When Democracies Denationalize: The Epistemological Case against Revoking Citizenship

被引:10
作者
Cohen, Elizabeth F. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Syracuse Univ, Maxwell Sch Citizenship & Publ Affairs, Polit Sci, Syracuse, NY 13244 USA
[2] NYU, Russell Sage Fdn, New York, NY 10003 USA
[3] NYU, Wagner Sch, New York, NY 10003 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1017/S0892679416000113
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Discomfort with denationalization spans both proceduralist and consequentialist objections. I augment Patti Lenard's arguments against denationalization with an epistemological argument. What makes denationalization problematic for democratic theorists are not simply the procedures used to impose this penalty or its consequences but also the permanence of this type of punishment. Because democratic theory assumes citizens to be subject to developmental processes that can substantially alter a person's character in politically relevant ways, I argue in favor of states imposing only revocable punishments. Penalties removing people's rights and political standing must be accompanied by avenues for periodic reconsideration of such punishments in order to meet Lenard's standard of democratic legitimacy. Copyright © 2016 Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs.
引用
收藏
页码:253 / 259
页数:7
相关论文
共 17 条
[11]  
Kingston Rebecca., 2005, Citizenship Studies, V9, P23
[12]  
Lackey Jennifer, 2016, NY TIMES
[13]  
Markell P, 2003, BOUND BY RECOGNITION, P1
[14]  
Noisette Leonard, NY TIMES, P201
[15]  
Noll G., 2005, IMMIGRATION ASYLUM 1, P495
[16]  
Spiro PJ, 2014, FORDHAM LAW REV, V82, P129
[17]  
Weil Patrick, 2013, SOVEREIGN CITIZEN DE, P172