Contractual Design: On The Law Of Peoples By Rawls

The Law of Peoples is an important works on international justice by Rawls and it is a really constructive contribution to contemporary political as well as legal theories. Therefore, the law of peoples is targeted as the subject matter of this paper and efforts have been made in this paper to mainly dwell on the analysis of it. No matter what theoretical retrospection we may perform, what definition and comparative analysis we may give concerning Rawls'the law of peoples, there is one basic perspective that we cannot afford to ignore: Rawls'employment of the conception and method of social contract. This very perspective is the key to the understanding of Rawls'works and to the opening up of new questions. Under this perspective, efforts have been made in this paper to discuss the law of peoples and the basic theoretical questions of it and to construct relevant questions concerning the law of peoples. Part of my attention has also been directed to the analysis of some academic dialogues concerning the law of peoples. In a sense, the real significance of this paper may lie in the fact that it will provoke some thinking and evaluation about the law of peoples and bring forth some real academic dialogue, rather than provide some final answer.Rawls'definition of the law of peoples is peculiar and deeply intended. The origin of the law of people is the traditional ius gentinm, while ium gentinm intra se is commonly meant to be the common law of all peoples. Rawls pointed out that his employment of the law of peoples is not in its usual sense, rather it is intended to mean the special political principles guiding over the political relations between all peoples. In other words, Rawls'law of peoples, as a theory of international justice, is a normative cognition in the prescriptive as well as descriptive sense. Regardless of its way of realization or of its essential requirements, to a certain degree, it is to set down some standard for international dealings and the evaluation of them and it is out of the considerations of actual political concern as well as possible political justice. Here, the law of peoples has at least to implications: on the one hand, there is some perfoliate sequential link between the standard, and on the other hand, it can indeed regulate some relevant actions and matters in a certain range. However, Rawls'law of peoples does not necessarily imply the existence of some external rules that are impersonally existent and binding and can be accepted by the wills of particular subjects. It is more of an effort to find some universal law or inevitable rule in the progress of society in the new future. With this understanding and the inner logic of Rawls'thinking as a basis, attention has been directed to the combing up, explication and reconstruction of the law of peoples. The value and significance of Rawls'law of peoples, as an academic design, will be exacted around three core thesis: the law of peoples as Kantian design in a certain sense; the construction of political justice via contractual idea and method; and the possibility of academic dialogue. Correspondent to this, the whole paper can be divided into three chapters.Chapter one—Kantian design: the construction of the question of Rawls'law of peoples. On the basis of the pectination of the shifts of justice as fairness, it is argued in this paper that the theoretical intention of Rawls'law of peoples is the construction of a set of universally effective and just regulations for international politics. In content, the law of peoples is essentially similar to the international law in The Theory of Justice while in the setting of basic questions it is similar to Political Liberalism. Rawls develops the liberal idea of justice into a system of ideas with descriptive and evaluative functions, a holistic conception for the regulation of international political activities. In terms of the structure of argumentation, Rawls employs a holistic perspective, i.e. the construction of theoretical basis is viewed as the mutually supportive structure of different factors in the theory, and a formative structure of ideas with the contractual method and the reflexive balance as features. Combined with the analysis of basic concepts/conceptions, e.g. peoples, human rights, and duty to aid, etc. Rawls tries to elaborate theoretically the question that on what just ground the fully just and stable international order can be established rather than to put forward an internal theory of justice with a view to the realization of personal welfare. This is on the one hand inheritance of Kant's ideas and on the other hand a revision and transcendence. Kant's conception of everlasting peace is to construct the proposition that the world state is a natural and necessary historical process from barbarism to human civilization, while on the other hand Rawls'law of peoples is to construct a realistic utopia as the limit to the actual political possibilities. Although both of them employ the contractual idea and method, Rawls pushes Kant's idea further, i.e. the adoption of a standard for the legitimacy of a social institution that can be reasonably consented by all parties, connoting a procedure for the just protection of the benefits of all peoples. In other words, Rawls'law of peoples can be viewed as a Kantian ideal on the basis of the insistence of the principle of justice (no matter national justice or international justice) of the rational construction.Chapter two—Political consensus: on the argumentation of Rawls'law of peoples. Rawls'construction of the conception of political justice is the opening up the question"how can we live together"with as its theoretical background modern culture of public politics. One of his argumentative foundations is his adoption of the contractual idea and method, while the law of peoples is not a mere way of tackling this problem; it is rather an academic design of the conception of the philosophy as reconciliation to our social world. In this sense, I call Rawls'argumentation for the law of peoples contractual design. This argumentation as a justification is meant to point out that for Rawls social contract is a process of strict deduction and what is important is not to ask whether it is a contract in the real sense of that word, it is rather the constructive significance of a fake contract to the theory itself; or the possible creation and significance of theory to practice. Based on this knowledge, the two specific questions are discussed: one is the possibility of theoretical construction, a methodological question in Rawls'conception of international justice; the other is testification of the conception of tolerance limited in the intermediation of social world, a fundamental question in the Rawls'conception of international justice. For the former, this paper views the law of peoples as a political construction from the perspective of the Rawls'shift from Kantian moral construction to political construction; for the latter, the law of peoples, as the principle of regulation of an actual political activity, does not possess the characteristic of exclusiveness, i.e. the specific discussion of the conception of tolerance.Chapter three—China-style design: contention with Rawls. To a certain degree, all the ideals of the world, no matter in what specific field of discussion, are about the relationship between ideals and reality against the background of global reorganization and redistribution; or in other words, what kind of argumentation conforms to the requirement of the creativeness of ideas and becomes the focus of mental design in the convergence of world cultures. Therefore, from the perspective of the grounds of conceptions, to react to Rawls'law of peoples is more valuable than to contradict it directly. After my argumentation that Rawls'law of peoples is an ideal based on American ground, i.e. Rawls constructed an Americanized world ideal in the field of discussion of international justice, efforts have been made to put forward some China-style design with Deng Zhenglai's"ideal picture"and Zhao Tingyang's"world view"to contend with Rawls'law of peoples. However, it should be pointed out that the precondition of academic dialogues lies in the fundamentality of questions, originality and openness of ideas, etc. Of course, academic dialogue can also be a kind of discourse construction, or I should say that it is my expectation of China's voice and idea in the dialogue.