All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

A Left-Libertarian Foundation for Political Philosophy
Unformatted Document Text:  A Left Libertarian Foundation for Political Philosophy Nicolaus Tideman * One of the most basic questions in political philosophy is the question of whether there is a defensible basis for compelling a person to pay taxes or to follow the regulations of a government. Is there any good reason why some people should be able to compel others? And if so, what is the reason? The answer I believe can be found in a left-libertarian approach to political philosophy. Left libertarianism is the framework that assumes that people have rights to themselves and that all persons have equal rights to natural opportunities. Robert Nozick says, “The minimal state [one that only protects persons and property] is the most extensive state that can be justified. Any state more extensive violates people’s rights.” 1 In this paper I argue that Nozick is wrong, because it is possible to justify more than a minimal state while recognizing the full rights of individuals to themselves and to their liberty. The key to the result is twofold: First, adopt the left-libertarian assumption that all persons have equal rights to natural opportunities, and second, recognize a right to secede, which can be satisfied by granting an appropriate amount of territory to those who wish to secede, in a place that is convenient to those who are being seceded from. An obligation to abide by laws is not coercive if there is an adequate exit option. To ensure the existence of an adequate exit option one must embrace the strong interpretation of Locke’s proviso that is embodied in the left-libertarian assumption of equal rights to natural opportunities. The most popular defenses of coercion—majority rule, utilitarianism, and contractarianism—operate without an exit option and in my view are inadequate. So before explaining the value of an exit option and its relation to Locke’s proviso, I briefly explain what I see as the principal limitations of majority rule, utilitarianism and contractarianism as ways to identify justified coercion. * Professor of Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. I am grateful to Florenz Plassmann for helpful suggestions. 1 Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia (New York: Basic Books, 1974), p. 149.

Authors: Tideman, Nicolaus.
first   previous   Page 1 of 8   next   last



background image
A Left Libertarian Foundation for Political Philosophy
Nicolaus Tideman
*

One of the most basic questions in political philosophy is the question of whether
there is a defensible basis for compelling a person to pay taxes or to follow the
regulations of a government. Is there any good reason why some people should be able
to compel others? And if so, what is the reason? The answer I believe can be found in
a left-libertarian approach to political philosophy. Left libertarianism is the framework
that assumes that people have rights to themselves and that all persons have equal
rights to natural opportunities.
Robert Nozick says, “The minimal state [one that only protects persons and
property] is the most extensive state that can be justified. Any state more extensive
violates people’s rights.”
1
In this paper I argue that Nozick is wrong, because it is
possible to justify more than a minimal state while recognizing the full rights of
individuals to themselves and to their liberty. The key to the result is twofold: First,
adopt the left-libertarian assumption that all persons have equal rights to natural
opportunities, and second, recognize a right to secede, which can be satisfied by
granting an appropriate amount of territory to those who wish to secede, in a place that
is convenient to those who are being seceded from.
An obligation to abide by laws is not coercive if there is an adequate exit option. To
ensure the existence of an adequate exit option one must embrace the strong
interpretation of Locke’s proviso that is embodied in the left-libertarian assumption of
equal rights to natural opportunities.
The most popular defenses of coercion—majority rule, utilitarianism, and
contractarianism—operate without an exit option and in my view are inadequate. So
before explaining the value of an exit option and its relation to Locke’s proviso, I
briefly explain what I see as the principal limitations of majority rule, utilitarianism and
contractarianism as ways to identify justified coercion.
*
Professor of Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. I am grateful to Florenz
Plassmann for helpful suggestions.
1
Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia (New York: Basic Books, 1974), p. 149.


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 1 of 8   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.