Reflections on Thomas Franck, Race and Nationalism (1960): ‘General Principles of Law’ and Situated Generality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article shows that Thomas Franck's little known first book, Race and Nationalism: The Struggle for Power in Rhodesia-Nyasaland (1960) shares a theme with several of Franck's most influential later books: The Structure of Impartiality (1968), The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations (1990), Fairness in International Law and Institutions (1995), and Recourse to Force (2002). The theme is that of persuasion and diversity: the problem of formulating, interpreting, and applying legal norms so that they appear legitimate in the eyes of very different communities. Over time, however, Franck’s account of diversity thins, and his post-1990 scholarship on this theme in international law has attracted criticism for his sanguineness about his own standpoint and his unconcern for the differences in perspective and position produced by history, culture, and gender. The article sets the stage for a reply that seeks to integrate Franck's earlier work into his later. It does so by making visible the heuristic of domestic adjudication implicit in the four later books. The article looks at how the metaphor of adjudication might be adapted to respond to the sorts of diversity-based criticisms leveled at Franck. By developing the metaphor to take fuller account of communities of judgment, we are able to recognize the emergence of a new model of international legal sources that aspires to do justice to diversity without sacrificing universality. In particular, the article analyzes several contemporary interpretations of general principles of law and argues that they reflect what the article describes as situated generality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".