Abstract
In this chapter, I argue that limitarianism should be advocated within neo-republicanism. For the neo-republican ideal of freedom as non-domination is jeopardized by the presence of the super-rich in a democracy. By possessing much more resources than their fellow citizens, the super-rich enjoy disproportionate political power, thus dominating the democratic process. Moreover, formal institutional constraints in this regard work only to a limited extent. For the sake of non-domination, therefore, excessive individual wealth should be limited. This, I argue, can be done through a limitarian threshold. However, such a threshold should be put where the problem itself arises. That is, it should not limit the wealth that people do not need for their full flourishing. Rather, it should limit the wealth that allows people to dominate public decision-making even when formal barriers are in place. Hence, I offer a novel argument for limitarianism from the neo-republican perspective.
Funder
European Research Council
Reference39 articles.
1. How much economic inequality is fair in liberal democracies? The approach of proportional justice;Alì, Nunzio; Caranti, Luigi;Philosophy & Social Criticism,2021
2. Bartels, Larry. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. Cagé, Julia. 2018. Le prix de la démocratie. Paris: Fayard.
4. Caranti, Luigi & Alì, Nunzio. 2021. The Limits of Limitarianism. Why Political Equality Is Not Protected by Robeyns’ Democratic Argument, Politica & Società, 89–116. https://doi.org/10.4476/100808
5. Republicanism and the political economy of democracy;Casassas, David; De Wispelaere, Jurgen;European Journal of Social Theory,2015
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献