Philosophy and Public Affairs 35 (4):318–358 (2007)

Authors
Arash Abizadeh
McGill University
Abstract
Many anticosmopolitan Rawlsians argue that since the primary subject of justice is society's basic structure, and since there is no global basic structure, the scope of justice is domestic. This paper challenges the anticosmopolitan basic structure argument by distinguishing three interpretations of what Rawls meant by the basic structure and its relation to justice, corresponding to the cooperation, pervasive impact, and coercion theories of distributive justice. On the cooperation theory, it is true that there is no global basic structure, but the basic structure turns out to be only an instrumental condition for realizing justice, and not an existence condition that must be met before demands of justice arise. On the pervasive impact and coercion theories, the basic structure is indeed an existence condition, but there exists a global basic structure. The upshot is that on any plausible interpretation of Rawls's account of the basic structure, Rawlsian justice is global in scope
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2007.00116.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,593
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Distributive Justice, State Coercion, and Autonomy.Michael Blake - 2001 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 30 (3):257-296.
Where the Action Is: On the Site of Distributive Justice.G. A. Cohen - 1997 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 26 (1):3-30.
Constructing Justice for Existing Practice: Rawls and the Status Quo.Aaron James - 2005 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (3):281-316.
Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Sentiment.Charles R. Beitz - 1983 - Journal of Philosophy 80 (10):591-600.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Territorial Exclusion: An Argument Against Closed Borders.Daniel Weltman - 2021 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 19 (3):257-90.
There Is No Rawlsian Theory of Corporate Governance.Abraham Singer - 2015 - Business Ethics Quarterly 25 (1):65-92.
The Many, Not the Few: Pluralism About Global Distributive Justice.Helena de Bres - 2012 - Journal of Political Philosophy 20 (3):314-340.
Systemic Domination as Ground of Justice.Jugov Tamara - 2020 - European Journal of Political Theory 19 (1).

View all 63 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Global Justice: What is Necessary to Legitimate Coercion.N. Hassoun - 2019 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 16 (5):563-589.
Is Coercion a Ground of Distributive Justice?Andrea Sangiovanni - 2016 - Law and Philosophy 35 (3):271-290.
What is so Special About the State?Rekha Nath - 2010 - In Gabriele de Angelis & Diogo P. Aurelio (eds.), Sovereign Justice: Global Justice in a World of Nations. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 109-128.
Justice and Boundaries.David Miller - 2009 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (3):291-309.
Gender.Anca Gheaus - 2018 - In Serena Olsaretti (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Distributive Justice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 389-414.
The Limits of Background Justice.Thomas Porter Sinclair - 2013 - Social Philosophy and Policy 30 (1-2):352-372.
Corrective Vs. Distributive Justice: The Case of Apologies.Andrew I. Cohen - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (3):663-677.
Two Concepts of Justice – and of its Scope.Saladin Meckled-Garcia - 2016 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 19 (5):534-554.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
290 ( #33,825 of 2,462,044 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #448,768 of 2,462,044 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes