Compatriot partiality and cosmopolitan justice: Can we justify compatriot partiality within the cosmopolitan framework?

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 Q4 ETHICS Etikk I Praksis Pub Date : 2016-10-26 DOI:10.5324/EIP.V10I2.1921
Rachelle Bascara
{"title":"Compatriot partiality and cosmopolitan justice: Can we justify compatriot partiality within the cosmopolitan framework?","authors":"Rachelle Bascara","doi":"10.5324/EIP.V10I2.1921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper shows an alternative way in which compatriot partiality could be justified within the framework of global distributive justice. Philosophers who argue that compatriot partiality is similar to racial partiality capture something correct about compatriot partiality. However, the analogy should not lead us to comprehensively reject compatriot partiality. We can justify compatriot partiality on the same grounds that liberation movements and affirmative action have been justified. Hence, given cosmopolitan demands of justice, special consideration for the economic well-being of your nation as a whole is justified if and only if the country it identifies is an oppressed developing nation in an unjust global order. This justification is incomplete. We also need to say why Person A, qua national of Country A, is justified in helping her compatriots in Country A over similarly or slightly more oppressed non-compatriots in Country B. I argue that Person A’s partiality towards her compatriots admits further vindication because it is part of an oppressed group’s project of self-emancipation, which is preferable to paternalistic emancipation. Finally, I identify three benefits in my justification for compatriot partiality. First, I do not offer a blanket justification for all forms of compatriot partiality. Partiality between members of oppressed groups is only a temporary effective measure designed to level an unlevel playing field. Second, because history attests that sovereign republics could arise as a collective response to colonial oppression, justifying compatriot partiality on the grounds that I have identified is conducive to the development of sovereignty and even democracy in poor countries, thereby avoiding problems of infringement that many humanitarian poverty alleviation efforts encounter. Finally, my justification for compatriot partiality complies with the implicit cosmopolitan commitment to the realizability of global justice theories. Article first published online: 9 NOV 2015","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":"10 1","pages":"27-39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Etikk I Praksis","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5324/EIP.V10I2.1921","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This paper shows an alternative way in which compatriot partiality could be justified within the framework of global distributive justice. Philosophers who argue that compatriot partiality is similar to racial partiality capture something correct about compatriot partiality. However, the analogy should not lead us to comprehensively reject compatriot partiality. We can justify compatriot partiality on the same grounds that liberation movements and affirmative action have been justified. Hence, given cosmopolitan demands of justice, special consideration for the economic well-being of your nation as a whole is justified if and only if the country it identifies is an oppressed developing nation in an unjust global order. This justification is incomplete. We also need to say why Person A, qua national of Country A, is justified in helping her compatriots in Country A over similarly or slightly more oppressed non-compatriots in Country B. I argue that Person A’s partiality towards her compatriots admits further vindication because it is part of an oppressed group’s project of self-emancipation, which is preferable to paternalistic emancipation. Finally, I identify three benefits in my justification for compatriot partiality. First, I do not offer a blanket justification for all forms of compatriot partiality. Partiality between members of oppressed groups is only a temporary effective measure designed to level an unlevel playing field. Second, because history attests that sovereign republics could arise as a collective response to colonial oppression, justifying compatriot partiality on the grounds that I have identified is conducive to the development of sovereignty and even democracy in poor countries, thereby avoiding problems of infringement that many humanitarian poverty alleviation efforts encounter. Finally, my justification for compatriot partiality complies with the implicit cosmopolitan commitment to the realizability of global justice theories. Article first published online: 9 NOV 2015
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
同胞偏袒与世界主义正义:我们能否在世界主义框架内为同胞偏袒辩护?
本文展示了在全球分配正义的框架内证明同胞偏袒的另一种方式。认为同胞偏袒类似于种族偏袒的哲学家抓住了关于同胞偏袒的一些正确之处。然而,这种类比不应使我们全盘否定对同胞的偏爱。我们可以以解放运动和平权行动被证明是正当的理由为同胞偏袒辩护。因此,鉴于世界各地对正义的要求,当且仅当它所认定的国家是在不公正的全球秩序中受压迫的发展中国家时,对整个国家经济福祉的特别考虑是合理的。这个理由是不完整的。我们还需要说,为什么A人,作为A国的国民,有理由帮助她在A国的同胞,而不是在b国同样或稍微受压迫的非同胞。我认为,A人对她同胞的偏袒可以进一步证明是正确的,因为这是受压迫群体自我解放计划的一部分,这比家长式的解放更可取。最后,我在为我的同胞偏好辩护时指出了三个好处。首先,我不是为所有形式的同胞偏袒提供一个笼统的理由。受压迫群体成员之间的偏袒只是一种暂时有效的措施,旨在平衡不公平的竞争环境。其次,因为历史证明,主权共和国可以作为对殖民压迫的集体反应而出现,以我所指出的理由为同胞偏袒辩护,有利于发展贫穷国家的主权甚至民主,从而避免许多人道主义扶贫努力遇到的侵权问题。最后,我对同胞偏袒的辩护符合全球正义理论实现的隐含的世界主义承诺。文章首次在线发布:2015年11月9日
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Etikk I Praksis
Etikk I Praksis Multiple-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Ethical challenges of social work in Spain during COVID-19 LGBTIQ+ prioritization in refugee admissions – The case of Norway Stakeholder Inclusion as the Research Council of Norway’s Silver Bullet Moral sensitivity, moral distress and moral functioning Nazism, Genocide and the Threat of The Global West. Russian Moral Justification of War in Ukraine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1