Intentional (Nation‐)States: A Group‐Agency Problem for the State’s Right to Exclude

Journal of Applied Philosophy 38 (1):73-87 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Most philosophical defences of the state’s right to exclude immigrants derive their strength from the normative importance of self-determination. If nation-states are taken to be the political institutions of a people, then the state’s right to exclude is the people’s right to exclude – and a denial of this right constitutes an abridgement of self-determination. In this paper, I argue that this view of self-determination does not cohere with a group-agency view of nation-states. On the group-agency view that I defend, a nation-state is the kind of group-agent that does not supervene on the intentionality of member/citizens. If we think that a nation-state is an intentional group-agent in its own right, then we should think that self-determination resides with the institutions of the state rather than with the citizens. If nation-states do not supervene on the intentionality of citizens, then it is unclear why citizens might have the right to control membership in the state as a feature of self-determination.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 106,621

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-12-12

Downloads
61 (#384,740)

6 months
11 (#335,812)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Matthew R. Joseph
University of Sydney (PhD)

Citations of this work

Migration and the Point of Self-Determination.Mike Gadomski - forthcoming - Social Theory and Practice.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references