National responsibility, global justice and transnational power
National responsibility, global justice and transnational power
This article focuses on David Miller's recent and influential study National Responsibility and Global Justice (2007). After outlining Miller's methodological commitments in the book, the article offers an interpretation of the major aspects of Miller's case against ‘Cosmopolitan egalitarianism’ before focusing especially on the issue of migration and refugees. Here the article argues that while membership of a nation is (under certain conditions) of intrinsic value, it is not the only thing that is of intrinsic value – friendship, family and other practices can also be sources of intrinsic value – nor is it necessarily the most important. It is therefore not clear, the article argues, why an account of global justice that seeks to take seriously the existence of national communities on the grounds of their intrinsic value, should propose rules of justice concerning freedom of movement that entail the de jure privileging of the value of national community over other sources of intrinsic value. The article concludes by assessing how Miller's arguments can support the movement from mere ‘distributivism’ towards political justice, towards an account that more adequately integrates agency, responsibility and power into our account of global justice.
97-112
Owen, David
9fc71bca-07d1-44af-9248-1b9545265a58
Owen, David
9fc71bca-07d1-44af-9248-1b9545265a58
Owen, David
(2011)
National responsibility, global justice and transnational power.
Review of International Studies, 36 (S1), .
(doi:10.1017/S0260210511000118).
(In Press)
Abstract
This article focuses on David Miller's recent and influential study National Responsibility and Global Justice (2007). After outlining Miller's methodological commitments in the book, the article offers an interpretation of the major aspects of Miller's case against ‘Cosmopolitan egalitarianism’ before focusing especially on the issue of migration and refugees. Here the article argues that while membership of a nation is (under certain conditions) of intrinsic value, it is not the only thing that is of intrinsic value – friendship, family and other practices can also be sources of intrinsic value – nor is it necessarily the most important. It is therefore not clear, the article argues, why an account of global justice that seeks to take seriously the existence of national communities on the grounds of their intrinsic value, should propose rules of justice concerning freedom of movement that entail the de jure privileging of the value of national community over other sources of intrinsic value. The article concludes by assessing how Miller's arguments can support the movement from mere ‘distributivism’ towards political justice, towards an account that more adequately integrates agency, responsibility and power into our account of global justice.
Text
National_Responsibility,_Global_Justice_and_Transnational_Power.pdf
- Version of Record
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 2011
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 186555
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/186555
ISSN: 0260-2105
PURE UUID: 32f8bda5-a06e-44f3-a73c-aedc98f30bbf
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 13 May 2011 13:22
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 02:50
Export record
Altmetrics
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics