Eyes wide shut: The curious silence of The law of peoples on questions of immigration and citizenship.

In an interdependent world of overlapping political memberships and identities, states and democratic citizens face difficult choices in responding to large-scale migration and the related question of who ought to have access to citizenship. In an influential attempt to provide a normative framework for a more just global order, The Law of Peoples, John Rawls is curiously silent regarding what his framework would mean for the politics of migration. In this piece, I consider the complications Rawls’s inattention to these issues creates for his broader vision of global justice. Yet I also attempt to show how these aspects of Rawls’s theory emerge from an underlying tension which confronts all liberal democratic conceptions of justice, both in theory and in practice. In my conclusion, I sketch an alternative rooted in the insights of agonistic pluralism, which “breaks” the Rawlsian silence and actively theorizes the democratic legitimation of political borders.

• Autores: Robert W. Glover; James Madison University, Department of Justice Studies.
• Fecha de publicación: 2011
• Institución: Universidad del Norte
• Repositorio: Repositorio Uninorte
• Idioma: eng
• OAI Identifier: oai:manglar.uninorte.edu.co:10584/2811
• Acceso en línea: http://rcientificas.uninorte.edu.co/index.php/eidos/article/view/2137; http://hdl.handle.net/10584/2811
• Palabra clave: Philosophy; Immigration; migration; citizenship; Rawls; The Law of Peoples; Political philosophy, global justice.; Filosofía; Inmigración; migración; cuidadanía; El derecho de gentes; Filosofía política
• License: http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2