24 Donald Allen—Paternalism vs. Democracy: A Libertarian View

2016 ◽  
pp. 151-156
Keyword(s):  
PEDIATRICS ◽  
1975 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-186
Author(s):  
R. J. H.

In a recent volume1 Arrow takes the libertarian view that individuals can and should make a free choice of whether and when they want to get medical care, when given all the information. Pellegrino comments on the limitations of this libertarian view: (1) We are not isolated individuals but social beings whose actions effect others as well as ourselves. (2) Society has now said that it will care for people when sick. But if they are sick because of what they willfully did then should society not provide care? For children it is difficult to argue that they should be punished for their parents' failings. (3) The sick person's ability to deal with "all" the facts is limited, especially so for children. Pellegrino advocates an ethical view of the right to medical care as well as a legal one. " . . . law is the coarse adjustment that guards against the grosser violations of human rights; ethics is the fine adjustment that sets a higher ideal than law can guarantee." It would seem that children should have the right to medical care.


2020 ◽  
pp. 199-225
Author(s):  
John W. Compton

This chapter examines some of the forces that led to the decline of mainline Protestant religious authority in the 1960s and 1970s. In addition, it argues that the waning of religious authority during these decades liberated upwardly mobile white Americans to follow their own inclinations and interests, not only in their personal lives but also in their thinking about politics and society. And it was at precisely this point that many of them developed a sudden affinity for the extreme libertarian view that the use of state power to correct systemic injustice or redirect resources to the less fortunate was fundamentally illegitimate. The chapter concludes with an account of mainline Protestant leaders’ failed campaign to defeat Proposition 14, a 1964 ballot measure that repealed California’s fair housing law.


2008 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 461-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Won-Taek Kang

Abstract. An interesting phenomenon in recent South Korean electoral politics is the generation gap. In the 2002 presidential and the 2004 National Assembly elections, voting behaviour was sharply split between different age groups. A main question of this article is to figure out the underlying characteristics of the generational differences in the two elections and of the ideological division in the South Korean context. Findings show that the generation gap reflects different assessments of the authoritarian period and its inheritance. Young voters took a libertarian view and a negative assessment of the authoritarian era, while older voters, especially in their fifties and older, had a positive attitude toward the authoritarian legacies. Roh Moo-hyun's victory was largely attributed to his successful mobilization of young voters' generational rebellion.Résumé. Un des phénomènes intéressants dans la vie politique électorale sud-coréenne concerne les différences de générations. Les groupes d'âge différents ont montré un comportement électoral différencié dans les élections présidentielles de 2002 et les législatives de 2004. L'interrogation majeure de cet article est de trouver les principales caractéristiques des différences générationnelles dans les deux élections, ainsi que les clivages idéologiques dans le contexte sud-coréen. Les résultats de cette étude montrent que les différences générationnelles reflètent celles du jugement sur la période du régime autoritaire et de ses héritages. Les jeunes électeurs possèdent une vision libertaire et un jugement négatif sur la période du régime autoritaire, tandis que les électeurs plus âgés, notamment ceux qui ont plus de 50 ans, font preuve d'une attitude positive sur les héritages de la période autoritaire. La victoire de Roh Moo-hyun s'explique en grande partie par la mobilisation réussie de la révolte générationnelle de jeunes électeurs.


2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Dʼ Amato
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 173-176
Author(s):  
Kire Sharlamanov

The reduction of the state of well-being is a current topic both in the general and in the professional public. There is debate in the professional public about the reasons that caused the welfare state to decline. An important part of the researchers point out that the collapse of communism, among other things, has resulted in a reduction of welfare states around the world. However, the number of analysts who consider that the idolatical movements and the debates between the Liberals and the Libertarian have also influenced the practices associated with the reduction of the welfare state. In order to understand the differences between these two ideological doctrines, in this text we will consider the basic positions of the most prominent liberal author John Rawls and the most notable libertarian author Robert Noizick.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document