Peer-Reviewed Publications
“Capital Flight and Domination by Diffuse Collectives” Politics, Philosophy & Economics (2024)
When progressive governments attempt to redistribute wealth, nationalize major industries, or empower unions, they are often faced with the threat of capital flight. Some republican theorists have suggested that this phenomenon might be a source of domination. However, the prominent neo-republican account of domination presented by Philip Pettit cannot justify this claim, since the class of investors is not usually an agent. In this article, I present a novel theory of domination by diffuse collectives that can justify the intuition that the threat of capital flight is a source of domination.
“Exploitation as Domination? A Response to Bryan and Kouris” Res Publica (2024)
Recent work by republican theorists has suggested that exploitation, understood as a form of unequal exchange enabled by a relationship of domination, should be a central normative category of republican economic thought. In this article, I argue against this claim. I contend that exploitative relations of domination should not be seen as any more intrinsically unjust than non-exploitative ones. Instead, the only reasons republicans have for paying special attention to exploitative forms of domination are instrumental: exploitative forms of domination are likely more effective at reproducing and extending themselves over time.
“Colonial Slavery, the Lord-Bondsman Dialectic, and the St Louis Hegelians” Hegel Bulletin 45 (1):43-64 (2024)
Hegel's lord-bondsman dialectic has been of especially great interest to progressive and radical Hegelians. They read Hegel as giving an account of how ‘lordship’ over others is an inherently unstable and unsatisfying social formation, even for its supposed beneficiaries. In contrast, recent scholarship on Hegel's views on race and colonialism has cast doubt on whether his systematic political philosophy and philosophy of history can be of similar use to progressives. Crucially, however, few of the scholars who write on Hegel's pro-colonialism have analysed its connection to the lord-bondsman dialectic. In this article, I argue for two connected theses. First, I argue that contrary to the hopes of some progressive defenders of Hegel, we cannot easily separate the lord-bondsman dialectic from Hegel's pro-colonialism. Hegel himself appealed to the lord-bondsman dialectic to argue that colonial slavery educated its victims, and could therefore be temporarily justified. Second, I argue that this pro-colonial reading of the dialectic, though largely ignored by contemporary interpreters, was in fact recognized and embraced by a group of Hegelians in North America. They used the lord-bondsman dialectic as a basis for a qualified defence of American slavery.
Works in Progress
Republicanism and the Mixed Constitution (draft available on request)
Philip Pettit argues that republicans should support a “mixed constitution” characterized by a separation of legislative, executive, and judicial powers. Many radicals, in contrast, are skeptical of the separation of powers. According to Karl Marx, such constitutional designs are “the craft of knaves” intended only to make government overly “complicated and mysterious.” In this article, I present an argument inspired by Marx against Pettit’s insistence on the mixed constitution. Once we acknowledge that republican institutions will have to counter the effects of past injustices, making legislation easier to veto through the separation of powers disproportionately favors the beneficiaries of the status quo, and allows their dominating power, personal and impersonal, to persist.
The Political Functions of the Hegelian Philosophy of History: Lessons from Du Bois (draft in progress)
W.E.B. Du Bois was intimately familiar with the philosophy of G.W.F. Hegel, and shared Hegel’s belief that the history of slavery could prepare its victims to bring about a new stage in human history. But the intended political function of Du Bois’ philosophy of history was not, as it was for Hegel, the peaceful reconciliation of his readers to the apparent injustices of the modern world, but the provision of revolutionary hope to the oppressed. I argue that Du Bois’ engagement with Hegelian themes highlights the tension between two political functions of the Hegelian philosophy of history: it can be used both to reconcile us to the status quo and provide us with the motivation to try to change it.
Other Publications
Short response piece commissioned for a conference to Kurt Stemhagen and Kathy Hytten’s article “Pragmatism, Antiracism, and New Democratic Possibilities” Philosophy of Education 78(3):134-148.