Cosmopolitism, Global Justice, and International Law

Leiden Journal of International Law

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 679-684

  Pierik, Roland ^a   Werner, Wouter ^a  

^a TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

cosmopolitism; environmental law; Rawls; sovereign equality; world poverty

Indexed keywords

EID: 34948823504     PISSN: 09221565     EISSN: 14789698     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0922156505002955     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. J. Rawls, The Law of Peoples (1999).
2. The Law of Peoples., at 3, 9.
3. The Law of Peoples., at 3.
4. In Rawls's description, liberal peoples are governed by reasonable and just constitutional democratic regimes that protect basic rights and liberties of all citizens, prioritizes these rights and liberties over claims of the general good or perfectionist values, and assures for all citizens access to primary goods to enable them to make effective use of their freedoms. Decent hierarchical peoples fall short of liberal standards but satisfy two criteria. First, they are peaceful, do not have aggressive aims, and respect the independence of other states. Second, they respect human rights, have a ‘decent consultation hierarchy’ (the elected bodies represent all the subgroups), and their officials operate in the honest belief that their law is guided by a ‘common good idea of justice’. Outlaw states are states that refuse to comply with the Law of Peoples. Burdened societies are societies whose historical, economic, and cultural conditionsmake it difficult, if not impossible, to become well ordered on their own. Rawls, The Law of Peoples note 1, at 14, 64-5.
5. J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice (1971); idem, Political Liberalism (1993); idem, Burdened societies are societies whose historical, economic, and cultural conditionsmake it difficult, if not impossible, to become well ordered on their own note 1, at 3.
6. Rawls, A Theory of Justice note 1, at 37. Rawls stresses that this set of principles is incomplete and that other principles might be added.
7. Rawls stresses that this set of principles is incomplete and that other principles might be added., at 59.
8. Rawls stresses that this set of principles is incomplete and that other principles might be added., at 90.
9. Rawls stresses that this set of principles is incomplete and that other principles might be added., at 92-3, 106.
10. M. Koskenniemi, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870-1960 (2001); A. Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law (2004); G. Simpson, Great Powers and Outlaw States: Unequal Sovereigns in the International Legal Order (2004).
11. Koskenniemi, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870-1960 note 10, at 490.
12. A. Buchanan, ‘Rawls's Law of Peoples: Rules for a VanishedWestphalianWorld’, (2000) 110 Ethics 697.
13. P. Kleingeld and E. Brown, ‘Cosmopolitanism’, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2002).
14. C. Beitz, Political Theory and International Relations (1979); idem, ‘Cosmopolitan Ideals andNational Sentiment’, (1983) 10 The Journal of Philosophy 591; T. Pogge, Realizing Rawls (1989); idem, ‘Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty’, (1992) 103 Ethics 48; idem, ‘An Egalitarian Law of Peoples’, (1994) 23 (3) Philosophy and Public Affairs 195.
15. Pogge, Realizing Rawls, Political Theory and International Relations note 14, at 247; for a similar claim see Beitz, ‘Cosmopolitan Ideals’, Political Theory and International Relations note 14, at 595.
16. Rawls, Pogge note 5, at 303.
17. Rawls, Theory of Justice, Rawls note 1, at 37.
18. ‘Not all [burdened] societies are poor, any more than all well-ordered societies are wealthy’. Rawls., at 106.
19. ‘Not all [burdened] societies are poor, any more than all well-ordered societies are wealthy’., at 108.
20. ‘Not all [burdened] societies are poor, any more than all well-ordered societies are wealthy’., at 111.
21. See for an elaboration of a Rawlsian emphasis on domestic institutions as the primary cause of the wealth of peoplesM. Risse, ‘WhatWe Owe to the Global Poor’, (2005) 9 (1-2) The Journal of Ethics 81.
22. Rawls, ‘WhatWe Owe to the Global Poor’ note 1, at 109.
23. C. Beitz, ‘Social and Cosmopolitan Liberalism’, (1999) 75 International Affairs 515.
24. C. Jones, Global Justice: Defending Cosmopolitanism (1999).
25. T. Pogge,World Poverty and Human Rights (2002).