LIBERALISM BEYOND BORDERS

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 206-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loren E. Lomasky
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Difference Principle ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Captive Populations ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Liberal Political Theory ◽  
International Difference

While citizens of developed countries enjoy lives of unmatched affluence, over a billion people struggle to subsist on incomes of less than $1/day. Can't we conclude that their poverty constitutes a glaring injustice? The answer almost certainly is yes—but not because some countries are rich, nor because of inadequate levels of redistribution. Liberal political theory traditionally maintains that persons are rights-holders, and the primary duty owed them is noninterference. Corrupt and tyrannical governments flagrantly violate the liberty rights of their captive populations. External governments conspicuously fail to respect noninterference, however, when they erect barriers to trade between foreign nationals and their own citizens, subsidize domestic industries, prevent innocent movement across borders by would-be workers, and when they tender assistance to abusive states (such as foreign aid that lines the pockets of kleptocrats and enhances their power). The theory advanced here is similar to that of Rawls in rejecting an international difference principle, but unlike Rawls it advances an account of international justice as continuous with domestic principles of justice.

International Economic Assistance in the 1970's — A Critique of Partners in Development (Review Article)

1970 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-490
Author(s):  
Nurul Islam
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
International Aid ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Economic Assistance ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Service Charge ◽  
The Developed Countries ◽  
Defence Expenditure

Foreign economic aid is at the cross-roads. There is an atmosphere of gloom and disenchantment surrounding international aid in both the developed and developing countries — more so in the former than in the latter. Doubts have grown in the developed countries, especially among the conservatives in these countries, as to the effectiveness of aid in promoting economic development, the wastes and inefficiency involved in the use of aid, the adequacy of self-help on the part of the recipient countries in husbanding and mobilising their own resources for development and the dangers of getting involved, through ex¬tensive foreign-aid operations, in military or diplomatic conflicts. The waning of confidence on the part of the donors in the rationale of foreign aid has been accentuated by an increasing concern with their domestic problems as well as by the occurrence of armed conflicts among the poor, aid-recipient countries strengthened by substantial defence expenditure that diverts resources away from development. The disenchantment on the part of the recipient countries is, on the other hand, associated with the inadequacy of aid, the stop-go nature of its flow in many cases, and the intrusion of noneconomic considerations governing the allocation of aid amongst the recipient countries. There is a reaction in the developing countries against the dependence, political and eco¬nomic, which heavy reliance on foreign aid generates. The threat of the in¬creasing burden of debt-service charge haunts the developing world and brings them back to the donors for renewed assistance and/or debt rescheduling.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Valls
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Social Construction ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Racial Inequality ◽  
The United States ◽  
Racial Justice ◽  
Color Blind ◽  
American Society ◽  
Liberal Political Theory

The persistence of racial inequality in the United States raises deep and complex questions of racial justice. Some observers argue that public policy must be “color-blind,” while others argue that policies that take race into account should be defended on grounds of diversity or integration. This chapter begins to sketch an alternative to both of these, one that supports strong efforts to address racial inequality but that focuses on the conditions necessary for the liberty and equality of all. It argues that while race is a social construction, it remains deeply embedded in American society. A conception of racial justice is needed, one that is grounded on the premises provided by liberal political theory.

scholarly journals Populism and foreign aid

2021 ◽  
pp. 135406612110442
Author(s):  
Tobias Heinrich ◽  
Yoshiharu Kobayashi ◽  
Edward Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Donor Country ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
The United States ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
Core Components ◽  
Thin Elements ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Aid Policy

Pundits, development practitioners, and scholars worry that rising populism and international disengagement in developed countries have negative consequences on foreign aid. However, how populism and foreign aid go together is not well understood. This paper provides the first systematic examination of this relationship. We adopt the popular ideational definition of populism, unpack populism into its core “thin” elements, and examine them within a delegation model of aid policy—a prominent framework in the aid literature. In so doing, we identify specific domestic political processes through which the core components of populism may affect aid spending. We argue that increases in one component of populism—anti-elitism—and in nativist sentiments, an associated concept, in a donor country lead to a reduction in aid spending through a public opinion channel. We supply both micro- and macro-evidence for our arguments by fielding surveys in the United States and United Kingdom as well as by analyzing aid spending by a large number of OECD donors. Our findings show that nativism and anti-elitism, rather than populism per se, influence not only individual attitudes toward aid but also actual aid policy and generate important insights into how to address populist challenges to foreign aid. Beyond these, our study contributes to the broader International Relations literature by demonstrating one useful analytical approach to studying populism, nativism, and foreign policy.

