Search results

This paper examines two sources of conflict within the literature on education in liberal political theories: the proper justifications for a state-mandated education and the necessary standard for education in a liberal state. After arguing that a liberal state must offer a child-centered justification for the universal mandate and uphold an equality standard of education, this paper proceeds to examine two common objections to such a system of compulsory education in a liberal state. This paper concludes that the perennial objections based upon concerns for familial rights and pluralism do not present a significant obstacle for incorporating a system of compulsory education in a liberal state.

Comparison table of political theories -- Anarchism -- Capitalism -- Communism -- Conservatism -- Fascism -- Federalism -- Feudalism -- Imperialism -- Liberalism -- Libertarianism -- Marxism -- Nationalism -- Pacifism -- Patron-client systems -- Populism -- Republicanism -- Socialism -- Totalitarianism -- Utopianism.

The topic of migration raises important and challenging normative questions about the legitimacy of state power, the boundaries of political membership, and justice within and across state borders. States exercise power over borders, but what, if anything, justifies this power? Is it morally permissible for liberal democratic states to prevent their citizens from exiting the country and exclude prospective migrants from entering? If liberal democratic states are justified in excluding some and accepting others, how should they decide whom to admit? This review examines how contemporary political theorists and philosophers have answered these questions. First, I examine the conventional view that says states have the right to control immigration; second, I discuss arguments for open borders. The third section examines critique of open borders, and the fourth section considers more recent arguments that have been advanced in favor of the conventional view. I conclude with some suggestions for future research.

The topic of migration raises important and challenging normative questions about the legitimacy of state power, the boundaries of political membership, and justice within and across state borders. States exercise power over borders, but what, if anything, justifies this power? Is it morally permissible for liberal democratic states to prevent their citizens from exiting the country and exclude prospective migrants from entering? If liberal democratic states are justified in excluding some and accepting others, how should they decide whom to admit? This review examines how contemporary political theorists and philosophers have answered these questions. First, I examine the conventional view that says states have the right to control immigration; second, I discuss arguments for open borders. The third section examines critique of open borders, and the fourth section considers more recent arguments that have been advanced in favor of the conventional view. I conclude with some suggestions for future research.