Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. A Lockean account of the moral status of undocumented immigrants.J. K. Numao - forthcoming - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy.
    This article aims to show that Locke’s discussion of tacit consent and the right to punish aliens in the Second Treatise of Government has important bearings on the moral status of undocumented immigrants. It argues that Locke conceptualized both friendly and hostile aliens, counting the former as tacit consenters to whom host states owed rights and protection. Moreover, it highlights how his approach, unlike theorists before and after him, was one that saw individuals as capable of shaping their own relationship (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Authority, Plurality, and Anarchist Scepticism.Allyn Fives - 2023 - Dialogue 62 (2):395-412.
    RésuméSelon le scepticisme anarchiste d'A. John Simmons, il n'y a pas d'obligation d'obéir à la loi dans l’état actuel des choses, car les obligations légales n'ont de légitimité que lorsqu'elles sont volontairement contractées par la plupart ou de nombreux citoyens. Cependant, la sensibilité de Simmons à la diversité des raisons et à la possibilité d'un conflit non résolu suggère une position alternative pluraliste. Celle-ci montre que les fondements de l'autorité légitime sont pluriels et incluent la justice distributive. En outre, même (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Immigration enforcement and justifications for causing harm.Kevin K. W. Ip - forthcoming - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy.
    States are not only claiming the right to grant or deny entry to their territories but also enforcing this right against non-citizens in ways that cause significant harm to these individuals. In this article, I argue that endorsing the presumptive right to restrict immigration does not settle the question of when or how it may permissibly inflict harm on individuals to enforce this right. I examine three distinct justifications for causing harm to individuals. First, the justification of defensive harm holds (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The open borders debate, migration as settlement, and the right to travel.Ugur Altundal - 2024 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 27 (7):1155-1179.
    The philosophical debate on the freedom of movement focuses almost exclusively on long-term migration, what I call, migration as settlement. The normative justifications defending border controls assume that the movement of people across political borders, independent of its purpose and the length of stay, refers to migration as settlement. “Global mobility,” “international movement,” and “immigration” are oftenused interchangeably. However, global mobility also refers to the movements of people across international borders for a short length of time such as travel, short-term (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Colonialism, injustices of the past, and the hole in Nine.Daniel Weltman - 2023 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 88 (2):288-300.
    In ‘Colonialism, territory and pre-existing obligations,’ Cara Nine argues that Lea Ypi’s account of the wrongness of colonialism has a hole in it: Ypi leaves open the possibility of justified settler colonialism. Nine suggests that we can patch this hole by attaching value to existing political associations. But Nine’s solution has its own hole. Many political associations exist due to settler colonialism, and thus if we endorse the value of these associations we seem to endorse colonialism. In response, we could (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Territorial rights and colonial wrongs.Benjamin Ferguson & Roberto Veneziani - 2020 - European Journal of Philosophy 29 (2):425-446.
    What is wrong with colonialism? The standard—albeit often implicit—answer to this question has been that colonialism was wrong because it violated the territorial rights of indigenous peoples, where territorial rights were grounded on acquisition theories. Recently, the standard view has come under attack: according to critics, acquisition based accounts do not provide solid theoretical grounds to condemn colonial relations. Indeed, historically they were used to justify colonialism. Various alternative accounts of the wrong of colonialism have been developed. According to some, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Publisher's Note.[author unknown] - 2019 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 18 (4):i-i.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark