Non-domination confers security that survives others’ changed attitudes

Evidence

To enjoy non-domination is to be in a position where no one has that power of arbitrary interference over me and where I am correspondingly powerful. It is to be possessed, not just of non-interference by arbitrary powers, but of a secure or resilient variety of such noninterference. Let the agents in question take against me; let me fail to be good at toadying to them; let me lose the cunning required to keep out of their way. None of this matters if I really enjoy nondomination: if I really benefit from the reciprocal power or the constitutional provision required for non-domination. It will still be the case that I enjoy non-interference at the hands of the agents in question, for that blessing comes to me securely, and not just by courtesy of one of the contingencies mentioned. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 350

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines non-domination as secure or resilient non-interference independent of others’ goodwill.
• XREF: connects to: A dominant party can accept a non-dominating order by recognizing shared vulnerability. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 345; Accepting vulnerability to others is necessary to enjoy maximal non-domination — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 1193; Mere non-interference can coexist with domination when security is absent — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 349 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Freedom as non-domination protects against the goodwill of others turning sour. #corroborates (0.90) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 136
• Accepting vulnerability to others is necessary to enjoy maximal non-domination #complicates (0.80) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 1193
• Mere non-interference can coexist with domination when security is absent #expands (0.80) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 349
• Dominant powers benefit from engineering their subjects’ inability to trust #expands (0.75)