This article argues that conceptualising the ethical/moral possibilities of international society can be enhanced by utilising the distinction between positive and negative duties rather than order versus justice. The main argument of the article targets the traditional pluralist account and claims that within this account far greater moves towards justice are possible, which can be seen through the lens of order versus justice. More specifically, it argues that a pluralist international society need not be indifferent to global injustices such as poverty, if the range of negative duties is expanded.
BainW (2007) One order, two laws: Recovering the ‘normative’ in English school theory. Review of International Studies33: 557–575.
2.
BainW (2013) The pluralist-solidarist debate in the English school. In: NavariCGreenDM (eds) Guide to the English School in International Studies. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp.159–170.
3.
BeitzC (1979) Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
BrockG (2009) Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Account. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5.
BrownC (1988) Ethics of coexistence: The international theory of Terry Nardin. Review of International Studies14: 213–222.
6.
BrownC (2015) International Society, Global Polity: An Introduction to International Political Theory. London: SAGE Publishing.
7.
BullH (1966) International theory: A case for a classical approach. World Politics18(3): 361–377.
8.
BullH (1971) Order vs. justice in international society. Political Studies19(3): 269–283.
9.
BullH (1972) International relations as an academic pursuit. Australian Outlook26: 251–265.
10.
BullH (1977) The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
11.
BullH (1979) The third world and international society. In: KeetonGWSchwarzenbergerG (eds) The Yearbook of World Affairs. London: Sohns, pp.15–31.
12.
BullH (1983) Justice in International Relations (The Hagey Lectures). Waterloo, ON, Canada: University of Waterloo.
13.
BuzanB (2004) From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
BuzanB (2014) An Introduction to the English School of International Relations: The Societal Approach. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
15.
CabreraL (2004) Political Theory of Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Case for the World State. London: Routledge.
16.
CaneyS (2005) Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
CochranM (2009) Charting the ethics of the English school: What ‘good’ is there in a middle-ground ethics?International Studies Quarterly53(1): 203–225.
18.
Di LampedusaGT ([1958] 2008) The Leopard. New York: Random House.
19.
DunneT (2015) The responsibility to protect and world order. In: ThakurRMaleyW (eds) Theorising the Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.81–100.
20.
DunneTDevetakR (2017) Civilising statecraft: Andrew Linklater and comparative sociologies of states-systems. Review of International Studies43(4): 686–699.
21.
GlanvilleL (2013) The myth of ‘traditional’ sovereignty. International Studies Quarterly57(1): 79–90.
22.
GlanvilleL (2014) Sovereignty and the Responsibility to Protect: A New History. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
23.
HurrellA (2013) Power transitions, global justice, and the virtues of pluralism. Ethics & International Affairs27(2): 189–205.
24.
HurrellA (2007) On Global Order: Power Values and the Constitution of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25.
HurrellA (2014) Order and justice. In: NavariCGreenDM (eds) Guide to the English School in International Studies, 1st edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp.143–158.
26.
JacksonRH (2000) The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
JaggarAM (ed.) (2010) Thomas Pogge and His Critics. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
28.
LinklaterA (2006) The harm principle and global ethics. Global Society20(3): 329–343.
29.
LinklaterA (2011a) The Problem of Harm in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
LinklaterA (2011b) Prudence and principle in international society: Reflections on Vincent’s approach to human rights. International Affairs87(5): 1179–1191.
31.
LinklaterASuganamiH (2006) The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
MayallJ (1990) Nationalism and International Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
MillerD (2007) National Responsibility and Global Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
MillerD (2008) National responsibility and global justice. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy11(4): 383–399.
NardinT (1983) Law, Morality, and the Relations of States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
37.
NavariC (ed.) (2013) Ethical Reasoning in International Affairs: Arguments From the Middle Ground. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
38.
PoggeT (1986) Liberalism and global justice: Hoffmann and Nardin on morality in international affairs. Philosophy & Public Affairs15(1): 67–81.
39.
PoggeT (1989) Realizing Rawls. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
40.
PoggeT (1994) Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty. In: BrownC (ed.) Political Restructuring in Europe: Ethical Perspectives. London: Routledge, pp.89–122.
41.
PoggeT (2001) Priorities of global justice. Metaphilosophy32: 6–24.
42.
PoggeT (2002a) World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
43.
PoggeT (2002b) Moral universalism and global economic justice. Politics, Philosophy & Economics1: 29–58.
44.
PoggeT (2002c) Cosmopolitanism: A defence. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy5(3): 86–91.
45.
RawlsJ (1999) The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46.
RawlsJ (1971) A Theory of Justice. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
47.
RisseM (2005) How does the global order harm the poor?’Philosophy & Public Affairs33(4): 349–376.
48.
RisseM (2012) On Global Justice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49.
RothBR (2011) Sovereign Equality and Moral Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50.
ShapcottR (2008) Anti-cosmopolitanism, pluralism and the cosmopolitan harm principle. Review of International Studies34: 185–205.
51.
ShapcottR (2010) International Ethics: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
52.
ValentiniL (2011) Justice in a Globalized World: A Normative Framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53.
VernonR (2010) Cosmopolitan Regard: Political Membership and Global Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54.
VincentRJ (1974) Non-Intervention and International Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
55.
VincentRJ (1986) Human Rights and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56.
WenarL (2008) Property rights and the resource curse. Philosophy & Public Affairs36(1): 2–32.
57.
WenarL (2015) Blood Oil: Tyrants, Violence, and the Rules That Run the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
58.
WheelerN (1992) Pluralist or solidarist conceptions of international society: Bull and Vincent on humanitarian intervention. Millennium: Journal of International Studies21: 463–487.
59.
WheelerN (2000) Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
60.
WheelerNJDunneT (1998) Good international citizenship: A third way for British foreign policy. International Affairs74(4): 847–870.
61.
WightMWightGPorterB. (1991) International Theory: The Three Traditions. Leicester; London: Leicester University Press.
62.
WilliamsJ (2015) Ethics, Diversity, and World Politics: Saving Pluralism From Itself?Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63.
WheelerNJDunneT (1996). Hedley Bull’s pluralism of the intellect and solidarism of the will. International Affairs72(1): 91–107.
