Intergenerational Justice and the “Hereditary Principle”

Abstract

Is it possible to justify the passing of property rights from one generation to the next, and the acquisition of citizenship rights, on the basis of inheritance? This paper raises two considerations which indicate that typical luck egalitarian arguments against the operation of any “hereditary principle” in the intergenerational succession of economic and political rights are not conclusive. Both considerations concern autonomy. The concept of inheritance can be seen to be justified when the social connectedness of individuals is appreciated – inheritance reflects the embeddedness of individuals in the lives and projects of others both in the past and in the future. So while there may be good liberal reasons to reject inheritance as a mode of property succession, for example that it might perpetuate or initiate unequal distributions, these do not begin to suggest that nothing can be said in its favor, morally speaking, if the autonomy of individuals is understood to be situated in particular social structures. A similar case can be made for the claim that rights to citizenship are best seen as reflecting a “duty to govern”; those most embedded in the life-ways of a community would appear to be best placed to shoulder this duty. Finally, the paper considers an argument from “familiarity,” which suggests that it is not wrong to favor to some extent individuals whose genetic and cultural characteristics reflect one’s own, and concludes that such a consideration can play a role in justifying to some extent the justification of a “hereditary principle.”