American Political Science Review 105 (1):205-220 (2011)
AbstractIn this article, I develop a new account of the liberal view that principles of justice are meant to justify state coercion, and consider its implications for the question of global socioeconomic justice. Although contemporary proponents of this view deny that principles of socioeconomic justice apply globally, on my newly developed account this conclusion is mistaken. I distinguish between two types of coercion, systemic and interactional, and argue that a plausible theory of global justice should contain principles justifying both. The justification of interactional coercion requires principles regulating interstate interference; that of systemic coercion requires principles of global socioeconomic justice. I argue that the proposed view not only helps us make progress in the debate on global justice, but also offers an independently compelling and systematic account of the function and conditions of applicability of justice. -/-
Similar books and articles
Cooperation, Pervasive Impact, and Coercion: On the Scope of Distributive Justice.Arash Abizadeh - 2007 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 35 (4):318–358.
Justice in a Globalized World: A Normative Framework.Laura Valentini - 2011 - Oxford University Press.
Justice, Authority, and the World Order.A. Walton - 2009 - Journal of Global Ethics 5 (3):215 – 230.
The Basic Structure and the Principles of Justice.András Miklós - 2011 - Utilitas 23 (2):161-182.
Equality, Coercion, Culture and Social Norms.Richard J. Arneson - 2003 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 2 (2):139-163.
Global Justice and Norms of Co-Operation: The 'Layers of Justice' View.Jonathan Wolff - 2009 - In Stephen De Wijze, Matthew H. Kramer & Ian Carter (eds.), Hillel Steiner and the Anatomy of Justice: Themes and Challenges. Routledge. pp. 16--34.
Principles or Imagination? Two Approaches to Global Justice.Mark Coeckelbergh - 2007 - Journal of Global Ethics 3 (2):203 – 221.
Global Health Justice and Governance.Jennifer Prah Ruger - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (12):35-54.
Coercion, Care, and Corporations: Omissions and Commissions in Thomas Pogge's Political Philosophy.Carol C. Gould - 2007 - Journal of Global Ethics 3 (3):381 – 393.
Can Global Justice Provide a Path Toward Achieving Justice Across the Americas?Allison B. Wolf - 2005 - Journal of Global Ethics 1 (2):153 – 176.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Crisis Nationalism: To What Degree Is National Partiality Justifiable During a Global Pandemic?Eilidh Beaton, Mike Gadomski, Dylan Manson & Kok-Chor Tan - 2021 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 24 (1):285-300.
The Subjects of Collectively Binding Decisions: Democratic Inclusion and Extraterritorial Law.Ludvig Beckman - 2014 - Ratio Juris 27 (2):252-270.
Feasibility as a Constraint on ‘Ought All-Things-Considered’, But Not on ‘Ought as a Matter of Justice’?Nicholas Southwood - 2019 - Philosophical Quarterly 69 (276):598-616.
Global Political Legitimacy and the Structural Power of Capital.Ugur Aytac - 2022 - Journal of Social Philosophy.
Sweatshops, Harm and Exploitation: A Proposal to Operationalise the Model of Structural Injustice.Fausto Corvino - 2020 - Conatus 5 (2):9-23.
References found in this work
No references found.