Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

Cosmopolitanism and distributing responsibilities.

Brooks, Thom (2002) 'Cosmopolitanism and distributing responsibilities.', Critical review of international social and political philosophy., 5 (3). pp. 92-97.

Abstract

David Miller raises a number of interesting concerns with both weak and strong variants of cosmopolitanism. As an alternative, he defends a connection theory to address remedial responsibilities amongst states. This connection theory is problematic as it endorses a position where states that are causally and morally responsible for deprivation and suffering in other states may not be held remedially responsible for their actions. In addition, there is no international mechanism to ensure either that remedially responsible states offer assistance to particular states nor some level of accountability for causally and/or morally responsible states. I suggest that an intermediary theory of cosmopolitanism offers one way of overcoming these difficulties.

Item Type:Article
Full text:Full text not available from this repository.
Publisher Web site:https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230410001702682
Date accepted:No date available
Date deposited:No date available
Date of first online publication:September 2002
Date first made open access:No date available

Save or Share this output

Export:
Export
Look up in GoogleScholar