special report liberalism east west 2009

8/3/2019 Special Report Liberalism East West 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-report-liberalism-east-west-2009 1/176

LIBERALISMS

IN

EAST ANDWEST

The record of a conference held at theUniversity of Oxford in January 2009



Poducd b Mdicl Inomics Uni, NDCLS, Univsi o Ood



TABLE OF CONTENTS

PrefaCe 5

Part I: the CONCePtUaL CaCOPhONy

Inoducion: timo Gon as 7

1. WestNo amic: Pul S 9

euop: Pi rosnvllon 17Lin amic: Lunc Wid 19Db 24

2. EastJpn: Koicio Msud 29Indi: rjv Bgv 33Cin: Wng Sogung 36Db 41

Part II: COre theMeS Of LIBeraLISM

Inoducion: Micl fdn 47

3. IndividualismSvn Luks 51Col hoon 55Jusin Lcoi 59

Db 62

4. ToleranceSusn Mndus 65Jcob Lv 70rjv Bgv 73Db 76

3



5. MarketsSmul Bin 85Zng Wiing 89Su Wi 91Db 94

6. UniversalismJon Iknb 103Inou tsuo 111Pi hssn 114Db 116

Part III: ChaLLeNGeS aND CONCLUSIONS

Inoducion: aln rn 121

7. Who decides what liberalism is? And how?Ivn Ksv 125Jn-Wn Müll 131Db 136

8. Concluding Debateronld Dwokin 145Db 151

aPPeNDIx: a LIBeraL traNSLatION, tIMOthy GartON aSh 159

OrGaNISING COMMIttee 163

VISItING SPeaKerS 165

Other PartICIPaNtS 175

SPONSOrING INStItUtIONS 176

4

LIBERALISMS IN EAST AND WEST



PrefaCe

all impon concps consd bu som mo consd nos. fw v bcom mo consd ov ls o s nLiblism. In Jnu 2009, scols om euop, amics, Indi,Cin nd Jpn cm og Ood Univsi, o look odinil divs usgs o m in Ws nd es nd o sk w

jusiid mns w v (i n) o dmining o pscibing is conns.tis is nscip o connc. Wi on cpion, wic is nod,nscibd inoduco mks v bn d nd ppovd b spks,bu som os in nscipion will min—spcill in dbscions. tis publicion sould o no b miskn o n did

volum. I is cod o goup o scols inking loud.

W mos gul o Pul fl nd is m euopum—floin ri, J homn nd Zuzn Ksáková—o immense o wn ino mking oiginl nscip, nd o Dominic Bubidg ndPcj Ss o i pin nd skilul dioil wok. W would lik op ou nks o ll insiuionl nd inncil sponsos o connc, wo lisd nd o is volum.

The Organising Committee

5



Part I: the CONCePtUaL CaCOPhONy

Introduction: Timothy Garton Ash*

t oiginl id o is connc cm wn som o us w lkingbou pculi usg o wod Liblism in amicn – b wic Imn US – poliicl discous. tis usg is is mos m on amicn rig, w wod Liblism mns, ougl spking, combinion o big govnmn nd onicion. I is lcd in book ilssuc s Liberal Fascism ; Liberalism Kills Kids ; Treason (b ann Coul);Deliver us from Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism and Liberalism (b Snhnni o fo Nws) nd is sonising compnion volum, lso b Snhnni, Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty over Liberalism. tis

usg is, I would submi, ul ccnic in sic sns o m.Unounl, is sunning o L-wod is no conind o amicn rig. I domins public discous in US. fo mpl, wnhil Clinon ws skd in 2008 US psidnil pim dbs odin “Libl” nd s i s ws on, s sid libl ws goodwod bcus i usd o mn dom bu now i mns big govnmn, so‘I p wod pogssiv, wic s l amicn mning’. ‘So ouwouldn’ us wod libl?’ skd modo, o wic s noddd.P o con o is connc is, o cous, ivl o Bck

Obm – wo, mn o us would ink, is cll libl in conn. Will som poin mp o bili wod, s wll s ing?

In euop, on o nd, wn popl s Liblism onmn w amicn rig mos liks, nml anglo-Son, No-Libl mk conomics. fo mpl, in db on eU’sConsiuionl t, fnc ws muc ciicisd o inoducing molmns o anglo-Son sl mk cpilism clld Liblism.Jcqus Cic, in dnding , sid logic o is bovll “no libl”, i.. i is good ing. Wn, owv, fnc vod

gins , consviv columnis in US wo is sowdfnc o b oll coupd b Liblism. t w v jus lil bio concpul ccopon wic w ddssing .

7* ts mks w inndd s n inoducion o connc s wol.



W mping o look Ws no jus s US nd Wsneuop, bu including wol o amic nd euop. and bond ,w wn o look w Ws s diionll clld es. In lg con o w I cll nissnc o asi, qusion is cll posd: w dos Liblism mn in Cin o in Indi o in Jpn?

W will, owv, onl g so in pusuing wod Liblism. Oussumpion is no ving is clld Liblism is in cLiblism nd – mo imponl pps – qui lo o liblconn (picull in non-Wsn wold) will b ound und din lbl o lg. Ou woking ssumpion is cin coconcps o concpul cluss og din Liblism o dinkinds o Liblism.

Sl-vidnl, w no going o lk bou ll o m. W v cosnou opics, pcisl bcus sm o us mos insing on coss-culul compison: Individulism, no jus bcus mn would gu io b co consiun o Liblism, bu lso bcus clim is onmd esn culus mo collcivis; tolnc; Mks, w qusion is posd o w n ou cn v Liblism wioumks nd vic vs; nd n, obviousl, Univslism, wic is, in sns, qusion o wol connc. W sll n o look wodins w Liblism is, nd ow. I op will lso opn up lmns

o possibl sc gnd. W conclud wi on o mos ousndinglibl inks in Ws, ronld Dwokin.


8



1. WEST

North America: Paul Starr

tnk ou o inoducion nd binging us og n conomicll

pilous momn bu on wic, ls om n amicn poin o viw,sms poliicll pomising. I is wi oug o puing is momnino pspciv nd ulilling m cg o discuss w is disinciv bouamicn Liblism I v viold timo’s diciv o spk o cu nd, insd, v commid m ougs o pp.

a poliicl idolog cquis is diniion no onl om wiin, no onl om woking ou o is own pincipls, bu lso oug w i s oig ov nd w i s o ig gins. Libl oug nd insiuionsv vid ov im nd om on coun o no o n numb o sons. t isoicl momn wn Liblism mgd o ook oo in soci m v lsing impc on ow i is undsood . tpicul movmns o pis v bn is cis m v ln i disinciv inlcion. Pculi spcs o nionl con m vld os movmns o giv libl ids n indignous pssion ilocl snimns nd cicumsncs. Bu mong mn isoicl ndconul inluncs, non s bn mo impon n illiblocs Libls conon.

Liblism is in is insnc pilosop o opposiion – diningi. Is dining suggls v din ims bn gins fudlism,absoluism, tocc, Colonilism nd fscism, gins illibl omso Consvism nd Populism, nd somims gins illiblndncis mongs Libls mslvs. Wv ig, conlic isl on bcoms souc o sucu. Somims conlic igns cons bwn Libls nd i dvsis ino in, sp poli.and somims, b lding o compomiss, i blus dincs,picull i conlic bcoms snciid s ms o pincipl nd

solidiid in insiuions. Conlic igus cnll in omion o amicn Liblism. In US, Liblism s bn dp nd powul

9



cun ougou nion’s iso bu is inluncs v bn spdnd limid b pculi us o amicn socil nd poliicldvlopmn, bginning bov ll wi slv, oigin o gamicn condicion. amicn soci s mn oug-lins ndnsions, o b su. Bu on uns dp n os, onl on s bn souc o civil w: condicion ounding o public bwn lib nd slv nd long in o consquncsinvolving c nd uss o poliicl pow s lowd om i. and in o consquncs s wisd nd und oug din psso amicn iso bu uns ig down o psn. tod, w s i in socil nd poliicl conss bwn Sou nd s o coun, nd bwn rpublicn nd Dmocic pis, nd in

vo o nd gins Bck Obm, wos lcion is in isl momnousvn in iso o amicn condicion nd pps bginning o nd o i.

tis viw o amicn Liblism s diion cing bck o ounding nd nngld in condicion cn o nion’siso dis om som o ws o inking bou amicnLiblism. I dis mos spl om viw o mn mid-wni-cnu amicn poliicl sciniss nd o inllculs, wo concivdo US s libl ll w oug, i.. wo sw amic s ving

consnsus on libl vlus nd lws ving d consnsus. andpps mos inlunil vsion o suc sis cm in Louis hz’s1955 book The Liberal Tradition in America. hz qud Liblism wiw clld Lockn Individulism nd climd , bcus dbn no fudlism in amic, could b no Socilism, indd no oidolog bu Liblism. Smou Min Lips’s book on amicnecpionlism lso posis n idologicl consnsus long lins o wSmul huningon clld amicn Cd. fo Lips, ou sd

vlus: Individulism, egliinism, Populism nd ani-Sism (ll

supposdl cbl o ounding o public) plin midws in wic US s sood p om o counis. fo hz ndLips: onc libl, lws libl, nd noing bu libl.

ts omulions su om on-sidd, sic undsnding o amicn insiuions. t il o giv dqu wig o illibllmns o amicn soci – psn ig om bginning, ndcucil cos in amic’s poliicl dvlopmn. t il o cknowldg dp o conlic ov vlus o ssum no m conlic libl consnsus pdmind oucom. t collps complcuns o oug, .g. l mi o rpublicn nd libl ndncisnd posi n oddl uncnging cc o soci. hz, om is


10



pculi noion om momn i ws sblisd US ws oznino is oiginl blis, viw in is l book The Founding of NewSocieties gnlisd ino o o ll gmn sociis sblisdb euopn sls nd wo: ‘o wn p o euopn nion isdcd om wol o i nd uld ouwd on nw soil i loss simulus owd cng wol povids – i lpsd ino kind o immobili.’ Onl euop, in Louis hz’s viw, d l clss conlic ndo dnmism. No ving clss conlic, amic jus d o wok ou is libl individulis possibiliis.

aloug Lips did no mk s m clim, lso gud amic’s libl vlus v bn isoicl consn. Bu vn i issom isoicl coninui in soci’s vlus ( sonbl noug

poposiion), i is misk o suppos os vlus v d smcs ov im, s i cs nv dpnd on con. Vlus lws mc o poliics nd no lws consisn wi onno o unmbiguous in i pplicion. So vn i w w o s bo Individulism nd egliinism ssnil vlus in amicnsoci, w dos i mn in muliud o siuions w os wo

vlus poin in opposi dicions? W is missing nd in so muc o discussion bou n amicn libl consnsus is n sns o innl nsions wiin Liblism, s wll s conlic bwn amic’s

libl nd illibl ndncis.I hz nd Lips wongl conciv o amicn Liblism s ll-

nvloping consnsus, scond viw ms Liblism in ms oo now. tis ppoc would limi Liblism o is conmpo poliicl us, ppling i onl o os wo v nswd o nmLibl. Bu w oug no o b discd b lbls. Json, Jon Locknd adm Smi ll did no cll mslvs Libl. t wod Libl didno com ino usg s poliicl m in euop unil l 19 cnu nd ws lil usd in amic unil 20 cnu. Nonlss, w sould

v no oubl ospcivl idniing Lock, Smi o Json sLibls nd w sould v no diicul in ppling m now opoliicins o os wo, o on son o no, m p no o cllmslvs Libls vn oug i ids cll i wiin diion.

t iso o wods is no sm s iso o ids ndidologis, oug m b ld. In US, ps cnu s sn ms ‘Pogssiv’ nd ‘Libl’ ln in us. t amicnPogssivs o l 1900s w cll nslnic cousins o Biin’s Nw Libls, bu i ws no unil implosion in 1916 o Pogssivs, wic d ou s li ild o lc tdd roosvl s id p psidnil cndid, New Republic Magazine

Part I: The Conceptual Cacophony

11



inoducd ino amicn discussion m Libl o dini is viws om os o collpsing Pogssiv P nd o ssoci isl wi w poin ws minnl succssul libl p o LlodGog. a Wold W I, mn amicns wo d suppod Wilsondminision w disgusd b is bus o s pow, picull insuppssing spc. adoping nm Libl d ddiionldvng o undlining commimn o individul lib d nobn ccisic o Pogssivs. In cs, cng omPogssiv o Libl did v subsniv signiicnc.

Ionicll, in inw s, jus s Libl P in Biin bokdown nd gv w o Lbou, m Libl nd poliicllngug o US, w i bcm iml sblisd duing 1930s

wn fnklin roosvl mbcd i, oug rpublicns o ,hb hoov o Sno rob t, insisd roosvl nd osw psudo-Libls, wils w l Libls. Pogssiv nbcm mginlisd s ing o f L, picull wn in 1948 scond Pogssiv P, vil inild b Communiss, nomindhn Wllc o Psidn. Bu mmois so nd mLibl cquid unpp ovons duing 1960s – nd s v muc o do wi c – m Pogssiv bgn mking combck ndws vn dopd b Cn rig Dmocic Ldsip Council in

1980s.tod, vn oug Pogssiv is on voud s m o sl-

dscipion b Libl Dmocs wn unning o oic, s sul o polls cid ou b consulns, ms Libl nd Pogssiv dplod lmos incngbl in mos poliicl discussions. as linguis J Nunbg s win, ‘os wo sl-consciousl cll mslvsPogssivs n Libls jus bou onl ons wo ink is dinc, o ls wo op os ink is dinc.’

Bu i w s Liblism is bod n pospciv cunl idniid wi wod, no so bod s o ncompss ll o amicnpoliicl consciousnss, w nd o disinguis din oms o pss o Liblism v in i scop nd mning. h disincionbwn Consiuionl Liblism ding o l 17 nd 18 cnuis,nd Modn Dmocic Liblism ding o l 19 nd l 20

cnuis svs s usul poin o dpu. B consiuionl LiblismI mn clssicl poliicl Liblism including suc nns s dom o conscinc, dom o spc, psniv govnmn, division o govnmnl pows, indpndn civil soci, igs o piv pop nd conomic dom, wic in 19 cnu volvd long sp


12



bnc ino docin o laissez-faire, nd om o Modn fMk Consvism. B Modn Dmocic Liblism I mn pilosop incopos sm consiuionl oundions buconcivs o dmocc nd ciiznsip in mo univsl ms, pudis

laissez-faire wils ining insiuions o Cpilism, pnds concpion o igs o includ ig o qul spc s bsicquimn o umn dvlopmn nd scui nd, wil nlging socil nd conomic ol o govnmn, insiss on song pocion o civil libis nd wid s o socil ccks nd blncs.

as I v gud in m book Freedom’s Power , c o s wo psso Liblism implis o o pow s wll s o o jusic, i.. o o ow o c pow, s wll s ow o consin i; o ow s

cn bs gn cpciis o civ nds o jus nd soci,wic ncssil includs cpci o dnd isl. In US,Consiuionl Liblism dos sm o v som o nl univsldnc hz nd Lips ibu o libl vlus gnll. Buwid gmn bou mis o diion sould no obscu dpo conlic bou is inpion. Jon Cloun nd fdick Dougls,slvold nd om slv, bo dmid amicn consiuionlpincipls bu mig s wll v bn lking bou din diions.amicns s lngug o consiuion bu on us i o s

opposi ings. t amicn condicion s cd c o s wopss o Liblism: slvolding ss disod ConsiuionlLiblism momn o ounding nd mouldd is inpion in l rpublic o i inss. evn slv ws bolisd islgcis limid undsnding o consiuionl igs, cil conlicnd ins o Sou in pocing is cil od. tis s inibid dvlopmn o Modn Dmocic Liblism nd coninus o unnd mp i o is d.

I sid ous picul isoicl momn wn Liblism

mgd, o ook oo, in soci m v d long-m impc on isundsnding, nd is ws cs in amic. t amicnrvoluion nd wiing o consiuion ook plc in 1770s nd80s – in ag o enlignmn bu bo consviv ciongins fnc rvoluion – lpd o mk nion’s oundingpincipls mo libl n mig owis v bn. Bu rvoluion W isl nd immdi innionl liiscononing nion in 1780s w lso ciicl inluncs in amic’ss omion. t iniil impulss in is s consiuion in icls o condion oll owds spl cicumscibing govnmnlnd spcill cuiv pow.


13



Duing rvoluion W, owv, iscl nd mili dbili o condion nl cos m mili vico nd suld in svpivions in Coninnl am, wos oics bcm co o movmn o build song nionl govnmn. am vnspsnd l o dlgs o consiuionl convnion inPildlpi, w w psidd ov b i om commndinggnl nd poducd documn povidd o unlimid pows o conscipion nd ion, s wll s cnl cuiv nd dl

judici d pviousl bn missing. Und icls o condion govnmn lckd uoi o compl viousss o ulil commimns nd, bcus i lso d ni conomiclvg no mili cpci, govnmn ws unbl o spond o

closu o euopn pos o amicn pos o o nsw s omBiin nd Spin o amicn io bond allgn.In o wods, jus s s building in l modn euop, including

is o libl s in Biin, lcd igncis o w ndinnionl compiion, so did s building in US in 18 cnu.In amicn cs, owv, s omion occud in n idologiclclim ws cul suspicious o s pow. I ws no onl Liblo rpublicn o ggndisd s pow souc o suspicion.t Soun dlgs wnd no innc wi slvolding b

nionl govnmn nd i inlunc lps o ccoun no onl o consiuion’s indic ccpnc o slv bu lso o som o is noblsilncs. aloug concp o umn quli pps bginningo Dclion o Indpndnc, i cull pps now in consiuion isl. t m quli onl coms up in lion o quli o ss, povision so dpl nncing pow o Soun ss i would bcom impossibl o bolis slv ougodin poliics. I ook, o cous, Civil W nd rconsucionamndmns o pu n nd o slv nd o pu concp o quli

ino consiuion. y, vn so, onc consucion collpsdsouns sumd i os o pvn fdl Govnmn omupsing ssm o cil dominion nd opposd nocmn o rig o qul pocion o lws 14 mndmn imd sblising o ll amicns.

to is d, mn o os wo clim idli o docin o oiginlinn b insising on now viw o dl pows oblivious o oiginl inn o consucion mndmns: os mndmnsv no lss consiuionl oc n povisions dopd li. tSoun consiuionl inpion s lso inibid dvlopmn o Modn Dmocic Liblism in amic. Duing ps cnu, ls


14



unil 1980s, Dmocic Liblism ws pdominn souc o iniiiv nd ng in amicn poliics, lning wi Consvismin pow, bu sming o v mo dcisiv impc in ‘wo spsowd – on sp bck’ pn. Pogssivism ws ollowd b Consviv 20s, Nw Dl b 50s, Nw foni nd gsoci b psidncis o Nion, fod, nd C. fo wil, bodconsnsus o amic ccpd oms o Nw Dl, suc scollciv bgining nd socil scui nd, b implicion, iundling pincipls. t id amic d lws d liblconsnsus including noion amicn Consvivs w jus

vin o Libls, smd o mk sns in piod, loug i involvdding mid 20 cnu consnsus bck ino ps wn, i d

bn consnsus, i would v bn nil din.In n vn, consnsus suc s i ws did no ls nd b 1980sund rgn, nd vn mo so in ps dcd und Gog W Bus,Consvivs v no onl soug o un o conomic nd lgl oispding Nw Dl, bu mbcd ndncis on rligious rig cnno b concild wi vn looss diniion o clssicLiblism. In c, Consvism in US od s bcom lssinllcull con n Liblism nd consiss o ls ivindpndn nd, ims, niicl ndncis: Libinism, Socil

Consvism somims vging on ocic Wi Nionlism, NoConsvism, nd Businss Consvism. ts ndncis would b w wi on no i modn Liblism would no povid m wi common nm nd cus o poliicl coliion. t is w Consvivs spnd so muc im cking Libls – i solvs i ownpoblm. ani-Liblism is w olds amicn Consvivs og,nd i’s i min souc o ninmn. a rpublicn discussion onlk dio, mn subjcs would b divisiv bu mock o Liblism islws gund o ickl von in udinc. Givn ow ncss

w Libls o i uni nd musmn, ou would ink Consvivs would sow us lil kind giud.

Bu s idologicll divs amicn Consvism is, Sou sbn bdock o is poliicl pow. Indd, silinc o Sounpow s bn on o mos psisn us o amicn poliics.a Civil W nd rconsucion, Sou os gin oug Dmocic P nd oug is inlunc in congss nd cous. aSoun sisnc o civil igs ws inll ovcom in w is somimsclld Scond rconsucion duing 1960s, Sou os oncmo, is im oug rpublicn P. In c cs, Sou sbn cucil o Consviv os o block o nulis movmns o


15



g quli, no onl involving Blcks bu Wis s wll. tis is p o lgc o amicn condicion. Bo Civil W, imwn No d mos univsl ssm o pim ducion nd igs s o lic in wold, Sou d viull no publicducion o Wis – l lon Blcks; onl ps o nbllumSou d dvlopd public scools w s wi lg sclslvolding. and om rconsucion o Nw Dl wi Sousisd n om o public polic involvd nding socil igs oll ciizns, lss os policis ups Soun cil od. t Nw Dlmd is pc wi Soun pow b ccping limiions o socilscui nd o pogmms civl cludd millions o aicnamicns. and 1938 congssionl lcion llinc in

congss bwn rpublicn P nd Soun Dmocs obsucdu dvlopmn o conomic nd socil igs unil 1960s.ts poliicl liis v no onl sund dvnc o libl

policis, v spd impon spcs o w w undsnd o bdisinciv bou amicn Liblism. Wiou Sou nd poliicldivisions inspid b c ougou coun, US would v likl v pssd univsl l insunc, o mpl, nd dvlopd wl s clos, ls, o Biis, i no Scndinvin popoions.Moov, mn o socil pogmms w dopd w vil

ldn wi cil ovons bcus o w w sucud. So, ompl, insd o univsl cild nd mil bni ssm, amicnsdvlopd wl ssm Wis sw s ndou o Blcks, nd isoo conibud o limid dvlopmn o socil igs in US. fo long im, dpndn on Soun vos o is congssionl mjoiis ndpsidnil vicois, Dmocic P ws nsnd in is own vsiono amicn condicion unil inll, in 1960s, Lndon Jonsonpusd oug civil igs lgislion nd s in moion dcion o Sou o rpublicns. t ws no onl co in scndnc

o Consvism in l 20 cnu, bu i ws b mos impon.Now, dcds o Consviv gmon, onoubl coic

is inll ping o. Bcus o gowing Liblism mong ducd ndlun, disinc libl nd mong oung nd ising numbs o hispnics, Dmocs inll v noug suppo o win psidnc nd mjoiis in congss wiou Soun vos. fo is im, p Liblism dpnds on s com ino pow no long dpndingon Sou o g . Moov, s Obm’s lcion siis, cilbckls ws so powul co 1960s, s inll bbd ndbgun ping ou. Somow, mos amicns sm o v mgd om bi conlics o cn dcds sonbl oln nd spcul o


16



on no, cpbl o msuing mn no b is colou, bu b iscc, is inllignc nd is biliis – jus s so mn dmd wouldb possibl. Ou poblms wi c cinl no solvd bu amiclooks din now nd, om Libl pspciv, bi mo opul. tisis nw libl momn. Nw no onl bcus libl dminision isiving in Wsingon long Consviv bu nw – muc moundmnll – bcus amic m inll b o cins on ispoliics slv l bind.

Europe: Pierre Rosanvallon

I would lik o s wi w gnl mks. fis o ll, Liblism is

no onl “L-wod”, i b w mn “loos wod”. t lo o loos wods, lik Socilism, Consvism, vn public o dmocc.t is iso o conncs on ccoponic wods. rmmb, ompl, in 1948 Lipmnn’s connc discussd poblm o Liblism. In mid 19 cnu, momn o voluions o 1848, in lo o euopn counis w lso discussions on k ccoponic wod o piod, nml dmocc. evn nd o 19 cnu in Ood w lo o conncs on Liblism ndNw Liblism. Liblism, w s, is no onl loos wod. Scondl, i

is possibl o dscib vi ccisics ccoponic wods s spciic cgo. t could b considd s ggg concps, i.. mi og din ss o lmns: vlus, insiuions, nd socil nomso sucus. a ccoponic wod is lso conovsil psswod, is os, i s uncion o idniicion (b i posiiv o ngiv). t pss, givn momn, ops o som udincs nd s o os.t lso unsbl noions in nv is s suc, bu lws o isoicl siuions. t v n inciv dimnsion nd pmnnl moving. t v o b undsood in isoicl w nd

no s concps, i.. ools o dscibing li; o s idologis, i.. ids o ids, ms nd psnions.

Ccoponic wods ld o condicions o modni. tl bsis o ccopon is modni is ognisd long numb o nsions concning v diniion o quli, lib, ol o individul, nd so on. hnc, no mn ccoponic wods; so wi would b s o v compl lis. also, onl is liv o co. I s diniion o Liblism s pilosop o opposiion; iis u o ll ccoponic wods lws dind ginssoming. Wn in fnc m Liblism ws coind in 1818 b Min d Bin, i ws o din vision o popl w gins


17



Ultra, os clos o Cls x, succsso o Louis xVIII. tcondicions o modni pssd in mn din ws bcus no ognisd in spons o spciic nd cl poblms. tpoblm coms in ing o undsnd w w do no g id o succcoponic wods. a ll, in noml cdmic li wn w vsoming oll uncl w o g id o i in od o v clconcps. y, sing s o wo cnuis w v nv wisd o g id o os ccoponic wods, mus v som socil uili.

as o spciici o Liblism mong os L-wods, i sms o m Liblism is mo o ll loos wods bcus i ws is ono b coind nd bcus i is bsic loos wod o modni. hnc, i is sm im looss nd wks, nd, s consqunc, s

l v suppod o dind poliicl ognision. all occoponic wods v bn uilisd o din v song socil movmnsnd ognisions. among m, Liblism s longs iso, wiccls o posiiv nd ngiv diniions. Comping euop nd amicw ind no din diniions bu din ccls nd din nmiso Liblism. Looking mous cisis o Liblism nd o 19 cnu o cun db bou cnn o fncrvoluion o so-clld Nw Libls in Biin, w cn cognis iso o un nd disppnc o os ccoponic wods.

a os gnl mks I would lik o spk mo pcisl bou poblms o Liblism in conmpo euop, minl mpsising ls o o so s. I wn o discuss Liblism no so muc in mso poliicl pilosop, bu in ms o mosps nd lngugs.amosps nd lngugs ccis spciic momns, nd in euopw cn spci min momns o Liblism in ls o s.rmmbing m Liblism ws lmos bsn om euopn poliicl vocbul om nd o Wold W II nd l60s, duing wic piod wod could no b sn on cov o n

book. t is o os momns ws wn Liblism und in l 60s, l 70s. Is un o cdmic, bu lso socil nd poliicl,sp consisd o kind o discov nd -ppopiion o ogondiion. a im in fnc w w ding Guizo nd tocquvill,wil in middl o 60s rmond aon dcld pd v sp pos o M o kind o dious pss o tocquvill. a momn, o sons o usion o Socilism (isl ciiqu o oliinism) ccl und o mo-idolog is ciicsw in som w usd.

Wn spking o Liblism in l 80s, k psswod ws CivilSoci, mning uonom, ciiqu o s, Individulism nd so on


18



(lso, o cous, ld o un o dmocc s spciic vlu). Inpoliics i ws usd, sm im, b rig nd b L; b rig in ms o modnision nd b L s ool o nsomion.a momn, Liblism ws minl ssocid wi socil, poliicl, ndmol issus. I ws din in mid 80s wn euop nd nwmosp o Liblism. I bcm ssocid minl wi poblmsconcning conomic gulion. I ws nc o mk, conom ndmngmn n o civil soci. I ws lso ssocid wi nw

vision o wl s, mpsising individul sponsibili nsocil ciiznsip nd old noion o solidi. In l 80s in esneuop mosps o Liblism s civil soci nd o Liblism smk conom w dopd sm im, ws in Wsn euop

w dinid mo songl.t id momn ss in mid 90s nd lss unil od. Sp b sp, Liblism ws sn s poblm, n soluion. I dbn soluion o conomic gulion; i d bn soluion oognising civil soci, nd so on. fom n on w cn s dinc inccls bwn es nd Ws euop. Liblism bcm poblm mucquick in esn euop n i did in Ws. t bsnc o lnivs o Cpilism o mk conom simuld L oincsingl suppo viw ciicl o Liblism, vn dmonising i

oug pssion Ul-Liblism o No-Liblism. Sinc n,euop ls libl in ms o psniv dmocc, uonom o civil soci, coic in psonl conduc; bu ls sm im ni-libl. Skoz, o mpl, climd o b ci o movmn ginsUl-Liblism.

W ppns i ccopon bcoms oo song? W ppns i Liblism bcoms sm im nm o posiiv ibu ndo ning vil? I consid i o b nd o ccl. I ccopon bcoms oo song, ou v wo opions: i ou invn nw wods, o

coin nw djcivs o vilis old wod. t o opion, o cous,is o sop using ccoponic wods nd o un o mo spciic issus, lik poblm o individul, o olnc, o univslism. I would considis connc o b succss i w mngd o pu n nd o us o wod Liblism.

Latin America: Laurence Whitehead

I v, o cous, w counis o cov. Nonlss, I will v o soo som ml oic gnlisions in od o ulil m mbiion o ddssing poblm o w Lin amicn pinc is. W kind


19



o Liblism cn w mp ou in Lin amic? ading o id o composi cgois, Liblism in Lin amic consiss o svlcompounds wic cn i og in din ws, loosl cois insp pool coodind compmns nd c is o subsidccoding o socil domin in qusion (.g. m o lcoldomin m b din om o lgl o commcil domin).ts dnmics cn b pomod nd cpud b spciic occupionlgoups comping bwn mslvs, bo wiin n o snd n o civil soci. t is, o mpl, Consiuionlism nd ul o lw – occupionl goup in qusion is lws, wo vi inss nd mns o cion no ncssil coodind wivon ls. t is scul ducion – no cucil p o libl

civi – nd v cs nd cdmics commid o . t isdom o pssion nd v jounliss. t is conomicliblision nd mks, nd v conomiss nd businsslobbiss. t is dmocision nd s possionl poliicins,dmocic pis nd so o.

as ou cn s, c o s inss m, in loos nvionmn, kconol nd pus owd i own gnd wiou ncssil monising i wi din ps o w w bodl gding composi id o Liblism, nc Liblisms. O cous, Liblism is

oli – ls in idologicl ms – wic m b mo n ll osgmns. I m incopo m ino mo bsc nd imlss s o

vlus, wic volv, s w know, ound psonl dom, sl-lision, noms concning pcul living og in spii o quli nd muul spc, nd so o – ll is is wll-known libldocin. In Lin amic, owv, wi ll is coninuing inquliis ndunsolvd socil conlics, suc bsc idls sill minl spiions.and no ncssil spiions ull conol collcivimginion o wol populion o clusion o lniv visions.

Noms o coisnc in dil li muc mo ggd nd impovisdn is monious picu o uniid Liblism mig suggs. Pi,

jus now, commnd on vlus nd insiuions o socil noms sdin componns o Liblism. In Lin amic, s coninuousl consd; insiuions onl modl civ – pn som ps o soci, bu lo o ings going on ousid insiuionl lm – nd socil noms on wkl linkd, io oicill pomod vlus o o insiuionl quimns o oml sucu.

tis is w w v, s oic gnlision, muliplici o gmn, bu sm im indispnsbl componns o vious


20



Liblisms wi ivl nd vn clsing ognisd inss, c pssingi own p o libl gnd. W lso v widspd nd psisnlnivs o s gmn libl pojcs. W v pojcs sillcivl wning mo ligion, wning mo uoiinism, wningmo populism, wning mo s-invnion in mks, nd so o.Ov iso o Lin amic w v lo o bidi, conncingwi Pul S’s commn in iso o US, ws bluingo Liblism nd rpublicnism. t ws nd coninus o b u oLin amic, w w on ind bluing, clsing nd somimsmging bwn Consvism nd Liblism, bwn Nionlism ndLiblism, bwn Cpilism nd Liblism, nd indd, is SocilLiblism, wic ims coms clos o Socilism. t undling libl

spiions o populion m sill b powul nd widl psn, bu lws in cons wi s lniv vsions. t bidinpions, in wic lss libl cun m com o o.

So muc o what , bu when dos is com ino isnc? t ising o sss bou Lin amic, i w doing compiv nlsiso wold, is , ls ps o i, cm ino isnc isoicll v l on. t Consiuionlism ws o cous v pcocious, loug iws lso ul. t consiuions w win in l 19 cnu bu m no ull conol poliicl li unil l n . So i ws

iul nd dld bu pcocious bginning. t sm would b uo conomic liblision: l nd in som css v song oso pomo mks in 19 cnu bu iul nd vsibl wi big vsl bwn 1930 nd 1980. t o componn o Liblisionis, o cous, Dmocision, wic ll s li pcusos bu s widspd noml gnl pcic i s onl go 25 s o iso ou o 200 s o s publics. So w v som v l nd powulbuss o som kinds o Liblism, spcill w liu s o salnic Consiuionlism. tis is wn di pivilg, cs soci,

cuc monopol ov ducion, slv nd colonil conomicmonopolis ll swp w. W v lmos wo cnuis o nd ppnd li in Lin amic n in aic, asi, o Middl es, o indd in muc o euop. Moncis w plcd b consiuionl publics; pincipl o popul sovign ws invokdwiin psonl public insiuions, spion o pow, nd lso dlism.all is ws odinil pcocious in globl ms. So, Linamics v som clim o bbing in vngud o iso o Liblism. Bu b l 19 cnu s pincipls w oicil docinnd lgl pcic in ll wn publics, loug sbili nd socilimpc o s pincipls ws, s I sid, pc nd incompl. I ws


21



consd b piods o mili ul, b civil w, b mgnc dcs, b ss o sig, nd i lso pnd onl so ino inoml soci.economic Liblism scd picull songl bwn 1870 nd 1930o inoc s poliicl sucus nd o mould m lgl inccodnc wi pviling Wsn docins. Bu ull conomic Liblismwn ino vs in 1930s nd s bn scond ug bus o liblision sinc 1980s in conomic ild. In mnim, ws sis o lniv pimns w in som sns pill illibl bu no compll illibl, conolld nonlss b mwok o libl ssumpions nd pcions. Bu ull dmocision nd opnmk conomis onl bou 25 s old nd sill bi socill pcious, spcill in clim w looking ig now.

So muc o when – where? t is no scop in im vilbl ocing coss m 20 o mo counis nd divs bid oms o Liblism v occud in Lin amic. I jus wn o singl ouwo cn mpls o giv ou sns o divsi. anonio Ocmpo,wo usd o b Posso o Lin amicn hiso in S anon’s,s win o agnin s ‘Liblism in coun bon libl’. t poin is mking in icl is o cons agnin wi ll is nigbous,sing in agnin docin o Liblism nv d o ngg wipocd suggl gins con lniv docins s i did in

o Lin amicn counis. On socil lvl libls nv do connd wi wll-sucud indignous o psn goups, o osocil cgois ddicd o sising libl pcics. So agnin, omis poin o viw, ws spcil in spc. ano cn sud comping agnin nd Mico in 19 cnu mks clim on poliicl lvl skl consing modls wiin sm consiuionlisdiion wi wk cuiv voud b 19 cnu Micn libls,in cons o song psidnil nd cnlisd dlism o agnins. t mig sm sng, considing subsqun

iso, bu illuss poin s cuns no sbl nd oncin plc coninuousl psn – ln, v ll im nd m b vsd o som n.

t is n nsiv discussion lso bou ow 19 cnu liblscopd wi poblm o od nd is w nsion bwnLibls nd Consvivs bu lso common gound bwn Liblsnd Consvivs cn b plod. and ow 19 cnu Libls copdwi poblm o socil inquli – cllng in cs ws ovlp, nsion, ivl nd somims pnsip wi dicls. Wcn s coninuing vidnc o unsolvd conlic on s issus o isd in poblm o od nd poblm o inquli. I’s wo


22



mmbing, nd is is m mpl, bu fidl Cso bgns lw nd is is o m ws pl bcus o spc md s lw dnding imsl in cou – spc ws ‘hiso Will absolvM’. W i did ssnill ws invok guns o Cub’s 1940sconsiuion. and i’s wo mmbing Pinoc, pssivdicosip on mn dimnsions, nvlss soug o mbc ndcmpion ig sl o conomic Liblism n nd, in nd, ssocid poliicl docins. t undling dominnc o liblspiions m b invokd o plin w vn in Cub is is ndo o nd k ino ccoun consiuionl considions. evn inPinoc’s Cil libl ids cisd cin lmn o sin oconol ov oug, wic po-businss dicosip d

dvlopd.Jus im o un o where from poin. tis is ugl compldiscussion, nd gin I m mking oic gnlisions, bu compd oeuop nd US, w could s in Lin amic muc o Liblism ws powull inluncd om ousid, oug no jus omon ousid souc s is on supposd, bu om vi o compiivnd o som n conlicing ousid soucs. t is n englis diiono Liblism conncd mong o ings o rol Nv’s ol inowing opn s conomis nd somims undpinning poliicl

sucus mgd in publics in 19

cnu. t is lo o liu on conncion bwn US consiuion nd imiionso plicions in numb o Lin amicn consiuions. Bu wn ongos oug iso o piod, i is lso v impon o s powul inlunc o fnc ivl diions – subjc wic wouldk lo o im o go ino (Consn pls v impon ol, ompl, s souc o inlunc nd tocquvill lso). Bu bov ll i’simpon o p nion o undsimd ol – ls i s bnundsimd unil v cnl – o Spnis Liblism. Null, wi

is o Spin od is lo o liu discoving inluncgin. Bu wi Spnis Liblism, wic gos ig bck o colonilpiod, som o pcics bou wic I ws lking d i isimpc, i is ivl in Lin amic coming oug 1812 Cozo Cdiz wn Spnis amic ws mo o lss sill und colonil ul.

t scond poin bou where from is is divs ng o compiiv libl inluncs om ousid nd ino Lin amicoug vi o cnnls I v indicd – possionl goupsnd lobbing nd cmpigns ov picul issus. to som n oucn s Lin amic is on pip civing Liblism om ousid.Bu would b v incompl ccoun nd iso o is opic


23



dws good dl o nion o w in wic nl Liblisms civd. I m no b cl qul o w s bn nsmid. t nsmud bcus v o b id ino bidi nd innll loos insiuionl sucus w civd. and, v imponl, m b no onl nsmud bu nsmid bck (o gimponc o Lin amicns). tis pocss o nsmiing bck ousidLin amic o old libl counis is soming wic ou m nob so w o, bu l m jus giv ou on o wo mpls o sow isimponc. Mico, o mpl, coninud o cognis Spnisrpublic nd o sl Spnis publicn lds ougou fncodicosip. So Micn iud o ivl o modn oms o Liblism in Spin, ou cn s, is nsmission – w sld i wn

ou did no v i. Uugu spid, i is on sid, o b Swizlndo Lin amic, bu nds o b kn bi u. In mn wsUuguns spid o s up n mpl vn Swiss could dmi nd,pps, ln om. ano mpl is Cil, wic ou m o m nodin s libl, bu I would din i s suc wiin m v bod bidng. Cil did o pcul od o Socilism w euo-Communiss could no do in euop. I ws impon w do i in Cilbu i s mning in s o Wsn wold.

In conclusion, subconinn is dpl libl in ollowing snss:

is no di isocc, no moncicl pincipl, nd vw snos. t is no suc ing s ocd mig, bu vw opnl compiiv bu conss. t no shariah, bu mn Supm Cou jusics. In mos counis cnsosip is occsionlnd ic wil jounliss nd lgl wis coninu o cis inluncnd socil psig. Lib is collciv vlu bu lin sping lib om licns is no sbl o lgiim in sings I v bn dscibing.So suggl ov w lin is dwn nd w cl is o bpsvd o dndd is n ongoing suggl wi siing boundis sill.

to inis, o, mn din Liblisms o Lin amic cn bsummd up wi 5 Ps: pcocious, pvln, pcious, pipl nd,lso, dpl psisn.

Debate

Samuel Brittan: how dos Bzil i ino picu, sing s slv isd long US nd d n mpo?

Laurence Whitehead: t cngs I ws dscibing d minl o mgnc o nw Spnis amicn publics in l 19 cnu. No ll s publics mgdn – Cub did no unil 1898. Bo Cub nd Bzil d slv US. t nd o


24



mpi nd monc ws nd o cin kind o colonil ngov, bu lso o cin kind o consviv Biis consiuionl gz sl. t w lo o fncinluncs nd lo o Biis inluncs bu mpi in 19 cnu d is liblccisics. Obviousl, di ws no on o ings cllngd unil mpows movd. fom nd o 19 cnu dominn cuns o opinion in Bzil I m w o inclind o s “W’v lws d Consvism, libls v nvll ivd in sng in Bzil. t old lis v mngd o poduc mslvs;’v mngd o cling on o s pow; ’v mngd o sp i pojcs inod o block gnuin liblision” – dominn gumn ou ind in Bzilinisoiogp. Bu givn w I v ccisd Liblism, wi is bidiis ndpil vicois on picul ons, I would k i o w ound nd s wsigniicn libl lmns (.g. docin in 1889 voluion nd ounding o public). all ings I v dscibd bou dlism, division o pows nd boliion o di pivilg ook plc in Bzil s wll bu jus lil bi l. to isd ou cn v n gumn s o wic kinds o Liblisms is in Bzil. t no

wold; is no libl voluion s ou would ink o om n esn euopno Ciln pspciv, bu I ink is g dl o consviv Liblism i ouwn o pu i w (nd publicn Liblism, nd now vn som socil Liblism).

Knick Harley : I wond w wo ps o cclicli? a ccl in ids:Individulism cononing socil solidi, ol o s in pocing nd dvncingsblisd insucus in soci. Bu I ink is lso poliicl cclicli ,loug ld, is no cl sm ing. W v sn, o mpl, in is coun govnmn wic s bn ound bond is sll-b d.

Paul Starr: I ws lluding on poin o noion is cclicl pn inamicn poliics; au Sclsing ws g dvoc o is posiion. h d noion ws kind o igu s in wil. In 1980s d obsvd in US ccl is bou 30 s. 30 s om bginning o pogssiv o nw dl, no 30 s o fnklin roosvl nd n, supposd, no 30s nd, bou 1990, w will s no ccl. Wn Bill Clinon ws lcd loo popl oug coms ig on scdul bu i did no wok ou w. and I ink mpsiss jus ow muc coningnc is in poliics. I 2000 lcion dund ou dinl nd al Go bcm psidn, mb w would look bck on piodnow wic ws somow compbl o nw dl, Go mig v ndd Clinon’sling bginnings nd undkn mjo iniiivs o nvionmn nd so o, bu

i did no wok ou. Now popl v dind ccl. fo mpl, m collgu SnWilnz lks bou 2008 s bing nd o g o rgn, so w v Consviv unning om 1980 o 2008. Bu w ppnd is m v bn dpndn on pomnc o conom in mons lding up o lcion. W will nvknow w i would v und ou dinl und o conomic condiions. tis lo o wok don in poliicl scinc indicing jus bo n lcion conomic pomnc is bs indico o oucom. So poo conomicpomnc in 2008 m v bn co s boug in Obm. W v scnc cos nd sms o b pn, kind o usion o ids gdlsso oucom o lcion. t smd o b in US n usion o Consvism;

sns o i bing som kind o powul iniiiv d ll un ou wi Gog Bus.t sms o b cclicl pn nd is compl lmn o cnc.


25



Timothy Garton Ash: a Pn-euopn ccls, o dos on v o go down o nionl lvl? Could on gu in ls o wo w v winssd globl cclin sns conomic Liblism, No-Liblism, s smd o b dominn coss v lg p o glob nd is now bing pu ino qusion simulnousl on mn coninns?

Pierre Rosanvallon: fis, I would lik o s ccl-building is p o wok o nisoin – i is ou job o build ccls. On m o ccls in euop: i ou consid 19 nd 20 cnuis, ou v cl sm kind o globl ccls, bu ou mus mk dinc bwn globl ccls nd pisn ccls – ccl is no jus cng bwnLbou nd Consviv. tk, o mpl, uning poin o bginning o 20

cnu. In ll euopn counis ou v simil kind o nw idolog coming:Sozilismus in Gmn, Nw Libls in Biin, rpublicn rdicls o Solidiss infnc – ou v communi o vision. a Wold W II ou v lso communi o vision o building socil dmocc in v globl ms. and now pps w

bginning o nw ccl: vocbul is sing o bcom obsol – w v id ou bswi ‘No-’ o wil nd now w un o ‘Pos-‘, “posdmocic,” “poslibl,”“posconsviv”. a ving usd os o ound n s usd gin.Onc “No-” nd “Pos-” inisd, ou coics bcom v limid. to m k qusion is w w sill nd os ccoponic wods nd w w do no dicl discuss poblms o Consiuionl Libis, Ciiznsip, nd so on. I is cll o poliicl sons,o building poliicl idniis w nd os m-concps. W nd m bcuspoliics is bsd on c, opposiion nd obscui.

Ccls o b considd dinl i ou consid, o mpl, pisn ccls ndw I would cll globl o bsic ccls. I m suck b ow bsic ccls v bn sm

coss euop ov 19

nd 20

cnuis.

Laurence Whitehead: I ink ‘cclicl’ implis som kind o libl nd o ccl nd iscion is s opposd o lin modls wic invibl, nul, on-w pogssions.t possibiliis wic ni libl cclicl in sns no libl lin.t is puncud quilibium, o mpl, wic mig cpu lo o counis cingon livl sbl oug ini, oug no woking ibl wll. Wn momn o bk coms m b congious c. Cinl in Lin amic w v sn ndnc o good o bd ings o spd om on coun o no in pid w. Bu is no libl, pdicbl ccl; is no subsiu o cull cking coningnnd dnmic suggls o din goups nd inss nd ids ov im.

Paul Starr: rgding dium sing in nd pis: is cl w som o us liko dink i Liblism sig.

Anne Deighton: Pi, ou lkd bou 1980s nd economic Liblism. how wouldou pi piod bwn 50s nd mid 60s nd mps o Ingionissbo in Council o euop nd in euopn Communiis? I sms o m lmns o Liblism in consiuionl, insiuionl, mk nd popl pojcs. Buou sm o discoun noion o Liblism s u o piod ll.

Pierre Rosanvallon: rgding 50s nd building o euop, o cous cinl w lmns o Liblism in ms o subsnc. Bu consid conomic gulion, oinsnc. t wod Liblism could no b usd in 50s, vn in euop. t


26



ppnsion o conomic poblms ws ognisd wi kind o vision o plnning ndno ll o mk conom, nd v noion o indusil polic cnl o euopninsiuion in 50s ws v muc gins noion o gulion b mk. Considlso wod libl o Liblism ws no usd ll duing piod. I m vmniond rmond aon wo s no onc in os 20 s win down wodLiblism – did bo nd , bu i ou look is icls in 50s wodLiblism lmos nv pps. a 1968 sd discussing Liblism wi is indnd sudn Glucksmnn, wo ws on l sid o Liblism. rmond aon imsl ws on ig sid o Liblism, bo o m w ppil libl og.

Joao Carlos Espada: I ws wonding bou dinc bwn libl s n djciv nds noun. howv ccoponic, wod s n djciv is sill pcis nd usul.Wn on ss libl dmocc o libl Consvism o libl Socilism on knowscl w is mn, s opposd o illibl dmocc o illibl Consvism o illiblSocilism. t sm pplis o libl rig s opposd o illibl rig o libl L s

opposd o illibl L. So w discussing mning o Liblism s noun nd nos n djciv? and, i so, could no is isl b sn s vico o Liblism?

Pierre Rosanvallon: I is si o din illibl dmocc n good dmocc bcusw know w con o dmocc is bu w good dmocc is is lws unddiscussion bcus dmocc is bsd on s o condicions nd diiculis nding ob solvd. W know v wll nmis o dmocc o lib bu i bs inds mo diicul o din.

Paul Starr: Wn i coms o disincion bwn libl nd illibl w v cl

id o w is sk bu, wn lking bou popl wo non-libls, w v o s no ll o m illibl. tis, I ink, is souc o mbigui.

Nicholas Bunnin: I wnd o sk bou lions bwn Lin amicn Liblismnd Cuc, picull clicl spc in som Liblisms nd libl spcs o som Cuc inking nd lion o Posiivism, wic d lo o idologiclimponc in Mico nd Bzil – picull in l 19 cnu wn i ws bido n opponn o Liblism.

Laurence Whitehead: Cn ou b illibl (djciv) in pusui o Libl (noun)objcivs? t cicumsncs in wic m b ncss o m b

considd b Libls o b coc nd jusiid. fo mpl, ani-Cliclism would k viw i ws jusiid o do ll sos o ings nic Libls in sbl libl sociiswould no lik, in od o d-nicis populion. t would c illibll bu woulds doing i in od o c b, mo libl soci wn inisd.t dos no ppl o ll ani-Clicls bu v song cuns o ani-Cliclismwic would i cgo. t sm could b sid o Posiiviss. W is mmbd o m is i scinism, i cin ws ig nsw nd w inpossssion o i nd , o, w nild o do w ws ncss – wouldb illibl sid. Bu o sid is oug did i in od o bing bouod nd pogss nd pogss would b on in wic dom ws mo sbl

pocd nd mo ull pssd in nd.I is lso lvn wn w lk bou Liblism s cing o Cuc. Obviousl,i ws diionl ul-mundn kind o Colic Cuc wic ou would v o dscib

27



s illibl, bu i is pcl possibl o mo libl ndncis o sp in, nd indd inLin amic mo nd mo do sp in nd pn Cuc ov im. and in somcicumsncs, suc s in Polnd o cous, bu lso in Bzil o Cil, Cuc bcoms mo libl insiuion, llowd o is in clim w o insiuions nollowd o is nd, o, concns wiin i libl spiions wic cnno indno oul.


28



2. EAST

Japan: Koichiro Matsuda

I undsnd im o ou connc is no o giv spciic poins

om on’s own pis, in m cs iso o poliicl oug in 18

nd 19 cnu Jpn, bu o c sp o opn discussion oviwing nd ssssing Liblism s lvn concp o woldod. In od o conibu soming o connc, I would lik omk ciicl ssssmn o convnionll ccpd ois on isoicl condiion o lib nd dom in Jpn. M im is no o judgw lvn in succssull ploing “isoicl u”, ow sops wic will misguid us o “bd” o “wong”undsnding. No do I v sligs ins in upolding univsll “u” Liblism, o, convsl, upolding lniv vlus inJpns o asin vsions o Liblism gins Wsn vsion.r, I will consid m o nc m sill bind oug nd discous on Liblism in Jpn.

1) t is on is picl Oinlism discous. I minins Jpnssoci knows no ‘lib’. Sinc l inoducion o Wsn oisin mid-19 cnu, Jpns inllculs v dopd id

onl Wsn “civilizd” sociis d civd dom o popl. t d o wid vi o inllcul soucs suc s J. S. Mill,tocquvill, Guizo, hgl c. fukuzw yukici (1835 – 1901), on o lding Jpns inllculs im o ll o diionl smuiul nd bginning o modnizion/Wsnizion piod, wo ‘ so-clld smui spii smbls lsic ubb. I pnds ov inios nd sinks wn cing supios. In euop, consingl,c individul, clss o ssociion in soci s i own solid goundo indpndnc.’ tis smn s bn quod qunl in vi o

liu vn o is d.

29



t bsnc o lib in diionl Jpn, implid in is pssg, cnb bokn down ino wo sp bu muull ld conns:

) t bsnc o uonomous individul. Bcus Jpns soci dno diion o considing individul s n uonomous nd subsniluni o soci, socil vlu o indpndnc nd sl-dminion o individul s bn disgdd.

b) t bsnc o volun ssociion. t sons o gouping poplog m b nu o umn spcis, conomics, o poliiclods om s, bu is nv ppnd volunil in Jpn. tis ispl ood in bli , sinc individul s no indpndn will,

cn b no volun goup. evn i goups v uncions nd duiswiin wid soci, i ws usull bcus govning pow ook dvng o m, using m s subodin ogns o s.Consqunl, wil mmbs o goup m s ling o llowsip o sns o muul id, sccl undsnd vlu o indpndnc om s nd ccounbili o c mmb o pupos o ssociion. t jus subodind mslvs o nulncssi o uoi o i supio pow, wic w usull nodisinguisd.

2) t scond p is mo sopisicd. I ss in Jpns iso s bn no u dicosip o nn o pincipl o lib o bpcd o snd gins. I is u snds long ig o tennō (mposip), bu is poliicl uoi s bn nominl o moso Jpns iso. tn, could tokugw sogun om 17 omid-19 cnu b sid o v sblisd dicosip wn conind impil mil in cou o Koo nd sind mom cising poliicl pow? No. t tokugw govnmn d

council ssm composd o svl vssls unciond s subsnilpoliicl dcision-mking bod. t sogun d v limid discion ovi. Moov, no singl mmb o cbin could clim pioi (gin,nominll, ws d o cbin). t cn o poliicl pow wsusull void in mos poliicl bodis.

evn Miji rsoion o 1868, wn mpo ws pcdo cu subsnil poliicl pow, cul oc n smcin ws buucc. Mum Mso, on o mos inlunilinllculs o pos w piod, did no id is nnonc wi “pculii” o “Jpns” poliicl ssm in wiing ‘ Gmnscis lds w convincd o w did bu Jpns poliicl

30

ON LIBERTY




nd mili lds nv dmi i ccounbili o dcisions md. ec o s Jpns lds, vn pim minis o gnlin commnd jus oug ws in pic o ssm.’ (I lmossounds lik Mum implis Gmn scism ws “b” o ls mo“ionl” n Jpns miliism.) I no on knows wo l powold is, i is impossibl o idni wo nm o lib is, bcus poliicl oppssion coms om n unknown plc in ssm, ndc mmb o soci is p o ssm.

3) t id o concns minolog nd concpulizion o “lib” in Jpns lngug. tis viw psupposs concp o lib o dom is uniqu poduc o Wsn poliicl diion nd

s bn lbod in iso o poliicl suggls in Wsn counis.Jpns (o es asin lngugs) v d no pop m cn b mning nd implicion o lib. Usull, Jpns nslion o lib is ‘ jiyū’. howv, m jiū diionll mn ‘ on’s discion’nd ‘wiou consin’. t mning is simil in diionl Cins usgs wll. Moov, in Jpns, jiū is lso usd s vb mning ‘odomin nd conol somon oll.’ So wn ou s ‘a jiūnisuu B’, idosn’ mn a libs B bu a uls B a’s will. to, i ou nild o b jiū, i mns no on cn ind w ou doing. Onl

ul s pc jiū. tis m mind ou o wll known pssg b hgl bou asi, sing ‘[ knowldg o dom] o Oinls,wo knw onl On is , n o Gk nd romn wold,wic knw Som , nd inll, ou own knowldg all mns suc .’ (Lectures on the Philosophy of World History.) acull, hglin viw o ‘Oin’ s bn on o soucs suppoing is

viw in Jpn. also, s cooll, jiū on mns lunc oconvninc. On o nd, i ul would pmi jiū o common popl on suc nd suc m, i cull mns ‘ ul s

no ins in m’ n cognizing undmnl ig o sl-dminion o individul o goup.

tppd in diionl minolog, Jpns popl usull misundsnd mning o lib. fo Jpns, popl’s jiū is m o dg nd coodinion. t Jpns ink jiū s ndnc o css nd somims nds o b punisd b supio pow wni sps bond limi o olnc. Jpns minolog mks i diiculo ll dinc bwn igs o dom nd old slisnss.

Svl s go, posso o consiuionl o wo is collguo Posso Inou wo n insing ss nild ‘W Jpns Won’tk rigs Siousl’, ing o Posso Dwokin’s book, nd sd

31



‘igs’ m o coodinion o ‘good Jpns’. tis ss suggss cs could b sm o lib s i is o igs.

4) t ou o ks n opposi, o ls din, viw insiming condiion o lib in Jpn. I scs o lmns inJpns soci v ini o plllism wi Wsn id o dom. fo mpl, isoins wo k is viw sim lck owknss o mol nd ligious oodo in Jpn s n dvng – sconsd wi Cin o Ko w oodo o No-Conucinismin poliicl gim d bn iml sblisd. t s posiivc o is ‘wknss o oodo’ in llowing plulisic iud omol o ligious vlus. evn in tokugw sogun gim, gnll

viwd s sicl uoiin, scol would ln o cConucinism, Buddism nd Sino in plll (onl Cisini wsbnnd). t tokugw govnmn sccl ind in w popl ovn smui clss wnd o ln. rgding issu o uonomousssociions, s in Jpns mdivl g popl njod p o lib o uonom. t poin ou psns in villgs in mdivl g ld pincipl o sl-govnmn nd sl-mmn.Moov, popl njod n gliin ssm o poliicl picipionnd voing o dcision-mking o i villg. also, clim

Jpns “udl” piod sows cin simili wi euopn udlsociis, wic unciond s oo o libl plulism – soming m mind us o fncois Guizo’s omion o euopn civilizion.acull, l Jpns nslions o Guizo’s iso o civilizion ineuop ppd in 1880s nd w widl ciculd mong ounginllculs nd sudns. to, is id o “udlism” gos bck long w. t oicl omion o Jpns udlism is mo nidologicl pssion o nionlisic pid n conclusions dwn omsd nlsis. hisoins wo clim is concp usull g o ss

Jpn is onl cpion in non-Wsn counis d similisoicl bckgound o euopn civilizion. accoding o is viw,Jpns soci is mo “Wsn” n “asin”.

I is no diicul o poin ou oicl mwoks psndin is pp cull nivs invnd o poliicl nd/oidologicl sons. howv, o -min libl vlus in Jpnssoci wiou soing o, o wiou bing cd b, s nivs is diicul sk. to ind ou ow o ciiciz nd livis s idologiclmwoks consius g inllcul cllng. I would sop nd op ou will no blm m o cunningl vding giving clnsw o qusion ‘W is Liblism in Jpn?’


32



India: Rajeev Bhargava

tos wo looking o L-wods in Indi will soon discov Liblism is no on o m – i is ni loos no w rosnvllon cllsccoponic. t plc o onou blongs in Indi o Sculism, wic sni-ligious, non-ligious, nd muli-ligious connoions s wll ssom o i pvsions: muli-communl (qul mn b sowds nicl ing o v ligion) nd uni-communl (pili owds mjoi ligion nd olion owds os). t mlibl is l usd b poliicins o sl-dscipion. tis biullucnc gos bck long w – in Indin nionl movmn, vnos wo w libl did no cll mslvs so. a im, Congss

ws dividd bwn mods nd miss. O cous, is nv mn lck o commimn o libl vlus. a im dnc o civil libisws indispnsbl o ni-colonil suggl. howv, s civil igscm o b sn no s snding bu p o dmocic discous; spoliicl igs.

W dos m “libl” mn in Indi? fis, ngiv lib: ig o piv sp om ncocmn b os, picull s. t b o is ig is individul. On spks, o mpl, o libl wo blivs in is cild’s ig o coos pn.

Scond, m is songl ssocid wi ig o piv pop,ncd om Indin Consiuion in 1950s; nd wi mkdom, gins cssiv pows o s. finll, i dnos somonwi diss o poliics. On wol libls poliicl, i no ni-poliicl; wn g ino poliics, do so lucnl nd bing in cin sl: ving ound bl discussions, wiing ls o nwsppdios nd, bs, signing piion. t disus mss movmns ndgiionl, cononionl poliics. tus kp i own nds clnwils bing blind o i dpndnc on os wo mus v di onis. tis is clssic Liblism o lis. fo is son, popl on L, picull os in cdmi, nv us “libl” o sl-scipion bu psisnl us i o bus o dismiss i nmis.

Indin Liblism is sn b insids nd ousids lik s bougois,n idolog o Uiliinism; is links wi Uiliinism consiuiv,no coningn, mking i d o k i in n ni-cpilis dicion.eli I spok o n unwillingnss mong poliicins o cll mslvslibl. In ls wn s o so, is s cngd s bougois libls

v bn iml sddld in pow, i.. conol s insiuions ndv dominn voic in public sp. Qui simpl, Indin Liblismis voic o sus quo. y, supisingl, i lso iculs


33



spiions o v vocl scion o Dlis – om unoucbls– g o join nks o lis (in is sns i is lso voic o nupwdl mobil, mginl goup). Ionicll, s Dlis s mslvsno jus s libls bu s dnds o p-wsn modni. t pp o go bck o Liblism o mpi nd o pnlisicUnivslism o wic mpi sood. to m, ppsundsndbl, ll o Indin diion is ingliin, dpl iddn wics-icis nd il. t clb Indi’s colonision nd clb bid o Mcul, uo o Minus on educion, womousl sid ‘W mus do ou bs o om clss o psons Indin inblood nd colou bu englis in s, opinions, mol nd inllc.’ tisgoup clims wiou colonision hindu cs ssm would v

mind ull nncd wi wosning igidiis. fo m, colonilLiblism is mncipo. t wos ing don b coloniss ws ov ivd oo l nd l oo l. Muc o is is ongu in ck, bui commimn o Liblism is no ll sllow – wis o n nks o bougois lis. t -mks bcus bliv globlizion opns up nw oppouniis o m nd blivin song gim o individul igs bcus o is ponil o libm om cs icis. Sinc, o o sons, is is lso viw o nwl mgn nd spiing middl-clss, clssic Wsn Liblism is

liv in Indi nd kicking.I op i is cl o d Liblism in Indi s il id

mning. No mn viis o sds o Liblism sn . NwDl Liblism nd is mos sopisicd iculions v no ll lmuc o n impc on public discous. In is gd, globlision s noll lpd ms. t pi ‘no-’ is dundn in Indi bcus ‘libl’coninus o mn w i onc mn. Sinc gliin oms o Liblismv lgl bpssd wid public discous, L sill uss wodwi dnuncio inn. Onc in smin in 1990 in Dli’s mous

Nu Mmoil Lib, I usd pnd m ‘l-libl’ gning pndmonium. Viull von in ll insisd I could no goon unlss I cliid w I ws l o libl. hving sid , I musquickl dd smll gul s sinc mgd bwn ou poliicl ndcdmic wolds. egliin Liblism s nd cdmi, ocing somscols o lis muc in conmpo Liblism closl smbls socil dmocic diion. Old os now indli. also, sugnc o hindu ul-nionlism d csning c. Mn nowl spc o Liblism – und ssul b ul-nionlis ocs– is, ll sid nd don, wo pocing.

In sns, concpul nd nomiv vocbul o is gliin


34



Liblism is ld nncd in Indin Consiuion – wic bombodis nd is o nscnd libl-dmocc. an insing bumoll mbiguous dilcic is pl bwn discouss o liblconsiuionlism nd hindu nionlism. hindu-mjoiins bosond b i nd povokd o l i. Insingl, link iss bwn cin kind o libl Individulism nd hindu-mjoiinism, on is ploid b mjoiins o sv i own nds. how so? B undscoing wo o individul igs nd dispuing nd ocommuni-spciic minoi igs, mjoiins im o consolid socilnd insiuionl biss in i vou. tis ss up ns coni bwn libl consiuionlism nd Individulism.

W md i possibl o nnc concpul nd nomiv

vocbul o smingl lin Liblism, on sics unsml cions o bo ni-libl nd ni-dmocic lmns, in IndinConsiuion? In m viw, is is possibl pl bcus ls sinc rjrm Mon ro, disinc libl nd bgn o gow in Indi, mgingwi dius bu psisn sm o soming kin o bu no sms libl pspciv.

I wn o nd wi n lboion o is mk. Jus s w mk disincion bwn libl vlus nd pilosopicl inpions ndois o s vlus, jus so, w nd o disinguis bwn libl vlus

nd vlus wic in v insing nd subl ws din om buclosl ld o libl vlus nd cn nd do uncion in o culus inmuc sm w s libl vlus wok in modn Wsn culus,including os culus inluncd b i. W nd o opn up spc o lg, ndd mil o mol nd icl pspcivs o wic WsnLiblism nd is esn vins mmbs. tis would lp pvn colonision o concps nd vlus. I would lso lp pvn misk,md qunl, wv w vlu od – lib, quli, jusic,plulism, olion, igs, c – is o b ound onl, o bs iculd, in

Wsn Liblism.In Indi, ncpsulion o svl vlus b Liblism is du in p

o om o culul colonision coninud poliiclindpndnc. tis colonision did no dso bu disloc diions inIndi, ling culul pioiis. I pusd o cn culul lmns w io mginl, onl bcus is suid colonising nion.I bgn o lc coloniss’ pioiis. So, o mpl, goupclssiicion bcm muc mo dominn, clipsing indignousconcpions o individul. Indi ws sid o possss jus on individulisconcpion, i.. o-woldl individul, nounc. “tis-woldl”individuls did no is in Indi. Simill, oms o wosip nd i w


35



md nd incopod s “ligion”, m viull coind b euopnswiin locl ologicl dispus o 16 nd 17 cnuis. Indinsw obligd o ink o i i s ligion, o ink o mslvs smmbs o on clusiv ligious communi. Moov, locl inllculdiions slippd ino com. a pil bu dp oging o ncindiions is no uncommon mong modn Indin scols. Som dgo nl linion is common mong oml colonizd lis: bon ino pcics pvn m om piciping in nd ving scu knowldg o i own isoicl nd culul diions. founl,is pocss is incompl. tnks lgl o subodin goups, somdiions liv. fo mpl, mulipl diions o Bkiinoducd v insing invsions o upp cs noms nd vlus. In

mn plcs Bks blld gins widspd viw ‘incildood womn mus b sildd b , in ou b usbnd,in old g b son – vil womn dosn’ dsv dom’. t poposd u mncipion is possibl onl wn mn loss ismsculini nd bcoms minin nd upp cs go o oucsso icl nd mol lssons.

t poin I m mking is v insing ids dvlopd inIndi o socil quli, individul coic nd sponsibili, nd o domso n ligious dom (implici, o mpl, in dmnds o boliion

o cild mig o dmnds o widow mig). toug mping od m s poo-libl, i would b misk o do so, bcus w lking o v din wolds. tis is w I sid wn w bgino icul is vocbul, i will b din om – bu p o – nndd mil o concpions, o wic Wsn Liblism is lso mmb.

China: Wang Shaoguang

M lk is dividd ino wo ps. I will is look ino Cins Liblismbo 1949 nd n mov on o conmpo Cins Liblisms. I wills wi iso o Liblism in Cin. yn fu is pobbl ispson wo boug id o Liblism o Cin. h sudid in Biinnd nsld clssics o Liblism, nml adm Smi’s Wealth of Nations, Monsquiu’s The Spirit of the Laws nd Jon Su Mill’s OnLiberty, loug ls on s no onl bn nsld bu lsoinpd so Cins nslion ws ild On the Boundary betweenIndividual and Collective Rights – no cl w Mill d in mind.

as l s 1945, Cins pilosop h Lin poind ou wws impon o yn fu ws , in od o coun o bcom


36



wl nd powul, Cin d o llow is popl dom. to,libis w mns n nds. Bnjmin Scwz publisd book in 1964 nild In Search for Wealth and Power: Yan Fu and the West ,guing simil cs.

ano pson ws Ling Qico (1873-1929), wo ws lso mong is goup o Cins inllculs dvocing dom. and mning o dom in Cin ws v simil o mning in Jpn bo 19

cnu. fo mpl, dom o nion-ss nd socil goups wmuc mo impon n individul dom. (I ink m wslond o Cin om Jpn.) Ling soon bcm disppoind wiLiblism; oud euop in l 1918 nd 1919, jus bo nd o Wold W I, nd ound mn poblms wi Wsn counis. h ws

no impssd wi w sw nd so bcm Consviv.aound sm im bcm disppoind wi nw cululmovmn. Mn oung scols wo d sudid in euop o in USbgn o un o Cin ound 1910s. t boug ids o Liblism ino Cin – kind o Goldn e o Cins Liblism –oug ids did no ls long. tis ws im wn mn oung poplmbcd libl vlus, suc s psonl dom, consiuionlism nd spion o pows. howv, p soon scols bcm dividdino ou inllcul cmps.

fis, w v som libls wo usd o b libl in mids o 1910s bu inll convd o Communism. Scondl, w v DmocicSocilism, spcill mong os wo sudid in Biin (on London Scool o economics – qui numb o sudns, including m om mno Pking Univsi, w hold Lski’s sudns). tidl,w v so-clld “Nw Liblism”, v muc inspid b Jon Dw – mn o is dvocos w sudns wo cm om US. t wdin om scond goup ( scond goup lso includd sudnswo d com om euop). finll, w v scols wo bgn,

spcill in 1930s, b dvocing auoiinism o fscism. I isqui insing mn o m d sudid in US. tis ws imwn Nionlis P bsobd good dl o fscis docin ndpcic.

Communism bcm qui popul – populi suv conducd Bid nd o 1923 sowd Lnin nkd s is nd Psidn Wilsons scond (loug could v bn numb on i suv d bndon bo 1918). Dmocic Liblism d w dvocs, mongwic mos wll-known nd icul w Zng Junmi nd ZngDongsun. So, s l s in 1920s, Zng Junmi ws guing socil

jusic nd psonl dom qull impon s pills o good


37



soci. ald d sn nsion bwn wo nd wnd owok on som kind o combinion o bo. Zng Dongsun lso blivd ulim gol o soci ws Socilism o Communism, bu is

vsion o Socilism o Communism ws v din om Communiss’ vsion. h gud poliics sould mbc Liblismnd dmocc wiou polin dicosip, nd conomics soulddvoc public ownsip nd plnning.

Nw Liblism, s I mniond bo, ws mosl dvocd b scolswo sudid in Unid Ss, vil inluncd b Jon Dw. amongis goup o scols mos psniv igus w hu Si (wo lsoclld “Nw Liblism”, “Libl Socilism”) nd fu Sinin. NwLiblism ws “nw” in w i blndd Liblism nd som lmns

o Socilism: i jcd Individulism nd unguld Cpilism ndvoud nsion o dom om isocc o cpilis ndwoking clsss. t dinc bwn “Libl Socilism” nd Mismws om opposd id o clss suggl, voluion, ndpolin dicosip. Ni Socilism wiou dom no domwiou Socilism w sn s idl. Nvlss, Nw Liblism pid oomuc nion o civil libis nd poliicl igs nd indqu niono socil jusic nd conomic qui. as sul, socil bs o NwLiblism ws wk. In 1930, numb o scols bgn o dvoc

dicosip nd ws uious db wiin Nw Liblism cmpbou vius o dmocc nd dicosip. Som vn oug NziGmn could povid modl o Cin o bcom song.

hk onc nod , in Ws, lbl Liblism ws “ijckd”b libl-mindd dmocic sociliss. t ws lso cs in Cin.Duing rpublicn piod lbl Liblism ws “ijckd” b mn popl. Mos Cins libls im bndond clssicl Liblism.Insd, sd n nip owd mk conom nd pivpop igs, nd pnc o cnll plnnd, vil guld,

gliin conomic od. So w mosl collciviss, nindividuliss. as s inllcul soucs concnd, did no ciin i wiings Jon Lock, Dvid hum, adm Smi, edmund Buk,Lod acon, fdlis Pps, Monsquiu, Bnjmin Consn otocquvill. r, i min souc o inllcul inspiion wsroussu. ti voui conmpo inks w Jon Dw ndhold Lski – no f. a. hk, wos 1944 publicion cd lilnion mongs Cins inllculs ( onl viw md b PnGungdn ws qui ciicl o hk’s viw on Socilism).

In conmpo Cin, om 1949-1979 ws no Liblism. t-mgnc o Liblism I would d in o no qui oml


38



publicion o On Freedom of Expression, wic is kind o wll ppwin b scol nmd hu Ping, ind o min. tis pp ws nopublisd unil 1986 nd i minds m v muc o Mill’s wiings. In 1980s, wil mos Cins inllculs ndd o cll mslvs i“humnis Miss” (o disinguis mslvs om “Slinis Miss”)o “Dmocs”, nobod wnd o ssoci mslvs wi m“libl”. I ws no unil l 1990s Liblism inll cm inosion mong inllculs. I ink goldn s o conmpo Cins Liblism w om 1995 o 2002. fom 2003 unil now, ings p mss; dominion o Liblism in idologicl db s dd.

I would lik o lk bou idologicl lndscp in Cin in psn s o so. t undds o scools o oug. In 2000

Liu Junning, wo I ink is mos consisn libl in Cin, climd:‘Clssicl Liblism now domins Cin’s inllcul lndscp. No oscool o poliicl oug njos g populi in Cinsinllcul communi’. I ws pobbl u im bu no nmo.Now, poliicl spcum is wid nd v complicd. On on ndou v oicil idolog bu, on o, ou v qui numb o Liblisms: Liblism, Libinism, poliicl Liblism, so-clld “nwLism”; nd is no-Conucinism, no-Lglism, no-Doism ndCommuniinism.

Now l m inoduc Cins Libinism, wic is v muc und inlunc o hk nd ausin Scool o conomics. I ou go o noml bookso in noml coun, ou would no ind book winb hk, bu is no cs in Cin. Go o n bookso nd ou willind hk. almos ll o is books v bn nsld nd v bcom

v popul. t mos signiicn psnivs o is movmn LiuJunning, wom I mniond bo nd Qiu fng, wo is columnis. tis lso jounl Res Publica, wic ws oundd in 1994, nd concnson clssicl Liblism. t movmn o Cins Libinism posuls

Individulism, piv pop ownsip/pivizion, laissez-faireconomic pilosop o d liblision, minimum govnmninvnion, quli o oppouniis nd consiuionlism. Som o m w o nsion bwn Liblism nd dmocc, bu bliv in n conlic Liblism sould pvil ov dmocc. a globlconomic sunmi scu plns vw, nd in Cin ou cns mn libin scols ciicizing Wsn govnmn mkinvnion.

ano scool is poliicl Liblism. In 1990s ws no cldisincion bwn conomic nd poliicl Liblism. howv, p soon bcm dividd bcus o gowing inquli in Cin. t


39



psnivs o is scool (mong wom cn b ound Qin hui, LiSnzi, Zu xuqin nd xu youu) v Sou Nws Gouppublicions, mning is scool o oug domins publicions.ti k posiions : Individulism ( mpsiz civil libis ndpoliicl igs, nd som lso suppo posiiv dom n jusngiv dom), quli o oppouni (som lso suppo socilwl), ul o lw, sss on imponc o ccks nd blncs inpoliics, nd suppoing mk om wiou ndosing laissez-faireconomic pilosop.

t Nw L sn s opponns o libls. Nw L oissg i nm bcus pd o dd “nw” o i lbl s som s “l” m b di wod now. Nw L oiss ink vn i

som spciic ps o Socilism v povd wong, co id o Socilism cn sill b ccpd. So Nw L is o jusi som socilisids om nw pspcivs di om pspcivs o diionlsociliss. Bu, s opponns o libls, Cins Nw L oiss onndos n plusibl posiion o ciiciz Liblism, including viws knom Mism, Communiinism nd Cins diionl oug. M own posiion includs nsiv dmocc (bo poliicl nd socio-conomic), qul dom (bo ngiv nd posiiv) nd n civ s.

So w poins o db. fo mpl, individul igs vs.

collcivism; ngiv lib vs. posiiv lib (in ms o l,ducion, ousing, umn scuiis); lib (quli o oppouni) vs.quli (quli o oucom nd quli o pobbili); laissez-faire vs. ncssi o s invnion; lib vs. dmocc (wo dcids nking od o igs – gnions o igs);libl/consiuionl dmocc vs. picipo dmocc; poliiclnn (Lock) vs. socil nn (J. S. Mill) nd conomic nn (M);nd Univslism vs. possibili o lniv modniis. t lso mpiicl qusions, suc s soucs o inquli, soucs o

coupion nd soucs o o socioconomic poblms Cin is nowcing. t libls, Communiss nd Nw L v v din ids o w s poblms com om.

to summis, i would b bs o invi psnivs o libls nd om Nw L o dilogu. t db in Cin dosno ml impo nd dvis din oign ids, nd Cin dos noovus ‘no’ pi – so is sill pln o oom o Liblism.


40



Debate

Joao Carlos Espada: I sms in Indi, Jpn nd Cin, wod ‘Liblism’ is noco-ponic. I mn, i s pcis mning. So m qusion would b – i I undsood

cocl w ou v sid – min mning o Liblism in Indi, Jpn nd Cin is 19 cnu clssicl Liblism nd, i is so, is suc big dinc in siuion in ou counis, o in ou s o wold, wi wsn euop nd UnidSs?

Rana Mitter: Wll, would cull b sig nd simpl qusion, so i w sk oupnl o giv nsws. Dos ‘Liblism’ jus mn 19 cnu ‘clssicl Liblism’?

Rajeev Bhargava: I ink I v md i v cl i dos nd I lso sid w ndo mk disincion bwn wod ‘libl’ nd concpul, nomiv vocbul

wic complics m ‘Liblism’. Wil wod isl is usd in poliics in cinws, cul inlunc o Liblism in poliicl wold is v din. t is ninsing kind o disnc, gp o scism wiin m isl. So los o similiis bwn Indin, euopn nd vn amicn css, bu wod dos job is ‘dmocc’ o ‘socil dmocc’ o ‘sculism’. No ‘Liblism’ nd no ‘libl’.

Rana Mitter: Posso Koicio, nk ou o giving us ou poin polog, bu in isqusion is Liblism in Jpn ll 19 cnu clssicl Liblism?

Koichiro Matsuda: I is u socio-poliicl liu in 19 cnu s qui song inlunc on consucing id o lib o Liblism in modn Jpn. hving

sid , I ink wn Jpns popl lk bou lib o Liblism, pl-consciousl o unconsciousl dpnd on din inllcul, o o, cons, usingsoucs in din ws. So I ink is kind o vi o divsi, wn w lkingbou lib o Liblism, is muc mo impon wn inking o Liblism in Jpn.

Wang Shaoguang: I ink in Cin old scool jcs id o clssiclLiblism om Ws bo 1949. Onl in 1990s w I clld libin scoolpps smbls clssicl 19 cnu euopn Liblism. Bu poliicl Liblism inod’s Cin s v lil o do wi 19 cnu euopn Liblism.

Chang : I v wo qusions. t is is o ou Indin collgu. Is impssion o Liblism in Indi on in wic ll os noions o lib mosl simil, o dincs w dpd o som o ids? Bcus ou mniond in Indinionlism uss libl ids. Scondl, I ink o modn Cin is no noug spco dominn oc. Bu ou mniond ll mmbs o Nw L dvocLiblism. fo cli o concp, ou v o mk judgmn.

Rajeev Bhargava: fis o ll I ink w v o kp in mind in Indi is no locldiscous o cdmic discous on poliicl pilosop. t gs oug s com ompoliicl nd socil movmns, suc s Gndi, wo is g dso o libl-slpoliics bcus bings msss ino poliics (nd I do no ink v dscibd

imsl s libl, in c discdid libls). Gndi boug popl ino picund consucd kind o popul will – o k ro wo dscibs imsl s ‘diclumnis’. ts popl wo cull iging bl, ni-colonil suggl.


41



ts gus wos wiings d nd is mks ug dinc. and I wouldno b bl o do w ws don b Posso Sogung o Cin; i would b impossiblo m o do . In m discous on Liblism I would no b bl o look hobbs,Lock, roussu nd so on – I jus v o look public igus.

t o qusion ws isd ws bou ow hindu nionliss us libldiscous. L m giv ou n mpl: Jin is lding igu o no-ligiousnionliss’ movmn. Bu onc gs s nnouncs i will b scul, wicmns would no b id ligion, wic is libl. and ss ‘no ciizn willb discimind’ s long cs o b Muslim, nd so on. tis is cl w advniss. h is lding igu o hindu nionlis goup nd, nkl, is suggsions in common wi discous o l in fnc rvoluion. fmousl, popl in fnc rvoluion lso sid Jws will g ll igs s long s cs o bJws. t cn g i igs s ciizns s long s ink o mslvs s individuls.So is dilmm ws boos o cin goups. I individuls idni wi communi (i own) will no g n ciizn igs, bu i cs o idni wi

i own communi, g igs vbod gs. Now in is picu in wicLiblism (so o) is up wi rpublicnism, bu wiou spc o communi spciicigs o iculion o communi spciic inss, socill mbddd inquliis simpl ignod, nd lds o cin kind o mjoiinism. So is nswo ou qusion.

Wang Shaoguang: Ok, I do no dn conibuion o rvoluion o inoducing id o dom nd lib ino Cin bu I could onl do jusic o wol id i Id mo im o lbo, wic I do no. Scondl, bou dominnc o Liblism, Isomow conusd con; I lkd bou m o Liblism - is w I pu

Nw L ino mil o Liblism. Bu is lil dominnc o Liblism in Cin.In Cin, m ‘Liblism’ s o Libinism s wll s poliicl Liblism, no somuc o Nw L. to, is no spcil dominnc o Libinism o poliiclLiblism.

Q: M qusion is ld o conncion wi 19 cnu wsn Liblism. I ink i is impon o mnion euopn wold ws bcoming mo libl wi pnsion o civil igs, bu sm im ws diusion o so-clld euopncivilizion o non-euopn wold. t euopn undsnding o civilizion in nusll: conomic govnnc, nd os individuls o communiis did no ndossuc uls w no bing civilizd. M qusion is ow in 19 cnu s inllculs

in Cin, Jpn nd Indi dl wi noion o civilizion? Did o concil iwi i concp o Liblism?

Q: I wn o un o dominnc, ding dominnc, o Liblism in Cin. M own pinc is lil din nd – loug i pobbl is no wo ll muc – Iws in 2002 nd bsolul g wi ou. evbod sid ‘w ll libls now’.Wn I ws w wks go I skd w d bn n ding o isnusism nd, in v smll oom, 30 popl nswd ‘No – on con’. Now, lds m o sk is: ou v md i bsolul plin b ‘libl’ ou do no mn‘libin’ – ou disinguisd . Sill, ou disinguis, wiin bod mil o

Liblism, Nw L om libl. Now, w is pincipl disincion suggss oou cons bwn s wo goups nd ding o libl? I k i Liblisms ou undsnd i in Cin is w w would cll ‘gliin Liblism’, i is no


42



mk-domind nd i mpsiss (o us sond) bo ngiv nd posiiv igs.Now, w in Nw L jcs Liblism, s undsood in is gliin w? Isddns m o Liblism, so dind, is ding.

Samuel Brittan: In 1991 v inlunil amicn uo wi Jpns sunmnnouncd nd o iso nd iump o w I ink amicns blivd o bi vin o Liblism coss wold. M qusion is – ws book inlunil ndd? Did i c big impc? and ws i sn s “coc” o ws i sn s inpplicbl os counis?

Wang Shaoguang: Ok, is o ll, I ink db bou Liblism s d bigimpc on Cins poliics. I md judgmn Liblism no long domins b obsving wo wbsi discussion bods. a w s bck w domind b libliss. tod v bcom v divs. W ou sid bou “Cins Liblism”clssiid s “gliin Libinism” I do no g wi. Bo Libinism nd

poliicl Liblism no gliin Liblism s w undsnd in euopn oUnid Ss sns. t v muc clos o 19 cnu concp. espcill,libin scools o oug muc clos o 19 cnu, clssicl Liblism.

Rana Mitter: Ok. Bu is qusion cull d closl o Jpn. Would Koicio liko giv us som ougs on ?

Koichiro Matsuda: Ok, jus on poin. t is qui wll known scol wos nm isfukuzw nd wo book nild General outline of civilisation. In book quodhni Bcon nd lso d o Jon Su Mill nd d tocquvill s wll. In book

id o sp diionl minolog o Jpns civilision nd bing in nw Wsn undsnding o m “civilision”. acull, is w o pliningcivilision in sns ws no so gnl o usul. I ink w popl lk boucivilision, gin, is qui divsiid.

Rana Mitter: and is no oo muc o link om fukusw o fukum undds l. Now mo n dcd nd l s pssd sinc fukum’s publicion. Ws n impc in Jpn o book in w ws din om cl impc i d in euop o amic?

Koichiro Matsuda: acull, i is u i is wll-d nd d o in mn nwspps.

Bu I do no know w i s ll md n impc on poliicl o socil discous, soI m no su. and I v impssion vn i lo o popl o book, mjoi o os popl v soming ngiv, soming gins w fukum wo.t is m impssion.

Wang Shaoguang: Jus on wod bou End of history? In Cin book ws nsldino Cins p soon, in l 1990s. Bu now is nw book nd i s lso bnnsld ino Cins. his nw publicion discdis is old on – vbod knows .

Rajeev Bhargava: fncis fukum s nv bn kn siousl, is jus jcd

ouig o vi o sons – pl bcus cdmi is v l-lding ( sds o Miss nd pos-modniss nd o viis o L nd domin). tis lso soming v song wic I would cll no culul nionlism bu culul pid.


43



and o ink ws som id w ws dvlopd lgl in Ws wouldcull bing bou nd o iso ws qui idiculous. I mn, mb som popl in powul li – Bus o libls – d i nd ook i siousl, bu mos popl didno d book popl. I did no ull undsnd qusion o civilision bu mb nsw s som bing on w ou v skd. a lo o libls, including Mill, cull oug civilision ws immu. I ws lik cild. and sw ligion pul ssupsiion – no lm o smbolic mning. So viw mn euopn libls d in 19 cnu on Indin civilision ws i ndd lo o impovmns nd onl libls could cull ld gnc o empi. I is v insing igu wocull spok gins m ws Buk, wo ws sn s libl.

Rana Mitter: W cn sc diniions pps. Could w s mo nds?

Q: I v qusion o spk on Indi. you mniond on poin ou dsi omk Wsn Liblism p o lg mil o diions, nd I snsd cin silnc

wn i cm o iculing w, in Indin cs, o mil mmbs would b.and I wond w is som so o dp poblm. In ll o discussions wconsd Liblism wi som o ‘-ism’ – Liblism vsus Socilism, poliiclLiblism vsus gliin Liblism, c. you giving piculiis o o giv msom mil smblnc. to g ino discussion w ving ou mk nbscing mov. So, is som so o pnomnon in pojc? t qusionls o soming jus mniond in pssing bu ou did no lbo on, in Indin consiuion ou wn no onl o incopo lmns o Liblism nd dmocc bu lso o nscnd m. I m wonding w in is qusion o piculi vsus univsl p o discous, qusion o somow nscnding libl dmoccis in

i common Indin cs wi nscndnc spc, binging in som so o diion,would b on som culul lvl lgiim o obiddn in so o discussion w vingnow.

Q: In Cin nobod links mslvs wi libliss bcus, diionll, libl mns ‘sin’, bu is so-clld “Nw Li” scool wic is o nsom is. t 1990s wdomind b Nw Liblism simpl bcus jus wnd o vs is om.Nvlss, I ink ou cnno s w libls domin o no.

Francis Chevenal: I v qusion o ll spks. I v go sns in oucounis Liblism is v muc n impod concp, oug nslions, oug

suding in Ws, c. So obvious qusion I v is: W pop diionsnocd o ccld b s nslions, w nonlss ld , psn inou own diions? O ws i ll soming cm o ou diions jus in 19

cnu, owning o s nslions?

Dominic Burbidge: a qusion o Msud. you mniond ow in Jpn concp‘libl’ usd o is nslion wod jiū, lib, mning non-siciv indulgnc.tis sms o b qui good dscipion o ngiv lib. I ws wonding w ou sin Wsn lib s bn missd ou in nslion. W is i sms o b uniquin is wsn concpion o lib is no cpud in Jpns nslion?

Jacob Levy: I m sill ing o g m d ound w poliicl libl concpdominn in Cin mn. I would v oug libl posiion in Cin would


44



v ndd up looking mo lik conomic o mk Liblism jus bcus o boundis o lgiim public gumn. t is, w know ou cn mk publicgumns in Cin bou ng o conomic qusions. t ings l o mig vbn ings owis would v ppd o b libl gumn. Bu i poliiclLiblism – s ou dining dominn discous – is soming o n mkLiblism o Libinism, w could i b? I cnno b dnc o ligious lib,i cnno b dlism, i cnno b dnc o muli-p ssm. an o ings Issoci wi poliicl libl o consiuionl libl diion, I do no pc o inds dominn, publicl-dbd inllcul nds in Cin. I m ing o b cul so s noo ld ou ino n uncomobl con, bu I sill cnno undsnd w minms o is ing is wn i is no mk Liblism, is bl o b lgiiml dbd,nd s disincivl libl diion.

Wang Shaoguang: W w lking bou dominnc o poliicl Liblism, bu no in ni o Cin. Wn I lk bou dominnc o poliicl Liblism, I mn in

inllcul communiis. So wn ou sk m w ws dominnc o Liblismin l 1990s ws no onl m judgmn, bu lso i judgmn. I ou qun visio o som inn discussion ooms, ou cn s ow discussion wsdomind b issu o clssicl Liblism. t is w I lk bou o dominnc.Poliicl Liblism, in ll issus ou mniond, s bn discussd nd dvocd inCin vn oug mn popl v impssion Cin is uoiin wi nooom o discussion. In c, ving is discussd in inn discussion ooms, innwspps nd in mgzins. I ink qusion om fncis is qui insing. I ld mniond db bou Liblism in Cin pps o b som in cup –mosl mong smll goups o Cins inllculs. I ou do public opinion suv, ou

will ind o b v lil Liblism. I ou sk, ‘Do ou suppo lib?’ s ‘s.’‘Dmocc?’ – ‘ys.’ ‘equli?’ – ‘ys’. Bu i ou sk spciic qusions bou c o sconcps, ou would ind v din obsvions. So is w I ink id isimpod b inllcul lis wo v som lvnc bu no lvnc o populso in Cin.

Koichiro Matsuda: I ink I will o nsw bo qusions. I op I do no com cosss ud i I s ings is w: I ink i somon skd m, ‘W is ou culu?’ Iwould conss , cull, I do no undsnd w m culu is. I is possibl wnsomon sks m w Jpns culu is I cn, mb, sgicll nsw, ‘O, is isJpns culu.’ Bu i is kind o discous ou cn k dvng o. I is v diicul o

nsw in w suggss Jpn d is own culu nd n Wsns cm ndsoming cngd. tis is oo simpl. and, lso, gding scond qusion – w m viw is o wsn Liblism – is is w s conncs o.

