2009Law Culture and the HumanitiesRequires access

We Should Be Liberals (at least)

Paul A. Passavant

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This paper addresses what it means to “critique” liberalism today. Liberalism has been subjected to critique from the left, and has endured such concerted attacks from the right, that virtually no national politician in the United States calls him or herself a “liberal.” This commentary, using John Locke's as an exemplar of liberalism, discusses a tradition of critiques of liberalism that use the resources within liberalism to deepen liberalism's democratic potential. I argue that liberalism, thus understood, enables us to address the most pressing forms of economic and political tyranny in the United States today. Some contend that our future politics should aspire to something more than liberalism. In the meantime, though, let us not be anything less than liberals.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This paper addresses what it means to “critique” liberalism today. Liberalism has been subjected to critique from the left, and has endured such concerted attacks from the right, that virtually no national politician in the United States calls him or herself a “liberal.” This commentary, using John Locke's as an exemplar of liberalism, discusses a tradition of critiques of liberalism that use the resources within liberalism to deepen liberalism's democratic potential. I argue that liberalism, thus understood, enables us to address the most pressing forms of economic and political tyranny in the United States today. Some contend that our future politics should aspire to something more than liberalism. In the meantime, though, let us not be anything less than liberals.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This paper addresses what it means to “critique” liberalism today. Liberalism has been subjected to critique from the left, and has endured such concerted attacks from the right, that virtually no national politician in the United States calls him or herself a “liberal.” This commentary, using John Locke's as an exemplar of liberalism, discusses a tradition of critiques of liberalism that use the resources within liberalism to deepen liberalism's democratic potential. I argue that liberalism, thus understood, enables us to address the most pressing forms of economic and political tyranny in the United States today. Some contend that our future politics should aspire to something more than liberalism. In the meantime, though, let us not be anything less than liberals.

Key concepts: Liberalism, Politics, Classical liberalism, Political science, Democracy, Economic liberalism, Law and economics, Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
We Should Be Liberals (at least) — Research Paper | ScholarLens