Many prominent theorists of global justice tie complicity in injustice to responsibility for addressing it. Thomas Pogge argues that we are all responsible for imposing the global order on the poor and that we have a negative duty to stop doing so and to compensate those who are harmed. Iris Marion Young argued that our “social connections” to others in the global economy make us responsible for tackling the injustices that pervade it. In this essay I argue that complicity accounts of responsibility are fatally flawed, for two reasons: they cannot account for the empirical complexity of the global order, and they cannot account for the positive effects of some global interdependence. The former flaw encourages blame shifting and evasion of responsibility rather than empathy and problem solving. The latter flaw underestimates the positive benefits that interdependence can have for alleviating poverty and promoting development. I argue that an ethic of care more appropriately captures the idea of responsibility for a global order in which we are all tied together. This approach provides a lens that helps us to recognize the good as well as the ill effects of the global order; it also engenders a more positive and productive approach to taking responsibility for global injustice.
