Property, Legitimacy, Ideology: A Reality Check

Rossi, Enzo; Argenton, Carlo

doi:10.1086/710781

Cited by 34 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here we rely on Bernard Williams' ( 2005) by now famous realist account of the normativity internal to politics. In a nutshell, Williams maintains that normative political questions should not be addressed by working out the implications of pre-political moral 25 The realist literature treats beliefs, political discourse, and even philosophical arguments as possible loci of ideological distortion (Cozzaglio 2020, Beetz and Rossi 2017, Prinz and Rossi 2017, Rossi and Argenton 2020. Our discussion here is compatible with all of those approaches.…”

Section: How To Politicise Public Debt Democraticallymentioning

confidence: 75%

“…Technocratic frames support a depoliticised approach to how obligations should be discharged. Moralising and technocratic frames are in a very close relationship, because moralist frames circumvent public 11 Unlike most accounts of ideology, ours is an epistemic one, which we defend at some length in Prinz and Rossi 2017, Rossi 2019, Argenton and Rossi 2020. The rough idea is that if a political actor relies-consciously or not-on epistemically questionable narratives to buttress their position, then there is reason to consider their position ideological in the pejorative sense.…”

Section: Moralism and Technocracymentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Financial Power and Democratic Legitimacy: How To Think Realistically About Public Debt

Prinz¹,

Rossi²

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To what extent are questions of sovereign debt a matter for political rather than scientific or moral adjudication? We answer that question by defending three claims. We argue that (i) moral and technocratic takes on sovereign debt tend to be ideological in a pejorative sense of the term, and that therefore (ii) sovereign debt should be politicised all the way down. We then show that this sort of politicisation need not boil down to the crude Realpolitik of debtor-creditor power relations—a conclusion that would leave no room for normative theory, among other problems. Rather, we argue that (iii) in a democratic context, a realist approach to politics centred on what Bernard Williams calls ‘The Basic Legitimation Demand’ affords a deliberative approach to the normative evaluation of public debt policy options.

show abstract

Section: How To Politicise Public Debt Democraticallymentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Moralism and Technocracymentioning

confidence: 96%

Financial Power and Democratic Legitimacy: How To Think Realistically About Public Debt

Prinz¹,

Rossi²

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Secondly, removing the bias in favour of private ownership reveals the true relation between one’s personhood and one’s property rights. The hand-waving from liberty to private property is often viewed as a disingenuous, ideological Trojan horse for political laissez-faire (Barry 1975; Nagel 1975; Murphy and Nagel 2002; Rossi and Argenton 2017). However, showing when and why our fundamental interest in autonomous project pursuit does and does not entail private property shows that the connection between person and property is in fact robust.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambidextrous Lockeanism

Christmas

2019

Economics and Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lockean approaches to property take it that persons can unilaterally acquire private ownership over hitherto unowned resources. Such natural law accounts of property rights are often thought to be of limited use when dealing with the complexities of natural resource use outside of the paradigm of private ownership of land for agricultural or residential development. The tragedy of the commons has been shown to be anything but an inevitability, and yet Lockeanism seems to demand that even the most robust common property arrangements be converted to privatized units. This often motivates a move away from natural law in the moral analysis of property rights. I argue however that it is not the deontological nature of Lockean principles that are at fault, but rather the manner of their application. Lockean theory often exhibits a bias in favour of private property: assuming that only private property can protect one’s interest in autonomy, and therefore asserting that each individual has a power of private acquisition. Starting with a claim against interference however enables us to mould the appropriate property rights to each individual’s particular interest in autonomy. This sometimes leads to private ownership, but often leads to various forms of commons.

show abstract

“…Proponents of the epistemic approach suggest that these knowledge deficiencies should be remedied by empirically-informed genealogical analyses, historical reconstructions of the origin and development of salient political concepts through which some of our intuitions are revealed as mistaken or illusionary (Rossi & Argenton, 2021).…”

Section: The Epistemic Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinctively political normativity in political theory

Erman

Möller

2022

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent years' literature on distinctively political normativity raises methodological and meta‐theoretical concerns of importance for political theory. The aim of this article is to identify and critically examine the main positions in this debate as well as to analyze problems and promising ways forward. In brief, we argue that the predominant “non‐moral view” of distinctively political normativity (i.e., the view that political normativity is independent of moral normativity), is problematic in all its three versions. Further, we suggest that a reasonable approach to political normativity should adopt a “moral view” (i.e., the view that political normativity is not independent of moral normativity) and investigate two such approaches: the so‐called “filter approach” and the “role approach.” Although still much in need of further development in political theory, both of them bear promise as accounts which preserve the distinctness of the political domain while acknowledging its status as a moral kind.

show abstract

Property, Legitimacy, Ideology: A Reality Check

Cited by 34 publications

References 36 publications

Financial Power and Democratic Legitimacy: How To Think Realistically About Public Debt

Financial Power and Democratic Legitimacy: How To Think Realistically About Public Debt

Ambidextrous Lockeanism

Distinctively political normativity in political theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About