Global justice refers to world politics and worldwide actions, relations, practices and institutions. Are they just? This question presupposes that we know the meaning of justice. Although the abstract concept of justice is universal, its substance and direction are not. Like almost all ethical concepts, the notion of justice is constructed metaphorically. The core meaning of justice is that similar cases should be treated in the same way, and given what they truly deserve. However, there are a large number of basic models of justice. Various theories and ideologies of justice articulate a carefully organized story of justice comprising a selected set of (largely) mutually consistent models. A particular conception of justice already constitutes many transnational practices, including practices of international law and global governance. In this dominant conception, free markets are best for justice. If markets are sufficiently competitive, justice will prevail in the sense of a scalar distribution model—the more you contribute, the more you get. I conclude by making two substantial points. First, there seem to be good reasons to stress the (generally greater) plausibility of alternative conceptions of global justice. Second, and perhaps even more importantly, is the recognition of the relativist nature of struggles between models and sentiments of justice, giving rise to a quest to democratize systems of global governance. Given how prone justice has been to absolutist and also violent interpretations, it seems that the real ethical and practical-political problem is how to effect necessary and desirable institutional changes by means of peaceful change.
Tijdschrift beschrijving