How do affected interests support global democracy?

Journal of Global Ethics 13 (3):264-278 (2017)
Authors
Vuko Andrić
Universität Bayreuth
Abstract
ABSTRACTIn this paper, I critique one way of arguing for global democracy on grounds of affected interests and defend another. A famous argument for global democracy, which I call the Demos-Based Argument, attempts to justify global democracy based on the claim that affected interests vindicate individual claims to democratic participation or representation. I analyze and evaluate the Demos-Based Argument and consider different ways of interpreting and justifying its crucial premise: the Principle of Affected Interests. The result is that the argument fails. One lesson of the discussion of the Demos-Based Argument is that the most promising, though eventually unsuccessful, justification of the Principle of Affected Interests is utilitarian. Given the failure of the Demos-Based Argument, the question suggests itself if there is another way to argue for global democracy on utilitarian grounds. I will outline a promising alternative argument for global democracy, which I call the Direct Argument. Like the De...
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2017, 2018
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1080/17449626.2018.1425219
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 37,988
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (2):311-327.
Democratic Theory and Border Coercion.Arash Abizadeh - 2008 - Political Theory 36 (1):37-65.
Enfranchising All Affected Interests, and its Alternatives.Robert E. Goodin - 2007 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 35 (1):40–68.
Democracy's Domain.David Miller - 2009 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 37 (3):201-228.
[Book Review] Democratic Justice. [REVIEW]Ian Shapiro - 2001 - Social Theory and Practice 27 (3):519-534.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Against the Principle of All Affected Interests.Zoltan Miklosi - 2012 - Social Theory and Practice 38 (3):483-503.
Against the Principle of All-Affected Interests.Zoltan Miklosi - 2012 - Social Theory and Practice 38 (3):483-503.
Federative Global Democracy.Eric Cavallero - 2009 - Metaphilosophy 40 (1):42-64.
Science, Biases, and the Threat of Global Pessimism.K. Brad Wray - 2001 - Philosophy of Science 68 (S3):S467-S478.
Science, Biases, and the Threat of Global Pessimism.K. Brad Wray - 2001 - Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S467-.
Is “Globalizing Democracy” Possible?Omar Dahbour - 2006 - Radical Philosophy Today 2006:255-260.
Human Rights and Global Democracy.Michael Goodhart - 2008 - Ethics and International Affairs 22 (4).
Human Rights and Global Democracy.Michael Goodhart - 2008 - Ethics and International Affairs 22 (4):395-420.
Animals and Democratic Theory: Beyond an Anthropocentric Account.Robert Garner - 2017 - Contemporary Political Theory 16 (4):459-477.
Democracy and Neo-Liberal Globalization.Mislav Kukoč - 2006 - Synthesis Philosophica 21 (2):373-383.
Democracy and Legitimacy in Plurinational Societies.Genevieve Nootens - 2009 - Contemporary Political Theory 8 (3):276-294.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-03-13

Total views
7 ( #668,737 of 2,312,410 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #229,396 of 2,312,410 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature