Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T15:16:49.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rights of States, the Rule of Law, and Coercion: Reflections on Pauline Kleingeld's Kant and Cosmopolitanism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2014

Alyssa R. Bernstein
Alyssa R. Bernstein*
Affiliation:
Ohio University Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pauline Kleingeld argues that according to Kant it would be wrong to coerce a state into an international federation, due to the wrongness of paternalism. Although I agree that Kant opposes the waging of war as a means to peace, I disagree with Kleingeld's account of the reasons why he would oppose coercing a state into a federation. Since she does not address the broader question of the permissibility of interstate coercion, she does not properly address the narrower question of whether coercion to compel a state to join a federation can be permissible. I revise and supplement her arguments.

Keywords

KantKleingeldByrdHruschkaRipsteinRawlscosmopolitanismwarstate of natureglobal justicerepublicanismcoercionself-governmentpaternalismbarbarismsovereigntymoral politician
Type
Critical Exchange
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , July 2014 , pp. 233 - 249
Copyright
Copyright © Kantian Review 2014 

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

Bernstein, Alyssa R. (forthcoming) ‘War as Means to Peace? Kant on International Right’. Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik, 21.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Alyssa R. (2013) ‘Kant and the End of War: A Critique of Just War Theory, by Howard Williams; and Kant and Cosmopolitanism: The Philosophical Ideal of World Citizenship, by Pauline Kleingeld’. Ethics and International Affairs, 27, 354–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Alyssa R. (2009) ‘Kant, Rawls, and Cosmopolitanism: Toward Perpetual Peace and The Law of Peoples’. Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik, 17, 3–52.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Alyssa R. (2008) ‘Kant on Rights and Coercion in International Law: Implications for Humanitarian Military Intervention’. Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik, 16, 57–99.Google Scholar
Byrd, B. SharonHruschka, Joachim (2010) Kant's Doctrine of Right: A Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flikschuh, Katrin (2010) ‘Kant's Sovereignty Dilemma: A Contemporary Analysis’. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18/4, 469–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, Louis-Philippe (2012) ‘Realizing External Freedom: The Kantian Argument for a World State’. In Elisabeth Ellis (ed.), Kant's Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press), pp. 101–134.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2006) Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. Trans. Robert B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996) Practical Philosophy. Trans. and ed. Mary Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline (2012) Kant and Cosmopolitanism: The Philosophical Ideal of World Citizenship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1999) The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ripstein, Arthur (2009) Force and Freedom: Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar