Translatio versus Concessio

David Ellerman
Additional contact information
David Ellerman: Economics Department of the University of California, Riverside, david@ellerman.org

Politics & Society, 2005, vol. 33, issue 3, 449-480

Abstract: Liberalism is based on the juxtaposition of consent to coercion. Autocracy and slavery were based on coercion whereas today’s political democracy and economic “employment system†are based on consent to voluntary contracts. This article retrieves an almost forgotten dark side of contractarian thought that based autocracy and slavery on explicit or implicit voluntary contracts. The democratic and antislavery movements forged arguments not simply in favor of consent but arguments that voluntary contracts to alienate (translatio) aspects of personhood were invalid—which made the underlying rights inalienable. Once understood, those arguments apply as well to today’s self-rental contract, the employer-employee contract.

Keywords: liberalism; consent; coercion; alienation contracts; inalienable rights; employment contract (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0032329205278463 (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:polsoc:v:33:y:2005:i:3:p:449-480

DOI: 10.1177/0032329205278463

Access Statistics for this article

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