Global Justice: A Utopia and Concern of Humanitarianism

Gong Qun

doi:10.1515/yewph-2020-0006

Article

Global Justice: A Utopia and Concern of Humanitarianism

Gong Qun

Published/Copyright: May 27, 2020

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Yearbook for Eastern and Western Philosophy Volume 4 Issue 1

Abstract

Global justice or the lack thereof has internal connections with global poverty. Global justice is an ideal pursuit of cosmopolitanism, which regards basic human needs as its rightful object. The right to life, from the point of view of global justice, is the most fundamental in the list of Human Rights. International anarchy and the current international economic order, however, cast a utopian shadow on the realization of this right when we consider the de facto institutions and the ostensible goal of impartial love for everyone. Humanitarian aid is another approach to the problem of contemporary global poverty. Its difficulty lies first in people’s different conceptions of obligation and donation. They consider the former as duty while the latter is seen to lie beyond the call of duty. Second, in terms of a correlation between right and duty, since everyone has the right to life, the duty falls accordingly upon organizations or individuals. Meanwhile, donation as duty is not perfect obligation, thus is not compulsory either. Finally, international humanitarian aid is constrained by nationalism and partial love. Hence, in the light of either government or individual, the humanitarian aid approach is beset with challenges.

Global justice has gained academic importance worldwide since John Rawls’ later works. By contrast to domestic justice, it is a theory of justice that proposes to include all human beings. Global justice stands for a kind of utopian justice in regard to both the institutional path and the humanitarian aid approach. I shall examine the theory of global justice under these two aspects.

Literature

Jones, Charles, Global Justice: defending Cosmopolitanism, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1999.Search in Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel, Perpetual Peace, tranl. by He Zhaowu, Beijing: Commercial Press 1990.Search in Google Scholar

McIntyre, Alasdair, “Is Patrioism a Virtue?”, Lindley Lecture, Lawrence, Kan, University of Kansas 1984.Search in Google Scholar

Milanovic, Branko, World Report: Measuring International and Global Inequality, Princeton: Princeton University Press 2005.Search in Google Scholar

Miller, David, National Responsibility and Global Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2007.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199235056.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Nagel, Thomas, Equality and Partiality, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1991.Search in Google Scholar

O’Neil, Onora, Faces of Hunger: An Essay on Poverty, Justice, and Development, London: Allen & Unwin 1986.Search in Google Scholar

O’Neill, Onora, “Transnational Justice”, in: Political Theory Today, ed. by David Held, Oxford: Polity 1991, p. 276–304.Search in Google Scholar

Pogge, Thomas, Kant, Rawls and Global Justice, tranl. by Liu Xin and Xu Xiangdong, Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Publishing House 2010.Search in Google Scholar

Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice, Harvard: Harvard University Press 1971.Search in Google Scholar

Rawls, John, The Law of Peoples, Harvard: Harvard University Press 1999.Search in Google Scholar

Sen, Amartya, Poverty and Famines, tranl. by Wang Yu and others, Beijing: Commercial Press 2001.Search in Google Scholar

Singer, Peter, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 1, no. 3, 1972, p. 229–243.Search in Google Scholar

Tan, Kok-Chor, Justice without Borders: Cosmopolitianism, Nationalism, and Patriotism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2004.10.1017/CBO9780511490385Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-05-27

Published in Print: 2020-05-26

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/yewph-2020-0006