z-logo
Premium
Between a principled and a consequentialist logic: theory and practice of secession in Catalonia and Scotland
Author(s) -
Dalle Mulle Emmanuel,
Serrano Ivan
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
nations and nationalism
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.655
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 1469-8129
pISSN - 1354-5078
DOI - 10.1111/nana.12412
Subject(s) - secession , legitimacy , argument (complex analysis) , normative , epistemology , independence (probability theory) , political philosophy , political science , sociology , politics , law , philosophy , mathematics , biochemistry , chemistry , statistics
This paper inquires into whether the three types of arguments usually formulated in the normative literature on the legitimacy of secession – i.e. communitarian, choice, and remedial arguments – are articulated (or not) by separatist parties in Catalonia and Scotland. It concludes that these actors do use such arguments, but they tend to merge them in different combinations making a pluralist case for independence rather than developing monist reasoning as most political philosophers do. Furthermore, it finds a fourth type of argument which is under‐theorised in the relevant literature. This is an instrumental argument whereby independence is depicted not as an end in itself, but as a means to achieve better welfare and governance for the national population. It further proposes a fourfold theoretical scheme that links communitarian and choice arguments to a principled logic based on the belief in the existence of an absolute right to self‐determination and remedial and instrumental arguments to a consequentialist logic that legitimates secession on the condition that it serves the achievement of specific ends.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here