Küsimused demokraatia või ükskõik missuguste valitud või domineerivate mängureeglite üle ja – tegelikult – mängude üle, võiks olla kogu aeg üleval ja arutluse all, sest selliselt pidevalt re-defineerides on võimalik nii areng kui olemasolevate soovitud väärtuste kinnistamine ja ülekordamine.

On ju oluline, et indiviid on vaba oma otsustes ainult selles ulatuses, mis arvestab ka teiste inimeste võrdset õigust samasugusele vabadusele. Kes aga käituvad viisil, mis ei võimalda teistel oma vabadust realiseerida, neil puudub õigus realiseerida ka enda vabadust otsustada.

Siinviidatud tekst on 2022. a raamatu Erastatud riik arvustus Kanti demokraatiapõhimõtete ja avaliku juhtimise perspektiivist. Raamatu Kindle versioon on praegu Amazonis alla hinnatud ja saadaval 16 dollari eest.

Kui arvad, et näiteks filosoofiaalased käsitlused võivad olla liiga elukauged või keerukad, siis võiks kindlasti seda teksti lugeda ja ilmselt avastad, et tegemist on vägagi praktiliste arutlustega.

Nii võikski tekst huvi pakkuda kõikidele neile, kellele olulised nii demokraatiapraktikad kui nende mõtestamine avalikus juhtimises.

Head uudistamist!

Kontekstiks

“Chiara Cordelli’s impressive book, The Privatized State, offers a comprehensive critique of the privatization of state services, and an ideal theory – broadly inspired by Kant – of how official discretion in public administration could be made democratically legitimate.” (Stilz, 2022, p. 1)

Terminitest: legitiimsus

“Cordelli’s argument focuses on the value of legitimacy, which she understands as a procedural value distinct from the substantive content of political decisions. Cordelli defines legitimacy as a ‘right to make and impose certain decisions on others, and . . . the standing to make those decisions in a way that results in changing the normative situation (the rights and duties) of those subject to them’ (Cordelli, 2020, p. 6).” (Stilz, 2022, p. 1)

Terminitest: legitiimne riik

“Unlike Stuart, the legitimate state is thought to possess the moral standing to determine its subjects’ entitlements. But how, if at all, does the legitimate state differ from Stuart? Kant offers an influential answer: while Stuart’s decisions are merely private exercises of his unilateral will, a legitimate state is a public power that articulates an omnilateral will – a will that is shared by, or is representative of, the members of the community.” (Stilz, 2022, p. 2)

Eeldus õigest vastusest ja teadmine õigest vastusest:

“First, it gets the phenomenology of democracy wrong. When citizens debate law and policy, they see themselves as disagreeing about questions that have right answers. They assume that there are principles of justice – independent of a society’s decisions – that should govern these matters. When citizens debate one another, they address the question of what these independent principles are. They do not see themselves as simply discussing indeterminacies that could be settled in a variety of equally acceptable ways.” (Stilz, 2022, p. 3)

Kui mul on õigus, kas siis ka võim?

“Why is being right not the same as having authority? I would characterize the Kantian answer as follows: part of treating others as independent equals as principles of right most fundamentally require – involves respecting their capacity to form and act on their own deliberative judgments. We should respect people as autonomous deliberators, people who can reason how to govern themselves, in both private and public life.” (Stilz, 2022, p. 4)

Indiviid on vaba oma otsustes ainult selles ulatuses, mis arvestab ka teiste inimeste võrdset õigust samasugusele vabadusele. Kes aga käituvad viisil, mis ei võimalda teistel oma vabadust realiseerida, neil puudub õigus realiseerida ka enda vabadust otsustada.

“It is true that this claim to autonomy has moral limits: people’s capacity to act on their own judgments should be respected only so long as they are willing to reciprocally recognize the equal independence of others. Individuals who are manifestly unwilling to recognize others as independent equals have no valid claim to govern themselves in a way that denies others’ independence.” (Stilz, 2022, p. 4)

Ametnikele antud volitused saab tagasi võtta.

“Rather, we as a political community have given this administrator the power to define certain entitlements, and we could take that power back, if we democratically decided to do so.” (Stilz, 2022, p. 6)

Stilz, A. (2022). Kantian democracy and public administration. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 0(0), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2022.2133827