I work on responsibility for global injustice, developing and critiquing Iris Marion Young's "social connection model" of responsibility. I also have research interests in reparations for historical injustice and intersectional feminism.
I offer academic editing services https://www.maevemckeown.com/. I founded the St Hilda's Feminist Salon - https://sthildasfeministsalon.wordpress.com/. Supervisors: Cecile Laborde, Jonathan Wolff, and Rainer Forst Address: United Kingdom
Contemporary political theory is a game. Individuals compete to publish in ‘top’ journals, to ama... more Contemporary political theory is a game. Individuals compete to publish in ‘top’ journals, to amass greater numbers of publications than their peers; then journal-ranking is combined with number of publications generating scores. The aim is to get the most points. Whoever gets the most points wins: they get the best jobs and the most prestige. This Hunger Games–like contest has serious consequences for people’s lives, determining who can make a living from academia, who will be relegated to the academic precariat or forced out of the profession. In this article, I argue that, aside from the chilling effect that job insecurity and the gamification of academia has on the precariat, these conditions are stifling intellectual creativity, diversity, and dissent in political theory/philosophy. I discuss how privatization and deregulation of universities has created unbearable working conditions, why academics are forced to publish in so-called top journals and why this is detrimental to o...
I, Maeve McKeown confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has ... more I, Maeve McKeown confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. What responsibilities do individuals have in relation to global injustice? Iris Young argues that all agents “connected ” to global structural injustice bear political responsibility, rather than moral responsibility; the difference being that political responsibility is non-blameworthy, shared and forward-looking, whereas moral responsibility entails blameworthiness, isolates particular agents for censure and is backward-looking. Thus, individuals are not guilty of wrongdoing but they bear responsibility for global injustice. Young’s argument is intuitively appealing and influential, however it is underdeveloped. In this thesis, I aim to develop Young’s account into a coherent theory of individuals ’ responsibilities for global injustice, by reconstructing her core insights and critically developing t...
If Third World women form ‘the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,’ as Ch... more If Third World women form ‘the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,’ as Chandra Mohanty argues, how can our theoretical definitions of exploitation account for this? This paper argues that liberal theories of exploitation are insufficiently structural and that Marxian accounts are structural but are insufficiently intersectional. What we need is a structural and intersectional definition of exploitation in order to correctly identify global structural exploitation. Drawing on feminist, critical race/post-colonial and post-Fordist critiques of the Marxist definition and the intersectional accounts of Maria Mies and Iris Marion Young, this paper offers the following definition of structural exploitation: structural exploitation refers to the forced transfer of the productive powers of groups positioned as socially inferior to the advantage of groups positioned as socially superior. Global structural exploitation is a form of global injustice because it is a form...
Upon what empirical basis did Hobbes make his claims about the ‘state of nature’? He looked to ‘t... more Upon what empirical basis did Hobbes make his claims about the ‘state of nature’? He looked to ‘the savage people in many places of America’ (Hobbes, 1976: 187). Most people now recognize Hobbes’s assertions about Native Americans as racist. And yet, as Widerquist and McCall argue in their book Prehistoric Myths in Modern Political Philosophy, the myth that life outside the state is unbearable and that life under the state is better remains the essential premise of two of the most influential Western political philosophies in the modern world – social contract theory (contractarianism) and property rights theory (propertarianism). Critiques of these philosophies are not new. But what is new, and exciting, about this book is that a political philosopher (Karl Widerquist) enlists an anthropologist (Grant S. McCall) to systematically debunk this founding myth on the basis of empirical evidence. Despite some confusion about the book's aims, the lack of attention to women and the ris...
The concept of "structural injustice" has a long intellectual lineage, but Iris Marion Young popu... more The concept of "structural injustice" has a long intellectual lineage, but Iris Marion Young popularised the term in her late work in the 2000s. Young's theory tapped into the zeitgeist of the time, providing a credible way of thinking about transnational and domestic injustices, illuminating the importance of political, economic and social structures in generating injustice, theorising the role of individuals in perpetuating structural injustice and the responsibility of everyone to try to correct it. Young’s theory has inspired secondary and novel research. In this paper, I outline the main topics in this recent literature: what structural injustice is, responsibility for structural injustice, acting on responsibility, avoiding responsibility, and historical injustice. I conclude by noting how the influence of structural injustice theory is spreading beyond the confines of political theory. Any field that is concerned with structural inequalities, disadvantage or oppression, can utilize structural injustice theory.
The 'structural injustice' framework is an increasingly influential way of thinking about histori... more The 'structural injustice' framework is an increasingly influential way of thinking about historical injustice. Structural injustice theorists argue against repara-tions for historical injustice on the grounds that our focus should be on forward-looking responsibility for contemporary structural injustice. Through the use of a case study-the Caribbean Community (CARICOM's) 10-Point Plan for reparations from 2014-I argue that this reasoning is flawed. Backward-looking reparations can be justified on the basis of state liability over time. The value of backward-looking reparations is that they ensure that historical perpetrators do not evade their reparative obligations and that affected communities are taken seriously. However, I argue that this backward-looking approach should be supplemented by a forward-looking structural injustice approach and the 'social connection model' of responsibility, which can (a) expand the scope of responsible agents and forms of injustice that warrant repair and (b) explain how citizens living now can be expected to pay for crimes of the past.
What responsibilities do individuals have for global injustices, such as sweatshop labor? Iris Ma... more What responsibilities do individuals have for global injustices, such as sweatshop labor? Iris Marion Young sought to answer this question with her " social connection model " of responsibility. She argues that all individuals " connected " to structural injustice share political responsibility (as opposed to moral or legal responsibility) to collectively struggle against it. The theory was inspired by the anti-sweatshop movement, which recognized that consumers felt responsible for the working conditions of distant garment workers, even though they do nothing morally wrong when purchasing clothes. The social connection model is intuitively appealing and popular because it can explain why there is a responsibility for structural injustices like sweatshop labor, which falls short of guilt and blame, and takes structure seriously. However, Young left several gaps in the theory. One such gap is that she does not explain what she means by " connection " to structural injustice. Three potential definitions of connection arise in Young's work— what I call existential, dependent and causal connection—but Young does not unpack or defend any version in detail. In this article, I aim to clarify these different meanings of connection and assess their plausibility within Young's own framework. I argue that the most appropriate and consistent way to understand connection to structural injustice is that individuals reproduce the background conditions in which they act. Young's conception of reproduction of background conditions is thus elaborated and defended as the relevant form of connection that generates political responsibility.
On Iris Marion Young's “social connection model” of responsibility, individuals bear political re... more On Iris Marion Young's “social connection model” of responsibility, individuals bear political responsibility to collectively organize against structural injustices to which they are connected. After situating Young's theory in relation to the global distributive justice and global poverty debates, I ask: what is ‘structural injustice”? What does “connection” to injustice consist of and why does it matter? How does the social connection model of responsibility differ from standard conceptions of responsibility? And what is “political responsibility”?
If Third World women form 'the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,' as Ch... more If Third World women form 'the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,' as Chandra Mohanty argues, how can our theoretical definitions of exploitation account for this? This paper argues that liberal theories of exploitation are insufficiently structural and that Marxian accounts are structural but are insufficiently intersectional. What we need is a structural and intersectional definition of exploitation in order to correctly identify global structural exploitation. Drawing on feminist, critical race/post-colonial and post-Fordist critiques of the Marxist definition and the intersectional accounts of Maria Mies and Iris Marion Young, this paper offers the following definition of structural exploitation: structural exploitation refers to the forced transfer of the productive powers of groups positioned as socially inferior to the advantage of groups positioned as socially superior. Global structural exploitation is a form of global injustice because it is a form of oppression.
Rawls famously argued that ‘justice is the first virtue of social institutions’; ever since we te... more Rawls famously argued that ‘justice is the first virtue of social institutions’; ever since we tend to think of the state institutions as the primary agent of justice. However, I argue that we are all agents of justice, and that our responsibility for justice entails participating in global civil society. This is a development of Iris Marion Young’s argument in her final book Responsibility for Justice. To show this I compare Rawls and Young, who both take a structuralist view of justice. I assess their different understandings of structure, justice, individuals’ responsibilities for justice (dualism), and global justice. Then I address the problem of capacity, raised by Onora O’Neill, and finally I show why individuals have a responsibility to participate in global civil society.
Contemporary political theory is a game. Individuals compete to publish in ‘top’ journals, to ama... more Contemporary political theory is a game. Individuals compete to publish in ‘top’ journals, to amass greater numbers of publications than their peers; then journal-ranking is combined with number of publications generating scores. The aim is to get the most points. Whoever gets the most points wins: they get the best jobs and the most prestige. This Hunger Games–like contest has serious consequences for people’s lives, determining who can make a living from academia, who will be relegated to the academic precariat or forced out of the profession. In this article, I argue that, aside from the chilling effect that job insecurity and the gamification of academia has on the precariat, these conditions are stifling intellectual creativity, diversity, and dissent in political theory/philosophy. I discuss how privatization and deregulation of universities has created unbearable working conditions, why academics are forced to publish in so-called top journals and why this is detrimental to o...
I, Maeve McKeown confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has ... more I, Maeve McKeown confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. What responsibilities do individuals have in relation to global injustice? Iris Young argues that all agents “connected ” to global structural injustice bear political responsibility, rather than moral responsibility; the difference being that political responsibility is non-blameworthy, shared and forward-looking, whereas moral responsibility entails blameworthiness, isolates particular agents for censure and is backward-looking. Thus, individuals are not guilty of wrongdoing but they bear responsibility for global injustice. Young’s argument is intuitively appealing and influential, however it is underdeveloped. In this thesis, I aim to develop Young’s account into a coherent theory of individuals ’ responsibilities for global injustice, by reconstructing her core insights and critically developing t...
If Third World women form ‘the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,’ as Ch... more If Third World women form ‘the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,’ as Chandra Mohanty argues, how can our theoretical definitions of exploitation account for this? This paper argues that liberal theories of exploitation are insufficiently structural and that Marxian accounts are structural but are insufficiently intersectional. What we need is a structural and intersectional definition of exploitation in order to correctly identify global structural exploitation. Drawing on feminist, critical race/post-colonial and post-Fordist critiques of the Marxist definition and the intersectional accounts of Maria Mies and Iris Marion Young, this paper offers the following definition of structural exploitation: structural exploitation refers to the forced transfer of the productive powers of groups positioned as socially inferior to the advantage of groups positioned as socially superior. Global structural exploitation is a form of global injustice because it is a form...
Upon what empirical basis did Hobbes make his claims about the ‘state of nature’? He looked to ‘t... more Upon what empirical basis did Hobbes make his claims about the ‘state of nature’? He looked to ‘the savage people in many places of America’ (Hobbes, 1976: 187). Most people now recognize Hobbes’s assertions about Native Americans as racist. And yet, as Widerquist and McCall argue in their book Prehistoric Myths in Modern Political Philosophy, the myth that life outside the state is unbearable and that life under the state is better remains the essential premise of two of the most influential Western political philosophies in the modern world – social contract theory (contractarianism) and property rights theory (propertarianism). Critiques of these philosophies are not new. But what is new, and exciting, about this book is that a political philosopher (Karl Widerquist) enlists an anthropologist (Grant S. McCall) to systematically debunk this founding myth on the basis of empirical evidence. Despite some confusion about the book's aims, the lack of attention to women and the ris...
The concept of "structural injustice" has a long intellectual lineage, but Iris Marion Young popu... more The concept of "structural injustice" has a long intellectual lineage, but Iris Marion Young popularised the term in her late work in the 2000s. Young's theory tapped into the zeitgeist of the time, providing a credible way of thinking about transnational and domestic injustices, illuminating the importance of political, economic and social structures in generating injustice, theorising the role of individuals in perpetuating structural injustice and the responsibility of everyone to try to correct it. Young’s theory has inspired secondary and novel research. In this paper, I outline the main topics in this recent literature: what structural injustice is, responsibility for structural injustice, acting on responsibility, avoiding responsibility, and historical injustice. I conclude by noting how the influence of structural injustice theory is spreading beyond the confines of political theory. Any field that is concerned with structural inequalities, disadvantage or oppression, can utilize structural injustice theory.
The 'structural injustice' framework is an increasingly influential way of thinking about histori... more The 'structural injustice' framework is an increasingly influential way of thinking about historical injustice. Structural injustice theorists argue against repara-tions for historical injustice on the grounds that our focus should be on forward-looking responsibility for contemporary structural injustice. Through the use of a case study-the Caribbean Community (CARICOM's) 10-Point Plan for reparations from 2014-I argue that this reasoning is flawed. Backward-looking reparations can be justified on the basis of state liability over time. The value of backward-looking reparations is that they ensure that historical perpetrators do not evade their reparative obligations and that affected communities are taken seriously. However, I argue that this backward-looking approach should be supplemented by a forward-looking structural injustice approach and the 'social connection model' of responsibility, which can (a) expand the scope of responsible agents and forms of injustice that warrant repair and (b) explain how citizens living now can be expected to pay for crimes of the past.
What responsibilities do individuals have for global injustices, such as sweatshop labor? Iris Ma... more What responsibilities do individuals have for global injustices, such as sweatshop labor? Iris Marion Young sought to answer this question with her " social connection model " of responsibility. She argues that all individuals " connected " to structural injustice share political responsibility (as opposed to moral or legal responsibility) to collectively struggle against it. The theory was inspired by the anti-sweatshop movement, which recognized that consumers felt responsible for the working conditions of distant garment workers, even though they do nothing morally wrong when purchasing clothes. The social connection model is intuitively appealing and popular because it can explain why there is a responsibility for structural injustices like sweatshop labor, which falls short of guilt and blame, and takes structure seriously. However, Young left several gaps in the theory. One such gap is that she does not explain what she means by " connection " to structural injustice. Three potential definitions of connection arise in Young's work— what I call existential, dependent and causal connection—but Young does not unpack or defend any version in detail. In this article, I aim to clarify these different meanings of connection and assess their plausibility within Young's own framework. I argue that the most appropriate and consistent way to understand connection to structural injustice is that individuals reproduce the background conditions in which they act. Young's conception of reproduction of background conditions is thus elaborated and defended as the relevant form of connection that generates political responsibility.
On Iris Marion Young's “social connection model” of responsibility, individuals bear political re... more On Iris Marion Young's “social connection model” of responsibility, individuals bear political responsibility to collectively organize against structural injustices to which they are connected. After situating Young's theory in relation to the global distributive justice and global poverty debates, I ask: what is ‘structural injustice”? What does “connection” to injustice consist of and why does it matter? How does the social connection model of responsibility differ from standard conceptions of responsibility? And what is “political responsibility”?
If Third World women form 'the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,' as Ch... more If Third World women form 'the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,' as Chandra Mohanty argues, how can our theoretical definitions of exploitation account for this? This paper argues that liberal theories of exploitation are insufficiently structural and that Marxian accounts are structural but are insufficiently intersectional. What we need is a structural and intersectional definition of exploitation in order to correctly identify global structural exploitation. Drawing on feminist, critical race/post-colonial and post-Fordist critiques of the Marxist definition and the intersectional accounts of Maria Mies and Iris Marion Young, this paper offers the following definition of structural exploitation: structural exploitation refers to the forced transfer of the productive powers of groups positioned as socially inferior to the advantage of groups positioned as socially superior. Global structural exploitation is a form of global injustice because it is a form of oppression.
Rawls famously argued that ‘justice is the first virtue of social institutions’; ever since we te... more Rawls famously argued that ‘justice is the first virtue of social institutions’; ever since we tend to think of the state institutions as the primary agent of justice. However, I argue that we are all agents of justice, and that our responsibility for justice entails participating in global civil society. This is a development of Iris Marion Young’s argument in her final book Responsibility for Justice. To show this I compare Rawls and Young, who both take a structuralist view of justice. I assess their different understandings of structure, justice, individuals’ responsibilities for justice (dualism), and global justice. Then I address the problem of capacity, raised by Onora O’Neill, and finally I show why individuals have a responsibility to participate in global civil society.
Unlike any other series of study guides the Page to Stage series offers insightful and authoritat... more Unlike any other series of study guides the Page to Stage series offers insightful and authoritative introductions by well-known theatre professionals to classic plays. For Our Country's Good, Max Stafford-Clark brings his own involvement in the play's history, and his unrivalled experience as the director of the original Royal Court production, to present an in-depth study of how it actually works on stage. After an introduction about the creation of the play, the reader is conducted through its action, the historical context, its characters, and how the play was rehearsed and designed. The result is an invaluable and authoritative guide for anyone studying, teaching or performing the play. Telling the story of a production of George Farquhar's 1706 play The Recruiting Officer by a company of convicts in the early days of the Australian penal colony Our Country's Good has become a modern classic. No one is better suited to writing about why and how that came about than Max Stafford-Clark.
Upon what empirical basis did Hobbes make his claims about the 'state of nature'? He looked to 't... more Upon what empirical basis did Hobbes make his claims about the 'state of nature'? He looked to 'the savage people in many places of America' (Hobbes, 1976: 187). Most people now recognize Hobbes's assertions about Native Americans as racist. And yet, as Widerquist and McCall argue in their book Prehistoric Myths in Modern Political Philosophy, the myth that life outside the state is unbearable and that life under the state is better remains the essential premise of two of the most influential Western political philosophies in the modern world – social contract theory (contractarianism) and property rights theory (propertarianism). Critiques of these philosophies are not new. But what is new, and exciting, about this book is that a political philosopher (Karl Widerquist) enlists an anthropologist (Grant S. McCall) to systematically debunk this founding myth on the basis of empirical evidence. Despite some confusion about the book's aims, the lack of attention to women and the risk of epistemic injustice, the results are fascinating and, I will argue, should prompt a methodological crisis for some schools of political philosophy.
CFP for special issue of Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric. What can radical approaches br... more CFP for special issue of Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric. What can radical approaches bring to the global justice debate?
This is the introduction to the special issue on 'Global Justice: Radical Perspectives', publishe... more This is the introduction to the special issue on 'Global Justice: Radical Perspectives', published in Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric
Uploads
Papers by Maeve McKeown