Abstract (may include machine translation)
Designing institutions to reconcile liberty and equality is a central goal of leftlibertarians. This article discusses the likely consequences of Michael Otsuka's suggestion of making "the unjust" provide for "the disabled", should this prove the only way of securing equality for the latter. I argue that even in the kind of society envisaged by left-libertarians, forcing people to work, be they criminals or not, would be morally unacceptable and politically dangerous. Part of my argument hinges on fairness towards those being punished by society: for a variety of reasons, it would be unfair to make convicted criminals work for others. Other objections are based on the practical (but morally charged) problems involved in such an arrangement: by encouraging abuse and engendering social antagonism,it would partly defeat the purpose of the law and might distort the mechanisms that serve to implement the rule of law. The most important objection, however, is the likely stigmatization of those whose livelihood would depend on the forced labor of convicted criminals: hence putting convicts to work for the disabled would be unfair to the latter as well, for it would mar their status in society.
Translated title of the contribution | Preserving Self-Ownership: Is It Worth the Price? |
---|---|
Original language | French |
Pages (from-to) | 109-126 |
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Raisons Politiques |
Volume | 23 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 15 Sep 2006 |