| The field of human rights literature has often focused upon how to get people to contribute aid to others who are faring badly by insisting that all human beings possess some characteristic which entitles them to a base standard of existence. Even if people accept this premise, the approach has not been very successful in convincing people to donate their resources. Thomas Pogge has pioneered a different methodology, arguing that those who are faring badly are not just innocent strangers with whom the affluent have no connection but rather people that they have harmed. In this language of negative rights, Pogge argues that the affluent have duties to correct these wrongs. In this thesis I defend Pogge's approach but I argue against the way he uses the approach to motivate his policy proposal. I offer a different framework for action which more closely follows his original intent. |
