Republican institutions constitute freedom as non-domination rather than cause it.

Evidence

I maintain that non-domination is a goal which such institutions should seek to promote, not a constraint that they have to honour in the pursuit of other goals; I defend a consequentialist version of republicanism. This republican doctrine, as we shall see, is a consequentialism with a difference: it allows us to say that the institutions which promote people’s freedom as non-domination go to constitute that freedom, not to cause it; the doctrine does not countenance any temporal or causal gulf between civic institutions and the freedom of citizens. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 401

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies Pettit’s distinctive ‘consequentialism with a difference’ and the constitutive rather than causal relation between institutions and freedom.
• XREF: connects to: Freedom as non-domination is constituted by institutions, not caused by them. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 1238; Political freedom is constituted by institutions, not by the absence of actual interference — Frank Lovett, Republicanism, 22; Republican democrats treated participation as a means to, not the definition of, liberty. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 158

Broader Connections

• Freedom as non-domination is constituted by institutions, not caused by them. #corroborates (0.95) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 1238
• Political freedom is constituted by institutions, not by the absence of actual interference #expands (0.80) — Frank Lovett, Republicanism, 22