IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pophec/v22y2023i4p423-440.html

Republicanism and moralised freedom

Author

Listed:
  • Lars JK Moen

Abstract

A moralised conception of freedom is based on a normative theory. Understanding it therefore requires an analysis of this theory. In this paper, I show how republican freedom as non-domination is moralised, and why analysing this concept therefore involves identifying the basic components of the republican theory of justice. One of these components is the non-moralised pure negative conception of freedom as non-interference. Republicans therefore cannot keep insisting that their freedom concept conflicts with, and is superior to, this more basic concept. I demonstrate how we can use pure negative freedom to formulate the republican theory more precisely. This exercise is more fruitful than the common focus on the alleged conflict between the two freedom concepts.

Suggested Citation

  • Lars JK Moen, 2023. "Republicanism and moralised freedom," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 22(4), pages 423-440, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:22:y:2023:i:4:p:423-440
    DOI: 10.1177/1470594X231167592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1470594X231167592
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1470594X231167592?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sean Ingham & Frank Lovett, 2019. "Republican Freedom, Popular Control, and Collective Action," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(4), pages 774-787, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sean Ingham & Frank Lovett, 2022. "Domination and democratic legislation," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 21(2), pages 97-121, May.
    2. Daniel Guillery, 2020. "Domination and enforcement: The contingent and non-ideal relation between state and freedom," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 19(4), pages 403-423, November.
    3. Hun Chung & Brian Kogelmann, 2024. "Formal models in normative political theory," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 36(3), pages 256-274, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:22:y:2023:i:4:p:423-440. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.