Individual Interest and Political Legitimacy
Loading...
Date
Authors
Advisors/Reviewers
Further Contributors
Contributing Institutions
Publisher
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Quotable link
Abstract
Criticism of contract theory has always played an important role in Hartmut Kliemt's writings on political philosophy. Notwithstanding his objections to a consent-based justification of the state he has never subscribed to an anarchist position. In Hartmut Kliemt's view, a minimal state which protects the basic liberties of its citizens has to be considered legitimate. The article begins with a brief restatement of the most influential objections that have been raised against the various forms of contract theory. Thereafter interestbased accounts of political legitimacy are critically examined; it is argued that individual interests fail to provide a justification for any kind of political authority. Finally, philosophical anarchism is suggested as a possible alternative to contract theory and interest theory. Although philosophical anarchism holds that no state has a moral right to rule, it can be reconciled with the view that it is in the individual's interest to create and maintain a minimal state.Link to publications or other datasets
Description
Notes
Original publication in
Rationality, markets, and morals: RMM 0 (2009), 273 - 286