What is the tenet upon which the public policy of lockdown by fiat experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic is based on? The work approaches this question about the rationale of the mandatory shelter-in-place policy as an interpersonal exchange of rights, but where the exchange occurs coercively instead of voluntarily. It compares, in positive political economy terms, the normative principles of utilitarianism and Rawlsianism, and shows that lockdown by fiat is a policy that is closer to a maximin equity criterion rather than to a utilitarian one. The work moreover shows, also with the aid of a thought experiment and with factual applications, that the fiat redistribution of rights to liberty in favor of rights to health—from those least affected to those most affected by COVID-19—is, in the main, a policy choice that is to be expected under certain constraints.
The work concentrates on the implications of the idealistic and the political realism senses of protecting classical liberalism for entangled political economy through the economics framework of duality. It finds that entangled political economy reveals a failure of the primal problem of duality, but not of the dual one. The modeling survival of the dual problem suggests that the minimization of coercion is what can (and must) be genuinely solved to protect classical liberalism. The solution hinges on institutional design as opposed to allocative choice. And this solution implies that the relationship between liberty and coercion is itself entangled.
The work concentrates on the implications of the idealistic and the political realism senses of protecting classical liberalism for entangled political economy through the economics framework of duality. It finds that entangled political economy reveals a failure of the primal problem of duality, but not of the dual one. The modeling survival of the dual problem suggests that the minimization of coercion is what can (and must) be genuinely solved to protect classical liberalism. The solution hinges on institutional design as opposed to allocative choice. And this solution implies that the relationship between liberty and coercion is itself entangled.
What is the tenet upon which the public policy of lockdown by fiat experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic is based on? The work approaches this question about the rationale of the mandatory shelter-in-place policy as an interpersonal exchange of rights, but where the exchange occurs coercively instead of voluntarily. It compares, in positive political economy terms, the normative principles of utilitarianism and Rawlsianism, and shows that lockdown by fiat is a policy that is closer to a maximin equity criterion rather than to a utilitarian one. The work moreover shows, also with the aid of a thought experiment in the spirit of Rawls and with factual applications, that the fiat redistribution of rights to liberty in favor of rights to health – from those least affected to those most affected by COVID-19 – is, in the main, a policy choice that is to be expected under certain constraints.
What is the tenet upon which the public policy of lockdown by fiat experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic is based on? The work approaches this question about the rationale of the mandatory shelter-in-place policy as an interpersonal exchange of rights, but where the exchange occurs coercively instead of voluntarily. It compares, in positive political economy terms, the normative principles of utilitarianism and Rawlsianism, and shows that lockdown by fiat is a policy that is closer to a maximin equity criterion rather than to a utilitarian one. The work moreover shows, also with the aid of a thought experiment in the spirit of Rawls and with factual applications, that the fiat redistribution of rights to liberty in favor of rights to health – from those least affected to those most affected by COVID-19 – is, in the main, a policy choice that is to be expected under certain constraints.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.