Burdened Societies and Transitional Justice
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice (forthcoming)
| Abstract | Abstract Following John Rawls, nonideal theory is typically divided into: (1) “partial-compliance theory” and (2) “transitional theory." The former is concerned with those circumstances in which individuals and political regimes do not fully comply with the requirements of justice, such as when people break the law or some individuals do not do their fair share within a distributive scheme. The latter is concerned with circumstances in which background institutions may be unjust or may not exist at all. This paper focuses on issues arising in transitional theory. In particular, I am concerned with what Rawls’ has called “burdened societies," that is, those societies that find themselves in unfavorable conditions, such that their historical, social or economic circumstances make it difficult to establish just institutions. The paper investigates exactly how such burdened societies should proceed towards a more just condition in an acceptable fashion. Rawls himself tells us very little, except to suggest that societies in this condition should look for policies and courses of action that are morally permissible, politically possible and likely to be effective. In this paper I first try to anticipate what a Rawlsian might say about the best way for burdened societies to handle transitional problems and so move towards the ideal of justice. Next, I construct a model of transitional justice for burdened societies. Ultimately, I argue for a model of transitional justice that makes use of a nonideal version of Rawls’ notion of the worst-off representative person. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-18 DOI 10.1007/s10677-011-9300-0 Authors Lisa L. Fuller, Department of Philosophy, University at Albany (SUNY), 1400 Washington Ave., Albany, NY 12222, USA Journal Ethical Theory and Moral Practice Online ISSN 1572-8447 Print ISSN 1386-2820 | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,701 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJamie Terence Kelly (2010). Transitional Justice and Equality: A Response to Eisikovits. Review of International Affairs 61 (1138-1139):190-196.
Marion Smiley (2001). Democratic Justice in Transition. Michigan Law Review 99 (6):1332-1347.
Marcus Arvan (2008). A Nonideal Theory of Justice. Dissertation, University of Arizona
Derek Bell (2004). Environmental Justice and Rawls' Difference Principle. Environmental Ethics 26 (3):287-306.
Derek Bell (2004). Environmental Justice and Rawls' Difference Principle. Environmental Ethics 26 (3):287-306.
David Little (1999). A Different Kind of Justice: Dealing with Human Rights Violations in Transitional Societies. Ethics and International Affairs 13 (1):65–80.
Mihaela Mihai (2010). Public Negative Emotions and the Judicial Review of Transitional Justice Bills: Lessons From Three Contexts. Papeles Del Centro de Estudios Sobre la Identidad Colectiva 60:1-29.
Claudio Corradetti (2011). Transitional Justice and the Truth-Constraints of the Public Sphere. Philosophy and Social Criticism 38 (7).
Mihaela Mihai (2010). Transitional Justice and the Quest for Democracy: A Contribution to a Political Theory of Democratic Transformations. Ratio Juris 23 (2):183-204.
Joseph Lacey (2012). Climate Change and Norman Daniels' Theory of Just Health: An Essay on Basic Needs. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (1):3-14.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-07-02Total downloads31 ( #39,358 of 549,108 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,108 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
