Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

M. J. Taylor

An analysis of the criteria for statehood laid out in article 1 of the 1933 Montevideo Convention and their substantive applicability on the 21st century global stage. Sections focused on Kosovo, Palestine, and Daesh highlight the... more
An analysis of the criteria for statehood laid out in article 1 of the 1933 Montevideo Convention and their substantive applicability on the 21st century global stage. Sections focused on Kosovo, Palestine, and Daesh highlight the inconsistent nature of the criteria and lead to the conclusion that the criteria are not fit for purpose in the modern day.
Research Interests:
Undergraduate dissertation on the emergence of 'new' terrorism displayed through the ideologies and methodologies of Daesh (ISIS) during the prominence of their caliphate in Iraq and Syria, 2014-2018. A qualitative approach to the topic... more
Undergraduate dissertation on the emergence of 'new' terrorism displayed through the ideologies and methodologies of Daesh (ISIS) during the prominence of their caliphate in Iraq and Syria, 2014-2018. A qualitative approach to the topic of 'post-modern' terrorism and the philosophical debates that surround the discourse. A five-point framework of structure, aim, method, use of the internet, and use of children and elderly combatants, is used to assess Daesh's potential status as a 'new' or 'post-modern' terrorist organisation.
Research Interests:
An assessment of the just war tradition and its applicability in the contemporary world. The three facets of just war - jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum, are analysed in context of their practical use to states in... more
An assessment of the just war tradition and its applicability in the contemporary world. The three facets of just war - jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum, are analysed in context of their practical use to states in governing warfare in the 21st century. Particular focus on the erosion of ad bellum and in bello practice by the UN system and the subversion of post bellum principles by the privatisation of warfare. Published in Issue X of the Manchester Review of Law, Crime and Ethics, Nov 2021.
The concepts of autonomy and sovereignty have found themselves flung to the forefront of legal and political discourse on the contemporary global stage. As a sociological response to the eroding significance of national identity,... more
The concepts of autonomy and sovereignty have found themselves flung to the forefront of legal and political discourse on the contemporary global stage. As a sociological response to the eroding significance of national identity, seclusionary movements are gaining traction in the Western world. As states adjust to existing as smaller cogs in a much larger machine, questions remain: to what extent have these interdependent processes subverted individual state autonomy and has 21st Century international cooperation destroyed the notion of unfettered sovereignty? This paper will attempt to address this directly through an analysis of the British nation-state, discussing the historical context of state autonomy and the traditional notion of Westphalian sovereignty before engaging with the substantive and abstract aspects of statehood through the writings of theorists such as Stephen Haseler and Paul Hirst. Finally, this piece will employ Rod Rhodes' Differentiated Polity Model along with some poignant critiques offered by David Marsh, David Richards, and Martin Smith through their Asymmetric Power Model to offer an assessment of the symbolic nature of autonomy in the contemporary international system.