|
Nozick: --It is first and foremost a theory of moral constraints rather than of moral goals; nozick is not primarily interested in maximizing anything, not cooperation, or control over our ives, or happiness, or even the nonviolation of rights. He holds that there are things one must not do to people, irrespective of the consequences --Lockean proviso can be based on individual rights, not necessarily on common good --the minimal state could have arisen without violations of individualsĄŻ rights, but that anhy more extensive state could not Kaus: -The trouble with our society is not just that the rich have too much money, in Kaus's view, but that their money insulates them, much more than it used to, from the common life. It is the "routine acceptance of `professionals' as a class apart" and the "smug content" of the affluent and educated for the "demographically inferior" that poses the greatest threat to civic life, according to Kaus. -Outlining a strategy of "civic liberalism," he insists that public policy should seek not to undo the effects of the market, which inevitably promotes inequality of income, but to limit its scope--that is, "to restrict the sphere of life in which money matters." Where "money liberals" worry about distributing and redistributing income, Kaus writes, "civic liberals" worry about "rebuilding, preserving, and strengthening community institutions in which income is irrelevant" and about "preventing their corruption by the forces of the market." Mr.
Approximate Word count = 652
Approximate Pages = 2.6
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
