN Conventions</subject><subject>United Nations</subject><subject>United States of America</subject><subject>Universal Declaration of Human Rights</subject><issn>1364-2987</issn><issn>1744-053X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtLxDAUhYso-PwHLgJu3HS8eTQPNyLiCwQ3iu5Cmt44lU6jSYdh_r0toxsX4uqeC985cDhFcUxhRkHDGeVSMKPVjAFlM8XAKLlV7FElRAkVf90e9YiUE7Nb7Of8DsCYUbBXqJeYhjlZzd1AVkga9G2D58SNKmCfkcRAhjmS1L7NBzJE0mGblwkPi53guoxH3_egeL65frq6Kx8eb--vLh9KLwwbyoCO-gqB0so4HbQOtYCaaiNqKb3w4yc1M01lOHLKA9Reas5ZHXwzlkB-UJxucj9S_FxiHuyizR67zvUYl9lSznRFAbT5D8oU5apS_0CphAqknFJPfqHvcZn6sfNEMS5AV2ykxIbyKeacMNiP1C5cWlsKdtrI_mxkp43sZqPRdrGxtX2IaeFWMXWNHdy6iykk1_s2W_5nwhf19pRL</recordid><startdate>201303</startdate><enddate>201303</enddate><creator>Richards, David L.</creator><creator>Carbonetti, Benjamin C.</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201303</creationdate><title>Worth what we decide: a defense of the right to leisure</title><author>Richards, David L. ; Carbonetti, Benjamin C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-fea1c5e01159a8f88fb40b1894b66c4cb406829d593e313f0bc68332bfcd976e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adequate Rest and Leisure</topic><topic>Congresses and Conventions</topic><topic>Criticism</topic><topic>Holidays</topic><topic>Hours of work</topic><topic>Human rights</topic><topic>International Law</topic><topic>International organizations</topic><topic>Leisure</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Political Opposition</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Right Wing Politics</topic><topic>Social construction</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><topic>Somalia</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>UN Conventions</topic><topic>United Nations</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><topic>Universal Declaration of Human Rights</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Richards, David L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carbonetti, Benjamin C.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>The international journal of human rights</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Richards, David L.</au><au>Carbonetti, Benjamin C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Worth what we decide: a defense of the right to leisure</atitle><jtitle>The international journal of human rights</jtitle><date>2013-03</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>329</spage><epage>349</epage><pages>329-349</pages><issn>1364-2987</issn><eissn>1744-053X</eissn><coden>IJHRF6</coden><abstract>One of the most routinely philosophically and politically attacked sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is article 24: 'Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.' Defending against these attacks is important. For example, only the USA and Somalia, among UN member states, are not parties to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). One reason for the USA's status is political opposition to CRC article 31, which maintains 'States parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure...' Our article defends article 24 from well-known criticisms. We maintain rights are social constructs and, as evidence of social construction, we provide a genealogy of article 24. We also address the social psychology of rest/leisure and trends in actual state practice.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/13642987.2012.720976</doi><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1364-2987
ispartof The international journal of human rights, 2013-03, Vol.17 (3), p.329-349
issn 1364-2987
1744-053X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1322713757
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; HeinOnline Law Journal Library
subjects Adequate Rest and Leisure
Congresses and Conventions
Criticism
Holidays
Hours of work
Human rights
International Law
International organizations
Leisure
Philosophy
Political Opposition
Politics
Right Wing Politics
Social construction
Social psychology
Somalia
U.S.A
UN Conventions
United Nations
United States of America
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
title Worth what we decide: a defense of the right to leisure
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T18%3A21%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Worth%20what%20we%20decide:%20a%20defense%20of%20the%20right%20to%20leisure&rft.jtitle=The%20international%20journal%20of%20human%20rights&rft.au=Richards,%20David%20L.&rft.date=2013-03&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=329&rft.epage=349&rft.pages=329-349&rft.issn=1364-2987&rft.eissn=1744-053X&rft.coden=IJHRF6&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/13642987.2012.720976&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1322713757%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1312340852&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true