Rahul Sagar – författare

Over the past decade, an intellectual movement known as "realism" has challenged the reigning orthodoxy in political theory and political philosophy. Realists take issue with what they see as the excessive moralism and utopianism associated with prominent philosophers like John Rawls, Ronald Dworkin, and G.A. Cohen; but what they would put in its place has not always been clear. The contributors to this volume seek to bring realism into a new phase, constructive rather than merely combative. To this end they examine three distinct kinds of realism. The first seeks to place questions of feasibility at the center of political theory and philosophy; the second seeks to reorient our interpretations of key works in the canon; the third seeks new interpretations or specifications of prominent ideologies such as liberalism, radicalism, and republicanism such that they no longer rely on abstract or systematic philosophic systems. Contributors include: David Estlund, Edward Hall, Alison McQueen, Terry Nardin, Philip Pettit, Janosch Prinz, Enzo Rossi, Andrew Sabl, Rahul Sagar, and Matt Sleat.

The chapters originally published as a special issue of Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy.

Secrets and Leaks examines the complex relationships among executive power, national security, and secrecy. State secrecy is vital for national security, but it can also be used to conceal wrongdoing. How then can we ensure that this power is used responsibly? Typically, the onus is put on lawmakers and judges, who are expected to oversee the executive. Yet because these actors lack access to the relevant information and the ability to determine the harm likely to be caused by its disclosure, they often defer to the executive''s claims about the need for secrecy. As a result, potential abuses are more often exposed by unauthorized disclosures published in the press. But should such disclosures, which violate the law, be condoned? Drawing on several cases, Rahul Sagar argues that though whistleblowing can be morally justified, the fear of retaliation usually prompts officials to act anonymously--that is, to "leak" information. As a result, it becomes difficult for the public to discern when an unauthorized disclosure is intended to further partisan interests. Because such disclosures are the only credible means of checking the executive, Sagar writes, they must be tolerated, and, at times, even celebrated. However, the public should treat such disclosures skeptically and subject irresponsible journalism to concerted criticism.