Institut for Statskundskab

Differential Voting Weights and Relational Egalitarianism

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

Two prominent relational egalitarians, Elizabeth Anderson and Niko Kolodny, object to giving people in a democratic community differential voting weights on the grounds that doing so would lead to unequal relations between them. Their claim is that deviating from a “one-person, one-vote” scheme is incompatible with realizing relational egalitarian justice. In this article, I argue that they are wrong. I do so by showing that people can relate as moral, epistemic, social, and empirical equals in a scheme with differential voting weights. I end the article by showing that from the perspective of relational egalitarianism, it is sometimes true that differential voting weights are more just than equal voting weights.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftPolitical Studies
Vol/bind68
Nummer4
Sider (fra-til)1054-1070
Antal sider17
ISSN0032-3217
DOI
StatusUdgivet - nov. 2020

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

ID: 173422827