On ing wic w l o Jpns oug is using m ‘-ism’ (Liblism,Nionlism) ws lso v big poblm o 19 cnu inllculs. fo mpl, nsld m ‘Liblism’ o soming clld ‘diu-sugi’ nd usull us ‘sugi’ osoming s ‘-ism’, bu i is qui n mbiguous wod nd s v wk diion. Iis no kind o diion convnionl ms v, i ws jus coind im. Mb is soming o cusom iud looks libl, bu o s somon is libliso no is din m, I ink.

Rajeev Bhargava: I m so i I gv impssion Liblism s no inluncd loo poliicl insiuions in Indi. I did no mn o giv i, oug on o wo popl mig


45




46

v go impssion. So is m is poin. t o is looking numb o policis o consiuionl icls (k, o mpl, invnion in is o ligion,cogniion o spciic igs o s gulion o mk, puing socil jusic s v impon p o pmbl o consiuion), on cn sk: libl o no? I dpnds on w ou mn b libl. fo som popl is is ll libl. On ond, o lo o popl is is no Liblism, is is soming ls. and is poin Iv bn mking. fo mn popl wo w mking is p o consiuion nd ninking bou policis lowing om i, did no sm o ink is is sominglowing om pckg I would cll ‘Liblism’. P o i lso s o do wi squncing o ow ings consiuionlisd. I mn, in Indi, Liblism nd dmocc , in sns, in popl. So i is no Liblism cm is nd dmocc cm l –bo cm sm im. and so i is s o s som o ings ou wouldink w p o Liblism d ll bcom p o dmocic discous. t is w I sid is no disincion wi kind o cumnicl concpion o poliicl Liblismom wic ll s ings will low. I is v now concpulision o poliicl nd

conomic Liblism. and is w Liblism is, s is ll din.t o ing o sk is w s bn g moun o wok don on is.

acull, wok on is is bl sing. t is no wol lo o wok don onlniv inllcul diions. and ‘-ism’ is n lin ing vn o modn culus. Sommniond Liblism ws inoducd in 19 cnu. t wod ‘hinduism’ ws noinoducd in Indi ill 19 cnu, so vn hinduism is n invnion o 19 cnu.Bu k Bki movmn – mn soucs om wic ou cn consuc oudiion nd is poin I v bn mking. and gumns o b md.



Part II: COre theMeS Of LIBeraLISM

Introduction: Michael Freeden

In Louis hz’s mous The Liberal Tradition in America w ind issmingl supising snnc: ‘Sul, n, i is mkbl oc: isid, dogmic Liblism o libl w o li’ (p9). In Guido druggio’s qull clbd The History of European Liberalism, wis:‘W o-d so muc ccusomd o id o Libl S wdo no noic is pdoicl nu…t S, ogn o cocion par excellence, s bcom igs pssion o lib’ (p353). Dogm ndcocion: is sm Liblism s poducd nicing cockilo volunism, coic, gnc, sl-dvlopmn nd opn-minddnss?

Indd i is, no dos condmn i s illibl: no Liblism is immuno lmns o cocion nd dogm; owis i would cs o b obuspoliicl cd. Lik n poliicl o o idolog, Liblism posssssd lins i will no coss nd non-ngoibl pincipls ov wic i will nobgin: umn igs, pimc o lib, snci o consiuionlngmns.

Bu odin compli w blil cll Liblism – s i nm isl suicd – quis v cul considion. I is nowincsingl, nd igl, common o ss is no on ing clld

Liblism; , insd, onl Liblisms und mil-smblncumbll. Bu commonplc bou conns o libl blis isinsuicinl vling s sing poin o compiv discussion. tmo undmnl qusion is: wic o vious mods oinvsiging Liblism is mos conduciv o compiv pspcivw sking in is connc? Wn w nqui ino Liblism, owdos ou cosn ppoc dmin what i is w n idni sLiblism? t mili gumn mong poliicl oiss ndpilosops, Liblism is s o univsl clims bou umn

cpci o ionli, individuli, sl-dvlopmn nd bov ll lib could sil bcom – s i s bcom in muc nlicl pilosop –

47



undmnll non-compiv. I ll oo on succumbs o locking co s concps ino singl mning no onl mps mgnc o pluli o Liblisms, bu miscivousl mplos lngug o mpiicism (‘Liblism is’; ‘libls minin’) o disguis isown idlizd lngug o nomivi.

tougou iso o invsiging Liblism, picull wnundkn b sl-sld libls mslvs, wo picul modls vbn s up, c wi din globlizing ndncis: on ncosLiblism in n bsc icl consucion o opiml umn conducwi immdi univsl ionl ppl – om socil conc o oug pscologicl ppocs o umn louising o oiginlposiions und vils o ignonc; o modl idniis Liblism

wi niv bou gow o civilizion inobl spds nooug mgic o imlss logic nd sipuliv moli, bu ougspil nd mpol qusi-lologicl congion nd oug cululconsion nd ulim iump. Bo combin icl nd idologiclssions; bo dogmic, bo spi o cl ccizions o wLiblism is. t is – inspid b cn ponouncmns in icl ndnlicl poliicl pilosop, spcill in No amic – s looddcdmic li ov ps 30 s, loug i mns in min omn lniv, micl nd uni, libl wold o on occupid b

d ruggio nd hz. t scond – wi is Milli nd Dwinin iin umn pogss – s domind dvlopmnl snd o Liblism msus is succss oug pomoing scul gospl o umni imd mnciping individuls nd popls wo li sgs o dvncmn. I jcs illusion o s nuli nd gds ss mov o indncs, undpinn o mon, licio o individul ponil nd cilio o psonl visions.

Bu conciving o Liblism i s pilosopicl-icl momn os n unsoppbl isoicl oc no mos lpul ws o ngging

in pop compison; no ls bcus ni sops o sk w discouss nd pcics w nd o cll libl cull are nd o w consiud, qusion w nd o sk long bo w moun icl o idologicl bicds, quippd wi gnd sns o missionconcning w Liblism should b. h no mod mig vl din consucs msquding s, o connding o, il‘libl’. Wn w ppl ‘mico’ ppoc o libl inking, w will ind i is indd ognizd ound co concps, co no in sns o bing ssnilis bu o bing cnll in vidnc – isoicll nddiscusivl – in ll mjo pssions o libl inking. fou o os vbn cosn o od’s sssions: Individulism, olnc, mks nd


48



Univslism. t , o cous, no onl libl co concps wcould v discussd: lib, pogss, consind nd ccounbl pow,nd socibili-cum-muuli, o pim cndids.

t poin is Liblism invibl mgs s mss o condicions nd pil incompibiliis. t is no soming wsould ncssil bmon o sk o ovcom: sucul libili o Liblism’s concpul cicu mios is pusui o olnc, bu isinscpbl ‘dogmism’ limis libili o volving oundconsining concpul nods. t son o is cl: c o osco concps os oug ng o mnings nd no ll o osmnings, no ll o concpul coniguions c og,min wiin conins o w w would nomll consid o b

Liblism. Bu some vsion o c core concp is ncss o sonbl ull libl poil o obin, n jus s liblgmns, nd som concpul combinions m no b ccoponic buuponic. t cucil issus in nlsis o Liblism o dul:fis, w smnic boundis o is co concps libls cnpu up wi, bo i cd mus ino soming ls? Scond, i isno jus psnc o bsnc o co concp dmins poilo Liblism. t qusion is : w is liv wig o c coconcp wiin libl concpul clus – is, disibuion o

signiicnc c concp cn c. Wn singl co libl concppnds o k up ll vilbl spc, dlic nd compl innlblnc o Liblism is dmolisd; w invibl v illiblism i onco concp domins ll s. fo mpl, i w un wi mkslon – wi pivizion o cng lionsips o sblisingo vsd sp o civil soci – pns o individul dvlopmno lib s lciv coic, clim o mmbsip o libl mil bgins o l. tolnc, s roussu undsood so wll, is isl dogm(o is civil ligion) unquivocll quid suppssion o

inolnc. ‘W mus b bsolul inoln bou inolnc’ ssroussu, no libl imsl bu is v libl smn. tus liblolnc would sop gs o mbcing buss o umn igs.Libl Univslism – w m ind ou l od – dos no coisppil wi som oms o libl divsi nd plulism. Individulism,kn o n m, poducs socil omism undmins liblumnism nd socibili.

In sum, jus s singl swllow dos no mk summ, siging o singl u o Liblism dos no mk i Liblism, nd mimizion o n on libl vlu ns opimizion o s,o vn subvs i mo noml suvivl sub-opiml lvls. I is onl

Part II: Core Themes of Liberalism

49



oug coninuous libl inpl bwn co libl concps w cn ppci inicc o libl gumn s wll s is limis. tsconcps nv compll dmin, oug bo iciss ndidologiss would dl lik o dcons i consd mnings s s cn. h libl cocion sucs. In rwls’s own lling wods, ‘I w l cocd, i m b bcus, wn w lc on m nd,

vlus, pincipls, nd sndds so omuld nd ngd l cognizd s ons w do, o should , ccp’ (Political Liberalism,p45). t is no n ics o coic; i is on o rational coic invlids o coics s bd o onous – no vsion o mddics o son. Libl idologiss, oo, v insisd sundk compulso civiis wiou wic individul igs cnno b

sgudd, no individul wl nbld. appls o son o o llow-ling s wll s song nd pssion uss o oic lws pplicion o psusiv oc, lws compiion ov conol o poliicl lngug – nd Liblism is no sng o n o os.

Bu w omulos o libl oug do is no sm s w w– inps o libl oug – quid o do possionll,nml, o sow ow vins o ic libl lngug mg.fumo, i is onl oug ou snsiivi o mulipl – ndoccsionll mss – mnings cid b co libl ids w cn

mplo insig bnicill in svic o compison. Compingdogms nd vn oms o idionl cocion com null o ll ps o poliicl inking – is on son mks suc inking political –nd i is qui noml o Liblism oo o displ os us in mildom. howv, o dop n uncompomising icl o idologicl mod inooing o one kind o Liblism, o on ppoc o i, wv m b, would b o dso ionl o compison s wll s o mciLiblism isl. Compison is no ggd-on o sud o poliicl oug; i divs dicl om ppciion vlus

signiid b poliicl wods will lws min polsmic, nd om undsnding ni im, no spc, no concpul cicu cnold mning o Liblism consn. t lgiim ngmns o libl pmuions v lil o do wi n ininsic logic o liblgumn. r, v lmos ving o do wi socil ndculul djusmns nd o b pomd, im nd im gin, wnlibls o clim i plc in sun in v din clims.


50



3. INDIVIDUALISM

Steven Lukes

t ognizs v suggsd ‘Individulism’ is on o k concps

ssnil o Liblism – i is ‘cnl o ll oms o Liblism’, so non-individulis Liblism would no b Liblism. tis dos look plusibl. ‘Collcivis Liblism’ nd ‘communis Liblism’ soundomoonic – oug ‘libl communism’ usd o mk sns, mningeuo-Communiss wo d bndond vious spcs o minlinMism incompibl wi libl poliics. ‘Communiin Liblism’sounds plusibl, bu onl bcus so-clld communiin ciics o Liblism w ll libls. t communiins w no ni-libl; wnd o nic o bodn o dpn Liblism. In dbs o 1970s nd 1980s bwn libls nd i communiin ciics, suc sMicl Wlz, Cls tlo, Micl Sndl nd Will Kmlick, lbsicll gud o libl poliics llowd o mulicululcogniion o goup o collciv idniis, o wnd o pomo civicpublicn vius, o sw culu s poviding con o mningulindividul coic.

t id Individulism is k concp Liblism quislooks plusibl. Bu poblms wi is. fis, I would lik o lk

bou wods o momn. ‘Individulism’ s isoicll d dinmnings in din lngugs, jus s ‘Liblism’ dos. Wn I wo m book Individualism, I ws suck b din smnic ilds o is wodnd is ppn quivlns in din nionl culul cons. foinsnc, comp fnc viw o Individualisme, wi amicnclbo mning o Individulism (s in ‘uggd Individulism’). tdiniion in Académie Francaise dicion o ‘Individualisme’ ws, Idiscovd, ‘plcing inss o individul bov o soci.’ and is n insing quo om Pi rosnvllon, wic mpliis

disincivl fnc w o using is wod. h wo : ‘t pogss o individulism, osion o dmocic vili, dclin o civic sns,

51



sm pssimisic nd noslgic dignosis s -ppd vw.’‘Individualisme’ is cll no pcivd s good ing. ‘Individualisme’ ,

in fnc lngug, s is nd o pjoiv connoions. rclltocquvill, wo wo in Democracy in America, ‘Individulism’ is nw wod, o wic nw pnomnon d givn is. t nwpnomnon ws: widwl om public sp, ino piv cicl o mil nd inds wic ws oding civic spii.

I is qusionbl w Individulism is indd concp. Pirosnvllon would s i is ccoponic concp. L’s k issuggsion suc concps is. W is ccoponic concp?Ccopon occus wn unld sounds bl ou og, nd cis qui unplsn, nd i is o soming w would lik o sop. So

w Pi smd o b sing is wns us, isl, o sop mkingnd lisning o suc nois, nd scondl, nois o ccoponicconcps s poliicl uncion, bu w sould lv is nois mking o poliicins, nd dvo ouslvs o nlsing individul sounds.

So w w o s bou Individulism? Wll, is, obvious ingo mnion is Individulism is n ‘-ism’. and ‘-isms’ 19 cnu consucions. I ou d encclopédi, o D. Jonson’s dicion, ouwill no ind ‘–isms’.

t scond ing is , ll coss wold, i s com o signi

cognizbl clus o ids, iuds, disposiions nd docins, nd isus no ccoponic. On con, I clim ls l cnu ssn convging wold-wid picu o s o docins nd ids viwds null ld nd muull indpndn. ‘Individulism’ usundsood nms clus o ids popgd ov ls l cnu b libin o no-libl inllculs, wi unqulld nd compllingoic, vnglicl vigou nd sns o isoicl mission, in cono gdul dplion o mning o ‘Socilism’, so b now w nolong v n cl sns o w that wod cn mn.

W, n, is is ppnl monious, s opposd o ccoponic so ids, widl lblld coss glob s ‘Individulism’? t ovll idis in din domins – conomic, poliicl, lgl, ligious,modologicl, nd so on – individul is kn o b pim; ndcollciviis (goups, insiuions o impsonl ocs) kn o bscond, diviv, icionl o ducibl o individuls nd iincions. Jus s M Wb oug lciv iniisbwn Posnism nd spii o Uiliinism, id is ‘Individulism’ cpus con compl o lmns uniqul ssocidwi Liblism.

So, o mpl, bwn Liblism nd so-clld modologicl


52



Individulism, is somow n indissolubl link, so i w d oLiblism w v o b modologicl individuliss, ducing ndplining ving socil o individuls. tis long-snding db sgnd n odin moun o pssion. Kl Popp oug i ou w no modologicl individulis ou w wickd, nd on dngous p o dngous opinions. t knl o is id o modologicl Individulism is plnions o socil pnomn ndpocsss onl dqu o “ock-boom” i coucd woll in ms o incing individuls.

So, modologicl Individulism is supposdl inspbl om dnc o vlus cnl o Liblism. Simill, oconncions supposd o old bwn s ids, docins nd

din posiions, ld og b is m. fo insnc, vlus cnl o Liblism supposdl nd b vious kinds o olisic o non-individulisic inking – o insnc onologicl olism,ibuing som kind o li o goups, collcivis, o socil unis o

vious kinds. and libl vlus supposdl nd i w bliv incollciv goods, o collciv gols, o i w spk o collciv idniis,o i w ink w cn ibu igs o goups. fumo, i commido libl vlus, w supposd o b inspbl commid o supioi, vn indispnsbili, o mk pocsss ougou ng

o umn civi, nd indd no jus in conom bu in us o mk nlogis bond conom.

B cons, I gu is clus is cull n idologicl ndculull spciic pckg. to, i is big misk o ink Individulism, us undsood, is k concp o Liblism. I clim is pckg ws pu og in ausi mos loqunl b Ludwig vonMiss, wo wo:

All varieties of collectivist creeds are united in their implacable

hostility to the fundamental political institutions of the liberal system:majority rule, toleration of dissenting views, freedom of thought,speech and press, equality of all men under the law.

t ws, wo,

struggle between individualism on the one hand and a multitude of collectivist sects on the other hand whose mutual hatred and hostilityis no less ferocious than their abomination of the liberal system… Asubstitution of collectivism for Liberalism would result in endlessbloody fighting.


53



t id o s nul nd inspbl inconncions bwn idsws mos powull popgd b fidic von hk. hk dvocdw clld ‘u’, s opposd o ‘ls’, Individulism – l divingom ‘mig o socil jusic’, supposd illusion socil jusicmks sns, nd ionlis o ‘scinisic’ illusion ‘socilngining’ could bing i bou. ‘tu’ Individulism would poc usom vnuing down ‘od o sdom’ nd om bing mpd osuccumb o ‘l conci’ o Socilism.

fo hk, ll lk o ‘socil jusic’ ws bo mninglss nd dngous,involving ‘nopomopism o psoniicion o soci,’ o ‘svicscn v vlu onl o picul popl’ (o n ognizion), nd ‘n picul svic will v v din vlus o din mmbs o

sm soci. to gd m dinl is o soci no s sponnous od o mn bu s n ognizion wos mmbs ll md o sv singl ic o nds’. tis would ncssil b oliin soci in wic psonl dom would b bsn. and Ms.tc gv popul pssion o is viw wn s mousl sid ‘ is no suc ing s soci’. t id, in so, ws Individulismis pckg o u ois wic, i w ollow m, will poc us omidolog, nd, spciicll, om dngs o Socilism. Smul Binmd is clim cll in 1980s, wiing

In every generation freedom is threatened by those who regard theindividual person as inferior to some supposed collective whole…[T]he intellectual battle between the individualist and the collectivist is never won, but it remains important to fight it.

M clim, b cons, is ssnil individulis vlus li o Liblism. So I vou dconsucing is pckg.following Posso Dwokin, I idni wo sp snds o Liblism.

t is quliin id i ms qull ow v individul ligos. and scond snd is ni-uoiin id v li isbs livd om insid, nd ow wll i gos is o b judgd b co’sown poin o viw (b w Bnd Willims clls ‘innl sons’). and vious concps closl cd o s wo v bscids: id o individul digni, id is sp o pivc o non-innc, id o uonom involving ciicl lcivnss, id o sl-dvlopmn o individuli. and ll o is is id upog. t is ow I ink Liblism ls o Individulism.

I com o wo ll-oo-bi conclusions. fis, concning idologiclpckg, I clim dnding nd plining condiions und wic


54



s individulis vlus cn b lizd quis cl jcion o somo os docins I lludd o li, nd qusioning o os. Inpicul, i quis jcion o modologicl Individulism nd l scpicism bou mks in llocion o goods nd svics.

t scond conclusion is o suggs w nd o k up mrjv Bgv isd sd. fo co vlus o Liblism o blisd in lniv, culull divs ws w nd o ddss cllng o llowing o culul cons lss omisicll concivd n in ou Wsn libl sociis.

Carol Horton

I would lik o si cous o discussion bi b looking Liblismin compiv con, ocusing on nu o Individulism in US.Sinc 1980s, amicn poliicl culu s bn domind b vino omisic Individulism dscibd b Posso Luks. tis, owv,is no onl modl o Individulism s bn isoicll imponin amicn soci. t s bn ls on longsnding lniv,wic s bn cnl vilisd b lcion o Psidn Obm. I is v din concpion, bo o Individulism nd individul’s olin soci.

In cn dcds, dominn concpion o Individulism in USs cmpiond w I would g wi Posso Luks o b nunlisic id o socill dcind individuls. Pilosopicll, is isino long diion ss pusui o individul pncs s raison d’être o amicn dmocc. Picull, sinc 1980s, isppoc o Individulism s bn mbddd in culul pspciv

vlus wl bov ll ls. to pu i blunl: dominn concpion o amicn Individulism o l s bn ll bou ging ic wiouscupl.

Sucull, is concpion o Individulism s bn id o gowingi bwn wl nd s o soci. a sm im, sng nd scui o middl clss s odd mndousl. Wilis biucion o amicn soci s cinl bn id ino globlconomic dvlopmns, i s bn cbd b govnmn policis lpd o blloon cnl bus inncil bubbl, od pogssivion, u lbou unions, block lc oms, duc l vluo minimum wg, nd so on.

Culull, US s sid o w s bn md “winn-ks-ll-soci”. In ms o Individulism, is nds o cus popl wov no bn succssul in gining wl o l “loss.” tis

55




conomicll divn, “winn” vs. “los” mnli s impovisdamicn culu bcus ull vi o wowil umn pusuis isno givn dqu spc.

howv, is n lniv diion o amicn Liblism, wicm mno l J. Dvid Gnson cd bck o abm Lincoln. Inis lniv viw k gol o amicn Liblism wi spc oIndividulism is osing l individul dvlopmn. fom ispspciv, l dvlopmn ncssil ncompsss ull ng o umn pusuis bcus o nul divsi o individuls. No simpl businss nd commc, bu cllnc in ducion, lics, , cild-ing, csmnsip, cibl wok, nd mn o pusuis lldmd wo o poound spc.

Cospondingl, gol o amicn dmocc is no simpl osis individul pncs bu, , o c soci in wic v individul s oppouni o dvlop is o lns o ull. fomis lniv pspciv, dvlopmn o suc divs o individul cpciis uls vili o amicn dmocc. Sucull,is concpion o Individulism s l umn dvlopmn sisoicll bn id o mo gliin poliics. tis is du o n insisnc i is ncss o consid w socil condiions llow dvlopmno suc ull ng o civiis, mking m conomicll vibl in v

pcicl sns.hisoicll, c s pld k ol in discdiing w commonl

clld “pogssiv” o “libl” poliics in US (i.., l-o-cnposiions commid o dvloping mo gliin soci). Sinc l1960s, amicn cil poliics s bn cnl in discdiing suc poliicsb pomoing widspd ngivi owd public sco nd ccpinggowing socio-conomic divisions. t common culul pcpion pov cn b qud wi Blck popl – nd Blcks cn in un bqud wi w is widl pcivd s violn nd immol go

culu – s undgidd common pcpion gliin policisunnl dolls w om d-woking nd incsingl conomicll sssd “l” amicns, snding public monis down cil sinkolw do no good wsov. tis bli s bn k in dvncing bod bsd ni- movmn, suppo o unpcdnd gow in pnl ssm nd, indd, suspicion o ll socil wl policis. essnill,c s bn cnl in pomoing poliics s cbd conomicdivisions bwn ic nd poo wil oding middl clss. In issns, c is dicl id o scndnc o dominn concpion o omizd Individulism wosips n unlisic idl o unmmlldmk ocs.


56



Psidn Obm mbodis nw nd unpcdnd cil pdigm cllngs bo consviv ig-o-cn nd pogssivl-o-cn concpions o c v domind amicn culusinc l 1960s. B cnging poliics o c, Obm simulnousl opns up nw oppouniis o cnging dominn concpions o Individulism, quli, nd amicn ciiznsip.

t nw cil pdigm psnd b Obm mbodis obviouscompli o is own cil sus. Duing un-up o 2008 lcion, ws signiicn qusioning gding w ws “oo Blck” owin – o, lnivl, “no Blck noug” o undsnd nds o amicn minoi communiis. evnull, amicn public b ndlg ccpd Obm s Blck. howv, c d Wi

mo, n aicn , Buddis sis, nd hwiin bckgoundd bcom wll known. to v poliicl ld wi suc complcil bckgound ws so widl discussd ws is in amicniso. Obm is simulnousl Blck nd Wi, amicn ndinnionl, Cisin nd cosmopolin, niv-bon bu sing in amicn immign pinc. h is psniv o nwmuliculul, mulicil amic could onl v mgd sinc Civil rigs movmn o 1960s.

fu, Obm s bn v dlib nd v public bou is

dcision o mbc n aicn-amicn idni. h clims bo isBlcknss nd is amicnnss poudl – bu no dnsivl o in nclusion w. his Blcknss, s voks i poliicll, minds us o bs o Blck pinc in amic. I poins o ssion o op in c o oppssion, commimn o dmocc dspi pinc o disciminion, nd vision o uni nscnds divsi.fo os wo mbc is vision, minds us o sng o Civilrigs movmn nd is commimn o b amic, no jus oaicn-amicns bu o ni soci.

Signiicnl, Obm is willing nd bl o ddss conmpo poblms in aicn-amicn communi, suc s bkdown o blck mil nd pologis o go culu. ts issus vbn boo in ms o l-libl poliicl discous in US sinc uo suounding Monin po o mid-1960s. tis l-o-cn usl o gppl onsl wi issus cing blck poo l poliicl vcuum in cn dcds s bn ppil illd b cion voics psn sl ngiv nd on-dimnsionlpol o minoi poo.

Obm, owv, lso dmonss common quion bwnBlcknss nd go pov is simpl inccu. t Obm mil


57



poudl – nd obviousl – mbodis v middl clss vlus suc s mil,i, ducion, wok, nd psonl sponsibili. t v bn upwdl mobil nd ml succssul. t psn p o aicn-amicn communi s mind culull invisibl, vn s i sgown in pow nd imponc.

t cil pdigm Obm mbodis is mbddd in lg vision o amicn idni. In is books, spcs, nd policis, cl mssg is v ciizn is bo n individul nd p o collciv dmocicpimn. amicn Individulism is ddicd o dvloping din lns nd cpciis o ll ciizns in od o build dmocicsng nd vili o nion. O cous, s undsndings o c,Individulism, nd dmocc conncd b bli ni c

no n o quivln socil cgo sould pos bi o l individul dvlopmn. to n suc bis min, amicndmocc sus.

tis vision o soci in wic v individul ul s oppouni o lis is o bs cpbiliis vivs longsnding bucnl domn undsnding l dmocc quis sonbl dg o mil qui: song middl clss, vibl ous ouo pov, ccss o l c, good ducion, nd so on. Obmadminision poposls suc s pogssiv , lc, nd ducion

om, s wll s g suppo o lbou unions nd ni-disciminionlw o conc mns b wic amicn soci could ponill movonc gin in mo gliin dicion. Bcus id o lg

vision o amicn Individulism nd dmocc, s polic poposlsculull psn mo n simpl milis vlus. t do nombc disibuion o wl o is own sk. r, imd cing muull bnicil lionsip bwn l individuldvlopmn nd obus, dnmic dmocc.

tis conncion bwn quliin policis nd lg vision o

libl vlus is ml impon. tis is picull u bcusamicn l-o-cn poliics v (unil now) bn v lucn ombc n so o non-milis vlus sinc culul upvls o 1960s. Onc gin, is usl o ngg wi icl qusions cd culul vcuum mo cion ocs (picull on ligiousrig) v bn mo n pp o ill. B cmpioning vision o amicn Liblism is bo nw – picull in ms o c – ndconncd o ps diion, Obm is bing nw sns o li inoamicn poliics.

Obm’s dcision o b swon in s Psidn using sm Bibl sabm Lincoln is pon smbol o ow is conncing nw


58



pinc o c wi mos poound poliicl spiions o nion.I is mind Blck so is amicn so: no n noml, poliicll coc oono, o n unmnionbl mbssmn. In mso libl poliics, Obm’s lcion movs us in dicion w w sow i is possibl o clb uni wil cognizing nd spcingdivsi. W cn s ouslvs s p o common dmocic pojc, inwic w s cin undmnl vlus nscnd ou individuldincs. tis dos no mn w v o jc obvious li os dincs min impon nd nd o b cognisd, bopoliicll nd culull. On con, i is possibl o undsndgliin poliics s sngning nion b nncing individuloppouni o ll. In od o is undsnding o bcom culull

obus, owv, pogssiv Dmocs mus opnl cmpion i bsundsnding o individul nd socil vlus sngnamicn dmocc. t nds o b muc mo plici db nddiscussion o suc pogssiv, bu non-milis vlus bcus i no pomod culull, simpl min domn o dispp ommningul socil li.

Obm’s lcion s givn amicn l-o-cn poliics nwopning nd oppouni. So , owv, i mins noing mo n. t poblms cononing amicn Liblism ml dp.

Cnging cous nd moving owd nwl pogssiv undsnding o Individulism nd libl dmocc will qui sking o sl-indulgnc, p, nd cnicism s domind muc o amicnpoliicl culu in cn s. I noing ls, owv, c Obm’s lcion suck suc dp cod mong so mn ciizns povs song lniv cun o amicn libl Individulism mins

v muc liv in nion’s poliicl culu.

Justine Lacroix

Svn Luks’ min objciv is o gu Individulism – om bing pociv bulwk gins dngs o idologicl inking – is in isl n idologicl consuc, sinc Individulism’s co vlus v bnnssd o vious docins mbod libin inking ndpomo mk-vouing policis. Mo pcisl, Posso Luks’ minpoin gins so-clld Cold-W, o No-Libls, is is nologicl conncion bwn Liblism on on nd s s o is-odnoms compis n individulis idl (i.. scui o individul, pim imponc o individul inss) nd, on o nd,Liblism s scond-od individulis mpsic poposs


59



gnl o bou onologicl modologicl nd iologicl pioi o individul ov soci.

I oll g wi im is no suc s conncion bwnIndividulism s n idl on on nd nd oicl o modologiclIndividulism on o nd. howv – nd sinc im o issssion is o ocus on som k concps – i is impon o disciminbwn os cnl o ll oms o Liblism nd os “us”, wic v md picul impc in som libl lngugsnd pcics.

M is qusion o commn lds m o wond w is l o Individulism in ou concpion o poliicl Liblism. t sms o b cons bwn ou iniil mp o din Individulism in is

ullnss, s ou did in ou sminl book, in wic ou singld ou ouuni-ids o Individulism, i.. spc o umn digni, uonom,pivc nd sl-dvlopmn; nd is psnion, in wic ou smlmos lucn o consid Individulism s k concp ssnil oLiblism. to b su, ou concd i dos look ‘plusibl’ non-individulis Liblism would no b Liblism – ‘plusibl’ is qui nundsmn o os o us wo, mb nïvl, w inking pimc o individul ws on o pills, i no pill, o Liblism.

I undsnd ou wn o disnc ousl s muc s possibl om No-Libls. howv, i is on ing o s Individulism s bndisod idologicll o sv som libin puposs nd i is noing o s pimc o individul is in isl n idologiclconsuc. I mins uncl w ou would suppo onl omclim o lso l. Pu dinl, would ou go s s Colin Bid,wo in is book The Myth of Liberal Individualism clims i mks nosns o cli libl vlus, s individulis ( n collcivis) in is insnc, nd wo nds up b climing unlpulnss o

dominn idiom o Individulism nd vn obsolscnc o lblLibl Individulism?

agin, i is on ing o s Liblism sould no o b idniidwi n omisic modl o umn conduc; i is on ing o s is no singl o nl viw o lion bwn individul nd soci, libl disincion bwn public sp nd pivsp is ni pmnn no unlbl sinc, in Judi Skl’s wods,‘ impon poin o Liblism is no so muc Where lin isdwn, s i b dwn, nd i mus und no cicumsnc b ignodo ogon’; i is no ing o clim on sould scp Individulis/Collcivis dicoom log, s i i w possibl o


60



conciv o poliicl Liblism wiou im commimn oIndividulism sn in is ullnss, i.. including ou bsic lmns ou idniid som i s go.

t poin I wn o mk is Individulism is oo sious ing ob bndond o libins. Libls, including os om poliiclL, sould no l uncomobl using is lbl in muc mo onsivw, sinc cn gu No-Libl ppoc is n impopinpion o Individulism nd libl commimn oindividuli s soucs cn b opposd o Libinism o conomic consvivs. tis commimn, o insnc, cn bomuld (s Jm Wldon did wi concp o lib) s commimn o qul Individulism, pincipl jusiis socil policis,

wic do no ining on pimc o individul, s im cing ncss condiions o ull dvlopmn o individuli b ll popl concnd. In is gd, ou ppoc o Individulismin is psnion pps o m lil bi dnsiv nd, gin,consing mos o ou li wiings.

tis lds m o m scond qusion o commn: you v convincingl gud , ov ls l cnu, Individulism s com oncpsul clus o ids popgd b Libins o No-Libls. and , I wond i ou psnion, wic ocuss lmos

clusivl on is No-Libl dnc o Individulism, dos no ovlook c cks on Individulism v lso bcom igl inlunilcnl. In ls wo o dcds, s ni-Individulis discoussv picll dicd i ciiqus Individulism o psonl igs.h, I would lik o zoom in on fnc cs, sinc im o isconnc is lso o nls ow usg o concps dis cosscounis. In is coun numb o impon oiss v insisnl cllngd Individulism nd v dicd i ciiqus so-clld“umn igs poliics” (la politique des droits de l’homme). In is spc,

Jcqus rnciè, in is smll book The Hatred of Democracy, s sown ow n vowd libl viws ld b som fnc inllculs sinc 1980s pind, in c, o doubl-dgd docin. Bind vnomg pid o enlignmn nd anglo-amicn diion o libl dmocc, old nd picll fnc dnunciion o Individulis rvoluion s up socil bic.

W supiss m no so muc s dic cks gins pimc o umn igs om consvivs, bu dius sns o unsnd doub on cn obsv on p o libls mslvs, includingos coming om poliicl L. Sinc ou v cosn no o ddss issu o igs in ou psnion, I wond i is omission is


61



dlib; nd i ou consid i would b possibl o dnd ullconcpion o dmocic individuli wiou plll nd qull songcommimn o igs-bsd Individulism?

Debate

Adam Swift: On ou lis o bsc vlus ccis Liblism ou includduonom. I looks s oug libls v in som w o o noion o individuluonom, bu ou n sid is w o inking bou libl vlus mig llow m oink o sociis s libl in v din culul cons, in lss omisd sociis ndso on. to w n is viw o wll-bing o individul pus uonom cnl in c compibl wi plulism?

Pierre Rosanvallon: t wod Individulism ws coind in fnc b Sin-Simon in 1825

nd momn wod ws snonm o slisnss nd omism, ving sociologicl nd mol dimnsion. tis is w in l 30s o 19 cnu Lmnnissid “Individulism” is uglis wod in fnc lngug. t m “Socilism” wscoind b Pi Lou jus w s l s con o Individulism. a momnSocilism d bsolul no poliicl o conomic connoions, bu onl mol ndsociologicl ons. a nd o cnu mos o publicns o tid rpublicw v w o ncssi o dvlop poliics o umn igs bu considd mIndividulism impop bcus o is iso. So l complld o invn nw m.t wod ws coind b Cls rnouvi, oicil pilosop o tidrpublic nd v libl mn, ws Psonlism, impling spc nd ncssi o goowds poliics o individul igs bu no Individulism in slis nd omisic snso m. Unounl, in 19 nd 20 cnuis wod Psonlism gind Cisin ccn oug popl lik emmnul Mouni. In ou ds lo o ciicso Individulism in fnc poliicl pilosop, bu i min g is no individul igsin isl, insd us mulicululism. to m individul igs mn din

vision o civili, din vision o psonl li; o m rpublicnism in fncsns mns kind o common, mndo civili – l g o i ciiqu ismulicululism.

Steven Lukes: In 1819 Josp d Mis usd m in ngiv w, poliiclPosnism – w wic ws socill disupiv nd dngous.

Tony Curzon Price: abou possibili o inoducing o Liblism noion o collciv dom: I sms o m in wo cos Posso Luks ndd up wi,‘von ms’, wic nds o b ssocid wi quli nd jusic, nd ‘v li livdom insid’, wic nds o b ssocid wi individul, is sns in wicld in division is disppnc o n uonomous poliicl lm. I wondw on cn, wiin Liblism, un o somon lik Bnjmin Consn nd De laliberté des anciens comparée à celle des modernes, in wic ‘libé ds ncins’ is v muc bou dom o collciv o dmin isl. I w k poliicl in mso collciv dom n w bing bck ll sns o ponil in poliicl

n No-Libl concpion o poliicl bing consin o individul.


62



Steven Lukes: I ink Liblism is iging cd (s sombod onc sid), so issoming o dnd nd bgins o b cpud v wll b wo, pps,misquoions om ronni: gliin componn, v individul’s wll-bingnd louising couns qull; nd id o individul bing judg o i wll-bing. Bu I do no ink w v cl gsp o w uonom is, w couns slcivnss – o culul vibili o undsnding s noions s o b knino ccoun. I is juggling c, ining som sns o w ou dnding bu, sm im, ving sns o divsi o undsnding.

Paolo Pombeni: disincion bwn Individulism nd Communiinism s dpisoic oos in 19 cnu. t anglo-Son vsion s lib insid communi.t coninnl vsion, w individuls w ug o mslvs om i ligiouso socil communi in vou o i insion ino nion, ws nw nd v bscom o communi.

Jan-Werner Müller: Is sold condiion o clling clus o ougs libl?I s, ow do w know w i is? Is i in som sns isoicll o, o us dngous wod,culull spciic? I s, dos mn w v o somow l on so o pogss? Dopopl lik hk psn – in ou poin o viw – gssion oug, sing s osic ougs o Liblism w vilbl nd wn bck o soming inn opoo?

Michael Freeden: Liblism is no n idl consuc w invn in ou ivo ows bu poduc o poliicl inking ov long piod o im. So i is cull sum ol o wol ng o oug pcics ov ps 200 s o vn bo. as o sold,

i w look som o oug-pcics cll mslvs libl, w will s is v wid ng o posiions. W w o k os s pssing ull ng o Liblism, w mig iv v ull noion in ms o ulim ng o qusionsi s isd ov ls cnu o wo. all ising Liblisms on i own onl pilpsnions o ull ponil o libl gumn, wic is cull is isoicl sumol o libl dbs nd discouss.

No ising Liblism s cd ull ponil o sum ol ll isingLiblisms v dmonsd. Liblism s lws volvd ound 6 o 7 k concpsin din concpulisions; ou cnno v Liblism wiou som noion o lib,Individulism, dvlopmn, ionli, consind pow, o socibili. ec o sconcps volvs ound wol ng o posiions; bi lik ui mcin

cin numb o posiions w ou cn s ou in libl ng. W v dgso moving solds ov im nd spc, nd lso scoll undsndings.

Ronald Dworkin: t id individul ig umps collciv good is v powul on. t som inss individuls v wic mus b svd nd spcdvn cos o collciv good. a n impon poliicl movmns wic gins id o igs s suc? In Biin is v powul nd sill imponid gins igs s suc nd is Uiliinism, n id s on bn gdd slibl.


63



Steven Lukes: t lngug o igs is modn nd no ll culus v usd i, bu dosno mn vlus o Liblism no . rigs pocions popl nd. Mismis pooundl individulisic in is pospc o umn c bu cull, o dpsons, s no plc o igs in is oicl sucu.

Pierre Hassner: On dicoom bwn piv nd public, fnc ciics considLiblism s dpoliision, i.. dilogu bwn ciizns nd bwn ciizns nd s. I ou mpsis common good is isk o individul igs.

Q: you mniond mjo co o Obm’s succss ws no o dissoci aicn-amicn idni om amicn idni. Communiins v sid Civil rigsMovmn ws succss bcus is ld Min Lu King did no so oIndividulism bu o sd collciv amicn idni. t ss libl individulispilosop is indqu o suppo is own poliics.

Kalypso Nicolaidis: Und wic condiions dos iging cd o Liblism mg?W is nmis nd w is sucul momn? W vsion o Individulism bsmpows cin kind o niv nd db? how dos Individulism, i.. v individul judging o imsl, i wiin Cins con o dicl collcivnsomion, w som vsion o Individulism mus b usd s souc?

Joao Carlos Espada: Cn b non-individulisic Liblism, nd in w sns wouldi b libl?


64



4. TOLERANCE

Susan Mendus

fis o ll, I would lik o nk ogniss o is connc. I is v

unusul o m s poliicl pilosop o go ousid m io, nd m io is Moll Cn o Sud o tolion in picul, ndNo yoksi in gnl. I do no on g bond No yoksi ndI do no on g o Sou o englnd, nd I v l ncounnbod wo s bn o Cin o Indi. I is v sious poin. t los o conncs nd civiis idniid o dvisd s“indisciplin”, nd wn ou g ou ind ou inds omScbooug! I is v good, inllcull nd socill, o m nw poplnd o g kind o inpu w d sd, discussing w inwic Liblism is undsood in Indi nd w lib is undsood(o no undsood) in Jpn. I is mndousl li-iming, so nk ouo .

Now, w I m going o do is is. I will pocd in incsing dgso spciici, bu i will no b long. I wn is o ll o oulin w I ko b min ms o connc s w psnd o m b ogniss. I n wn o idni w I k o b m sk wiin wid spciicion o sks. finll, I wn o us in w ngls o

d. Wils I m conscious i is u los o Liblisms, loso ws o undsnding i, nd los o ings o undsnd bou olncwiin i, wn ou com om No yoksi, on’s noug! I m goingo giv n nsw o qusions ‘W is Liblism?’ nd ‘W is ol o olnc o olion in Liblism?’ (I us msincngbl, bu m v conscious good gumns odisinguising bwn m). So I will giv n nsw o qusion ‘Wis Liblism?’ nd n n nsw o qusion ‘W is plc o olion wiin Liblism?’ tn I’ll duck nd wi o popl o com

bck m.I sould s loug w in wic I will psn i will b p

65



cud, I cull do bliv in m conclusion nd I m ppd o dndi in som dp, bu mb no o d. t nu o connc,s i ws psnd o m, is is: i is connc bgins om cogniion is som kind o concpul ccopon suoundingundsndings o Liblism, som popl, som culus,som vocbulis, som ims in wic “libl” is m o pis, ndos in wic i is m o bus. also, is is iic ps“concpul ccopon”: sill ssion o condico posiions. I is concpul ccopon gins wic w nd o sk qusion ‘W isLiblism?’ o ‘W Liblisms ?’

M qusion wiin ovcing qusion is bou ol o olion. W ogniss v idniid cocl numb o

co concps wiin Liblism, nd on o os concps is olion.and n qusion o m is: ‘W is plc o olion inLiblism?’ hisoicll, i sms o m, plc o olion in Liblismcn dl b doubd. I w go bck bou 300 s o 17 cnu,on o v is dncs o olion is Jon Lock’s Letter Concerning Toleration. In Letter Concerning Toleration, Lock psns us wi pincipld dnc o ligious olnc. I know numb o popl –mos nobl Jm Wldon – v gud wi som plusibili Lock’s dnc is no in nd mol dnc o olion bu dnc

on gounds o ionli, nd no ibl powul dnc . tsid, I ink i cnno b dnid w Lock is ing o do is o psn pincipld dnc o olion, no dnc simpl in ms o ndo psv pc. So i qusion is ‘W sould w ngg in ligiousolion?’ Lock wns o go bond nsw ‘bcus i ou don’,’ll com nd kill ou,’ o ‘’ll b civil uns,’ o ‘’ll b blood on cp.’ h wns o go bond o oug is sompincipld son o oling os o din ligious convicions. youm ink psns good gumns, o ou m ink psns bd

gumns, bu ll I wn o pss is pincipld gumns, wiin libl diion olion is pincipl nd no somingdon jus s m o pdinc o ncssi.

L’s mov owd now om 17 cnu o 1993 nd o Jon rwls’sPolitical Liberalism. In Political Liberalism, rwls lso ks olion sbsolul cnl. h ks c nd psisnc o plulism s bingsoming wic quis olion, nd is mousl (o nooiousl)sisn o n undsnding o olion s simpl modus vivendi. I kim s sing w w nd wiin libl diion is dnc o olion is no jus ‘i’s w w v o do in od o ub longog.’ I is pincipl o wic, s libls, w commi.


66



So l us go bck o qusion o connc: ‘W is Liblism?’M suggsion is olion is on o cnl concps o Liblismnd w cn s i is i w look iso o Liblism.hisoicll, olion us ov nd ov gin, nd i us ssoming o wic libls will b commid in pincipl. fo libls,olion is viu, no ncssi. I m lso b ncssi, bu i is, isnd omos, viu.

t is isoicl so, bu i w n un om historical sus o olion wiin Liblism o conceptual sus o olion wiinLiblism, w lso ind olion is cnl. So I now wn o suggs olion is lso cnl concpull, is b looking diionlnsw o qusion ‘W is olion?’ nd n b looking nw

nsw, n nsw s mgd in ps 10 o 15 s. I will ispoin pu m cds on bl nd s I wn o dnd diionlnsw ov nw nsw. So, diionl nsw gos soming likis: ‘wiin Liblism, olion is viu o pmiing o iningom ining wi ings o wic w disppov, vn oug w v pow o in wi m’. t diniion ws givn b m omcollgu P Nicolson mn s go nd i s bn usd ov ndov in liu. tolion is libl viu nd i consiss inpmiing o ining om ining wi w os do, vn oug

I ink w do is moll wong, nd vn oug I v pow osop m doing i. t numb o puzzls is ou o diniion, noug pdos nd puzzls o v kp m going o 25 so so. fis o ll, w mig sk w I ll mus moll disppov o w ou do in od o ol i. Cn I no jus ol ings bou ou I dislik? I ink i is Josp rz wo mks muc o c (s ssi) olion dos no v o b olion o w I ink is moll wong. I cn lso b olion o limiions on ou bviou, on oupsonli, on ou cc. I do no wn o ngg in discussion

, I jus wn o indic is discussion o b d.Scondl, nd pps mos mousl, is buil ino noion o

olion wiin libl diion pdo. t pdo is is: I vsid svl ims , o libls, olion is viu, nd i consiss inpmiing popl o do ings wic w bliv o b wong vn ougw v pow o sop m. t disgggs ino: wiin libldiion, i cn b ig o llow popl o do w is wong. t is viu o olion. Bu ow cn i b ig o llow popl o do w iswong? to bliv w ou doing is wong sul is o bliv ou sould sop doing i. and i sul is o bliv ou sould sopos om doing i i do no sop o i own ccod. t is lo o


67



liu on is pdo, nd obviousl on o sponss o pdoo olion is n invocion o Individulism, nd o imponc o individul uonom. On nsw is jus o s, ‘I s w ou doingis wong nd I disppov o i, bu I llow ou o coninu bcus i is moimpon ou bv in w ou v dcidd upon n i is ou bv in w i is, in som objciv sns o wod, right .’t is mous pssg o On Liberty in wic Mill, dmidl in con o discussion o lib nd no o olion, lks bou imponc o lib, nd ss i is no simpl w kind o li mnlds ms, bu lso c s cosn li imsl. tn gos on o gu i is v diicul o i mn wi li, in jus sm w s i is diicul o i mn wi sui o clos ou o wdob:

is i no, o, impon o c pson o coos i own li? tis oug v cudl undlis dnc o olion in mn sndd oms. I is w o dissolving pdo o olion.

and id poin I wn o mk is wiin poliicl pilosop,wiin Liblism, popl suspicious o olion bcus i smsscond bs. I s so o gudging quli bou i. I ss wi oug, ‘you doing wong ings, bving v bdl… bu I in my graciousness will llow ou o coninu.’ I s mn, gudging, “scondbs” i bou i, nd is p o w mks i puzzling nd poblmic.

I is puzzling nd poblmic o mk virtue o soming wic looksgudging nd scond bs. ‘Cn’ w do mo n is?’ is oug, sincpopl do no wn o b “old”, wn soming mo. t wno b ccpd.

t qusion o ll o us, n, is qusion bou nu o Liblism. t oug is olion is on o cnl concps o Liblism. W n is olion? I v givn isoicl so wicsows i is cnl; I v givn concpul ccoun is milind popul; nd I v indicd ccoding o concpul ccoun

olion is cinl cnl o Liblism, nd is considd o b cnl viu o i. Nonlss, i is diicul o s i is viu: pdosnd puzzls ssocid wi . So, mindul o c spuzzls nd pdos ssocid wi Liblism, nd wi olionwiin i, numb o popl v dvlopd w s com o b knowns “nw” olion. tis is on d o s “olion s cogniion”.I is ssocid in is insnc wi wok o ann elisb Gloi,nd in picul wi book, Toleration As Recognition, bu i s mucwid cunc n , nd cnl ms muc wid. Gloi’soug is w sould o nscnd n undsnding o olion sbsd in disppovl o mol wongnss. r, w sould ink o


68



olion, wn i woks ig, s m o nbling us o cognis osnd o s vlu in w do, n simpl puing up wim.

t mov o undsnding olion s cogniion bings wi i woimpon us. On is lngug o cogniion is lngug ims o mov lmn o disppovl; o is lngugo cogniion is lngug ims o cknowldg w in wicpopl’s viws, iuds nd commimns mig b m no simpl o i individul blis, bu o i mmbsip o picul goups. Soolion s cogniion movs simulnousl w om concp o disppovl nd w om concp o individul; i movs owdscogniion o mol vlu o w popl nd do. I movs owds

cogniion o n o wic vlu is no dwn nil om ou suss individuls, bu lso om ou sus s mmbs o goup.I sms o m bo os movs dpl ni-libl, nd I lso

ink dpl dngous. and I ink is o ollowing v simpl son: qusion w skd o ddss is qusion, ‘Wis Liblism?’ t nsw o qusion, i sms o m, is Liblism– wv i is – iss om convicion conlic nd disgmn pmnn. t is oug in Lock; is oug in rwlswn in Political Liberalism, lls us ims o poliicl pilosop

dpnd upon soci i ddsss nd dds w is ccisic o modn poliicl pilosop is i iss in wold is ccisdb pmnnc o plulism. fo rwls, nd o poliicl liblsgnll, dinc nd conlic no going o go w. W is mo,nd gin ccoding o rwls, w sould no b so bou . W souldno g c conlic is no going o go w. and is mvllous nd lmos licl pssg in rwls in wic ss og divsi o opinion nd o g disgmn is lik ging son cn op und condiions o dom. fo rwls, w w

will g, pdicbl, null, undsndbl, nd cocl, und condiions o dom, is disgmn nd conlic. W sould noo lws ddss conlic b ing o dissolv i; w sould ddssconlic in din ws, nd on o os ws is oug olion. tmovmn om diionl concp o olion o concp o olion s cogniion sms o m o b mov bs oundionl oug o Liblism isl, nd oundionl oug is oug conlic is nul nd o b clbd. So, ou qusion is‘W is Liblism?’ M nsw is Liblism is ccisd (in p)b bli conlic is pmnn. and o Liblism so undsood

viu o olion is on wic w will lws nd, sinc w cnno pc

69




nd sould no wn wold in wic conlic dispps. In so, iump o Liblism lis in is cogniion w liv in wold wdisgmn will no go w nd is v considbl good ob scud oug olion o ings wic w bliv o b wong.

Jacob Levy

L m s wi sing soming bou ll ou concps o od –Individulism, olion, mks, Univslism. I sms o m wispc o Individulism is v wid ng o viws gnuinl libl viws, humbold nd tocquvill bo oougl libl. tou, Monsquiu nd Smi ll woll libl, oug

tou nd humbold gnuinl individulisic nd on is mning o wod, Smi, Monsquiu nd d tocquvill no. fomks, rwls nd Nozick, Kns nd hk ll gnuinl libl. Wm v ving viws on ig posiions o k wi spc oi ccouns o mks bu I ink i is unlpul o ccis db s n gumn ov w “libl viw” is, s opposd o w ig viw is. Univslism s ld bn lludd o in ls sssion:Micl Wlz’s Liblism-in-amic is, I ink, Liblism s gnuins n univslis Liblism o umn igs.

rgding dom o ligion, I cnno ink o compbl spcumbou wic I cn s os wo “po” nd os wo “con” lllibls – vn mong os wo occup s compbl wid spcum shk nd Kns occup on mks. I m b popl m disgbou numb o ings bou dom o ligion nd sill b libls, llings considd. Bu ng o viws libl viws boudom o ligion sm o m il igl consind.

Noic, owv, I v bn sing dom o ligion; I v nobn sing olion. I ink Liblism is in is insnc mil o

poliicl docins. accodingl, I m going o s pulling p wo wods Susn bgn b binding og: olnc nd olion. I sms om usul disincion o s olnc is iud psonculivs, psonl sin o ow on psss on’s disppovl o w on dos, nd olion is usull svd o qusions o polic.Lock’s l ws Letter Concerning Toleration, no l concningolnc.

Wi disincion in mind – nd ging wi Susn cogniionis n ovdon concp dos no conibu nl s muc snusiss v oug o usul discussions on i Liblism oculu – l m s I ink olnc, psonl viu, is o


70



somw mginl lvnc o co qusions o libl policis o dom o ligion. and olion is wong w o ink bou nwok o policis o libl dom o ligion, pcisl bcusolion dos dpnd on pio concp o som kind o disppovl,wic is no soming libl s oug o b in businss o wi spc o ligions wos dom i is spcing. Now, I cognis id o olnc o olion is no onl pplicbl o ligion. BuI ink i is cs concp s cnll dvlopd ound ligionnd ligious dom, nd nsions om i v lgl bnnlogicl. I will lv sid qusion o w sm kind o dom o ligion nlogicll nds ou o s olion sbn nlogicll ndd ou o.

fis, olnc. t is, no doub, v on sog o olnc s poliicl nd mol iud mong ciizn o libl dmoccis.t is no nl s muc o i s on would ink om ding, ompl, discussions o “cogniion” in lo o liu ksolion nd olnc s boing nd insuicin, s i i would b mucmo insing i w could g soming b nd livli. tis sms om ccisic possionl domi o cin kind o inllculwok. W pon o ink wic sms moll s, is os noug o k o gnd. Libl lgl o sus lo om

inking ngiv libis nd consiuionl libis, ul o lw, ndhabeas corpus w s nd boing nd o no v insing, ndwouldn’ i b muc b i w d ic li? Wll, i uns ou ulo lw, habeas corpus, nd co consiuionl libis m b concpull s bu dos no mn are s, nd kping m pocdquis lo o wok o is own. and olnc, psonl iud o bing willing o liv pcull wi os wos viws on disgs wi,is, owv moll o concpull s i sms, no s in pcic. trusdi i mins wi us o is d, nd -s is d v so

on ino nw mnisions (mos cnl Dnis coonconovs). Simill, iud is culivd b oo mn in oomn Wsn sociis owds Islm, o o v visibl pcic o Islm,mniss dp lck o olnc. I v in ls w s movd ou oon o ouposs o fnc civilizion in No amic, wic s inws I sill cnno g m d ound incopod iuds o pos-Jcobin fnc wi spc o laïcité, nd “pop” – is o s,iddn w – ol o ligious pcis in scul soci. t is dp lck o olnc on p o ciiznis is p o plnion o w I s s ilus o polic.

howv, o kinds o pvsiis is wi spc o


71



song nd dp mpsis on olnc s psonl viu. t on sms o m o is mos on in m om coun, Unid Ss,is kind o undgdu livism wi lg: sng viw ,bcus ou v pssd viw o ou own – nd spcill i ou vpssd viw o ou own ou v opnl nod disgs wi m own pviousl pssd viw – ou so intolerant ! t inbili odisinguis ciicism om inolnc, is, I ink, spding ndccling u, cinl o discous in amicn poliicl li, nd Iink no onl . I olnc is igull pid wi disppovl – ndI ink is ig – n is no son o pc w I ol Isll in om ciicising. I sll in om pvning, I sll inom sopping, I sll in om pscuing, s, bu bili o

spcull db, o vn bili o non-spcull db, bili o mock, bili o siis? tis is p o w is going on in amicn public db bou ligiosi nd ism od. t milinpssion o on viw is id up wi sis nd mocking o o viws.Wll, ’s w i’s lik! and o b oln is no ncssil o in omciicism, si nd mocking, bu sms o b n inbili o kpos disincions psn in mind. and sms o b viw on’sllow ciizns oug o b s willing o l m go bou m businssunciicisd nd uncommnd upon – jus s libl s oug o b.

t is no ncssil n css o u olnc, bu is n css o cin kind o vlu is plcd on wod, o misundsnding o iud. and ovmpsis gos dp noug o is o lvl o gnuin poblm in pusing v d on olnc s vlu wnd o inculc mos dpl. to cin dg w nd o inculc icknss o skin on p o cipins. No insisnc oumus b willing o in om disppoving, bu I mus b willing oliv wi bing disppovd o. and ll I v jus sid is, o cous,igl compibl wi Susn’s wois bou cogniion s ms

concp.I v now oo lil im o ull pss wo bou olion bu,

ounl, I ink i is convnionl wo gding olion s igw o ognis polic in libl s. t wo is iudwic I v jus inisd sing popl nd o b willing o liv wi omi llow ciizns o i llow picipns in db, n iud o oln disppovl, is no on I ink libl ciizn oug o v o livwi from their state. t pop snc o libl s wi spc oligions nd non-ligion is no disppovl nd gudging pmission, bu spc o co, digniid, dom pson s o liv in ccodncwi is o conscinc, nd dom pson s in communi


72




nd ssociion wi on no, is o s, o om i goups oundi conscincs s undsnd m joinl. tolion, s w odscib o ink bou w libl s sould do, o sms om no onl no cnl concp o Liblism, bu soming o

discion om cnl concp o Liblism in is spc, wic isdom.

Rajeev Bhargava

I is on mkd Indi is lnd o olnc nd non-violnc.Vivknnd, Wold Congss in Cicgo in l 19 Cnu,sid: ‘I m poud o blong o ligion wic blivs no onl in olnc,bu lso in univsl ccpnc o ll ligions s u’. and Nu,wiing om pison o is oung dug Indi, sid:

It is curious and rather wonderful to compare other countries withIndia in the matter of treatment of different religions. In most placesand especially in Europe, you will find in the past intolerance and persecution of all who do not profess the official faith. In India in older times, there was always full tolerance.’

tis is no jus sl-undsnding o bisd, nionlis inks. his quo om M Wb, wo ss v simil snimn. ‘rligiousnd pilosopicl inks in Indi w bl o njo n bsolu domo long piods. fdom o oug in ncin Indi s no plll in Ws bo cn g.’

Obviousl, is could no b woll u. I is d o imgin n soci ov 2,000 s old dos no v conlics, somims violn conlics.So w conlics bwn Sivis nd Visnvis, vnSivi pogoms gins Buddiss. I is common o ssoci

dscion o mpls, spcill Sivi mpls, wi Muslims, buSivis nd Visnvis indulgd in muul dscion o mplsoo. So, con o ou mologicl sl-undsnding, Indin soci wsinoln. Nvlss, i is u vidnc o scl nd innsi wi wic on ssocis ligious ws in euop is ound spingl inIndi. In c, v im wn S Bolomw’s D msscoccud in l 16 Cnu fnc (1572), Indi ws winss o disclosu o nw spcs o muul spc. akb d bolisd jzi, pilgim on hindus. In-i dilogus w king plc in

cous w no onl Muslims cm og wi hindu scs, bu lsoJsuis, wo d bn ound in Indi o som im. t dilogu ook

73



plc wi ull knowldg o likliood o muul inlunc, vnconvsions. a on poin, akb imsl ws on vg o conving oCisini. focibl convsions w bnnd. and, pobbl o isim in cn iso, ll is w clbd wi ol ndosmn, pcic coninus in Indi unil od.

M is clim is soming kin o impili owds ll is,sicl wiin ligious domin, s s polic, ws dvloping in Indi im. all is im wn euop sw som o is ddlispscuions in con w inolnc smd n ingl p o pi.

allow m o dw ou nion o concp isl. In liu, wknow disincion iss bwn olion s viu nd olion spcic (Bnd Willims), nd I compll g wi Susn Mndus

pcic o olion is pcic o no ining in domino os, vn oug on inds i moll objcionbl, nd on s pow o do so. hiso is swn wi suc oln pcics, nd w know o i bi nd voluion, olnc s viu is no ncss.tolion s viu is suicin bu no ncss condiion. Soolion s pcic gows ou o indinc, usion o scpicism,s lso om psnc o common gound.

M scond poin is is ls oms o olion, wo o wic Lock dul nod. t isoin Bnjmin Kpln minds us o

po Lock sn o ind in hollnd in wic mnions subjc o olion s bn discussd in englnd und wo oms:compnsion nd indulgnc. B compnsion is mn nlgmn o bounds o cuc b boliion o cin clusivis cmonis oinduc sngd co-blivs o conom. t id bind i is o v singl cuc. tolion s indulgnc, on o nd, is id on mus pu up wi os wo unbl o us o uni wi Cuc o englnd, vn und poposd condiions o boliion o cincmonis nd pcics. So olion s indulgnc is isnc o

mulipl coics, nd o l nd l liv wi is muliplici, vn ougon inds is moll pugnn. Now is olion s indulgnc cn lsok wo oms: on wic mig b clld indulgnc in public, o publicindulgnc, nd o, indulgnc in piv, o piv indulgnc.Indulgnc in public is possibl und wk conssionl ss. fo insnc,n ising communi mig gudgingl ccp sing is cuc wi conquing communi. tolion s piv indulgnc pocs li ndpop o os, nd llows cin om o wosip, s long s sucwosip ks plc in piv, w om public.

Wic om o olnc is ound in Indi? Insncs o pivindulgnc w commonplc in 13 nd 14 cnuis, wn uls


74



disinguisd bwn, on on nd Muslims nd, on o, Kis.Bo njod divin compssion, i ws gud, bu wo mus b ddinl. Muslim uls mus poc li nd pop o Kis, buonl on condiion no public spcs o wosip buil b m, nopublic possion nd dmonsion o cusom, no mouning o i ddin public, no cing o dd bodis oug Muslim gvds, ndsing w om Muslim nigbouoods. So w los o insncso w in euop ws clld piv indulgnc.

Public indulgnc oo ws il common. Muc is md in Indi o sncic, pomnu culus, bu i is possibl mn suc pcicsdvlopd und ssm o public indulgncs. a communi m vd no coic bu o s is mpl wi powul, pps conquing

goup. and sinc wosippd og ov piod o im, iligious smbols coisd nd inmingld, suling in vi o sncic pcics. t oigins o mn sncic pcics m b sooug wi lions o dominion.

finll, id om. h, olnc is bo n iud nd pcic.to undsnd i, w bgin wi cicumsncs o olion. In liu, mong s cicumsncs () divsi nd (b) som om o disppovl, including culul, mol nd ligious disppovl. I sll cll(b) mol unccpnc. In euop, id u is psn. Mol

unccpnc ks om o mol pugnnc o mol d.W is innl colouing nd concpul sucu o is noiono olion? I is is: o ol is o pivis mol d ndpugnnc nd o llow pcics on pivl s. Cll i ‘olncs gudging indinc’. Now is concp o olion is v dinom on ound in diionl Indi. Mol unccpnc in Indi ks om o n d. how so? Bcus gound o non-ccpncis no w possss ulim u o uniqu, supio concpion o idl li bu vn oug w blong o ni o u

sks, w v din ous o u, som b n os. evn i m w is b n os’ nd o I ind ous unccpbl, Icnno ou o s ou s ivl. r, w co-sks o u, w convsionl pns. a pil, posiiv ppisl o o’s w is ingl o is noion o ‘olion’. Cll i olion s modl ciiclspc. h, o piviz d would b wong. Insd, on mus cngon’s iud om pugnnc o undsnding nd som dg o ppciion. allow m o subsni is poin b quoing om asokndics: “W sould lws gud gins on’s spc, w sould no olon’s i o dispg i o os impopl o immodl.” Sociicism is llowd, bu no immodl, nd no impopl. Sinc w


75



ll u-sks ‘w sould do noing wic ols ou own i nd sm im disonous i o o. Bcus in disonouing i o o, w , in som v dp sns, cusing mol inju o ouslvs.’ tking p wic uns ou o b wong mus no b sns mol diss. Ou w mig b b n os’, bu om is idos no ollow w do no cognis kind o ni o wic llo us blong. and is gound on wic w mus bo b ciicl o m nd spc m. Scondl, i is cl i lls so o cogniion s quls. rcogniion s quls would b bd mov wic, i kn, ocs us nil ou o mbi o olion, o i viols inbuil ingliinism o is concp.

I ink i would b g i w d wold w vlus o gliin

Liblism (nd mo) immdil lisd. Bu i conul molsoning indics ll sibl lnivs o olion wos, non o oms o olion mus b undsood o b moll ppopi. In siuions o violn conlic, on nds soming likolion in n o oms. So vn gliin libls mus lno ol olion.

Debate

Samuel Brittan: I ink w v givn ligion oo s li, spcill ls spk.ting o ink o Ignius Lool nd Min Lu s llow, i ivl, u-sks jusdos no wok. I mn, i Lool d d is w, Lu would v bn bund sk, nd w Lu would v don o Lool, I do no know, bu I’d no ink bou i. and ow oln uloodo Jws in Isl? t cinl do no bliv lss ligious popl sould b llowd o div c on Sbb, c. t onl sonw do no g i w is do no v mjoi in govnmn. Wo knowsw would do i bcm ll k co in coliions? a momn iinolnc is, I’m id, dicd owds pc pocss nd I ink i w look iso no o olion o olnc, bu o inolnc, n cp on ligion would om g p o book!

Timothy Garton Ash: I ink Jcob Lv cull sowd us w Susn Mndus isbsolul ig in cnl connion, bcus Jcob igl mpsisd ow olncis diicul. tolnc is diicul; w is skd o us b poliics o cogniion in dicl, is o s ncssil ligious, vsion o mulicululism is simpl impossibl.Bcus w skd no simpl o ccp o inks bliv owis bu ocknowldg somon wo inks womn null inio nd omosuli is sin s i u, wils is is ou u. t is i good, is is ougood. and dmnd is no simpl s sould b nul in lion o w is vlubl li, wic is clssic convnion o Liblism; dmnd is society sould

b nul in spc, nd is, s Susn gud, n bsolul cnl cllng o co o Liblism isl. Now ou m s ou lking bou cicu o mulicululism. fisl, is is w is cull ppning in mjo euopn ciis nd


76



counis s w spk. t dmnd o sl-cnsosip in lion o discussion bouIslm is md on pcisl bsis. tis is no som cicu, i is l gound o connion o euopn poliics od.

Scondl, ou m s, ‘O wll, bu w cn ind ou vsion o libl mulicululism,’nd I g ou wok nd o os gos signiicn w in dicion. Buw I would s is is: i ou k w s o css o nionl minoiis in dindiois wi long isois – wic is w Cls tlo, Will Kmlick nd os vbn inking bou (wi ll spc o Cnd, Cndin oigins o db vbcom poblm); i ou k w picul s o css nd lk bou kind o divsi w v, o mpl, in euopn ciis, nd ou look w liblmulicululism is guing o, i is cull muliculul Liblism. t is no “-ism” lin mulicululism. t “–ism” is Liblism, simpl vsion o Liblism, nd so in sns i sms o m mulicululism is mong os ccoponic concps w couldppil bndon, bcus ccpbl vsion is in c muliculul Liblism.

Daniel Butt: tis is qusion o Jcob Lv. Could ou s bi mo bou olnc?W do ou ink olnc quis us o do s individuls? I sms w cn mock, w cnsiis, w cn spcull ciicis ligion. t qusion, ll, is: Dos i qui ningmo n sicl ining om pvning popl om pcising i ligion? Dosolnc qui mo o us n simpl no using oc o sop popl pcising iligion?

Jacob Levy: I will s wi tim’s qusion. On unpcd c o m moving o Cnds bn somims in s sings I m clld o nsw o ll o sins o Cndinpoliicl oiss. I g wi Susn cogniion is no ig o ognising pincipl.

I msl v gud g dl o w ou v jus sid. t dmnd w cognisnd im incompibl ings in wold is cogniivl, moll, pscologicll impossibl nd incon. I w cn g so s ving, on on nd, blivs inligions cll omosuli sinul nd, on o nd, gs nd lsbins muull spcing bsic dom, nd no clling on pow o s, would b mndous ccomplismn, sin sown on bo sids. t is vidnc in someuopn sociis v movd s in dicion o w I k s n ppopicogniion o igs o gs nd lsbins o n ncoc on co ligious lib o ligious spc, nd o ligious pcic, oug ligious oicils sll coninu o v dom o spc o popg i own docins. In Cnd oo s bn isncocmn. t ig snc o s is o sp bck om nd o poc dom

on bo sids; is ks n iud o som kind o sin on bo ps o ciizn.I would b n ccomplismn. I is soming o suggl o, i w cn g .

I cinl ink ou’ ono soming wi ou qusion. and o g olnc is viu-concp, no isl igs-concp, is pobbl going o b soming scs sombod. t cinl is kind o socil civi dos no incs lvl o s cocion, is no bou psuding i picipns o i opponns.and I do ink som o nsi kinds o si cn sill b cs o psusion, bu isno n c o psusion ll, cull n mp o civl pvn. t I ink ou ls s ilu in ull cising viu o olnc, nd mb soming wos n.

Rajeev Bhargava: I do no dn vious ligious us wic no willingo s mslvs s ps o lg communi o ni o u-sks. I ws onl


77



lking bou w din oms o olion ou cn k, nd is is on possibl om.I is cognisd sg – cognisd b Lock imsl s possibili – nd i wokd incin plcs w im w wk conssionls. In song conssionlss is did no wok; in c, w wokd ws wic w m ind, und psncondiions, moll p pnsibl. W wokd ws w I m clling pivindulgnc. t w cucs o minoi o i Luns o Clviniss. tcucs nv lookd lik cucs, nd d o b in smll plcs, in v smll lns,in odin sidnil buildings, nd so on. Bu popl im l som sns o giud bcus i li ws no kn w! all I m sing is os condiions vno disppd, vn od. twn iv s go ws no singl mosqu in Blin lookd lik mosqu. Muslims wosippd in ggs. t ws ug suggl ook plc . O cous, in pincipl, ow could ning lik b dnid? Bu lo o buucic gumns w givn, nd so i ws onl mb wn s go ismosqu cull lookd lik mosqu ppd in Blin. Som o condiions I ws dscibing in euop im sill ound in euop nd s o wold.

t mus b ug numb o insncs w popl would v bd livs n oinsis on publicl cognisd cucs.

t insncs in Indi, nd I’ll jus giv on o wo. On is insnc in Indiw popl vod o p sponsibl o mssc in Mumbi – wn Muslims vod o Siv Sn in 1992/3 bcus i ws onl w o nsuing scui o i lind pop. I ws Siv Sn killd lo o Muslims in 1992/3. So w I m sing is und suc condiions, on blivs is no o lniv bu on o ooms o ngmns. and is possibili o dvlopmn o olion s viu, bu onl in id sns.

Michael Freeden: t issu is Liblism lso nds o b bl o know sonbllimis o olion. W kinds o wongs, w kinds o misks ccpbl wn oncs poin bond wic olion is no long ccpbl? On possibl disincionbwn olnc o oug nd olnc o pcics m wll b mo libili inpssion o oug, nd w ll know pssion o oug cn b dngous s wll.Pcics m in c cll o limi o olnc. t is on possibili. t o is bound bwn ciminli nd non-ciminli, on o v obvious boundisbwn olnc nd non-olnc. O cous, bound isl is v z in ciminlision o pcics (.g. pdopili). a o boundis cp ociminli w sould discuss wiin limis o olion? fo mpl, civildisobdinc is v ick .

Stuart White: I ll wn o mk mo plici n issu bou wic conmpo Liblism is v conusd, bcus o mp o connc Liblism wimulicululism. In lo o conmpo libl o, in sns, olion is scond pincipl, b wic I mn i is oug o div om som vlu, mo undmnl igo uonom o quli. t oug is s sould spc o pomo uonom nd som om o olion s insumnl o spc o ciizn. Bu i wink o olion s diving om som mo bsic vlu lik uonom o quli, n qusion iss: W ppns i olion sms o conlic wi uonom o quli?a w quid o ol pcic o w o li wic is isl in som w disspcul

o nom o quli? So qusion bou wic conmpo Liblism is v conusd is qusion o w, o o w n, olion s n indpndn vlu,wn olion would ld o som violion o uonom o quli. O, in Jcob’s ms,


78



o w n dos dom o ligion v n indpndn wig wn dom o ligion lds o pcics conlic wi uonom o quli? I pnlliss v viwon , I would b v insd o i.

Francis Chevenal: I would lik o com bck o concp o cogniion. I do g wi cl-cu concpul disincion bwn clssicl noion o olion, nd moconmpo on includs qul cogniion, nd I ink w d lo o convincinggumns gins . espcill on individul lvl. On socil lvl i is o cousbsud o dmnd qul cogniion. Bu s s s is concnd, w in mucmo compl siuion, spcill in euop, bcus, is o ll, cogniion cn jus impl cogniion o sus; i dos no ncssil v o impl cogniion o ll ligiouspcics. So, som ligions in v libl euopn ss v cogniion s oicils cuc, o insnc in G Biin, bu in o euopn counis ou v, so mpl in Gmn, pnomnon o Landeskirche. So s ligions no so mucold s v n oicil cogniion o sus s s cuc. and qusion is:

Will libl posiion b is sould b compll bndond, sould bno suc sus s s cuc, nd sould no b d o s wo is smim d o s ligion, c.? O, is libl posiion w v qul cogniion o sus, s now in cnon o Bn in Swizlnd, Jwis rbbi is lso now ging sl om s, so is mov owds posiiv cogniion o sus, qul suso s ligions? t is no o impl s s o ol ll ligious pcics mig b suggsd b s ligions, o insnc in Gnv Muslim gils complld opicip in gm clsss vn oug i s mig impd m. toug I do ink w sill l wi poblm o cogniion o sus o ligions, spcill in euopn con. So I ink w nd o lc mo on is on.

Susan Mendus: I sms o m qusions v bn pu in is om: w ccp lngug o cogniion is inppopi, i is no doing wok quid o i. L’sv disppovl bck in s cucil. Bu now, i w ccp olion is ncss, i wccp i includs s cnl componn disppovl, w poin dos disppovlbcom so g s o qui olion isl b suspndd? W limis o olion? t is cp nsw nd is n pnsiv nsw. t cp nsw is Ido no know, nd I do no bliv is kind o a priori idniicion o limis o olion. and, in w, Micl fdn discussd limis givn b limis o ciminli nd non-ciminli. Wll, Liblism isl s poblm bou w linsould b dwn bcus, s ou sid, do w n k ciminlision o omosuli

s lgiim? t on qusion i sms o m is boom o ll is, is: Wn nd w nild o invok cociv pows o s in od o scu ings wic wbliv o b coc nd vlubl? t is qusion. I ou sk o m nsw, I m iging libl on is. I ink, s, w culus wic uonom-diminising. t c uonom-diminising is p good son oinking cin pcics sould b sicd b lw o obiddn b lw. t cn bll sos o sons o inking, l’s s, in muliculul con womn in piculv i igs viold nd d ibl. Bu mig b pcicl sons ono invoking cociv pow o s bcus i cn do mo m n good. I ink,in pincipl, i ou sk, ‘Do I ink c soci o goup is uonom-diminising

is signiicn noug son o poibiing is pcics?’ I would giv sig nsw,‘ys, I do.’ Bcus I ink Liblism is iging o, i gw ou o conlic nd w vo b cl bou wic sid w on in conlic.


79



Jacob Levy: I ink cd o wic libls ig is dom o ligion, no uonom.On ing ppns kin o m lil jb amicn public discous is, mo spciiclvl, id ‘wll o cous w mus b oln, bu mus no ol inoln,’wic uns il pidl ino viw w mus spc ligious dom o llligions, povidd ll Uniinism. to v viw is o v s u ou invoc o ou blivs. t would b illgiim o s o do, nd popl gid up v quickl in s o pdos nd s climing violion o ligious domo olion o ligion o bliv in is own ligion. O, o ligion o v subsniv viws no sm s coc subsniv viws s oug o v wispc o quli. Viull no mjo ligion s d quli o mn nd womn spciions, s blivs, s conggns, s qul componns o is i o lmos n mningul sc o umn iso. tis is, in m viw, bd ing. howv, i ligiousdom is co consiun libl vlu, n i mus no b cs w ol ollow dom o ll ligions in so s c compibl quli bwn mn ndwomn, bcus n w s wi oling Univslism on ig, nd v lil

bsids.

Q: I jus wn o pss ou on w dom o ligion nds o dom o conol ligion o ou cildn? Bcus i ou no going o mk uonom cnl, ou going o si ocus o dom o ligion nd ving uns on ow w spll ou conn o dom, ig?

Jacob Levy: t ovwlming mjoi o ligious blivs v gown up bliving in ligion i pns ug m. Is conol? I is no impisonmn, i is noouing ou cildn, bu i dos sm o b mndousl powul pscologicl oc.

I v d gumns i is violion o dom o ligion wn pns c icild ligion. tis is pdo nd i is bsud. I is cgo misk. W i is o v mil is o c ou cildn ings, nd o c cildn ings ou ink u.tn ou cildn bcom duls nd o b n dul is o b pl uonomous, o b ndul is o sp bck om som commimns ou w isd wi – o mb ll o m on im – nd ssss m. Bu o b n dul is no n uonomous ns cu,o cin kind o compnsiv libl imginion. Non o us ougow nd vis ndjc ving ou pns ug us. alws w gowing wi inlunc o suc-nd-suc ing, vn i ou jc i. you jcing i viw bu ou living in wold cd.

Susan Mendus: rligious olion is gining li o is own ov ! I v muc gwi Smul Bin ligion is ging qui n s id. Bu w v ll “u-sks” og on on nd, nd n, on sm nd, ‘w ll c ou cildn,w p muc know w w old o bliv, nd w’s wong wi ?’ y, i ou look Lock’s dnc on olion b in mind cicumsncs und wic i ws win,in wic popl w sdding c o’s blood in podigious mouns. I is no woldin wic ll “u-sks” og, cing i cildn nic ings bou lovingon no. I is wold in wic on p o hll! and is w ligiousolion sms o m immnsl poblmic. rligion is no bnign. I is n o o mki bnign. I is v dngous. Picull, concp o slvion is ml dngous,

isoicll nd concpull.


80



Rajeev Bhargava: I v o pl on qusion o w o no sould b nosblismn o mulipl sblismns. t is qusion. M nsw is I wouldp nion o so o disincion din lvls. On is spion o s ndligion nd lvl o nds; s mus v common scul ins nd nd. tscond is lvl o insiuions nd psonnl, wic is w w cll cuc-sspion; ligious psonnl, ligious insiuions o b spd om poliiclinsiuions, poliicl psonnl. and id is spion lvl o lw nd publicpolic. Som popl k viw ligion mus no vn b objc o lw nd publicpolic, sould b sic spion. O popl mig k viw sould no b cs, ou cn mk ligion n objc o lw nd public polic. Incin ms ou v go o in wi ligion, nd invnion mig bonsiv o lo o popl wo blong o is ligious communi. fo mpl, in cso scools un b ligious communiis m b cin goups wic v liblin soci, nd mig qui s suppo in od o un i ducionl insiuions. tig cn onl b civ i s cull suppos m. So on is lvl, wic is

qusion ou isd, I ink sould b no sblismn o ligion, sould b no ocic sblismn. t scond lvl is obvious: s o b cuc-s spion. and id lvl – on w o no s sould mk ligion nobjc o lw nd public polic givn complicd viw I v o suppo nd ngivinnc – i dpnds on con; I would go b con. and is cl csin mn counis. t nsw sould b no sblismn, no occ, no sblismn.t would b libl gliin viw, n ving mulipl sblismns.

Ronald Dworkin: W sm o g bou cogniion. tis movmn gind sngwn pcics w oml cipins o olnc, in picul omosuli,

bcm snul o id o olnc bcus ws v song ling ws noing wong wi m. I ink is is pobbl lso u bou ligion, bu I willcom bck o in momn. W v sn o cogniion, bu I m no su w vgo v in libl bsis o olnc bcus w nd n plnion disinguissbwn os pcics o wic w disppov, wic w dislik, wic w ol, ndos wic w do no. fo long im popl likd o s ws n impon disincionbwn sl-gding nd o-gding cs. t sl-gding cs md, i ll,onl gn. W v gon ps , o sons timo Gon as mniondbou mulicululism. Popl bing md b ngd migs, b insiuions subjug, inllcull nd in o ws, on gnd gins no. ts disincms. Bu I ink onc w bgin o sk, ‘a n ms in o pcics?’ n w

com o c w liv in culul, icl, ligious nvionmn in wic olncs coss. I is d o bing ou cildn up o old viws ou lik bou suloinion wn ilms nd pls s clb din ids. I is d opcis ou own opinion wi convicion ou would lik o v, inocmn ou would lik o v om smbols suound ou. I is d o bing upcildn in communi in wic mblms nd ibiions o ivl commimn.you mig s is no kind o m w nild o poc ouslvs gins.Cinl, suc would b libl posiion. Bu ow do w dscib i? W ccp quicull sicions on sic zoning. I cnno dco m ous w. Is dnil o m uonom? Dos plnion ppl o gnl ins in ving

omognous ow o ouss? Is limiion o m uonom? and w is dincbwn ving sic zoning nd ou dsi imgs wi wic w suoundd conim ou ligious i?


81



On ls mk. you s ligion is spcil, nd cinl consiuions v d i sspcil. Bu is i spcil bcus popl killd c o ov i in 17 cnu? Is w i is spcil? W suppos i sould b spcil on pincipl. Bu ow cn w insis dom o ligion is spcil nd dsving o spcil consiuionl o libl pocions?I sms o m ’s muc mo wok o b don bo w v libl bsis oolnc.

Andrew Vincent: Is olnc n issu o pincipl? Is olnc ncssil spciicll libl viu? a libls isoicll concnd wi issu o olnc? Jus quick lcion on s qusions. I sms o m m b kind o lmn in iso o olnc wic dos l closl o ligious civil ws, picull in 16

nd 17 cnuis. I d n isoin wo sid popl wo gud mos vociousl o olnc duing is piod w os wom w would now gd s ml undmnlis. ts w minoiis wiin s mjoi gims nd onl w could civ w wnd ws o dmi som om o w ou mig cll olnc.

In is sns ou could s issu o olnc is no n issu o pincipl ll, bu in c pgmic issu involving usion o violnc nd pgmism. you cn s Wsplin s, s i ws omd im, ws simpl omd on pincipl o wou mig cll dg o spion o ligion, poliics cing o occ. and in w consiuionl moion in sns s bcom kind o pgmic fait accompli o w olion coms bou. I ink i is pilosopicl ubis o ink somow olionis n issu o pincipl o mol pincipl in sns. and, scondl, is olnc ncssil libl viu? I cn ink o numb o wis om 17 nd 18 cnuis, publicn,consviv wis, sociliss in 20 cnu, nionliss lik Mzzini, mn om hbsbug empi nd os, wo cull v bn ll concnd wi issu o

olnc. I jus wond w i is spciicll libl viu w lking bou –is i viu ll? and is i soming libls v bn concnd wi? I do no know nsw spciicll, bu i I go o inks suc s Kn, Mill o Lock, I m no bsolul convincd, wn looking m in i conmpo spc, o ow oug o ligious popl o ow oug o womn. t issu o olnc is no on w wouldcogniz in con. In c, do no ink o b issus o olnc ising,bound up wi v limid concpion o w umn bing is.

Paolo Pombeni: a w dsoing in nm o libl olnc libl ssm? W coming bck o hol romn empi id poliicl ssm is so o condion o din socil mmbsips. t id o ionlising o sculising

ciiznsip, id ciiznsip ws commonl spd b is om o ionlgnl smn, wic ws om o ou scul ligion, Cisin ligion. Now wv o conom wi soming wic is din om is, nd i is v diicul o bincludd in is common sp. Bcus is id ligion is so o piv icnno b ccpd. and wo din consquncs. fis, on sid o publicssm – wic is incsingl ing o dso gnl lgl ssm (wic ws bolgl nd mol). I ou look Civil Cod in euop, i is no simpl lgl lgislion.I is so o mol cod o poliicl gound. Scondl, in cin sns scs v inglisic. W w losing ll ligious ssm in Wsn wold scivd? all cucs in esn euop, spcill in russi, Colic Cuc in

Il, in Spin, in fnc lso, muc mo inglisic now n w wn oi s go. and w? Bcus w sing wi is id o olnc id c on s o – in cin sns – wc i own bo.


82



Rajeev Bhargava: I wn o spond o issu o w olnc is spciic issu o Liblism. I do no ink so. I sid I ink w sould s Liblism s volving pspciv on snsibili o docin, nd w md disincion sd bwn 19

cnu Liblism nd modn Liblism. t ws im wn olnc ws v k vlu o Liblism. I do no ink i is cs now. fo m, olion is linkd in on w o no o cin kind o ingliinism. V on i is bnign gliinism. I m b pnlism, s Indin cs suggss. as in bo Wsn nd esn pinc.t is cin moun o gliinism buil ino i, so i will ld o gliin conlicwi conmpo vsions o Liblism. I do no s ow i cn b md k concp.to, i ollows in conmpo Liblism i cnno ll b m o pincipl,onl m o pgmism. t is w I s i. On issu o ligion s somingspcil, I do no ink w sould ssum ligion is spcil. I do no ink i cn bncdnl buil ino n kind o libl o. So I do no g on is spc wi ou.On o nd, I wn o go bck o pincipl s sd o us: i ms owqull individul li gos, nd ow i gos is o b judgd om c individul’s own poin

o viw. t judgmn cnno b md b os. I i is cs, s w know, lo o popl bs i livs upon w is dpl, dpl ligious, (sud, in som ws) no n o m i is spcil, libl o would lso i s spcil o m.

Jacob Levy: I v g dl o s bou s ings. to qusion o w ligionis spcil I mk no clim bou mol o vn pincipld spcilnss, onl bou isspcilnss in ging old o lionsip o concp o Liblism. t isoicldvlopmn o docin – dg o wic dom o ligion, ul o lw,consiuionl libis non-ngoibl ps o pckg – s bn lcion o libl poliicl docin. I somon lls m v wokd ou coc libl

o o olion nd i s no lionsip o dom o ligion, o s ligion s mginl m, n I would s soming sng s ppnd. as o w ignsws bou ow concp s volvd s ligious con nds ouwdnd is moll undsood, I did no pss viw on .

Susan Mendus: to dw lin bwn w is olion nd w isn’, i pssd, I ink w cn go bck o Mill on m pincipl, nd som suibl inpion o i. and so qusion bou uonom, Mill s viws bou , wic spl ou in isinsisnc i is m o inss ms. So l’s c g cop o On Liberty ndv d.

On qusion o w ligion is spcil, I ink i is spcil nd spcill

dngous i i ks slvionis un. Bcus n, s rwls ss, w v kind o conlic knows no compomis in pincipl. t concp o ngoiion dos no ppl oncligion ks slvionis un. t is, o m w o inking, w mks i spcil.


83



5. MARKETS

Samuel Brittan

tnk ou v muc. fo ll possibl s in wic I mig v bn

skd o lk bou is subjc, is is undoubdl wos on. and i ouink I vn’ go i plnion o cu o mlis wic scd wol wold conom, ou wong – cp I’ll v o llbck on soming lik oiginl sin, wic ws no w ou skd m olk bou.

I s wi poliicl vlu judgmn, no wi cnicl conomics.Bu I know i I gv lo o cnicl conomics (nd I would b good i)popl would s, ‘w did bo us wi ?’ I I lk bou poliicl

vlus, wic I m going o lk bou, popl will s, ‘w oug wsn conomis?’ Bu I m no n conomis; I m poliicl pilosop-monk. Wn I sd ou m inllcul li, i did no look s o n living s poliicl pilosop. So I sld o conomics. and on imI wnd o b pscologis, bu I oug in Cmbidg pscolog involvd lo o biolog, psiolog nd disscing s nd ogs. So Isld o conomics s bing cousin o poliics, in wic I ws oiginll insd.

I s wi poliicl vlu judgmn. a libl is somon wo cs

spcil vlu o psonl dom, jus s socilis o socil dmoc doso quli nd consviv dos o uoi. Bu I do no bliv inguing bou diniions. I ou wn o s libl is ll somingls nd no kind o individulis, I sll no los n slp ov i. Indd,o cli ms, I v kn o dscibing msl s libl individuliso somims jus s n individulis. a libl in m sns wns o duc numb o mn-md obscls o cis o cul o ponilcoic. In o wods, cs ig vlu o w Isi Blin clldngiv dom. and i tim wns o s Isi od bck bi om

, is insing, bu i dos no c m spousl o ngivdom.

85



a libl in sns dos no v o div ll public polic om ongol. h o s dos bliv, owv, in presumption in vou o psonlcoic. and I ink psumpion is s s on cn go ino poliicl o,o poliicl conom. In o wods, onus is on os wo wn opscib dugs, lcool, obcco o oign vl o mk i cs, no o w ound. t mn popl wo would lik o gu pov is sicion on dom. agin, I wn o void guing boumnings o wods. t subsniv poin is i I cnno od o l oGc, i is on so o vil; nd i m govnmn obids m o vl ,ispciv o w I cn od o o no, i is no so o vil: n co cocion. Indd, on w o disinguising bwn n conomic liblnd socil dmoc is libl ccps oc o is disincion

nd socil dmoc dos no. t n numb o socil dmocbooks wic o din s ms nd jus c linguisicconusion.

fo u mk libl, n bnis in sp o pospi oconomic gow bonus, nd in n cs mimision o GDP isn bsud objciv o conomic polic. I is b o s loug mncnno liv on bd lon, cnno liv wiou bd, nd i would buil o pc bnis o psonl dom unlss i w nomll ssocid wi sonbl mil pomnc, nd is is spcill u

o mging conomis.Obviousl I cnno mk cs o is so o individulisic

Liblism in im vilbl (I did m bs in A Restatement of EconomicLiberalism, Mcmilln 1988). Bu m I jus s i is noing o do wi pilosopicl gumn bwn dminism nd will, w i ning I m on dminis sid. Suppos som sup sciniswi noug knowldg o cusl lws nd iniil condiions could pdicw I will wn o l o Gc o no. tis in no w sbliss cso s ining wi m dcision. Would i b b i m dsi o

visi coun w ndom m lik spin o di?t bs w o sing w mk is in is o look lniv

o s Socilism. how is s o dcid w poducs sould b md,w jobs popl sould do, ow long sould wok, nd ow muc sould pu sid in sving, w sould b blnc bwn lisund wok, nd so on? I is bcm insd in s ms wn I cmcoss Milon fidmn wn ws on sbbicl Cmbidg. hwould qunl pl o poposls o s invnion b sing:‘Pcl ll ig i ou ink govnmn sould dcid n individul ciizn.’ I ws sockd b ow mn popl w willingo ccp is ssumpion in i dnc o govnmn invnion.


86



Pps ooldil, I id o dnd mid conom o Bul, Giskllnd Mcmilln wiou oviding individul coic.

t is lso song conncion bwn mks nd poliicl ndinllcul dom. V bil: suc dom is diicul i s ownso conols ll mns o publicion nd dissminion, nd joboppouniis in jounlism nd s. tis conncion dos no ll onning muc bou dils o conomic polic, w s souldown ilws o no. Bu s invnion wi poliicl nd inllculdom cn go qui on bsis o good dl lss n 100 pcnClus IV ownsip o conomic soucs. O cous, numousmpls o compiiv cpilis conomis wic unplsndicosips. t poin is isnc o subsnil mk sco

is ncss bu no suicin condiion o isnc o dom in wid sns.t wo sndd plis b sociliss wo v undsood is

ciiqu. On is o s s sould mul cpilis pcic, invso poi, nd sblis compiiv consum mks. In o wods, oumk donk ino zb b pining sips on is bck. Mn o ou willknow b n I do w is id o s mk conom nv ll woks. t o pl is o spous mk bsd on compiiv woks’co-opivs. t libl conomis cn v no pincipld objcion, so

long s si o suc co-opivs is m o coic nd nogovnmn-nocd. In pcic, suc co-opivs likl o binsing cpions in lgl cpilis nvionmn.

t wo min oms o mk ilu wic cn diso mks,w o no o cpilis vi, s vnus o individul coic, ndwic would b impon vn in b conom wiou mon. t nliis nd public goods. t is cn on b ckld b mkmods, loug no b laissez-faire. t scond is mo diicul ockl in is w, vn oug som US libins wo vou

piv mis nd polic ocs, clusiv linc on oll-inncd odsnd so on! t cn ig i own bl.

t cs o mk ilu v o b blncd gins os o govnmn ilu. Govnmns nd i gns no disinsdinsumns o public wl, bu jus s concnd wi i owninss s businssmn nd piv sco woks . evn on bs o ssumpions, poliicl dcisions invibl involv oviding minoi ssnd viws. tis is wll-oddn gound mong sudns o poliiclconom, loug o mn poliicl oiss i is lin io.

too mn popl will gd ving I’v sid so s clssoomgms compd wi booms nd buss wic v cnl culmind in


87



l n-bkdown o wold mon ssm. I is s bsud oigno s dvlopmns s o bndon ving ou v v blivd.Cpilism s lws sud om boom nd bus. t is no gulccl, bu succssion o lucuions o ving dgs o svi. tis noing so bsud s o s som commnos using om cing‘M ws ig!’ wnv is sv slump, nd n bckpdllingo s ‘Cpilism is onl gm in own!’ wn conomic cov coms, s i nomll dos.

t is sp owds lvl-dd ppoc is o cuis inncil ssm. Is ilings do no sblis dirigiste cs. Noing s ppnd in psn cdi cunc suggss govnmns n good picking winns, consum coic sould b oviddn, o

ing innionl d is bd ing. W s gon wong is in inncil ssm nomll nbls popl o d wiou nomous inicincis o ling on b. as Kns sid long go,‘mon will no mng isl ’, mssg lso pplis o cdi.

aloug i is lpul o im bing, igid division bwn mon ssm nd l conom is no uliml sisco. tDuc ulip bubbl o 18 cnu ws no poduc o mon css.No on sould b supisd i mpls o lg-scl impudnc, wi owiou ciminli, vnull mg ousid inncil sco bo

psn cunc is ov.W is uliml sk is poi-sking pdigm. Nl ll

mk-inclind poliicl conomiss ccp pois mus b soug noml b lgl mns bu wiin unwin uls o soci. tpoblm, s Nomn B s poind ou, is is g conusionnd disgmn bou w s unwin uls ll . hk, lmoslon mongs mk conomiss, mpsisd imponc o diionl uls, wic mbod mo knowldg n n on pson cnop o v.

Bu did no ll go ino n dil on w s uls w. I migsupis som popl I v gon bck o englis novlis Jnausn, wo ook o gnd igs o piv pop, bu lso sssdis obligions nd d gs conmp o os wo pusud wlo is own sk o o mul os.

Obviousl, I v no bn bl o l down in dil nw uls o poi-sking gm – ml o sss nd o m nd o povid w ins.


88



Zhang Weiying

I g wi mos poins Si Smul Bin md. So m commns md no o punis im, bu o giv suppo nd supplmn is gumns,nd lbo som o m own gumns. t is poin I would lik omk is mks pd o bo nomiv nd posiivdoms. Som insing poins s libls nd o c somspcil vlu o psonl dom. and I mpsis ig, bu Iink w nd mks mo n . Bu in c, in Cin, n lisg o om, conomiss gud o mk conom, nd somom-mindd lds insilld mk ino diionl plnndconom no bcus ppcid psonl dom, bu bcus

oug mks would mk pi bigg, mk ving b.economiss ink i mk llocion will b mo icin.as s quli is concnd in Cin, in gions w conom

is mo mkisd, nd govnmn ins lss, incom inquli is low. So w nd mk no jus o icinc, bu lso o quli.In Cin, mn popl ciicisd libl conomiss wiin Cin obing concnd onl wi is icinc, no wi quli. and I ink iis bsolul wong. Cins libl conomiss lso concnd wiquli, bu bliv (s do I) mk is b n

govnmn poviding is. t is is gumn I would lik omk.

t scond gumn is bou mk ilu nd govnmn ilu. al sgs o conomic dvlopmn, ou m s mk iluuomicll invis govnmn invnion. you ig. W nd oblnc mk ilu gins govnmn ilu. I ink i is sill nonoug: w nd o lis mn mk ilus cull cusd b govnmn invnion. W is lionsip ngiv? you know i is mk’s puion pls v impon ol in displing nomsnd individul bviou. W popl concnd wi puion?Bcus, i los i puion, n would b punisd b oconcnd pis. Bu wn govnmn inoducs mo gulions, will cull dso puion bdl. W? t son is wngovnmn s mo discion pow, i will mk businssnvionmn mo uncin. Wn nvionmn bcoms mouncin, businsspopl v v so nion spns; bcom v mopic. t no concnd wi long-m uns, bu jus wi so-

m incoms. So lss concnd wi puion. tis is, inpicul, u in Cin, w so mn compnis do no c o poducquli; do no know ow long i businss cn ls. t wo


89



govnmn m sk m o sop doing suc businss nim. I is in bs inss o businsspopl jus o pusu so-m poi, n long-m un.

ano son is mol zd poblm, lik wn govnmnpovids som guns o businsss, lik od’s mn insolvn inncilinsiuions, o povid inncil suppo could cus moll zdousbviou s nobod would k l sponsibili o i bviou. Iink asin inncil cisis 10 s go ws cusd cl b govnmn guning s kinds o ings. also, I ink isinncil cisis is muc mo sul o govnmn’s pnsion mon polic, bu cinl popl would lik o blm mk. Iink in ciicising mk is no isk, bu in ciicising

govnmn, on cs som isks. Popl mo likl o ciicis mk isl n govnmn. Bu I nd o mpsis mn govnmn ilings cull cusd b govnmn bviou,govnmn gulion, n b mk isl.

t id poin I would lik o mk is bou poi-mimizionbviou. Poi-mimizion bviou is on ciicisd o cusingsom socil poblms, nd i is ciicism in wic popl misundsndw poi is. you m know poi is cull n ccounbili ssm.I is bs ssm in umn soci w cn ind o mk von

k sponsibili o is cions. In lgl ms, I ink popl wo civpoi mo likl o k sic libili, nd popl wo civ iduns lik sl, likl o k nglign libili. Onl wn mk som plici misk do k sponsibili. Bu ll popl wok poi nd o k sponsibili o ll o popl, including poplin i suppl-cins, nd i mplos. t mns i ou cnnodiscov o popl’s misks, i is collciv misk o wic owns o im libl. I ink is is v impon. I is ld o oucun concp clld copo socil sponsibili o skold viw.

Bo o s concps wong, ls v mislding. I w jus lk bou copo socil sponsibili, i is d o din. W kinds o ings sould popl do? W cnno s w im sould bv inms o lw, bcus in li som ings lgl o illgl nd cn bi socill wong o ig. I ou ind soming socill ig wil iis illgl, sould ou do o no? Som ings socill wong, bu noillgl. I ou do i, ou v no lgl isk, bu i is socill no good. So som concps, lik copo socilis sponsibili, no ll n nsw o impon qusions.

t ou gumn I would lik o mk is , bliving in conomicLiblism is qui on in Cin no sm s bliving in poliicl


90



Liblism. I ul bliv in mk nd piv ownsip, bu I dono ink in od’s Cin i is good im o inoduc modmocic ssm dind b lcion. t som sonssuppoing m gumn. fis, I ind wn popl mk iindividul coics, sm v ionll icin. Bu wn mk collciv coic, sm v moionl, o ionll moionl. all, von would lik o v ‘ lunc’, vn i conomiss dmin is no lunc o b d! Bu popl lws wn o v lunc nd l o popl p o i. t is v picl pnomnon inpublic coic o collciv coic. ano son is i w wn o v good, icin nd mo dmocic soci, w nd o v songmiddl-clss, bcus onl middl-clss cn k sponsibili. Wn

popl v ig o vo bu do no su om n consquncs o obni om is dvlopmn, do no c wo is going o b ipsidn. Suppos Cins popl slc psidn lik in amicn ssm. fo wom do ou ink will vo? you know, dono c. Mb som cndids will giv som smll gi o m, nd somb will b vod in s psidn. and is m gumn. So Iink o Cin, loug w v don lo in conomic om, so oo doI cinl op poliicl om will com, bu I do no ink w sould b

v impin o i. I ink w nd o wi o som im, w nd o s

song middl-clss mg, nd onl in is w cn w inoducdmocc o gnl lcions.

Stuart White

W I m going o ssum, s I ppn o ink i is u, is mks indd n indispnsbl u o libl conomic od, nd inddn dsibl conomic od. Bsicll, I ink good soci musllow o divsi o lisl coics, nd mks bs

mcnisms w v o ognising poducion in w is sponsivo lisl coic. Bu is mpicll dos no mn libls souldndos ning lik w w usull mn b mk conomicssm, ls wi spc o disibuion o incom nd wl. todvlop is poin, I would lik o un o lionsip bwn pov nd lib Si Smul Bin lkd bou in is psnion. I ink unpcking w is going on is impon o undsnding w libl conomic od mus mbd mks in insiuions consininquli in disibuion o incom nd wl. In Smul’s nlsis,lib is o b undsood s ngiv lib: dom o c s ou likwiou bing subjc o cocion b os. Pov, gus, mig b


91



bd ing, bu i is no soming wic limis lib in sns. Pov is on kind o obscl; cocion is no. and lib is bou bsnco cocion.

Mn socil libls v mo o lss ccpd is w o sing ingsup. t v cd conclusion pov dos consin lib onl b vising diniion o lib. following ld o t. h. Gn, v sid lib is no ml bsnc o cocion, busoming lik pow o dvlop ousl. Pov obviousl obsucs, so conclud pov limis lib .you cn ind undds o socildmocic o socil libl books wic v kind o gumn. Bu Iwn o gu pov consins lib pcisl in sns Smuldins i, ngiv lib. In sns ou o do w ou lik

wiou bing subjcd o innc b os. t cons bwnpov s on kind o obscl nd cocion s no is, I ink, misk,nd I m dwing on wok o popl lik J Con, Jm Wldonnd adm Swi.

L m s wi simpl mpl. I wn o vl om London oLivpool on in, bu I cnno od ick. W ppns? I gon in; ick inspco discovs I do no v ick; I mmovd om in, , l’s s, Sloug. M lck o ick mns I lck lgl pmission o b on in nd m o subjc o

cociv innc, uliml bckd b s, in doing w I wouldlik o do. tis is cuilmn o m lib, no som msious posiivlib, bu old-siond, sigowd ngiv lib. you cnppoc poin in no w. In soci wi piv ownsip, millions o cions wic c o us is ngivl un o pom,bcus objcs w nd o s cions blong o o popl.t pop igs o os plc us und ug o poibiionsbou w soucs w cn us nd o w cions w cn pom.Mon is mgicl dvic w us o mov som o s poibiions, nd

so cqui ngiv dom o pom spciic cions w wis opom. I is mon nbls m o go ino c sowoom nd cull lv wi Posc, wic I cn n div om London o Livpoolwiou bing soppd nd bing own in jil. Now poin I v mdso dos no ncssil v n nomiv conn. I m simpl ingo mk n obsvion bou ow sucu o piv pop igss implicions o ngiv lib.

Bu l m now o k poin I v md in nomiv dicion.fis, w i w s, s nomiv clim, ll popl mus b o ls som minimum n? tn i would sm o ollow om w I v

jus sid ll ciizns mus v som kind o gun o ccss o


92



minimum o soucs. fo mpl, gun o minimum incom, o gun o minimum sum o cpil wi wic individuls bl on mk plc. In c, is is on o k ids o Sm’s ownsipo conomic Liblism. Sm is mos consisn nd long-sndingdnd I know o id ingl o n conomic od is somunivsl bsic incom o univsl cpil gn, nd I mc solidl longsid im in ig o suc ing.

M inl poin is Si Smul dnds is suppo o bsic incom ongounds o lib, no on gounds o quli. h mindd m ls nig is uo o n icl clld Redistribution Yes, Equality No. Iwn o conclud jus b ising qusion bou is sk cons bwnquli nd lib. and on w o ging m concn is o no

mn libls isoicll v no so muc bn commid o lib,s o soming lik qul lib, o qul mimum lib. I ink is isu, o mpl, o libls s din s t.h. Gn nd hb Spnc,nd in w i is logicl conclusion i ou k wo noms wic SvnLuks sd wi is moning: gliin nom, w c pson’swll-bing couns s muc s nbod ls’s; nd Individulism nom,w c pson is bs judg o w is in i ins. and i oupu os wo og, n ou’ null dwn o som noion bsic pincipl o jusic is som noion o qul lib, o qul mimum

lib. Now, i w combin is noion o qul lib s nomivcommimn wi poin o ngiv lib vis wi incom ndwl, n is song psumpion in vou o quli o disibuion o incom nd wl. I s, lik Smul, I bliv inpsumpions n d-nd-id uls nd so mig bconsidions ump psumpion. fo mpl, rwls, in ATheory of Justice, mnions incnivs; ronld Dwokin, in is wok, dwsnion o imponc o lisl coic isl in ponill jusiinginquliis. Bu psumpion is in vou o quli, nd budn o

jusiing inquli ss wi pson guing o inquli. I is no o gliin o jusi movmns w om mk-divd inquli,i is o suppos o mk-divd inquli o jusi movmnw om moll ppopi bslin o quli. W ollows omis, in insiuionl ms, is v muc opn o db. Bu I ink o sons I v sid, bsic libl pspciv on mks is v nicl summd up b Jon Su Mill in is uobiogp, w ss‘ socil poblm o uu w considd [i.., imsl nd hitlo] o b [ws] ow o uni gs individul lib o cion wi common ownsip o w mil o glob, nd n qulpicipion o ll in bnis o combind lbou?’


93



Debate

Q: I would lik o s I nil g wi Smul Bin’s psnion nd is viw o Liblism, nd wi is diniion o on o undmnl psumpion o ngiv lib,

nd psonl coic. I m no su i is nil compibl wi ls spk’s viwbou psumpion o quli, bu would b long discussion. anw, I cnundsnd ow ou c psumpion o quli, bu I cn dl s ow psumpion o quli is compibl wi psumpion o lib nw. Bu I vmo pcis qusions o Si Smul Bin. t is qusion is: i is ou opinion o Liblism, sould no w n s suc din popl s Jon Mnd Kns,Milon fidmn, nd fdick hk ll libls in ou sns? Would ou g wi o no? Dos i ollow w ou v sid o no? and scond qusion: i i ollows– nd I ink i dos – som popl would s i Liblism cn ppl o s din popl, o s din viws, i bcoms oo bod concp, nd in

cs i could b lmos mp. Os mig gu i Liblism pplis, is sign o sng n wknss. M qusion is: do ou g wi on o oinpion, o do ou v ou own inpion?

Samuel Brittan: On o ings wic I ink I l songl s ims go on is uili o guing bou diniions o suc ms. In som ws, Kns nd hk ll libl,in som ws v din. to void s smnic gumns, I v spokn bou “umn individulism”, nd md i v cl I m no cl w ou’d cll socillibl. Bu on o bs dncs I’v sn o n individulisic mk conom is in ls w pgs o Kns’s General Theory. h spnds lo o im lking bou inicincis o lbou mks, ow s mus bv, som o wic ollow, som o

wic dd. Bu n gos on i s could mng o k c o civdmnds, n is lo o b sid bou diionl qul individulisic conomicssm, nd dos i wi low loqunc. So w ou wn o lk bou viiso Liblism o ou wn o lk wi din wods, I dscib msl s ds s ‘umn individulis’. Bu I ink pnl ws los wn Gog Bus S. md Liblismino boo-wod nd opponns n pickd i up s i wod, wic, in cuious w,swung pndulum nd pusd libls owds dirigiste individulis cmp. Wcould gu unil midnig bou w sould b don, bu I m no ppd o gu oomuc ov wic wods sould b usd o dscib on’s blis. I I jus mk on poinbou msl, i is qui u I v gud o s in vou o ings suc s minimum

incom nd som s-ognisd disibuion o cpil. I v no cull sid sings incs ngiv lib; w I v sid is ngiv lib is no onl vlu,nd ou cnno div polic bsd on vlu. I m no going o gu liblo individulisic. I jus ppn o bliv in m, nd I wis Godon Bown would k lil im ou om sving wold o dnd s ids, som o wic inoducd scncllo.

Q: M qusion is bou din usgs o m “mk”. I sms o m ls wo dincs. On is n conomic mcnism, nd n o cous mis o mk sould b subjc o sciniic invsigion. O is i cull nc wod ol ll inllcul nd poliicl igs w ou sld libl vlus ppn o nd up

coosing mk? t wod “mk” is n usd s nc o os vlus. toubl is now conom is muc mo complicd nd w in din siuion,nd s consqunc i is cl mk mcnism s lo o compliis, nd w


94



v o p o i in dnding mcnism s p o Liblism. Would i no b muc sio giv up m nd us soming ls insd?

Samuel Brittan: W I v givn up, Liblism, is w I bing bck gin. W nowgoing o giv up mk – ow socil sciniss univsi will coninu giving up ono os cin wods o! I ink wod “mk” sould b usd dscipivl mo. I do no dvlu i bu i sould b usd dscipivl, bu o cous is dinc bwn individul mks nd globl id o mk ssm. Sompgmic conomiss in middl ciicisd conomiss o ll im, guing bou mkss pp nd nd sing sould invsig individul mks mo. Unounl, mns ging i nds di, wic w would no lik doing.

Ronald Dworkin: I wn o go bck o Bijing, nd conomic nd poliicl Liblism. Now,i suck m s insing Posso Zng sid mks pomo quli, nd i isu, w is i kind o quli mks pomo is mo vlubl n kind

o quli poducd b dmocc? you gumn Cin is no d o dmocc md wo insing sps. On is popl wo vo mk dcisions on moionlgounds n ionl gounds. I is cinl u, w ll su som om i, bu cod o dicos is no v good i! W cn ink o dicos, som o wom livd inBijing, wo md iionl dcisions. a lo o dmg ws don in is w.

tn ou sid Cin nds middl clss bo ining dmocc. t is complicd nd insing gumn. Bu I do no ink son ou gv, middl clss s sk in oucom, is ll convincing. tis is bcus i m b qusion o ducion, bu l’s s Cin’s gin o ul populion sul s sk, dmic sk, in dicion coun now gows. I do no ink i is c o middl-

clss pop ownsip sould b dcisiv.and I v qusion bou mon nd ngiv lib. Ngiv lib is dom asa right ; no on could sop ou. Mon dos no giv ou . a ic pson mig wn ovl in m c om Ood o London, bu is no mo ngiv lib o do bcus is ic. t mon dos giv im oppouni o bib m, bu i is ncss o bib m, nd I ink i would b conusion o s is pow o bib m is isngiv lib. Bcus is no n insnc o is ving dom o do somingwiou govnmn innc; i I cll policmn, won’ b bl o g ino m c.

Zhang Weiying: fis, i govnmn conols mulipl soucs, nd polic lwscngs, n odin popl cnno do businss. Onl os wi v song conncions

wi govnmn cn do businss, so cn mk v ug pois (lik som innos ). Bu in s lik Zhejian povinc, govnmn ins v lil, bunon cn do businss. So poi mgin is v low. So incom quli is low.

as o poliicl om, Cins Communis P dsod culu o pop igs. In od’s Cin, loug w v lws sguding pop igs, dl spcd b odin popl, nd M’s o o ploiion is sill ug in univsiis nd ig scools. Suppos ou v gnl ndum in is kind o culu.you v poposd w k ll pop om ic popl. you will ind mjoi o popl ging wi . t bill would b pssd. I ink w nd culu o pop igs. Look iso o Biin w, is, onl os wi pop d ig o

vo. and in Cin is would no b ccpd od, bu sm im voing quli would no wok. educion is ndd o c ionl inking nd no moionl inkingbou uu.


95



Stuart White: I do no wn o dn conlics bwn libis nd quliis,bu I do wn o jc w popl could lk bou quli/lib dilmm, bcusI ink on cnno b jus gins lib. I ink lib is soming disibud, nd so ouv o k viw on w pop disibuion o lib is, wic n immdil nngls ou concn wi lib nd is disibuionl oucom wi n ccoun o quli. On poin bou diniion o ngiv lib, l m s i I v go is ig: diniion o ngiv lib ronld is poposing is bsnc o cocivinnc in doing w ou v ig o do.

Ronald Dworkin: you v dom o do i unindd b n cociv uoi. t is clssic noion o ngiv lib. t govnmn cnno sop m sing w I wn os. I do no v o p o s w I wn o s. W I m jcing s k is dilmmo ngiv lib vsus pov. I do no bliv is conlic. Bu id w cnpsv disincion bwn ngiv nd posiiv lib, nd n s ‘pov limisngiv lib’ is no good gumn.

Stuart White: I m no su ow ou wn o build noion o igs violions ino limiion o ngiv lib. t is sndd objcion o id w sould buildsom noion o igs violions ino i, wic is mpl o jusl impisondciminl. t ciminl dos no v ig o mc ou o pison. I is no sicion onw v ig o do o consin m wiin pison gounds, bu w sill wno s b bing impisond su om loss o ngiv lib.

Samuel Brittan: W is gumn? Obviousl i ou in pison ou su sv losso ngiv lib!

Stuart White: ys. t poin is i n innc wi m lib onl couns s ninnc i i sms in som sns unigul, n on diniion o w ninnc wi lib is, jusl impisond ciminl dos no su loss o lib.

Samuel Brittan: I ink ’s pling wi wods. Mos o s wods v bckgoundin iso, nd I do no ink Jon Su Mill oug bou ngiv lib s bing ig o go ono somon’s pop (o o v id in Dwokin’s c); i ws mnwiin pop ssm. Und lws o coun ou could dcid on ou couso cion, bu i would b cz o s nbod wo cnno od ning (in lics, mn couldn’ od o go o Mncs), i is unoun noug, bu I do no

ink i ou ndd im cqu would b free o go o Mncs. I guing boumnings o wods, bu sul no sn pson would gd i s coninmn o ngivlib I cnno go in o Ms’s room Blliol nd b d s i I w .

Jan-Werner Müller: W sonbl lgiim consins on lib? and isqusion cngs ov im. t v bn nomous culul cngs cing w consins consis o. I ink w Su is ing o gu is o ps o invning cos c s consins on umn civi, nd n mcnicll l picul noion o lionsip bwn umn civi nd lib, w nd oopn ild o includ ngiv concpion o lib, nd undsnd is cocion

o consin issu is no bou lib; i is bou consins. and I would lik o s noion o consin is libl on; i is soming , in volving, ccus mnings, ndlso loss mnings ll im. Sm, ou sid ou do no wn o occup ousl wi


96



mnings o wods, bu is w w v o b doing ll im. you v o occup ousl wi mnings o wods, bcus w dbing smnic issus. Smnicissus simpl us o mning, nd is is no w o sing sm ing. W ing o undsnd cnging nd libl nd usul mnings o bo lib ndlib wiin concp o Liblism.

Q: I would lik o go bck o Bijing b w o Ood. t is conomic libl Im ws in siing-oom o Jon Willims’ supviso in Ood, nd ppnd o b m bo-in-lw. h ws dico o Insiu o Mis nd Lninis Sudis fcul o Socil Scincs, n conomis wo ws p o dmocic movmn in piod, in 1990s. h ws on o mos psusiv opponns o poliicl Liblism s consqunc o is nlsis o limis o conomic om und diions o isinggovnmn nd p sucu in Cin. his gumn ws conomicll bsd: sid conomic om will b limid nd domd wiou cin moun o poliiclom in libl dicion. On ing mig lp concil ou viw nd is viw

is inking o poliicl om nd poliicl Liblism gin no s dvoc, bu ssoming cn b civd sg b sg. and picull gumn s somsonnc now: w spcs o poliicl om ncss o succss o conomicom? two ings I would lik o mnion. W is nspnc o dcision-mkingincluding gumnion lds on o dcisions? t o is ccounbili o os in pow, w ccounbili is in som sns o n lmn in soci dosno old pow dicl isl. and gin, on o gumns d bn pu owd im o dmocision ws no bsolu dmocision, bu pps limid licns.and is nowds sounds qui old-siond nd cion, bu nvlss in Cinscicumsncs i mig b n gumn o pu owd s ncss immdi sp owds

opning up nswbili o govnmn wiou lving possibili o populism,iionli, nd oug isl sown in culul voluion wic mn Cinsinllculs o bo sids sill s possibili o oo-pid om. I ll wn o sk qusion: i ou s wi conomic Liblism, cn ou sop , nd w ppns wi poliicl om ou s s inn in mk Liblism, nd w ps do ou ink indispnsbl o im bing?

Zhang Weiying: Pls do no misundsnd m: I lso ink poliicl om souldcom, bu m gumn is i sould b gdul. t is is sill o nd o dgulconom, bcus govnmn sill conols lo o soucs, nd so i ou wn o dobusinss, ou v o go oug mn dminisiv pocdus. Dgulion is lso

kind o poliicl om. W is impon o poliicl om in Cin is o now downgovnmn ps. Scond, I ink i is v impon o us o gdull build nindpndn lgl cou, judicil ssm. tn popl v culu o ul o lw,owis ou could no v gnl lcions. Bu wo mks judgmns is big poblm.In ps dcds, Cin lmos compld conomic om. I mn lmos, sinc sill lo o ings o do, bu i is mo cnicl. W know w w sould go. Bu govnmn sill olds mjoi s o som lisd big compnis. how s nd owmuc sould duc s oldings o socks? t is v cnicl qusion. In n 30 s, mo impon is consiuionl om. Consiuionl om cn consis o wo ps: is is n indpndn judicil ssm, nd scond is ul dmocic poliicl

om. t poliicl om sould com scond, no is. tis is m gumn. Cin sld don qui lo o ings in poliicl om, no lik som popl suppos, Cins don non o oms. I do no ink is ig.


97



Knick Harley: I would lik o o dic discussion somow. I m sligl disppoind is sssion on mks sms o b lgl discussion on dom, ndI would lik o o dic i bck. I ink som issus v com up sd nd ismoning l qui dicl o is. W v no ll com o gips wi som o s.Smul Bin lkd bou Liblism quing o psonl dom, quli o Socilism,Consvism o uoi, o pps o psvion o ps vlus. I sms o m in mk sns, issu ll is ov w bound is bwn mk nd s. I ws suck b wo ings in discussion. On ws commn Individulismis dind gins Socilism, nd Socilism los is conn. I ink is on p o poblm – w vn’ bn inking bou mks. t o ing is in conomic sp, id o Liblism sms o v slippd ino ausin diniionin poliicl db. I do no lik mk Liblism bing consind in ausinsijck, bu I ink impon issus bou icincis o mks; bouinomion; ognision; bou mcnisms o n nd is, inoducing nw ids ocivl dsoing old ids. I ink Scump is n impon ausin nm s

no com up . I would lik o know i pnlliss v som ougs bou iscollcion o ids I v own down wiou g dl o conc.

Samuel Brittan: I vn’ d bo Scump nd hk, bu I v d an rnd! tson w I spok bou fidmn ws bcus I oug i would b n o isconnc. Bu I v soming o s bou in w w w cn nd in w w w souldno ciicis Cin, nd lso bou no i in Liblism bwn Cobdnis, wobliv in non-invnion, nd libl impiliss, now smbolisd b ou oign sc,Dvid Millibnd.

Jessica Rawson: you voidd cun cdi cunc, bu is no n mpl o sicion o lib nd Liblism? t w i is pld ou b govnmn invnion ono s poducd igl sicd siuion o v lg numb o popl.

Susan Mendus: tis moning, Su, ou pssd m on w olnc is vlu inisl o w i gins is vlu om som o vlu. I ink sm qusion mig bskd bou mks: w gin vlu in mslvs o w undpinndb som o vlu. and i so, w is vlu? and lds p null o scond qusion: I m v gl smpic o ou ssociion o lib nd pov, ndou dsi o s pov is, in som sns, sicion on lib. Bu I jus go v buddld wn ou wnd o do in ms o ngiv lib, nd I m no su w

i is bcus dp lvl I ink disincion bwn ngiv nd posiiv lib is bd id, o w i is bcus I do no undsnd ou ccoun o ngiv lib.So is is pl o lp. I would lik o suppo ou mc o n idniicion o pov s somow lib-ducing, bu I m no qui su ow I sould do .

Timothy Garton Ash: I m v gld ou go iniil dicoom bwn conomicLiblism undsood s mks nd poliicl Liblism undsood s muli-p dmocc. Bcus in ou l nsws ou sd o ll din so, w cincomponns o clssicl Liblism, suc s limid govnmn nd ul o lw, ssnil o scu pop uncioning o mks. M qusion is is: i w k ou

pioi, i w ssum ou pioi is no individul lib o clssicl uonom, bu bspossibl uncioning o mk conom, w clssicl componns o clssicl Liblism ou would gd s ncss o pupos, bond ul o


98



lw nd limid govnmn? fo mpl, would ou gd -cing dom o pssion o dom o ssmbl s ssnil o scuing wll-uncioning mkconom?

Stuart White: Mks do no v n indpndn vlu. I ink nw isscci mks going o b insumnll vlubl bcus o i conncion wiings lik divsi o lisl coic. also, I wn o lk bou unpdicbili o coic.t onl mpl I v com coss is n mp o concil id o cnll-plnndconom wi sponsivnss o consum pncs, o is clld picipo conomics, p-con, wic is inlunil in som wings o ni-globlision movmn.Und p-con, ou v o dw up n nnul consumpion pln, wic is submid o uoiis nd n gggd nd n pln would b dvolvd down o poducssociions. P o poblm is w v o publicl vl ou consumpionpln, bu lso oug I cn nicip now w m nds o wol isnciul. So, onl in wold wiou scci would i no b bd ing i mks no long

isd.Imgin wold in wic ll soucs pivl ownd. fo v objc o spc in

wold, is sombod wo owns i. Now, i is sombod in is wold wo sno pop, w cion o pom? t nsw is bsolul no cionwsov. Wv cion I o pom, I v o l clim o n objciv spc wicblongs o sombod ls, nd in doing I bcom vulnbl o pow o cocivinnc o sop m doing wv I wn o do. t is no cion I cn pom wioubing subjc o lgll-snciond cociv innc o sombod ls. In sns,I compll lck ngiv lib. L’s s I wn o mdi. W cn I mdi wioubing subjcd o sombod’s pow o lgl cociv innc? So in sns I ink

pov consins ngiv lib.

Zhang Weiying: t is v impon lsson w sould undsnd: mk pocss,in picul imponc o npnus in conomic dvlopmn. I ink is is v impon o undsnding Cin’s cng in ps dcds. t goups.t is goup ul npnus, in is dcd – ul popl wo dswicd o businss. Scond, oicil-und-npnus, wo usd o wok ingovnmn nd n sd businsss in scond dcd. t id dcd ss und-om-ovss npnus; popl wo sudid ovss un o Cin o si businss. t lding popl in ps dcds wo dvlopd conom,nd is is v impon o undsnding mks.

Scond, ow do w din “mk Socilism”? I ou din mk Socilism s ‘mkplus s ownsip’, n w v oll uniqu ssm. you cnno v mkSocilism. I v don som oicl wok wic sows wn ou inoduc mkcompiion, s sco would collps. t is w s ppnd nd would ppnin Cin. t Cins govnmn did no wn o piviz s sco in is plc,bu b mid-1990s w d no o w bu o pivis, bcus wn ou inoducsom piv sco s compiion, big s sco mks loss.

tid, I lws ink dom is mo impon n dmocc. Dmocc is ls-so soluion. Odin popl v mo coic in libl mk. Bucinl som issus mus b solvd b govnmn, wic mns ou nd dmocc.

and o Cin, nspnc is v impon. Cunl, inn povids v impon cllng. So wn govnmn mks n policis, i nds o lisn o ospopl wo in pss nd on inn. t govnmn nds o lis


99



cn no long do wv lik, nd v o do soming o cng. I is v impon.So I ink -dmocc is v usul, bu i cnno solv ll poblms.

Samuel Brittan: I ink mks mcnisms, nd i’s bsud o wosip mcnism.to m mind, mks v wo vlus: ncss bu no suicin condiion o lib, bodl dind; nd lso sm mpiicll o b condiion o pospi. also, qusion ws skd w dom o pssion is ncss o mks o wok wll. Iwis I could s s. Bu I m id s vidnc sows, dom o pss ciiqu o sub-pim moggs, dom o b v ciicl o som ings bnk cuivsdo, would cinl lp, bu is dom o spc ism in Vicoin englnd, o o ck M nd Lnin in Cin? a s pcondiions o uncioning nd pospous mkconom? I wis I could s s. Bu I cnno ll s dom o pssion ov lg is ncss o pospous mk conom. Pu i o w ound: i ou in vou o is dom, n ou v o vou song mk sco. Bu i dos nowok o w ound.

Tony Curzon Price: you iniguingl sid ou oug vlus lik qui nd poplving disibuion w vlus somow indpndnl nd uonomousl. I wswonding w os s gds mk, w is. a mk ilus; public goods? O i is n nli? O is i simpl piv pnc on ou p?and i i public goods o nliis, is sns in wic udvlopmn o mk cull quis som dg o disibuion?

Michael Freeden: Wn mks inppopi? Wn do ou ink i is no good id mk mcnism sould b wok?

Jacob Levy: hk s pu owd so o oolki o nsw qusions lik is, bu i’s nocl o m ow i would b usul . W boundis sould b dwn oclssicl Liblism?

Inoue Tatsuo: I v wo qusions. fis is on concp o ngiv dom, nd o on lionsip bwn is concp nd mks. I ink w sould giv up concp o ngiv lib bcus i dos no din mning o lib isl. I jussows nds o lib, bu i dos no sow w w v o dnd gins sinvnion. I ss noing ll bou i. Onl concp o posiiv lib cn o mning. t is on disinc concpul lmn undling concp o posiiv nd

ngiv lib, bu i s noing o do wi lib isl, bu quli. Nu cnno viol concp o ngiv lib. evn i w pvnd om doing soming b nuldiss, i is no violion o ngiv lib. Ou ngiv dom is viold onl i oumn bings pvnd us om doing w w wn o do. Bu w is viold is no oulib bu lionsip bwn us nd o popl. t violion o ngiv lib mus b ciicisd bcus i imposs on us icicl od bwn coc nd cocd. I viols bsic quli bwn wo individuls. So concp o ngivlib would b usul o quli.

I ink i is no v lpul o us o ccis mk in ms o ngiv lib.a mk is no s o ngiv libis; i is s o posiiv nilmns consiud b lgl

lions nd bckd b s. Conc lw, o mpl, givs us pow o lgisl on smll scl, wic is publicl nocd bwn pis. and pop lw givs us s up o posiiv govnnc o us nd dispos o soucs wi lw nd pop


100



lw. fo wom is ? So i is v mislding o ccis mks in ms o ngivconcp o lib.

Q: I sounds lik mk Cpilism cn is wiou individul dom, bu dmocc nd individul dom cnno is wiou mk Uiliinism. On pcds o.I is cs, nd mks supsucu in wic Liblism iss, dos nu o mk Uiliinism cng, nd, wi i, dos diniion o dom cng,nd diniion o Liblism?

Francis Chevenal: Don’ ou ink complion o conomic om in Cin ismb mo n cnicl m, bcus i quis gun o old o pop igs o ms nd is v diicul qusion sill o b solvd?

Stuart White: I guss I jus ook i s d w o b los o quliicions in singmks o b good ing. Bu l m mk som o os svions mo plici. I ink

is sndd s o wl conomic gumns bou mk ilu wic would vindicions o plcing limis on opion o mks. I ink I cn mk pnlisicgumns o closing down mks’ civi in cin kinds o dugs. I ink I cn bgliin in cs o w is somims clld slciv gliinism, so w mig ink inquli o disibuion o incom nd wl s suc is ok, bu no in soming slc o ducion, so w will k bo picul goods ou o gnl mkdisibud indpndnl. Bu o cous ou cn sill us so-clld innl mkmcnisms wiin os sps o lp wi llocion o soucs, bu w ou doing is ls sgging mk om o mks, sing up disibuion o pucsing pow wiin s spciic mks o gliin puposs. Bu is lso

w ou mig cll “civic nli” gumns o limiing mks, limiing mouno im spn on woking ous gulion, on gounds o pomoing culu o civ,nggd ciiznsip, o, o mpl, minis gumns o limiing buing nd sllingo ponogp, id vilbili o ponogp ducs sm in wic wold womn.

Zhang Weiying: I ink no cl bound bwn conomic om nd poliicl omiss. Bu i mig b condicion o s sco conomic om. Bu pocion o pop igs is bond conomic om wiou consiuionl om. tis is w I ink conomic om lmos compl bu lo o ings o do. Scond, bound o mks: m simpl gumn is mks won’ wok i govnmn dos

no llow m o wok. Wn govnmn wns o do soming, mk will lso do. Govnmns cn comp wi mks bu sould no monopoliz. t is m gumn. In ducion, lc, c., govnmns sould do soming. Bu lso,mks cn do . I govnmn comps wi mk, n w cn s w ismo icin.

Samuel Brittan: I I w mmb o conomics indus, I would lk bou implicimks, nd mk o ponogp nd s-buing, os sos o ings. I ink ,lisicll, s no bn v muc discussion bou w limis o mks souldb. I ink hk would v bn v smpic wi id o limis o mks, no

in ms o pic conol, dmidl, bu would v ccpd muc o id cin kinds o womn could no do i wok on cin ss in Vinn. h ws nvplici, bu w did lk bou w diionl uls o soci, nd lkd


101



bou lo o implici wisdom, wic no on umn bing could v. Unounl, isno going ino n dil bou w s diionl uls w. and w now v o do wok, ugnl oo, in ms o inncil mks.

I wn o lk bou Liblism in Cin. t wo diiculis. On is disincivdiss bou conomic civi. t w v discussd. t is no lionsipbwn communism, wic ss w sould in s lil s possibl ino is o o counis, nd libl impilism s popgd b hn Jckson.

I m cinl no in vou o snding n invding oc om tiwn o imposdmocc. I would b bsud. I do no gu Wsn dmocc mig b bsmodl o Cin is sg. I gd dmocc s no sm s Liblism. Dmocc is dcision ul, wic mig b suibl som sg o dvlopmn; i sould no bimposd on o counis. and nobod is in posiion o oc i upon Cins.W I do ink w o commn on is o w n o counis obsv opnsoci. Lisning o Cins picipn discuss din ps o Liblismsd, I ws inking, ow would I b o discuss is in tinnmn Squ? how dos

is docin ll wi pssion in Cin? tis is no u o w Popp clldn opn soci, nd I could lk nonsns wiou ndnging will o li, wioulosing ngiv lib nd nding up in pison. W ll v ig o pss ou viws, ndI didn’ ink i ws ig o old Olmpic Gms in Bijing. I ink w nd odisinguis v cll bwn dmocc wiin dcision ul nd nd opnsoci. W lib o commn on siuion in o counis, bu no llowd onoc ou concpions on o counis.


102



6. UNIVERSALISM

John Ikenberry

Liblism – o libl vision – is, s bod o ids nd spiions,

dpl univslisic. t univslism o Liblism ollows invibl omis enlignmn undsndings o nul igs nd umn son. Ilso ollows om psumd supioi o socil, conomic, ndpoliicl ssms consucd ou o libl idls nd pinc. On globl sg, Liblism is “on wold” vision in wic dp ocso modnizion nd nlignd sl-ins pus nd pull woldlong common pw – joun, ccoding o libl niv - inwic sping nd disciplining dnmics o lgiimc, icinc, nd sd gd o igs nd common umni giv libl odingo poliis nd innionl lions dg, llowing i o iump ovivl wold isoicl idologis nd poliicl pojcs.

Liblism os vision o “on wold” globl ssm. Bu spciiccc nd logic o libl Univslism – bo ids nd l-wold poliicl omions – v volvd coss ls wo cnuis. Opnmks, innionl insiuions, coopiv scui, dmociccommuni, pogssiv cng, collciv poblm-solving, sdsovign, ul o lw – s spcs o libl vision v

md ppncs in vious combinions nd cnging ws ov dcds nd cnuis.Indd, is volving libl vision is (smingl) conimd in w is

gubl mos impon mco-poliicl nsomion in woldpoliics ov ls wo cnuis – w mig b dscibd s “liblscndnc”. tis s involvd odin is o libldmocic ss om wknss nd obscui in l 18 cnu ino wold’s mos powul nd wl ss, poplling Ws nd libl cpilis ssm o conomics nd poliics o wold pominnc. all

o is occud in is nd ss in 20 cnu mids wold w ndconomic upvl. a isoicl juncus long w, libl ss v

103



pusud vious os o sblis uls nd insiuions o govnnc.adpion nd innovion, ncssi nd coic, succss nd ilu – ll o s spcs o libl innionlism’s movmn long is 20

cnu pw. and dm o libl scndnc coninus.Bu dos libl scndnc ul vlid univsl clims o

Liblism? t 20 cnu lizion o libl innionl od sbn dpndn on non-univsl suppos. In picul, pos-w liblinnionl od s bn buil ound Wsn dmocic solidi nd amicn gmonic ldsip. amicn pow nd alnicpnsip v povidd sucul suppos o wid liblssm. W ppns o libl innionl od in n wn amics dclind nd Ws no long domins globl ssm? t

univsl pnsions o Liblism v no bn pu o s – bu soon will b. L m s bi mo bou univslisic clims o Liblism, ollowd b w poins bou pospcs o “on wold”libl od in g o ising non-Wsn pows.

Three Facets of Liberal Universalism1) Normative claimt is c is nomiv clim bou nul igs o individuls.tis is olds nd mos bsic w in wic Liblism sss univsl

vision. Individuls possss inn igs b viu o i umni. tislibl convicion ding o Lock ws mn o din lionsipbwn individul nd s – bu i lso cid wi i viw bouumni nd digni nd quli o individuls on univsl scl.

as Micl Dol gus, is Lockn concpion o igs-bingindividuls d implicions o ow ss sgudd s igs –libl ss – w o l o c o, ling oundion oinnionl lw, noms o nionl indpndnc nd sl-dminion,nd id o wold communi o sovign ss. (Dol, Ways of War

and Peace) I libl ss mus spc igs o i own popl, so oosould spc igs o popls in o ss. Ou o is libllogic, lws nd is bwn nions could b omd. t nomivmbc o Liblism om cd sons o ss o ngg olibl ss wi spc nd sin. a ll, o ploi o coc olibl ss involvd violion o igs o individuls wiin spoliis. t consucion o innionl lw ws onl sp w, nd sooo noions o “on wold” ssm o sovign ss.

t libl vision o nul igs o individuls lso d modicl implicions. I igs d in individuls bcus o iumni, is mns umni – o umnkind – s mo


104



pimodil sus n ss, vn libl ss. and so umnkind – o innionl communi – s snding nd sk in pocion o s igs. tis, o cous, lds dicl o Universal Declaration of Human Rights dopd b UN Gnl assmbl in Dcmb 1948,pocliming ll ‘umn bings bon nd qul in digni ndigs’ nd ll wold’s popl v ig o ull ng o liblpocions, including quli bo lw, dom o pssion, nd ig o picip in govnmn. In l cnu s ollowd,s “univsl” libl idls sill no unconsd bu v gindwid cogniion nd od nw innionl noms bou ‘sponsibili o poc’. as suc, sovign o ss is incsingl sn s coningn. Wn ss do no c o poc igs nd wl

o i own popl, innionl communi s n obligion o c.In mn ws, is is culminion o Liblism’s univsl nomivclim.

