Shared understandings, collective autonomy, and global equality
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12866902 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christine Armstrong (0000-0002-7462-5316, corresponding author), Chris Armstrong (0000-0002-3478-2579) |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 4 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 51-69 |
| Publication date | 2011-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Ethics & Global Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1654-6369 • E-ISSN: 1654-4951 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.3402/egp.v4i1.5725 |
| OpenAlex | W3122391657 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 7 |
The political theorist Michael Walzer has usually been taken as an opponent of global distributive justice, on the basis that it is incompatible with collective autonomy, would endanger cultural diversity, or simply on the basis that principles of global distributive justice cannot be coherently envisaged, given cross-cultural disagreement about the nature and value of the social goods that might be distributed. However in his recent work, Walzer demonstrates a surprising degree of sympathy for the claims of global distributive justice, even of the egalitarian variety. But the precise contours of his current position on global equality are not yet clearly developed. The paper, therefore, attempts to reconstruct what that position might be, paying particular attention to the conclusions we could draw firstly for our understanding of the opposition between global equality and national self-determination (which is more complex than has sometimes been thought), and secondly for the relationship between global equality and shared understandings
Autonomy · Distributive justice · Economic Justice · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Global justice · Global politics · Law and economics · Opposition (politics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Sympathy · Value (mathematics · Law · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Social Psychology
| Highly cited | No |
|---|