Translatio versus Concessio: Retrieving the Debate about Contracts of Alienation with an Application to Today’s Employment Contract
Liberalism is based on the juxtaposition of consent to coercion. Autocracy and slavery were based on coercion whereas today’s political democracy and economic “employment system” are based on consent to voluntary contracts. This article retrieves an almost forgotten dark side of contractarian though...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Politics & society 2005-09, Vol.33 (3), p.449-480 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 480 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 449 |
| container_title | Politics & society |
| container_volume | 33 |
| creator | Ellerman, David |
| description | Liberalism is based on the juxtaposition of consent to coercion. Autocracy and slavery were based on coercion whereas today’s political democracy and economic “employment system” are based on consent to voluntary contracts. This article retrieves an almost forgotten dark side of contractarian thought that based autocracy and slavery on explicit or implicit voluntary contracts. The democratic and antislavery movements forged arguments not simply in favor of consent but arguments that voluntary contracts to alienate (translatio) aspects of personhood were invalid—which made the underlying rights inalienable. Once understood, those arguments apply as well to today’s self-rental contract, the employer-employee contract. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0032329205278463 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60655740</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0032329205278463</sage_id><sourcerecordid>60655740</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c354t-15c151f61c98ca484c8cb8643148b5ce55f3c65b7c130064959744137b87abe43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1LAzEUxIMoWKt3wUvx4G31ZfNekj1K8QsKXuo5ZENWtmw3Na8r-N-7pYJQEE9zmN8MzAhxKeFWSmPuAFSpyqoEKo1FrY7ERBKVhSGJx2Kys4udfyrOmFcAgFrTRFwts--589s2zT5j5oFn89SHyNymc3HS-I7jxY9Oxdvjw3L-XCxen17m94siKMJtISlIko2WobLBo8VgQ201Kom2phCJGhU01SZIBaCxosogSmVqa3wdUU3Fzb53k9PHEHnr1i2H2HW-j2lgp0ETGYR_QTLjemn_b1R2pNDaEbw-AFdpyP241pUKKyBtqxGCPRRyYs6xcZvcrn3-chLc7nx3eP4YKfYR9u_xt_NP_hsEeX-z</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>234905689</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Translatio versus Concessio: Retrieving the Debate about Contracts of Alienation with an Application to Today’s Employment Contract</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Ellerman, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Ellerman, David</creatorcontrib><description>Liberalism is based on the juxtaposition of consent to coercion. Autocracy and slavery were based on coercion whereas today’s political democracy and economic “employment system” are based on consent to voluntary contracts. This article retrieves an almost forgotten dark side of contractarian thought that based autocracy and slavery on explicit or implicit voluntary contracts. The democratic and antislavery movements forged arguments not simply in favor of consent but arguments that voluntary contracts to alienate (translatio) aspects of personhood were invalid—which made the underlying rights inalienable. Once understood, those arguments apply as well to today’s self-rental contract, the employer-employee contract.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0032-3292</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-7514</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0032329205278463</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PSOCEX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Alienation ; Autocracy ; Civil rights ; Coercion ; Consent ; Contracts ; Corporate power ; Democracy ; Employment ; Employment contracts ; Human rights ; Informed Consent ; Intergroup relations ; Labour contract ; Labour relations ; Liberalism ; Natural rights ; Ownership and control ; Personhood ; Rights ; Slavery ; Sociology of work</subject><ispartof>Politics & society, 2005-09, Vol.33 (3), p.449-480</ispartof><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Sep 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0032329205278463$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0032329205278463$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21799,27903,27904,30979,33753,43600,43601</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ellerman, David</creatorcontrib><title>Translatio versus Concessio: Retrieving the Debate about Contracts of Alienation with an Application to Today’s Employment Contract</title><title>Politics & society</title><description>Liberalism is based on the juxtaposition of consent to coercion. Autocracy and slavery were based on coercion whereas today’s political democracy and economic “employment system” are based on consent to voluntary contracts. This article retrieves an almost forgotten dark side of contractarian thought that based autocracy and slavery on explicit or implicit voluntary contracts. The democratic and antislavery movements forged arguments not simply in favor of consent but arguments that voluntary contracts to alienate (translatio) aspects of personhood were invalid—which made the underlying rights inalienable. Once understood, those arguments apply as well to today’s self-rental contract, the employer-employee contract.</description><subject>Alienation</subject><subject>Autocracy</subject><subject>Civil rights</subject><subject>Coercion</subject><subject>Consent</subject><subject>Contracts</subject><subject>Corporate power</subject><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Employment contracts</subject><subject>Human rights</subject><subject>Informed Consent</subject><subject>Intergroup relations</subject><subject>Labour contract</subject><subject>Labour relations</subject><subject>Liberalism</subject><subject>Natural rights</subject><subject>Ownership and control</subject><subject>Personhood</subject><subject>Rights</subject><subject>Slavery</subject><subject>Sociology of work</subject><issn>0032-3292</issn><issn>1552-7514</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM1LAzEUxIMoWKt3wUvx4G31ZfNekj1K8QsKXuo5ZENWtmw3Na8r-N-7pYJQEE9zmN8MzAhxKeFWSmPuAFSpyqoEKo1FrY7ERBKVhSGJx2Kys4udfyrOmFcAgFrTRFwts--589s2zT5j5oFn89SHyNymc3HS-I7jxY9Oxdvjw3L-XCxen17m94siKMJtISlIko2WobLBo8VgQ201Kom2phCJGhU01SZIBaCxosogSmVqa3wdUU3Fzb53k9PHEHnr1i2H2HW-j2lgp0ETGYR_QTLjemn_b1R2pNDaEbw-AFdpyP241pUKKyBtqxGCPRRyYs6xcZvcrn3-chLc7nx3eP4YKfYR9u_xt_NP_hsEeX-z</recordid><startdate>20050901</startdate><enddate>20050901</enddate><creator>Ellerman, David</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7QJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050901</creationdate><title>Translatio versus Concessio</title><author>Ellerman, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c354t-15c151f61c98ca484c8cb8643148b5ce55f3c65b7c130064959744137b87abe43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Alienation</topic><topic>Autocracy</topic><topic>Civil rights</topic><topic>Coercion</topic><topic>Consent</topic><topic>Contracts</topic><topic>Corporate power</topic><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Employment contracts</topic><topic>Human rights</topic><topic>Informed Consent</topic><topic>Intergroup relations</topic><topic>Labour contract</topic><topic>Labour relations</topic><topic>Liberalism</topic><topic>Natural rights</topic><topic>Ownership and control</topic><topic>Personhood</topic><topic>Rights</topic><topic>Slavery</topic><topic>Sociology of work</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ellerman, David</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Politics & society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ellerman, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Translatio versus Concessio: Retrieving the Debate about Contracts of Alienation with an Application to Today’s Employment Contract</atitle><jtitle>Politics & society</jtitle><date>2005-09-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>449</spage><epage>480</epage><pages>449-480</pages><issn>0032-3292</issn><eissn>1552-7514</eissn><coden>PSOCEX</coden><abstract>Liberalism is based on the juxtaposition of consent to coercion. Autocracy and slavery were based on coercion whereas today’s political democracy and economic “employment system” are based on consent to voluntary contracts. This article retrieves an almost forgotten dark side of contractarian thought that based autocracy and slavery on explicit or implicit voluntary contracts. The democratic and antislavery movements forged arguments not simply in favor of consent but arguments that voluntary contracts to alienate (translatio) aspects of personhood were invalid—which made the underlying rights inalienable. Once understood, those arguments apply as well to today’s self-rental contract, the employer-employee contract.</abstract><cop>Thousand Oaks, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0032329205278463</doi><tpages>32</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0032-3292 |
| ispartof | Politics & society, 2005-09, Vol.33 (3), p.449-480 |
| issn | 0032-3292 1552-7514 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60655740 |
| source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); SAGE Complete A-Z List |
| subjects | Alienation Autocracy Civil rights Coercion Consent Contracts Corporate power Democracy Employment Employment contracts Human rights Informed Consent Intergroup relations Labour contract Labour relations Liberalism Natural rights Ownership and control Personhood Rights Slavery Sociology of work |
| title | Translatio versus Concessio: Retrieving the Debate about Contracts of Alienation with an Application to Today’s Employment Contract |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T22%3A41%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Translatio%20versus%20Concessio:%20Retrieving%20the%20Debate%20about%20Contracts%20of%20Alienation%20with%20an%20Application%20to%20Today%E2%80%99s%20Employment%20Contract&rft.jtitle=Politics%20&%20society&rft.au=Ellerman,%20David&rft.date=2005-09-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=449&rft.epage=480&rft.pages=449-480&rft.issn=0032-3292&rft.eissn=1552-7514&rft.coden=PSOCEX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0032329205278463&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E60655740%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=234905689&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0032329205278463&rfr_iscdi=true |