scholarly journals What Second-Best Scenarios Reveal about Ideals of Global Justice

2020 ◽  
pp. 317-336
Author(s):  
Christian Barry ◽  
David Wiens
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Global Inequality ◽  
Second Best

While there need be no conflict in theory between addressing global inequality (inequalities between people worldwide) and addressing domestic inequality (inequalities between people within a political community), there may be instances in which the feasible mechanism for reducing global inequality risks aggravating domestic inequality. The burgeoning literature on global justice has tended to overlook this type of scenario, and theorists espousing global egalitarianism have consequently not engaged with cases that are important for evaluating and clarifying the content of their theories. This chapter explores potential tensions between promoting global and domestic inequality. It introduces a class of second-best scenarios that global justice theorists have neglected in order to demonstrate the importance of such scenarios as an aid to constructing and evaluating ideals of global justice.

scholarly journals Justice, Not Development: Sen and the Hegemonic Framework For Ameliorating Global Inequality

1970 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aram Ziai
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Development Theory ◽  
Global Inequality

Starting from the merits of Sen’s Development as Freedom, the article also explores its shortcomings. It argues that they are related to an uncritical adoption of the discourse of ‘development’, which is the hegemonic framework for ameliorating global inequality today. This discourse implies certain limitations of thought and action, and the article points out three areas where urgent questions of global justice have been largely ignored by development theory and policy as a consequence. Struggles for justice on a global scale, this is the conclusion, should not take the detour of ‘development’.

scholarly journals Cosmopolitism, Global Justice, and International Law

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 679-684
Author(s):  
ROLAND PIERIK ◽  
WOUTER WERNER
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Global Inequality ◽  
Sovereign Equality ◽  
Central Elements

Along with the exploding attention to globalization, issues of global justice have become central elements in political philosophy. After decades in which debates were dominated by a state-centric paradigm, current debates in political philosophy also address issues of global inequality, global poverty, and the moral foundations of international law. As recent events have demonstrated, these issues also play an important role in the practice of international law. In fields such as peace and security, economic integration, environmental law, and human rights, international lawyers are constantly confronted with questions of global justice and international legitimacy. This special issue contains four papers which address an important element of this emerging debate on cosmopolitan global justice, with much relevance for international law: the principle of sovereign equality, global economic inequality, and environmental law.

The Rights Kind of Politics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brooke A. Ackerly
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Political Community ◽  
The Political ◽  
Transformative Politics ◽  
Taking Responsibility ◽  
Normative Political Theory

Just responsibility is a way of taking responsibility for all forms of global injustice (not just women’s human rights) and to all people, even those who consider themselves removed from the politics of global injustice (though they want to be engaged). Chapter 7 applies the theory to taking responsibility through the enactment of roles in the political economy—those of consumer, donor, worker, and activist—and beyond. It summarizes the view of political community, accountability, and leadership essential to transformative politics. Just responsibility is more than a normative theory of human rights principles. It is also a normative political theory of how to carry out those principles not only in the practices proscribed by our roles in the political economy, but also in imaginative practices that defy the boundaries of those roles in order to transform the political economy. Just responsibility is a human rights theory of global justice.

Ideals of Egalitarianism and Sufficiency in Global Justice

2010 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 53-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Debra Satz
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
Average Income ◽  
Global Inequality ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Income Levels ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Catching Up ◽  
Special Obligations ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
The Rich

It is well known that there are large differences in the per capita income levels of the world's states. While a few poor countries are catching up with the rich world, for some countries, the gaps are growing wider. Most of this global inequality is between countries, not within them. In other words, even if income were equalized within countries, a large part of the gap in average income levels between countries would remain.At the same time, the majority of movements in the wealthier countries for greater distributive equality have tended to focus on inequalities within their own borders: on issues such as raising minimum wages, changing the domestic tax rate, and ending national health disparities. This state-centric focus is frequently justified in moral terms. It is a familiar claim, for example, that we have special obligations to our own citizens and that these obligations are both weightier and more extensive than our obligations to strangers outside our borders.

Just Responsibility

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brooke A. Ackerly
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Critical Methodology ◽  
Causal Responsibility ◽  
The World

When disaster strikes, what is the just thing to do? When local or global crisis threatens the human rights of large parts of humanity, what is the just thing to do? Can we respond to injustices in the world in ways that do more than simply address their consequences? Just Responsibility provides a human rights theory of global justice that guides how we, each in political community together, can take responsibility for injustices wherever they are. Using empirical research into the ways that women’s human rights activists have done so under conditions of little political privilege, Just Responsibility offers a theory of global injustice and political responsibility that can guide the actions of those who are relatively privileged in relation to injustice, whether they are citizens, activists, academics, policymakers, or philanthropists. We can take responsibility for the power inequalities of injustice, what, following John Stuart Mill, the author calls “injustice itself,” regardless of our causal responsibility for the injustice and regardless of the extent of our knowledge of the injustice. Using a feminist critical methodology, Just Responsibility offers a grounded normative theory for taking political responsibility. The book integrates these ways of taking political responsibility into a rich theory of political community, accountability, and leadership in which taking responsibility for injustice itself contributes to and transforms the fabric of our political life together.

Global Distributive Justice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin K W Ip
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Global Inequality ◽  
Global Issues ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Global Distributive Justice ◽  
Historic Injustice ◽  
Transnational Trade

Distributive justice, in its broadest sense, is about how benefits and burdens ought to be distributed among a set of individuals as a matter of right and entitlement. Political philosophers have traditionally assumed that principles of distributive justice apply only within the bounds of a given political community. However, this assumption has been rigorously challenged in recent years, as evidenced by the recent work on global distributive justice. The focus of this article includes theoretical approaches to the problem of global poverty, special obligations among fellow nationals, and global inequality. In addition to these theoretical debates, students of global distributive justice have paid considerable attention to how certain facts about the global domain might affect the grounds of their normative judgments. Therefore, it is important to focus on the application of distributive justice to certain global issues. These issues include reparations for historic injustice, climate change, transnational trade, and natural-resources ownership. These issues are inevitably global in scope and they tend to have profound impacts on the well-being of individuals around the world.

scholarly journals On the Usefulness of Luck Egalitarian Arguments for Global Justice

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Schemmel
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Luck Egalitarianism ◽  
Global Inequality ◽  
Philosophical Literature ◽  
Moral Claims ◽  
Egalitarian Principle ◽  
Luck Egalitarians ◽  
Luck Egalitarian

Much of the recent philosophical literature about distributive justice and equality in the domestic context has been dominated by a family of theories now often called ‘luck egalitarianism’, according to which it is unfair if some people are worse off than others through no choice or fault of their own. This principle has also found its way into the literature about global justice. This paper explores some difficulties that this principle faces: it is largely insensitive to the causes of global inequality, and it is so demanding that it can only give rise to weak moral claims. I go on to argue that a) understanding justice claims as merely weak claims rests on an implausible and impractical concept of justice, and b) using the global luck egalitarian argument in practical discourse is likely to lead to misunderstanding, and to be counterproductive if the aim is to tackle global inequality. While these considerations do not suffice to make a conclusive case against the luck egalitarian principle, they should be acknowledged by global luck egalitarians – as some similar problems have indeed been by domestic luck egalitarians – and need to be addressed.

On Global Justice

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathias Risse
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Labor Rights ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Global Inequality ◽  
Trading System ◽  
Collective Ownership ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Global Distributive Justice ◽  
Principles Of Justice

Debates about global justice have traditionally fallen into two camps. Statists believe that principles of justice can only be held among those who share a state. Those who fall outside this realm are merely owed charity. Cosmopolitans, on the other hand, believe that justice applies equally among all human beings. This book shifts the terms of this debate and shows how both views are unsatisfactory. Stressing humanity's collective ownership of the earth, it offers a new theory of global distributive justice—what it calls pluralist internationalism—where in different contexts, different principles of justice apply. Arguing that statists and cosmopolitans seek overarching answers to problems that vary too widely for one single justice relationship, the book explores who should have how much of what we all need and care about, ranging from income and rights to spaces and resources of the earth. It acknowledges that especially demanding redistributive principles apply among those who share a country, but those who share a country also have obligations of justice to those who do not because of a universal humanity, common political and economic orders, and a linked global trading system. The book's inquiries about ownership of the earth give insights into immigration, obligations to future generations, and obligations arising from climate change. It considers issues such as fairness in trade, responsibilities of the WTO, intellectual property rights, labor rights, whether there ought to be states at all, and global inequality, and it develops a new foundational theory of human rights.

Order and Justice

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Hurrell
Keyword(s):  
International Society ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
International System ◽  
World Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Political Community ◽  
English School ◽  
Value Conflict ◽  
Theoretical Understanding

Order and justice are deeply intertwined in English School writing. The central concern of the English School is with the problem of order and with the question: To what extent does the inherited political framework provided by the international society of states continue to provide an adequate basis for world order? This kind of question links closely with the debates on international institutions and global governance that have been so prominent since the end of the Cold War. But the English School focus is less on theoretical understanding of particular institutions and more on assessing the overall character of institutionalization in world politics, the normative commitments inherent in different ways of governing the globe, and the adequacy of historical and existing interstate institutions for meeting practical and normative challenges. There are four specific themes that are central to the pluralist wing of English School writing on order and justice. The first theme concerns power and the conditions of order, while the second concerns diversity and value conflict. Meanwhile, a third theme emerges from the idea that moral values should, so far as possible, be kept out of international life and of particular international institutions. Finally, the fourth theme concerns the argument that international society has the potential not just to help manage international conduct in a restrained way but also to create the conditions for a more legitimate and morally more ambitious political community to emerge. As power diffuses away from the Western, liberal developed core, and as the intractability of the international system to liberal prescriptions becomes more evident, so one can detect new changes in the way in which global justice is understood.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document