Michael Walzer and Global Justice

Article Sidebar

PDF (Spanish)
Published: 2017-06-15
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18566/apolit.v7n12.a03

How to Cite

ARBELÁEZ, A.-M. . (2017). Michael Walzer and Global Justice . Analecta política, 7(12), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.18566/apolit.v7n12.a03
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Societal impact


Main Article Content

ANGELA-M ARBELÁEZ
Universidad Pontifica Bolivariana
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4992-3861 (unauthenticated)

Abstract

The aim of the article is to present Michael Walzer’s conception of global justice, which is one of the few conceptions suggested by contemporary political philosophy that proposes an order that might be regarded as an interstate order. Despite globalization, interdependence and widening of the transnational political sphere, Walzer still regards States as the most important political units within the international system and considers that they have a moral significance derived from the political communities they claim to represent. Walzer’s political conception of global justice is opposed to dominant cosmopolitan analysis within contemporary international political theory, which consider that legitimacy of the States depends on their capacity of making possible human autonomy.

Keywords:
Global Justice, International Politics, States, Self-Determination, Human Rights

Article Details

Author Biography

ANGELA-M ARBELÁEZ, Universidad Pontifica Bolivariana

Comunicadora social. Magíster en Estudios Políticos por la Uni- versidad Pontificia Bolivariana. Candidata a Doctora en Cien- cias Políticas por la Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina. Profesora e investigadora de la Facultad de Ciencias Políticas de la Universidad Pontifica Bolivariana.

References

Beitz, C. (1999). Political theory and international relations. Princeton: Princeton Uni- versity Press.

Beitz, C. (2005). Cosmopolitanism and global justice. The Journah of Ethics, 9(1/2), 11-27.

Buchanan, A. (1989) Assessing the Communitarian Critique of Liberalism. En: The Uni-

versity of Chicago Press. Vol 99, No 4. Recuperado de: www.jstor.org

Bull, H. (2005). La sociedad anárquica. Madrid: Los Libros de la Catarata.

Mouffe, C. (2012). La paradoja democrática. El peligro del consenso en la política con- temporánea. Barcelona: Editorial Gedisa.

Pogge T. (1994). Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty. En: C. Brown. (Ed.), Political restruc- turing in Europe (pp. 85-118). Londres: Routledge.

Rawls, J. (2011). Teoría de la justicia. México D.F.: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Walzer, M. (1993a). Interpretación y Crítica Social. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Nueva Visión.

Walzer, M. (1993b). Las Esferas de ha Justicia. Una defensa deh phurahismo y ha iguahdad.

México D.F.: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Walzer, M. (1995). Response to Beit Vader. Political Theory, 23(2), 247-249.

Walzer, M. (1996). Moralidad en el Ámbito Local e Internacional. Madrid: Alianza Edito- rial.

Walzer, M. (1998). Tratado sobre la tolerancia. Barcelona: Paidós.

Walzer, M. (2001). Guerras justas e injustas. Un razonamiento moral con ejemplos histó- ricos. Barcelona: Paidós.

Walzer, M. (2010). Pensar políticamente. Madrid: Paidós.

Walzer, M. (2011). Sobre el humanitarismo. Foreign Affairs Latinoamérica, 11(4), 72-82.