Podcast Summary

Podcast: New Books Network
Episode: Philip Pettit, The State (Princeton UP, 2023)
Host: Caleb Zakrin
Guest: Philip Pettit, Professor of Human Values at Princeton University and the ANU
Date: December 1, 2025

Overview: Main Theme and Purpose

Caleb Zakrin interviews renowned political philosopher Philip Pettit about his new book, The State. The discussion explores the nature, function, and legitimacy of the state, examining how states arise, how they should be structured, and what limits—both functional and normative—should guide their power. Pettit’s perspective is deeply informed by his longstanding work in republican theory and his more recent research into group agency. The episode highlights contemporary challenges to statehood, including the balance between sovereignty and decentralization, and offers comparative insights drawn from different governmental systems.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Philip Pettit’s Intellectual Background and Motivation

• Background (02:12): Pettit recounts his academic journey from Ireland to positions in England, Australia, and the US.
• Continuity with Previous Work (03:01): The book marks a “slight shift of direction” within political philosophy while still rooted in neorepublicanism, which centers on the idea of “freedom as non-domination.”
  • “You’re free in a range of choices only if you’re secure in the exercise of those choices… It’s a richer notion of freedom as requiring that you’re protected against the power of others, not just against the exercise of that power.” (03:19)

2. Republican Theory and the Concept of Freedom

• Freedom as Non-Domination: Distinguishes between freedom as non-interference and the republican view that real freedom requires protection from arbitrary power (03:19).
• Implications: This theory leads to demanding standards for social justice and systems of democratic control that go beyond mere electoral accountability, emphasizing protest, legal action, and constitutional safeguards (04:03).

3. Purpose and Function of the State

• Motivation for the Book (06:29): Pettit seeks to address a gap in political theory: that even normative giants like Rawls or Habermas don’t sufficiently grapple with the means (the state itself) by which justice can be realized.
• Central Argument:
  • “If the state is the means whereby social and political justice can be advanced…then of course we’re stuck with the means.” (08:10)
  • To achieve justice, we must understand both the potential and limitations of the state.

4. Defining Legitimacy and Features of States

• Legitimacy (09:19): Pettit avoids overloading “legitimacy,” defining it in terms of democratic control:
  • “A state is legitimate… insofar as those running the state are subject to a system of control to which individuals…have equal access, even if they don’t use it equally.” (09:58)

5. Contrasting Political Philosophers: Hobbes and the Republican Tradition

• Hobbes’ Functionalism:
  • Recognized as “the dominant figure in the history of political philosophy” (11:02), Hobbes prioritizes order and a central sovereign authority.
  • Pettit critiques Hobbes’s dismissal of mixed constitutions (checks and balances) as chaotic, noting Hobbes’s focus is on function, not justice (12:40).
• The Mixed Constitution: Pettit highlights republican systems, which divide power, as historically and functionally significant (13:12).

6. Sovereignty and Decentralization

• Balancing Sovereignty and Checks (15:14):
  • Pettit argues a state needs both a central ‘sovereign’ authority and effective checks and balances to be functional and protect against autocracy.
  • He compares “Washington-style” (U.S.) and “Westminster-style” (Australian/UK) democracies, suggesting Westminster systems are less prone to gridlock (19:55).

7. States as Group Agents

• Agency of States (23:49):
  • Expands on the notion from his earlier work with Christian List: states (like corporations, councils, or churches) have agency—they set goals, adapt, and are accountable.
  • “Corporations are more like human beings than like, for example, animals… they can make commitments or promises and they can be held to those promises.” (24:37)
  • Warns against equating corporations or states with individuals regarding rights (27:24).

8. Collective Power, Natural Rights, and Economic Constraints

• Normative Constraints (29:36): Pettit critiques two traditional limits on state power:
  • 1. Natural rights as pre-political constraints (found in Nozick); he questions their conceptual basis.
  • 2. Dogma of self-regulating markets; he argues the economy always depends on state rules and enforcement (30:57).

9. Models and Merits of Decentralized Governance

• Australian Example (32:01): Praises Australia’s parliamentary system for its effective checks—independent courts, an empowered electoral commission, and transparent appointment processes.
  • “In Australia, there’s an electoral commission that determines the boundaries of districts… almost never questioned by either side of politics because the people appointed are appointed under these conditions of transparency.” (34:02)
• Critique of US System: Compares with US system, where lack of independent electoral commissions breeds chaos and makes gerrymandering harder to prevent (34:24).

10. Contemporary Innovations and The Future

• Citizens’ Assemblies and Democratic Renewal (38:21):

  • Advocates new institutions like citizens’ assemblies for deeper, deliberative democratic engagement.
  • Cites Irish referenda (abortion and gay marriage) as examples where such processes influenced public and policy decisions.
  • “People were deeply influenced by what the Citizens’ Assembly judged, because they said, ‘those are people like us.’” (40:29)

• Outlook: Pettit plans to expand these ideas in a follow-up book, tentatively titled From State to Republic.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Definition of Republican Freedom:

  • “No one is going to be in the position of a dominus in your life, even a nice dominus, even someone who lets you be.” (03:40) — Philip Pettit

• State as Functional Means:

  • “We’re stuck with the means. We can’t just invent a means to suit the goal.” (08:13) — Philip Pettit

• On Legitimacy:

  • “A state is legitimate… insofar as those running the state, are subject to a system of control to which individuals…have equal access.” (09:58) — Philip Pettit

• On Hobbes’s Legacy:

  • “It’s a wonderful overall view, even though it’s a horrible view in some respects, but it’s wonderful in its coherence.” (11:14) — Philip Pettit

• Eyeball Test for Non-Domination:

  • “People in this society enjoy that sort of freedom as non-domination if they can pass the eyeball test… they can look others in the eye without reason for fear or deference based on the power of interference of the other.” (38:50) — Philip Pettit

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Pettit’s Intellectual Background — [02:12]
• What is Freedom as Non-Domination? — [03:01–04:50]
• Motivation for the Book, Critique of Rawls/Habermas — [06:29–08:38]
• Defining Legitimate States — [09:19–10:36]
• Contrast with Hobbesian Sovereignty — [10:57–13:12]
• Function of the State, Checks and Balances Explained — [15:14–21:32]
• States as Group Agents, Agency vs. Personhood — [23:49–29:20]
• Limits on State Power: Rights and the Economy — [29:36–31:30]
• Australian vs. US Political Systems — [32:01–36:35]
• Future Directions and Citizens’ Assemblies — [36:59–41:21]

Conclusion

Pettit’s interview makes a compelling case for understanding the state not just as a normative ideal but as a concrete, functional means that must be carefully constructed and constrained. Drawing on republican theory, he insists on the importance of sovereignty coupled with robust checks and balances, favoring parliamentary models like Australia’s over the gridlock-prone US system. He is skeptical about pre-political natural rights and free-market dogmas, advocating instead for mechanisms—like citizens’ assemblies—that foster democratic oversight and curb the risk of state power slipping toward domination. Pettit leaves open the field for further innovation and urges political theorists to refocus on the question: What does it actually take for a state to do its job—and to do it justly?