if the Confederacy had abolished slavery but seceeded for other reasons, do you think they would have remained independent?
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.
As Rawls puts it: “The exercise of political power is legitimate only when it is exercised in fundamental cases in accordance with a constitution, the essentials of which all reasonable citizens as free and equal might reasonably be expected to endorse.” [...] So the Lockean notions of justification and legitimacy are both “pushed” toward a Kantian middle ground where the distinction between them virtually disappears: the Rawlsian argument that shows a type of state to be justified also shows all tokens of that type to be legitimate.
In fact it seems clear that contemporary Kantian and hypothetical contractarian political philophies have illicitly appropriated the justificatory force of voluntarism while being (like Kant) in no real way motivated by it.
« Older It's possibly the most popular (est. 300M particip... | Sharpest manmade object... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt