This article examines Locke's slippery notion of consensual taxation. Locke insisted that property right entailed that all taxes be voluntary, requiring the consent of the taxpayer or the consent of a majority of representatives. However, Locke did not think that everyone who paid sales taxes was entitled to vote for the government to which they were subject but claimed that these taxes were passed on to, and borne by, landowners. Taxes on land were voluntary in that they were subject to gentlemanly agreements between landowners, whereas excise taxes fell on all without their consent. Locke did not specify a property qualification for the franchise in his Two Treatise of Government, as he did in other writings, but indicated that political representation should be proportionate to tax burdens. Although Locke's doctrine of taxation and representation is far from clear and unambiguous, the legacy of voluntary taxation continues to haunt us.
'Tacit consent' has long interested historians of political thought and political philosophers, but its nuances nevertheless remain unappreciated. It has its roots in the Roman law concept of a 'tacit declaration of will'. Explicating this concept allows a new conception of tacit consent to be proposed, which I term the 'tacit declaration of consent'. The tacit declaration of consent avoids both the triviality of common sense views and a weakness in Hobbes' account. Unlike other contemporary philosophical accounts, it avoids fictions and meets the condition of intentionality. Furthermore, it also advances understanding of the sorts of claim offered by proponents of a tacit consent-based theory of political obligation, whilst facilitating a more radical critique. The tacit consent-based theory of political obligation is not simply limited in application, but indefensible. It unwarrantedly transposes onto tacit consent the potentially fictional character of declarations of will.
The consent theory of power, whereby ruling elites depend ultimately on the submission, cooperation and obedience of the governed as their source of power, is often linked to debates about the effectiveness of non-violent political action. According to this theory, ruling elites depend ultimately on the submission, cooperation and obedience of the governed as their source of power. If this cooperation is with-drawn, then this power is undermined. Iain Atack outlines this theory and examines its strengths and weaknesses. Atack argues that incorporating the insights of other theories of power, such as Gramsci's theory of hegemony and Foucault's views on 'micro-power', can provide us with a more sophisticated understanding of both the effectiveness and the limits of nonviolent political action than the consent theory of power. Gramsci's contribution deepens the analysis in terms of our understanding of the origins of individual consent in the context of larger economic and political structures, while Foucault adds a different dimension, in that his micro-approach emphasizes the ubiquity and plurality of power, rather than its embodiment or reification in large-scale structures.
Grounds for a Purely Procedural Defense of Majority Rule
legitimacy of majority rule could be established. In particular, I show in the following section of this article that a purely procedural justification of majority rule can be provided on the basis of the value of consent , defined as the idea that
Introduction By 2019, the concept of affirmative consent had become so mainstream that it was edited into the Good Boys (2019) script before its final draft. Although the word “consent” did not appear in the 2017 script by 4 April, the
Consent and Gendered Power Dynamics in Sex
Katrín Ólafsdottir and Jón Ingvar Kjaran
research from the United States has indicated, violence in relation to young people's dating life is a big problem ( Hirsch et al. 2018 ; Jozkowski et al. 2014 ). Furthermore, research show young people don't understand what sexual consent really means and
A Case Study of Norman Douglas
Rachel Hope Cleves
activists responded by sharply differentiating between their own advocacy for the legitimization and legalization of sexual relations between consenting adults and any defense of intergenerational sexual relations. The line was drawn within internal debates
Student Activism against Rape Culture
“normalize candid discussion about consent” (Fieldnotes October 2018) among students on campus. Their efforts resulted in a four-minute video developed for incoming freshmen that challenged prevalent misconceptions about topics such as relationship violence
Negotiating the Unforeseen Challenges of Ethnographic Fieldwork
Jocelyn D. Avery
received approval from the university Ethics Review Board (ERB). Approval was also sought and gained from the Southern State Education Department (SSED) to conduct research at one of their colleges. 2 In addition, consent was gained from the dean of the
The basic human right to sexual autonomy and self‐determination encompasses two sides: it enshrines both the right to engage in wanted sexuality on the one hand, and the right to be free and protected from unwanted sexuality, from sexual abuse and sexual violence on the other. This concept elaborated by the European Court of Human Rights, in the light of European legal consensus, suggests that the age of consent for sexual relations (outside of relationships of authority and outside of pornography and prostitution) should be set between 12 and 16 years. In any event the age of criminal responsibility should be the same as the age of sexual consent.