sohimoОмский научный вестник. Серия "Общество. История. Современность"Omsk Scientific Bulletin. Series Society. History. Modernity2542-04882541-7983Омский государственный технический университет10.25206/2542-0488-2024-9-3-90-9LTUCANsohimo-88Research ArticleФИЛОСОФИЯНарушает ли перераспределение доходов категорический императив?Is income redistribution a violation of the categorical imperative?https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3677-801XМорозовК. Е.MorozovK. E.

МОРОЗОВ Константин Евгеньевич, аспирант кафедры этики 

AuthorID (РИНЦ): 1225399 

MOROZOV Konstantin Evgenyevich, Graduate Student of Ethics Department 

Moscow 

AuthorID (RSCI): 1225399 

lovecraft.wittgenstein@gmail.comМосковский государственный университет имени М. В. ЛомоносоваLomonosov Moscow State University202430092024939098Copyright © Морозов К.Е., 20242024Морозов К.Е.Morozov K.E.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://ois.omgtu.ru/jour/article/view/88

В книге Анархия, государство и утопия Роберт Нозик выдвинул аргумент в пользу того, что перераспределение доходов нарушает кантианский категорический императив. Нозиковский аргумент ретроспективного порабощения по сей день используется в дискуссиях о моральной обоснованности налогообложения. Эта статья эксплицирует четыре неявные предпосылки аргумента Нозика: принцип самопринадлежности, ее полноту, отсутствие ограничений на присвоение природных ресурсов и отсутствие ограничений на распределение плодов кооперации. Без дополнительного обоснования каждой из этих посылок аргумент Нозика не может показать, что перераспределение доходов нарушает категорический императив. 

In Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick made the argument that income redistribution violates the Kantian categorical imperative. Nozick’s retrospective enslavement argument is still used today in discussions about the moral justification of taxation. This article explicates four implicit premises of Nozick’s argument: the self-ownership principle, its fullness, the absence of restrictions on the appropriation of natural resources, and the absence of restrictions on the distribution of the fruits of cooperation. Without additional justification for each of these premises, Nozick’s argument cannot show that income redistribution violates the categorical imperative. 

