I argue that the distance between state and citizen gives state paternalism a pro tanto advantage over paternalism between individuals. Pace Jonathan Quong, the state neither denies nor diminishes my moral status by acting on a justified negative judgment about my rational or volitional capacities. Nor does its failure to paternalize on the basis of detailed information about individuals constitute a source of disrespect. Rather, the less discriminating nature of general legislation both reduces the risk of social stigmatization and avoids a problematic dynamic with the paternalizee. But paternalistic policies may give us reason to be concerned about superiority or contempt in policy-makers towards the citizens at whom they are directed. Governments must remain ‘faceless’ enough for paternalism to operate at a distance, but they must reassure the governed that the judgment that they can do better for them does not conceal the attitude that they are better than them.

我认为，国家与公民之间的距离使国家家长制相对个人之间的家长制具有明显的优势。乔纳森·邝(Pace Jonathan Quong)，国家既不会对我的理性或意志能力做出合理的负面判断，从而否认或削弱我的道德地位。它未能根据有关个人的详细信息表现出家长式的态度也不构成不尊重的根源。相反，一般立法的歧视性较少，既减少了社会耻辱的风险，又避免了与受家长式对待的问题。但家长式政策可能让我们有理由担心政策制定者对他们所针对的公民的优越感或蔑视。政府必须保持足够的“不露面”，以便家长式作风能够在远处运作，但它们必须让被统治者放心，他们可以为他们做得更好的判断并不掩盖他们比他们更好的态度。