Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:05:34.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Political Independence, Territorial Integrity and Private Law Analogies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2019

Arthur Ripstein
Arthur Ripstein*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
*
Email: arthur.ripstein@toronto.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Kant deploys analogies from private law in describing relations between states. I explore the relation between these analogies and the broader Kantian idea of the distinctively public nature of a rightful condition, in order to explain why states, understood as public things, stand in horizontal, private legal relations without themselves being private. I use this analysis to explore the international law analogues of the three titles of private right, explaining how territory differs from property, treaty from contract and the specific form of status relations between nations. I conclude with a brief discussion of the ongoing relevance of these horizontal relations.

Keywords

Kantpropertyterritorycontracttreatyius cogens
Type
Articles
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 24 , Special Issue 4: Special Issue on Kant & Law , December 2019 , pp. 573 - 604
Copyright
© Kantian Review, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achenwall, Gottfried (1763) Iuris Naturalis Pars Posterior: Ius Familiae, Ius Publicum et Ius Gentium, In Usum Auditorum. Gottingen. Trans. Vermeulen, Corinna as Natural Law Part II: Family Law, Public Law, and the Law of Nations, for Students’ Use. London: Bloomsbury, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Beitz, Charles (2009) ‘The Moral Standing of States Revisited’. Ethics and International Affairs, 23(4), 325–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bottici, Chiara (2003) ‘The Domestic Analogy and the Kantian Project of Perpetual Peace’. Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(4), 392–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrd, B. Sharon (1995) ‘The State as a “Moral Person”’. In Robinson, Hoke (ed.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Kant Congress Memphis, vol. 1/1 (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press), pp. 171–89.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. (1995) Self-Ownership, Freedom and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordelli, Chiara (n.d.) ‘What is Wrong with Privatization?’. Unpublished manuscript on file with the author.Google Scholar
Dimitriu, Cristian (2015) ‘Agency Law and Odious Debts’. Jurisprudence, 6(3), 470–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorfman, Avihay and Harel, Alon (2013) ‘The Case Against Privatization’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 41(1), 67–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flikschuh, Katrin (2010) ‘Kant’s Sovereignty Dilemma’. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(4), 469–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Nelson (1972) ‘Seven Strictures on Similarity’. In Goodman, Nelson (ed), Problems and Projects (Indianapolis: Bobs-Merrill), pp. 437–46.Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo (1625) De Jure Belli ac Pacis. Trans. Whewell, William, as On the Laws of War and Peace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1853.Google Scholar
Hart, H.L.A. (2012) The Concept of Law. 3rd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, Jakob (2017) ‘No Right to Unilaterally Claim your Territory: On the Consistency of Kantian Statism’. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 20(6), 677–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelsen, Hans (1959) Principles of International Law. New York: Rinehart & Co.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans (1967) The Pure Theory of Law. Trans. Knight, Max. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans (1992) Introduction to the Problems of Legal Theory. (translation of the first edition of The Pure Theory of Law) Trans. Paulson, Bonnie Litchewski and Paulson, Stanley L.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kunz, Josef L. (1924) ‘On the Theoretical Basis of the Law of Nations’. Transactions of the Grotius Society, 10, 115–42.Google Scholar
Lauterpacht, Hersch (1927) Private Law Sources and Analogies of International Law (With Special Reference to International Arbitration). London: Longmans, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Lauterpacht, Hersch (1944) ‘Recognition of States in International Law’. Yale Law Journal, 53(3), 385–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauterpacht, Hersch (1970) ‘General Rules of the Law of Peace’. In Lauterpacht, Hersch, International Law: Collected Papers, ed. Lauterpacht, Elihu. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 149–443.Google Scholar
Lauterpacht, Hersch (1982) The Development of International Law by the International Court. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Luban, David (1980) ‘Just War and Human Rights’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 9(2), 160–81.Google Scholar
Ludwig, Bernd (1993) ‘Kants Verabschiedung der Vertragstheorie: Konsequenzen für eine Theorie der sozialen Gerchtigkeit’. Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik, 1, 239–43.Google Scholar
Meckstroth, Christopher (n.d.) ‘Kant on the Politics of History’. Unpublished MS on file with the author.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart (1984) ‘A Few Words on Non-Intervention’. In John, M. Robson (ed.), Essays on Equality, Law and Education, volume 21 of The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press), pp. 109–24.Google Scholar
Miller, David (2016) ‘Neo-Kantian Theories of Self-Determination: A Critique’. Review of International Studies, 42(5), 858–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niesen, Peter (2014) ‘Restorative Justice in International and Cosmopolitan Law’. In Flikschuh, Katrin and Ypi, Lea (eds), Kant and Colonialism: Historical and Interpretive Essays (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 170–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orakhelashvili, Alexander (2006) Peremptory Norms in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Portmann, Roland (2010) Legal Personality in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pound, Roscoe (1923) ‘Philosophical Theory and International Law’. In Bibliotheca Visseriana Dissertationvm Ivs Inter-nationale Illvstrantivm. Leiden: Brill, pp. 73–90.Google Scholar
Press, Steven (2017) Rogue Empires: Contracts and Conmen in Europe’s Scramble for Africa. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripstein, Arthur (2014) ‘Kant’s Juridical Theory of Colonialism’. In Flikschuh, Katrin and Ypi, Lea (eds), Kant and Colonialism: Historical and Interpretive Essays (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 145–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodin, David (2014) ‘The Myth of National Self-Defense’. In Fabre, Cécile and Lazar, Seth (eds), The Morality of Defensive War (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Scott J. (2011) Legality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, A John (2016) Boundaries of Authority. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdross, Alfred von (1937) ‘Forbidden Treaties in International Law: Comments on Professor Garner’s Report on ‘The Law of Treaties’’. American Journal of International Law, 31(4), 571–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdross, Alfred von (1966) ‘Jus Dispositivum and Jus Cogens in International Law’. American Journal of International Law, 60(1), 55–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy (1993) ‘Special Ties and Natural Duties’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22(1), 3–30.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy (2017) ‘Exclusion: Property Analogies in the Immigration Debate’. Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 18(2), 469–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walzer, Michael (1977) Just and Unjust Wars. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael (1980) ‘The Moral Standing of States: A Response to Four Critics’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 9(3), 209–29.Google Scholar
Zylberman, Ariel (2016) ‘Why Human Rights? Because of You ’. Journal of Political Philosophy, 24(3), 321–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar