{"title":"Against the Received View","authors":"Thomas J. Donahue-Ochoa","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190051686.003.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 2 examines the view that prevails among the world’s liberal elites on the book’s questions. Specifically, it examines this received view’s theories of the nature of systematic injustice, whether there are global systematic injustices, and the duty to challenge injustice. The received view argues that oppression or systematic injustice is mainly a form of political subjugation of a group, done chiefly by the state. It argues that there are no global systematic injustices, because a systematic injustice can implicate only those people over whom some agency claims political authority, and no agency claims political authority over the whole globe. And it argues that when groups have duties to challenge injustice, this does not imply that their individual members do, and vice versa. As a result, the view has nothing to say about when individuals should join in solidarity against injustice. Ironically, the view thereby sets groups free: rather than Leviathans composed of atomistic individuals jealous of their liberties, groups become Gullivers released from the Lilliputians’ bonds. The chapter then argues that this results in dangerously unchecked groups and a shortfall of responsible agents.","PeriodicalId":221809,"journal":{"name":"Unfreedom for All","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Unfreedom for All","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190051686.003.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Chapter 2 examines the view that prevails among the world’s liberal elites on the book’s questions. Specifically, it examines this received view’s theories of the nature of systematic injustice, whether there are global systematic injustices, and the duty to challenge injustice. The received view argues that oppression or systematic injustice is mainly a form of political subjugation of a group, done chiefly by the state. It argues that there are no global systematic injustices, because a systematic injustice can implicate only those people over whom some agency claims political authority, and no agency claims political authority over the whole globe. And it argues that when groups have duties to challenge injustice, this does not imply that their individual members do, and vice versa. As a result, the view has nothing to say about when individuals should join in solidarity against injustice. Ironically, the view thereby sets groups free: rather than Leviathans composed of atomistic individuals jealous of their liberties, groups become Gullivers released from the Lilliputians’ bonds. The chapter then argues that this results in dangerously unchecked groups and a shortfall of responsible agents.