Michel Seymour fills an important gap in Rawlsian theory. In fact, his Rawls
inspired normative theory of collective rights is unprecedented. Likewise, his
ideal theory of a primary right to internal self-determination (ISD) is a welcome
contribution to the issue of collective rights. That said, his non-ideal theory –
a remedial right only to secession – seems rather toothless in cases of noncompliance.
In particular, Seymour leaves us with no guidance in the case of
transition countries a…
Read moreMichel Seymour fills an important gap in Rawlsian theory. In fact, his Rawls
inspired normative theory of collective rights is unprecedented. Likewise, his
ideal theory of a primary right to internal self-determination (ISD) is a welcome
contribution to the issue of collective rights. That said, his non-ideal theory –
a remedial right only to secession – seems rather toothless in cases of noncompliance.
In particular, Seymour leaves us with no guidance in the case of
transition countries and situations of tension where we need to know whether
the ISD of the minority (the stateless) people is enabling or disabling for the ISD
of the majority (the state owning) people. The paper concludes that borrowing
from Aristotle, as Rawls does, offers more in the way of guidance when it comes
to these issues.