David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Res Publica 17 (2):107-123 (2011)
Political parties have only recently become a subject of investigation in political theory. In this paper I analyse religious political parties in the context of John Rawls’s political liberalism. Rawlsian political liberalism, I argue, overly constrains the scope of democratic political contestation and especially for the kind of contestation channelled by parties. This restriction imposed upon political contestation risks undermining democracy and the development of the kind of democratic ethos that political liberalism cherishes. In this paper I therefore aim to provide a broader and more inclusive understanding of ‘reasonable’ political contestation, able to accommodate those parties (including religious ones) that political liberalism, as customarily understood, would exclude from the democratic realm. More specifically, I first embrace Muirhead and Rosenblum’s (Perspectives on Politics 4: 99–108 2006) idea that parties are ‘bilingual’ links between state and civil society and I draw its normative implications for party politics. Subsequently, I assess whether Rawls’s political liberalism is sufficiently inclusive to allow the presence of parties conveying religious and other comprehensive values. Due to Rawls’s thick conceptions of reasonableness and public reason, I argue, political liberalism risks seriously limiting the number and kinds of comprehensive values which may be channelled by political parties into the public political realm, and this may render it particularly inhospitable to religious political parties. Nevertheless, I claim, Rawls’s theory does offer some scope for reinterpreting the concepts of reasonableness and public reason in a thinner and less restrictive sense and this may render it more inclusive towards religious partisanship
|Keywords||Religious political parties Political liberalism Public reason Reasonableness Unreasonable parties|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Richard Bellamy & Martin Hollis (1995). Liberal Justice: Political and Metaphysical. Philosophical Quarterly 45 (178):1-19.
Joshua Cohen (2004). Minimalism About Human Rights: The Most We Can Hope For? Journal of Political Philosophy 12 (2):190–213.
Will Kymlicka (2002). Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Matteo Bonotti (2012). Beyond Establishment and Separation: Political Liberalism, Religion and Democracy. Res Publica 18 (4):333-349.
Nancy L. Rosenblum (2003). Religious Parties, Religious Political Identity, and the Cold Shoulder of Liberal Democratic Thought. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6 (1):23-53.
James W. Boettcher (2003). “Political, Not Metaphysical”. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 77:205-219.
Alan Carter (2006). Political Liberalism and Political Compliance: Part 2 of the Problem of Political Compliance in Rawls’s Theories of Justice. Journal of Moral Philosophy 3 (2):135-157.
João Cardoso Rosas (2006). Justice and Restrain. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 2:153-157.
Simon Căbulea May (2009). Religious Democracy and the Liberal Principle of Legitimacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 37 (2):136-170.
Fabienne Peter (2013). Epistemic Foundations of Political Liberalism. Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (5):598-620.
Christie Hartley & Lori Watson (2009). Feminism, Religion, and Shared Reasons: A Defense of Exclusive Public Reason. Law and Philosophy 28 (5):493 - 536.
Thomas Schmidt (1999). Religious Pluralism and Democratic Society: Political Liberalism and the Reasonableness of Religious Beliefs. Philosophy and Social Criticism 25 (4):43-56.
Enzo Rossi (2013). Legitimacy, Democracy and Public Justification: Rawls' Political Liberalism Versus Gaus' Justificatory Liberalism. Res Publica (1):1-17.
Ruth Abbey (2007). Back Toward a Comprehensive Liberalism? Justice as Fairness, Gender, and Families. Political Theory 35 (1):5 - 28.
Gerald F. Gaus (1999). Reasonable Pluralism and the Domain of the Political: How the Weaknesses of John Rawls's Political Liberalism Can Be Overcome by a Justificatory Liberalism. Inquiry 42 (2):259 – 284.
James Boettcher (2004). What is Reasonableness? Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (5-6):597-621.
Steinar Bøyum (2012). Rawls’s Notion of the Political Conception as Educator. European Journal of Political Theory 12 (2):136-152.
Thomas M. Besch (2012). Political Liberalism, the Internal Conception, and the Problem of Public Dogma. Philosophy and Public Issues 2 (1):153-177.
Added to index2010-12-24
Total downloads74 ( #19,044 of 1,102,744 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #120,386 of 1,102,744 )
How can I increase my downloads?