John Rawls: can liberalism’s great philosopher come to the west’s rescue again? – The Guardian
In the extraordinary aftermath of the American presidential election, as Donald Trump set about de-legitimising the countrys democratic process in order to stay in power, a timely investigation was published in a New York-based cultural magazine.
The piece examined the angry internal battles that broke out at the New York Times as the paper grappled with how to cover the upheaval that accompanied Trumps uniquely divisive presidency. Confronted with a leader who delights in flouting democratic norms and attacking minorities, was it the duty of this bastion of American liberalism to remain above the fray and give house-room to a wide range of views? Or should it play a partisan role in defence of the values under attack?
As journalists and staff argued online, a prominent columnist, the investigation reported uploaded a PDF of John Rawlss treatise on public reason, in an attempt to elevate the discussion. Rawls, who died in 2002, remains the most celebrated philosopher of the basic principles of Anglo-American liberalism. These were laid out in his seminal text, A Theory of Justice, published in 1971. The columnist, Elizabeth Bruenig, suggested to colleagues: What were having is really a philosophical conversation and it concerns the unfinished business of liberalism. I think all human beings are born philosophers, that is, that we all have an innate desire to understand what our world means and what we owe to one another and how to live good lives. One respondent wrote back witheringly: Philosophy schmosiphy. Were at a barricades moment in our history. You decide: which side are you on?
In an age of polarisation, the exchange encapsulated a central question for the liberal left in America and beyond. Jagged faultlines have disfigured the public square during a period in which issues of race, gender, class and nationhood have divided societies. So was Bruenig right? To rebuild trust and a sense of common purpose, can we learn something by revisiting the most influential postwar philosopher in the English-speaking world?
In a couple of weeks time, it will be 50 years since A Theory of Justice was published. Written during the Vietnam war, it became an unlikely success, selling more than 300,000 copies in the US alone. In the philosophical pantheon, it put Rawls up there with JS Mill and John Locke. In 1989, copies were waved by protesting Chinese students in Tiananamen Square. Passages have been cited in US supreme court judgments. Next year, eminent political philosophers from around the world will congregate in the United States to celebrate the golden anniversary of the books publication and discuss its enduring impact. Half a century on, it seems that Rawlss magnum opus is once again making the weather in discussions about the fair society.
Its central assertion was that freedom and equality can be reconciled in a consensual vision, to which all members of a society can sign up, whatever their station in life. This became and remains the aspiration for all liberal democracies. But did the Harvard philosopher get it right?
The vision of fairness in A Theory of Justice aspired to what Rawls called the perspective of eternity. But it was also a book of its time. Twenty years or so in the making, its preoccupations were formed first by the authors youthful encounter with the horrors of totalitarianism, world war, the Holocaust and Hiroshima.
Rawls fought in the Pacific and lost his religious convictions as he lived through one of the darkest ages of human experience. By developing a comprehensive philosophy of a free, fair society, he hoped to promote a secular faith in human co-operation. As Catherine Audard, a biographer of Rawls and the chair of the Forum for European Philosophy, puts it: His ambition was to find a language or argument that would convey concern for minorities, after the way human beings had been treated in the war and of course the Holocaust.
The eruption of the civil rights movement, feminism and radical leftism in the 1960s lent this task even greater urgency. Much of mainstream Anglo-American philosophy of the time was abstruse and insular. But Rawls produced a book intended to lay out fair rules for a just society. It was breathtakingly ambitious, says Audard: He asked: what was a reasonable view of justice that a wide consensus could agree on. And he did something that was absolutely new. He linked the idea that you would fight for the rule of law for democratic institutions to a simultaneous battle against poverty and inequality.
So on the one hand you have political liberalism defence of the rule of law, formal rights and so on. And on the other hand you had social liberalism, which was concerned with questions of equality, inclusion and social justice. To unite the two in this way was revolutionary for liberals at the time.
The means by which Rawls pulled off his ingenious synthesis was a thought-experiment which he called the original position. Imagine, he suggested, if a society gathered to debate the principles of justice in a kind of town hall meeting, but no one knew anything about themselves. No one knows his place in society, wrote Rawls, his class position or social status, nor does anyone know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength, and the like.
Passing judgment from behind this veil of ignorance, he believed, people would adopt two main principles. First, there should be extensive and equal basic liberties. Second, resulting social and economic inequalities should be managed to the greatest benefit of the disadvantaged. Inequality could only be justified to the extent it provided material benefit to the least well-off. This template, hoped Rawls, would make intuitive sense to everyone who imagined themselves into the original position.
It was a vision that set the parameters of western liberalism in subsequent decades. The book stands out as one of the great achievements of 20th-century Anglo-American political philosophy, says Michael Sandel, arguably Rawlss successor as the worlds most famous public philosopher.
As a young professor, Sandel got to know Rawls at Harvard in the 1980s. He systematised and articulated a generous vision of a liberal welfare state, a vision that reflected the idealism of liberal and progressive politics as it emerged from the 1960s. The greatest philosophical works express the spirit of their age and this was true of A Theory of Justice.
Following its triumphant publication however, the times began to change at dizzying speed. De-industrialisation bestowed a bitter legacy of distrust, division and disillusionment in the west, symbolised in Britain by the scars left by miners strike of 1984. Marketisation and the rise of the new right inaugurated an era in which growing inequality was not only sanctioned but celebrated as Ronald Reagan championed trickle-down economics. The neo-liberal dismantling of the welfare state sidelined the ethos of Rawlsian egalitarianism. By the late 1990s, a senior Labour party politician, Peter Mandelson, felt able to declare himself intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich, as long as they paid their taxes. Other threats emerged. During the 2000s, religious fundamentalism emerged as a sometimes violent rejection of the freedoms envisaged by political liberalism.
Following the financial crash, further culture wars ignited, dividing liberal cities from socially conservative hinterlands amid a resurgent nationalism. A new focus on systemic racism led to the formation of movements such as Black Lives Matter. There is now a palpable crisis of faith in the possibility of the kind of consensus that Rawls hoped to philosophically ground. What was it that A Theory of Justice didnt foresee, or value enough, or understand?
Rawlss philosophical aim was to offer a justification for a generous welfare state, says Sandel, who is a sympathetic critic of his former colleague. This was based not on invoking communal ties or allegiances, but on an individualistic thought-experiment involving rational choice. The starting point of the argument was individualism the idea that if you set aside for the moment all your particular aims and attachments, you would, on reflection, prudentially choose principles of justice that would care for the least well-off.
It was a strategy based on achieving consensus through a kind of neutrality. Interests, along with particular values, perspectives and histories, were put to one side in the original position. Judges and politicians would act according to the principles established in that rarefied atmosphere. The problem raised by Rawlss critics is that, bluntly, in real life people dont act or think like that. From the right, opponents contested Rawlss prioritisation of the less well-off. Why should lifes strivers only gain the rewards they merited, if the least well-off benefited too? On the left, Rawls was accused of failing to recognise that vested interests and big finance use their power to bend modern democracies according to their will. In a major study of Rawls published last year, another Harvard academic, Katrina Forrester, writes that he assumed an incremental path toward a constitutionalist, consensual ideal. That vision didnt think hard enough, she suggests, about the basis and persistence of exclusions based on race, class or gender. In America, it treated, for example, the history of black chattel slavery as a unique original sin or a contingent aberration.
Audard agrees that the books abstract methodology was problematic. A philosopher colleague once said to me that A Theory of Justice looks at issues as if theyre being debated in a Harvard senior common room, she says. Its true that Rawls was too trusting in the US constitution and not aware enough of the dark side of politics and power. He did not take on board the depth of social passions, interests and conflicts.
Nevertheless, she points out, the insistence that inequality undermines democratic societies has been amply vindicated. As divergences in wealth and circumstance deepened, and the welfare state became a minimalist safety net, faith in the social contract eroded and identity politics boomed. Contemporary interest in a universal basic income, says Audard, is one example of how Rawlss liberal egalitarianism is still relevant to the fractured politics of 2020. There is a lot of interest at the moment in his critique of the capitalist welfare state and a lot of work going on in that area.
In divided times though, Sandel believes that liberal neutrality is not enough. The ideal of social solidarity and consensus, to which Rawls devoted his lifes work, can only be realised by a practical and plural politics which engages with real people, with all their varied histories and disagreements.
The liberalism of abstractions and neutrality fails to provide a compelling account of what holds societies together. The political arena is messier and less decorous than the court, which deals with abstract principles. But its ultimately a better way to genuine pluralism and mutual respect, Sandel says.
Fifty years is a long time to stay talked about and relevant. Although he became a critic of Rawls, Sandel remains most of all an admirer: He remains an inspiration to those of us who believe that it is possible to reason together about the meaning of justice and the common good, at a time when we seem to despair of the possibility of doing so. The spirit of his work is summed up in the injunction that we should agree to share one anothers fate. This, says Sandel, is an enduring moral argument against inequality. And a reminder that the world is not necessarily the way it has to be.
Going beyond Rawls, in an attempt to change the world, might just be the political and philosophical challenge of the age.
Read this article:
John Rawls: can liberalism's great philosopher come to the west's rescue again? - The Guardian
- Where are the Liberals When Iran Mass-Deports Millions of Afghans? - The European Conservative - July 10th, 2025 [July 10th, 2025]
- The Supreme Courts Liberals Have an Impossible Task. One of Them Is Charting the Way. - Slate Magazine - July 10th, 2025 [July 10th, 2025]
- Opinion: The Liberals launch another expenditure review: This time, we mean it - The Globe and Mail - July 10th, 2025 [July 10th, 2025]
- Liberals could find out soon whether their rushed projects bill will spark another Idle No More - National Post - July 10th, 2025 [July 10th, 2025]
- Wealthy White Liberals Reportedly Urge Democrats To Be Willing To Get Shot Opposing Trump - dailycaller.com - July 8th, 2025 [July 8th, 2025]
- Albertas PCs Might Rise from the Dead. Not the BC Liberals - The Tyee - July 8th, 2025 [July 8th, 2025]
- Cryo-liberals are still dishing up deranged delusions - The Times - July 8th, 2025 [July 8th, 2025]
- Wealthy White Liberals Reportedly Urge Democrats To Be Willing To Get Shot Opposing Trump - AOL.com - July 8th, 2025 [July 8th, 2025]
- Liberals, Conservatives, And Independents Form Initiative To Fight For Democracy And Freedom - thedailypoliticususa.com - July 8th, 2025 [July 8th, 2025]
- How the Liberals are eroding workers Charter-protected rights - Canadian Dimension - July 8th, 2025 [July 8th, 2025]
- Liberals dont want Muslim women to demand rights in the Hindutva era. Theres no right time - ThePrint - July 8th, 2025 [July 8th, 2025]
- New polls show the Liberals opening large lead over the Conservatives - iPolitics - July 6th, 2025 [July 6th, 2025]
- Another Saturday Night - Liberals Are Patriotic! updated with how to help the central Texas flooding - Daily Kos - July 6th, 2025 [July 6th, 2025]
- Vancouver has a new civic party the Vancouver Liberals - Business in Vancouver - July 6th, 2025 [July 6th, 2025]
- Liberals Lose Trust on Health After 11 Years - Mirage News - July 6th, 2025 [July 6th, 2025]
- Newsom warms to building, but will California liberals allow it? - Washington Examiner - July 4th, 2025 [July 4th, 2025]
- Liberals Are Declaring That The Fourth Of July Is Canceled This Year And Even Threatening To Sue People Who Celebrate For Emotional Damage - Whiskey... - July 4th, 2025 [July 4th, 2025]
- Peter Menzies: Justin Trudeaus legislative legacy is still haunting the Liberals - The Hub | More Signal. Less Noise. - July 4th, 2025 [July 4th, 2025]
- Opinion | Memo to liberals: Diversity can be conservative - The Washington Post - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Liberals Are Going to Keep Losing at the Supreme Court - The Atlantic - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Hollywood Liberals Slammed as 'Disgusting' for Bleating They Weren't Invited to Jeff Bezos 'Vulgar' Wedding - RadarOnline - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Forget female quotas, its mediocrity thats killing the Liberals - The Australian - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Fatal flaw of liberals is belief that being right is enough | Opinion - The News-Press - June 29th, 2025 [June 29th, 2025]
- Liberals want Americans to depend on government - Washington Times - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- If old school white-anting Sussan Ley on gender quotas works, the Liberals may pay a heavy political price - The Guardian - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- HUNTER: Have Liberals had their come-to-Jesus moment on crime? - Toronto Sun - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Random Musing: Why some Indian liberals are celebrating Zohran Mamdani and think he is the new Obama - Times of India - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Liberals In California Are Banning Books Again - The Daily Wire - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- 'Liberals need to reconnect with people's deep feelings of being disrespected,' sociologist says - Perspective - France 24 - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Threat of Trump should drive liberals from the middle ground | Opinion - The Portland Press Herald - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- If the Liberals want to appeal again to aspirational Australians, they could start by taxing wealth | Judith Brett - The Guardian - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- The Weekly Wrap: The Liberals must abandon their internet regulation agenda - The Hub | More Signal. Less Noise. - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Data breach may have exposed 200,000 home-care patients' information, say Ontario Liberals - Yahoo - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- M. imeka criticized the Slovak government after the summit of liberals in Brussels for not diversifying gas supplies - European Newsroom - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- ANALYSIS: David Petersons Liberals are remembering the good times. Ontarians should, too - TVO Today - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Carney Liberals urged to ditch DST as Trump terminates trade talks with Canada - Toronto Sun - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Martin Regg Cohn: History reminds Ontarios languishing Liberals that they need to make their own luck - Toronto Star - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Arab Journalists and Liberals Praise U.S. Strike On Iran: The Iranian Threat Is Over; Trump Saved Humanity; God Bless America - MEMRI | Middle East... - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Conservatives report better mental health than liberals. I think I know why. | Opinion - USA Today - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Federal Liberals reintroduce cybersecurity bill meant to protect critical infrastructure - The Globe and Mail - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Threat of Trump should drive liberals from the middle ground | Opinion - Lewiston Sun Journal - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Opinion: The Tory future may lie with the Liberals - Winnipeg Free Press - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- FIRST READING: All the hidden extras buried in the Liberals fast-tracked omnibus bills - National Post - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Battin wants to reset and to rally Liberals behind taxes, housing and crime - Neos Kosmos - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Chaos over withdrawal of EU law against greenwashing. Last trialogue skips, anger of socialists and liberals - Eunews - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Libman: Quebec Liberals gamble on Rodriguez. Will voters? - Montreal Gazette - June 22nd, 2025 [June 22nd, 2025]
- Hunger strikes! Tears! Arrest! Its been a week of ridiculous performances as NYC liberals chase folk-hero status - New York Post - June 22nd, 2025 [June 22nd, 2025]
- The Trump Peace Prize? Matt Gaetz suggests renaming honor they only give to liberals - AL.com - June 22nd, 2025 [June 22nd, 2025]
- Victorias Liberals saved John Pesutto from bankruptcy. But can they save themselves from all-out war? - The Guardian - June 22nd, 2025 [June 22nd, 2025]
- Q+A | Outgoing Yukon premier highlights renewed energy in Yukon Liberals with new leader - Yahoo - June 22nd, 2025 [June 22nd, 2025]
- Trump Complains He Should Have Won FIVE Nobel Prizes By Now But They Only Give Them To Liberals - Mediaite - June 22nd, 2025 [June 22nd, 2025]
- Putins biggest threat is not from liberals but the nationalist Right - The Telegraph - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Obama swipes at affluent liberals during rare public remarks, says 'all of us are going to be tested' - Fox News - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Swedens Liberals bet to revive a sinking party - Euractiv - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- They Hate Our Country The Right-Wings Accusation Towards Liberals - Daily Kos - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- BREAKING: Yukon Liberals select Mike Pemberton as their new leader and the territory's next premier - Yukon News - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Andr Pratte: Pablo Rodriguez has won over the Quebec Liberals. That was the easy part - National Post - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Why liberals ignored the grooming gang scandal - The Spectator - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Liberals to pass major projects bill this week with Conservative support - National Post - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Liberals Pushing Through Law That Expands Governments Power - The Tyee - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Liberals major projects bill on track to pass before House rises for summer - iPolitics - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Yukon Liberals to choose new leader tonight - 96.1 The Rush - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- MAGA World and liberals have turned on Musk as Trump divorce turns friends to foe - The Independent - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- The Occupation Is Destroying Israel From Within, and Liberals Can't Ignore It Anymore - Haaretz - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- 15 Liberals And Conservatives Are Sharing The Political Opinions They Hold That Align With The Opposite Party - Yahoo - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- How are the Liberals of Bradfield coping with their loss? | Fiona Katauskas - The Guardian - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- 15 Liberals And Conservatives Are Sharing The Political Opinions They Hold That Align With The Opposite Party - BuzzFeed - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Liberals and Conservatives in Canada split on Mark Carney and the country's direction after the election - YouGov - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Moderate Liberals say the party has a choice be a far-right rump run by octogenarians or move to the centre - The Guardian - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Chris Selley: Liberals wrap much-needed refugee reform in a terrible privacy-invading package - National Post - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- 7 Things: Trump and Musk are going at it; Tuberville taunts liberals; angry mob demands MTG stay out of HSV; and more... - Yellowhammer News - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- How a little-known procedure helped the Liberals dodge their first confidence vote - National Post - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Supporters of John Pesutto question Victorian Liberals priorities over reluctance to bail out former leader - The Guardian - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Globe editorial: The Liberals get around to fixing the thing they broke - The Globe and Mail - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- As John Pesutto faces bankruptcy, the Victorian Liberals struggle to unite - Australian Broadcasting Corporation - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Liberals survive confidence vote, as throne speech motion passes through House - iPolitics - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Liberals introduce bill to cut trade barriers, speed up 'nation-building' infrastructure - Yahoo - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Wave of anger could sweep liberals to victory in South Korea election - Reuters - June 4th, 2025 [June 4th, 2025]
- Liberals lead debate on the future of European security in Helsinki - ALDE Party - June 4th, 2025 [June 4th, 2025]
- Milk Act to Bike Month: How Liberals are trying to slow Bill 5 with 4,000 amendments - Global News - June 4th, 2025 [June 4th, 2025]