Social Rights in a Global Economy

Chapter

Abstract

The issue of global justice in the socioeconomic sphere refers to the question of whether or not the global legal order can be regarded as fair. Economic globalization has found its complement in juridical globalization, which confirms the traditional hierarchy of rights. If international organizations can define new legal norms, which are obliging for nation-states and can effectively be enforced, the implementation is far more successful in the case of rights protecting private property and the freedom of contract than in the case of rights promoting the freedom of action of those excluded from economic power. Which arguments allow either justifying or criticising this asymmetry? According to conservative theories, distributive justice cannot apply to an economic order based on the market, and individuals are entitled to rights mainly as market actors. However, radical theories advocate rights, that enable their bearers to resist economic and social coercion.

Keywords

World Trade Organization Private Property Distributive Justice Market Actor International Labour Organization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Bibliography

  1. Gosepath, S. 2004. Gleiche Gerechtigkeit. Grundlagen eines liberalen Egalitarismus. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  2. Gould, C.C. 1988. Rethinking democracy. Freedom and social cooperation in politics, economy, and society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Harvey, D. 2005. A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. International Labour Organization [ILO]. 2004a. Economic security for a better world. Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  5. International Labour Organization [ILO], and World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization. 2004b. A fair globalization. The role of the ILO. Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  6. Kant, I. 1968. Werkausgabe. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. WA.Google Scholar
  7. Marx, K. 1956. Marx Engels Werke. Berlin: Dietz. MEW.Google Scholar
  8. Petras, J.F., and H. Veltmeyer. 2001. Globalization unmasked. Imperialism in the 21st century. London: Fernwood.Google Scholar
  9. Reddy, S. 2005. The role of apparent constraints in normative reasoning: A methodological statement and application to global justice. In Current debates in global justice, ed. G. Brock and D. Moellendorf, 119–125. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sen, A. 2004. Elements of a theory of human rights. Philosophy and Public Affairs 32(4): 315–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shue, H. 1996. Basic rights. Subsistence, affluence, and U.S. foreign policy, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. von Hayek, F. 1976. Law, legislation and liberty, The mirage of social justice, vol. 2. London: Routledge and Kegan.Google Scholar
  13. Waldron, J. (ed.). 1987. Nonsense upon stilts: Bentham, Burke and Marx on the rights of man. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  14. Waldron, J. 1988. The right to private property. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  15. Waldron, J. 1993. Liberal rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Young, I.M. 2004. Responsibility and global labor justice. The Journal of Political Philosophy 12(4): 365–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universität ZürichZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations