PhilArchive
open access
The limits of limitarianism Why political equality is not protected by Robeyns’ democratic argument
Limitarianism takes an important step towards an appropriate concern in normative theory about the danger that financial power can pose to political equality. Despite its significant merits, this paper will show that Robeyns’ proposal still has serious shortcomings. These criticisms pave the way for an alternative proposal that we call proportional justice. In the first section, we briefly reconstruct the limitarian approach. In the second section, we formulate a series of criticisms that expose the inadequacies of limitarianism. In the third section we explain how proportional justice is better equipped than limitarianism to defend political equality.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Perfekcjonizm i równość płci. Johna Rawlsa krytyka Johna Stuarta Milla#95000
- Rawlsian Incentives and the Freedom Objection#747232
- In Defense of Rawlsian Egalitarianism#113003
- Must Egalitarians Rely on the State to Attain Distributive Justice?#761491
- Reconstrução Normativa vs. Procedimentalismo: a crítica de Axel Honneth ao liberalismo procedimental#776609
Record · ID 715377
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive