On Power and Responsibility

Clarissa Rile Hayward

Political Studies Review, 2006, vol. 4, issue 2, 156-163

Abstract: The article focuses on Lukes’ treatment of the relation between power and responsibility. By attempting to draw a sharp distinction between power and structural constraint, I argue, Lukes unnecessarily excludes from his analysis a wide range of significant and inegalitarian social constraints on freedom. The article defends a more structural approach to the study of power, one that employs democratic evaluative standards. Power relations are more or less legitimate, by this view, depending on the extent to which they enable the people they affect to help shape and reshape them. Contra Lukes’ claim that structural approaches are incapable of accounting for the relationship between power and responsibility, I argue that they are fully compatible with theories of political responsibility. Even if no identifiable agent or agents can be held morally responsible for creating a given relation of domination, those actors whose actions helped produce that relationship are obligated to attempt to understand and to change it.

Date: 2006
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9299.2006.000101.x

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:bla:pstrev:v:4:y:2006:i:2:p:156-163

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=1478-9299

Access Statistics for this article

Political Studies Review is currently edited by Matthew Festenstein and Martin Smith

More articles in Political Studies Review from Political Studies Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().