Needs and Global Justice

2005 ◽  
Vol 57 ◽  
pp. 51-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Brock
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Thought Experiment ◽  
Basic Needs ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Special Significance ◽  
Important Work ◽  
Plausible Account ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
The Relationship

In this paper I argue that needs are tremendously salient in developing any plausible account of global justice. I begin by sketching a normative thought experiment that models ideal deliberating conditions. I argue that under such conditions we would choose principles of justice that ensure we are well positioned to be able to meet our needs. Indeed, as the experiment aims to show, any plausible account of distributive justice must make space for the special significance of our needs. I go on to offer some empirical support for this view by looking at the important work of Frohlich and Oppenheimer. I then present an account of our basic needs that can meet a number of goals: for instance, it provides a robust theoretical account of basic needs which can enjoy widespread support, and it can also provide an adequate framework for designing policy about needs, and thus help us to discharge our global obligations. I then briefly discuss the relationship between basic needs and human rights, arguing why the basic needs standard is more fundamental than—and required by—the human rights approach. Finally, I tackle a few important sets of objections to my view, especially some objections concerning distributing our responsibilities for meeting needs.

Needs and Global Justice

2005 ◽  
Vol 57 ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Gillian Brock
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Thought Experiment ◽  
Basic Needs ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Special Significance ◽  
Important Work ◽  
Plausible Account ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
The Relationship

In this paper I argue that needs are tremendously salient in developing any plausible account of global justice. I begin by sketching a normative thought experiment that models ideal deliberating conditions. I argue that under such conditions we would choose principles of justice that ensure we are well positioned to be able to meet our needs. Indeed, as the experiment aims to show, any plausible account of distributive justice must make space for the special significance of our needs. I go on to offer some empirical support for this view by looking at the important work of Frohlich and Oppenheimer. I then present an account of our basic needs that can meet a number of goals: for instance, it provides a robust theoretical account of basic needs which can enjoy widespread support, and it can also provide an adequate framework for designing policy about needs, and thus help us to discharge our global obligations. I then briefly discuss the relationship between basic needs and human rights, arguing why the basic needs standard is more fundamental than—and required by—the human rights approach. Finally, I tackle a few important sets of objections to my view, especially some objections concerning distributing our responsibilities for meeting needs.

Penal Imaginations of Global Justice-Making

2019 ◽  
pp. 125-154
Author(s):  
Kjersti Lohne
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Close Relation ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice Systems ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Sociology Of Punishment ◽  
The Relationship

The chapter analyses the cosmopolitan penal imaginary building on western domestic penality, delving into the relationship between human rights sensibilities and criminal justice mentalities in the ‘fight against impunity’. Through the fieldwork in Uganda and Rwanda, the chapter describes asymmetries between the international and national criminal justice systems. It shows how international criminal justice circulates transnationally between different geographical sites via human rights NGOs and is closely linked to human rights expertise, and how human rights NGOs turn international criminal justice into issues about social justice. Applying a sociology of punishment perspective, the chapter brings out the similarities and differences in ‘penal imaginations’ between domestic and international criminal justice, and argues that international criminal justice both echoes the national and departs from it. For example, while international criminal justice relies upon retributive and expressive undertones, it makes no appeal to punitive sensibilities: a fact that can be understood in light of the close relation between international criminal justice and human rights NGOs. Yet, it is argued that human rights NGOs rely too strongly on punitive answers, and that amnesties can be just a matter of pragmatism in situations of profound violence. Thus, while the ICC has both retributive and reparative aims, the situation in northern Uganda demonstrates how international criminal justice became an impediment to peace. Moreover, the chapter reveals how a lot of practical issues had simply not been ‘thought of’ when setting up the ICC, such as acquittals and asylum-seeking witnesses.

Global Distributive Justice: An Egalitarian Perspective

2005 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 139-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cécile Fabre
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Basic Needs ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
Thomas Pogge ◽  
Global Distributive Justice ◽  
Distribution Of Resources ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
National Boundaries

A good deal of political theory over the last fifteen years or so has been shaped by the realization that one cannot, and ought not, consider the distribution of resources within a country in isolation from the distribution of resources between countries. Thus, thinkers such as Charles Beitz and Thomas Pogge advocate extensive global distributive policies; others, such as Charles Jones and David Miller, explicitly reject the view that egalitarian principles of justice should apply globally and claim that national communities have only duties to help other countries be viable economically and meet the basic needs of their members. In the global justice debate, pretty much all parties acknowledge that we have obligations of distributive justice to for-eigners. The question is how strong those obligations are, and in particular whether national boundaries can make any difference to the distribution of resources between members of different countries.

Poverty and Global Justice

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Kokaz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Society ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Just World ◽  
Poverty Eradication ◽  
Law Of Peoples ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Selection Of

Poverty eradication has been identified as the largest challenge facing international society in its quest for a peaceful, prosperous, and just world. I respond to this challenge by proposing a global poverty eradication principle. Grounded in John Rawls's account of human rights and assistance for the law of peoples, the global poverty eradication principle applies regardless of causal patterns that may obtain in a given case. The relationship between persons affected by poverty and their governments has implications only for the selection of the appropriate means of poverty eradication, but never undermines the goal of poverty eradication itself. The duties of human rights and assistance that establish the global poverty eradication principle apply even to societies that may reject them, because they are institutional reaffirmations of the natural duties of persons in the context of international society, without whose affirmation no domestic society can be considered well-ordered. I conclude by pointing out some of the challenges that are likely to arise in the application of the global poverty eradication principle. While I cannot hope to settle these practical problems philosophically, flagging them helps to clarify the scope of application of the global poverty eradication principle and gives a sense of the concrete targets and measures that could be adopted in working toward its fulfillment in practice, especially for the elimination of certain types of severe deprivation at a minimum.

The Law of Peoples and Global Justice: Beyond the Liberal Nationalism of John Rawls

Human Affairs ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marek Hrubec
Keyword(s):  
Social Contract ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Law Of Peoples ◽  
Liberal Nationalism ◽  
The Law ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Relationship

The Law of Peoples and Global Justice: Beyond the Liberal Nationalism of John RawlsThe paper deals with the relation of a theory of international justice, specifically John Rawls's philosophy of the law of peoples, and a theory of global justice. In the first part, the paper outlines Rawls's main theses on the international conception of the law of peoples. The second part concerns a problem found in segments of Rawls's theory, specifically his concept of a social contract—contractualism. This problem inadequately approaches the relationship between the individual and the community. The third part deals with the inconsistent points in Rawls's theory contained in part two, i.e. his principles of justice selected with the aid of social contract. In the fourth part, the paper concentrates on the consequences of these limitations for a socially distributive dimension of justice or as an approach for dealing with disproportionate global inequalities. The last part formulates the causes of the limitations of Rawls's theory of international justice and points out the need for a global justice which is socially and inter-culturally considerate.

Risk, Desire and Adaptation: The Paradox of Queer Solidarity and the Political Possibility of Death Under Neoliberalism and Homonationalism

Somatechnics ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-200
Author(s):  
Natalie Kouri-Towe
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Movement ◽  
Political Activism ◽  
State Violence ◽  
The Political ◽  
Sexual Rights ◽  
Political Strategy ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Strategy I

In 2015, Queers Against Israeli Apartheid Toronto (QuAIA Toronto) announced that it was retiring. This article examines the challenges of queer solidarity through a reflection on the dynamics between desire, attachment and adaptation in political activism. Tracing the origins and sites of contestation over QuAIA Toronto's participation in the Toronto Pride parade, I ask: what does it mean for a group to fashion its own end? Throughout, I interrogate how gestures of solidarity risk reinforcing the very systems that activists desire to resist. I begin by situating contemporary queer activism in the ideological and temporal frameworks of neoliberalism and homonationalism. Next, I turn to the attempts to ban QuAIA Toronto and the term ‘Israeli apartheid’ from the Pride parade to examine the relationship between nationalism and sexual citizenship. Lastly, I examine how the terms of sexual rights discourse require visible sexual subjects to make individual rights claims, and weighing this risk against political strategy, I highlight how queer solidarities are caught in a paradox symptomatic of our times: neoliberalism has commodified human rights discourses and instrumentalised sexualities to serve the interests of hegemonic power and obfuscate state violence. Thinking through the strategies that worked and failed in QuAIA Toronto's seven years of organising, I frame the paper though a proposal to consider political death as a productive possibility for social movement survival in the 21stcentury.

Ups and downs on the roller coaster of task conflict: the role of group cognitive complexity, collective emotional intelligence and team creativity

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-37
Author(s):  
Andreea Gheorghe ◽  
Oana Fodor ◽  
Anișoara Pavelea
Keyword(s):  
Emotional Intelligence ◽  
Cognitive Complexity ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Task Conflict ◽  
Team Creativity ◽  
Mediating Role ◽  
Low Levels ◽  
Explanatory Mechanism ◽  
The Relationship

This study explores the association between task conflict and team creativity and the role of group cognitive complexity (GCC) as a potential explanatory mechanism in a sample of 159 students organized in 49 groups. Moreover, we analyzed the moderating effect of collective emotional intelligence (CEI)in the relationship between task conflict and GCC.As hypothesized, we found that task conflict has a nonlinear relationship with GCC, but contrary to our expectations, it follows a U-shaped association, not an inversed U-shape. In addition,the moderating role of CEI was significant only at low levels. Contrary to our expectation, the mediating role of GCC did not receive empirical support. Theoretical and practical contributions are discussed.

Need of Human Rights as a Better Way of Life

Think India ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 72-83
Author(s):  
Tushar Kadian
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Basic Needs ◽  
Research Paper ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Labour Unions ◽  
The People ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Made In

Actually, basic needs postulates securing of the elementary conditions of existence to every human being. Despite of the practical and theoretical importance of the subject the greatest irony is non- availability of any universal preliminary definition of the concept of basic needs. Moreover, this becomes the reason for unpredictability of various political programmes aiming at providing basic needs to the people. The shift is necessary for development of this or any other conception. No labour reforms could be made in history till labours were treated as objects. Its only after they were started being treating as subjects, labour unions were allowed to represent themselves in strategy formulations that labour reforms could become a reality. The present research paper highlights the basic needs of Human Rights in life.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document