From conditions of equality to demands of justice: equal freedom,motivation and justification in Hobbes,Rousseau and Rawls

Equal freedom is the common starting point for most contractual theories of justice from Hobbes and Rousseau to Rawls. But while equal freedom defines a common starting point for these theories, this does not result in a general consensus on the conception of justice. On the contrary, different ways of conceptualizing the contractual starting point leads to different conceptions of the demands of justice. To fully understand the relationship between equal freedom and justice we therefore first need to explicate how and why the initial condition of equality is transformed into demands of justice. In this paper we discuss how this transformation takes place in the theories of Hobbes, Rousseau and Rawls, with particular emphasis on the vexed relationship between motivation and justification.     

Self-interest,public interest,and public health

Although the activities of physicians, as represented by the AMA, have long been viewed from a self-interest perspective by economists, public-health processes have not been subjected to such an examination. But just as the conduct of ostensibly charitable hospitals cannot be examined independently of the interests of the physicians who staff them, so too, we think, the conduct of public-health bureaus should not be examined in isolation from the interests of the medical community that they represent. An interest-group interpretation of public health would look to the ways in which public-health processes increase the aggregate demand for medical services, thereby generating quasirents for specialized input suppliers. We have explored in preliminary fashion some ways in which public-health agencies may advance the collective interests of physicians, though we would be the first to acknowledge that much work remains to be done on this topic.We are grateful to the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation for financial support.     

Childhood bads,parenting goods,and the right to procreate

Abstract

Harry Brighouse and Adam Swift, together with many other philosophers, think that adults’ interests in raising a child can give them a moral right to parent when they will be adequate parents. We consider whether the same interest could give such adults a moral right to procreate, as a means of acquiring a child to raise. We argue that the interest in parenting cannot support a right to procreate, because the features of childhood that make parenting uniquely valuable for adults are bad for children. Adults may have a right to procreate, but they do not have that right due to their interest in a parent–child relationship.     

Examining the French Hijab and Burqa Bans through Reflexive Cultural Judgment

How can we judge unfamiliar cultures while avoiding ethnocentrism and universals? It requires what I call reflexive cultural judgment. After considering the socially and politically situated knowledge and commitments that guide the judgment of others, those engaged in reflexive cultural judgment meditate on what they have learned in the intercultural engagement and cast a critical eye on their own supposedly universal principles to reveal cultural particulars that typically would not be as visible to insiders. To demonstrate this, the article examines French political judgment of Muslim women who wear the hijab (a head covering) and burqa (a face covering). Through content analysis of previously unanalyzed data on the National Assembly's 2009–2010 discussion of the burqa, the article identifies particular French assumptions about gender and freedom that informed the ban. The author then casts a critical eye on her own political situatedness, highlighting the limitations of American liberal thought on freedom and religion.     

Public Outrage,Media Spectacle and the Kapunda Road Royal Commission

The article focuses on the relationship between the executive and the judiciary in respect of a legal case that provoked public outrage. This outrage entered into the media spectacle and was channelled by the executive into calling a royal commission. The royal commission was charged with re‐examining the police actions and the legal case. However, hidden behind its narrow terms of reference was the larger question of justice being ‘blind’ to a network of privilege. As such, the royal commission had the potential to threaten the independence of the judiciary.     

The Queensland Health Royal Commissions

Utilisation of public inquiries and royal commissions in Westminster systems of government is a source of continuing interest. That royal commissions continue to be appointed when there is an increasing array of other institutions governments can now employ and given that royal commission reports often have very adverse impacts on the appointing governments, remains a key issue. So the appointment by the Queensland government of not one, but two royal commissions in 2005 into the same topic – the recruitment and performance of doctors recruited abroad working in Queensland public hospitals – provides a special opportunity to analyse the circumstances in which a royal commission mechanism is activated. That one of these royal commissions had to be disbanded because of legal action taken by several of those being investigated is another reason to assess these royal commissions. This is almost without precedent in Australia and has implications for the future conduct of such bodies. Lastly, how the Queensland government was able to minimise the blame from the subsequent royal commission's highly critical report, is also instructive and worthy of assessment .     

Libertarian Paternalism: Leviathan in Sheep’s Clothing?

Contrary to the views of some libertarians, “libertarian paternalism” is not an oxymoron. But are its two most prominent advocates, Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, really libertarian paternalists or are they paternalists in sheep’s clothing? Thaler seems to be somewhat of a libertarian paternalist whereas Sunstein appears to be more of a straight coercive paternalist. But even Thaler passes up major chances to advocate reducing straight paternalism by making it more libertarian. Those who favor freedom should not reject the concept of libertarian paternalism altogether. Instead they should apply the concept more consistently than Thaler and Sunstein have doneand use it to push for a less coercive government. Indeed, the fact that government officials who plan our lives also have human foibles argues for less government, not true.     

Friendship,Recognition and Social Freedom: A Sociological Reconstruction

In Freedom’s Right, Axel Honneth articulates the social freedom of friendship with reference to its institutionalised norms. These action norms, however, are not specific to friendship; they apply to modern intimacy per se. Such non-specificity cannot adequately account for the experience of social freedom in friendship. Addressing this issue, I evaluate friendship as a form of recognition and identify a generative recognition deficit functional to its relational autonomy. Then, taking Honneth’s institutional approach to friendship as a point of departure, I ascertain an institutional deficit that both sustains friendship’s autonomy and constrains the generalisability of its social freedom by way of institutional connectivity to heterosexuality. I suggest that only a differentiating approach to friendship that fathoms its extraordinary position among interpersonal relationships can yield new insights. That done, friendship can in turn provide a prism through which to assess the conceptual approaches deployed in its analysis.     

Equality and family values: conflict or harmony?

Abstract

This paper provides a critical commentary on the claim advanced by Harry Brighouse and Adam Swift in their book Family Values: The Ethics of Parent–Child Relationships that there is an ineliminable conflict between relationship goods and fair equality of opportunity. I argue there need be no conflict between family values and equality of opportunity in a suitably non-hierarchical society. I also argue that the idea that equality of opportunity might be served by abolishing the family is mistaken. Egalitarian justice does not provide an obstacle to the realization of family values.     

Is unauthorized immigration an immoral act? On David Miller’s ‘weak cosmopolitan’ defense of the right to exclude

While immigration is attracting increasing attention in political theory, there are as yet, few political theorists who adopt a restrictionist stance. With very few exceptions, the most political theorists have offered so far are pragmatic, not principled, defenses of the right to exclude. Looked at in this light, David Miller’s engagingly thoughtful book is surely a welcome and distinctive addition to the burgeoning literature on immigration. But readers who are looking for a normative counterpart to Joseph Carens’ Ethics of Immigration might be disappointed. In fact, the two books display more similarities than one would expect. Most notably, they share a common methodological ground: both reject top-down approaches, which proceed from abstract normative principles and apply these principles to immigration and integration policies. Yet, Miller’s realism reaches farther, giving greater weight to empirical evidence and focusing on institutions instead of on how individuals should act. This institutional focus is a key-defining feature of Miller’s political philosophy of immigration as distinct from an ethics of immigration. However, as I shall argue in the first part of this paper, Miller does not remain faithful to this distinction. He blames unauthorized migrants for acting ‘unfairly.’ But his criticism of irregular migration lacks a sufficient normative and empirical basis. The second part of the paper deals with the question whether legal coercion gives rise to a right to stay. My focus is in particular on the costs that irregular immigrants must bear when they are forced to go back to their countries of origin. These costs tend to be much higher than one expects.     

For a political philosophy of parent–child relationships

Abstract

In Family Values, Harry Brighouse and Adam Swift argue that parents should, in sharing values with their children and in conferring advantage upon them, act in ways that realize the intimacy that lies at the core of the value of family life. In their view, they should prescind from autonomy-inhibiting activities not required by the need to maintain intimacy. I argue that while this standard is sufficient to distinguish between permissible and impermissible practices of advantage conferral, it does not provide us with a perspicuous standard with which to distinguish among activities of value-sharing. This is because the difference between permissible and impermissible forms of value-sharing is adverbial rather than categorical. I argue moreover that even if we were to solve this problem, we would end up with another problem, to do with the unattractive nature of the state activities that would have to be set up in order to police family life. I conclude that the problem of how to enforce the child’s right to autonomous upbringing is best thought of as a political one. Schools, rather than the home, are the appropriate site for the development of autonomy, and the state appropriately regulates schools to ensure that they achieve this end.     

Freedom, Interference and Domination

Interference and domination make persons less free. This paper discusses how they do so. It considers and rejects two influential recent accounts of freedom, one that holds that freedom is best understood in terms of non-interference and one that holds that freedom is best understood in terms of non-domination. Against these accounts, the paper argues that both interference and domination play an important role in reducing freedom and that neither concept can be reduced to the other. To bolster this argument, the paper presents and defends an account of freedom that relates both concepts back to a common source. This account shows that while interference and domination have independent significance for judgments of freedom both reduce freedom by obstructing the ability of persons to plan their lives.     

Peacock and Wiseman on the growth of public expenditure

This is a new initiative forPublic Choice. From time to time, the Editors will offer a point of view on a topical issue in public choice. The intent of Editor's Notes is to stimulate discussion and possibly research on such controversial and timely issues. The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.     

The Subjects of Socialism: Politicizing Honneth’s Idea of Socialism

ABSTRACT

This paper criticizes Axel Honneth’s Idea of Socialism from a post-Marxist but nevertheless Marxian perspective. It focuses on the importance of particular political subjectivities for bringing about emancipatory transformations. Honneth’s decoupling of his revived conception of socialism from any kind of partisan subjectivity is not only overhasty. It also loses sight of the emergence of socialism as an idea in a proper Hegelian sense. Whilst Honneth contradictorily assumes that contemporary ethical life is already infused with a comprehensive normativity of social freedom that points towards its further realization, such a tendency of normative and social universality has been largely eliminated by the regressions of neoliberal hegemony. In this historical situation, the becoming-hegemonic of social freedom depends on the polemical initiative of those kinds of political subjectivities which are theoretically excluded from Honneth’s conception of socialism.     

Decentralisation,Citizenship and Mobility: Residency Restrictions and Skilled Migration in Moscow

This study explores the effects of political restructuring on citizenship in contemporary Russia by examining the impact of decentralisation on freedom of movement in Moscow. It seeks to explain why, in spite of the change of regime and delegation of authority from federal to regional government, there has been a marked continuity in the practice of residency controls that restrict freedom of movement. It investigates the conditions for skilled migrants who wish to settle in Moscow and examines how the deconcentration of authority over residency policy has produced new inequalities such as access to essential services, employment, and the property market which have effectively created new classes of citizenship based on differentiated options for mobility. The range of options is determined by geographical location, place of residence, occupational status, and political engagement, and is illustrated by three types of citizenship: (1) full Muscovite status; (2) conditional subjects; and (3) resident participants. The empirical basis for this study draws upon data gathered during field visits to Moscow in January 2005 and winter 2006 when interviews (n = 36) and focus groups (four) were conducted with migrants from other regions and employers.     

Foreign Direct Investment,Regime Type,and Labor Protest in Developing Countries

We explore the relationship between FDI, regime type, and strikes in low‐ and middle‐income countries. We argue that FDI produces social tensions and opportunities for protest that can result in higher levels of industrial conflict. However, the effect of FDI is moderated by regime type. While democracies tend to have higher levels of protest overall, they are better able than authoritarian regimes to cope with the strains arising from FDI. We cite two reasons. First, political competition forces regimes to incorporate workers, which shifts conflict from industrial relations to the political arena. Second, democracies provide workers with freedom of association rights, which facilitate institutionalized grievance resolution. We test the argument using a new dataset of labor protest in low‐ and middle‐income countries for the period 1980–2005.     

Orchestrating silence,winning the votes: Explaining variation in media freedom during elections

Restrictions on media freedom play a prominent role in the survival of incumbents in hybrid regimes. But while scholars agree that governments limit media freedom to punish opponents and mobilize supporters, less is known about the electoral incentives that explain the timing and location of restrictions. Using original microdata on government attempts to prevent the dissemination of information from Venezuela (2002–2015), I show that electoral competition at the local and national levels shape patterns of government-led restrictions on media freedom. At the local level, I find that differences in the opposition's strength incentivize governments to use restrictions to demobilize opponents where they are strongest, target marginal districts during local elections, and maintain dominance in their strongholds. At the national level, I show that as threats to the government party's primacy increase, so does the effect of local electoral competition on the hazard of restrictions.     

Lifestyle and the Depoliticisation of Agency: Sex as Power in Women's Magazines

Sex, due to its connotations of dangerousness and the non-traditional, has been used heavily in women's magazines and other mass media to signify core values of power and freedom as part of their brands. Through this process, other forms of agency for women have tended to be excluded. In these magazines women are shown to be assertive, powerful and independent, not through the political views that they hold, not through the way that they act upon society, but through the way that they seduce men and behave sexually. We show, using a number of examples, that for this to happen a fantasy space has to be created: a space where real-world obstacles and meanings are erased, allowing a repertoire of theatrical sexual play to operate. This is typical of the lifestyle society in which we now live. In this society, we define ourselves not on the basis of who we are, in an older sense of gender or social class, but in terms of what we do and the values we hold. The way we communicate these values is often through our use of consumer products, which allows us to align ourselves with the core values and meanings with which the products have been loaded. But while lifestyle itself may be a matter of choice, the choices available to us are often created to serve the interests and needs of large corporations, of consumerism. Sex is one such choice of which we must be very careful.     

In Defence of British Politics Against the British Political Tradition

This article explores some of the current themes round the perceived crisis in British politics in supposed an age of ‘anti‐politics’. Drawing on Bernard Crick's In Defence of Politics, it offers a critique of what is referred to as a dominant British political tradition and in so doing seeks to challenge ‘demand‐side’ accounts that ostensibly defend the traditional arena politics of the Westminster system. Instead, it argues that developments around issues such as big data, social media and freedom of information have led to a more open society in recent years. It concludes by suggesting that if traditional political institutions wish to restore a greater degree of legitimacy, they need to ‘do’ or, more particularly, ‘supply’ politics differently, adapting to these changes by seeking out new modes of openness, engagement and accountability.     

Lived reality and the multiplicity of norms: a critical tribute to George Canguilhem

Canguilhem considered the lived reality of a disease that makes a person visit a doctor with clinical complaints as more important than the deviance that may be detected in the laboratory. He also insisted that doing medicine is a technique mobilized to improve life rather than an assemblage of neutral scientific facts. But these two ways of insisting on lived reality have different consequences. In line with the second, I present various ways in which clinical normality and laboratory normality are handled in current day medical practice. I consider where that leaves the first approach of setting standards. The multiplicity of normalities detected raises the question of how the various medical normalitiesrelate. For if they hang together coherently, medicine, by normalizing, might actively help to order the society of which it forms a part. But what if the various medical normalities contradict each other and inform different orders?