Enfranchising all subjected: A reconstruction and problematization

Robert E. Goodin and Gustaf Arrhenius
Additional contact information
Robert E. Goodin: School of Philosophy, 2219Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
Gustaf Arrhenius: 7632Institute for Futures Studies, Stockholm, Sweden

Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 2024, vol. 23, issue 2, 125-153

Abstract: There are two classic principles for deciding who should have a right to vote on the laws, the All Affected Principle and the All Subjected Principle. This article is devoted, firstly, to providing a sympathetic reconstruction of the All Subjected Principle, identifying the most credible account of what it is to be subject to the law. Secondly, it shows that that best account still suffers some serious difficulties, which might best be resolved by treating the All Subjected Principle as a subset of the All Affected Principle with which the All Subjected Principle must in any case be supplemented.

Keywords: boundary problem; All Subjected Principle; All Affected Principle; democratic theory; voting rights; subject to the law (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1470594X241232023 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:pophec:v:23:y:2024:i:2:p:125-153

DOI: 10.1177/1470594X241232023

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Politics, Philosophy & Economics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().