Interesting reading. The reading of the 'Kantian perspective' implies consent attained by dishonesty and coercion is ruled out as not viable through words in actual practice of language word usage, by persons, which all know is never the case otherwise rulers would never be able to utilize words to attain consent attained by dishonesty and coercion. Examples: hitler, obama, putin and assorted others throughout history prove the Kantian theory incorrect (imho). That is my understanding. Do you have another opinion?
Heheheheh! I was being funny, not serious. I’m not sure about your take on Kantian theory. One would think that the existence of unethical people wouldn’t disprove the theory that would condemn them, if I am understanding you correctly. All those people do use others “merely” as a means, that is, by violating their autonomy. Though the classical Kantian view has all sorts of other problems, such as what to do with marginal persons.