ABSTRACT
This chapter explores the paternalism in peacebuilding, with two objectives in mind. Peacebuilding is accused of many things. It is criticized for having a predetermined idea about what a proper state should look like: liberal, democratic, and market-oriented. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, paternalism is 'the policy or practice on the part of people in positions of authority of restricting the freedom and responsibilities of those subordinate to them in the subordinates' supposed best interest'. Paternalism rests on an ethic of consequentialism; suspending someone's liberty, restricting their choices, or encroaching on their autonomy is justified because doing so is in the best interest of the target. Frequently when the paternalism charge is slapped on peacebuilding, the insinuation is that peacebuilders believe themselves to be superior to the local population. This critique has a mixture of layers. According to some definitions, paternalism exists whenever an actor interferes in the affairs of another without his or her consent.
