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