2) Functional claimt scond c is uncionl clim bou supioi o pomnc nd dpiv cpci o libl poliis. Compd olniv oms o poliicl nd conomic od, libl ssms moicin nd lgiim. t mo icin in sns o

mo poduciv mwok o conomic gow nd wl cion.t b innoving, ognizing, poducing, nd modnizing.t mo lgiim in sns s is n pssion o will o popl nd no dpndn o suvivl on cocion. t opn,ul-bsd, nd consnsul oms o poliics nd conomics in liblpoliis mks m unusull cpbl o gning wl, pow, ndscui. tougou libl scndnc, lniv poliicl-conomicssms compd o dominion. auocic, scis, nd communisssms od idologis nd poliicl pojcs on globl scl. evn ino

ls dcds o Cold W, sious dbs isd bou wic ssmws winning “g cons”. Bu coss s, ivl ssms wknd,los ou, nd ll o wsid.

t implicions o is uncionl clim o liblUnivslism. On is simpl o ps o poliis lss vibl ov long m. and so globl ssm will gdull bcom incsingl domind nd populd b libl dmocic ss. Obviousl, innionl ssm is no sigowd Dwinin ssm o voluionbsd on suvivl o is. Bu i is ssm om o isdomind b mos powul nd wl ss. t v lso bnisoicl momns wn g ws – Scond Wold W nd Cold


105



W - did poduc winns nd loss cs blnc bwn liblnd non-libl ss. Moov, wn libl ss domin ssm –s Biin did in ninn nd Unid Ss s in 20 cnu – c uls nd insiuions mk i si o o ss oing nd nsiion o libl dmocc.

a scond implicion is , onc sblisd, libl innionlod cs “ssm cs” povid ddiionl incnivs o onwold ssm. tis is pimil poin bou ognizion o liblUiliinism. In picul, ssm o opn d – cmpiond b liblpoliis – cilis gow nd wl cion mong ding ss.tis in un pnds scop o wold cpilis ssm nd csincnivs nd oppouniis o o ss – nsiionl nd non-cpilis

ss – o join in. t uncionl logic o libl Uiliinism lds sso sk conomic gins om spcilizion nd opion wiin globldivision o lbou. Ss ousid is pnding od bcom incsingl wk in liv ms nd mginlizd – nd so c incsingincnivs o sk libl oms nd ccommod o libl cpilisssm.

a id implicion is pnding scop nd dp o nsnionlsocil lions wiin is libl cpilis ssm. agin, is is “ssmcs” poin. t nwoks o socil nd poliicl lionsips pnd wi

gow o conomic cng. ts nsnionl lionsips svo spd libl noms nd cili ingion o sociis on pip o libl innionl od.

tkn og, libl vision pcs n pnding innionlod is uliml univsl in scop. No o ssms o conomicsnd poliics o suc pomis. t us o libl innionl od– conomic opnnss, libl dmocc, ul o lw, mulillcoopion, nd coopiv scui – muull inocing. t mulipl conomic nd poliicl sing poins nd pws ino libl

od. Ss join g wli nd wli s lss likl i is o il s libl dmocc. as libl innionl od gins inis globl scop, i bcoms mo powul nd wl liv o lnivs. tis plcs lniv oms o poliicl od n incsingdisdvng. Wi is logic, i is s o s uncionll divnunivslism o libl vision.

3) Developmental claimfinll, is ld dvlopmnl clim bou Liblism ndmodni. tis is clim modni isl is poind in libldicion. Sinc bginning o indusil voluion, socil oiss


106



os dminisic nd conomicll-ducionis clims bou poliics nd s. aon, nd o is Eighteen Lessons on Industrial Society,concluds ‘ poliicl’ s ‘m nd m’ o is own. t song

vsions o libl modnizion o widl dispud. Bu in wodcds sinc nd o Cold W, noion pw omodni lds oug wold o libl dmocc mins iml p o libl imginion.

a oubling implicion o libl modnizion inking is , in nds o powul libl ss, i cn lgiim ic, gmon, ndimpilism. a ll, ss no p o libl dvlopmnl

vngud lss ss – lss dvlopd, lss modn, nd lss pcd.tis viw, o cous, oms inllcul oundions o l-19 nd

l-20

cnu “libl impilism”. Woodow Wilson cmpiond univsl noms o s sovign nd sl-dminion, bu soppdso o ppling is nom Vsills o undmin Biis ul inIlnd, egp, nd Indi, o fnc ul o Indocin. Sovign,ppnl, quid mgnc o n “ognic” nion in wic popl w poliicll mu noug o indpndnl ul mslvs. alibl conci mgs v quickl – nml, dominion ndinvnion in “bckwd” gions o wold is no jus good gopoliicsbu is good o p-modn popl mslvs.

W libls disg is ov iming nd dnmics o liblmodnizion nd dg o wic libl vngud ss musinvn in pocss. fmousl, libl modnizion ids o Wlrosow nd os povidd inllcul ionl o Knnd-Cold W invnionism in consd nd nsiionl id-woldcounis. t opimisic ssumpion ws civ invnion could“u” isoicl pocss. I lso lds o opimisic ssumpion libl innovions in dvncd wold could b boug o b onbckwd sociis. rcll LBJ’s nciul viw tVa ( Nw Dl

govnmn dvlopmn pojc in amic) could b cd on Mkong Dl in Sou Vinm! Bu is so o invnionism dos noollow invibl om ssumpions o libl modnizion vision.Indd, o n libl vngud ss s dvlopmnlpocss s woking ov long-m in vou o libl nsiions, is son o b sind nd pin. (tis is m own viw s i ls oCin. S m 2008 nd 2009 Foreign Affairs icls. t k is o l wold isoicl pocss gind ou is oucoms. Cin will vnull comou w. In mnim, mpsis o amicn nd Wsn gndsg sould b on upolding nd nwing libl innionlod povids oundion o libl modnizion ocs o wok


108



i mgic.) tis is w no-consvivs no ll libls. t dono bu ino ssumpion o long-m dvngs o libldmocic wold (pps bcus mo idlis n milisin i oulook) nd do no bliv dmocic nsiions willoccu wiou Unid Ss ocing m o ppn ( impin).Bu i ou ink iso is on ou sid, ou cn l dp ocs o modnizion do d wok.

Limits of Universalismtos wo subscib o Univslism o libl vision mus gpplwi svl issus suggs is limis. Svl o s issus isd b cul isoicl pw o libl scndnc. fis, Unid

Ss isl povidd gmonic suppo o pos-w consuciono libl innionl od – so ow pnsiv nd silin will liblod b wiou is civ amicn sponsosip? t Unid Ss, ldb fDr, oiginll soug o c Wilsonin on wold ssm o libl innionl od wi bi mo o ol o g powmngmn n ws povidd wi Lgu o Nions. Bu wknss o euop nd ising o Sovi pow quickl pusd Unid Ss o pl mo dic ol in cing nd mnging liblod. t Unid Ss bcm ogniz nd mng o Wsn

libl od. t amicn poliicl ssm – nd is llincs, cnolog,cunc, nd mks – bcm usd o wid libl od. t UnidSs suppod uls nd insiuions o libl innionlism bu iws lso givn spcil pivilgs. In sdow o Cold W, UnidSs bcm own nd opo o libl cpilis poliiclssm. t qusion od is: ow will ssm volv – nd ow will Unid Ss spond – o succsso libl od in wic UnidSs pls lss domining ol? fo l cnu, Unid Ssssnill d libl od buil o is spciicions. W ppns

wn is spcil sus nds? I libl od is n ougow ndmnision o amicn o dominnc, is Univslism pps in is libl innionl ssm ll n illusion?

Scond, libl pojc in nds o Woodow Wilson ws globlpojc – bu i ild. t libl pojc in nds o tumn nd pos-w amicn lds ws Wsn pojc, ls in is insnc.t alnic gion ll povidd gopoliicl oundion o libl pojc. NatO – no UN – ws souc o scui pocion.t amicn doll nd mk – no Bon Woods – ws souc o conomic opnnss, gow, nd sbili. t Unid Ss ound ipossibl o mk binding scui commimns s i sid om Wilsonin


109



collciv scui o llinc scui buil ound dmocic solidi wiin alnic gion. tis si ws wo-old. On ws movmnowd mo spciic nd plici scui commimns. allincpnsips nild obligions bu w lso limid libili gmns. Commimns w no univsl nd opn-ndd. Scond, w commimns w bckd b poliicl vision o Wsnscui communi. t sns amic nd euop w impilld b common sngnd ling o Wsn solidi. agin, wppns o libl od s Wsn oundion upon wic i ws builgivs w o globl libl od w scui coopion ndcivilizionl solidi is bsn?

Conclusiont pon cc o libl pojc is bsd on cpci o liblpoliis o dp o nd poi om modnizion. as logic o poliics ndconomics, libl poliis c wi m dvngs o lgiimc ndicinc llow m o iv nd domin i nvionmn – ndo ogniz mslvs woldwid wi univsl scl nd scop. Liblisms o nd isoicl cod mks s swping clims cdibl.

Bu qusion o w Liblism is ul pojc wi univslc o no will onl b pu o s in coming dcds s cn

o gvi o wl nd pow sis nd diuss o asi. a asincounis, mos cucill Cin, vlling libl dvlopmnl pw piond b Unid Ss nd euop? O will Cin nd o non-Wsn ss pc non-libl pw o modni? a “mulipl modniis”? agin, Cin is ciicl swing s. Somobsvs clim n lniv non-libl modl o dvlopmn ismging in es – so-clld “uoiin cpilis” lniv. Bu mo obvious u o Cins pinc is in c is dmicvoluion in dicion o libl Cpilism (i no libl dmocc).

In dcds d, i Cin dos in c u ing ino woldcpilis ssm, mbcs n incsingl ul-bsd poliicl od, ndmovs in dicion o ccounbl govnmn, univsl pnsionso Liblism will b conimd. t inl iicion o Univslism o libl vision would b uu isoicl momn wn i is Cin – no Unid Ss o euop – is lding cmpion o libl – is o s, opn nd ul-bsd – innionl od.


110



Inoue Tatsuo

Posso Iknb’s sndpoin cn b ccizd s “libl isoiclmilism,” o us m imsl usd in ou -mil communicionbo ou connc on Liblisms. aloug did no us is m inis psnion in connc, i sms o m is gumn sill s subsnc wic cn b pl dscibd s libl isoicl milism.M commn is ocusd on subsnc.

Iknb’s snc o libl isoicl milism minds m o gumn hioji Bb, Jpns Mis conomis, md lmos wodcds go wn communis gims in om USSr nd esneuop collpsd. Bb concdd collps o communis

gims sowd Mism pcicll los is idologicl w wiCpilism. Bu climd pcicl d o Mism povd oicl u o is k n, isoicl milism, wic olds is nd dclin o idologis is dmind b succss nd ilu o conomic insucus o “poduciv pow” nd “poducivlions”, wic gn m s ionlizing dvics o inllculcosmics. Mism s n idolog ws dd bcus conomicinsucu o poliicl gims ld i s i oicil docinlos i compiion wi Uiliinism in nncing conomic

poducivi. t conomic ilu o Mism s n idolog od nionicl poo o vlidi o isoicl milism s is m-idologiclpismolog. h usd m knsiki uibususikn, sd o gicisoicl milism, o piomis is ionicl .

Impssd b Jpns conomic succss unil l 1990’s, Bbld ls idologicl vico ws no Wsn libl Cpilism, buw clld Kissugi, “compnism” i lill nsld, ingo communiin kind o Cpilism pvln in Jpn unil cnl.Dspi dinc in judgmn, bou wic idolog will b ls

vico, is undling sis o ionicl pismic vico o isoiclmilism s muc in common wi m-idologicl pspcivundling Posso Iknb’s uncionl nd dvlopmnl gumnso univsl clims o libl od.

I suspc, owv, Posso Iknb’s nc o isoiclmilis pspciv in ssssing univsl clims o libl poliics ismo obuscing n vling. L m mk wo mks on is poin.

fis, isoicl milis lngug lds o mislds im ino

conusion bwn gnic o cusl plnion o w clls liblscndnc nd jusiicion o univsl clim o Liblism. tlibl clim o univsli is clim v coun in wold s


111



nomivl sound son o kp o dvlop libl gim. t sonin qusion m b n innl on divbl om c coun’s dpnomiv commimn, o n nl on wic s pilosopicl

vlidi indpndn o suc commimn. Innl libl univslismclims v coun s is own innl son o dvlop liblgim, wil nl libl univslism clims is pilosopicll vlid son o c coun o do so. to ssss

jusiibili o libl univslism is o ssss w c clim is nbl.Bu ll isoicl milism cn do is o plin cus o

gnsis o libl scndnc, no is sons. evn i isoiclmilis plnion o libl scndnc w u, i cn sill b cs nions in wold v no o coic bu o join in libl

cpilis cmp bcus, w Posso Iknb clls is “ssm c”o w conomiss would cll is “nwok nli”, s pusd mino siuion w i conom would b dsod unlss doso. to s v n innll ccpbl o nll vliddson o do so in is cs would b s idiculous s o s psonwo succumbd o obb’s od, “Li o mon?” d suc son odo so.

fumo, vn i n lniv isoicl milis pognosis o dclin o libl od sould com u s sul o dvlopmn

o cun globl conomic cisis ino dvsing csop, i cnsill b cs os nions, wic pssuizd o bndon libl gim, v no son o b gld o cng bu v mplsons o dplo i nd o sc o w bck o libl sus quon o o nwd om o conomicll vibl libl od. W ono isoicl milis pspciv is nbl s gnic plniono libl scndnc o s pognosis o libl dclin, i is ilvn o ssssmn o jusiibili o libl Univslism.

Scondl, isoicl milis pspciv is indqu vn o

gnic plnion nd pognosis. Posso Iknb clims conomic icinc nd poliicl lgiimc o libl od muull inocing. tis is pp scnio. agubl, i is, mo on n no,u, i no lws u. Bu wn i is u, i sows plno indquc o isoicl milis pspciv bcus i lds us oliz is no unill plno od bwn conomicicinc nd poliicl lgiimc, suc om is lws nplnns wil l is lws n plnndum. In som conconomic icinc mus b plind in ms o poliicl lgiimc, no

vic vs. tis is no wond, bcus conomic poducivi dos no jusdpnd on cpilis poi-mking incnivs bu lso on woking-clss


112



popls’ willingnss o wok d, wic in un dpnds on ipcpion o w mo o lss il d, no simpl ndunilll ploid. Libl gims cnno civ popul cogniion o is poliicl lgiimc wiou nding o disibuiv inss o gnl public o som minimum n nd scuing dmocicpocdus o conlic soluion bou disibuiv inss. economicicinc o libl gim is b-poduc o is ndvou o obinpoliicl lgiimc.

Sn om is pspciv, i is no simpl cs Communisgims in om USSr nd es euop w dd b liblgims bcus ild o nnc conomic poducivi. I is lso cs w dd in compiion o conomic poducivi,

ls pl, bcus ild o obin lgiimc oug populcogniion. Cin s so bn succssul in minining pidconomic gow bcus Communis govnmn s md up o islgiimc dici b sving is popl om bjc pov. Bu onc gobond s subsisnc lvl, popul dissiscion wi gossdisibuiv inquli will nnc poliicl nsions o dngous n.t dinc in ms o incom io bwn op n p cnnd boom n p cn is now ld g in Cin n in Unid Ss. t ibl dmogpic imblnc gnd b on-

cild polic will cus sv ingnionl disibuiv conlics wn dmogpic im bomb plods. t uu susinbili o conomic

vigou in Cin dpnds on n o wic Communis gim willnnc is lgiimc in s o is popl b mbking on poliiclnsomion.

L m dd on bi commn on ld poblm. Posso Iknb gds gmon o US s on mjo cus o libl scndnc. tm wll b u s gnic plnion. Bu s cun dnds o amicn gmon lik Josp N mpsizs, i dpnds on so-

clld so pow, s wll s on mili nd conomic pow. So pow isno jus pow o conol inomion bu i lso involvs pow oinlunc vlu pcpions o popl in wold. O cous, sopow cn b nd s, in c, bn busd b US o mnipul globlpublic opinions in sinis w. Bu so pow cnno b susinbl unlssi s som cdibl co. as mous poliicl dg ss, ‘w cnnodciv von ov, loug w cn dciv som o m o somo im.’ tis mns US s conmpo gmon mus mksinc os o civ globl lgiimc cogniion i is so pow is ob susind. t c “libl scndnc” s bn spd b amicn gmon in non-ngligibl w dos no impl


113



univsl clim o libl od is ducibl o s amicn “vico’s jusic” - i implis i is no.

Now I would lik o mk bi concluding mk. t lngug o isoicl Milism is lngug o idolog-ciiqu usd b Misso dbunk biinss nd goundlssnss o univsl clim o Liblism. Bu Posso Iknb usd lngug o sow owdnsibl clim is. h usd wong lngug. h sould v usd nomiv lngug o poliicl moli o sc o globll ccpblpincipl gounds nd condiions lgiimc o libl od.

Pierre Hassner

I wn o slu w I consid buiul nd cougous c o i b Jon Iknb in ploing vico o libl od. I m wi imin inking Liblism povids mos icin nd mos moll ccpbl od ound. Sill, I m mindd o dilogu bwn wopopl om o cmp, Bus nd azn, Spnis pim minis,on v o Iqi w, in wic azn sid: ‘I g wi vingou bliv – onl ing wic wois m is ou opimism.’ to wicBus nswd, ‘I m opimisic bcus I know I’m ig’.

I ink Jon is ig bu I m lss opimisic n im. I ink i is

picull cougous bcus is kind o id o on wold nd univsl public o dom mgd in 18 cnu nd ws vivd c Wold W nd Cold W. Bu now w v nd lsspcul ims nd s coug o pomoing i momn o isug conomic cisis, wic nobod knows ow mig nd (w i willsul in mino djusmn o ll cng nd bing wold bck omCpilism o pocionism nd nionlism); wn ll pogss, ll innionl insiuions plsd, i ou s ol UN in vns in Gogi o Du – s insiuions iling i

“sponsibili o poc.” t is no possibili could pocnbod. and dug cls, mon lunding, ognisd cim,oism nd so on.

I consid msl libl innionlis bu I blong o dindiion; o tocquvill wo oug is n inn bl bwndom nd quli nd din oucoms possibl; o Scump, wo oug Cpilism ws mos icin conomicssm possibl bu ssumd i would il bcus i cnno poduclgiimc mong oung nd inllculs, nd so on; o aon, wo sid wo inks popl will b movd b i inss n b i pssions, s no undsood 20 cnu; nd Snl homnn,


114



communism. Bu oos o bo sill : lings o inquli nd ploiion o msss, o dsi o uoi o oliinism.Liblism will gin o los, dpnding on is cpbili o spond o sconcns nd o s nds, nd o bsob o d m.

Debate

John Ikenberry: I wn o s soming bou Cin’s lionsip o libl Univslism.I is cocion . t qusion is w in Cin in picul, nd in asiin gnl, ids bou ognizion o poliics bo domsicll nd innionll. a undmnl cllng o libl ids in ll dimnsions o no? and m nsw isno. Cin dos no v big id. evbod is wiing o Cin o us is pow o bingowd g pows o ps, kind o nlisd vsion o isl, nd o ogniz ssm nd o us is pow o c n nvionmn o isl, nd would b Cins vsion looks no v libl. I m no convincd o . I do no ink ids nd, mo gnll, gumn Mdl Bní mks bou Ws noundsnding es; Ws no ging ou o w; es lising is pomis, iscing undmnl conusion. t complin o gumn o asins o b mopowul is no n gumn bou pincipl. I is n gumn bou uoi; i is ngumn bou ging nd sing bl; i is n gumn bou ognizing dcision-mking uls gding w in wic globl ssms cis uoi o n o guds. I is no bou cng o undling pincipls. W undlingpincipls I would s libl, univsl nd consisn wi is in asi? Numbon: ul-bsd od. and numb wo: opnnss. t is o s i is ul-bsd – s

opposd o “d oc sns o inlunc” impil – nd opn, in sns i is on ssmoug wic counis lowing innionll ou o c o in vious ws. andi is bsd on som om o coopiv scui. and bond socil dimnsion isbou nw disibuion, bou govnmn ssisnc, ll sos o ings ngoibl, bu no on is od [ul o lw]. I ink on lin l db isbou uoi, bou pincipl. and divisions no bwn es nd Ws bubwn os wo sick o vision o wold is ul-bsd nd opn, nd oswo no. and os in Ws wo nd os wo no; nd in es s wll. and ion is w v com bck 30 s o db is. tion is Cin could wll b gs suppo o is in o wk vsion o liblod s w go o n slid o iso, bcus s psniv o ising ss woid bou disciminion nd mk pocion powul ss v pssd ino libl od. I ink w living in momn wn is possibl.

Li Qiang: I cn g wi im nd sns o innionl od. I do no wn o ink o so-clld asin vlus; I wn o ink o som kind o Univslism. and I lso ink inms o libl Univslism. I do no ink Cin s n mjo poblms wi innionlunivsl vlus. I ink innionl ssm dos no pos mjo cllng. Svls go w d discussion bou so-clld pcul igs in Cin. I Cin ollows innionl od nd ollows is ssm, nd is b o n som o counis,i sould no cng sucu o innionl od, bcus w ll wok wiin is

od. I ink , in Cin cs, I g wi Iknb: is no lniv o dsi.


116

P l e a s e c o n fi r m

n a m e



Adam Roberts: W kind o sociis mig b unsuibl o libl dmocc? a sucul poblms? t is long iso in dvocc o libl ids o suculdiiculis inn in din sociis, w is onl on libl univsl id, ow mo. I ink is dinc bwn Cins gim o woldnd som Wsn visions, nd picull som amicn visions. t is pcisl noion o sovign ou v mniond in ou mks. Cin s bn muc monvous n n US dminision bou n docin mig impl violion o sovign. t is p undmnl dinc in noions o libl od, ow muc onspcs ising wold o sovign ss, som o wic m b illibl in sucu,nd ow on gos bou cnging m. I is no b som noion o ll sociis bing oodisinc o ollow sm p, uilizing md ocs, o qusioning i sociis.

Ivan Krastev: I m spciicll ddssing pos-gmonic libl od. I is ninsing qusion o sk o w n ou no going o v libl dmocc i gmon is going o c od? I m going o giv ou svl mpls o ow i cn

look. I ou s russin-Gogin conlic, mos insing ws russinpplicion o ‘ sponsibili o poc’ bcus docin o umn igs oic ws moivion o Kosovo opion. fom is poin o viw, ou v jusiicionwiin nomiv mwok o Liblism, jus dind in din ps o policis,mids bckgound o cng in consolidion o pow. fom is poin o viw, Iun o discussion fukum nd Kn Jovick d in 1999 on nd o iso; om, is no o lniv o libl dmocc, bu i dos no mn ou nogoing o v pow poliics o compiion, nd is is ou snc.

Koichiro Matsuda: a coupl o mons go I visid sc cn clld Nionl

am in Ko; i is sc cn o No-Conucinism. I know Cin s smp o sc insiuion. I do no bliv Conucinism s univsl pow, lso so pocd b es asi. Do ou ink id o song smbiosis o No-Conucinism nd Cpilism is sill ld in es asi o Cin?

Li Qiang: I ink wo spcs o is qusion. On is w Conucinism s pow o b kind o cllng o Univslism. Conucinism is kind o Univslism,bcus n “mpo” lws s cin p o “univsli”. Conucinism is quidin om wsn culus bcus i dos no bs on Univslism cin kind o nscndnl vlu. I is pow mpos lck i is pow o ggssion s qui ngiv Univslism, in m opinion. to, I do no ink Conucinism could

civl cllng dominn Univslism. howv, kind o dpndnc o sopow on innionl od is kind o dpndn Univslism. M id is Conucinism is insumnl bod o Cins Cpilism. t s bn lo o discussion bou uncionl quivlnc o Conucinism nd pcis individul oo mking mon. I is possibili m v ngiv spc.

Inoue Tatsuo: I ink Conucinism is no monoliic s o ids du o is innldivsi nd nsomiv ponil, dspi ow uncl i is. t is simil concpulccopon concning w Conucinism is. t som ds in Conucinismwic m wll b usd s culul soucs o dvloping som o libl ids lik

ul o lw.


117



M commn on Iknbu: sid Cin s no lniv bu o dvlop bso govnmn o ul o lw vn i i is no wll id o is diionl culul diions.Cin mus dop o plo id o ul o lw. Do ou bliv Cin s ld commid o ul o lw? Bcus is is cucil issu bou libl Univslism.

M poin is v simpl. t Conucin diion s som soucs o ul o lw. tul o lw is no ul o oml, mcnicl opions o givn oml lws. I is ulo pincipl. evn in Wsn diions, ul o lw is dpndn on mol dingo consiuion. and conusion concning commimn o mol conol o o owpoliicl pow m b dpd mo o Wsn ids. I ink issu is no bou culul o idologicl soucs; i is bou pow. rul o lw is v diicul o implmnin Cin bcus lck n indpndn judici, indpndn om os in pow,wic s noing o do wi ionlision o culu. t is poin I would lik omk.

John Ikenberry: I do no ink Liblism s pincipl viw on s sovign. In asi,

Wilson sd sovign ws clbd in om o sl-dminion,indpndnc o nions. Bu vn n Wilson, bcus ws dvlopmnlis, did noncssil wn us o s sovign o cull non-Wsn popl wos dvlopmnllogic ws no mu noug o un i own s. Bu o k viw bou sovign s bing 20 cnu pssion o ul o lw, w would now b clbing kindo osion o s sovign oug ‘ sponsibili o poc’, nd ol o innionl communi in ddssing poblms o umniin cisis, nd now vnscui issus. So, sovign is incsingl consd. Bo com om libl vision,bu sovign ks din om in os vious iculions. and mn in euop nd US v din oms. euop is mo willing o s sovign; US is in mo

in-bwn posiion, w i wns o sgud is uoi s g pow nd mksu sovign is sd s WtO o wi wigd vos up o down clsss. andso ws o guling dg o sovign givn cicumsncs. andn ou com o Cin, nd Cin s o look Ws, sing w i liks euopn vsion o amicn vsion. M own insisnc is is pobbl lisic logic mks m s on o wo lings wi euop, bu mo sl-insdlogic mks i mo comobl wi amicn viws on sovign, wsovign in innionl insiuions is pl sguding sovign, no simpl mcnism o dius sovign. So I ink ll o is in pl.

On fukum nd nd o iso m gumn is no nd o iso gumn;i is n gumn iso is on ou sid. t is o s dvngs nd biss in

ssm llow us o ink conl nd ssmicll bou poliicl cng. tlds o id gumn bou dvlopmn. W vn’ guidd is, bu is good nwsnd bd nws . t bd nws is, o cous, libl dvlopmnl pspcivs ldus o look wold nd s som ss s bing lss nd lss dvlopd nd no quimodn, pps, nd s ‘no ving ivd’. you cn s oubl in implicions o libl modnizion inking is dvlopmn is in nds o powul libl ss.you cn lgiim ic nd impilism o ll o ss no p o libldvlopmn vngud – o lss ss, lss dvlopd, lss modn nd lss pocd. tis viw, o cous, is om o inllcul oundions o 19 cnu libl impilism,dpicing so o ws nd lionsips pusud. t good nws is i ou

dvlopmnlis, ou do know iso is on ou sid nd ou do no v oinvn o kick iso owd, o k n dvng o closing window, o pus s mig mk nd o illibl ws o inc illiblism. t is no w libl


118



modnision oiss guing. In som sns, ls ou l: l ssm opo libl innionliss; kp ssm opn; l ocs o iso miliz ono. So is good nws.

Rajeev Bhargava: I wond w is non-libl p o modni. t qusioncould b is libl p o modni. and is p Wsn ss, bunow I know is niv, nd isoicl sl-undsnding gus is liblp o libl dmocic od, bo om nd bod. and i is lso v omccounbili, wic cull ss p o modni Wsn ss v is libl on in sns p s no bn on o culul ws, bu civil ws ndws bod. t is colonilism, is gnocid, is nic clnsing, isploiion ounding, nd so on. I mn ving ppns o coun.So I jus commnd wcing w ou k on, is qusion.

Q: I s bn sid numb o ims is connc Liblism is iging i.

fou, iv s go I d numb o voics amicns dmndd nwinnionl libl oliinism s song s Islmic undmnlism. all o m smo dispp. Is bcus i is now simpl sul o mjo conmpo violnc osomow wol id o sning som kind o culul dom in g o w, ids so misconcivd oo conlicing, o n o sons? W do wsnd now?

Li Qiang: I onl s on ing: is n non-libl modni? Som popl mig ink cn conomic dvlopmn in Cin is n mpl o non-libl modni. Ipobbl would no g. Poliicll mo opn, som popl will cll i mo opn soci.

M sns is blnc bwn individul lib nd poliicl od m v bwndin sociis. In m opinion, vn i is conomic succss in Cin, liblUnivslism nils som kind o loss.

Inoue Tatsuo: I would lik o mpsiz libl dmocc is n uninisd pojc vno Wsn counis. and w v o disinguis bwn Liblism o libl dmocc s n id, nd Liblism s pcic. I is u Liblism s n id ppd in Wsn diion. Bu i dos no mn i ws n n sblisd pcis. I would lik osk Biis udinc on qusion: wn did UK pss sold? In 1911. as o ul o lw id, ronld Dwokin s, in on o is pmpls, ciicisd tc ndsoion. t Biis popl, up o now, v d n unwin consiuion. t s w

do no nd win consiuion; w muc b n amicns. Bu undtc nd soion coun sw Ira oism. how ull o cuss in violingpoliicl libis is piod ws, nd Biis popl d no scu wiin Biis lglssm, bcus is no judicil viw. So now UK uss convnionl coninnlumn igs nd is scu pocdus. M poin is in consiuionl dmocc, libl dmocc, ll s ids lss n . and i is sill n uninisd pojc,vn o Biin. So w v o b cul bou culul obscl o ul o lw;dmocc is pvln. W v o b v cul o mking is kind o ssumpion.

John Ikenberry: I m going o ddss qusions bou illibl p o Liblism. I

ound msl dinn p in Pincon is ll, nd discussion ws on ow o plin igs o libl wold od. Bo win, w wo posiions. On, I wsp o, wic gud i is ll bou umn spii nd kind o impuls. to sin


119



in bi pow is dpl pimodil so o umn condiion. Posso Konws mking opposi gumn – do no b snimnl; Liblism is ll soluiono poblm o ow o dl wi violnc, nd i ws mns o kind o slmnoug wic ou llow clsss o b pocd, o b consin on pow o os kindso pcicl sons. In som ws, db cos s qusions o illibl pws.Bcus is no qusion libl unolding s bn violn on. I is blood so.

W wois m is US s buil pivilgs nd igs ino innionlssm in suc w i is going o b v diicul o giv os up wiou suggl.t qusion is w m ldsip on is sid o o sid ll ngoid dls would lib Liblism o wold. I v go ling i is going o bs nd I cn imgin kinds o non-libl pws would no b icin ndnomivl lgiim, bu would involv counis dividing up wold nd building no1930s Cpilism bu muc mo dividd wold w din counis powul,din nwoks pow cns, wic is mo lik ilin indus w ou v o

dcid wic ci ou k. t kind o bokn ssm would sill b lss opn, lss ul-bsd; i would no b blocks o co-pospi sps, bu i would b wold wouldlook lss libl n i is od. Bu I ink ll ss in Ws cinl v d coic o moving o muc mo pos-sg libl od nd I m woid bou i.


120



Part III: ChaLLeNGeS aND CONCLUSIONS

Introduction: Alan Ryan

I oug is moning, sinc w going o b old w Liblism is ndw o ink bou i, nd sinc w v onl wo psons, n on pnl, I would og o msl sk o summing up ls wds o g moning o low nd o povok w qusions. No on isobligd o bliv ning I s; bu i is mn o b il unconnious nd ml picking up w slin ms.

t is ing is o no ppnc o wo tocquvillin qusions.t cm up in con o es nd Ws, No amic, Linamic nd so on, cd o qusion o w kind o idologicl

consucion Liblism is. t is issu is w poliicl Liblismquis cin so o socil Consvism. tocquvill, ll, ougi did. h mousl pisd ol o amicn womn in discipliningamicn mn, o insnc. a good dl o mlncol wok,Bowling Alone, cpiuls tocquvillin m no jus in cono popl nding o ln o sl-govnmn in smll ssociions,bu lso bcus inoml ognisions povid so o disciplin o immbs nbl m o n pcis poliicl Liblism. Sl-policingks wig o o kinds o policing, nd llows Liblism in

sns o poliicl Liblism, spc o ul o lw, nd lik, wioucos. t is n undcun in amicn socil commn ov ps i s, wic s bn nious vious culul movmnswill undmin poliicl Liblism b undmining soci nd sl-disciplin. t cion o om libls gins 1968, o mpl, lcs sns poliicl Liblism nds o b svd om cululLiblism; qusion w is so is lg tocquvillin qusion,wic, s i w, lod ino oom nd lod ou gin bou ouo’clock on fid noon.

t scond qusion, wic cm up mo visibl, is n o wicpoliicl Liblism nds sl-govning civil soci undn i s

121



ssnil undpinning. t discussion o Liblism in Lin amic, ompl, md i cl Liblism ws n i o lis, nd soming poliicl lis id o psud i llow counmn o mbc.t sm ing I ink s bn u o Cin nd Jpn. I ink sming s bn u in Indi. Wn w condmn es Indi Compn,on qusion w nd o sk is, om wom did Indin inllculs lnbou wickdnss o colonilism i no om os wo colonisd m,nd dos no suggs Liblism mins n i o lis, vni lis indignous n lin. I is on o g pdos Ws s mngd o po is libl mbiions, wil louingm so oougl in is colonilis pcic, bu sociologicl qusionbou w ou nd, b w o uncioning civil soci, o mk poliicl

Liblism wok is lg qusion w v bn skiing ound. Wv d som wondull inomiv discussions, bu old nd oiblqusion o ow muc dp o popul suppo Liblism mus v osuviv, is on w v polil skd ound.

ano lg qusion, wic gin gos bck o tocquvill, is ow Liblism is osping o Wsn euopn Posn Cisini.how is Mill’s mpsis on c pson, no ‘doing i own ing’impossibl o mk sns o wiou Wsn euopn PosnCisini bind i, wic ws on o poins Susn Mndus ws

mking sd noon? tis is no jus isoicl m, s i wcould s, ‘ coms Jon Lock, bu ws long im go’; i is ‘so coms Immnul Kn wo oug wos om o nn ws ing omk o popl pp ccoding o ou concpion o i ppinss’nd ex hypothesi s ining wi ou sc o ou ownslvion ws wos. Wn ou d Jon rwls A Theory of Justice i is quicl mol diving oc is is bli in inviolbili o individul conscinc, bu mn mn sociis v go onpcl wll wiou Wsn euopn Posn concpion o

conscinc.I suc sociis n bcom libl sociis, w kind o libl

sociis do bcom? t is soming w v ssnd owiou woll cliing i (oug Micl fdn go v clos o liningi up jus lik is). t innumbl insiuions , in on con, gdd b os wo op m s n indispnsbl p o libl ool ki nd oug o ng og in picul ws lc i libl nu, wil in o cons sm insiuionlngmns m b dopd o din sons, nd ng og widin blis nd socil iuds. I is no supising hk nd isinds v bn globll lppd up wiou ving muc impc on


122



suounding poliicl o wid culu. t innumbl sons oinking piv pop gims oupom collcivis gims, nomn o wic v ning o do wi Liblism; convsl, “culul”Liblism is ininsicll connious: g lib m no v d n nil s im in is coun, bu i s d muc wos im in russi.Ws unbidld mk, ls o cin piod, d il s un in russi wiou nbod ing i would ld o Sonwllmc ousid Kmlin in n uu. t qusion o ow culu,ligion, conomics nd poliics ng og is v lg qusion ndiss u qusion w v no gppld wi, wic is ow iis m o Liblism s opposd o x Liblism, y Liblism, z Liblism? t sul libls wo no ncssil poliicl

libls. t Lsbin, G, Bisul allinc s jus pod mosg indl insiuion in Biin is polic. I is s b lgnumb o os g-indl polic no owis i socill,inllcull o poliicll libl. t qusion o x, y, z oms o Liblismis lg qusion; vin on i is vlidi o hkin disincionbwn clssicl vsus modn, o cous Lo Suss viwd ws suc ing s ncin Liblism.

t poin is ou cn dnd mn o insiuions libls cd o on innumbl gounds, no ll o wic libl. fo

mpl, ul o lw is good o businss, bu i is lso n pssion o concn o umn igs. you cn ink bou i s bing good obusinss, bu k p cold viw on umn igs, s los o popl do.Convsl, ou cn ink bou i s n pssion o concn o umnigs nd k p cold viw bou is o businss. tolion ison o s w dinc is mos obvious. Popl on quisupisd b romn nd Gk olion o ligious divsi bu,s rjv ws sing, i d good dl in common wi kind o olnc Indin soci s displd in mn piods in is iso.

t qusion o w ou ink bounds o olbili dpnds v muc on locl concpions o w ligion is o indd w ou boo us pssion ll. Mcivlli oug romn gnls wqui ig o ig uguis bo bl, nd lso qui ig o cuon spo n soldi wo mockd m. hving uguis is good; belief in uguis cll cz! you cn b oln wiin limis o w ouink socil pcic is usul o, bu is is din niml om libl vsion.

t libl vsion, in Susn’s book nd min, s o com om picul concpion o li o conscinc. Simill, I ink, wiPul S nd Jon Iknb, noion slv is obviousl blo on

Part III: Challenges and Conclusions

123



Liblism is diicul o susin I ou dpl (i wongl) convincd o non-univsli o cpci o sl-govnmn, ou cn un mos pplling insiuions longsid gnuinl libl convicions; ouml v o bliv Liblism onl suis som popl. tanins w bsolul cl poliicl dom suid Gks ndnobod ls muc; gnuinl blivd in lib, nd gnuinl d slvs. t povoks som u ncin qusions, on o wic is n o wic dmocc nd Liblism nul bd-ms.Posso Dwokin inks , bcus is no going o coun sdmocc ning is no libl dmocc, bu popl lik m p old docin, wic ss dmocc is jus bou demos ving ls s, nd w demos bvs in libl o non-libl

sion is soming o b gud bou n (nd i is no dd qusion).So mol, o n is on, is w mus s dlic lin bwn inking Liblism is jus m o s –‘Liblism o libls nd cnniblism o cnnibls’ s old jok d i– nd inking is vius obvious o von o sound mind. Wn A Theory of Justice cm ou vious popl poind ou i qunl ppld o ‘w we ink’, nd skd old nd di qusion, ‘Wois is “w”?’ Usull, implicion is “w” psons living bwn68 s nd 114 s on Ws end avnu, o som simil smll goup

wi pdicbl nd no widl sd viws. I ink i is impon ob sl-conscious bou wo is “w” is, i.. v ll song wnsso on’s own isoicl, culul nd concpul oos, nd sm imo b livl unmbssd, so long s ou wid opn o poplsing, ‘wll i dosn’ look lik om ’, o, ‘I wouldn’ pu i lik ’,o, ‘no o us i isn’’. Bu “w-nss” o muc o is picul s o concpul ppus nd poliicl cmn is soming on musbsob, bu no bcom compll cippld b doing so. I ink Ivn is nowgoing o kick o sious pocdings.


124



7. WHO DECIDES WHAT LIBERALISM IS? AND HOW?

Ivan Krastev

L us s wi c wn I ws ling o Ood I ws ling wi

Bulgin ailins. t gv m mgzin clld Our Home, nd ll ou w o do wn ou wn o mk ou ous nd cng ouuniu nd ings lik ; i is v sopisicd mgzin. Bsicll, sid ou sould consul cic nd dsigns, bu do noog o consul ou clning-ld! So m pspciv is going o b pspciv o clning-ld. Wn tim skd m o spk, sid o o spk s poliicl scinis, wic is bsicll mssg ousould no o look inllign, sing cin ings v muc moo do wi l ising Liblism. W I m plnning o do is ollowing: Eastern Europe and the experience of Eastern Europe between 1989and 2009, n ml impon momn in lcing libl dilmms. Iis impon o mmb o w n inpion o 1989 wspcivd s invnion nd iump o libl discous. h I v nic quo om Buc ackmnn wo, in 1992, in is book clld TheFuture of the Liberal Revolution wo, sounding lik mniso: ‘omWsw o Moscow, hvn o Bijing spc ounds wold, s i ising om gv, un o voluion, dmocic Liblism’. I

m su now in esn euop i somon ws going o wi book on uu o libl voluion, i would v moo o Dn Qul, uu will b b omoow. Bu I do bliv pinc o libl voluion, pinc o mning o 1989 nd ow idvlopd, could b n insing ddiion o nd lcion o w sbn discussd o ls wo ds.

W I m plnning o do is ollowing: I will no go bck o iso o ids, o diions, wo libls nd wo no. I will swi v simpl qusion on ow Liblism ws pcivd b gnl

poliicl public in Cnl nd esn euop o ls wn s; w bliv Liblism is. tis pcpion s, o cous, bn spd b

125



din pls: libl poliicins nd poliicins wo cll mslvslibls; libl inllculs nd cdmics; -libls (nd I do blivm o b v impon goup o undsnding diniion o Liblism – nd wn w lk bou no-consvivs I do bliv wsould cll m e-libls; i is e-Liblism mks m climw clim). I is lso impon bcus i w going o dop iskind o discous w no going o v is bod bwn diionl,domsic, insid-es-euopn discouss nd ousid discouss bcus,o cous, wok o Posso Dwokin nd Posso Luks nd oss bn p o mking o is img – popl ding nd misdingm. O cous ou v poliicl pis, bu lso non-govnmnlognisions, umn igs goups, nd so on, wo v bn v

impon in mking is db.In od o mk is possibl I v ognisd m psnion oundiv k dbs o ls wn s spd pcpion o wLiblism is o poliicl public in Cnl nd esn euop. hvinggon oug s dbs I will o lc on som o poblms o osion o libl consnsus in Cnl nd esn euop.

ts iv dbs I v in mind 1) consiuionl db,spion o pow nd poblm o judici; 2) lusiondb, wic ws v ciicl; 3) no so muc mk db bu

sock p db ws ciicl o idniicion o wo is liblnd wo is no in Cnl nd esn euop; 4) libl invnionismdb ws v muc conncd o polic wi spc o Kosovo w; nd 5) mos impon db nd w I ink will dinw Liblism is od – cun db on populism (w ispopulism?).

I m sing in 1989 bcus i is impon o wo sons. On,bcus i concild Liblism nd popul dmocc. tis nsion ws mniond ld, is id Liblism nd dmocc simpl

wins, lik Polis wins, ws no common sns in poliicl diionin Cnl nd esn euop. to g n, Liblism in mn plcsnd in mn ims ws pcivd s n lniv o popul dmocc,nd I do bliv vn od in mn plcs, spcill wn lisning o Cins db, Liblism could b pcivd s n lniv opopul dmocc. I ws in 1989 libls los i o mss poliicsbcus o is im sw llis on s o popl wo wsouing ‘Libl!’ I is v impon s i cngd pspciv o Liblism nd cd id ll good ings go ino sm bsk.W is impon o s iv dbs is pcivd dinl;in cin dbs cin posiions clld libl,


126



cognisd s libl b libls mslvs, v bn ckd b ciics o libls o bing libl, nd v bn souco disppoinmn o e-libls.

as o is db on consiuion, ws ug consiuionlmomn nd i is no n ccidn i ws Buc ackmnn nd os– wo bliv in consiuionl poliics – wo ll in lov wi Cnl ndesn euop. t mos impon ing ws ow ou consiu soci,nd ow ou dining pow. M clim is , o g n,wn consiuionl pocss ws sd i ws din in dincounis. Sombod sd ws lking bou oic gnlisions; m gnlisions going o b muc mo wild n oic bcus ouv din counis nd din isois. W ws ml

impon o is db ws ) ming cuiv pow, b) songsss on judici nd imponc o judici’s pow, nd o cous c) pocion o igs, ws w dind libl posiion in consiuion-mking pocss. W mins o b sn, nd w is v muc dbd now, is ow s ps o insiuionl ngmns vbn suls no onl o ids o libls, bu lso o insso old poliicl lis.

I will giv mpl o pow in Bulgin judici. In Bulgin consiuion no onl judgs bu lso poscuos v

bn sblisd s sp bnc o pow wic is oll indpndnom govnmn. W ws impon o libls ws lspion o pow limiing govnmn ccounbili; w wsimpon o old li ws non o judgs o poscuos couldb cngd, so popl wo v ppoind would min. and now cisis o judicil pow is wn ou v public is oll disppoind wi lck o jusic nd uncioning judicil ssm, s inBulgi, bsic poblm coms bck. tis cin posiion wsconsidd v song libl posiion. I do bliv ou o ll o is

consiuionl db cm lision o poblm o “wk s”,wic bcm mjo m in l 1990s in Cnl nd esneuop. t pssiv nu o wk s: c govnmnis no violing ou igs, is no pocing ou igs i, o mpl,somon is violing ou igs nd ou v n inciv govnmnsimpl obsving nd doing noing om ousid. I bliv is ws is db w kind o clssicl libl posiion s bn v songl visid, no on bsis o vlus v bn implmnd– nobod is cking spion o pow o limid govnmn – buon bsis o pcicl consquncs o doping cin posiions.

