Logo Logo
Help
Contact
Switch language to German
Libertärer Paternalismus als politisches Ordnungsprinzip. normative und kulturvergleichende Aspekte
Libertärer Paternalismus als politisches Ordnungsprinzip. normative und kulturvergleichende Aspekte
Since Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler proposed their agenda of libertarian paternalism, libertarian paternalism has been discussed vehemently in academia and the public sphere in many countries. There is a wide range of views on the possibility of libertarian paternalism as a political order: some against and some for libertarian paternalism. This thesis attempts to present a comprehensive assessment of the possibility of libertarian paternalism as a political order from a more synthetical perspective. On the theoretical level, the author argues that there is an inherent contradiction in libertarian paternalism, namely that the freedom of choice which libertarian paternalism promises to ensure, is due to its general theoretical set-up (especially its epistemological anthropological presupposition), only an illusory freedom. On the practical level, however, the author argues that modern states (especially welfare states) are more or less paternalistic, which means that on the practical level the question is not whether liberal paternalism as a political order is possible, but how to make it possible. Drawing on Ernst Forsthoff's discussion of the welfare state (Sozialstaat) and liberal constitutional state (Rechtsstaat), the author argues that if essentially different and even conflicting political orders such as liberal paternalism want to coexist and function well, we must identify the main order and sub-order between them. In our case: we must identify the core elements that constitute liberal political order, and then use them as criteria for determining which paternalist policies or political measures can be incorporated into liberal political order. Through the lens of comparative political theory, the author reconstructs the political thought of classical Confucianism. On the one hand, the author points out the differences between Confucian paternalism and liberal paternalism on several key issues, and on the other hand, I show how the Chinese government has made utility of Confucian paternalism as a political culture to construct its political legitimacy and conclude with an analysis of whether liberal paternalism might be an attractive option for the Chinese government.
Paternalismus, liberal paternalism, Konfuzianismus, Gemeinwohl, Rechtsstaat, Sozialstaat
Ko, Chen-Yu
2021
German
Universitätsbibliothek der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Ko, Chen-Yu (2021): Libertärer Paternalismus als politisches Ordnungsprinzip: normative und kulturvergleichende Aspekte. Dissertation, LMU München: Faculty of Social Sciences
[img]
Preview
PDF
Ko_Chen-Yu.pdf

3MB

Abstract

Since Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler proposed their agenda of libertarian paternalism, libertarian paternalism has been discussed vehemently in academia and the public sphere in many countries. There is a wide range of views on the possibility of libertarian paternalism as a political order: some against and some for libertarian paternalism. This thesis attempts to present a comprehensive assessment of the possibility of libertarian paternalism as a political order from a more synthetical perspective. On the theoretical level, the author argues that there is an inherent contradiction in libertarian paternalism, namely that the freedom of choice which libertarian paternalism promises to ensure, is due to its general theoretical set-up (especially its epistemological anthropological presupposition), only an illusory freedom. On the practical level, however, the author argues that modern states (especially welfare states) are more or less paternalistic, which means that on the practical level the question is not whether liberal paternalism as a political order is possible, but how to make it possible. Drawing on Ernst Forsthoff's discussion of the welfare state (Sozialstaat) and liberal constitutional state (Rechtsstaat), the author argues that if essentially different and even conflicting political orders such as liberal paternalism want to coexist and function well, we must identify the main order and sub-order between them. In our case: we must identify the core elements that constitute liberal political order, and then use them as criteria for determining which paternalist policies or political measures can be incorporated into liberal political order. Through the lens of comparative political theory, the author reconstructs the political thought of classical Confucianism. On the one hand, the author points out the differences between Confucian paternalism and liberal paternalism on several key issues, and on the other hand, I show how the Chinese government has made utility of Confucian paternalism as a political culture to construct its political legitimacy and conclude with an analysis of whether liberal paternalism might be an attractive option for the Chinese government.