|
|
|
| Cosmopolitanism and Beyond: Global Justice from the View of China |
| Fu Jiajia1, Zhang Guoqing2 |
1.Marxist Theory Innovation and Communication Research Center, Zhejiang University,Hangzhou 310058, China
2.School of Philosophy, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Since the 1980s, economic globalization has been accelerating, international relations have become closer, and competition among major powers has become more intense. Global justice is a hot topic in the academic circles, and cosmopolitanism is one important perspective within this discourse. The world today is characterized by institutional diversity, cultural diversity and value diversity. Different peoples and nations have different national and individual interests, which are often in conflict with each other. Due to the absence of a world government above national sovereignty, the feasibility of cosmopolitanism is questionable. Cosmopolitanism does not challenge the basic assumptions of capitalist states but abstracts capitalism from the real world, without deeply reflecting on the logic of the world economy dominated by transnational capital. This theory may appear idealistic but it is substantively dangerous in ideology, as it harbors the liberal presumption of “human rights above sovereignty” and represents another version of Western universal values. Of course, the issue of justice exists on a global scale. We need a more reasonable theory of global justice. However, it is not a cosmopolitanism but rather an international pluralism.In recent years, the Chinese government and people have confronted the common challenges faced by human society and put forward the “common values of humanity” and the concept of “a human community with a shared future”, establishing a political conception that is oriented towards the world and the future in line with the characteristics of globalization and global governance. This conception of global justice replaces the idea of “globalized liberal justice value” and has achieved a profound transformation in the understanding of the humanity itself. The Chinese perspective on global justice includes a series of viewpoints proposed by China to respond to globalization and global governance. It differs significantly from cosmopolitanism and overcomes its shortcomings.The conception of global justice in the Chinese perspective expresses a cautious optimism towards globalization. As a rising powerful developing country, China advocates for peaceful development and win-win cooperation, seeks to resolve international disputes through consultation, jointly addresses human challenges, pursues common values of the humanity, and builds a community with a shared future for mankind. We recognize the moral importance of nation-states, respect national sovereignty and core interests, and urge sovereign states to assume the prior responsibility of the interests of their own people. Global justice should be rooted in the common values derived from the local experiences of each country rather than any forms of universal values. It should be based on the common interests of each country and the overall interests of the humanity rather than being a political guise for any individual country to safeguard unilateral interests or interfere in other countries’ internal affairs. Global justice responds to the common concerns of the humanity and strives for broader national cooperation and political mobilization.Under the guidance of the common values of the humanity, we will reconstruct the blueprint for global justice. Firstly, the common values of the humanity criticize the idea of universal values. We need to distinguish the pursuit of a good life by the peoples of the Western countries from universal values. We also need to view the achievements of the Western countries in pursuing human values dialectically, engage in dialogues in the field of global justice, and strive to establish a global justice consensus that includes the Western countries and their people. Secondly, common values of the humanity acknowledge that different nations have different social systems and ideologies, and respect the different modernization paths of different nations. It guides the people of all countries to form an effective mechanism for consultation and cooperation in dealing with values, interests, and concerns at different levels. Finally, it also recognizes the core position of basic human rights. All modern democratic countries acknowledge that every citizen enjoys equal basic human rights, and China is no exception. However, we must be vigilant against the idea of “human rights above sovereignty”. Global justice is not an international political tool to subvert the regimes of other countries. The achievement of global justice generally cannot come at the expense of intervening in the internal affairs of other countries. Even if global justice is the goal of development for the human society, the maintenance of the integrity and independence of sovereign states remains unshakable. Of course, it is necessary to criticize and condemn those government regimes that significantly violate human rights. Global justice is not being inactive in the face of worldwide human rights challenges.There are many controversies over human values. We are willing to engage in dialogues with the Western world to accurately convey our true thoughts. We also have strong theoretical confidence in addressing common challenges and outlining a new blueprint for a global justice based on the common values of the humanity. The Chinese perspective on global justice respects the sovereignty and core interests of independent nations, acknowledges the differences in democratic development among countries, respects the basic human rights of citizens, recognizes the common values of the humanity, respects the history, culture and traditions of all countries, acknowledges the diversity in lifestyles, values and social political systems of different countries. It upholds the overall interests of mankind, responds to the common concerns of mankind and provides a theoretical basis for addressing the numerous challenges faced by mankind in the 21st Century. The realization of this new blueprint will benefit not only the East but also the West and the entire world.
|
|
Received: 03 February 2023
|
|
|
|
1 Rawls J.， A Theory of Justice， Cambridge： Belknap Press， 1971.
2 Singer P.， One World Now： The Ethics of Globalization， New Haven： Yale University Press， 2016.
3 习近平： 《高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜 为全面建设社会主义现代化国家而团结奋斗——在中国共产党第二十次全国代表大会上的报告》，2022年10月16日，http：//www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2022/content_5722378.htm，2023年1月25日。
4 Forrester K.， “The future of political philosophy，” 2019-09-17， https：//www.bostonreview.net/articles/katrina-forrester-future-political-philosophy/， 2023-09-05.
5 伏佳佳： 《全球正义：从书斋哲学向社会运动的转变》，《国外社会科学前沿》2022年第8期，第21-28页。
6 Pogge T.， World Poverty and Human Rights： Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms， Cambridge： Polity Press， 2002.
7 美］涛慕思·博格： 《实现罗尔斯》，陈雅文译，上海：上海译文出版社，2014年。
8 Caney S.， Justice Beyond Borders： A Global Justice Theory， Oxford： Oxford University Press， 2005.
9 美］涛慕思·博格： 《康德、罗尔斯与全球正义》，刘莘、徐向东等译，上海：上海译文出版社，2010年。
10 张国清： 《〈正义论〉评注》（上册），北京：中国社会科学出版社，2023年。
11 张国清： 《社会共享研究》，杭州：浙江大学出版社，2022年。
12 美］查尔斯·贝兹： 《政治理论与国际关系》，丛占修译，上海：上海译文出版社，2012年。
13 Beitz R. C.， “Cosmopolitanism and global justice，” The Journal of Ethics， Vol. 9， No. 1-2 （2005）， pp. 11-27.
14 廖申白： 《〈正义论〉对古典自由主义的修正》，《中国社会科学》2003年第5期，第126-137页。
15 Steger B. M.， Goodman J. & Wilson K. E.， Justice Globalism： Ideology， Crises， Policy， London： Sage， 2013.
16 丰子义： 《马克思视野中的“世界主义”》，《哲学研究》2023年第1期，第13-22页。
17 德］马克思、恩格斯： 《德意志意识形态》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译： 《马克思恩格斯全集》第3卷，北京：人民出版社，1960年。
18 美］迈克尔·J.桑德尔： 《自由主义与正义的局限》，万俊人等译，南京：译林出版社，2011年。
19 英］戴维·米勒： 《论民族性》，刘曙辉译，南京：译林出版社，2010年。
20 Walzer M.， “Achieving global and local justice，” Dissent， Vol. 58， No. 3 （2011）， pp. 42-48.
21 Macintyre A.， “Is patriotism a virtue？” https：//kuscholarworks.ku.edu/bitstream/handle/1808/12398/Is%20Patriotism%20a%20Virtue-1984.pdf， 2023-01-25.
22 美］约翰·罗尔斯： 《政治自由主义》（增订版），万俊人译，南京：译林出版社，2011年。
23 美］迈克尔·沃尔泽： 《正义诸领域：为多元主义与平等一辩》，褚松燕译，南京：译林出版社，2009年。
24 Nagel T.， “The problem of global justice，” Philosophy & Public Affairs， Vol. 33， No. 2 （2005）， pp. 113-147.
25 Blake M.， “Agency， coercion， and global justice： a reply to my critics，” Law and Philosophy， Vol. 35， No. 3 （2016）， pp. 313-335.
26 Freeman S.， “Distributive justice and the law of peoples，” in Martin R. & Reidy A. D. （eds.）， Rawls’s Law of Peoples： A Realistic Utopia？ Malden： Blackwell Publishing， 2006， pp. 243-260.
27 高景柱： 《当代世界主义：批判与辩护》，《国外理论动态》2017年第9期，第44-52页。
28 李包庚： 《世界普遍交往中的人类命运共同体》，《中国社会科学》2020年第4期，第4-26页。
29 贺来： 《马克思哲学的“类”概念与“人类命运共同体”》，《中国社会科学》2016年第8期，第3-9页。
30 刘同舫： 《构建人类命运共同体对历史唯物主义的原创性贡献》，《中国社会科学》2018年第7期，第4-21页。
31 龚群： 《全球正义的进路与人道主义关怀》，《世界哲学》2018年第2期，第137-144页。
32 Ypi L.， Global Justice and Avant-garde Political Agency， Oxford： Oxford University Press， 2012.
33 赵汀阳、［德］R.弗斯特、［美］M.威廉姆斯： 《全球正义如何可能？——威廉姆斯、弗斯特和赵汀阳三人对话》，《世界哲学》2021年第5期，第5-18页。
34 习近平： 《论坚持人与自然和谐共生》，北京：中央文献出版社，2022年。 |
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 54 
