This research paper presents the theoretical conflicts and potential synergies between communitarian political philosophy and the contemporary theory of global justice. Raised by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel, Charles Taylor and Alasdair MacIntyre, communitarianism suggests its own values founded on associative obligations and democratic self-determination as opposed to universal justice. Universal distributive justice principles that cut across boundaries are advocated by cosmopolitan theorists such as Thomas Pogge, Charles Beitz and Simon Caney, on the equal moral value of all individuals.

The article looks at the role of communitarian understanding in contributing to the solutions of such global problems as extreme poverty, climate change, forced migration and structural economic inequalities. It asserts that communitarianism can play necessary roles by emphasizing on democratic legitimacy in international politics, developing cultural pluralism and local version of rights and providing motivational realism by binding international obligations to compelling local narratives. However, communitarianism is deficient in the explanation of cross-border duties when international institutional arrangements are systematically dependent on the disfigurement of distant others, and of cultural relativism, which can aggressive the global protection of human rights.

The paper addresses hybrid models, like the so-called rooted cosmopolitanism, the Iris Young social connection model, which adheres to the interests of communitarianism in membership and democratic participation without prejudice to the powerful world pressures that accompany interdependence and complicity in structural injustice. It concludes that responsible global justice models must include cosmopolitan recognition of the equal moral worth and communitarian focus on community, custom and lawful autonomy, which operate via multilevel governance that guarantees afflicted populations real voice and maintenance of human dignity.