An Egalitarian Law of Peoples

1

• An Egalitarian Law of Peoples
• Thomas Pogge
• Philosophy Public Affairs 2005
• Leonardo Flores
• PUAF 699I

2
Rawlss Conception of Domestic Justice

• Fair value of political liberties
• Fair equality of opportunity
• Difference principle

3
Current World Order

• It fails to give members of different peoples
  roughly equal chances to influence the
  transnational political decisions that shape
  their lives.
• It fails to give equally talented and motivated
  persons roughly equal chances to obtain a good
  education and professional position irrespective
  of the society into which they were born.
• It also generates international social and
  economic inequalities that are not to the maximum
  benefit of the worlds worst-off persons.
• p.196

4
Pogges Argument

• Rawls does not think that any of the three
  analogous criticisms is valid, but he only
  concentrates on the third.
• Pogge believes all three are valid, but only
  presses him on the following A plausible
  conception of global justice must be sensitive to
  international social and economic inequalities.

5
Pogges Argument

• He accepts, for the sake of argument, the
  following
• 1) That global justice is addressed in a second
  session of the original position.
• 2) That the worlds population neatly divides
  into peoples cleanly separated by national
  borders.
• He also waives any support his position could
  draw from the role past crimes have played in
  settling current borders.

6
Global Resources Tax

• - Though each people own and control all
  resources within their territory, they must pay a
  tax on resources they choose to extract.
• Tax should be extended to reusable resources
  including land use, as well as taxing the
  discharge of pollutants into the air and water.
• It should be thought of as an amendment to the
  Law of Peoples.

7
Global Resources Tax

• - Its basically a tax on consumption.
• - The tax falls on goods and services in
  proportion to how much value it takes from the
  planet.
• - In this way it serves as a modern Lockean
  proviso One may use unlimited amounts, but one
  most share some of the economic benefit.

8
Global Resources Tax

• Money from the GRT should go to the poor to
  ensure that they have access to education,
  health care, means of production (land) and/or
  jobs . . . to meet their own basic needs with
  dignity and to represent their right and
  interests effectively against the rest of
  humankind.

9
Global Resources Tax

• - States are responsible for paying the GRT and
  are free to raise the funds in any way they like.
• - Ideally, GRT payments should go directly to the
  government of the poorest societies.

10
Global Resources Tax

• - Governments are free to spend the GRT as they
  wish, but if the poor arent helped in recipient
  countries then GRT funds may be cut off.
• - In such a case, the GRT funds could be given to
  a development agency to fund programs in the
  country, or no money would go there.

11
Global Resources Tax

• - Pogge envisions a facilitating organization
  which sets the rules so that the tax has the best
  possible impact on the worlds poorest people in
  the long run.
• Pogge thinks that a 1 GRT would be both feasible
  a morally attractive.

12
Global Resources Tax The Problem of Stability

• Small scale defections The response should be
  sanctions (import/export duties) impose by every
  other country. This would keep things
  decentralized so as not to require a world
  government.
• Large scale defections Pogge does not give a
  definitive answer, but think the GRT is in the
  best interest of the more affluent societies.
  Argues for an appeal to values in Western moral
  thought, touts the environmental benefits, and
  thinks the GRT can be used as a bargaining chip
  against dangerous technologies.

13
Rawlss Position on International Distributive
Justice

• Rawls claims that delegates from liberal
  societies will adopt his law of peoples because
  they have one fundamental interest that its
  societys domestic institutions satisfy its
  conception of justice.
• Pogge denies that they only have one interest and
  goes on to say that even if they only had one
  interest, they would favor the GRT over the law
  of peoples.

14
Against Rawlss Stipulation

• It is hard to believe that delegates would not
  have an interest in well-being. After all, the
  whole point of domestic justice is the well-being
  of individuals.
• If there is any interest in well-being, the GRT
  would be favored.

15
Against Rawlss Reasoning

• Even if delegates had only the one interest, they
  would, at most, be indifferent between GRT and
  Rawls.
• However, given that international inequality may
  have a negative impact on domestic justice in a
  poor society, then delegates have a reason to
  favor the GRT.