Political Obligation

Question 1

Political Authority

Answer 1

• Political authority involves a moral right to command and a correlative duty to obey those commands.
• This is a form of claim right.
• The central problem of political authority is that of deciding how such a right can be justified.
• If the right to command is morally justified then authority is legitimate.

Question 2

Philosophical Anarchism

Answer 2

• Philosophical anarchists argue that legitimate authority is a logical impossibility (much like a married bachelor).
• Robert Wolff claims that the exercise of autonomy is a fundamental part of what it means to be human. We cannot be moral agents and give up our private judgement. Submitting to authority means surrendering one’s private judgment.
• P1. It is a requirement of being autonomous that we take responsibility for our actions.
• P2. We ought to act autonomously.
• P3. A state is legitimate if and only if its citizens ought to obey its commands just because it is their state.
• C1. Therefore legitimate authority and autonomy are incompatible.
• C2. Legitimate authority does not exist
• Hobbes argues that without a state, life would be nasty brutish and short therefore the state protects us and we should give it authority

Question 3

Contingent Anarchism

Answer 3

• Contingent anarchists (such as John Simmons) argue that the conflict between authority and autonomy is not a logical one.
• They argue that it might be theoretically possible to reconcile authority and autonomy.
• However, in practice it would be very difficult indeed for a state have a well grounded moral right to command.
• No presently existing state, and in all likelihood no future state, has met or can meet the requirements for legitimate authority.

Question 4

Other Reasons to Obey the Law

Answer 4

• Besides prudential reasons (such as because it benefits us, or because we are frightened of negative consequences), there might still be moral reasons to obey the law. E.g.
• Respect for fellow citizens.
• Those in power might be better at moral reasoning than the rest of us.
• Rule by law might make life better than life without it (e.g. compared with Hobbes’ State of Nature).
• In other words, there might be a presumption in favour of obeying the law even if the state lacks legitimacy.

Question 5

Consent Theorists

Answer 5

• Consent theorists argue that the strongest candidate for a duty to obey the law comes out of the consent of the governed (voluntarism).
• Under this theory, we have a duty to obey because we have granted someone else a right to command us via an agreement.
• This agreement can be explicitly or expressly made (such as by a verbal or written promise), or it can be tacitly made (such as by remaining silent when expressions of dissent are called for, or by voluntarily accepting and enjoying state benefits). See: Simmons, John ‘Tacit Consent and Political Obligation’.
• But, how far can consent bind us? Can we consent to unjust laws?
• In practice, consent is quite hard to secure and maintain (just as the contingent philosophical anarchists argue).

Question 6

Gratitude Theorists

Answer 6

• Gratitude theorists argue that duty to obey the law arises out of a sense of gratitude for benefits received (see Walker, Gordon ‘Political Obligation and the Argument from Gratitude’).
• Gratitude is an attitude involving good will and respect for one’s benefactor. Walker’s argument is as follows (p.205):
• The person who benefits from X has an obligation of gratitude not to act contrary to X’s interests.
• Every citizen has received benefits from the state.
• Every citizen has an obligation of gratitude not to act in ways that are contrary to the state’s interests.
• Noncompliance with the law is contrary to the state’s interests.
• Every citizen has an obligation of gratitude to comply with the law.
• John Simmons rejects gratitude theory on the basis that we only ought to feel gratitude where our benefactor has acted intentionally and at significant cost to themselves. Since the state is not an agent it cannot have intentions, and in any case it’s fellow citizens not the state that bear the costs. Besides, the things the state provides us with are things we have a right to, and we ought not feel grateful for things we are owed. Therefore, we ought not feel grateful to the state

Question 7

Fair Play Theorists

Answer 7

• Fair play theory trades on the intuitive wrongness we associate with free-riding behaviour.
• If we all benefit from a cooperative scheme, then it is wrong to receive the benefits without bearing the associated burdens.
• The state is a cooperative scheme, which we benefit from.
• One of the burdens associated with maintaining the scheme is obedience to the law.
• Therefore, breaking the law is a form of free-riding and is unfair to fellow citizens.
• The duty to obey the law is an indirect duty owed to one’s fellow citizens.