Samenvatting migration, citizenship & identity.
Mandatory literature:
John Locke: second treaties of government
John Ralws: justice as fairness
Seyla Benhabib:
o who can become a German citizen.
o The law of peoples p. 1761-1787
o P. 45-74
Robert Nozick: anarchy, state & utopia (libertarian)
o Distributive justice
o Entitlement theory
o Locke’s theory of acquisition
Gary Becker: p 20-66
Ingrid Robeyns
Diana Virginia Todea
Georg Simmil
Joseph Carens: p.251-273 (egalitarian liberalist)
Bikhu Parekh: p. 239-263 (communitarian)
Amitai Etzioni: p. 353-363
Shachar Ayelet p. 21-37
Rebecca Ruth Gould
Peter Spiro
Branko Milanovic p. 198-208
,Week 1
Lecture 1
Moral reasoning
Consequentialist moral reasoning
- Locates moralities in the consequences of an act (it’s ok that one dies, if it saves five’:
or the greatest good for the greatest number -utilitarianism)
Categorical moral reasoning
- Individual rights are important no matter what the consequences. (a doctor may not
kill a healthy patient; even if it saves five or more persons; the case for individual
(human) rights and/or minority rights)
Six classis theories/principles of justice
- Utilitarian
o The greatest good to the greates number
- Egalitarian
o To all the same
- Meritocratic
o To each according to their merit
- Socialist
o From each according to their ability, to each according to their need
- Libertarian
o From each what they freely choose to contribute to each who wishes to accept
the contribution
- Communitarian perspective
o We share the good-life in groups. At times group rights and values are more
important than individual rights or minority rights.
Fabre takes three different perspectives
(1). Egalitarian liberalism (John Rawls)
(2). Communitarianism (Michael Sandel, Michael Walzer)
(3). Libertarians (Robert Nozick)
,Liberal egalitarianism
(A). a theory of justice is liberal in so far it defends fundamental individual rights. They tend
to protect the individuals for the “tyranny” of the majority – liberals tend to defend the
fundamental rights of individuals
(B). a theory is egalitarian liberal in so far it assumes that all individuals are morally equal
and mandates and extensive distribution of material resources (income and wealth)
towards those who have fewer such sources. However, they disagree on the extent to which
inequality matters.
Week 2
Lecture 2
Why do we need a government? What are the limits of Government? (John Locke/Robert
Nozick)
Why do we choose to be governed? (John Locke)
Where do unalienable rights come from? (John Locke/John Rawls)
What is a (nation) state?
Locke: the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it which obliges everyone: and
reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and
independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health liberty or possesions
Social contract: an agreement between the members of the community and the Sovereign.
The rights of rulers are limited, in so far as the rights to life, liberty and property are
given and cannot be taken away.
Libertarian view of government
1. No paternalist legislation
2. No moral legislation
3. No redistribution of income from the Rich to the Poor
John Rawls:
In the original position people choose two principles:
1. The liberty principle
, a. Stipulates that each individual has a right to enjoy certain basic liberties,
consistent with similar rights for others. Rawls does not say much about these
rights, but we may assume he means; freedom of speech; freedom of
movement; the right to private property etc.
2. The second principle has two parts
a. People are attached to positions and offices open to all
b. Allocating material resources. That is that social and economic inequalities are
permitted provided that they benefit the worse-off members of society
The claims of community/ Walzer/Sandel
Communitarians argue that, in addition to voluntary and universal duties we also have
obligations of membership, solidarity, and loyalty to ourselves and our community/ these
obligations are not necessarily based on consent. We inherit our past and our identities.
Mandatory literature:
John Locke: second treaties of government
John Ralws: justice as fairness
Seyla Benhabib:
o who can become a German citizen.
o The law of peoples p. 1761-1787
o P. 45-74
Robert Nozick: anarchy, state & utopia (libertarian)
o Distributive justice
o Entitlement theory
o Locke’s theory of acquisition
Gary Becker: p 20-66
Ingrid Robeyns
Diana Virginia Todea
Georg Simmil
Joseph Carens: p.251-273 (egalitarian liberalist)
Bikhu Parekh: p. 239-263 (communitarian)
Amitai Etzioni: p. 353-363
Shachar Ayelet p. 21-37
Rebecca Ruth Gould
Peter Spiro
Branko Milanovic p. 198-208
,Week 1
Lecture 1
Moral reasoning
Consequentialist moral reasoning
- Locates moralities in the consequences of an act (it’s ok that one dies, if it saves five’:
or the greatest good for the greatest number -utilitarianism)
Categorical moral reasoning
- Individual rights are important no matter what the consequences. (a doctor may not
kill a healthy patient; even if it saves five or more persons; the case for individual
(human) rights and/or minority rights)
Six classis theories/principles of justice
- Utilitarian
o The greatest good to the greates number
- Egalitarian
o To all the same
- Meritocratic
o To each according to their merit
- Socialist
o From each according to their ability, to each according to their need
- Libertarian
o From each what they freely choose to contribute to each who wishes to accept
the contribution
- Communitarian perspective
o We share the good-life in groups. At times group rights and values are more
important than individual rights or minority rights.
Fabre takes three different perspectives
(1). Egalitarian liberalism (John Rawls)
(2). Communitarianism (Michael Sandel, Michael Walzer)
(3). Libertarians (Robert Nozick)
,Liberal egalitarianism
(A). a theory of justice is liberal in so far it defends fundamental individual rights. They tend
to protect the individuals for the “tyranny” of the majority – liberals tend to defend the
fundamental rights of individuals
(B). a theory is egalitarian liberal in so far it assumes that all individuals are morally equal
and mandates and extensive distribution of material resources (income and wealth)
towards those who have fewer such sources. However, they disagree on the extent to which
inequality matters.
Week 2
Lecture 2
Why do we need a government? What are the limits of Government? (John Locke/Robert
Nozick)
Why do we choose to be governed? (John Locke)
Where do unalienable rights come from? (John Locke/John Rawls)
What is a (nation) state?
Locke: the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it which obliges everyone: and
reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and
independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health liberty or possesions
Social contract: an agreement between the members of the community and the Sovereign.
The rights of rulers are limited, in so far as the rights to life, liberty and property are
given and cannot be taken away.
Libertarian view of government
1. No paternalist legislation
2. No moral legislation
3. No redistribution of income from the Rich to the Poor
John Rawls:
In the original position people choose two principles:
1. The liberty principle
, a. Stipulates that each individual has a right to enjoy certain basic liberties,
consistent with similar rights for others. Rawls does not say much about these
rights, but we may assume he means; freedom of speech; freedom of
movement; the right to private property etc.
2. The second principle has two parts
a. People are attached to positions and offices open to all
b. Allocating material resources. That is that social and economic inequalities are
permitted provided that they benefit the worse-off members of society
The claims of community/ Walzer/Sandel
Communitarians argue that, in addition to voluntary and universal duties we also have
obligations of membership, solidarity, and loyalty to ourselves and our community/ these
obligations are not necessarily based on consent. We inherit our past and our identities.
