The Complementarity of Rights: Rawls and Habermas on International Justice for Individuals and Groups

Abstract

Assesses Jurgen Habermas's & John Rawls's utopian but realistic conceptions of international justice. They agree that national sovereignty must be limited by respect for universal rights & peoples must be permitted to interpret those rights in accordance with their own political traditions. Important differences between Rawls's political liberalism & Habermas's cosmopolitan liberalism are pointed out. There is agreement with Habermas that peace & justice require the development of an international democratic federation of liberal democracies & political groups. However, it is argued that neither Habermas nor Rawls presents an adequate account of the equal importance of economic, social, & cultural rights. The rights of minorities & immigrants are examined to contend that a liberal democracy must recognize the rights of groups as well as the rights of individuals. Other suggestions for ways to achieve the proper balance between civil/political rights & cultural, economic, & social rights are offered, including restructuring the UN; "opening up" global banking/trading institutions; & gaining multilateral cooperation between the most powerful nations.