![]() |
CiteULike | ![]() |
haelstaed's CiteULike | ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
Register | ![]() |
Log in | ![]() |
Translatio versus Concessio: Retrieving the Debate about Contracts of Alienation with an Application to Today's Employment Contractby: David Ellerman
|
Reviews
[Write a review of this article]
Find related articles from these CiteULike users
Find related articles with these CiteULike tags
Posting History
AbstractLiberalism is based on the juxtaposition of consent to coercion. Autocracy and slavery were based on coercion whereas today's political democracy and economic "employment system" are based on consent to voluntary contracts. This article retrieves an almost forgotten dark side of contractarian thought that based autocracy and slavery on explicit or implicit voluntary contracts. The democratic and antislavery movements forged arguments not simply in favor of consent but arguments that voluntary contracts to alienate (translatio) aspects of personhood were invalid--which made the underlying rights inalienable. Once understood, those arguments apply as well to today's self-rental contract, the employer-employee contract. 10.1177/0032329205278463
BibTeX record
RIS record