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.

Proportionate Use

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathias Risse
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Illegal Immigration ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Physical Aspect ◽  
Collective Ownership ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Adverse Possession ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the relationship between immigration and collective ownership of the earth, and whether the physical aspect of immigration provides constraints on immigration policy. The fact that the earth is originally collectively owned must affect how communities can regulate access to what they occupy. The chapter first considers an account of relative over- and underuse of original resources before discussing illegal immigration in the United States, using a parallel to the civil law notion of “adverse possession” to argue that, under certain conditions, illegal immigration is morally unobjectionable. It then formulates conditions under which it would be reasonable for co-owners to refrain from entering certain regions, even though they would violate no duties of justice by doing so. This proposal is part of the overall approach to global justice that pluralist internationalism develops.

The Grounds of Justice

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathias Risse
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Systematic Theory ◽  
Comprehensive View ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Pluralist Approach

This book explores the question of what it is for a distribution to be just globally and proposes a new systematic theory of global justice that it calls pluralist internationalism. Up to now, philosophers have tended to respond to the problem of global justice in one of two ways: that principles of justice either apply only within states or else apply to all human beings. The book defends a view “between” these competing claims, one that improves on both, and introduces a pluralist approach to what it terms the grounds of justice—which offers a comprehensive view of obligations of distributive justice. It also considers two problems that globalization has raised for political philosophy: the problem of justifying the state to outsiders and the problem of justifying the global order to all.

“A Life Worthy of Being Called Human”

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-332
Author(s):  
Catherine Larrère ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Environmental Ethic ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Second Stage ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Life On Earth ◽  
Ecological Transition

“Act so that the effects of your action are compatible with the permanence of genuine human life on Earth.” How can we understand Jonas’ “maxim”? Is it too anthropocentric to be of any interest for an environmental ethic? Is is too limited to survival to have a moral signification in a truly human ethic? One can argue first that it is not so much anti-Kantian than that it challenges the current prevailing “presentism” and obliges us to take into consideration not only future generations, but also the context in which one anticipates these future generations to be living. Therefore, we can distinguish two different interpretations of Jonas’ maxim: in a first stage, that of sustainable development, it was understood as taking into consideration not only the needs but also the rights of future generations; in a second stage, that of an Anthropocene and ecological transition, it means that making sense of humanity implies connecting human beings to the Earth and other living beings far from opposing them.

scholarly journals A Critique of the “Common Ownership of the Earth” Thesis 1

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arash Abizadeh
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
Basic Needs ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Conventional System ◽  
Property Ownership ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Common Ownership ◽  
The Common ◽  
Moral Constraint

In On Global Justice, Mathias Risse claims that the earth’s original resources are collectively owned by all human beings in common, such that each individual has a moral right to use the original resources necessary for satisfying her basic needs. He also rejects the rival views that original resources are by nature owned by no one, owned by each human in equal shares, or owned and co-managed jointly by all humans. I argue that Risse’s arguments fail to establish a form of ownership at all and, moreover, that his arguments against the three rival views he considers all fall short. His argument establishes, rather, a moral constraint on any conventional system of property ownership.

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.

“But the Earth Abideth For Ever”

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathias Risse
Keyword(s):  
Natural Capital ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
Legitimate Expectations

This chapter proposes a framework that makes it possible to consider future generations explicitly and presents two future-directed obligations of justice. It argues for a principle of intergenerational equality: each generation can be reasonably expected to leave a nondeclining stock of natural capital behind. It introduces an additional principle of justice relating to the distribution of the original resources and spaces of the earth across different generations of human beings. The chapter first examines Rahul Kumar's view that wronging consists of violations of legitimate expectations in relationships before discussing ways of characterizing our relationship with future generations that have nothing to do with the ownership approach. It then looks at the debate about sustainability and concludes with some reflections on what we can say about duties to future generations that share membership in a state.

scholarly journals IN PURSUIT OF BROAD AGREEMENTS IN THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DECLARATION ON THE RIGHT TO PEACE WITHIN THE UNITED NATIONS

2017 ◽  
pp. 383-406
Author(s):  
Christian Guillermet-Fernandez ◽  
David Fernandez Puyana
Keyword(s):  
Future Generations ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
Joint Effort ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
High Importance ◽  
The Earth ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Voice

War and peace perpetually alternate and peace is always seen as an endless project, even a dream, to be realised in brotherhood by everyone all over the earth. Present generations should ensure that both they and future generations learn to live together in peace with the highest aspiration of sparing future generations the scourge of war. The UN Charter is the most solemn pact of peace in history, which lays down on the necessary basic principles for an enduring peace. Recently, in the context of the joint effort in the recognition of the high importance of practicing tolerance, dialogue, cooperation and solidarity among all human beings, peoples and nations, the General Assembly has raised the voice of victims to strongly condemn war and to openly reiterate their inalienable right to enjoy peace such that all human rights are promoted and protected and development is fully realized. The aim is to present activities of the General Assembly focused on the adoption of the Declaration on the right to peace.

scholarly journals The Importance of Studying and Education People Concerning International Peace and Wellbeing Searching for New Paradigms for Peace and Wellbeing in the World Community

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. p1
Author(s):  
Ryotaro Katsura
Keyword(s):  
Peace Education ◽  
Structural Violence ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
International Peace ◽  
World Community ◽  
The Earth ◽  
The World

We have to seriously accept that it is impossible for future generations to inherit the earth with harmony between nature and human beings without true freedom from armies and structural violence. With this in mind, we would like to take the human upbringing and creative activities as the basis for peace education.

“Our Sole Habitation”

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathias Risse
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
Alternative Conceptions ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Philosophical Literature ◽  
Collective Ownership ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Ownership Status ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Common Ownership

This chapter examines from a secular standpoint the notion that the earth belongs to humankind collectively by offering a view on the ownership status of the earth that it calls Common Ownership. It first considers collective ownership of the earth and some of its conceptions, especially Common Ownership, before describing what work Common Ownership does in an engagement with libertarianism. It then defends Common Ownership against objections in terms of the value of the environment and discusses two alternative conceptions of collective ownership. It relates the results to global justice and shows how Common Ownership enters into debates in the philosophical literature. Finally, it explores one version of left-libertarianism and one of Thomas Pogge's arguments for the claim that the global order harms the poor.

Taking up space on earth: Theorizing territorial rights, the justification of states and immigration from a global standpoint

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
MATHIAS RISSE
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
Collective Ownership ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Territorial Rights

AbstractThe author’s 2012 book On Global Justice gives pride of place to the idea that humanity collectively owns the earth. Independently, there has been a flourishing literature on the justification of rights to territory. Central to this discussion are a Kantian and a Lockean approach. This paper recapitulates the author’s approach to humanity’s collective ownership of the earth and argues that, properly understood, both of those approaches should integrate the global standpoint constituted thereby. However, the goal here is not to amend the Kantian and Lockean approaches to territory, but to refute them. To that end the paper also argues that both approaches endorse an unacceptably strong view of the justifiability of states and should therefore be rejected. The view in On Global Justice emerges vindicated, according to which territorial rights, the justification of states and immigration all need to be theorized together, and need to be theorized from a genuinely global standpoint.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document