PHIL 457J: Problems in Law and Morality: The Moral Significance of National Borders Instructor: Daniel Koltonski Time

and Place: W 1:40-4:40; DC 122 Office: LT 1203 Hours: M 3:30-4:30pm, Tu 10-11am, or by appt. Email: dkoltons@binghamton.edu (For emails sent after 5pm, please allow until at least 10am the next day for a response.) COURSE DESCRIPTION Despite some movement towards increasing political integration (particularly in Europe) in recent years, the world is organized into separate political territories with fairly precise borders between them. These political territoriescall them statesorganize in important ways the lives of those who reside within those borders, including their interactions both with one another and with those outside the borders. And they usually claim that the vast majority of these peoplecall them citizensowe them allegiance. In this seminar, we will consider several moral questions that arise in this sort of global situation: Do people in developed countries owe the poor in developing countries a demanding duty of aid, a duty that holds regardless of state borders? Or do they owe it to them because of state borders and the harms to citizens of developing countries allowed by the system? Or do features of the political community justify compatriot priority with regard to distributive justice? Does the domineering power of the contemporary American state over other, developing countries give America particular (and particularly demanding) duties towards developing countries? What might be the value of nationalityto individuals and/or to the communityand what steps, if any, may states take to protect that value? Is military invasion across borders objectionable because it violates communal autonomy and, if so, how might that affect the permissibility of humanitarian intervention? We will read a variety of contemporary answers to these and other questions, and, though the course is organized into sections, many of the issues are interrelated and so themes from one section regarding the moral significance of borders will reappear in later ones. REQUIRED TEXTS David Miller, On Nationality, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. [0-19-829356-9] Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice: The Ethics of Poverty and Power, New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. [978-0-19-958199-3] Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice. New York: Basic Books, 1984. [978-0-46-508189-9] BLACKBOARD This course will make use of Blackboard (Bb) in several ways. This syllabus and other course documents will be posted there, as well as several readings (as pdfs). You should check Bb often for announcements and additional resources for the course. REQUIREMENTS & THEIR RATIONALES 1. General I expect you to have read and understood the Student Academic Honesty Code in the University Bulletin, including, but not limited to, the sections Plagiarism and Cheating on Examinations. If

you have any questions about what constitutes academic honesty or dishonesty, you are responsible for speaking to me about them. (But I didnt know that was plagiarism will not excuse instances of plagiarism.) I also very much recommend reading Maud McInerneys Plagiarism and How to Avoid It <www.haverford.edu/writingcenter/files/mcinerney_plagiarism.pdf> 2. Reading A good way to begin thinking about some subject is to master some of the best thinking that has already been done. In getting something out of the readings, you are ultimately on your own, and I hope that you find the reading intrinsically interesting. You are expected to have done the assigned reading prior to class. Do not come to class if you have not done the reading. If I find that you have not done the reading, I will ask you to leave that class session and you will not get credit for attendance/participation. 3. Talking You are in large part on your own in learning to make good oral arguments. (Indeed, most of your education is in your own hands.) If you discuss the issues in the course only when required to do it in your writing assignments, you are unlikely to grasp them very thoroughly. You have two arenas in which to practice making good oral arguments: class and office hours. Class: Regular attendance is expected and will be checked each time. Why have such a requirement? The negative reason is that interested students hardly notice it and suffer no real harm. The positive reason is that class is conducted as a seminar. A seminar is designed so that unscripted discussions can develop spontaneously; the clash of ideas, sometimes at least, generates new formulations or insights that no one had grasped before class began. Class attendance and participation will count for 10% of your grade. So long as you do not miss any class sessions without a legitimate excuse and so long as you say, on average, at least two substantive things each class session, you will get full credit for participation. You will also do a presentation, which will be worth 10% of your grade. The aim of the presentation is to present the reading clearly and concisely in your own words. And this is harder than you might think, for the best way to present an argument is often not the way the writer chose to do so in the text. You will also be expected to offer 3-4 objections and/or questions that spark discussion. You will be responsible for 50 mins of class time, divided roughly equally: 25 mins for the presentation, 25 mins of guided discussion. (You must arrange to meet with me for approx 30 mins on either the M or Tu prior to your presentation to discuss your presentation.) Office hours: Additionally, I will hold regular office hours, for which you are encouraged to make appointments (so as to avoid waiting outside my office while I talk to another student). 4. Writing This course is designed to provide substantial opportunity for written argument. In class, well do a variety of activitiessuch analyzing arguments, evaluating reasons, offering and responding to objectionsto help you develop the skills needed for effective written argument. You will write three essays in this course, two 6-8 pp. essays, and one final (10-12 pp.) essay. This way of putting it is misleading, however. Individuated by essay topics, you will write two essays: at the end of the course, you will pick one of your two 6-8 pp. essays to expand into your final 10-12 pp. essay. You will get credit for completing the first drafts of the longer essays. Each is worth 5% of your grade. I will not grade these; I will only look for evidence of real work (i.e., not sloppily thought out, not done in a rush). For these, then, as long as you try your best, you will get full credit (and you will

improve in your writing and thinking). The revised essays and the final essay will each receive a grade. The revised essays 25% of your grade each, and the final essay 20%. My reasoning for arranging the grading in this way is that, since I intend this course to be an opportunity for you to improve your writing (and thinking), I do not think you should be graded on your written arguments until youve had some chance to develop them. 5. Grading There are 100 possible points. Participation: 10 pts. Presentation 10 pts. Longer Essay Drafts (5 pts. x 2): 10 pts. Longer Essays (25 pts. x 2)): 50 pts. Final Essay: 20 pts. ------------------------------------------------------100 pts. 6. Schedule of Essay Assignments Submit essays by noon on the dates below. F 10/7 F 10/28 F 11/18 F 12/2 F 12/16 Draft of Longer Essay #1 Revised Longer Essay #1 Draft of Long Essay #2 Revised Longer Essay #2 Final Essay

Letter grades for the course will be assigned as follows: A AB+ 93+ 90-92.99 87-89.99 B BC+ 83-86.99 80-82.99 77-79.99 C CD 73-76.99 70-72.99 65-69.99

SCHEDULE OF TOPICS AND READINGS

I. W 9/7 W 9/14: The Foreign Poor and the Duty of Beneficence Peter Singer, Famine, Affluence and Morality Peter Unger, Living High and Letting Die (selections) Both Singer and Unger argue for a very weighty duty of beneficence, and this duty makes it wrong for citizens of relatively wealthy countries to spend money on luxuries and frills, for that money should be used to relieve poverty overseas. Singers position is important in the literature on global economic justice, for most other contributors recognize a need to explain why they reject it, and one good way of understanding these other positions is to understand their reasons for rejecting Singer. Henry Shue, Basic Rights (selections) Shue offers a different and itself important version of the argument for a duty to relieve dire need. David Schmidtz, Islands in a Sea of Obligation, Law and Philosophy 19: 683-705. Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice, Ch. 1 Schmidtz and Miller both criticize the Singer/Unger position on the duty of beneficence. Millers criticisms mark the beginning of his recent efforts to develop his own position regarding global economic justice. II. W 9/21: Allowing Poverty and Harming the Foreign Poor Thomas Pogge, Assisting the global poor in Dean Chatterjee, ed., The Ethics of Assistance, 260-88. Pogge argues that, even if Singers position is mistaken, certain facts about the global system of economic and political institutions give rise to a demanding duty to relieve dire need.

Mathias Risse, Do We Owe the Global Poor Assistance or Rectification? Ethics and International Affairs 19: 9-18. Thomas Pogge, Reply to the Critics: Severe Poverty as a Violation of Negative Duties, Ethics and International Affairs 19: 55-60. Risse offers various criticisms of Pogges position, and Pogge replies. III. W 10/5: Compatriot Priority and the Foreign Poor Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice, Ch. 2 Miller advances the view that the demanding obligations of distributive justice depend on the exercise of political coercion, and, since political coercion is exercised primarily within political communities (or states), the obligations of distributive justice bind compatriots to one another and not to all people across the globe. Richard Arneson, Do Patriotic Ties Limit Global Justice Duties? Journal of Ethics, 9: 127-50. Arneson criticizes the sort of position regarding patriotic priority offered by Miller and others. IV. W 10/12: Globalization Moralized Allen W. Wood, Exploitation, Social Philosophy and Policy, 12:135-58. Wood argues that exploitation consists in extracting a benefit from another by taking advantage of that others weakness or vulnerability. Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice, Ch. 3 Miller argues that the current global economic framework institutionalizes morally objectionable forms of economic exploitation of developing countries and their citizens by developed ones. V. W 10/19 W 10/26: American Empire? Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice, Chs. 5-7 Miller argues that the realities of American global power gives rise to responsibilities owed to citizens of developing countries, responsibilities that are specific to America and its citizens. As he puts it, major, unmet imperial responsibilities are in fact created by [American] imperial power. Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice, Chs. 8-9 Miller concludes in these chapters by emphasizing the weightiness of the duties developed countries owe to citizens of developing countries, and these duties exist even though (and perhaps even because) national borders are morally significant. VI. W 11/2: Spheres (or Communities) of Justice? Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice, Chs. 2-3, 13 Walzer argues that thinking about economic (or distributive) justice must begin with determining the boundaries of the group to which the standards of justice are to apply. In this way, questions of membership are prior to questions of justice. VII. W 11/9: National Communities and Immigration Joseph H. Carens, Migration and Morality: A Liberal Egalitarian Perspective in Brian Barry and Robert Goodin, eds., Free Movement, 25-47. Joseph H. Carens, Aliens and Citizens: The Case for Open Borders, 224-230. Carens argues in Migration and Morality that restrictions on free immigration are, on the whole, violations of human rights. In Aliens and Citizens, he responds to objections that might be offered by Walzer and other communitarians. 4

James Woodward, Liberalism and migration in Barry and Goodin, eds., Free Movement, 59-84. Woodward responds to Carens argument in Migration and Morality. Michael Dummett, On Immigration and Refugees, Routledge, 14-21, 46-53. Dummett considers whether the threat of cultural submergence can justify immigration restrictions. VIII. W 11/16 W 11/30: Nationality and Nationalism David Miller, On Nationality, Oxford University Press Miller offers what he calls a discriminating defense of nationality. Nationality, properly conceived, is an (and perhaps the) appropriate form of political solidarity, for it provides a common culture to unite citizens, but one that still provides for the deep sense of attachment that is crucial for persons identities. Jeremy Waldron, Minority Cultures and the Cosmopolitan Alternative On Waldrons view, the fact that a freewheeling cosmopolitan life, lived in a kaleidoscope of cultures, is both possible and fulfilling raises serious doubts about any claim that all people need their rootedness in the particular culture in which they and their ancestors were reared. XI. W 12/9: Borders, War and Humanitarian Intervention Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, Fourth Edition, Basic Books, 51-63, 86-108 Walzer offers a statist view of the crime of aggression and of the morality of humanitarian military intervention, one that is based on the value of communal autonomy. David Luban, Just War and Human Rights, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 9: 160-181 Michael Walzer, The Moral Standing of States Philosophy and Public Affairs, 9: 209-229 David Luban, The Romance of the Nation-State Philosophy and Public Affairs, 9: 392-397 Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, Third Edition, Basic Books, xi-xvi Walzer and Luban engage in a debate about humanitarian intervention and communal autonomy.