Vol. 36 Nro. 1 (2016)
Articles

Global Inequality and Coercion

PDF (Español (España))
  • Francisco García Gibson
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36446/af.2016.31

Published 2016-05-01

Keywords

  • Coercion,
  • Egalitarianism,
  • Global Justice
  • Coerción,
  • Igualistarismo,
  • Justicia global
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Abstract

In this article I claim that the scope of certain egalitarian principles of distributive justice is domestic, not global. i ground my claim on Michael Blake's theory, according to which the scope and content of principles of distributive justice is determined by the type of coercion which is exercised in a certain domain. Against this theory, several authors argue that there is no type of coercion which is exercised only in the domestic domain, but not also in the global domain. using an analogy, I contend that continuous coercive control exists only in the domestic domain, while at the global level coercive control is discontinuous.

PDF (Español (España))

References

  1. Abizadeh, A. (2007), "Cooperation, Pervasive Impact, and Coercion: on the Scope (not Site) of Distributive Justice", Philosophy & Public Affairs, 35, pp. 318-358.
  2. Acemoğlu, D. (2014), "Democracy Does Cause Growth", NBER Working Paper No. 20004. Recuperado de http://www.nber.org/papers/w20004 (14/02/2016).
  3. Barry, C. y Valentini, L. (2009), "Egalitarian Challenges to Global Egalitarianism: a Critique", Review of International Studies, 35, pp. 485-512.
  4. Beitz, C. (1999), Political Theory and International Relations, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
  5. Blake, M. (2001), "Distributive Justice, State Coercion, and Autonomy" Philosophy and Public Affairs, 30, pp. 257-296.
  6. Cohen, J. y Sabel, C. (2006), "Extra Rempublicam Nulla Justitia?", Philosophy & Public Affairs, 34, pp. 147-175.
  7. Freeman, S. (2006), "The Law of Peoples, Social Cooperation, Human Rights, and Distributive Justice", Social Philosophy and Policy, 23, pp. 29-68.
  8. Meckled-Garcia, S. (2008), "On the Very Idea of Cosmopolitan Justice: Constructivism and International Agency", Journal of Political Philosophy, 16, pp. 245-271.
  9. Moellendorf, D. (2009), Global Inequality Matters, Nueva York, Palgrave Macmillan.
  10. Nagel, T. (2005), "The Problem of Global Justice", Philosophy and Public Affairs, 33, pp. 113-47.
  11. Nozick, R. (1974), Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
  12. Pogge, T. (1989), Realizing Rawls, Ithaca, Cornell University Press.
  13. Pogge, T. (2010), "The Role of International Law in Reproducing Massive Poverty" en Besson, S. y Tasioulas, J. (eds.), The Philosophy of International Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  14. Rawls, J. (1999), The Law of Peoples: With,"The Idea of Public Reason Revisited", Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
  15. Risse, M. (2006), "What to Say About the State", Social Theory and Practice, 32, pp. 671-698
  16. Sangiovanni, A. (2007), "Global Justice, Reciprocity, and the State" Philosophy and Public Affairs, 35, pp. 3-39.
  17. Sen, A. (1985), Commodities and Capabilities, Amsterdam, North-Holland.
  18. Tan, K. (2004), Justice without Borders: Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Patriotism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.