Notes
That is in the absence of any constitutional rights that may act as output constrains on decisions taken by the majority.
Examples here are thinkers such as Bentham, Burke, Hume, Hegel and Marx.
This proves that democratic procedures are not utilitarian in nature however only in this respect.
See also Cohen (1989) for a less pessimistic conclusion than Sadurski's.
Thomas Nagel (1979) treatment of equality develops a persuasive argument in favour of this classification.
To make things easier for the reader I should explain here that I use misfortune as synonymous to ‘luck’. Discussions of ‘Luck Egalitarianism’ often resolve around a distinction between ‘option’ and ‘brute’ luck that some readers of this review may find confusing.
References
Cohen, J. (1989) ‘Democratic equality’, Ethics 99 (4): 727–751.
Dworkin, R. (2000) Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hobbes, T. (1668) Leviathan, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Locke, J. (1690) Second Treatise on Civil Government, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nagel, T. (1979) ‘Equality’, in T. Nagel (ed.) Mortal Questions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 106–127.
Rawls, J. (1993) Political Liberalism, Columbia: Columbia University Press.
Rawls, J. (1999) A Theory of Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Raz, J. (1986) The Morality of Freedom, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rousseau, J.J. (1762) The Social Contract, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Simmons, A.J. (2001) Justification and Legitimacy: Essays on Rights and Obligations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Parijs, P. (1997) Real Freedom for All: What (if Anything) Can Justify Capitalism?, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Efthymiou, D. Equality and Legitimacy: A Critical Review. Eur Polit Sci 7, 411–421 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2008.34
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2008.34