Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T18:52:24.884Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Anarchist's Myth: Autonomy, Children, and State Legitimacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Luara Ferracioli
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Philosophical anarchists have made their living criticizing theories of state legitimacy and the duty to obey the law. The most prominent theories of state legitimacy have been called into doubt by the anarchists' insistence that citizens' lack of consent to the state renders the whole justificatory enterprise futile. Autonomy requires consent, they argue, and justification must respect autonomy. In this essay, I want to call into question the weight of consent in protecting our capacity for autonomy. I argue that if we care about all of the preconditions for autonomy, then we have good reasons to leave the state of nature. This leaves the philosophical anarchist with a dilemma. If she truly cares about autonomy, then she must welcome the state. But if she wants to deny the legitimacy of the state because of the value of consent, then she needs to downplay the moral significance of autonomy in people's lives. If autonomy matters, the state does too. If it doesn't, then consent doesn't. The philosophical anarchist can't have it both ways.

Type
Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , Spring 2015 , pp. 370 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abizadeh, Arash. 2012. On the demos and its kin: Nationalism, democracy, and the boundary problem. American Political Science Review 106 (4): 867–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archard, David. 2002. Children, multiculturalism, and education. In The moral and political status of children, ed. Archard, David and Macleod, Colin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BBC News. 2008. Isolated tribe spotted in Brazil. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7426794.stm (accessed January 20, 2015).Google Scholar
Benson, Paul. 2004. Autonomy and self‐worth. Journal of Philosophy 91 (12): 650–68.Google Scholar
Burtt, Shelley. 1994. Religious parents, secular schools: A liberal defense of an illiberal education. Review of Politics 56 (1): 51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callan, Eamonn. 1997. Creating citizens: Political education and liberal democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiano, Thomas. 2004. The authority of democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy 12 (3): 266–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferracioli, Luara, and Terlazzo, Rosa. 2014. Educating for autonomy: Liberalism and autonomy in the capabilities approach. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (3): 443–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galston, William. 1995. Two concepts of liberalism. Ethics 105 (3): 516–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Govier, Trudy. 1993. Self‐trust, autonomy, and self‐esteem. Hypatia 8 (1): 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, Amy. 1987. Democratic education. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. 1668/1994. Leviathan. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Huemer, Michael. 2013. The problem of political authority. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laborde, Cécile. 2006. Female autonomy, education and the hijab. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 9 (3): 351–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyers, Diana T. 1987. Personal autonomy and the paradox of feminine socialization. Journal of Philosophy 84 (11): 619–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, Claudia. 2003. The child's right to an open future? Journal of Social Philosophy 34 (4): 499–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha. 2000. Women and human development: the capabilities approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha. 2011. Perfectionist liberalism and political liberalism. Philosophy & Public Affairs 39 (1): 3–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1984. Political liberalism, justice, and gender. Ethics 105 (1): 23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peter, Fabienne. 2008. Democratic legitimacy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph. 1986. The morality of freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Renzo, Massimo. 2011. State legitimacy and self‐defense. Law and Philosophy 30 (5): 575–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, A. John. 1996. Philosophical anarchism. In For and against the state, ed. Sanders, John T. and Naverson, Jan. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John. 1999. Justification and legitimacy. Ethics 109 (4): 739–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stilz, Anna. 2012. Why does the state matter morally? Political obligation and particularity. In Varieties of sovereignty and citizenship, ed. Smith, Rogers and Ben‐Porath, Sigal. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Stoljar, Natalie. 2000. Autonomy and the feminist intuition. In Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self, ed. Mackenzie, Catriona and Stoljar, Natalie. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wallace, Scott. 2011. The unconquered. New York: Crown Publishers.Google Scholar
Wellman, Christopher H. 2001. Toward a liberal theory of political obligation. Ethics 111 (4): 735–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, Robert Paul. 1970. In defense of anarchism. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar