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) • 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) • Feature
Rethinking Central Bank Accountability in Uncertain Times
As the dust has settled following the 2008 financial crisis and the economic dislocations that ensued, it has become clear that central banks have gained considerably ...
Summer 2016 (30.2) • Feature
Should We Take the "Human" Out of Human Rights? Human Dignity in a Corporate World
In recent years philosophical discussions of human rights have focused on the question of whether “humanist” and “political” conceptions of human rights are genuinely incompatible ...