How privatization threatens the private
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (1):65-87 (2013)
| Abstract | Across countries, governments are urging civil society, in particular charitable and non-profit associations, to take up a part of the social burden, and to produce and provide critical human services and social goods, either independently or on governments' behalf. This type of privatization, or public?private partnership, is encouraged by many on grounds of pluralism and liberty, as empowering individuals and their associations. In this paper, I aim to provide a liberty-based normative argument against privatization. A common view, supported by both conservatives and classical liberals, is that the more social responsibility is left or delegated to civil society, the more civil society will flourish. I contend, by contrast, that when political societies rely on civil society to provide critical goods and services, individuals' freedom of association is threatened. The consequence of privatization is a multiple loss, in terms of individual freedom, value pluralism and the expressive character of civil society | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,701 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesBrook J. Sadler (2010). Public or Private Good? The Contested Meaning of Marriage. Social Philosophy Today 26:23-38.
Lorenzo Fioramonti (2005). Civil Societies and Democratization: Assumptions, Dilemmas and the South African Experience. Theoria 44 (107):65-88.
Sungmoon Kim (2010). Beyond Liberal Civil Society: Confucian Familism and Relational Strangership. Philosophy East and West 60 (4):476-498.
A. Brinton (2012). Association and Recognition in Authoritarian Societies: A Theoretical Beginning. European Journal of Political Theory 11 (3):324-347.
Gideon Baker (2001). Civil Society Theory and Republican Democracy. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 4 (2):59-84.
Bruce Buchan (2001). Liberalism and Fear of Violence. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 4 (3):27-48.
Chris W. Surprenant (2010). Liberty, Autonomy, and Kant's Civil Society. History of Philosophy Quarterly 27 (1).
Philip Oxhorn (2007). Civil Society Without a State? Transnational Civil Society and the Challenge of Democracy in a Globalizing World. World Futures 63 (5 & 6):324 – 339.
Helga Varden (2008). Kant's Non-Voluntarist Conception of Political Obligations: Why Justice is Impossible in the State of Nature. Kantian Review 13 (2):1-45.
Mark C. Mitschow (2001). Challenging the Third Rail: Iconography and Social Security Reform. Journal of Business Ethics 29 (1-2):95 - 103.
Gary Alan Fine & Brooke Harrington (2004). Tiny Publics: Small Groups and Civil Society. Sociological Theory 22 (3):341-356.
Michaelle L. Browers (2004). Arab Liberalisms: Translating Civil Society, Prioritising Democracy. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 7 (1):51-75.
Rogan Kersh (2000). State Autonomy & Civil Society: The Lobbyist Connection. Critical Review 14 (2-3):237-258.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2012-01-24Total downloads18 ( #67,593 of 549,118 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,118 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
