Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Rectification and Historic Injustice.Jason Lee Byas - 2022 - In Matt Zwolinski & Benjamin Ferguson (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Libertarianism. Routledge. pp. 427-440.
    This chapter surveys libertarian thought on the question of “historic injustice,” which is when serious injustice goes unresolved for many years. After some historical discussion of early libertarian writing on the subject, I turn to the contemporary debate surrounding reparations for slavery. After outlining three arguments common among libertarians for reparations, common reasons for skepticism are also discussed. Then, special focus is given to the topic of land theft. In particular, I hone in on what I call the “Poisoning Problem,” (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Scanlon, permissions, and redundancy: Response to McNaughton and Rawling.Philip Stratton-Lake - 2003 - Analysis 63 (4):332–337.
    According to one formulation of Scanlon’s contractualist principle, certain acts are wrong if they are permitted by principles that are reasonably rejectable because they permit such acts. According to the redundancy objection, if a principle is reasonably rejectable because it permits actions which have feature F, such actions are wrong simply in virtue of having F and not because their having F makes principles permitting them reasonably rejectable. Consequently Scanlon’s contractualist principle adds nothing to the reasons we have not to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Disputed land claims: A response to Weatherson and to bou-Habib and Olsaretti.Hillel Steiner & Jonathan Wolff - 2006 - Analysis 66 (3):248–255.
    In a paper published in this journal we proposed a method for resolving disputed land claims between two parties (Steiner and Wolff: 2003). In essence the proposal is to hold an auction between the disputants in which the land is given to the higher bidder, but the receipts of the auction to the under-bidder. We claimed that under such circumstances both parties can walk away happy: the higher bidder happy to pay the price bid for the land; the under-bidder happier (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark