super patriotism
the view that gov't power is legitimate and that citizens have a powerful obligation to obey governmental laws and directives
political cynicism
the view that the gov't claims to act for the common good but they are in fact tools for servicing the interests of those who hold power
anarchism
anti-political philosophy
3 claims of anarchism
1. no gov'ts are legitimate 2. no one has a moral duty to obey the law3. human beings would be better off w/o gov'ts
critical citizenship
the view that one cannot reasonably decide either that all gov'ts are legitimate or that none are
parent argument
1.
the state is socrates' parent 2. everyone ought to obey his/her parents3. if socrates escapes, he disobeys his parent4. therefore, socrates ought not escape
benefactor argument
1. the state is socrates' benefactor 2. everyone ought to obey his/her benefactor 3.
if socrates escapes he disobeys his benefactor4. therefore socrates ought not escape
agreement argument
1. socrates made an agreement to obey the state2. everyone ought to keep his/her agreements3.
if socrates escapes he will violate his agreement4. therefore socrates ought not escape
Thrasymachus' cynic view
"just or right meas nothing but what is to the interest of the stronger party"
two versions of political cynicism
1. equivalent of Thrasymachus' view: rulers are out for self and manipulate the state for their own good2. subtle version: rulers actually see themselves as acting for the good of society as a whole & sincerely reject that they're defenders of oppression
two distinct views of cynicism
1. a description of the nature of gov't2.
a prescription or recommendation about how we should act toward gov't and politics
local cynicism
people who look at their gov't and assert it's organized to benefit the rulers
universal cynicism
those who believe all gov'ts are organized to benefit the rulers
necessary cynicism
all gov'ts are by nature exploitative
contingent cynicism
while some are exploitative not all are necessarily
key points in argument for anarchism
1. individual autonomy has extraordinary value2. gov'ts and laws limit freedom by imposing restrictions on individuals and supporting those restrictions w/ force
two reasons for high value of freedom
1. all of us value and desire many things2. freedom is simply the ability to act to achieve our goals and satisfy our desires
universalizability
the idea that a moral principle is only valid or acceptable if it could be followed by everyone
evils of government
1. economic inequality2.
prisons and criminal justice3. war and the state
philosophical anarchism
anarchists who believe in the 1st three 3 beliefs but not the 3rd. (gov'ts ought to be abolished)
first source of conflict in "state of nature"
scarcity
second source of conflict in "state of nature"
competition
third source of conflict in "state of nature"
motive of fear or suspicion (aka diffidence)
fourth source of conflict in "state of nature"
desire to be "top dog" or "number 1" (domination)
objections to critical citizenship
1. anarchists2. super patriots
MLK's criteria for determining if disobedience is justified
1.
any law degrading humanity is unjust2. any law is a code that a power majority uses to compel a minority3. a law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority group 4. if a law is unjust by its application
three questions for determining if disobedience is justified
1. what sort of gov't is in power?2. what sorts of procedures were followed in the passing of the law?3.
what sort of law is it?
two ways critical citizenship can go wrong in evaluating gov'ts and laws
1. be mistaken that a particular gov't or law is unjust2. choose wrong means to oppose unjust gov't or laws