Liberal Principles and Kant's Perpetual Peace

598 Words2 Pages

According to Doyle, the three liberal principles that if applied collectively lead to Kant’s, Perpetual Peace, are freedom from arbitrary authority, protection and promotion of the capacity and opportunities of freedom also know as “positive peace,” and democratic participation or representation. If all three of these are applied together than Doyle argues liberalism meets Kant’s standards of Perpetual Peace. If we first look at freedom from arbitrary authority, this means that peoples have the freedom of speech and press, equality under law, and the right to buy and sell property without fear of arbitrary seizure. This is connect to Kant’s idea of cosmopolitan law in the way that through these freedoms and similarities in norms as well as open trade will foster a brotherhood both internally and between states which makes it less likely for these states to go to war. However, alone this cannot provide perpetual peace because if there is not a confederation of free states to deter attacks there is still a chance of war if an actor wishes to increase its overall power. While also needing a republican constitution because a king is more likely to go to war …show more content…

Both Doyle and Kant argue that it is necessary for the public to be in charge of the decision to go to war because they are the ones who feel the backlash from it, and as such it is needed to elect officials who will represent the world’s peace interests at all times, hence the idea of the moral politician. The reason this principle cannot stand on its own is that if they are the only democratic process there is no way they will be able to protect that idea against the entire globe, hence the requirement of the confederation. Also cosmopolitan law is important because this idea would make it so the public had a mutual brotherhood in the idea of

Open Document