International distributive justice, associativismand self-government.<br>

Authors

  • HUGO OMAR SELEME

Keywords:

Social Liberalism, Cosmopolitanism, Basic Structure

Abstract

This article argues that discrepancies between Rawls and the cosmopolitans regarding international distributive justice stem from the political associativism inherent to Rawls’s concept of justice. Rawls considers relevant membership to be an association within a core structure established by the collective political activity of the State’s governmental agencies. The cosmopolitans disagree for two reasons: because they deny the associative nature of distributive justice, and/or they consider relevant membership to be independent of collective political activity. The concept defended by Beitz provides examples of each type of discrepancy.

Published

2008-03-28

Issue

Section

ARTICLES