Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Impartiality and democracy: an objection to political exchange.Matthew T. Jeffers - 2024 - Economics and Philosophy 40 (1):166-189.
    The philosophical debate concerning political exchange has largely been confined to debating the desirability of vote trading; where individuals can sell their votes or buy votes from others. However, I show that the vote credit systems prevalent in public choice theory entirely avoid the common objections to political exchange that afflict vote trading proposals. Namely, vote credit systems avoid equality concerns and inalienability concerns. I offer an alternative critique to formal mechanisms that encourage political exchange by drawing on the role (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Effective Vote Markets and the Tyranny of Wealth.Alfred Archer, Bart Engelen & Viktor Ivanković - 2019 - Res Publica 25 (1):39-54.
    What limits should there be on the areas of life that are governed by market forces? For many years, no one seriously defended the buying and selling votes for political elections. In recent years, however, this situation has changed, with a number of authors defending the permissibility of vote markets. One popular objection to such markets is that they would lead to a tyranny of wealth, where the poor are politically dominated by the rich. In a recent paper, Taylor :313–328, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Two (Weak) Cheers for Markets in Votes.James Stacey Taylor - 2018 - Philosophia 46 (1):223-239.
    This paper offers the first moral defense of markets in votes in a democratic electoral system based on majority rule where there are no moral restrictions on how votes can be cast. In Part 1 I outline the type of vote buying that I defend in this paper, and defend my methodological assumption. In Part 2 I criticize Freiman’s arguments for legalizing vote buying. In Part 3 I outline and reply to some responses that could be made to my criticisms (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Markets in votes: Alienability, strict secrecy, and political clientelism.Nicolás Maloberti - 2019 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 18 (2):193-215.
    Standard rationales for the illegality of markets in votes are based on concerns over the undue influence of wealth and the erosion of civic responsibility that would result from the commodification of votes. I present an alternative rationale based on how the mere alienability of votes alters the strategic setting faced by political actors. The inalienability of votes ensure the strict secrecy of voting, that is, the inability of voters to communicate credibly to others the content of their votes. In (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation