Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies , Utrecht University , Janskerkhof 13 , 3512 BL Utrecht , The Netherlands
Abstract
Abstract
Are political and economic rights equally basic? This is one of the main issues liberal egalitarians and classical liberals disagree about. The former think political rights should be more strongly protected than economic ones; classical liberals thus accuse them of an unjustified and politically biased ‘economic exceptionalism’. Recently, John Tomasi has developed a special version of this challenge, which is targeted against Murphy and Nagel’s account of the relationship between property rights and just taxation. In this paper, I analyze this challenge, and provide an account of its limitations. Tomasi’s strategy to drive Murphy and Nagel’s account into an overgeneralization problem brings to light that liberals weren’t guilty of any kind of economic exceptionalism in the first place. However, this also shows that classical liberalism and libertarians do not disagree as much as it might seem.
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Sociology and Political Science,Philosophy
Reference22 articles.
1. Brennan, G. (2005). ‘The Myth of Ownership,’ Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 30: 129.
2. Brennan, J., Schmidtz, D., and van der Vossen, B. eds. (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Libertarianism (New York and London: Routledge).
3. Buchanan, J. (1976). ‘Taxation in Fiscal Exchange,’ Journal of Public Economics 6: 17–29.
4. Christman, J. (1994). The Myth of Property: Toward an Egalitarian Theory of Ownership (New York: Oxford University Press).
5. Fowler, T. (2015). ‘Markets, Choice and Agency,’ Res Publica 21 (4): 347–361.