The Politics of Justification
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6350255 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stephen Macedo (0000-0003-3083-2636, Harvard University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1990 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 280-304 |
| Publication date | 1990-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Political Theory (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0090-5917 • E-ISSN: 1552-7476 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0090591790018002006 |
| OpenAlex | W2031905361 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 24 |
| References cited | 2 |
THE PRACTICE OF POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION is not just for philosophers, and it does not simply lie behind (as we may hope) our political arrangements. Commitments to reason giving and reason demanding inform some of our most valuable political practices. Judicial review, most obviously, helps ensure legislative and executive acts are reasonable in constitutional terms: In court it is not the fact of power but the display of reasons and evidence counts. Not only the courts, but also Congress and the executive branch sometimes (and quite properly) conscientiously justify their actions in constitutional terms. Constitution aside, much takes place in and around legislatures, elections, and other political fora can be understood as efforts to justify particular policies and programs.1 Liberals demand, as Jeremy Waldron puts it, that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding.2 Liberal, democratic politics is not only about individual rights and limited govemment, it is also about justification, but not about any kind of justification at all. Liberal political justification, even in its ideal form, should be understood politically this article considers why and how. Liberal contractualists typically seek justifications are widely acceptable to reasonable people with a broad range of moral, philosophical, and religious commitments.3 The aim is reasonable agreement: to be both reasonable and agreeable in a widely pluralistic society.4 The appropriate means is a process of reasoning is publicly accessible, but genuinely justificatory
Epistemology · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Sociology · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
Liberalism and Mysticism
Deliberative Politics in Action
Still There But For How Long? The Counter-Intuitiveness of the Universal Welfare Model and the Development of the Universal Welfare State in Denmark
Rawls, Political Liberalism and Reasonable Faith
Is Social Policy Retrenchment Unpopular? How Welfare Reforms Affect Government Popularity
Les droits religieux sont-ils compatibles avec le pluralisme démocratique
Reflexive Demokratie
Consenting to Geoengineering
Responsibility and the hidden politics of directionality
Justification, Pluralism and Pragmatism
Bringing political identity into discursive and ideational analysis
Experts versus politicians
Do voters punish the government for welfare state retrenchment? A comparative study of electoral costs associated with social policy
Legitimacy, Democracy and Public Justification
Public Reason through the Mirror of the One. Claude Lefort vs. Rawls
Can Liberalism Lose the Enlightenment
Taking reasonable pluralism seriously
A Human Right to Deliberative Justification
Political Philosophy and Empowering Citizens
Comparing Government Agendas
Liberty and Community
Public political thought
Citizenship revocation
Rawls's "Political" Philosophy and American Democracy
| Unique citing works | 24 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,69 |
| Citation span | 1991 - 2024 (34) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 23 |