On Compensation and Return: Can The 'Continuing Injustice Argument' for Compensating for Historical Injustices Justify Compensation for Such Injustices or the Return of Property?
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (2):151-168 (2011)
This paper offers a critique of recent attempts, by George Sher and others to justify compensation to be paid to descendants of deceased victims of past wrongs. This recent attempt (the ‘continuing injustice argument’) is important as it endeavours to avoid some well-known critiques of previous attempts, such as the non-identity problem. Furthermore, this new attempt is grounded in individual rights, without invoking a more controversial collectivist assumption. The first step in this critique is to differentiate between compensation and restitution. Once this important distinction is clear, an examination of several factors follows: the importance of the passage of time vis-à-vis claims for compensation and/or restitution (and especially the passing away of the original victims and wrongdoers), the responsibility of the would be payers, the responsibility of the descendants of the victims, the welfare level of the descendants of the victims, information-related issues, and several additional factors. The conclusion is that once we take into account the distinction between compensation and restitution, and the additional factors mentioned, the case for compensation and/or restitution under the ‘continuing injustice argument’, is highly limited
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Margaret Moore (2013). On Rights to Land, Expulsions, and Corrective Justice. Ethics and International Affairs 27 (4):429-447.
Similar books and articles
H. P. P. Lotter (2005). Compensating for Impoverishing Injustices of the Distant Past. Politikon 32 (1):83-102.
Daniel Butt (2009). Rectifying International Injustice: Principles of Compensation and Restitution Between Nations. Oxford University Press.
Chandran Kukathas (2003). Responsibility for Past Injustice: How to Shift the Burden. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 2 (2):165-190.
Jeff Spinner-Halev (2007). From Historical to Enduring Injustice. Political Theory 35 (5):574 - 597.
Jeffrey Moriarty (2011). Does Distributive Justice Pay? Sternberg's Compensation Ethics. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (1):33-48.
John Dobson (2011). A Moral and Economic Defense of Executive Compensation. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 30 (1-2):59-70.
Andrew I. Cohen (2009). Compensation for Historic Injustices: Completing the Boxill and Sher Argument. Philosophy and Public Affairs 37 (1):81-102.
Ella Mae Matsumura & Jae Yong Shin (2005). Corporate Governance Reform and CEO Compensation: Intended and Unintended Consequences. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 62 (2):101 - 113.
George Mendelson (1991). Chronic Pain, Compensation and Clinical Knowledge. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 12 (3).
Mel Perel (2003). An Ethical Perspective on CEO Compensation. Journal of Business Ethics 48 (4):381-391.
Robert Kolb & Jeffrey Moriarty (2011). Dialogue - CEO Compensation. Business Ethics Quarterly 21 (4):679-691.
A. John Simmons (1995). Historical Rights and Fair Shares. Law and Philosophy 14 (2):149 - 184.
Axel Gosseries (2004). Historical Emissions and Free-Riding. Ethical Perspectives 11 (1):36-60.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads28 ( #71,746 of 1,410,004 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #107,552 of 1,410,004 )
How can I increase my downloads?