Blind Injustice: Theorizing Anonymity and Accountability in Modern Democracies

Abstract

Anonymity is one of the great enigmas in the history of Western philosophy. The possibility of acting anonymously – without fear of repercussions or accountability – can appear either as liberating or destabilizing, depending on the circumstances. Whereas anonymity is often lauded as a symbol of solidarity among activists, a source of protection for hackers and whistleblowers, and a small price to pay for genuinely free speech, other observers regard it with trepidation as encouraging rashness and abuses of power. Our goals in this article are two-fold. First, we aim to elucidate several dimensions of anonymity, including the variety of forms it takes as well as its potential uses and abuses. Second, we seek to develop a normative framework through which to evaluate contemporary cases in which anonymity plays a central role. Drawing upon several episodes from the history of political thought, we identify three factors relevant to assessing any particular claim to anonymity; we conclude with a discussion of anonymity’s role in campaign finance reform in the United States and anti-masking law in Canada.