Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

contractualist OP t1_j4j3a7a wrote

Reply to comment by NotAnotherEmpire in Democracy is Only a Means to an End (Examining the Inherent Political Authority of Democracy) by contractualist

I argue that not even 1 has political authority. Popular support can't make an unjust law just.

6

zhibr t1_j4kr15c wrote

Aren't you conflating moral authority and political authority?

5

contractualist OP t1_j4krvf1 wrote

Good pick up and I should clarify. The argument I make in my substack argues that political authority requires moral authority.

Basically it’s: reason>moral principles of social contract> constitution> formal legal rules.

If you have any questions regarding this argument, I’d be happy to address them here and in future posts.

2

zhibr t1_j4lth5n wrote

So I assume political authority and legitimacy are somewhat equivalent here.

You are talking about legitimacy as a philosophical term (some kind of objective legitimacy, similar to universal morality), rather than empirical (i.e. whether people factually behave in a way that makes ruling/governing possible)? If so, what is the difference between moral and political authority?

1

kyajgevo t1_j4kfrqw wrote

Yes but don’t people often disagree on what is a just law and what isn’t? So at that point you have to figure out whose opinion to go by. And going by the one with the most support seems like the most “just” way of choosing. Even if I’m in the minority and believe that a law is unjust, I’ll still believe that the process through which it was chosen was just. And crucially, democracy contains an internal mechanism for those who want to change unjust laws (convince enough people of my position).

4