Why is the “KGB Bar” possible? Binary morality and its consequences

This article asks why a popular bar named after a criminal Soviet secret police organization has not provoked the outrage of the developed world's intellectual and artistic elites, who would surely condemn an SS Bar. It attributes this moral blindness to the Holocaust's centrality in Israeli, German, and American national discourse and the resultant binary morality that ascribes collective innocence to all Jews at all times and in all places and collective guilt to all Germans – and potentially to all non-Jews – at all times and in all places. The moral logic of the Holocaust thus transforms Jews into victims and non-Jews into victimizers; the moral logic and reality of the Gulag transform everybody into both victim and victimizer. The binary morality of the Holocaust insists that all human beings be heroes; the fuzzy morality of the Gulag recognizes that all humans are just humans constantly confronted by moral ambiguity. But because the Gulag's moral ambiguity concerns non-Jews and Jews, the Gulag undercuts binary morality. The Holocaust and the Gulag are not just incompatible moral tales; they are incompatible and intersecting moral tales. As a result, they cannot co-exist. We therefore fail to respond to the KGB Bar because to recognize the Gulag as a mass murder worthy of categorical moral condemnation would be to challenge the sacred status of the Holocaust. Ironically, the KGB Bar is possible precisely because an SS Bar is impossible.     

Mortal threat: Latvian Jews at the dawn of Nazi occupation

In late June 1941, Nazi Germany stormed the borders of the Soviet Union, occupying the three Baltic republics within weeks. By the end of 1941, a significant proportion of the Jewish population had been murdered by German forces and local collaborators. In the days before full Nazi occupation of the territory, Latvia’s Jews confronted the question of whether to flee into the Russian interior or stay in their communities. History shows that this would be a critical choice. Testimonies and memoirs of Jewish survivors illuminate the competing motivations to leave or to remain. This article highlights the key factors that figured into these calculations and the interaction between individual agency and structural opportunities and obstacles in determining where Latvia’s Jews were when Holocaust in their homeland began.     

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

This paper is concerned with illuminating the experiences and perspectives of sexual offenders who had categorically denied their offences and, through their narratives, gain an insight into the processes behind and underlying both maintaining and coming out of, denial. The study is made up of interviews with 11 convicted sexual offenders who had each denied their offences but who are now admitting their guilt. The interviews were analysed qualitatively using interpretative phenomenological analysis. The analysis revealed three superordinate themes: ‘maintaining viable identities’; ‘being’ in denial’; and ‘wanting to change’. These themes are unpacked and their relevance to maintaining and leaving denial are discussed. Implications for treatment, including barriers to treatment for convicted sexual offenders who deny their offences are discussed.     

法与伦理的交织:婚生否认之诉中适格原告分析

婚生否认之诉是人事诉讼程序中的重要组成部分。与我国大陆社会伦理观念较为相近的台湾地区,其民法亲属编经过十余次修正,其亲属法日益与世界亲属法的潮流相融合。反观我国亲属法和民事诉讼法,仅就婚生否认之诉中适格原告问题仍无法达成一致。而适格原告是成功构建婚生否认之诉的前提。借鉴德国及我国台湾地区等成功立法经验和结合我国现状,论证我国婚生否认之诉的诉讼主体不仅限于夫、妻及子女,还应有条件的包括第三人。     

Combatting antisemitism in the school playground: an Australian case study

The aim of Gross and Rutland's paper is to analyse the problem of antisemitic bullying in contemporary Australian state schools by investigating the case of Jewish children in those schools. The study is interdisciplinary, drawing on historical data and educational methodology, and employs a qualitative approach through semi-structured interviews conducted in Sydney and Melbourne with all the major actors: students (55), teachers (10), principals (4), parents (13) and Jewish communal leaders (10). Gross and Rutland argue that classical anti-Jewish stereotypes are perpetuated in the school playground, transmitted by children from one generation to the next. This finding provides an additional perspective to the general literature, which argues that racial prejudice and stereotypes are acquired primarily through home socialization, religious institutions and the media, and neglects the role of the school playground.     

公司人格与公司人格否认

公司人格独立原则实际运行过程中所引起的价值背离和利益失衡问题,导致了公司人格否认制度的产生。公司人格否认具有相对性,而且仅适用于实质上已经丧失独立人格的公司。公司人格否认制度不是对公司人格独立原则的否认,相反,是对公司人格独立原则的净化、补充和完善。     

论我国的法人人格否认制度

法人人格否认的本质是通过否定特定法律关系中的法人特性,追究法人人格滥用人的法律责任,以维护法律的公平正义。法人人格否认的适用条件:一要有滥用法人人格的行为存在,二要造成实际的民事损害,三是法人人格滥用行为与实际民事损害之间存在因果关系。至于法人人格滥用行为人的主观心理状态可以在所不问。法人人格否认的民事责任应具体情况具体分析。我国现阶段尚未确立完整的法人人格否认制度,对于我国现行法律法规中有规定的,可以直接援用;对于我国现行法律法规没有规定而又需要否认法人人格的,可以直接援用诚实信用原则。     

How to make perpetrators in denial disclose more information about their crimes

This study examined interview techniques for eliciting admissions from perpetrators of a crime. Two techniques derived from the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) framework (SUE-Confrontation and SUE-Confrontation/Explain) were compared to an Early Disclosure of Evidence technique. Participants (N?=?75) performed a mock criminal task divided into three phases before being interviewed. In the SUE conditions, statement-evidence inconsistencies were obtained by strategic interviewing for Phases 1 and 2. For both SUE conditions, the interviewer confronted the suspects with these inconsistencies, emphasising that withholding information undermined their credibility. For the SUE-Confrontation/Explain condition, the suspects were asked to explain each inconsistency. To restore their credibility, the suspects in the SUE conditions were expected to become more forthcoming in Phase 3 (the phase which lacked information). The suspects in the SUE-Confrontation condition (vs. the suspects in the Early Disclosure condition) disclosed more admissions about Phase 3. As predicted, the suspects in the SUE conditions perceived the interviewer to have had comparatively more information about Phase 3. The suspects in the SUE-Confrontation/Explain condition strived to maintain their credibility either by fitting their story to the evidence or by sticking to the initial story. The study shows that the SUE technique is effective for eliciting admissions.     

论股东有限责任制度

股东有限责任乃现代公司法律之基石.股东有限责任是股东仅以出资额为限对公司承担责任,并非股东无责任,也并非公司有限责任.公司法人人格否认并不必然导致股东有限责任之例外适用.我国公司法应坚持股东有限责任为原则,公司法人人格否认为例外.主要从股东有限责任制度的概念、历史渊源、功能及局限性、人格否认理论及其完善几个方面予以论述.     

引进公司法人格否认制度应注意的几个问题

公司法人格否认法理有其产生和发展的历史基础,但理论体系尚须完善。指出了公司法人格否认法理定义的缺陷,并论证了公司法人格否认法理的归责原则,试图完善该法理的法律处理问题,为我国引进公司人格否认法理作客观剖析。