无动于衷的私有化

Q2 Arts and Humanities Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics Pub Date : 2023-12-09 DOI:10.23941/ejpe.v16i2.800
Joseph Heath
{"title":"无动于衷的私有化","authors":"Joseph Heath","doi":"10.23941/ejpe.v16i2.800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Privatization of state services has been a flashpoint for political conflict over the past several decades. The goal of this paper is to explain why someone who is a supporter of the welfare state might also support the privatization of certain state services, in certain cases. Recent philosophical literature has focused on the most problematic privatization initiatives, especially the introduction of private prisons and military contractors. As a counterpoint, this paper describes a set of anodyne privatizations, understood as privatizations that no reasonable person could object to. The key step in this analysis involves showing that privatization is not a unitary phenomenon. There are different types of privatization, different degrees of privatization, and also different motives for privatization. There are also important normative differences between these initiatives, which might lead a reasonable person to support some but not others.","PeriodicalId":37914,"journal":{"name":"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anodyne Privatization\",\"authors\":\"Joseph Heath\",\"doi\":\"10.23941/ejpe.v16i2.800\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Privatization of state services has been a flashpoint for political conflict over the past several decades. The goal of this paper is to explain why someone who is a supporter of the welfare state might also support the privatization of certain state services, in certain cases. Recent philosophical literature has focused on the most problematic privatization initiatives, especially the introduction of private prisons and military contractors. As a counterpoint, this paper describes a set of anodyne privatizations, understood as privatizations that no reasonable person could object to. The key step in this analysis involves showing that privatization is not a unitary phenomenon. There are different types of privatization, different degrees of privatization, and also different motives for privatization. There are also important normative differences between these initiatives, which might lead a reasonable person to support some but not others.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v16i2.800\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v16i2.800","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的几十年里,国家服务的私有化一直是政治冲突的导火索。本文的目的是解释为什么福利国家的支持者在某些情况下也可能支持某些国家服务的私有化。最近的哲学文献集中于最有问题的私有化倡议,特别是引进私人监狱和军事承包商。作为一种对比,本文描述了一套止痛的私有化,理解为任何理性的人都不会反对的私有化。这一分析的关键步骤是表明私有化不是一个单一的现象。私有化有不同的类型,不同的程度,私有化的动机也不同。这些倡议之间也存在着重要的规范差异,这可能导致一个理性的人支持某些倡议而不支持其他倡议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Anodyne Privatization
Privatization of state services has been a flashpoint for political conflict over the past several decades. The goal of this paper is to explain why someone who is a supporter of the welfare state might also support the privatization of certain state services, in certain cases. Recent philosophical literature has focused on the most problematic privatization initiatives, especially the introduction of private prisons and military contractors. As a counterpoint, this paper describes a set of anodyne privatizations, understood as privatizations that no reasonable person could object to. The key step in this analysis involves showing that privatization is not a unitary phenomenon. There are different types of privatization, different degrees of privatization, and also different motives for privatization. There are also important normative differences between these initiatives, which might lead a reasonable person to support some but not others.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics
Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics (EJPE) is a peer-reviewed bi-annual academic journal supported by the Erasmus Institute for Philosophy and Economics at the Erasmus School of Philosophy of Erasmus University Rotterdam. EJPE publishes research on the methodology, history, ethics, and interdisciplinary relations of economics, and welcomes contributions from all scholars with an interest in any of its research domains. EJPE is an Open Access Journal: all the content is permanently available online without subscription or payment. EJPE aims to... -Publish high quality original research on the intersection of philosophy and economics. -Support the inter-disciplinary development of the field with critical survey papers covering ongoing debates and information about relevant publications. -Provide a forum that is friendly to young scholars, and supported by an authoritative, efficient, and constructive review process.
期刊最新文献
Carbon Offsets and Concerns about Shifting Harms: A Reply to Mintz-Woo Review of Stephen Engelmann’s Economic Rationality: What is Political Economy? Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2022, 144 pages. Editorial Note Review of Thomas Nagel’s Moral Feelings, Moral Reality, and Moral Progress. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2023, v + 70 pp. Intergenerational Cooperation and Justice between Age Groups
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1