IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v9y2021i4p465-474.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Democratic Legitimacy of Secession and the Demos Problem

Author

Listed:
  • José L. Martí

    (Department of Law, Pompeu Fabra University, Spain)

Abstract

The normative literature on secession has widely addressed the question of under which conditions the secession of a particular territory from a larger state might be regarded as justifiable. The idea of a normative justification of secession, however, remains ambiguous unless one distinguishes between the justice of secession and its legitimacy, a distinction that is now widely accepted in political philosophy. Much of the literature seems to have focused on the question about justice, while, in comparison, very little attention has been paid to the question of under which conditions secession can be regarded as democratically legitimate, as something explicitly different to the question of justice. This article addresses this second question. After some preliminary remarks, the article focuses on the main obstacle to develop a theory of democratic legitimacy of secessions, the so-called “demos problem.” Such problem, it is argued, has no categorical solution. This does not imply, however, that there is no democratic, legitimate way of redrawing our borders. Two strategies are proposed in this article to overcome the difficulty posed by the demos problem: an ideal strategy of consensus building and a non-ideal strategy of decision-making in the circumstances of disagreement.

Suggested Citation

  • José L. Martí, 2021. "The Democratic Legitimacy of Secession and the Demos Problem," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 465-474.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v9:y:2021:i:4:p:465-474
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v9i4.4633
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4633
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v9i4.4633?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. ., 1997. "The national debt: asset or liability?," Chapters, in: Puzzles and Paradoxes in Economics, chapter 42, pages 198-199, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Margaret Moore, 1997. "On National Self‐determination," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 45(5), pages 900-913, December.
    3. anonymous, 1997. "National book-entry system to be implemented in October," Financial Update, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, vol. 10(Apr), pages 1-3.
    4. Unknown, 1997. "Spotlight: National Food Spending," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 20(3), pages 1-3.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. José L. Martí, 2021. "The Democratic Legitimacy of Secession and the Demos Problem," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 465-474.
    2. Krauss, Steven Eric & Zeldin, Shepherd & Abdullah, Haslinda & Ortega, Adriana & Ali, Zuraidah & Ismail, Ismi Arif & Ariffin, Zaifu, 2020. "Malaysian youth associations as places for empowerment and engagement," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Sirkku K. Hellsten, 2006. "Ethics, Rhetoric and Politics of Post-conflict Reconstruction: How Can the Concept of Social Contract Help Us in Understanding How to Make Peace Work?," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-148, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    4. Starodubrovskaya, Irina, 2015. "Informal institutions and radical ideologies under institutional transformation," Russian Journal of Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 182-198.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v9:y:2021:i:4:p:465-474. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.