Centre for International Studies, Hihg School for International Relations and Diplomacy Dag Hammarskjöld
Abstract
Suvremeni svijet otvara brojne moralne dileme, i teško se može opisati kao pravedan. Globalno siromaštvo, nerazvijenost, masovna kršenja ljudskih pra-va samo su neki od problema čije rješavanje zahtijeva multilateralnu koordi-naciju velikog broja zemalja. Upitno je jesu li ti problemi pitanja pravednosti ili samo humanitarna pitanja. Glavna rasprava vodi se između dva pristupa – antikozmopolitizma, ili pristupa političke pravednosti (Rawls, Nagel, Blake), i kozmopolitizma, ili pristupa globalne distributivne pravednosti (Beitz, Pogge, Singer). Osnovna je logika pristupa globalne pravednosti ukazati na znatne sličnosti između globalnog i domaćeg društva kako bi se opravdala primjena načela distributivne pravednosti na globalnoj razini.Our contemporary world generates numerous moral dilemmas, and it can hardly be described as just or fair. Global poverty,underdevelopment, mass violations of human rights are just some of the issues which require global solutions and multilateral coordination of a large number of countries. The-re is no consensus in academia whether these problems are issues of social justice or just humanitarian issues. Two basic perspectives in the discussion about justice in international sphere are anti-cosmopolitanism, or political
justice approach (Rawls, Nagel, Blake), and cosmopolitanism, or global justice approach (Beitz, Pogge, Barry). The basic logic of cosmopolitan perspective was to develop justification for the application of the principles of distributive justice on a global scale
