Discomfort with denationalization spans both proceduralist and consequentialist objections. I augment Patti Lenard’s arguments against denationalization with an epistemological argument. What makes denationalization problematic for democratic theorists are not simply the procedures used to impose this penalty or its consequences but also the permanence of this type of punishment. Because democratic theory assumes citizens to be subject to developmental processes that can substantially alter a person’s character in politically relevant ways, I argue in favor of states imposing only revocable punishments. Penalties removing people’s rights and political standing must be accompanied by avenues for periodic reconsideration of such punishments in order to meet Lenard’s standard of democratic legitimacy.
Full article available to subscribers only. Access the article here.
More in this issue
Summer 2016 (30.2) • Review
Scientists at War: The Ethics of Cold War Weapons Research
In this important new work, historian Sarah Bridger explores the ambivalent role of scientists in U.S. policy debates over national defense issues from the 1950...
Summer 2016 (30.2) • Essay
Accountability for the Sustainable Development Goals: A Lost Opportunity?
The question of accountability—or, more precisely, the question of how governments will be held to account for implementing the commitments made in this new ...
Summer 2016 (30.2) • Essay
Lost in Transformation? The Politics of the Sustainable Development Goals
On September 25, 2015, the world’s leaders adopted a new suite of development goals—the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)—that are to guide policymakers for the ...