The ethics of asymmetric politics

Politics, Philosophy and Economics 22 (1):3-30 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Polarization often happens asymmetrically. One political actor radicalizes, and the results reverberate through the political system. This is how the deep divisions in contemporary American politics arose: the Republican Party radicalized. Republican officeholders began to use extreme legislative tactics. Republican voters became animated by contempt for their political rivals and by the defense of their own social superiority. The party as a whole launched a wide-ranging campaign of voter suppression and its members endorsed violence in the face of electoral defeat. This paper is about how such asymmetric polarization affects everyone else’s obligations. My core claim is that two kinds of relationship – civic friendship and non-subordination – underpin critical democratic norms. Republican misbehavior has severed cross-partisan civic friendships. Their authoritarianism forfeits their claim to non-subordination. The former means that non-Republicans need not justify policy on public grounds. The latter undercuts Republicans’ claim to enjoy minority vetoes when out of power and it gives their rivals reason to disobey the laws that Republicans make when they are in power. More generally, when one political actor contravenes the proper norms of democratic politics, their opposition is not bound by those norms.

Similar books and articles

On the Cultivation of Civic Friendship.Myisha Cherry - 2021 - Journal of Philosophical Research 46:193-207.
On justificatory liberalism.Steven Wall - 2010 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 9 (2):123-149.
Moral Compromise, Civic Friendship, and Political Reconciliation.Simon Căbulea May - 2011 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (5):581-602.
Civic Friendship.Mary Healy - 2011 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 30 (3):229-240.
Why Public Reasoning Involves Ideal Theorizing.Blain Neufeld - 2017 - In Kevin Vallier & Michael Weber (eds.), Political Utopias: Contemporary Debates. New York, USA: Oup Usa. pp. 73-93.
Poltical-philosophical justification the public shpere: The possibility of achieving Habermassian ideal in modern conditions.A. Tretyak - 2010 - Epistemological studies in Philosophy, Social and Political Sciences 2 (20):214-219.
Authority, Nationality, and Minorities.Alex Schwartz - 2015 - Ratio Juris 28 (3):354-371.
Against the Asymmetric Convergence Model of Public Justification.James W. Boettcher - 2015 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (1):191-208.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-09-30

Downloads
330 (#58,150)

6 months
115 (#30,428)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Adam Lovett
Australian Catholic University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Political Liberalism.J. Rawls - 1995 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 57 (3):596-598.
The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Philosophy 63 (243):119-122.
The Moral Nexus.R. Jay Wallace - 2019 - Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rule Over None II: Social Equality and the Justification of Democracy.Niko Kolodny - 2014 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 42 (4):287-336.
Democratic Equality and Political Authority.Daniel Viehoff - 2014 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 42 (4):337-375.

View all 15 references / Add more references