Abstract
The all-affected principle is a widely accepted solution to the problem of constituting the demos. Despite its popularity, a basic question in relation to the principle has not received much attention: why does the fact that an individual is affected by a certain decision ground a right to inclusion in democratic decision-making about that matter? An answer to this question must include a reason that explains why an affected individual should be included because she is affected. We identify three such reasons in the literature - to wit, interest protection, self-government and welfare - and show why they all fail. We then propose two alternative reasons, equal relations and fairness, and show why they are also deficient. Surprisingly, the all-affected principle then appears groundless, which supports withholding belief in the all-affected principle or(/and) investing future research in identifying the thus-far unidentified reason why being affected grounds a claim to inclusion.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of Moral Philosophy |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages (from-to) | 571-596 |
| Number of pages | 26 |
| ISSN | 1740-4681 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2021 |
Keywords
- Democracy
- Democratic inclusion
- The all-affected principle
- The all-subjected principle
- The problem of constituting the demos
- COERCION
- DEMOCRACY
- the all-subjected principle
- the problem of constituting the demos
- democracy
- AFFECTED INTERESTS
- EQUALITY
- RULE
- the all-affected principle
- democratic inclusion