Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Just and Unjust PeaceAn Ethic of Political Reconciliation$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Daniel Philpott

Print publication date: 2012

Print ISBN-13: 9780199827565

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2012

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199827565.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 30 November 2020

Is Reconciliation Fit for Politics?

Is Reconciliation Fit for Politics?

Chapter:
(p.74) 5 Is Reconciliation Fit for Politics?
Source:
Just and Unjust Peace
Author(s):

Daniel Philpott

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199827565.003.0006

This chapter considers criticisms of the reconciliation from two perspectives. The first is that of power, consisting of the realist school of international relations thought as well as analogous explanations for domestic politics. The second is that of skeptical versions of liberalism, which view reconciliation as interfering unjustly with personal autonomy. After seeking to answer both kinds of criticism, the chapter critiques liberal consequentialism.

Keywords:   realism, liberalism, autonomy, consequentialism

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .