Discomfort with denationalization spans both proceduralist and consequentialist objections. I augment Patti Lenard’s arguments against denationalization with an epistemological argument. What makes denationalization problematic for democratic theorists are not simply the procedures used to impose this penalty or its consequences but also the permanence of this type of punishment. Because democratic theory assumes citizens to be subject to developmental processes that can substantially alter a person’s character in politically relevant ways, I argue in favor of states imposing only revocable punishments. Penalties removing people’s rights and political standing must be accompanied by avenues for periodic reconsideration of such punishments in order to meet Lenard’s standard of democratic legitimacy.
Full article available to subscribers only. Access the article here.
More in this issue
Summer 2016 (30.2) • Feature
Should We Take the "Human" Out of Human Rights? Human Dignity in a Corporate World
In recent years philosophical discussions of human rights have focused on the question of whether “humanist” and “political” conceptions of human rights are genuinely incompatible ...
Summer 2016 (30.2) • Essay
Patti Tamara Lenard Replies
Is the revocation of citizenship—a policy increasingly adopted by democratic states—a violation of democratic principles? In an article published in the Spring 2016 issue ...
Summer 2016 (30.2) • Essay
Equality as a Global Goal
The MDGs were often criticized for having a “blind spot” with regard to inequality and social injustice. Worse, they may even have contributed to entrenched ...