Иммануил КантДжон РолзРоберт Нозиккатегорический императивналогообложениеперераспределениесамопринадлежностьвзаимностьImmanuel KantJohn RawlsRobert Nozickcategorical imperativetaxationredistributionself-ownershipreciprocityReferencesРолз Дж. Теория справедливости / пер. с англ. В. В. Целищева. Москва: ЛКИ, 2010. 536 с. ISBN 978-5-382-01051-9.Rawls J. Teoriya spravedlivosti [A Theory of Justice] / trans. from Engl. V. V. Tselishchev. Moscow, 2010. 536 p. ISBN 978-5-382-01051-9. (In Russ.).Нозик Р. Анархия, государство и утопия / пер. с англ. Б. Пинскера. Москва: ИРИСЭН, 2008. 424 с. ISBN 5-91066-007-0.Nozick R. Anarkhiya, gosudarstvo i utopiya [Anarchy, State, and Utopia] / trans. from Engl. B. Pinsker. Moscow, 2008. 424 p. ISBN 5-91066-007-0. (In Russ.).Chalmers D. J., Bourget D. Philosophers on Philosophy: The 2020 PhilPapers Survey // Philosopher’s Imprint. 2023. Vol. 23, № 1. P. 1–53. DOI: 10.3998/phimp.2109.Chalmers D. J., Bourget D. Philosophers on Philosophy: The 2020 PhilPapers Survey // Philosopher’s Imprint. 2023. Vol. 23, no. 1. P. 1–53. DOI: 10.3998/phimp.2109. (In Engl.).Christmas B. Property and Justice: A Liberal Theory of Natural Rights. New York: Routledge, 2021. 184 p.Christmas B. Property and Justice: A Liberal Theory of Natural Rights. New York: Routledge, 2021. 184 p. (In Engl.).Zwolinski M., Tomasi J. The Individualists: Radicals, Reactionaries, and the Struggle for the Soul of Libertarianism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2023. 432 p.Zwolinski M., Tomasi J. The Individualists: Radicals, Reactionaries, and the Struggle for the Soul of Libertarianism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2023. 432 p. (In Engl.).The Routledge Companion to Libertarianism / Eds. M. Zwolinski, B. Ferguson. New York: Routledge, 2022. 644 p.The Routledge Companion to Libertarianism / Eds. M. Zwolinski, B. Ferguson. New York: Routledge, 2022. 644 p. (In Engl.).Freeman S. R. Liberalism and Distributive Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. 368 p.Freeman S. R. Liberalism and Distributive Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. 368 p. (In Engl.).Anderson E. S. Hijacked: How Neoliberalism Turned the Work Ethic Against Workers and How Workers Can Take It Back. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023. 384 p.Anderson E. S. Hijacked: How Neoliberalism Turned the Work Ethic Against Workers and How Workers Can Take It Back. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023. 384 p. (In Engl.).John Rawls: Debating the Major Questions / Eds. J. Mandle, S. Roberts-Cady. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. 408 p. 10. Кант И. Основоположение к метафизике нравов. Критика практического разума // Сочинения на немецком и русском языках. В 4 т. Т. 3. Основоположение к метафизике нравов. Критика практического разума / пер. с нем. А. К. Судакова. Москва: Московский философский фонд, 1997. С. 39–276. ISBN 5-85133-028-7.John Rawls: Debating the Major Questions / Eds. J. Mandle, S. Roberts-Cady. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. 408 p. (In Engl.).Cohen G. A. Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 288 p.Kant I. Osnovopolozheniye k metafizike nravov. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Kant I. Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Critique of Practical Reason] // Kant I. Sochineniya na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh. V 4 t. T. 3. Osnovopolozheniye k metafizike nravov. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Kant I. Works in German and Russian. In 4 vols. Vol. 3. Basis for the Metaphysics of Morals. Critique of Practical Reason] / trans. from Germ. A. K. Sudakov. Moscow, 1997. P. 39–276. ISBN 5-85133-028-7. (In Russ.).Feser E. Taxation, Forced Labor, and Theft // The Independent Review. 2000. Vol. 5, № 2. P. 219–235.Cohen G. A. Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 288 p. (In Engl.).Mack E. Nozickian Arguments for the More-than-Minimal State // The Cambridge Companion to Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia / Eds. R. Bader, J. Meadowcroft. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. P. 89–115.Feser E. Taxation, Forced Labor, and Theft // The Independent Review. 2000. Vol. 5, no. 2. P. 219–235. (In Engl.).Морозов К. Е. Поддерживал ли Роберт Нозик принудительное налогообложение? // Философия и общество. 2023. № 2 (107). С. 78–96. DOI: 10.30884/jfio/2023.02.06. EDN: TSYXZD.Mack E. Nozickian Arguments for the More-than-Minimal State // The Cambridge Companion to Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia / Eds. R. Bader, J. Meadowcroft. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. P. 89–115. (In Engl.).Huemer M. The Problem of Political Authority: An Examination of the Right to Coerce and the Duty to Obey. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. 393 p.Morozov K. E. Podderzhival li Robert Nozik prinuditel’noye nalogooblozheniye? [Did Robert Nozick Support Forced Taxation?] // Filosofiya i obshchestvo. Philosophy and Society. 2023. No. 2 (107). P. 78–96. DOI: 10.30884/jfio/2023.02.06. EDN: TSYXZD. (In Russ.).Коэн Дж. Совместимы ли свобода и равенство? / пер. с англ. Д. С. Середы. Москва: Свободное марксистское издательство, 2020. 121 с. ISBN 978-5-6041968-9-2.Huemer M. The Problem of Political Authority: An Examination of the Right to Coerce and the Duty to Obey. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. 393 p. (In Engl.).Block W. E. Toward a Libertarian Theory of Inalienability: A Critique of Rothbard, Barnett, Smith, Kinsella, Gordon, and Epstein // Journal of Libertarian Studies. 2003. Vol. 17, № 2. P. 39–86.Cohen G. Sovmestimy li svoboda i ravenstvo? [Are Freedom and Equality Compatible?] / trans. from Engl. D. S. Sereda. Moscow, 2020. 121 p. ISBN 978-5-6041968-9-2. (In Russ.).Kershnar S. A Liberal Argument for Slavery // Journal of Social Philosophy. 2003. Vol. 34, № 4. P. 510–536. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9833.00198.Block W. E. Toward a Libertarian Theory of Inalienability: A Critique of Rothbard, Barnett, Smith, Kinsella, Gordon, and Epstein // Journal of Libertarian Studies. 2003. Vol. 17, no. 2. P. 39–86. (In Engl.).Vallentyne P., Steiner H., Otsuka M. Why LeftLibertarianism Is Not Incoherent, Indeterminate, or Irrelevant: A Reply to Fried // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2005. Vol. 33, № 2. P. 201–215. DOI: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2005.00030.x.Kershnar S. A Liberal Argument for Slavery // Journal of Social Philosophy. 2003. Vol. 34, no. 4. P. 510–536. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9833.00198. (In Engl.).Локк Дж. Два трактата о правлении / пер. с англ. Е. С. Лагутина, Ю. В. Семёнова. Москва, Челябинск: Социум, 2020. 496 с. ISBN 978-5-91603-701-2.Vallentyne P., Steiner H., Otsuka M. Why LeftLibertarianism Is Not Incoherent, Indeterminate, or Irrelevant: A Reply to Fried // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2005. Vol. 33, no. 2. P. 201–215. DOI: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2005.00030.x. (In Engl.).Ротбард М. Этика свободы / пер. с англ. Ю. Аристовой, В. Жилина. Москва: Скрипториум, 2019. 330 с.Locke J. Dva traktata o pravlenii [Two Treatises on Government] / trans. from Engl. E. S. Lagutin, Yu. V. Semenov. Moscow, Chelyabinsk, 2020. 496 p. ISBN 978-5-91603-701-2. (In Russ.).Barnett R. The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. 368 p.Rothbard M. Etika svobody [Ethics of Liberty] / trans. from Engl. Yu. Aristova, V. Zhilina. Moscow, 2019. 330 p. (In Russ.).Grunebaum J. O. Autonomous Ownership // LeftLibertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate / Eds. P. Vallentyne, H. Steiner. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. P. 48–73.Barnett R. The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. 368 p. (In Engl.).Кант И. Сочинения. В 5 т. Т. 5. Метафизика нравов. В 2 ч. Ч. 1. Метафизические первоначала учения о праве / Ред. Н. В. Мотрошилова, Б. Тушлинг. Москва. 2014. 1120 с. ISBN 978-5-88373-382-5.Grunebaum J. O. Autonomous Ownership // LeftLibertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate / Eds. P. Vallentyne, H. Steiner. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. P. 48–73. (In Engl.).Чалый В. А. Философские идеи Канта в политической теории Роберта Нозика // Кантовский сборник. 2014. № 2. С. 46–52. DOI: 10.5922/0207-6918-2014-2-4. EDN: SITCUR.Kant I. Sochineniya. V 5 t. T. 5. Metafizika nravov. V 2 ch. Ch. 1. Metafizicheskiye pervonachala ucheniya o prave [Kant I. Works. In 5 vols. Vol. 5. Metaphysics of Morals. In 2 parts. Part 1. Metaphysical First Principles of the Doctrine of Law] / Eds. N. V. Motroshilova, B. Tushling. Moscow, 2014. 1120 p. ISBN 978-5-88373-382-5. (In Russ.).Гаджикурбанов А. Г. Идея человечества в категорическом императиве Канта // Этическая мысль. 2023. Т. 23, № 2. С. 5–19. DOI: 10.21146/2074-4870-2023-23-2-5-19.Chaly V. A. Filosofskiye idei Kanta v politicheskoy teorii Roberta Nozika [Kant’s Philosophical Ideas in Robert Nozick’s Political Theory] // Kantovskiy sbornik. Kantian Journal. 2014. No. 2. P. 46–52. DOI: 10.5922/0207-6918-2014-2-4. EDN: SITCUR. (In Russ.).Teuber A. Kant’s Respect for Persons // Political Theory. 1983. Vol. 11, № 3. P. 369–392. DOI: 10.1177/0090591783011003004.Gadzhikurbanov A. G. Ideya chelovechestva v kategoricheskom imperative Kanta [The Idea of Humanity in Kant’s Categorical Imperative] // Eticheskaya mysl’. Ethical Thought. 2023. Vol. 23, no. 2. P. 5–19. DOI: 10.21146/2074-4870-2023-23-2-5-19. (In Russ.).Bardon A. From Nozick to Welfare Rights: Self Ownership, Property, and Moral Desert // Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society. 