Kant, coercion, and the legitimation of inequality

References

• Alvaredo, F., Chancel, L., Piketty, T.,  Saez, E, and Zucman, G. (2018). World inequality report. https://wir2018.wid.world/files/download/wir2018-summary-english.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Beck, L. W. (1993). Kant’s two conceptions of the will in their political context. In B. R. Ronald & W. J. Booth (Eds.), Kant and political philosophy: The contemporary legacy (pp. 38–49). New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beiner, R. (2010). Paradoxes in kant’s account of citizenship. In G. Ognjenovic (Ed.), Responsibility in context: Perspectives (pp. 19–34). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Biebricher, T. (2018). The political theory of neoliberalism. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blake, M. (2001). Distributive justice, state coercion, and autonomy. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 30(3), 257–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgin, A. (2012). The great persuasion: Reinventing free markets since the depression. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, C., & Hoxie, J. (2017). Billionaires Bonanza: The forbes 400 and the rest of us. Washington, DC: Institute for Policy Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Cudd, A. (2006). Analyzing oppression. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Economic Policy Institute. (2012). State of working America key numbers: Inequality. Retrieved from http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/fact-sheets/inequality-facts/
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, E. (2005). Kant’s politics: Provisional theory for an uncertain world. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fricker, M. (2009). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. (1982). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilabert, P. (2010). Kant and the claims of the poor. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 81(2), 382–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasan, R. (2018). Freedom and poverty in the Kantian State. European Journal of Philosophy, 26(3), 911–931.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayek, F. (1978). The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herman, B. (2007). Moral Literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hodgson, L. (2010). Kant on the right to freedom: A defense. Ethics, 120(4), 791–819.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kant, I. (1996). Practical philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kant, I. (2012). Religion and rationality theology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kleingeld, P. (2004). Approaching perpetual peace: Kant’s defence of a league of states and his ideal of a world federation. European Journal of Philosophy, 12(3), 304–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korsgaard, C. (2009). Self-constitution: Agency, identity, and integrity. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kosch, M. (2006). Freedom and reason in kant, schelling, and kierkegaard. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kotsko, A. (2017). Neoliberalism’s demons. Theory & Event, 20(2), 493–509.
   Google Scholar
• Kukathas, C. (1989). Hayek and modern liberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Love, S. M. (2017). Kant after marx. Kantian Review, 22(4), 579–598.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGilvray, E. (2011). The invention of market freedom. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mishel, L., & Schieder, J. 2018. CEO compensation surged in 2017. Retrieved from https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-surged-in-2017/
   Google Scholar
• Mulholland, L. (1990). Kant’s system of rights. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nagel, T. (2005). The problem of global justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 33(2), 113–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawls, J. (2000). Lectures on the history of moral philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Riley, P. (1982). Will and political legitimacy: A critical exposition of social contract theory in hobbes, locke, rousseau, kant, and hegel. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ripstein, A. (2009). Force and freedom: Kant’s legal and political philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rostbøll, C. (2016). Kant, freedom as independence, and democracy. Journal of Politics, 78(3), 792–805.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rostbøll, C. (2019). Kant and the critique of the ethics-first approach to politics. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 22(1), 55–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slobodian, Q. (2018). Globalists: The End of empire and the birth of neoliberalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Uleman, J. (2004). External freedom in kant’s rechtslehre: Political, metaphysical. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 68(3), 578–601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varda, H. (2006). Kant and dependency relations. Dialogue, 45(2), 257–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinrib, E. J. (2003). Poverty and property in kant’s system of rights. Notre Dame Law Review, 78(3), 795–828.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinrib, J. (2008). Kant on citizenship and universal independence. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, 33(1), 1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Zylberman, A. (2016). The public form of law: Kant on the second-personal constitution of freedom. Kantian Review, 21(1), 101–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar