![]() This is a problem not only for left-libertarians but for ‘philosophical anarchism’ more generally. Hence the issues of a state’s justness and a state’s political authority cannot be dealt with separately. States without political authority are intrinsically unjust in that sense. ![]() Institutions, I argue, are intrinsically unjust when they have legal liberties and powers without having the corresponding moral liberties and powers. The reason is that institutions can be unjust independently from what they achieve or do: they can be ‘intrinsically unjust’. Against Vallentyne, I try to show that states without political authority have to be judged unjust even if they successfully promote justice. Vallentyne has argued that one can indeed assess a state’s justness without assessing its political authority. By a minimal state Nozick means a state that functions essentially as a night watchman, with powers limited to those necessary to protect citizens against violence, theft, and fraud. ![]() ![]() For that reason, left-libertarians like Peter Vallentyne understandably hope that states without political authority could nonetheless implement left-libertarian justice. The main purpose of Anarchy, State, and Utopia is to show that the minimal state, and only the minimal state, is morally justified. From a left-libertarian perspective, it seems almost impossible for states to acquire political authority. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |