Decolonizing Anglo-American Political Philosophy: The Case of Migration Justice

I—ALISON M. Jaggar
{"title":"Decolonizing Anglo-American Political Philosophy: The Case of Migration Justice","authors":"I—ALISON M. Jaggar","doi":"10.1093/arisup/akaa008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"International migration is increasing not only in absolute terms but also as a percentage of the global population. In 2019, international migrants made up 3.5 per cent of the global population, compared to 2.8 per cent in the year 2000. Over the past two decades, a philosophical literature has emerged to investigate what justice requires with respect to these vast migrant flows. My article criticizes much of this philosophical work. Building on the work of Charles Mills (2015), I argue that the terms in which many Anglo-American philosophers presently debate migration justice neglect and even obscure consideration of the ways in which current migration flows may be shaped by Euro-American colonialism and neo-colonialism. Such exclusions produce systematic biases in much of our philosophical literature. To develop less biased understandings of migration justice, I propose that Anglo-American philosophers should revise our methods and our conceptual frameworks to enable exploring the possible extent and ethical implications of colonial and neo-colonial influence. This is one part of the much larger task of decolonizing our political philosophy.","PeriodicalId":100121,"journal":{"name":"Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume","volume":"11 1","pages":"87-113"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arisup/akaa008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

International migration is increasing not only in absolute terms but also as a percentage of the global population. In 2019, international migrants made up 3.5 per cent of the global population, compared to 2.8 per cent in the year 2000. Over the past two decades, a philosophical literature has emerged to investigate what justice requires with respect to these vast migrant flows. My article criticizes much of this philosophical work. Building on the work of Charles Mills (2015), I argue that the terms in which many Anglo-American philosophers presently debate migration justice neglect and even obscure consideration of the ways in which current migration flows may be shaped by Euro-American colonialism and neo-colonialism. Such exclusions produce systematic biases in much of our philosophical literature. To develop less biased understandings of migration justice, I propose that Anglo-American philosophers should revise our methods and our conceptual frameworks to enable exploring the possible extent and ethical implications of colonial and neo-colonial influence. This is one part of the much larger task of decolonizing our political philosophy.
非殖民化的英美政治哲学:移民正义的案例
国际移徙不仅在绝对值上而且在占全球人口的百分比上都在增加。2019年,国际移民占全球人口的3.5%,而2000年这一比例为2.8%。在过去的二十年里,出现了一种哲学文献,研究在这些庞大的移民流动中,正义需要什么。我的文章对这一哲学著作的大部分内容进行了批评。在查尔斯·米尔斯(Charles Mills, 2015)的研究基础上,我认为许多英美哲学家目前讨论移民正义的术语忽视了,甚至模糊了对当前移民流动可能受到欧美殖民主义和新殖民主义影响的方式的考虑。这种排除在我们的许多哲学文献中产生了系统性的偏见。为了减少对移民正义的偏见,我建议英美哲学家应该修改我们的方法和概念框架,以便探索殖民和新殖民影响的可能程度和伦理含义。这是使我们的政治哲学非殖民化这一更大任务的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信