2000. Vol. 14, № 4. P. 481–501. DOI: 10.1080/08913810008443570.Teuber A. Kant’s Respect for Persons // Political Theory. 1983. Vol. 11, no. 3. P. 369–392. DOI: 10.1177/0090591783011003004. (In Engl.).Varden H. Rawls. vs. Nozick vs. Kant on Domestic Economic Justice // Kant and Social Policies / Eds. A. Faggion, A. Pinzani, N. S. Madrid. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. P. 93–123.Bardon A. From Nozick to Welfare Rights: Self Ownership, Property, and Moral Desert // Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society. 2000. Vol. 14, no. 4. P. 481–501. DOI: 10.1080/08913810008443570. (In Engl.).Korsgaard C. M. The Reasons We Can Share: An Attack on the Distinction Between Agent-Relative and Agent-Neutral Values // Social Philosophy and Policy. 1993. Vol. 10, № 1. P. 24–51. DOI: 10.1017/s0265052500004003.Varden H. Rawls. vs. Nozick vs. Kant on Domestic Economic Justice // Kant and Social Policies / Eds. A. Faggion, A. Pinzani, N. S. Madrid. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. P. 93–123. (In Engl.).Korsgaard C. M. Realism and Constructivism in TwentiethCentury Moral Philosophy // Journal of Philosophical Research. 2003. Vol. 28. P. 99–122. DOI: 10.5840/jpr_2003_8.Korsgaard C. M. The Reasons We Can Share: An Attack on the Distinction Between Agent-Relative and Agent-Neutral Values // Social Philosophy and Policy. 1993. Vol. 10, no. 1. P. 24–51. DOI: 10.1017/s0265052500004003. (In Engl.).Чалый В. А. Интерпретация категорического императива Джоном Ролзом в «Теории справедливости» // Кантовский сборник. 2013. № 2. С. 33–38. EDN: QCHMHF.Korsgaard C. M. Realism and Constructivism in TwentiethCentury Moral Philosophy // Journal of Philosophical Research. 2003. Vol. 28. P. 99–122. DOI: 10.5840/jpr_2003_8. (In Engl.).Tomasi J. Free Market Fairness. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. 384 p. 34. Vallier K. Rawlsianism // Arguments for Liberty / Eds. A. R. Powell, G. Babcock. Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2016. P. 161–202.Chaly V. A. Interpretatsiya kategoricheskogo imperativa Dzhonom Rolzom v «Teorii spravedlivosti» [John Rawls’ Interpretation of Categorical Imperative in «A Theory of Justice»] // Kantovskiy sbornik. Kantian Journal. 2013. No. 2. P. 33–38. EDN: QCHMHF. (In Russ.).Flanigan J. All Liberty Is Basic // Res Publica. 2018. Vol. 24, № 4. P. 455–474. DOI: 10.1007/s11158-017-9368-z.Tomasi J. Free Market Fairness. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. 384 p. (In Engl.).Brennan J. Against the Moral Powers Test of Basic Liberty // European Journal of Philosophy. 2020. Vol. 28, № 2. P. 492–505. DOI: 10.1111/ejop.12497.Vallier K. Rawlsianism // Arguments for Liberty / Eds. A. R. Powell, G. Babcock. Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2016. P. 161–202. (In Engl.).Koppelman A. M. Rawls, Inequality, and Welfare-State Capitalism // American Journal of Law and Equality. 2023. Vol. 3. P. 256–282. DOI: 10.1162/ajle_a_00057.Flanigan J. All Liberty Is Basic // Res Publica. 2018. Vol. 24, no. 4. P. 455–474. DOI: 10.1007/s11158-017-9368-z. (In Engl.).Vallentyne P., Mazor J. M. Libertarianism, Left and Right // The Oxford Handbook of Distributive Justice / Ed. S. Olsaretti. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. P. 129–151.Brennan J. Against the Moral Powers Test of Basic Liberty // European Journal of Philosophy. 2020. Vol. 28, no. 2. P. 492–505. DOI: 10.1111/ejop.12497. (In Engl.).Vallentyne P. Introduction: Left-Libertarianism – A Primer // Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate / Eds. P. Vallentyne, H. Steiner. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. P. 1–20.Koppelman A. M. Rawls, Inequality, and Welfare-State Capitalism // American Journal of Law and Equality. 2023. Vol. 3. P. 256–282. DOI: 10.1162/ajle_a_00057. (In Engl.).Christman J. Self-Ownership, Equality, and the Structure of Property // Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate / Eds. P. Vallentyne, H. Steiner. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. P. 345–362.Vallentyne P., Mazor J. M. Libertarianism, Left and Right // The Oxford Handbook of Distributive Justice / Ed. S. Olsaretti. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. P. 129–151. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199645121.013.3. (In Engl.).Vallentyne P. Self-Ownership and Equality: Brute Luck, Gifts, Universal Dominance and Leximin // Real Libertarianism Assessed: Political Theory after Van Parijs / Eds. A. Reeve, A. Williams. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. P. 29–52.Vallentyne P. Introduction: Left-Libertarianism — A Primer // Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate / Eds. P. Vallentyne, H. Steiner. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. P. 1–20. (In Engl.).The Myths of the Self-Ownership Thesis // The Routledge Handbook of Libertarianism / Eds. J. Brennan, B. van der Vossen, D. Schmidtz. New York: Routledge, 2018. P. 199–211.Christman J. Self-Ownership, Equality, and the Structure of Property // Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate / Eds. P. Vallentyne, H. Steiner. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. P. 345–362. (In Engl.).Rawls J. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 2001. 240 p.Vallentyne P. Self-Ownership and Equality: Brute Luck, Gifts, Universal Dominance and Leximin // Real Libertarianism Assessed: Political Theory After Van Parijs / Eds. A. Reeve, A. Williams. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. P. 29–52. (In Engl.).Fried B. H. Facing Up to Scarcity: The Logic and Limits of Nonconsequentialist Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. 288 p.The Myths of the Self-Ownership Thesis // The Routledge Handbook of Libertarianism / Eds. J. Brennan, B. van der Vossen, D. Schmidtz. New York: Routledge, 2018. P. 199–211. (In Engl.).Lippert-Rasmussen K. Against Self-Ownership: There Are No Fact-Insensitive Ownership Rights Over One’s Body // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2008. Vol. 36, № 1. P. 86–118. DOI: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2008.00125.x.Rawls J. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 2001. 240 p. (In Engl.).Mack E. The Self-Ownership Proviso: A New and Improved Lockean Proviso // Social Philosophy and Policy. 1995. Vol. 12, № 1. P. 186–218. DOI: 10.1017/s0265052500004611.Fried B. H. Facing Up to Scarcity: The Logic and Limits of Nonconsequentialist Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. 288 p. (In Engl.).Морозов К. Е. Оговорка Локка и базовый доход // Проблемы этики. 2022. № 11. С. 29–46.Lippert-Rasmussen K. Against Self-Ownership: There Are No Fact-Insensitive Ownership Rights Over One’s Body // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2008. Vol. 36, no. 1. P. 86–118. DOI: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2008.00125.x. (In Engl.).Van Parijs P. Why Surfers Should Be Fed: The Liberal Case for an Unconditional Basic Income // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1991. Vol. 20, № 2. P. 101–131.Mack E. The Self-Ownership Proviso: A New and Improved Lockean Proviso // Social Philosophy and Policy. 1995. Vol. 12, no. 1. P. 186–218. DOI: 10.1017/s0265052500004611. (In Engl.).Free to Choose 1980 – Vol. 01 The Power of the Market — Full Video // YouTube. 2019. URL: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=dngqR9gcDDw (дата обращения: 23.03.2024).Morozov K. E. Ogovorka Lokka i bazovyy dokhod [Locke’s Proviso and Basic Income] // Problemy etiki. Problemy Ètiki. 2022. No. 11. P. 29–46. (In Russ.).Intropi P. Reciprocal Libertarianism // European Journal of Political Theory. 2024. Vol. 23, № 1. P. 23–43. DOI: 10.1177/14748851221099659.Van Parijs P. Why Surfers Should Be Fed: The Liberal Case for an Unconditional Basic Income // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1991. Vol. 20, no. 2. P. 101–131. (In Engl.).Quong J. Left-Libertarianism: Rawlsian Not Luck Egalitarian // The Journal of Political Philosophy. 2011. Vol. 19, № 1. P. 64–89. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00376.x.Free to Choose 1980 – Vol. 01 The Power of the Market — Full Video // YouTube. 2019. URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dngqR9gcDDw (accessed: 23.03.2024). (In Engl.).Otsuka M. How to Pool Risks Across Generation: The Case for Collective Pension. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023. 128 p.Intropi P. Reciprocal Libertarianism // European Journal of Political Theory. 2024. Vol. 23, no. 1. P. 23–43. DOI: 10.1177/14748851221099659. (In Engl.).Reiff M. R. Left-Libertarianism for the Twenty-First Century // Journal of Social and Political Philosophy. 2023. Vol. 2, № 2. P. 191–211. DOI: 10.3366/jspp.2023.0057.Quong J. Left-Libertarianism: Rawlsian Not Luck Egalitarian // The Journal of Political Philosophy. 2011. Vol. 19, no. 1. P. 64–89. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00376.x. (In Engl.).Otsuka M. How to Pool Risks Across Generation: The Case for Collective Pension. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023. 128 p. (In Engl.).Otsuka M. How to Pool Risks Across Generation: The Case for Collective Pension. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023. 128 p. (In Engl.).Reiff M. R. Left-Libertarianism for the Twenty-First Century // Journal of Social and Political Philosophy. 2023. Vol. 2, no. 2. P. 191–211. DOI: 10.3366/jspp.2023.0057. (In Engl.).Reiff M. R. Left-Libertarianism for the Twenty-First Century // Journal of Social and Political Philosophy. 2023. Vol. 2, no. 2. P. 191–211. DOI: 10.3366/jspp.2023.0057. (In Engl.).

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.