Prof. James Pattison1
1University of Manchester, United Kingdom
Biography:
James Pattison is Professor of Politics at the University of Manchester. His work focuses on ethical issues in international politics. He has particular research expertise on humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect (R2P), Just War Theory, private security, and the alternatives to war (e.g. sanctions). He has written four books (all with Oxford University Press) and over 35 journal articles, including in British Journal of Political Science, Ethics & International Affairs, European Journal of International Relations, International Studies Quarterly, Journal of Political Philosophy, and Review of International Studies.
Abstract:
Alongside the growth of authoritarianism domestically and the rising influence of authoritarian states internationally, the increase in global authoritarianism has a transnational element, with authoritarian actors working together in transnational partnerships. Those wishing to confront authoritarianism therefore need a strategy for responding to these partnerships. But what should this strategy be? One set of options, frequently defended by commentators given the gravity of the threat posed by global authoritarianism, is the use of exacting, illiberal means against transnational authoritarians. These illiberal means range from the denial of democratic rights to the destruction of property, cyber hacking, verbal abuse, and physical force. This paper argues that, although superficially attractive, illiberal means should generally be eschewed. It first repudiates the (1) self-defence and (2) reciprocity-based defences of using liberal means, before arguing that (3) there are three types of errors with arguments for using illiberal means – the ‘alienation error’, the ‘cathartic error’, and the ‘idealisation error’. The final section explores, and defends, alternatives to using illiberal means that avoid these three errors and that do not involve the denial of democratic rights or wrongful harm.