I ws v muc sm poblm wi lusion, wic ws ug


127



db, w som o mos impon libl inllculs nd dissidnslos p o i smbolic cpil, nd i ws v muc bsd on ido Individulism, individul igs gins collciv guild. Bsicll, isws no simpl gumn w w mking gding libl vlusbu, , spking pgmicll bou mking libl soci. In odo mk libl soci, ou sould o dnounc id o ociv

jusic, nd linquis ps, w in wic pvious gims dlwi i. I ws pcivd nd idniid s libl posiion b soci, buis sd o cng momn nsiion ws pcivd b publics gnd scm w old lis simpl kp i pow. you v nw gnion o ni-Communism wic ws sil sn duing iso Kczński bos in Polnd, w lusion onc gin bcm

k issu. In cin w nw gnion o ni-Communism ws lsoni-pos-Communism. t lck o lusion dsod oundion o jus soci, nd n libl posiion ws v songl ckd, ndcin popl wo v bn olding is posiion dcidd o cng i.

I will go o poblm o mk oms nd sock p no bcusin esn euop ws mjo divid bwn conomic libls ndpoliicl libls momn. I ws muc mo libl conomissn conomic libls w guiding db, nd i ws no bou limis o mk bu mo n ni-gliin consnsus ws

cd bcus o ids o libls, nd inss o old lis,wo d bn muc b posiiond in conomic sp. and ismn consnsus ws conomic dcision-mking sould bkn ou o poliics. No m wo coms o pow in esn euop, impos sm p o conomic policis. t insiuionlpcondiions o is; mjo mssg ws mk policis w no bs policis bu onl ionl policis. t id o ving lgiimlniv o sock p ws odd, nd I bliv is poblm wi gumn: is ws no wos polic bu c ws

in libl discous w v songl ciminlisd ll o opionss iionl, o cpo-Communis, o incul.

Soming lik is lso ppnd in ou impon db, db on libl invnionism. t public w v muc ocusd on Kosovo w – nd public no ding books bu nwspps. On bsis o nwspps dciding w is libl nd w is no.fom is poin o viw, Kosovo w ws cl posiion on pimc o umn igs. and o cous is momn ws v songsuppo om som o os counis, wic v i own pssivisois, umn igs sould pvil bov id o sovign.t is poblm is o pcicl consquncs: cls bwn


128



polic o umn igs nd innionl lw, c ws no UNsncion o cmpign, nd so on. Scondl, is sid c wou s mos o s policis v slciv: ou go o Kosovo, buou do no go o Du? t id on is i s v diicul l liconsquncs. I bliv i ws ml impon bcus p o pcicl consquncs v muc sd o sp id o wLiblism is, nd w libl posiion is. Jus lking bou Kosovoissu, i ws ml scining om libl posiion nd libldiscous bcus i ws w wic ws bsicll dnding no simpl igs o os, bu os wo no lik us. I mmb ton Blicoming o Soi, nd sid, ‘w going o do o Kosovs wGldson did o Bulgins’. In cin w, i ws jus opposi.

Gldson cm bing Cisin o dnd Cisins, nd Kosovows bou Ws dnding Islmic minoi, nd is mks i v muc idologicll civ. tis, bsicll, ws ig poin o idniicion o is kind o oign polic.

I m no going o us mpl o Iq w, wic sows isp o jusiicion cn b usd s jusiicion o n p o opion.Popl sd o lis o ings. Wn ou dcid o v pimc o umn igs polic, nd wn ou dcid o go u n id o sovign, on o logicl consquncs is nucl pow bcoms

snonm o sovign, nd on o ings puss s gimso go nucl is nucl pow is onl ing givs ousovign. you sould v nucl bomb in od o clim sovign s ds. Now, in gim o pimc o umn igs, c is ll s ings do no go og – c is opion s bn

v muc dvisd s no simpl igl mol bu n opion isno going o v n csulis. tis ws lso v impon momno public bcus w nd w I bliv o b hollwood vsiono Liblism, wic is bs dscibd b mous ilm Air Force One,

sing hison fod. Bsicll, i is clssicl dilmm: amicnpsidn is cing dilmm ov w sould sv is mil o iscoun. W is is dcision? h svs bo! I do bliv s o b v picul ccisics o Liblism o 1990s, wic ws pinc in Cnl nd esn euop: no gic coics. I ws mucmo o n “ninmn-p” Liblism w ll good ings goog.

I m sing is bcus I m coming o i db, wic is now v muc undw, nd is is v muc bou nu o populisis in Cnl nd esn euop. tis is diniion o w kind o movmn w lking bou. I do bliv is o b ciicl db


129



bcus, in cin w, Liblism is cising is poliicl pow mucmo o dining w illibl is n bou dining w Liblism is,dwing bods nd dining nmis. t poblm wi sps o populis movmns is no ni-dmocic; ni-libl bu no ni-dmocic. t v muc boudmocic mjoiinism, v muc bou pow o mjoi odcid, nd v muc ing o spk on bl o bdmjoiis, wic cnno s i voic bing d. h, p o spons om libl goups, libl pis nd libl inllculs wsdmonising, nd ing o mk m look ni-dmocic, o o mkm look lik sciss in 1930s nd os nd public ws noging wi is.

as sul o is, I do bliv w bck o siuion wblivd d bn solvd in 1989. W bck o nsion bwn ids o Liblism nd dmocic mjoiinism. and om is poin o

viw eU, insd o lping o solv is poblm, is incsing i mucmo, bcus i Guizo in 19 cnu blivd w is libl ndionl is 20 p cn o bs ppd nd mos ionl o mkdcisions on 100 p cn o issus, now wi euopn Union wv 100 p cn o popl dciding on onl 20 p cn o issus,in od o b su is blnc is going o b kp. I do bliv is

nsion is going o b dining co o w Liblism is, no onl om poin o viw o o, bu lso o public pcpion o w Liblism is.

I do bliv in Cnl nd esn euop w d, nd sill v, poblm wic ws v din om, o mpl, w Gog Lko ws lking bou in Unid Ss wo o s go. In Cnl ndesn euop w v libl insiuions, libl policis nd libllngug, bu w missing mo nd mo libl consiuncis. as sul o is, bcus o c vbod spks libl, bu w v

no libl consiunc, bsic poblm o Liblism is: w kind o lngug o cng cn i o? a momn, cng is w popl v muc pc. tis is pobbl good mssg, nd nw ccl sdwi Obm lcion. In Cnl nd esn euop, nd spcill inm coun, Obm ws clbd v muc lik yui Ggin wsclbd onc upon im. t poblm wi Ggin ws i wssoming oic: ’s mn in cosmos, no I’m going o do i, bui’s g mn did i. fom is poin o viw, I do bliv Obm’s lcion concild onc gin popul dmocc wi Liblismin imginion o libls nd pobbl o Cnl nd esneuop. tis is biggs mssg o s lcions. tnk ou v muc;


130



i ws no wll-sucud psnion bu, s clning-ld, oucnno pc n mo! tnk ou.

Jan-Werner Müller

Wo dcids w Liblism is? h is simpl nsw: ou cn dcidwo dcids w Liblism is b king o sl ou voui wok o poliicl o o ou voui wok in cnon o iso o poliicl oug, nging om hobbsin soluion, w o cousp o sk o sovign is o i poliicl lngug nd o dmin mning o cin wods, o, l’s s, hbms, w nd qulciizns mn o dlib on suc qusions in public sp, nd

b dcid mning o mos bsic pincipls govning ilivs. t is jus no w o sing is is lso, no onl bu lso, nomiv qusion: wo dcids w Liblism is? and s suc, I cull wn o lv i sid nd, , un o som o modologiclqusions wic v bn popping up ougou is connc. Inpicul, I wn o o ss o mks. t is o s lil bibou compiv sud o poliicl oug in gnl, in piculsking qusion o w lg pupos is, bu lso w pcisobjc o suc sudis is mn o b. Scond o ll, I wn o un o

wol issu o csing wods s opposd o csing ings. tn, idl, Iwn o sk w is soming bou Liblism mks ipicull diicul o sud s n “-ism” ( nsw is s).

fis o ll, l m un o qusion Pi rosnvllon skd onfid: w bo wi dining ll s “-isms”? a mous 19 cnu ni-libl sid, ‘onl wic s no iso cn b dind’, nd, in mn ws, Nizsc mus v bn ig bou . So w gin nd gin o din soming wic is ld sud wi mn conlicingpincs, w no jus dicl o ddss nomiv poblms

wic ins us, wi jusic, lib, w v ou? W no jus oind bs o o lib, n going gin no “-ism”,o ngging in ll kinds o v compl nd ssnill dscipiv mppingciss?

On nsw is s mpping ciss, s compisonsmslvs, on (bu no lws) nimd b lg nomivqusions, o mn o v lg nomiv puposs. W do I mn?Wll, v on o insnc – i is onl l cknowldgd i ll – ulim im o compison is ll som so o b muulundsnding, o som noion o conciliion, o, i ou p lngug o mnuics, som usion o oizons nd o suc n


131



cis. O, lnivl, is noion w ngg in vious pso ciss bcus w wn o jusi sm poliicl pincipls omwiin din diions, o wi din nomiv soucs dwnom din culus. I dos no ll v o b so nic nd posiiv. I oullow m o coin long, ns Gmn wod, i cn lso pp in spo w on mig cll kind o Feindwissenschaft , kind o scinc o nm: l’s igu m ou, l’s igu ou w ll ink in odo b conin m o b ig m. W is impon, i sms om, is o b s cl s possibl bou s lg nomiv puposs, i indd on s m, nd lso o mk su do no bcommuull condico, s somims do. fo insnc, i is v onllgd b os wo pcisl iming som so o noion o

conciliion bwn din culus, popl wo ssnill wn oun huningon’s cls ound, inks om o diions on nd sm im incdibl lin, incdibl din, incdibl o,nd sm im jus lik us. t cn nomousl nic convsion w ld ving, sm im vld sid nd ld inking w w inking nw. tcnno b u sm im, bu i is on psnd in jus w. Oi ou will pmi no mpl, is lso n unspokn sg o pciicion. t is o s, w do no pu ou mos cisd pincipls in

pl; w simpl sk o popl o jusi m wi din sons, ogins bckgound o din diions, bu w do no s, ‘l’s pulib up o gbs’ in db. W jus wn ou o ind ou own w olib wi ou own sons, wi ou lniv sons, bu pls don’pu i in qusion s suc.

t scond ing I wn o s bou compiv sud o poliicl oug is w nd o b cl bou pcis objc o ww suding. W I wn o suggs o ou is somw momulidimnsionl ppoc n w w v somims d in

connc so . I ink w nd o look ls lmns. On isconcps, bu no jus concps: I ink w lso nd o look w oumig bodl cll insiuionl bckgound o poliicl discous. foinsnc, o b smull euocnic, i w lk bou in-euopncompisons i lps o v bsic gsp o din euopnundsndings o s. I is v boing mpl bu w nd bsicsns o w insiuionl mpl is gins wic cin concps dplod nd usd.

tidl, I ink w nd o v sns o wo cis o s idsnd concps . I ink is s com up numb o ims s wll.Lunc Wid lkd bou vious oms o occupionl goups


132



dplo libl lngug in Lin amic. rjv mindd us inIndi i is v on socil movmns wic dcisiv in spingdiscous, nd no so muc cdmics. I ink v bsic sns o wo lvn pls , w i is public inllculs in so o convnionl sns, o cdmics, polic npnus, public lws, wv ou; bsic sns o lvn pls is lpul ing o v.

a v bi oono isk o sing obvious (bu w v noll lkd muc bou i): i lso lps o v v cl gsp o linguisic sublis. evbod knows mous ing bou longeur bingpsn in som lngugs bu no in os, loug vbod knows ing nd vbod s i. Cll, lso som lngugs lucki nos s s Liblism is concnd. fo insnc, is n Ilin p

wic clld isl Il movimento liberale, liberista, e libertario, nd i is rdicl P, so go igu! I m no su i did m n good o cllmslvs , bu cll som lngugs v ig dg o diniion s s cin poliicl ids concnd. Bu s I sid, is jus oono.

t scond mjo s o mks I wn o psn is un o wol issu o csing wods nd csing ings. W v, I ink, ll gd w sould no b so discd b lbls w conclud Lock wsno libl bcus did no v wod. Bu i is wo sking, w

do w g o i w simpl ollow wods? W dos i do o us i w ollowwods? I would suggs i dos no lws g us v , bu isomims lds us o insing plcs. So i on simpl visis clssiclccoun o Gmn scool o concpul iso Begriffsgeschichtewicin mn ws piond is ppoc, w dos on g? Wll, ccodingo m, w g o v insing id. Wo is invno o Liblism?Wll, bc ouslvs (spcill ), invno o Liblism isNpolon. accoding o is clssicl ccoun, bo fnc rvoluion,o cous wod “libl” ws ound, nd “libli” ws ound, bu i

onl d p-poliicl mnings: i is libl ducion, libli s quinssnil ibu o gnlmn. Duing fnc rvoluion isl, ws no p clld isl libl, loug w poplbod wo oug dnouncing fnc rvoluion in bodl ni-libl lngug ws good ing o do. I m inking o cous o Buk, wo ws picull opposd o (in is od) pilosop, lig,libli nd igs o mn. tis, oug, ws quinssnill wongwi fnc rvoluion. Now coms long Npolon, wo wi 18

Bumi dcls is coup ssnill ppns in nm o woicill coms o b known s les ideés libérales. and in c is is noidiosncic; mn obsvs wo s Npolon is o o


133



libl ids bcus bings consiuionl sbili nd is sponsibl oings lik Code Civile. Dos ll us ning ll? ys nd no. Iink i dos ll us soming o n v noion Liblism is no onl, bu lso om bginning, o o nsiion, o o poliicl sbilision, o o modion, is . t id sombod lik Npolon cll dvncd id gins o voluion d o b combind wi pos-voluion sbili. Mb gs us somw, mb i dos no.

ano quick mpl o w w g o do no g wn w onl look wods: timo Gon as v bginning mniond kind o polmicl books v bn coming ou in Unid Ss in psw s, suc s Sn hnni , ann Coul, c. On o mpl o

is is book ppd bginning o ls b JonGoldbg, Liberal Fascism, wic som o ou mig v d. Now ‘liblscism’ is, o cous, is sig bsud, bu ving sid , wscull mjo 20 cnu euopn pilosop wo pcisl, lso bi momn, id o combin Liblism nd scism, nd wsGiovnni Gnil, wo ls bginning o Mussolini’s ign wsqui plicil sing Mussolini is, in sns, nw om nd vsiono Liblism. In 1923, Gnil sill wn on cod wi n icl clld Il Mio Liberalismo, ing o plin scism ws nw om o

Liblism. tis ws no som cnk; I m vn old b collgus piod w Ood nlicl pilosops wo would lnIlin simpl o b bl o d Gnil. agin, w dos ll us? Wll,in isl, no v muc, bu i is cllng o do ing Miclfdn ws clling o sd, nml o look v cull boundis o Liblism: w is bod, w do w ind ouslvs poin w w cn ll s, ‘is is w n plusibl noion o Liblism cll sops’? O w w simpl cnno go n u, is is w i bcoms bsud. Bu pps Gnil is b w, wi ll

du spc, n Jon Goldbg.W bou iso o ing? W ll know noion o n “idl

p” om M Wb: ssnill kind o nlicl consuc snoing o do wi csing wods, bu is ssnill coniguion o concps usd in od o undsnd pnomnon. I is uisic dvic,no soming sbl o objciv, nd i cn b siond c im in odo undsnd picul qusion. I ink in sns w cn lso spk o Liblism s picul “idl p”, bu onl in lion o piculqusions w sking. L m giv ou n mpl lso ls osoming w lkd bou on fid. I sms o m w mgsin pos-1945 Wsn euop, v bodl spking, cn b clld om


134



o Liblism, vn oug, s w d, w v, v w poplound wo clld mslvs libls, o libl pis wi n gmoun o inlunc. W w sould look is soming rjv

boug up on fid. Nml, w sould look o som kind o uncionlquivlnc o libl vlus o libl ids, vn i coucd indin lngugs. In is cs, w is mns is w look mosimpon poliicl oc in pos-1945 Wsn euop, wic spd islibl slmn. tis is Cisin Dmocc, nd w s o w nCisin Dmocs w cull bl o dvlop qusi-libl ids ouo i own pilosopicl nd ligious soucs o sp slmn,vn oug mslvs v on viwd mslvs s ni-libl,nd w v muc opposd o ings lik libl Individulism. Pulo

Pombni, lso on fid, mniond psonlism, wic ws pcisl so o diionl idolog wic llowd Cisin Dmocs o mbcumn igs nd dmocc wil inking ll long w sillgood ni-libls, bcus d no boug ino Individulism nd mk ids nd so on nd so o.

a picul diiculis in suding Liblism? Pps ising o mind ouslvs o is Liblism is no sn s mosdiicul “-ism” in is wol ild. t clssicll diicul “-ism” isConsvism. Unlss ou s Jon Su Mill’s v subl diniion o

Consviv P s mos supid p, i s povn nooiousl diicul o din Consvism. I s on bn sid du o c Consvivs v psnd mslvs s ni-ionlis, uomicll sis ionl diniion o bing pinnd down in suc w.and so Consvism is sn s diicul ing o din, no so mucLiblism.

Bu mb Liblism is diicul o din in no w. Mb diicul lis no in is diniion, bu i cn bo pp s n idolog nd lso cn o mk isl pp s kind o m-idolog. I is ingo b soming is lg, is bov pis, o in lingo o modnpilosop, bov ‘concpions o good’, nd will o lws bsoming bod nd bl o conin lo o o idologis, in w Consvism dos no clim. Consvism dos no clim o v bod “Consviv” umbll, wiin wic ou cn b libin, o oucn b is o nd o, so Liblism in sns is spcil. I dono mn o ndos viw Liblism s lws conind somsong noion o nuli. as os o ou wo spcilis in poliicl

pilosop will know, ws wid-nging db bou is in 1990s ound Jon rwls’s Political Liberalism. I ink i ws p muc conclusivl dbd clling Liblism “nul” s suc is


135



mislding nd dos no g us nw. y I would minin is soming picul bou sucu o Liblism llows i onsom isl ino is kind o m-idolog, o v ls wi o nuli, nd in sns b oscilling s pnomnon, nd o do pin down o us s sudns o Liblism in w o idologissimpl no. tnk you.

Debate

Q: I v qusion o Ivn Ksv bou euopn Union. t c euopnUnion is so impon on supnionl lvl in Cnl nd esn euop mig poino is in libl dmocc in sns os ings mould m og, bu is i cs? fis o ll, in euopn Union, mn dcisions kn in Bussls, wic s is

noion o ul o lw, wic is pcisl md o pil md o w ou sid bou wk s poblm. So ul o lw – is is clssicl libl ing – ou cn s is po Liblism, bu no ncssil dmocc bcus i dismpows popl? Bu vn i oulook sociologicl d ou ind mn consiuns, vn, I suspc, som bodso os populis movmns, pp wi c dcisions kn in Bussls.t bs mpl is no on ls bu Civic Dmocs in Czc rpublic. Vclv Kluswould no pu euopn Union lg in is oic, bu is p is po-euopn, so idis supnionl lvl is bodl libl in sns o guning mo unicpocion o lib nd ul o lw, bu lso soming dmnd, wic mig bpdoicl om UK pspciv o vn om Wsn euopn pspciv, bu imig b gud i s dmocc. So, is euopn Union bs bd m olibl dmocc in Cnl esn euop?

Ivan Krastev: So, l’s mk i mo complicd. I m coming om coun wic o ous ws on o v w in Cnl nd esn euop bing govnd b liblgovnmn, wic mns ou v wo pis in govnmn wo mmbso libl innionl. t wo pis w King’s P nd tukis P. So,om is poin o viw, poblm wi Liblism is ml, ml insing ndI do bliv i is w m clim ws. I didn’ commn so muc on w’s going o b impc o euopn Union on libl dmoccis in Cnl nd esn euop. fo momn, i’s possibl. I ws sing wi v isnc o libl dmocc, ving

is din lvl, nsions bwn popul dmocc nd Liblism going o bvn mo innsiid, nd is is v s o s v momn wn euopnUnion dcidd o us clssicl dmocic insumn o lgiimion: mousndum. a momn, ou cn bsicll undsnd , nvlss, vos v muc po-euopn, suppoiv nd . you v poblm, nd s sul o is poblm w ou ing o do is vn mo o dpoliicis pojc. and vn i ou ssum cion o ndums in fnc nd Czc rpublic, nvgoing o b in posiion o euopn Union w could b poliicl poblmwi consiuion. t poblm is lws communicion, nd I do bliv is is v clssicl libl sg, bu no ncssil clssicl dmocic sg. and is1989 pp mig bwn popul dmocc nd Liblism, in m viw, is qusiond,nd I do bliv i is no soming is nw. ts wn s v bn cpionl,is p o pp mig bwn Liblism nd popul dmocc ws v muccpionl in diion o euop, nd w bck o w w w.


136



o com bck o m Gnil mpl, som v sious inks v sid onl w o cull lis vlus lik dom, givn isoic cicumsncs o modni, isoug w would v clld n “icl s”, compll uniid collciv, in wicn individul’s icl cpciis w ull dvlopd. I mn, ws lo on o popl sw s plusibl. I mn, s ou know, in sns, compnsiv book mdis poin mos cll ws Mk Mzow’s book bou 20 cnu, wic sid: look,w cn’ wi ll s ings o s simpl pologicl; w v o somow lsundsnd w w , s ou know.

Catherine Audard: W I mn is d o Liblism is d o modni; wo in-conncd.

Jan-Werner Müller: ys, bu w v o k i sp u. I ink is cnno b ouplno co: d o libl bougois, libl bougois wold, plinswv did o oug. t’s ll I’m ing o s.

Michael Freeden: t ws on o m-idolog, nd ws Mism, nd dining u o m-idolog is i uss o idni isl s n idolog, s inddws cs wi Mism, nd s is cs wi nlicl oms o Liblism od. Sow v wo, I ink, v insing mpls o w m-idolog is. I wn o ndis bi u nd go bck o som o issus v o do wi Liblism wiou nm, nd nm wiou Liblism, nd s wo o cucil boundis I ink w v o look . W v ld discovd, o bn mindd , w v infnc v good mpl o Liblism wiou nm, nd w v nm wiouLiblism, s wi oms o populism lik ausin fdom P w s go. W

v nm wiou Liblism; ou v oms o libinism w d bousd on ou sssion on mks, dop nm wiou Liblism. So m qusiono pnl ll is (w d w s go sis o innionl woksops ognisdb Cn o Poliicl Idologis on ‘appopiions nd Misppopiions o Liblism’), is som odin oicl civnss bou wod libl,cp o fnc nd som scions o Unid Ss? and I would lik o oucommn on w is oicl ppl, oicl pow, is in word , s muc s in content of the word .

Jan-Werner Müller: Wll, I v o ink mo bou , so mb I cn jus bil nggwi m-idolog is. Cll, ou’ ig Mism didn’ cll isl n idolog bu

I don’ ink Micl Okso would v gon ound nd sid, ‘Wll, I’m cull nidologis bcus I’m consviv.’ and I would sill minin is somingpicul bou Liblism in i is o cognis s w gnuin nmis s possibl.fo insnc, id Liblism is ppd o ngg in cibl suggl wi nm, nd bsicll o lws incopo, o mk os liblis in w Mism didn’. Mism ws qui pp o s, ‘’s n nm, ’s n nm, nd nowl’s v i ou!’

I g colonising o cowding ou c mig b in book. Bu onsw ou l qusion, I ink ’s n civnss, obviousl wi dom nd ocnl concps nd o g consd b os, bu I’m no su i wod “libl”

isl s lws ncssil bn v civ, o ll movmns vn wn d quisongl libl lmns (suc s 68-s wo w v kn on mking libl oCldwll Liblism sw wod, bsicll; d no ins in incopoing “L-wod”


138



ino ning). I’m no su w i’s no concp s opposd o “L-wod” popl wn o ijck.

Ivan Krastev: O cous, o kinds o possibl lnivs: on is o bliv is soming spcil bou Liblism, wic is llowing i o s inds in mn plcs; o is o ink is kind o idologicl ccl in wic, is bginningidologiss muc mo d o s nmis bcus n v muc moidologicl idniicion. t mo “bcoming”, o lck o common ps, mo is oc is ing o ind inds. evn s ll s wi Socilism ou cn s s v milin is pss o Mism. Wn inking von knows Miss, nd o d, bcm wk poliicll – n mo iddn inds, Mis ndsocilis, sd o s ound wold. and I do bliv is is lso posis lso b kn siousl. Bu is soming bou wod “libl”. I mmb in l 1980s bing sudn in Soi. I ou w o sk, ‘W is libl?’ o m n! I ws nenglis-spking mmb o communis li!

tis ws disincion: ou w nv going o cll dissidn libl; wdicls. fom is poin o viw ws soming – nd is is muc mo wi cion o id o “libl” – pling in o popl’s gm. evn od w s ow wod is usd; i is incdibl. fo mpl, M Mdvdv is libl bcus ’s no comingom KGB! In c con ou v suc disincions, ml conul, wic ing o din “libl” no so muc wi id o lib bu gins id o susquo in plc. t onl dinc is wn ou ing o us Liblism s is oc o sus quo , s I v plind, s bs in cn o esn euop, v mucw cng is. Sill, I bliv could b soming spcil bou Liblism,bu i could b soming in dvlopmn o Liblism mks i so s o go

vw.

Q: I v qusion o Jn Müll. I ws insd in ou mks bou Liblism bing o o nsiion s wll s sbilision. Now, v on in ps, s mns o sbilision includd diionll libl mns suc s consiuionl poliics, bu lsomnisl illibl mns suc s dicosip, nd I ws wonding on n o wicou ink combinion o libl nds nd illibl mns o b usul, nd o w ni cull ms o Liblism? and, scondl, o w n ou oug us o illiblmns o u libl nds is isoicll s wll s spill coningn, uning ound oou qusion ou skd Micl fdn bo bou solds?

Jan-Werner Müller: Wll, I’m no ull su I undsood is p o qusionbwn mns nd nds, bu w I would s – i I undsnd cocl – is illiblmns nd o coup libl nds. I’m no cull su w n good mplso libl nsiions w, l’s s, ibl illibl mns w usd. I mn mplI ws poining o, igl o wongl, wi Npolon ws is is now piod w violnc coms o n nd, w w g sbili bu w lso don’ simpl go bck o statusquo ante; w don’ go bck o Ancien Régime, bu w g bs o ll wolds, w psvvoluion civmns nd w lso g sbili. and, in sns, I ink so o ncompssing, conciling mn ings somw bov pis, is soming is indo long im oug 19 cnu in undsndings o “libl” bu lso in libl

sl-concpions. Popl lws s, ‘Wll, libl lso mns w’ somw bovnicl pis, bu w cn lws ind w o mking m mo mod, o liblisingm, so o spk.’


139



concps nd ids, wn w sould us “libl” s n djciv, s opposd o “Liblism”?Mb in n innionl con w’ sing soming, bcoming mo pcis bouwo dcids (oug no so muc bou conn). t’s wol gdion – wiclinks bck o ou pnl sd – in innionl dimnsion. L m iglig ougds. 1) Libl Univslism: os wo dcid, i is coningn m in minds o popl – bou psvion, c.; n w go o 2) libl innionlism: wv ssmic cs, w “wo dcids” s o do wi ocs, wic m no b gnsbu soming mo conc; n ou v 3) libl invnionlism: ou v lgnc nd mn ws o invn, o ings o invn bou o bing bou good lsw in no poli; n, inll, w v ou pd scpgo, 4) liblimpilism: o cous w go bck o Jn's non-cibl suggl (is is cocion, ndwo dcids is gnl nd no Colin Powll). t conn is sm, good o Liblism is no qusiond, bu w’ bck o mns vs. nds nd wo dcids o os ndno jus o ousl. Mb w cn lc on pocis, o no, in is cs?

t bings m bck o oicl civnss Micl ws picking up on. I

ink o on o ncs inoms Ivn’s “illibl dmocc” ps o ougs ,wic s d ug consquncs is ollowing cs. hundds o millions o euos ndPounds v bn spn b eU, US, Cnd nd o good libl counis bsd on ssumpion , ound wold, bd, illibl dmoccis, nd so w ndo pus o “libl” wiou dmocc – somow w nd o mk coic. tsong vsion o coic is simpl o ump, libl insiuions simpl umpdmocc log, nd ws w Ivn ws lking bou. ano is wid in issquncing: libl coms bo, so l’s spnd som im dvloping libl insiuionsbo w pomo dmocc, so w v libl dmocc in o counis. In eU 's vsion o squncing. W v libl pil dmocc, bu l’s pus

libl su bo, s in ll s non-mjoiin insiuions, om cnl bnks ogncis, c. W cn s in som css umping is ok sucull, vn cnl bnk ss , bu w’ bck o, ‘Wo ou o dcid; ou’ 20 p cn?” t good, oldpoblm o libls. t’s bn scining wok on so-clld ionli o s lis(Knmn nd tvsk, collciv cion cuss poblms). all o s issus cn binnlisd in libl inking on dciding is bound. Bu mo imponl o us s cllng innionll is is wol noion o squncing. I s ld v , nd, obviousl,bo w v cndids in lcions ou nd o mk su don’ di bo ’lcd. In long un w ll dd, nd los o popl di bo ving pincddmocc. tis bings us bck o aln’s v insing mk, wn sd us o ismoning, wic I opd som o ou mig pick up, wic is muc mo undmnl. t

ind nu o som libl goods simpl bcus on cn b dind nd pomodmo o lss cocivl o non-libl sons on non-libl gounds, om commcilinss o inss in od o conol oism ig. t sound nic nd sound liblnd, s w w sing, ’s good. Bu mus b good no onl in u bu lso in s o bolds; no pomod b libl gns nd is mig b w usLiblism mos.

Ivan Krastev: W sing o mmb ll dbs v bn ogon. fom ispoin o viw, 1989 ws ll ml impon. W ppnd in 1989 in Cnl ndesn euop dcld cin dbs ls. On ws db bwn umn igs

communi nd dmocic communi concning logic o invnion. In Unid Ss in l 1980s, s w suggling communiis. humn igs poplsid could invn in umn igs lking bou lgl sndds, univsl lgl


141



sndds o wic w cn . W cnno do is in nm o dmocision nddmocc bcus i’s up o popl on gound. a , logic ws dmocc s n idolog is bs pocion o umn igs. fom is poin o viw ouv soming pomoing dmocc nd no simpl pocing gins cim s w isig. I don’ know i w’ bck o bginning o -discussing is bcus sd,lisning o Posso Iknb, ou cn k libl od nd libl Univslism; w is dinc wi g o dmocic Univslism, wic no-Consvivs nd Busv bn lking bou? t dinc is in dmocic Univslism ou is blivin o o globl nd dvlopmnlism: w’ ll going o nd up s dmocic. I is pcondiion o sbl od. In cs o Iknb, w s in od o v liblod ou do no nd libl mindd cos; i is pow o insiuions. tis isinsing on lvl o s in esn euop. to w n cn libl nuo insiuion gun libl nu o gim, gdlss o nu o cos? t libl od is suc song insiuions, bu nvlss, vbn pu , i’s going o b libl o ls bv s libl, nd i i bvs s libl

o long noug n i will b considd libl. tis is mjo issu bcus i is bondn p o convsion bou “in” Liblism, in wic mo w spk bou nu o insiuions n bou nu o cos, lss w going o knoww Liblism is bcus i will simpl b ccisics o insiuions. tis is m poin: w will s o b muc mo insd in nu o cos in n ws.

Jan-Werner Müller: Mb jus bil on Klpso’s poin gin bou “m-”: I ink ou’ ig. t disppnc o djciv “libl” mig b n indico o vingcd kind o “m-” sg. to go bck o m li mpl o Cisin Dmocc,

Cisin Dmocic pis w oundd o nd o cks o illibl scul ssin s o ducion nd mil, c. t’s nsiion piod w i suddnl mks dinc o s cin inks o pis v bcom libl, n, cinpoin, i’s lmos givn Cisin Dmocc in bod, m sns is libl in Wsneuop. Picking up on Ivn Ksv’s poin, pcisl suc iso suggss i wsn’simpl ssmic cos o impsonl ocs boug is dvlopmn bou. t isn gumn ound now in ods o dmocision liu ss on d will b ing lik Muslim dmocc on modl o Cisin dmocc. Onc pislik mous aKP in tuk, wi in-p compiion, ncssil bcom momod o ppl o s mn popl s possibl, c. Bu cn’ b ig bcus b logic ll pis would lws b mod; von would o b popl’s p. t

d o b sping o vns, o ids bou lgiimc. In Cisin Dmocic cspopl lik Jcqus Miin w bsolul cucil in lboing Cisin ndosmno umn igs. t w, o pu i mildl, vns, d bo, vns, m vdiscdid cin o oms o doing Cisin poliics in cicumsncs ound 20

cnu euop, fnco nd Slz nd so on.

Timothy Garton Ash: I cll suding Nzi Gmn in m ou; Biis foignOic, wi ccisic judgmn, dscibd Going s libl Nzi. I w pusulibl-soming o sombod in n con, I ink w’ los. W nd o sick o subsniv noun, i Liblism o libl/som o “ism”. two quick commns.

Numb on: coming ino is connc I oug w mig com ou o i sing, ‘Wwn mo Kosllckin isoicl smnics.’ W’s insing is w cull ppnd is w wn v pidl bond wods, sing in is sssion. Bu


142



n wn w cm bck o wods i ws v illumining, oiginl fnc usg o Individulism gins Socilism, Jpns cc o dom, wic uns ou o b mkbl smblnc o Cins cc, nd so on. M conclusion o discussion is w do nd bsic goundwok in isoicl smnics, bu I don’ ink w nd w w v o Gmn. I don’ ink Begriffsgeschichte is k modolog o k us o w w wn o b; w nd o go wi Micl fdn’s modolog.

M scond commn: i suck m, lisning o Ivn, Consviv nd populisciiqu o so-clld Liblism in Cnl nd esn euop bs song smblnc o Consviv/populis ciiqu in Middl amic. fo bo o s, cnl objcionis i’s pojc o libl lis. W is i bou Liblism mks i so suscpiblo ciiqu o i bing pojc o lis? Is Liblism in som sns ininsicll liis? Pps i spis o b “m-idolog”, is, in is nu n liis pojc. Is ciiqu d in o ps o wold?

Paul Flather: I d wo ougs lisning o db is moning ‘Wo dcids?’

following Jn’s poin, wn ou sk qusion, i, qusion, dmins nsw. Iink aln sid “w” in now w, ollowing timo Gon as’s poin – n “liis”nsw. I siks m w’s spcil bou Liblism is w willing o b inclusivin “w”. Mb in pcic i is is li siing in Mnn o Ood o Pincon wodo d wok, bu lisning o ps wo ds w’v d Kings in Indi migdcid; w’v d Cisin Dmocic pis in euop cn dcid; w’v d popls mig dcid o som n in Cnl euop. I jus wondd i c wcn b inclusion, in pcic o no, givs Liblism spcil quli ov nd bov o“-isms”, Mism, Consvism nd so on, wic mo clusion on “w” lmn.

t scond oug is on ccls. I lik Micl fdn’s id o Liblism bing ool

ki. I sms din lmns o ool ki g mpsisd in lion o ccls. tisis mb sl-vidn, bu i sn’ bn sssd noug. Wn Bvidg ss, o mpl, pospous quilibium wic w’ ll dling wi s com o n nd, w nmpsis din ccl, wic is o dmpsis mks o wil. Wn rgn ndtc smd o b iumping, n uniinism coms liv nd w o discovw blongingnss is plcd wiin libl idolog. I don’ wn concp o collpsbo gins dild isoiogp, wic is w tim sid, o in compliis, oug is bn good o lisn o m. t qusion o ccls nd inlunc o din lmns din poins is cucil id I will k w nd I wn o commnd i o os.

and l poin: in nd Spn ws on scu mission o Individulism, wsn’comobl wi i nd som poins suggsd doing w wi i s k concp,

couldn’ bcus i dos cpu soming ’s cucil o Liblism. Bu w los“blongingnss” in individul pnon, nd I don’ know w gos.

Ivan Krastev: I g wi timo Gon as bou so o ciicism ou goingo bou w Middl amic psns. In m viw mos lvn book winon is o populism in Polnd ws What’s the matter with Kansas? on culul lis buno so muc bou ni-businss. to m, is is impon bcus libl o dnomll bn ckd simpl s n insumn o ck libl soci, o mb modnsoci. I ws no mjol insd in gumns o o; i ws w o s soming bou soci in wic w liv. tis ws cs wi Scmi nd Lo Suss,

c. t bsic poblm is on impon socil nsomion king plc, l songl b din socil goups, nd wic sping pcpions o Liblism. tis is c globlision nd dmocision, ll o s, pcivd s pocss o


143



8. CONCLUDING DEBATE

Ronald Dworkin*

W v d n ndd discussion wi mn componns. W v

lkd pdicivl bou c o Liblism o com; w v lkdisoicll bou wn cin ms w is usd, cin ids isconcivd; nd w v lkd in nomiv w bou ow w oug oconciv Liblism. Popl wo vnud pdicions w bi dmpndb c pdicion o suvivl, l lon louising, o Liblism is now und cloud. Indd, blck clouds: conomic cisis, mining ois – w v ld sn w nd o oism s don o umn igs ound wold,picull in US nd in ou nvl bs in Cub. and i oism gswos dng o Liblism will, in nd, cd dng w going o c om ding up o cdi ound wold. Bind scondcloud ws clim : is no o us nd I op i is no o oucildn bu i is coming nd, wn i coms, Liblism will b subjc ono diicul, diicul o scc soucs. Mos libl inksv supposd jusic is viu wo lking bou onl incicumsncs wiou cusing pov o scci, nd i m b o cng o clim m l ll o . tis mks pdicion v

diicul, nd os wo discuss i dsv ou nks o i coug. Wd mo bou iso o id. I m no going o lk v mucbou , cognising m own incompnc, oug compingdmnds o iso nd nomiv inking w mniond nd I will s soming bou os. B nd lg I wn o lk bou nomivissu.

W cgd wi qusion o w Liblism is. el on, cin opinion ws v ocull pu: nml, is so muc nois– ccopon w clld i – bou concp o Liblism w would

do b o i concp log. tis is suggsion w v im going gs oug in nlsis o poliicl nd mol concps.

145* tis is nscip ppd b dios nd no did o viwd b Posso Dwokin.



oug i is impon c pson’s li succds, on pson is incg nd s sponsibili o idniing nd pusuing concpiono w vlu lis. t pson is pson wos li i is.

W v w is sig sms o b bo n gliin pincipl:von’s li is impon; nd libl pincipl: is ng o dcisions, o wic n individul is sponsibl nd o wic individul’s sponsibili mus b cognisd nd pocd. t poliiclimpiv, wic ollows om is, is condiion o lgiimgovnmn. No govnmn is lgiim dos no ulil quimn o qul concn nd spc o os ov wic i cissdominion. t woking ou o concpion o Liblism consiss inwoking ou w qul concn nd spc quis – nd, s I v sid,

is nomiv cis. t wo pincipls nd poliicl impivI v jus dscibd sm o m o s w w v bn looking o ov ps wo ds, nml soming ss miniml condiions o Liblism. I do no mn o s s pincipls v bn ccpdov mos o umn iso – v no. (I cnno vn s ccpd ov mos o wold now – no.) t pincipls conovsil. Bu pincipls , o m mind, povid goundo Liblism. t o o Liblism is n o o w bsinpion o s ids is. and bs inpion cnno k

om o ping on o os pincipls ov o o compomisingm in som w. rgding nu o pincipls w ind bsolu wils, sm im, ou inpion o c o m lcsnd ds ino ou undsnding o os. fo mpl, w nd o o quli mks oom o ou o o lib nd vic vs.

t sucu, i sms o m, povids nsw o on o opicso sd: ow cn w s Liblism is univsl? In is oundion imus b univsl – ollows om w I s ou, pincipls ppl oll umn bings. Wn w wok ou implicions, wn w o wok

ou concpion o Liblism, n, o cous, w mus k ino ccoun isoicl con in wic w sk o dplo nd poc os wopincipls. Is Liblism univsl? a bsc lvl, s. a n picul concpion, o w w cll poliicl slmn, no. I do nomn o ccp w sould un w om pilosopicl invsigiono s concps nd simpl look w iso s gnd. aconcpion o Liblism is spons b popl movd b bscidls I v dscibd in spons o s o s idls. t s os idls l in i lision, ving om con o con ndpiod o piod. I o m inpion o k ids o cin lvlo spciici: I somon jcs wo pincipls nd poliicl


147



impiv, i would bgin discussion no in Liblism bu bov i.W dos poliicl impiv o qul concn o o ll

ciizns qui b w o n conomic disibuion? t soucs cpson s wiin poliicl communi n picul im commnds o nd mk dcn li o imsl. tis is uncion o wo

vibls. fis, psonl vibls: is coics bou wok nd kindo wok s gins lisu; is coics o invsmn, including ducion sgins consumpion; is skill poducing w mk vlus; is luck,n ml impon componn. ts psonl vibls dmin w soucs n individul s. t o l is poliiclslmn in oc, b wic I do no jus mn lws. I mn v bi o lw: lbou lw, conc lw, nvionmnl sicion,

innionl d gulions – v bi o lw cs w nindividul s. to pu i dmicll: o n disibuion o psonl vibls, individul cn nd up wi mn din lvls o soucs.W nds up wi dpnds on poliicl slmn. I wn o clim n o clims disibuion o b non o govnmn’sbusinss s o b wong – it cannot not be part of the government’s business.

Imgin somon doing bdl in communi sking s o us,‘Dos is poliicl slmn m wi qul concn? I popos din , din conc lw would giv m mo. Pls

plin o m w on ou cos sows m qul concn.’ t opson mus v n nsw. I bliv ig spons o dmnd isnlising bo pincipls. W nd concpion o conomic quli givs c o dmnds o psonl sponsibili. t mnsdisibuion mus im, s n idl, o b snsiiv o n individul’s coics– o wic is sponsibl – bu i sould b insnsiiv o is gnicndowmn nd luck. I is v d o civ nd quis n conomicmk o b cn o conomic ngmn o n liblsoci. t mk dos no jus ppn o b u o clssicl libl

oug; mk is indispnsbl o coc undsnding o wqul concn nd spc o sponsibili qui. Onl oug mkcn n individul k o imsl soucs wns nd p oppouni coss o os o is ving w ks. I is picingmcnism indispnsbl o sponsibl om o quli. as , idisgds insnsiivi o luck nd ndowmn. I o poposdisibuiv ion modlld on poicl insunc polic, i..w popl would ionll p ex ante o insunc gins kinds o unmplomn nd bd luck nd ill l nd owis, poplncoun. t is m suggsion s o ccouns o nd limis o ol n conomic mk pls in libl soci.


148



W lkd bou wo o co ids o Liblism: olion ndIndividulism. I ink os ids bs ppocd og. SvnLuks usull disinguisd s o gumns v isoicll bnd bou Individulism, nging om n gumn bou bs modso us in socil scinc o mpsics o hgl. I ink impongumn o b d bou Individulism is n gumn bou windividuls v v igs ump collciv good. I wn o suggs v in dcn libl soci. t v igs inn in m dscipion o quli bcus mk, unning in w svs gol o poducing disibuion (snsiiv o coic ndinsnsiiv o ndowmn), is on quis g dl o dom.Scondl, v igs low om coc undsnding o

i sponsibili ( scond pincipl I v dscibd) o idni ndpusu vlu o mslvs.W v lkd sd bou dom o ligion, nd som o us v

skd qusion, ‘W is dom o ligion so cnl nd imponmong lis o igs o scond kind?’ Plinl, dom o ligioncoms und d o dom ou nd in od o cqui ousponsibili und scond pincipl. Bu ow do w disinguis om dom o pin ou ous in din colou in Goginow, o k ivolous mpl? t s mks collciv dcisions

bou mn ms nd lvs individul’s dcision bou mn os,nd i is in m mind n unddvlopd p o poliicl pilosop odvlop n ccoun o wic is wic. W mk conomic dcisions lgl individull, pics nd wgs s b nd lg oug mkguld in w I sid i s o b. t mns conomic climis s individull. t mol clim is s collcivl. t ciminl lw is collciv m: w do no s individuls mus dcid o mslvsw i pop nds nd somon ls’s pop bgins. tpocion o buiul oss nd buiul picus in musums is

collciv m.how do w dw disincion? I ink scond pincipl poins

w. W mus mk disincion bwn mol vlu nd impsonl vlu, lik vlu o picus on on nd nd, on o nd,os vlus wos vlu iss om impc on succss nd ilu o umn livs. and i ligion lls ino cgo, n so dos muc ls.Sul oinion, o mpl, lso lls ino is cgo, includingw o no scmn nd sus o mig sould b vilbl osm-s coupls. In m viw, oug is will b mo conovsil,boion lso lls ino cgo. In o wods, pincipl in so s m lls wiin cgo o wos vlu lis o popl in


149



nncmn i povids o i livs, n i is soming in libl soci, wic spcs scond pincipl, mus b l oindividuls. O cous, ll o is nglcs ll o quliicions bu lsi givs us o id.

