Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Judgmental privacy and the special obligations of leadership

Terry L. Price

Keywords: privacy; political leadership; autonomy; liberalism; John Stuart Mill; sex scandals; special obligations


This article defends the claim that followers are justified in using what would be considered private behavior to assess a leader's fitness. In defense of this claim, I make a liberal, autonomy-based argument. The argument is liberal in that it does not appeal to the intrinsic wrongness of the behavior in question. Rather, it appeals to the fact that leaders have voluntarily taken on special obligations to followers to behave in ways that promote, rather than detract from, the causes to which they are collectively committed. To make this argument, I consider whether Mill's analysis in On Liberty could be applied in leadership contexts to derive some special privacy protection for leaders, and I conclude that such an application ultimately fails. I conclude that judging the private behavior of our leaders does not inappropriately threaten the value of autonomy when their behavior would interfere with discharging these obligations. The special obligations of leaders extend, then, even into their private lives.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.