Punishing States that Cause Global Poverty
February 20, 2009
William Mitchell Law Review, Vol. 33, No. 2, 2007
The problem of global poverty has reached terrifying proportions. Since the end of the Cold War, ordinary deaths from starvation and preventable diseases amount to approximately 250 million people, most of them children. Thomas Pogge argues that wealthy states have a responsibility to help those in severe poverty. This responsibility arises from the foreseeable and avoidable harm the current global institutional order has perpetrated on poor states. Pogge demands that wealthy states eradicate global poverty not merely because they have the resources, but because they share responsibility for its continuation. For Pogge, global poverty is more than a wrong imposed on the poor: it is a violation of human rights and a crime.
In this paper, I critically examine Pogge's claim that global poverty is a crime. My aim is to demonstrate that Pogge's conclusions do not follow from his arguments. That is, if affluent states have a negative duty to assist those in severe poverty, their duty is not absolute because they are not fully responsible for this poverty. Moreover, if global poverty is one of the greatest crimes against humanity, then it seems inappropriate at best to champion proposals, pace Pogge, that lets the guilty parties walk free.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 14
Keywords: Brooks, Pogge, Rawls, Mill, human rights, rights, poor, poverty, global, global poverty, global justice, justice, jurisprudence, law, distributive justice, negative duties, assistance, obligation, starvation, institutional order, affluence, crime, rights violation, punishment, retributivism
JEL Classification: K0, K10, K14, K19, K30, K39, K40, K42, K49Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: February 20, 2009
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.812 seconds