Rethinking remedial responsibilities

Ethics and Global Politics 4 (3):195-202 (2011)
Abstract
How should we determine which nations have a responsibility to remedy suffering elsewhere? The problem is pressing because, following David Miller, ‘[it] is morally intolerable if (remediable) suffering and deprivation are allowed to continue . . . where they exist we are morally bound to hold somebody (some person or collective agent) responsible for relieving them’. Miller offers a connection theory of remedial responsibilities in response to this problem, a theory he has been developing over the last decade. This theory is meant to serve as a guide on how we can best determine which nations are remedially responsible for alleviating suffering and deprivation elsewhere. Miller’s theory entails our following a procedure in order to determine remedial responsibility for nations. The problem is that there is an important flaw in this procedure, a flaw that previous critiques have overlooked. This essay will explain this flaw and how Miller’s theory might be reformulated into a two-tiered procedure that would take better account of this problem. Keywords: Global justice; nationalism; Miller; identity; distributive justice; severe poverty (Published: 16 September 2011) Citation: Ethics & Global Politics, Vol. 4 , No. 3, 2011, pp. 195-202. DOI: 10.3402/egp.v4i3.7140
Keywords Global justice  Severe poverty  Human rights  Miller
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.3402/egp.v4i3.7140
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,694
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Cosmopolitanism and Distributing Responsibilities.Thom Brooks - 2002 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 5 (3):92-97.
Punishing States That Cause Global Poverty.Thom Brooks - 2007 - William Mitchell Law Review 33 (2):519-32.
The Duty to Eradicate Global Poverty: Positive or Negative?Pablo Gilabert - 2005 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (5):537-550.
Contractualism and Poverty Relief.Pablo Gilabert - 2007 - Social Theory and Practice 33 (2):277-310.
Global Basic Rights.Charles R. Beitz & Robert E. Goodin (eds.) - 2009 - Oxford University Press.
Global Justice and Poverty Relief in Nonideal Circumstances.Pablo Gilabert - 2008 - Social Theory and Practice 34 (3):411-438.
Poverty, Negative Duties and the Global Institutional Order.Magnus Reitberger - 2008 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 7 (4):379-402.
On Global Justice.Mathias Risse - 2012 - Princeton University Press.
Added to PP index
2011-09-20

Total downloads
43 ( #124,940 of 2,197,196 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #298,376 of 2,197,196 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature