Non-domination makes citizens more radical and less state-sceptical
Evidence
The shift from freedom as non-interference to freedom as nondomination is going to have two effects, then, that might have disturbed Paley and that might have motivated his third criticism. The shift is going to make us potentially more radical in our complaints about the ways in which social relationships are organized. And it is going to make us potentially less sceptical about the possibilities of rectifying those complaints by recourse to state action. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 390
Categorization
- SEED: Angle: the republican ideal of non-domination transforms diffuse marital and employer-employee frustrations into well-founded political grievances addressable by democratic state power.
- XREF: connects to: Freedom as nondomination yields radical policies and democracy through contestability rather than consent — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 35; Non-domination is less skeptical of government but socially more radical than non-interference — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 1253; Freedom as non-domination requires embracing state power rather than fearing it — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 389 (+2 more)
Broader Connections
- Non-domination is less skeptical of government but socially more radical than non-interference
#corroborates(0.95) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 1253 - Freedom as non-domination requires embracing state power rather than fearing it
#expands(0.95) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 389 - Distrust of government is easier to ground rationally than trust
#contradicts(0.80) - Social capital enables citizens to contest policies endangering non-domination.
#expands(0.75) — Adelin-Costin Dumitru, Forging the Resistive Republic, 34