Global justice asks whether the principles of fairness and obligation that apply within societies should also apply across them. Peter Singer's influential argument holds that if we can prevent something bad without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought to do it — regardless of the victim's nationality. This generates demanding obligations: a child dying of preventable disease in Chad has the same moral claim on you as a child drowning in front of you. Critics respond that special obligations — to family, community, compatriots — are morally legitimate and limit what global obligations can demand. Thomas Pogge shifts the ground: we are not merely failing to help the global poor; through the institutions and trade rules we impose and maintain, we are actively harming them. This transforms global poverty from a matter of charity into one of justice.

💡 Did you know? Peter Singer's 1972 essay 'Famine, Affluence and Morality' has been called one of the most influential philosophy papers ever written. It has also been called one of the most ignored — its conclusions are accepted as logically valid by many students who nevertheless do not act on them.