Disaggregating Political Authority: What's Wrong with Rawlsian Civil Disobedience

Political Studies (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
John Rawls is a central figure in contemporary philosophical and theoretical discussions of civil disobedience, which hope to contribute to significant political debates around when and in which forms political dissent, protest and resistance are appropriate. Ignoring the frame in which Rawls discusses civil disobedience has led critics to wrongly attack his theory for being too restrictive when it is more likely to be too permissive. That permissiveness depends on treating any political order which does not come close to fulfilling his theory of justice as absolutely illegitimate. In this sense, Rawls’ theory of political authority is binary and demanding. The problems his theory shares with most others, including his critics’, show that political authority needs to be disaggregated to make sense of the conditions under which different forms of protest and resistance are appropriate.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-02-08
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Why Not Uncivil Disobedience?Scheuerman, William E.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
84 ( #32,789 of 46,142 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
44 ( #18,801 of 46,142 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.