Skip to main content

Modus Vivendi as a Global Political Morality

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Political Theory of Modus Vivendi

Abstract

In recent years a number of political theorists, dissatisfied with what they see as a dominant but wrongheaded approach to political philosophy exemplified in what they call “liberal moralism,” have endorsed a modus vivendi approach as a framework for evaluating political institutions around the globe. In this paper I discuss this approach in the face of a serious challenge that can be raised against it. The challenge is to show that as an approach to global political morality modus vivendi is both (1) essentially different from the liberal moralism it rejects and (2) normatively and conceptually compelling as a way of answering fundamental questions of political morality. To satisfy the first, global modus vivendi must avoid appealing to the parochial notions of universal norms, human nature, and human interests that are often said to mar liberal moralism. To satisfy the second, it must posit some universal moral standards of minimally decent treatment (most often, and most usefully, cashed out in the idea of human rights). In this chapter I pursue these challenges to determine whether modus vivendi is best seen as a genuine alternative to liberal moralism or instead simply as a more chastened and sensible version of that approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Theorists who consider modus vivendi in the context of liberal theory include Neal (1997), Bellamy (2002), and McCabe (2011). Influential discussions that look at modus vivendi in a wider context include Gray (2000), Horton (2010), Williams (2005), and Galston (2010).

  2. 2.

    I sometimes want to say on behalf of liberal moralism what Rawls said on behalf of deontological approaches to ethics: “All ethical doctrines worth our attention take consequences into account in judging rightness. One which did not would simply be irrational, crazy” (Rawls 1971: 30). So too for a liberal moralism fanatically insistent on establishing liberal rights regardless of potentially terrible costs.

  3. 3.

    Williams might contest the obviousness of this claim. He builds into his very conception of political arrangements the idea that they are free of a kind of disqualifying level of coercion, which might make it conceptually impossible for there to be genuinely political arrangements that systematically violate substantial human rights through massive coercion. But this strikes me as an unnecessary detour from what we really want to say, viz., that the preservation of social order by political institutions is compatible with a level of moral odiousness that marks a regime as illegitimate. Do we want to say that in the antebellum United States there were no political institutions, or that there were vis à vis free citizens, but not vis à vis slaves? I don’t see what this gains us.

  4. 4.

    For helpful discussion exploring the issues in the preceding two paragraphs, see Wendt (2016: Chaps. 6–9).

  5. 5.

    The general idea of a normative supplement (though not the inelegant phrase) I owe to my reading of Matthew Sleat’s paper in this volume.

  6. 6.

    The locus classicus of this last idea is Shue (1980).

  7. 7.

    I suspect that such a position is in the end unsustainable, since whatever considerations lead one to endorse democracy also commit one to the conditions under which it can function, and these I take to include the range of protected freedoms that mark liberal democracy.

  8. 8.

    Manon Westphal has suggested to me a possibility I have overlooked: that certain evils can, over time, grow from being merely contextual evils to being genuine universal evils. This idea does seem to me something that might be welcomed by Gray’s account, which makes reference to the changing character of universal evils, but I confess that I am not entirely clear how to think about this tantalizing suggestion.

  9. 9.

    This example, and the complications it points to in thinking about the universality of important evils, I owe to discussion with John Horton.

References

  • Bellamy, R. (2002). Liberalism and pluralism: Towards a politics of compromise. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galston, W. (2010). Realism in political theory. European Journal of Political Theory, 9, 385–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. (2000). Two faces of liberalism. New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, J. (2010). Realism, liberal moralism, and a political theory of modus vivendi. European Journal of Political Theory, 9, 431–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. (2011). Modus vivendi liberalism: Theory and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neal, P. (1997). Liberalism and its discontents. New York: New York University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shue, H. (1980). Basic rights: Subsistence, affluence, and U.S. foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, F. (2016). Compromise, peace, and public justification. Political morality beyond justice. The Netherlands: Palgrave-McMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. (2005). In the beginning was the deed: Realism and moralism in political argument. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David McCabe .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

McCabe, D. (2019). Modus Vivendi as a Global Political Morality. In: Horton, J., Westphal, M., Willems, U. (eds) The Political Theory of Modus Vivendi. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-79078-7_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics