Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-nwzlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T10:48:04.634Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Self-determination, Non-domination, and Federalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Abstract

This article summarizes the theory of federalism as non-domination Iris Marion Young began to develop in her final years, a theory of self-government that tried to recognize interconnectedness. Levy also poses an objection to that theory: non-domination cannot do the work Young needed of it, because it is a theory about the merits of decisions not about jurisdiction over them. The article concludes with an attempt to give Young the last word.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 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

Brow v. Allen. 1953. 344 U.S. 443.Google Scholar
Kukathas, Chandran. 2003. The liberal archipelago. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kymlicka, Will. 1989. Liberalism, community, and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, Jacob T. 2007. Federalism, liberalism, and the separation of loyalties. American Political Science Review 101 (3): 459–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Jacob T. 2008. Three perversities of Indian law. Texas Review of Law and Politics.Google Scholar
McMahon, Christopher. 2005. The indeterminacy of republican policy. Philosophy & Public Affairs 33 (1): 6793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, Philip. 1997. Republicanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pettit, Philip. 2006. The determinacy of republican policy: A reply to McMahon. Philosophy & Public Affairs 34 (3): 275–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raz, Joseph. 1979. The authority of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph. 1980. The concept of a legal system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez. 1978. 436 U.S. 49.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1985. Atomism. In Philosophy and the human sciences: Philosophical papers, Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasi, John. 1991. Individual rights and community virtues. 32 101: 521–36.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 1992. Minority cultures and the cosmopolitan alternative. 32 25: 751–93.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 1999. Law and disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worcester v. Georgia. 1832. 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1989. Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1992. Together in difference: Transforming the logic of group political conflict. 32 4: 1126.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2000a. Inclusion and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2000b. Hybrid democracy: Iroquois federalism and the postcolonial project. In Political theory and the rights of indigenous peoples, ed. Ivison, Duncan, Patton, Paul, and Sanders, Will. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2000c. Self‐determination and global democracy: A critique of liberal nationalism. In Nomos XLII: Designing democratic institutions, ed. Shapiro, Ian and Macedo, Stephen. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2001. Two concepts of self‐determination. In Human rights: Concepts, contests, contingencies, ed. Sarat, Austin and Kearns, Thomas. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2005. Self‐determination as non‐domination: ideals as applied to Palestine/Israel. Ethnicities 5 (2): 139–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2006. Global challenges: War, self‐determination, and responsibility for justice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar