Un mundo moralizado: seguridad jurídica con normas justas: Global domestic politics: a moralized world

Thomas  Pogge

doi:10.12795/araucaria.2024.i55.23

Authors

Thomas Pogge Universidad de Yale

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12795/araucaria.2024.i55.23

Keywords:

basic needs, human rights, impartiality, inequality, John Rawls, justice, modus vivendi, nationalism, nepotism, peace, power, rule of law, Thomas Hobbes

Abstract

Today’s most advanced societies are structured around three normative elements: rule of law, meeting basic human needs, and constrained inequality. These are culturally deeply entrenched to the point that citizens are expected fully to subordinate their diverse personal interests and values to their shared commitment to their society’s just and fair functioning. Arguably, the long-term survival of humanity requires an analogous civilizational achievement on the global plane. There, as well, just and fair rules and institutional arrangements can persist only if those entrusted with their design and operation are expected to be strictly impartial in the execution of their public roles and hence widely denounced for any favoritism toward their home country. Reflecting a mere modus vivendi, the current state of international relations involves the opposite expectation: that agents operating at the supranational level will act to advance the special interests and values of their home state. Such national nepotism prevents the emergence of a world order based on shared values, which humanity urgently needs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Blake, Michael. “Distributive Justice, State Coercion, and Autonomy”, Philosophy and Public Affairs 30 (2001): 257-96.

Cohen, Joshua y Sabel, Charles. “Extram Republicam Nulla Justitia?”, Philosophy and Public Affairs 34 (2006), pp. 147-75.

Dworkin, Ronald. Law’s Empire,Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press, 1986.

Dworkin, Ronald. Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press, 2002.

Kant, Immanuel. Metaphysik der Sitten, Rechtslehre, Preußische Akademieausgabe, Vol. VI, 1977.

Lessig, Larry. Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress - and a Plan to Stop It, Nueva York, Hachette Book Group, 2011.

Nagel, Thomas. The Possibility of Altruism, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1970.

Nagel, Thomas. “The Problem of Global Justice”, Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2005), 113-47.

Nye, Joseph. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, Nueva York, Public Affairs, 2004.

Parfit, Derek. Reasons and Persons, Oxford, Oxford University Press 1984.

Pogge, Thomas. World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibility and Reform, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2002.

Pogge, Thomas. “Historical Wrongs: The Two Other Domains” en Lukas Meyer (ed.): Justice in Time. Responding to Historical Injustice, Baden-Baden, NOMOS Verlag, 2004, 117-134.

Pogge, Thomas. La pobreza en el mundo y los derechos humanos, trad. Ernest Weikert García, Barcelona, Paidós, 2005.

Pogge, Thomas. Politics as Usual: What Lies behind the Pro-Poor Rhetoric, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2010.

Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1971.

Rawls, John. “The Basic Liberties and their Priority” en John Rawls, Political Liberalism, New York, Columbia University Press 1993, lección VIII.

Raz, Joseph. Practical Reason and Norms, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1990.

Ridge, Michael. “Reasons for Action: Agent-Neutral vs. Agent-Relative,” en Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2022. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reasons-agent/ (último acceso 03/14/2023)

Sidgwick, Henry. The Methods of Ethics, 7a ed., Indianápolis, Indiana, Hackett, 1981.

Tucídides, The Peloponnesian War, trad. Crawley Richard, London, New York, E. P. Dutton, 1910.