Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T19:02:15.863Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rawls's “Political” Philosophy and American Democracy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

George Klosko
George Klosko
Affiliation:
University of Virginia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

John Rawls has recently argued that political philosophy can significantly contribute to making democratic societies stable. He seeks moral principles that can ground what he calls an overlapping consensus and argues that his well-known principles of justice can serve in this capacity. I criticize both Rawls's general claims about the role of political philosophy and his particular defense of the principles of justice. Both arguments commit Rawls to specific empirical claims about existing liberal societies that are highly questionable. In particular, the Kantian moral views that Rawls believes to be central to liberal culture are controverted by extensive empirical research on the actual beliefs of liberal citizens. Despite the problems with Rawls's arguments, I suggest that a rather different overlapping consensus appears to contribute to stable democracies. This centers on support of the political system rather than more substantive moral principles.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 87 , Issue 2 , June 1993 , pp. 348 - 359
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baier, Kurt. 1989. “Justice and the Aims of Political Philosophy.” Ethics 99:771–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnum, David G., and Sullivan, John L.. 1989. “Attitudinal Tolerance and Political Freedom in Britain.” British Journal of Political Science 19:604–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnum, David G., and Sullivan, John L.. 1990. “The Elusive Foundations of Political Freedom in Britain and the United States.” Journal of Politics 52:719–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benn, Stanley I., and Peters, Richard S.. 1959. Social Principles and the Democratic State. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Budge, Ian. 1970. Agreement and the Stability of Democracy. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
Citrin, Jack. 1974. “Comment: The Political Relevance of Trust in Government.” American Political Science Review 68:973–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easton, David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1975. “A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support.” British Journal of Political Science 5:435–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., Luttbeg, Norman R., and Tedin, Kent L.. 1991. American Public Opinion. 4th ed.New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Finkel, Steven E., Muller, Edward N., and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 1989. “Economic Crisis, Incumbent Performance, and Regime Support: A Comparison of Longitudinal Data from West Germany and Costa Rica.” British Journal of Political Science 19:329–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galston, William. 1989. “Pluralism and Social Unity.” Ethics 99:711–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galston, William. 1991. Liberal Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1988. “Political Intolerance and Political Repression During the McCarthy Red Scare.” American Political Science Review 82:511–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1989a. “The Policy Consequences of Political Intolerance: Political Repression During the Vietnam War Era.” Journal of Politics 51:13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1989b. “The Structure of Attitudinal Tolerance in the United States.” British Journal of Political Science 19:562–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, Robert J. 1978. Political Repression in Modern America. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.Google Scholar
Hampton, Jean. 1989. “Should Political Philosophy Be Done Without Metaphysics?” Ethics 99:791–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klosko, George. 1992. The Principle of Fairness and Political Obligation. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Kukathas, Chandran, and Pettit, Philip. 1990. Rawls: A Theory of Justice and Its Critics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Kuklinski, James H., Riggle, Ellen, Ottati, Victor, Schwartz, Norbert, and Wyer, Robert S.. 1991. “The Cognitive and Affective Bases of Political Tolerance Judgments.” American Journal of Political Science 35:1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, and Tyler, Tom R.. 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipset, Seymour M. 1981. Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. Rev. ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
McClosky, Herbert. 1964. “Consensus and Ideology in American Politics.” American Political Science Review 58:361–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClosky, Herbert, and Brill, Alida. 1983. Dimensions of Tolerance. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
McClosky, Herbert, and Zaller, John. 1984. The American Ethos. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macedo, Stephen. 1990. “The Politics of Justification.” Political Theory 18:280–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, Michael. 1970. “The Social Cohesion of Liberal Democracy.” American Sociological Review 35:423–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1972. Utilitarianism, Liberty, Representative Government. Ed. Acton, H. B.. London: Dent & Sons.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur. 1974a. “Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970.” American Political Science Review 68:951–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur. 1974b. “Rejoinder to ‘Comment’ by Jack Citrin: Political Discontent or Ritualism?” American Political Science Review 68:989–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, Edward N. 1977. Aggressive Political Participation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Muller, Edward N., and Jukam, Thomas O.. 1977. “On the Meaning of Political Support.” American Political Science Review 71:1561–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, Edward N., Jukam, Thomas O., and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 1982. “Diffuse Political Support and Antisystem Political Behavior: A Comparative Analysis.” American Journal of Political Science 26:240–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paris, David C. 1991. “Moral Education and the ‘Tie That Binds’ in Liberal Political Theory.” American Political Science Review 85:875–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prothro, James W., and Grigg, Charles M.. 1960. “Fundamental Principles of Democracy: Bases of Agreement and Disagreement.” Journal of Politics 22:276–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1958. “Justice as Fairness.” Philosophical Review 67:164–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1980. “Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory.” Journal of Philosophy 77:515–72.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1982. “The Basic Liberties and Their Priority.” In The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, ed. MacMurrin, Sterling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1985. “Justice as Fairness: Political, Not Metaphysical.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14:223–51.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1987. “The Idea of an Overlapping Consensus.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7:1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1988. “The Priority of Right and Ideas of the Good.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 17:251–76.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1989. “The Domain of the Political and Overlapping Consensus.” New York University Law Review 64:233–55.Google Scholar
Schenck v. United States. 1919. 249 U.S. 47.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Tetlock, Philip E., Glaser, James M., Green, Donald Philip, and Hout, Michael. 1989. “Principled Tolerance and the American Mass Public.” British Journal of Political Science 19:25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stouffer, Samuel. 1955. Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John. L., Piereson, James, and Marcus, George E.. 1979. “An Alternative Conceptualization of Political Tolerance: Illusory Increases 1950's–1970's.” American Political Science Review 73:781–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, John. L., Piereson, James, and Marcus, George E.. 1982. Political Tolerance and American Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John L., Shamir, Michal, Walsh, Patrick, and Roberts, Nigel S.. 1985. Political Tolerance in Context. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
Tocqueville, Alexis de. 1969. Democracy in America. Trans. Lawrence, George. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom. 1988. “What Is Procedural Justice? Criteria Used by Citizens To Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures.” Law and Society Review 22:103–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, Tom. 1990. Why People Obey the Law. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Weatherford, M. Stephen. 1992. “Measuring Political Legitimacy.” American Political Science Review 86:149–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, James D. 1981. “Political Disaffection.” In The Handbook of Political Behavior, vol. 4, ed. Long, Samuel L.. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar