Abstract
The undeniable reemergence of the multipolar world order accompanied by by the reaffirmation of the commitment of the major world powers to their local political traditions, each underpinned by diverse hierarchies of values and diverse identity narratives undermines the plausibility of the theories of global justice put proposed over the last few decades (by the likes of John Rawls, Peter Singer, Thomas Pogge, Martha Nussbaum or Amartya Sen). This essay contains an outline of an alternative theory of global justice (a theory of 'global solidarism') which identifies as its foundational concept 'agathological solidarity', that is 'global solidarity in pursuit of human good'.
The bottom line of the argument contained in this essay highlights the need for formulation of political anthropology that is sensitive to the human diversity and to the global value pluralism and thus more cross-culturally acceptable without giving up entirely the ambition for a degree of global consensus without which not theory of global justice is worthy of the name. The consensus is, however, built bottom up, starting with the local identification of the basic elements of the human condition and the formulation of the local conceptions of the human good, followed by the determination of the overlapping consensus regarding the fundamental principle of the human need for 'agathological recognition' which calls for human agathological solidarity, both local and global.
The agathological recognition that results in agathological solidarity is identified as the necessary condition of any global theory of justice, since - as the ongoing military conflicts and the current reemergence of the atmosphere of the Cold War testifies - in the absence of the basic recognition of the indispensable good of the other, no principles of justice recognised by various parties may be established and what results is a unilateral preaching about justice of one party to the others who refuse to listen.