Professor Howard Schweber analyzes whether there are limits to what counts as an appropriate justification for coercive government actions.In Democracy and Authenticity Professor Howard Schweber examines a basic problem for liberal democracies. When a political entity is characterized by diversity of identities and values, what kinds of justifications are appropriate for coercive government actions? In particular, the author argues that justifications based on particular religious doctrines inaccessible to nonadherents cannot be a proper basis for government actions that affect everyone. Schweber develops a model of public justification intended to guide citizens in a liberal democracy through the work of creating policies that satisfy their responsibilities to one another.In Democracy and Authenticity Professor Howard Schweber examines a basic problem for liberal democracies. When a political entity is characterized by diversity of identities and values, what kinds of justifications are appropriate for coercive government actions? In particular, the author argues that justifications based on particular religious doctrines inaccessible to nonadherents cannot be a proper basis for government actions that affect everyone. Schweber develops a model of public justification intended to guide citizens in a liberal democracy through the work of creating policies that satisfy their responsibilities to one another.In Democracy and Authenticity Professor Howard Schweber examines a basic problem for liberal democracies. When a political entity is characterized by a multitude of identities and values, certain constraints apply to reasons for citizens and public officials to justify coercive political actions. The author argues that justifications based on particular religious doctrines are not a proper basis for government actions that affect everyone. He then develops a concept of public justification intended to guide citizens in a liberal democracy through the work of creatilC!