Political obligation refers to the moral obligation of citizens to obey the law of their state and to the existence, nature, and justification of a special relationship between a government and its constituents. This volume in the Contemporary Anarchist Studies series challenges this relationship, seeking to define and defend the position of critical philosophical anarchism against alternative approaches to the issue of justification of political institutions. The book sets out to demonstrate the value of taking an anarchist approach to the problem of political authority, looking at theories of natural duty, state justification, natural duty of justice, fairness, political institutions, and more. It argues that the anarchist perspective is in fact indispensable to theorists of political obligation and can improve our views of political authority and social relations. This accessible book builds on the works of philosophical anarchists such as John Simmons and Leslie Green, and discusses key theorists, including Rousseau, Rawls, and Horton. This key resource will make an important contribution to anarchist political theory and to anarchist studies more generally.

This book examines the central questions concerning the duty to obey the law: the meaning of this duty; whether and where it should be acknowledged; and whether and when it should be disregarded. Many contemporary philosophers deny the very existence of this duty, but take a cautious stance towards political disobedience. This 'toothless anarchism', Professor Gans argues, should be discarded in favour of a converse position confirming the existence of a duty to obey the law which can be outweighed by values and principles of political morality. Informed by the Israeli experience of political disobedience motivated by radically differing moral outlooks, the author sets out the principles which should guide our attitude to law and political authority even amidst clashing ideologies and irreconcilable moralities. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of law, philosophy and politics, and anyone concerned with the individual's responsibilities toward his or her political community.

Political obligation is concerned with the clash between the individual’s claim to self-governance and the right of the state to claim obedience. It is a central and ancient problem in political philosophy. In this authoritative introduction, Dudley Knowles frames the problem of obligation in terms of the duties citizens have to the state and each other. Drawing on a wide range of key works in political philosophy, from Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, David Hume and G. W. F. Hegel to John Rawls, A. John Simmons, Joseph Raz and Ronald Dworkin, Political Obligation: A Critical Introduction is an ideal starting point for those coming to the topic for the first time, as well as being an original and distinctive contribution to the literature. Knowles distinguishes the philosophical problem of obligation - which types of argument may successfully ground the legitimacy of the state and the duties of citizens - from the political problem of obligation - whether successful arguments apply to the actual citizens of particular states. Against the anarchist and modern skeptics, Knowles claims that a plurality of arguments promise success when carefully formulated and defended, and discusses in turn ancient and modern theories of social contract and consent, fairness and gratitude, utilitarianism, justice and a Samaritan duty of care for others. Against modern communitarians, he defends a distinctive liberalism: ‘the state proposes, the citizen disposes’.

This book highlights the recent rise in interest in anarchist theory and practice attempting to bridge the gap between anarchist activism on the streets and anarchist studies in the academia. Bringing together some of the most prominent voices in contemporary anarchism in the academy, it includes pieces written on anarchist theory, pedagogy, methodologies, praxis, and the future.

What is the purpose and justification of government? Upon what grounds is a regime considered legitimate? These perennial questions take on added significance at a time when legislative paternalism produces regulations which conflict with individual freedom of choice; special interest groups demand not only to be heard but to have their ideals given the force of law; and when there exists a clear and present danger that the actions of government may threaten the very persons it was designed to protect. Richard Taylor argues that we must find "the role of government which is least incompatible with freedom and at the same time adequate to the basic needs of protection." Of course, many questions arise when pursuing this goal. What principle(s) should guide us in our quest? Recognizing that government is a coercive force, what restrictions could be placed upon the power of the state without rendering it impotent? Can individual freedom of expression be conciled with the actions of social groups which seek to impose their will on others? Should government's power be used to protect individuals from the consequences of their own freely chosen actions, especially when these consequences impact only upon the individuals themselves? What is the appropriate scope and range of the government's protective powers; to what lengths may a political regime go to protect its citizenry? Professor Taylor confronts these complex questions with clarity, candor and conviction. His analytic mind slices through tangled issues to expose the core of each problem. He argues forcefully for the position that effective government is minimal government. The primary function of political regimes should be to protect citizens from one another and from outside enemies. Beyond this basic role each additional exercise of the state's coercive power must be carefully scrutinized.

With a new preface, Robert Paul Wolff's classic analysis of the foundations of the authority of the state and the problems of political authority and moral autonomy in a democracy.

How should we understand the relationship between citizens and governments, and what are the obligations of citizens? In this substantially revised new edition of an influential text, John Horton challenges dominant theories by offering an 'associative' account focusing particularly on what it is to be a member of a political community.