W v, i sms o m, in is v bi nd skc ccoun, picuo libl soci. I is soci in wic n conomic mk is n inglp o concpion o quli wok in communi. I is communi in wic igs o individuls cknowldgd nd spcdvn cos o som collciv good. I is d o somon o isis o cildn in n oodo i in soci in wic ismsuounds cild. W cnno ppl o Mill’s pincipl o s is nosoming n individul s o wo bou. Bu i is cos w mus p ou

o dnc o scond pincipl o digni. W did no lk sd,cp obliqul, bou dmocc. I wn o s id o dmocc is indispnsbl o Liblism, ls in ou cnu, ls ound ,bcus i is v diicul o s ow govnmn could, in good i,clim o sow qul spc o ll is ciizns i i llows onl som opicip in collciv dcisions domin livs o ll.

howv, iss inpiv qusion: w is dmocc?Dmocc in libl mod, concivd s lowing om quimn o qul spc, cnno mn mjoiin ul. I s lil dnsivl

bcus so mn popl ink dmocc nd mjoiin ul mn sm ing. evn dmocc pocd b pocdul igs lik igo spc nd qul sug cnno sis. equl spc quis govnmn b n idl govnmn, pnsip in wic ll ciiznsincluding os wo los on picul ms v s nd spcdb i llow ciizns. as n idl, i mns c ciizn mus boug b o ciizns o v n qul sk, s wll s n qul voic, in oucom o dmocic pocss. Obviousl, is g dl oinvsig nd pps quli. Bu wn I d sd n mp o

disinguis conomic om poliicl Liblism, suck m s, i ncss, dpl, dpl gbl. Liblism is cu om on clw nd soci mks wl bu dos no sow qul spc o ll ciizns ison cnno onsl clim, in m viw, o b libl soci.

I v id o l ou picul inpion o wo pincipls.t wo ws o cllng w I v sid. fis, on mig s I jcoo nd bnc o id; I jc wo pincipls nd poliiclimpiv – I mo popl ound wold do jc m. t ow is o cp s bnl pincipls bu o disg wi implicions, o disg, o mpl, wi ccoun o lib ndquli simpl ss conlic bwn m. Wn w cocl


150



undsnd cc o concps in plc, cnno b n succonlics. I ou bliv in mo unsind mk n m ccounwould llow, ou mig disg wi m quli dos qui, s nidl, disibuion insnsiiv o ndowmn, skill nd luck.

ts disgmns w cn nd sould v. t is w ccopon mig di, i ccoponis indd di. as o is kind o gumn, ow sll w gu wi ligious undmnliss, ciss, nd liks? t w no o gu wi m is o s o mpl, ‘O cousI don’ g wi ngd migs, bu ’s onl m opinion –vbod is nild o i opinion nd m opinion is b n nbod ls’s – look ow oln I m.’ t is no olnc bu inconc. youcnno clim cin ing o b ig in ou opinion nd n s

ving ls is jus s good.t is n old oug, oigin o wic I cnno mmb now:‘Libls cnno vn k i own sid in n gumn.’ W v o kou own sid in gumn nd w v on g dvng: w v u on ou sid.

Debate

Michael Freeden: I v svions, is o wic ls o bsolu nuo scond pincipl. as ou pobbl know s wll s I do, on o g libl inkso 20 cnu, Lond hobous, wo muul id is no lss impon nmuul obnc nd I ink is mgs in ou own wiings. In o wods, wnou s ou ssumpion is i’s onl sponsibili o pson o pusu“louising”, I ink on mjo libl ddiionl sub-pincipl is i’s lso sponsibili o os o ssis in individul louising, wic diminiss bsolunu o scond pincipl.

Scondl, bou wn ou s w cn’ look iso. all bsc ids, includingos ou mniond, poduc o l isoicl inks nd discouss; ou nisoicl ni ousl. t don’ dscnd om nomiv vn. W ou’ doing,nd is is qui noml – w ll do i – is ou idlis picul cul pssions bou

Liblism, wic is v ncss, bu don’ lo in som bsc wold.tid poin: I qui g wi ou poin bou collciv dcisions bu ou ousl

don’ mk collciv dcisions; ou mk dcisions for collciviis. In ou own lngug,ou lk bou indispnsbili; ou lk bou bsoluism. tis is w I cll, in v gnlsns, libl dogmism; nd ’s noing wong wi i. W cnno block dogmicbou imponc o ou own blis, bu jus o mpsis wn w consucing n idolog w , ls in idionl ms, imposing ou ids on collciviis.

Ronald Dworkin: t is pincipl cinl souldn’ b kn o obid inluncing poplbou w kind o livs would b good o m o v nd i cinl dosn’ obid bing

inluncd. t wol communiin id Libls suppos o b oms loingindpndnl o on no is bslss. I obids subodinion nd dominion; i obidslling popl mus. Wn ou id popl in pusuing w v idniid s


151



kind o li wn, n o cous ou’ no violing n sponsibili o is.Pps m wods “idni” nd “pusu” mislding. I don’ mn pusu clusivl,o o pusu unidd. Pnlism iss poblms bou bound: w poin inquiing cildn o go o scool o popl o w sbls, m I cossing lin inosubodinion? and popl wo bou . M own viw is i ou cn b conidn is psns w popl would wn o mslvs, n ou no ininging scond pincipl.

abou ids dscnding om isoicl igus nd no loing in i – w vo sp wo ings: w do ids com om? t com om popl wo g iids om vious soucs, including looking sunss o bing ng o jlous. W v wol pscologicl so bou ow ids n inllcul iso, ow is s,w i consquncs . I ink w sould disinguis om qusion o uoi o ids. I do no bliv, nd I disg wi lo o popl, c idsw ld in iso s o cs o os ids. you s ids don’ lo in n bscwold. Wn m son ws v oung, would ol m o sk im qusions suc s,

‘W do numbs liv?’ nd go v id o is, nd sid on d, ‘I know wnumbs liv – liv in b cns in himln mounins’. and ’s w ids liv,oo. and n in dogmism w impos on collcivi, is dinc ginbwn inlunc nd imposiion. Wn w c ids, wn Min Lu King oabm Lincoln o Bck Obm spk loqunl, cing ids, bu is opposi o subodinion.

Samuel Brittan: Bo w cn ciicis ou ids, wic w don’ ll v im o, nd w in n cs bodl smpic o m, I ink w sould undsnd cin mo dil wic I wn o pusu. Wn ou w lking bou dmocc, I oug pps

I m dmoc ll bcus m nul insinc is o so o libl uoiindico, loug I don’ ink msss picull libl bu ou n sd oinp dmocc in n insing w, bu dd ou bo ou cm o nd o .and o mk i spciic, mb ou would lik o lis wic counis ull dmocic inou sns? I suspc nsw is zo, bu ou mig v din on.

Ronald Dworkin: I’m dligd o ou’ smpic wi m ids wiouundsnding m. Wic counis ull dmocic? you nicip m nsw: zo.Wic counis suggling o civ dmocc? I bliv wn consiuionwi civ judicil viw is in oc, nd jusics mking dcn dcisions ndwiing dcn opinions, n w ppocing pnsip dmocc. t quis

consiuion b undsood s sing ou povisions go long w owds nsuingqul sk, ’s qul pocion clus o 14 mndmn o US consiuion;qul voic, ’s is mndmn; nd indpndnc om collcivi in osms in wic i sould b indpndn. So wn ou v n civ, l’s s, viw o mjoiin dcisions gins sndds dsignd o poc id sl-govnmn issl-govnmn b vbod, n I ink ou ppoc id. I don’ mn o s,owv, ving supm cou lik ou own, picull sd wi popl Bus sppoind, is onl w o do i – mn ws o do i. I would lov, o mpl,o is coun o om hous o Lods b ving n lcd hous o Lods, poplligibl wo v nv bn in hous o Commons, nd sving o on singl m o,

s, ig s, cgd wi inping nd ppling humn rigs ac. t wouldb v good sp owds impoving dmocc in Biin, bu o cous i would ldw om mjoiin dmocc.


152



On insunc: w cn’ ll nsw qusion o n individul, w would individul v cosn b w o n insunc polic i pson dn’ known bou owlivl likl pson would v bn o nd insunc. In m mp o dvlopis id, I v sid w sould look cul insunc mks in picul counisgivn i s o cnolog. you v o know ow muc i ou’ blind, ow muc mon is wo o ou, w i cn do o ou. Bu w look cul insunc mks wi sisiclclims bou w mos popl would, und cin condiions p, n w g nic bll-spd cuv wi big ump, n w cn s, somw owds bck nd, on l sid o big bll, w oug o i w is sonbl o ssum w lmos vonwould do. t’s onl w o do i.

Susan Mendus: In Truth and Truthfulness, Bnd Willims clims wils Liblismis – s I undsnd i, i’s now nd ound , i’s u und condiions o modni – onl gm in ou im; bu i’s no onl gm. I would lik o sk ow obus ouppd o b bou Liblism bing u ull-sop?

Ronald Dworkin: two disincions: wn w ink bou univsli, w v odisinguis w I cll gound pincipls om picul inpion od inspons o picul cicumsncs. W bou popl wo jc bsic pincipls? Iclim ’ u nd ’ u ll ov plc nd lws bn u, vn ougi ook long im vn o som o us o s m. Bnd Willims s din sono sing w sid, nd is is o o u nd moli. h didn’ bliv inning bu locl u, ws oc o is disincion bwn “ick” nd “in”concp. you cn v u in dling wi ick concps bcus v locl u.Jus s m o gnl pilosop, I disg wi im. W d din viws bou

u, wic w gud o mn s in smin ooms in is univsi.

Timothy Garton Ash: abou ow libls conduc mslvs in libl wold. Wsould b lngug nd sg o popl poposing supml con, nomivpoposiions in wold o supml incon nomiv poposiions, wic ppl o vs numb o popl nd possibl mjoi in mn counis?

Ronald Dworkin: I k i con is no on o u sking, bu on o psusion. Woug oug in ig vocbul, wic w v o do, nd n qusion is: owdo w psud? and I wond i is ning cn b sid in gnl. Psusionmns ing o ind soming will lp pson i undsnd b,

mpo o ook in pson’s id. I’v bn p o svl convsions cnl wipopl ing o plin in Kon cn b ound condmnions o oism. I’s unn gumn – i I’m mking gumn, m I ndosing Kon s souc o u? No. Mig I mk gumn in od o g som lvg on popl I m ingo convinc? ys.

Laurence Whitehead: t wo pincipls bsolu, bu I would lik o know w bsolul bsolu o livl bsolu. I w k pincipl, pson wo ssponsibili o idniing dicion involvd is pson wos li i is, s bsolul,bsolul u, n Libls cnno ccp conscipion. Wn w k pincipl i’s

objcivl impon onc li bgins i louiss, n I’d v o b pciis. So owbsolu pincipls?


153



lso no suicin condiion o pocdul sons. W v o wok ou n innionllgiimising uoi. I don’ ink unillism is nsw, picull b m govnmn psn im, bcus i s povd o b dissous nd I ink ulo lw is v impon nd i quis b lgiiming uoi, bu os lso ncss condiions, nd condiion I’m sssing now is b violion o umn igs. I nd o o umn igs nd I would l on disincion I’v bnmking bwn bsc lvl nd poliicl slmn o giv us o, i. undmnl umn ig is ig o b d wi good i mp o spc wo pincipls. t’s qui song, bu ’s w I ink w sould s. Obviousl, wdisg vn wiin is oom bou ig inpion – dosn’ mn on is sgood s no, bu w do disg. and I ink sovign oug o poc nionwic s md good i mp – ou s wo dcids on w good i mp isnd ’s w innionl uoi coms in – bu sndd sould b . I’s wk sndd n poliicl igs, bu i’s sill sndd ’s bsd on s wopincipls. and ou s, wll, mn nions don’ ccp s wo pincipls nd ’s w

I sid nd w v u on ou sid.

Steven Lukes: how, on ou viw o Liblism, sould w ink bou pow? O, mospciicll, ow sould libl idni illgiim pow? you sid Liblism obidssubodinion nd dominion; ou didn’ s cocion. Is n spc in ouinpion o scond pincipl bou individuls ging i wong bou i livs ndw kind o spc would b?

Ronald Dworkin: W condiions o lgiim cis o cociv pow? Onn bsc lvl, condiions includd s ncss condiion o lgiim cociv

quli, insiuion ciss is v qul concn nd spc o ll osund is dominion, nd o bsc dmnds conc. t’s w gumnsbou poliicl igs bou; ’s w gumns in Supm Cou bou. t gumns bou w bsc condiions , in m viw, ou consiuion ssou, v bn m in conc cs. I lso ink iso s ol o pl inlgiimc. I dcid wi w o ou s m comds o cis qul spc nd concno flklnd Islnds, bu iso dos no giv us pow. hiso is m o coningnc. I’s m o w ivs un nd kings v slp, ’s w dminsboundis. I ink lgiimc s o v coningn lmn, bu coningnlmn s o b supplmnd b ncss condiion o qul concn nd spc.

Individuls cn mk misks – ’s poin. you mig s, ‘W souldn’ w lp

popl ld b livs?’ I v md misks, w sp in, gb m b scu o nck nd pus m in ig dicion. t iss numb o qusions, on o wic is icl. Cn ou v b wn ndosd? M own viw is oug ou cnmk misk, misk cn’ b cocd oug cocion om ousid bcusn i bcoms n inunic li. and n inunic li is no good li. t snddpoliicl sons: c on pson cn mk misk is no poo no pson,vn i los o m, isn’ lso going o mk misk, nd opposi misk.Bu I wn o l mos on id ou cn’ ld good li nd o gun.

Joao Carlos Espada: how cn ou disinguis bwn w is sul o coic, nd w

is sul o ndowmn nd luck? Is ul o pincipl, o is i jus bsd onopinion?


156



Scondl, i ou wn o coc inlunc o ndowmn nd luck, cn ou do wiou pmnnl ining wi cions o suls o cions spingom coics o individuls?

Ronald Dworkin: Wo mks disincion bwn coic nd luck? Wll, i dpndsupon wo’s skd o mk coic. I i’s plimn wic is skd o dsign lw, i’sgo o mk coic. Is i diicul dcision o mk? Som popl ink i is – i ou n incompibl-is bou -will-poblm n ou ink is no coic, nobod v s coic nd disincion is illgiim ig om s. So I g wi ou i on wns o go looking o icbgs, ’s big icbg und is on, clld will poblm. Bu I ink i’s pcicl m, i I m us obnoious ps. I ous i is no n individul’s coic o bcom blind in n ccidn, lso mid css,cig smoking o insnc. Ws ou coic o ws i bd luck? I don’ ink isis going o b muc o poblm on mco lvl in dsigning i disibuiv ssm.

Inoue Tatsuo: t c ou v v sic gulions bou wic ng o colou ou llowd o pin ou ous in, ws dom in ms o ligion is sicl pocd,cn onl b jusiid b ppling o gumn concpion o good li wimpsis on ligion is b n o concpions. how do ou spond o n ccnicpson illing lwsui bou colou gulions on gound , o im, colou o isous is mo impon n ligion?

Ronald Dworkin: I disg wi Micl Sndl, wo ss i’s b concpion o good li o b ligious n o wn o pin ou ous pink insd o wi o vic vs.

I’s muc mo impon w colou o ou ous is, bu I I’m in minoi on qusion, cinl in m coun. I would s w’s impon is no on is bconcpion o good li bu on is concpion o good li, nd o is no.t quis m o s i’s no up o popl, on b on, o dcl w’s n iclqusion nd w’s mol qusion. t is v impon poliicl dcision, nd i w’going o v concpion o Liblism, i will v o includ i.

Alan Ryan: Jus o b obnoious, I b dn pincipl v li ms. I dn v li ms qull. I sms o m pposous o ink v umn li iso qul vlu. I ssn o ngiv poposiion i’s v d o g consnsus onwic li ms mo n wic wi no oubl ll. Bu ou clim ou v von

on ou sid o pincipl wic i s o g dilud ino uolog o b cdibl o lsuns ou o b ou s-so bou condiions o lgiimc in libl s; o cous iis igl plusibl s-so, libl ss los i lgiimc i don’ iciizns wi qul concn nd spc, nd on I ssn o. Bu noion is lcs dp undling mol u sms o m dpl consbl. Sombod in is oom ougo dn i, so, on bl o l Bnd Willims nd vn l fidic Nizsc,I b dn i.

Ronald Dworkin: I nv sid c li is o qul vlu, nd is obviousl no u. Nom ow vlu is mniond, popl no qull mol; popl no qul

conibuos o good o os, o cllnc o culu o ning ls. Popl noqul in ning. M nil din poposiion is i ms w ppns o m


157




158

qull. and ’s qui consisn wi sing som odns nd som ngls. you’qui ig in sing i would b nic i I d n gumn n dicum. I will givou m vsion o Knin gumn: ou cn’ mk sns o ou own li wiouinking i’s objcivl impon ow ou liv. you cn’ ink i’s impon bcusou ppn o wn o liv wll – won’ wok, i gs gumn going in wong

dicion. you ousl – is is w Kn clld nscndnl gumn - ssum ou li ms. t n qusion, o, is: is ning bou ou, suc ouli could m mo n nbod ls’s? hisoicll, mn popl v givn posiivnsws o : I m dscndn o Plngn, o m li ms mo; I m Jw nd cosn pson, o m li ms mo. I m jus supposing non o s nsws is n good nd ou nd up wi posiion i ou ink ou lims, n li ms. I ink ws Nizsc’s viw, oo; i mig b conovsil,bu I’m suppod b book I cnl d b tmsin Sw, wic coms o smconclusion, nml Nizsc oug onl v w popl, I ink lis wsGo, imsl, nd I’v ogon wo ls, cpbl o lding disinguisd li, bu

ws sm bcus i ms ow von livs.



aPPeNDIx: a LIBeraL traNSLatION

Timothy Garton Ash*

Govnmn nd mks bo v i plc in dcn soci, Psidn

Obm suggsd in is Inugul addss, bu cn bcom oc o ill i wiou sin. Missing om M. Obm’s ddss ws onl pop nm o poliicl pilosop, codd ino consiuionl DNao Unid Ss, poposs is nd o blncs: liblism.

Lik mn o M. Obm’s spcs, Inugul addss psnd,in subsnc, blnd o clssicl consiuionl nd modn gliinliblism. t ing, bu nv wod. anon wo knows ningbou conmpo poliicl discous in Unid Ss undsndsw.

Jus ov 20 s go, goup o lding amicn inllculs, gdb isoin fiz Sn, plcd n dvismn in is v pping o dnd wod “liblism” gins is bus b ronld rgnnd os on amicn ig. I ws in vin. Ov ls wo dcds ul ccnic usg s iumpd in amicn public db. Liblisms bcom pjoiv m dnoing — o pu m d ivolousl — som unol mig o big govnmn nd onicion.

tis wid usg lds, m, o book ils lik Deliver Us From

Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism and Liberalism. Bu i incs minsm oo. askd duing pim db o din “libl,” nd s i s ws on, hill Clinon plid wod oiginll ssocid wi bli in dom d unounl com o mn vouing biggovnmn. So, s concludd, “I p wod pogssiv, wic s l amicn mning.” tis implis mning o “libl” mus bunl, un-amicn, o possibl bo.

t Unid Ss is no onl plc w “liblism” is icl consd. In cn connc Ood, wi spks om

amics, euop, Indi, Jpn nd Cin, w plod w w dlibl clld “Liblisms.” Insingl, w is uiousl ckd s “liblism”in fnc, nd in muc o Cnl nd esn euop, is pcisl w is

159* tis icl ppd in The New York Times, 24 Jn 2009.



mos blovd o libin o “iscl consviv” snd o amicn ig. Wn fnc liss nd Polis populiss dnounc“liblism,” mn anglo-Son-sl, unguld -mkcpilism. (Occsionll pi no- o ul- is ddd o mk iscl.)

On Cins inllcul old us in is coun, “Liblism mnsving govnmn dosn’ lik.” t m is usd in Cin s poliicl insumn o ck, in picul, dvocs o u mk-oind conomic om. Sndds o w couns s socill o culull libl lso v widl. an Indin spk wl obsvd in Indi “libl” is on wo llows is cildn o coos wom wn om.

fcd wi is woldwid concpul ccopon, som conncgud w sould bndon m, o ls dismnl i inocomponn ps wi plin mnings. Bu combinions nd blncsblong o liblism’s dining ssnc, nd wol is g n sum o is ps. as Ood poliicl ois Micl fdn obsvd,i jus on o ncss componns — o mpl, mk —domins, n sul cn b illiblism. t vil, nv-nding dbov liblism is no jus ov is indispnsbl ingdins, bu lso ovi om, popoion nd lion o on no.

a plusibl minimum lis o ingdins o 21s cnu liblismwould includ lib und lw, limid nd ccounbl govnmn,mks, olnc, som vsion o individulism nd univslism, ndsom noion o umn quli, son nd pogss. t mi o ingdinsdis om plc o plc. W som disn cousin ll blongs o ndd mil o liblisms is m o l dispu. Busomw in is consd, volving combinion is ing o nduing vlu.

tis s bn n amicn gumn, som would s the amicn

gumn, o mo n 200 s. In c, Unid Ss is sill ull o libls, bo pogssiv o l libls nd, I would insis, consviv oig libls. Mos o m jus don’ us wod. Liblism is amicn lov d no spk is nm.

fo obvious sons, w now winssing woldwid ciicism o vsion o pu -mk liblism, . k. . no-liblism, cgd wiving ld us ino ou cun conomic mss. y, ou Cins ndeuopn collgus gd mks min n indispnsbl condiiono lib. On lding Cins conomic om vn suggsd is lss incom inquli in os Cins povincs w mk pls lg ol.


160



I don’ pc M. Obm o us wod n im soon. Bu os o us wo bliv in univsl, nduing vlu o liblism pp o sim s b vigoousl soing mo o ing. h s dcisivl ssd imponc o qul lib und ul o lw, no ls b oding closing o Gunánmo B pison. Sking mo jus ndicin blnc bwn govnmn nd mks is o isdomsic gnd. h s lso ound ws o psn diionl libl

vlu o olnc in nw lngug spks o ou incsingl mid-upwold.

tn, pps in is scond m, mig vn d o scu wod.

Appendix

161



OrGaNISING COMMItteeProfessor Luc Borot

Director, Maison Française d’Oxford Dr Nigel Bowles

Director, Rothermere American Institute and Fellow of St Anne’s College

Dr Paul FlatherSecretary General, The Europeaum, and Fellow of Mansfield College

Professor Michael Freeden

Director, Centre for Political Ideologies, and Fellow of Mansfield CollegeProfessor Timothy Garton Ash (Chair)

Professor of European Studies and Isaiah Berlin Professorial Fellow, St Antony’s CollegeProfessor Robert Gildea

Professor of Modern History and Fellow of Worcester CollegeProfessor Paul Giles

Professor of American Literature and Fellow of Linacre CollegeDr Ian Goldin

Director, James Martin 21st Century School, and Fellow of Balliol CollegeProfessor Andrew Hurrell

Montague Burton Professor of International Relations and Fellow of Balliol CollegeProfessor Tony Judt

Director, Remarque Institute, New York UniversityProfessor Rana Mitter

Professor of the History and Politics of Modern China and Fellow of St Cross CollegeProfessor Ian Neary

Director, Nissan Institute for Japanese Studies, and Fellow of St Antony’s CollegeProfessor Kalypso Nicolaïdis

Director, European Studies Centre, St Antony’s College and Professor of International Relations

Professor Alan Ryan

Warden of New CollegeProfessor Jennifer Welsh

Professor of International Relations and Fellow of Somerville CollegeDr Stuart White

Tutor in Politics and Fellow of Jesus CollegeMr Laurence Whitehead

Official Fellow in Politics at Nuffield College

163



VISItING SPeaKerS

Professor Rajeev Bhargava

Professor Rajeev Bhargava obtained his BA degree from the University of Delhi and M.Phil and D.Phil degrees from Oxford University. He is currently Senior Fellow and Director of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies. He has previously been aProfessor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. From 2001-2005, he held the chair inPolitical Theory and Indian Political Thought at the University of Delhi and was theHead of its Department of Political Science.

He has been a Senior fellow in Ethics at Harvard University, Visiting fellow of theBritish Academy, CR Parekh Fellow at the CSDS, Delhi, a Leverhulme fellow at theUniversity of Bristol, Senior Fellow at the Institute of Advanced Studies at Jerusalemand Distinguished Resident scholar at the Institute of Religion, Public Life and

Toleration, Columbia University, NY. He held the Asia Chair at Sciences Po, Paris inthe summer of 2006. He will be a Visiting Fellow, at the Wissenschaftkolleg, Berlin in2009-10.

His publications include Individualism in Social Science (1992), Secularism and itsCritics (ed.) (1998), Multiculturalism, Liberalism and Democracy (ed.) (1999),Transforming India (ed.) with Francine Frankel (2000) and Politics and Ethics of theIndian Constitution (ed.) (2008). He is currently working on a book on Secularism. Hehas contributed to several international books and journals including the RoutledgeEncyclopedia of Philosophy and the Oxford Handbook of Political Theory. He was a

consultant to the UNDP report on Cultural Liberty.

Sir Samuel Brittan

Sir Samuel Brittan has been an economic commentator on the Financial Times since1966. Prior to this he was economics editor of the Observer (1961-64) and an adviser at the Department of Economic Affairs (1965).

His most recent books are Against the Flow (2005), Capitalism with a Human Face(1995) and Essays, Moral, Political and Economic (1998). He is an Honorary Fellow of

Jesus College, Cambridge and an honorary Doctor of Letters at Heriot-Watt University,

Edinburgh. He has been visiting professor at the Chicago Law School, a visiting Fellowof Nuffield College, Oxford, and an honorary professor of politics at Warwick.

165



He has been awarded the George Orwell, Senior Harold Wincott and Ludwig Erhard prizes. He was a member of the Peacock Committee on the Finance of the BBC(1985-86). He was knighted in 1993 for “services to economic journalism” and that

year also became a Chevalier of the Legion d’Honneur.

Professor Cui Zhiyuan

Professor Cui teaches Politics and Public Management at the University of Tsinghua,Beijing. His research is characterised by an innovative approach to the social and economic developments of post socialist China and by strong theoretical interests. His

publications include books and articles on both capitalist and socialist economies. Heedited the selected essays of Roberto Unger and has co-authored with him a book and various articles. Professor Cui has a rich experience as a scholar and professor in the

USA. At present he is Visiting Professor at Cornell University.

Professor Ronald Dworkin

Professor Ronald Dworkin is Professor of Philosophy and Frank Henry Sommer Professor of Law at New York University. He received BA degrees from both Harvard College and Oxford University, and an LLB from Harvard Law School.

He was associated with a law firm in New York (Sullivan and Cromwell) and wasa professor of law at Yale University Law School from 1962-1969. For many years, hewas the Professor of Jurisprudence at Oxford. After retiring from Oxford, Dworkin

became the Quain Professor of Jurisprudence at University College London, where hesubsequently became the Bentham Professor of Jurisprudence. He gave his valedictorylecture at University College London in March 2008, “Can we disagree about law and morals?” He is a Fellow of the British Academy and a member of the American

Academy of Arts and Sciences.Professor Dworkin is the author of many articles in philosophical and legal journals

as well as articles on legal and political topics in the New York Review of Books. Among his many books are Taking Rights Seriously (1977), A Matter of Principle (1985), Law'sEmpire (1986), Philosophical Issues in Senile Dementia (1987), A Bill of Rights for

Britain (1990), Life's Dominion (1993), and Freedom's Law (1996). Several of thesebooks have been translated into the major European languages, as well as into Japaneseand Chinese.

Professor Pierre Hassner

Professor Pierre Hassner is Emeritus Research Director at Sciences-Po (CERI) and lectures in international relations and the history of political thought at the Institut d'Études Politiques of Paris and at the European Center of Johns Hopkins Universityin Bologna. His books include La violence et la paix, La terreur et l’empire and, Justifier la guerre? De l'intervention humanitaire au contre-terrorisme? (ed.) (2005). Professor Hassner has also taught as a visiting professor at the Universities of Chicago, Harvard,


166



and Geneva. He was written widely on political philosophy (particularly on Rousseau,Kant and Hegel) and on international affairs (particularly on totalitarianism,nationalism, war and peace).

Several of his books have been translated into English including: Violence and

Peace (1997), Justifying War? From Humanitarian Intervention to Counter-Terrorism(ed.) (2008).

Dr Carol Horton

Dr Carol Horton is an independent scholar and author of Race and the Making of American Liberalism (2005). She holds a doctorate in Political Science from the Universityof Chicago and served on the faculty of Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota.

During the past decade, Carol has specialized in program planning and evaluation

research for the public and non-profit sectors. Most recently, she was employed as aResearch Scientist focusing on programs and polices affecting low-income children and families at Erikson Institute, Chicago. She has authored or co-authored numerousresearch reports for public and private organizations including the Center for the Studyof Social Policy, Chapin Hall Center for Children, Chicago Community Trust, ChicagoPublic Schools, Chicago Department of Children and Youth Services, DeWitt Wallace-Reader’s Digest Fund, Erikson Institute, Ford Foundation, W. K. Kellogg Foundation,

Ms. Foundation for Women, and Pew Charitable Trusts.

Professor John Ikenberry Professor John Ikenberry is the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University, in the Department of Politics and theWoodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He is also a Global Eminence Scholar at Kyung Hee University. Professor Ikenberry is the author of After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars(2001), which won the 2002 Schroeder-Jervis Award presented by the AmericanPolitical Science Association for the best book in international history and politics. Acollection of his essays, entitled Liberal Order and Imperial Ambition: American Power

and International Order appeared in 2006. He is also co-editor of End of the West? Crisis and Change in Atlantic Order (2008). Most recently, he is co-author of Crisis of

American Foreign Policy: Wilsonianism in the 21st Century (2009), which explores theWilsonian legacy in contemporary American foreign policy. He is currently writing abook entitled Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the

American System (forthcoming). Professor Ikenberry is the co-director of the PrincetonProject on National Security, and he is the co-author, along with Anne-MarieSlaughter, of the final report, Forging a World of Liberty Under Law. Professor Ikenberry is the author and editor of many other books, including State Power and the World Economy (2002) with Joseph Grieco. He is also editor of AmericanUnrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power (2002) and co-edited The Nation State

Visiting Speakers

167



in Question (2003) which examines the changing capacities and roles of the modernstate. He is also co-author with John A Hall of The State (1989) which has beentranslated into several languages, including French, Spanish, and Japanese. He hasalso edited a volume, with Michael Doyle, on New Thinking in International Relations

(1997). He is co-editor with Michael Cox and Takashi Inoguchi of U.S. DemocracyPromotion: Impulses, Strategies, and Impacts (2000) and co-editor with Michael

Mastanduno of International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific (2003). He has published in all the major academic journals of international relations and writtenwidely in policy journals.

Among his many activities, Professor Ikenberry served as a member of an advisory group at the State Department in 2003-04 and was a member of the Council onForeign Relations Task Force on U.S.-European relations, the so-called Kissinger-

Summers commission. He is also a reviewer of books on political and legal affairs for Foreign Affairs.

Professor Inoue Tatsuo

Professor Inoue Tatsuo was born in Osaka, Japan, in 1954. He is Professor of Philosophy of Law at the Graduate Schools for Law and Politics, the University of Tokyo. After having graduated from the Faculty of Law, at the University of Tokyo, hemajored in philosophy of law as Research Associate there in 1977-1980. He was aFulbright Visiting Scholar at the Department of Philosophy, Harvard University, 1986-

88. After teaching philosophy of law as Associate Professor at Faculty of Law and Economics, Chiba University, he became Associate Professor at the Graduate Schools for Law and Politics, the University of Tokyo in 1991 and Professor in 1995. He taught at New York University School of Law as Visiting Professor for the Global Law School Program in 2002 Spring Semester. He was Senior Research Fellow at the Center for European Integration Studies, the University of Bonn, in 2003. He was inaugurated asa Member of the Science Council of Japan in 2005.

His research covers subjects such as the theory of norms, the theory of justice, theconcept of law, the rule of law, philosophical foundations of liberalism and

constitutional democracy, Asian values and human rights, and law and politics incontemporary Japan. He is the author of six books in Japanese and has received theSuntory Art and Science Award for his book Kyosei no Saho: Kaiwa toshiteno Seigi[Decorum of Conviviality: Justice as Conversation], (1986) and the Watsuji TetsuroCulture Award for his book Ho toiu Kuwadate [Law’s Project], (2003). Among hismain publications in English are The East Asian Challenge for Human Rights, (1999);“Reinstating the Universal in the Discourse of Human Rights and Justice,” in A. Sajo(ed.), Human Rights with Modesty: The Problem of Universalism (2004); “How Can

Justice Govern War and Peace: A Legal-Philosophical Reflection,” in Ludger Kühnhardt and Mamoru Takayama (eds.), Menschenrechte, Kulturen und Gewalt:

Aufsätze einer interkulturellen Ethik (2005); “Two Models of Democracy: How to


168



Make Demos and Hercules Collaborate in Public Deliberation,” in Luc Wintgens (ed.),The Theory and Practice of Legislation: Essays in Legisprudence, (2005); “The Rule of Law as the Law of Legislation,” in Luc Wintgens (ed.), Legislation in Context: Essaysin Legisprudence, (2007)

Professor Ivan Krastev

Professor Ivan Krastev is a political scientist and Chairman of the Centre for Liberal Strategies in Sofia, Bulgaria. He is a founding member of the European Council onForeign Relations (www.ecfr.eu) and member of the Trilateral Commission. He is anOpen Society Fellow and the academic director of the Open Century Project of theCentral European University in Budapest. Ivan Krastev was the executive director of the International Commission on the Balkans chaired by former Italian Premier

Minister Giuliano Amato.In the last decade he has been a visiting fellow at St. Antony’s College, Oxford; theWoodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington; CollegiumBudapest; Wissenschaftskolleg, Berlin; Institute of Federalism, University of Fribourg,Switzerland; Institute for Human Sciences, Vienna, Central European University,Budapest and the Remarque Institute, New York University.

Among his publications in English are: Russia and the European Order, The American Interest (2008); The Age of Populism, in Simon Serfaty, ed. A Recast Partnership: Institutional Dimensions of Transatlantic Relations (2008), The Anti-

American Century, eds. Alan McPherson and Ivan Krastev (2007); Shifting Obsessions. Three Essays on Politics of Anti-Corruption (2004); Nationalism after Communism, Lessons Learned eds. Allina Pippidi and Ivan Krastev, (2004). IvanKrastev is a contributor to the op-ed pages to a number of the leading Europeannewspapers including Le Monde, The Wall Street Journal, Financial Times,Deutschland, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Gazeta Wyborcza, Dziennik, and Vedomosti. His articles have also been published in the Journal of Democracy, The

American Interest, Prospect magazine, Russia in Global Affairs, Pro&Contra, and Europe’s World. He is a regular contributor to OpenDemocracy.net. Professor Ivan

Krastev is the editor in chief of the Bulgarian Edition of Foreign Policy.

Professor Justine Lacroix

Professor Justine Lacroix is Deakin Fellow at St Antony’s College, Oxford (2008-9) and Associate Professor at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Her research interests includecontemporary political thought and the normative dimensions of Europeanintegration.

She has published recently L’Europe en procès. Quel patriotisme au-delà desnationalismes? (2004) and La pensée française à l’épreuve de l’Europe (2008). Along with Professor Kalypso Nicolaïdis, she is currently editing a book on European Stories:How National Intellectuals Debate Europe.

Visiting Speakers

169



171

Visiting Speakers

had visiting appointments in various US universities, Paris, Brazil, South Africa, Israel, etc.Professor Lukes is the author of Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work; Individualism

(1973); Power: A Radical View (1986); Marxism and Morality (1985); The CuriousEnlightenment of Professor Caritat: A Comedy of Ideas (1995); and, most recently,

Moral Relativism (2008). In addition, Professor Lukes has produced three collectionsof essays and numerous articles about social theory, political philosophy and

philosophy of the social sciences.Professor Lukes is a Member of the editorial board of the Archives européennes de

sociologie (European Journal of Sociology) since 1972. He has always worked as anintellectual nomad in the borderlands of philosophy and the social sciences. Currentlyhe is working on an English edition of Condorcet's Esquisse d'un tableau historique des

progrès de l'esprit humain and on further research in what may be called 'the sociology

of morals.' Professor Lukes will be working on this at the Wissenschaftskolleg in Berlinnext academic year.

Professor Matsuda Koichiro

Professor Matsuda Koichiro is Professor of Japanese Political Thought at theDepartment of Law and Politics, Rikkyo University, Tokyo. He obtained his PhD in

political science from Tokyo Metropolitan University. His recent book Edo no chishikiKara Meiji no seiji he (From Edo intellectual to Meiji politics) was awarded theSuntory Prize 2008. His publications in English include “Social Order and the Origin

of Language in Tokugawa Political Thought”; Rikkyo Hogaku 63 (2003.3).

Professor Susan Mendus

Professor Susan Mendus studied Classics and Philosophy at the University of Wales,but soon became more interested in Philosophy than in Classics. Her first degree wasin Philosophy and, after graduating, she went to Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, whereshe studied for the B.Phil in Philosophy. From 1986 to 1990, Professor Mendus was

Morrell Fellow in Toleration at York University; from 1995 to 2000, she was Director of the Morrell Centre for the Study of Toleration. Professor Mendus has been Professor

of Political Philosophy at York since 1996, and a Fellow of the British Academy since2004.

Professor Mendus has recently completed two research projects: the first is a bookentitled Politics and Morality in which she asks whether it is possible for politicians tobe morally good or whether, as philosophers from Plato onwards have insisted,

politicians must have dirty hands. The book will be published by Polity Press in late2009. The second project is a development of her 2007 Freilich lectures (ReligiousToleration in an Age of Terrorism) and involves an analysis of the ways in which eventsof 9/11 have (or have not) altered our understanding of and attitude to religioustoleration. The Freilich Lectures have been published in pamphlet form by the

Australian National University.



172


Professor Jan-Werner Müller

Professor Jan-Werner Müller is Associate Professor of Politics at Princeton University.During 2008-9 he is an OSI Fellow at Central European University Budapest. He was

previously a Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, and a Research Fellow at St Antony’s

College, Oxford.He is the author of Constitutional Patriotism (2007), A Dangerous Mind: Carl

Schmitt in Post-War European Thought (2003) and Another Country: GermanIntellectuals, Unification and National Identity (2000). He is currently at work on ahistory of political thought in twentieth century Europe.

Professor Pierre Rosanvallon

Professor Pierre Rosanvallon was born in 1948. He received his doctorate in History

(1978) and a Ph.D in Political Philosophy at the Ecole des Hautes Études en SciencesSociales. He was Senior Research Fellow at the University of Paris IX-Dauphine (from1977 to 1983) where he founded with Jacques Delors the Research Center Travail et Société. He has held the Chair in Early Modern and Modern Political History at theCollège de France since 2001. He has also been Directeur d ètudes at the Ecole desHautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris since 1989. Professor Rosanvallon is alsocurrently the President of the international intellectual workshop La République desidées and the Director of the website www.laviedesidees.fr dedicated to the study of intellectual history.

Professor Rosanvallon’s works on history and democratic theory include a trilologyon the history of representative democracy: a history of universal suffrage in Le Sacredu citoyen: Histoire du suffrage universel en France (1992); a history of representationin Le Peuple introuvable: Histoire de la représentation démocratique en France (1998);and a history of popular sovereignty in La Démocratie inachevée. Histoire de lasouveraineté du peuple en France (2000).

He has also published two volumes on the history of State and Civil Society inFrance, the latter translated as The Demands of Liberty: Civil Society in France sincethe Revolution, (2007). In 2006, he published La Contre- démocratie. La politique à

l’âge de la défiance, translated as Counter Democracy (2008). A volume of essays hasalso been translated into English: Democracy, Past and Future (2006). He has also

published several books on the history of 19th century liberalism (among them, Le Moment Guizot, 1985) and works on the welfare state: The New Social Question(2000). His latest book, La légitimité démocratique: Impartialité, réflexivité, proximité,was published by Le Seuil in September 2008.

Professor Paul Starr

Professor Paul Starr is professor of sociology and public affairs at Princeton Universityand co-founder and co-editor of The American Prospect. He is the author, most recently, of Freedom's Power, on the history and promise of liberalism (2007). Among



173

Visiting Speakers

his other books are The Social Transformation of American Medicine, which received the 1984 Pulitzer Prize for Nonfiction and Bancroft Prize in American History, and The Creation of the Media, which won the 2005 Goldsmith Book Prize. Professor Starr writes on American society and politics, social theory, and both domestic and foreign

policy. In 1990, with Robert Kuttner and Robert Reich, he cofounded The AmericanProspect, a liberal magazine about politics, policy, and ideas. During 1993, while onleave from both Princeton and The American Prospect, he served as a senior advisor in the Clinton White House on health policy.

Professor Wang Shaoguang

Professor Wang gained his Ph.D. in Political Science from Cornell University in 1990.He is currently Professor and Chairman of the Department of Government & Public

Administration for China Studies at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and theChangjiang Professor in the School of Public Policy and Management at TsinghuaUniversity. Professor Wang is also a non-official member of the Hong Kong Government’s Commission on Strategic Development, and the chief editor of TheChina Review, an interdisciplinary journal on greater China.

He taught at Tijiao High School in Wuhan, China from 1972 to 1977 and at YaleUniversity in the United States from 1990 to 2000. His research interests include

political economy, comparative politics, fiscal politics, democratization, and economicand political development in former socialist countries and East Asian countries. He

is the author of many books, including: Failure of Charisma: The Chinese Cultural Revolution in Wuhan (1995), Rationality and Madness: The Masses in the ChineseCultural Revolution (1993), Challenging the Market Myth (1997), The Limits of Decentralization (1997), The Third Sector in Comparative Perspective (1999),Thoughts from the Left Half of the Mind: Collection of Political Economy Papers(2002), Lessons from the Progressive Era of the United States (2002), Ways to Bring Peace and Stability to the Country (2007), and Four Lectures on Democracy (2008).In addition, he has contributed to numerous edited volumes and journals. He hasserved as a consultant to the World Bank, United Nations Development Programme

(UNDP), World Economic Forum, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute(SIPRI), Johnson & Johnson, the Samsung Group, and Rio Tinto.

Professor Zhang Weiying

Professor Zhang is Dean of the Guanghua School of Management of Peking University,Director of Peking University’s e-Business Center, and a leading economist in China.He received a bachelor degree in 1982 from Northwestern University at Xi’an and a D.Phil. in economics in 1994 from Oxford University. Between 1984 and 1990, he was aresearch fellow of the Economic System Reform Institute of China, and heavily involved in economic reform policy making in China. He was the first Chinese economist to

propose the “dual-track price reform” (in 1984). After he graduated from Oxford, he



174


co-founded the China Center for Economic Research (CCER) at Peking University in1994. From 1999 to August 2006, he was the executive associate dean of GuanghuaSchool of Management. His visionary reform has changed business education inChina. He was also the chief architect of the 2003 Peking University faculty system

reform. As a scholar of economics he has published dozens of academic articles and 10

books. His works have had significant impacts on the ongoing enterprise reform policy formulation and the development of economics in China. His opinions of the Chineseeconomy have been frequently reported in media. He was named one of the "10 Peopleof the Year in the Chinese Economy" by CCTV in 2002. In 2008, he was ranked among “30 Economic Figures for 30 Years of the Reform” by China Economic Reform

Association, and “Top Ten Chinese Economists for 30 Years” by China Entrepreneurs

Magazine. He has served as the chief economist for the China Entrepreneurs Forumsince 2001.



175

Other PartICIPaNtS

D Oon ansskis

D K andv

Posso Cin auddD Dimi Bcv

D Cisop Bickon

Posso Vnon Bogdno

D Smil Bos

Ms In Bndl

D Cis Book

D Nicols Bunnin

D Dnil BuPosso ricd Cpln

D fncis Cvnl

D Jn-Pscl Dloz

Posso Nomn Dvis

Posso ann Digon

Posso Joo Clos espd

D Gc espd

Ms Dnu Gon asM Dvid Good

D rcl Mup

D Km Okm

D fnk Pik

Posso Polo Pombni

M hn PoPosso al Pvd

M ton Cuzon Pic

Dm Jssic rwson

Posso Si adm robs

Ld elizb robs

Si Ivo robs

D So Konisi

Posso Vivinn SuPosso Sll Sulwo

D Juli Skoupsk

D adm Swi

Posso alis tdi

Posso tkiko Ki

M Mk tompson

D Pici tonon

Posso hnk d VldD Lil Vignl

Posso andw Vincn




SPONSOrING INStItUtIONS

t ognision o is connc ws susind b cul nd s o numb o insiuions bo insid nd ousid Univsi o Ood. t

includ, in Ood, rom amicn Insiu, consoium o euopn

Sudis Ood, Cn o Poliicl Idologis, Dpmn o Poliics

nd Innionl rlions, Nissn Insiu o Jpns Sudis, euopn

Sudis Cn S anon’s Collg, asin Sudis Cn S anon’s

Collg, Insiu o Cins Sudis, Biis In-Univsi Cin Cn,

Conmpo Cin Sudis Pogmm, euopum, Mison

fnçis d’Ood, Jms Min 21s Cnu Scool nd Modn hiso fcul, nd, ousid Ood, rmqu Insiu Nw yok Univsi. W

nk m ll.

fo inncil nd mil suppo w mos gul o:

special report liberalism east west 2009

Documents