David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (5):657-680 (2009)
The debate about global distributive justice is characterized by an often stark opposition between universalistic approaches, advocating an egalitarian global redistribution of wealth (Beitz, Pogge, Barry, Tan), and particularistic positions, aiming to justify a restriction of redistribution to the domestic community (D. Miller, R. Miller, Blake, Nagel, Rawls). I argue that an approach starting from the deliberative model of democracy (Habermas) can overcome this opposition. On the one hand, the increasingly global scope of economic interactions implies that the range of individuals concerned with the redistribution of wealth should also be increasingly universal. On the other hand, the need for democratic deliberation refers to the fact that demands of justice should be contextual and should take into account the particular circumstances, needs and values of the people concerned. Both concerns can be realized simultaneously only within a multi-layered democratic system in which redistribution is a concern at the domestic, the international and the global level.
|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
John Rawls (1999). The Law of Peoples. Harvard University Press.
Jürgen Habermas (1998). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. The MIT Press.
John Rawls (2009/2005). A Theory of Justice. In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Philosophy and Rhetoric. Oxford University Press 133-135.
David M. Rasmussen, Jurgen Habermas, Christian Lenhardt & Shierry Weber Nicholsen (1993). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Philosophical Quarterly 43 (173):571.
Thomas Nagel (2005). The Problem of Global Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2):113–147.
Citations of this work BETA
John S. Dryzek (2015). Democratic Agents of Justice. Journal of Political Philosophy 23 (3).
Similar books and articles
Pablo Gilabert (2007). Comentarios Sobre la Concepcion de la Justicia Global de Pogge. Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofia 33 (2):205-222.
Sagar Sanyal (2009). Political Equality and Global Poverty: An Alternative Egalitarian Approach to Distributive Justice. Dissertation, University of Canterbury
John Gastil, Colin J. Lingle & Eugene P. Deess (2010). Deliberation and Global Criminal Justice: Juries in the International Criminal Court. Ethics and International Affairs 24 (1):69-90.
Arash Abizadeh (2007). Cooperation, Pervasive Impact, and Coercion: On the Scope (Not Site) of Distributive Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 35 (4):318–358.
Xin Liu (2011). The Implication of Rawls' Approach to Public Reason. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 6 (1):161-169.
Allison B. Wolf (2005). Can Global Justice Provide a Path Toward Achieving Justice Across the Americas? Journal of Global Ethics 1 (2):153 – 176.
Gillian Brock (2009). Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Account. Oxford University Press.
Mark Coeckelbergh (2007). Principles or Imagination? Two Approaches to Global Justice. Journal of Global Ethics 3 (2):203 – 221.
Added to index2010-07-27
Total downloads38 ( #85,842 of 1,724,742 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,121 of 1,724,742 )
How can I increase my downloads?