Justice beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory
Simon Caney
Language: English
Pages: 320
ISBN: B001KYFHD0
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
Which political principles should govern global politics? In his new book, Simon Caney engages with the work of philosophers, political theorists, and international relations scholars in order to examine some of the most pressing global issues of our time. Are there universal civil, political, and economic human rights? Should there be a system of supra-state institutions? Can humanitarian intervention be justified?
Plato's Laws: A Critical Guide (Cambridge Critical Guides)
What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense
Leo Strauss and the Rediscovery of Maimonides
La Conquête de l'Amérique : La question de l'autre
Stasis: Civil War as a Political Paradigm (Meridian: Crossing Aesthetics)
which one thinks should be applied everywhere on this earth. Theories of human rights are, then, but some of the members of the class of universalist theories. With this in 26 Justice Beyond Borders mind, we can discern three reasons for examining the arguments for and against universalism first before proceeding to consider the arguments for civil, political, and economic human rights. First, on a methodological level, it makes sense to consider if there are, as many think, any convincing
argument given in Section IX to the effect that relativism is in tension with people’s understanding of their own moral commitments and principles. This is particularly evident in cases of ethical disagreement. From the point of view of the participants, their view is correct and the view of the other protagonists is false. It would completely misdescribe the situation of people disagreeing about whether women should have the right to vote to say that each is right from their own point of view.
underpinning the argument is incorrect. The fact that an ideal is sometimes invoked by some people as a cover for their imperialist designs does not logically imply that the ideal is Universalism 53 wrong. It just shows that we should be suspicious of political actors when they invoke moral principles and should not unquestioningly take them at their word. It does not, however, invalidate the (universal) moral norms employed. A second, and related, problem with the anti-universalist argument
equal opportunities and while they are paid for the work done they are, because of their lack of talent, extremely poor. For this reason one might countenance an additional principle, namely: Principle 4: ‘[b]enefiting people matters more the worse off these people are’ (Parfit 1998: 12: cf. further pp. 11–15). I should stress yet again the tentative nature of these proposals. There are, however, three considerations in their favour. The first concerns the demandingness 124 Justice Beyond Borders
one is motivated to comply with them but this is a highly dubious assumption. It entails the implausible conclusion that one can escape one’s obligations to others if one lacks any inclination to perform them and this is hard to accept.80 This point undermines the individualistic version but does not refute the societal version. However, three points might be made against the societal version. First, it might be argued that it overstates the necessity of ‘national’ sentiments. There are, for