Questioning the Assumptions of Political Discourse

Much of our contemporary political discourse rests on unquestioned assumptions. This book questions these underlying assumptions and then offers new, unconventional answers.

Disputes over how to use government power assume that the use of government power is morally justified. Arguments over voting and the scope of democratic government assume that democracy is coherent form of government. Disputes over whether certain actions violate the rule of law assume that the rule of law is a genuine political value. Arguments over the scope of discrimination and affirmative action assume that there is an anti-discrimination principle that applies to all parties. And arguments over how to punish corporations assume that corporations can and should be punished.

Each chapter of the book addresses one of these assumptions, and each is designed to serve both an educational and an argumentative purpose. Each begins with the educational aspect by providing the reader with necessary background information and a description of the current state of intellectual debate on the relevant subject. The chapter then proceeds to the argumentative stage by identifying the assumption upon which this debate rests, presenting reasons to believe that it is false, and presenting an alternative resolution to the debate.

John Hasnas is Professor of Ethics at the McDonough School of Business and Professor of Law (by courtesy) at Georgetown University, USA. He is also the Executive Director of the Georgetown Institute for the Study of Markets and Ethics. His recent books include Common Law Liberalism (2024) and Better Ethics for Better Behavior (2021).