Global Distributive Justice and
Political Responsibility
Aysel Dogan,
Koçaeli University
This article considers some issues concerning the responsibility of people to global distribution of wealth and resources. Skeptics of global redistribution argue that there is no obligation of distributive justice across boundaries. This is because, they say, the poor of developing countries are responsible for their plight, which is induced by misguided economic policies of the governors they elected. Brian Barry is among those who argue against the legitimacy of global obligations of distributive justice on the ground of the political responsibility of the poor. I argue that Barry’s arguments against duties of global distributive justice are far from convincing. Before denying assistance to the poor, we should have a clear conception of electoral processes of developing countries and the implications of economic punishment within the context of global distributive justice.
Introduction
The claim that there is no global duty of distributive justice is commonplace among some political philosophers. They contend that poor people of developing countries might be held accountable for their bad economic conditions because these conditions are a result of wrong economic policies of the politicians they elected as their representatives. Brian Barry is among those who hold the poor of developing countries responsible for their plight. In “International Society from a Cosmopolitan Perspective”, Barry argues that there is no profound moral significance of being a member of a society. He advocates what he calls “moral cosmopolitanism,” according to which members of a political society might have special obligations to each other but the special treatment to fellow citizens must be justified “on grounds that can in principle be accepted by those excluded”. That is to say, outsiders may benefit by having the same privileges in their own society legitimately on the same grounds.