scholarly journals The Macro Economic Management Challenges of Foreign Aid in Developing Countries

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-170
Author(s):  
U Arabi ◽  
Nagendra
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Aid ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Economic Resources ◽  
Poor People ◽  
Global Integration ◽  
Economic Management ◽  
International Consensus

Foreign aid is one of the most powerful weapons in the war against poverty.  Many people equate aid with charity as one way act of generosity directed from high income countries to their low income counterparts. Foreign aid is indispensable for the development of less developed countries. It flows in the form of loans, assistance outright grants from various governmental and international organizations. It spreads the benefits of global integration and shared prosperity by enabling poor people and countries to overcome the health, education and economic resources barriers that keep them in poverty. There is an international consensus that human development should be the primary objective. Hence aid budgets are raising despite the several fiscal and public debt problems facing some of the donor countries.

Aristotle, Kant and Rawls on Moral Motivation in a Just Society

1980 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 385-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven M. DeLue
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Moral Theory ◽  
Moral Motivation ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Mutual Respect ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Standards Of Conduct ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Just Society

John Rawls considers his Theory of Justice to be in the Kantian tradition. Generally there seems to be agreement among Rawls' critics that at least with respect to the procedural formulation of the principles of justice, it is difficult to call Rawls' position Kantian. In this article I will argue that Rawls' Kantianism is best understood as providing a motive source for acting upon known just standards of conduct. In this regard Rawls can be read as synthesizing aspects of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Kant's moral reasoning to provide the rationale to explain why an individual who knows what is morally correct conduct in a given situation, makes such knowledge the source of his action. Demonstrating the Aristotelean roots of Rawls' Kantianism with respect to the problem of motivation for just conduct helps one understand how Kant's moral theory can be viewed in Rawls' words not as a “morality of austere command but … [as] … an ethic of mutual respect and self esteem” (1971, p. 251). Secondly, this view of Kant provides the basis for understanding the anti-corporatist aspect of Rawls' political theory that my reading of Rawls makes necessary.

scholarly journals Foreign Aid in Nepal

2018 ◽  
pp. 71-76
Author(s):  
Kiran Bahadur Pandey
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Domestic Investment ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
Capital Goods ◽  
Economic Journal

Foreign aid is essential for least developed countries like Nepal because these countries have the shortage of fund to meet their domestic investment for accelerating economic development and also to finance the import of essential capital goods required for the development. Nepal receives foreign aid from bilateral and multilateral sources. Following a descriptive approaches this paper analyses the trend of foreign did flow in Nepal from aggregative perspective. Economic Journal of Development Issues Vol. 23&24 No. 1-2, (2017) Combined Issue, Page : 71-76

Political Emancipation

2019 ◽  
pp. 89-121
Author(s):  
Joan Wallach Scott
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Thinking ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Formal Equality ◽  
Political Emancipation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Women's Emancipation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Liberal Political Theory

This chapter considers the contradictions of women's emancipation in light of the American (1776) and the French (1789) revolutions. It shows how the resistance to women's citizenship had less to do with the necessarily slow but inevitable progress of liberal democratic ideas than it did with a contradiction at the very heart of the political thinking that articulated them—a political thinking integral to the discourse of secularism. Liberal political theory postulated the sameness of all individuals as the key to their formal equality—abstracted from their circumstances there was no discernable difference among them, they stood as equals before the law. At the same time there were differences that were thought to refuse abstraction. These were people in a state of dependency, such as propertyless peasants, wage laborers, women, children, slaves. Therefore, they could not be counted as autonomous individuals—autonomy, after all, was at the heart of the very definition of individuality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document