Analiza i Egzystencja


ISSN: 1734-9923     eISSN: 2300-7621    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/aie.2024.66-01
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  ERIH PLUS  DOAJ

Lista wydań / 66 (2024)
A Liberal Proposal to Justify State Authority

Autorzy: Giorgi Tskhadaia ORCID
Caucasus University
Słowa kluczowe: English
Data publikacji całości:2024
Liczba stron:20 (5-24)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:

Abstrakt

It is often asserted that a liberal theory of political obligation is unattainable. This is, largely, because liberalism revolves around consent and hence, is supposed to be intrinsically inimical to the existence of state authority. However, there is at least one liberal proposal – the argument of fair play, that makes a plausible case for justifying the establishment of a coercive entity. The most popular contemporary version of it, which is offered by George Klosko, turns on the fact that non-excludable goods cannot be exchanged based on consent. Instead, there must be enforceable, independent, objective standards of fairness that should govern the distribution of the effects of such goods. In this article, I argue that if Klosko’s account is correct, then not only the existence of non-excludable goods but also, the production and exchange of existentially significant excludable goods warrant an establishment of coercive authority. I argue that in this way, we can take an important step towards establishing a full-blown liberal theory of political obligation.
Pobierz plik

Plik artykułu

Bibliografia

1.Beran, H. (1987). The Consent Theory of Political Obligation. London: Routledge.
2.Buchanan, A. (2004). Justice, Legitimacy, and Self-Determination: Moral Foundations for International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3.Dworkin, R. (2000). Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
4.Edmundson, W. A. (1998). Three Anarchical Fallacies: An Essay on Political Authority. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.Hart, H.L.A. (1955). Are There Any Natural Rights? Philosophical Review 64, 175-191.
6.Klosko, G. (1992). The Principle of Fairness and Political Obligation. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
7.Klosko, G. (2005). Political Obligations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8.Klosko, G. (2018). Why Should We Obey the Law? Cambridge: Polity.
9.Locke, J. ([1689] 2016). Second Treatise of Government and A Letter Concerning Toleration. Mark Goldie (Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
11.Rawls, J. (1964). Legal Obligation and the Duty of Fair Play. In Law and Philosophy, S. Hook (Ed.). New York: New York University Press.
12.Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice. Revised Edition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press.
13.Schlein, L. (2017). Report: Billions of People Lack Safe Water, Sanitation. Voice of America, Available At: https://www.voanews.com/science-health/report-billions-people-lack-safe-water-sanitation, Access On 10/01/2021.
14.Simmons, J. A. (1979). Moral Principles and Political Obligations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
15.The World Bank. (2017). World Bank and WHO: Half the World Lacks Access to Essential Health Services, 100 Million Still Pushed into Extreme Poverty because of Health Expenses. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2017/12/13/world-bank-who-half-world-lacks-access-to-essential-health-services-100-million-still-pushed-into-extreme-poverty-because-of-health-expenses. Accessed On 10/01/2021.
16.Waldron, J. (1999). Law and Disagreement. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
17.Wellman, C. H. (2005). Samaritanism and the Duty to Obey the Law. In Is There a Duty to Obey the Law? C.H. Wellman and A.J. Simmons (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.