Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:02:31.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Freedom and Authority: Beyond the Precepts of Liberalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Larry M. Preston
Larry M. Preston*
Affiliation:
Northern Arizona University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Both liberal theorists and their critics have been unable to reconcile successfully respect for individual freedom and autonomy with a system of legitimate political authority. Liberal theory fails because its system of rights and representative institutions is particularistic, favoring the interests of restricted individuals and groups. Nonliberal theory threatens individuals' freedom by having political authority exercised in the name of a dubious, real will. Present liberal and nonliberal theory continues to reflect these problems.

This article is an effort to present a view of political authority that respects individual freedom and is legitimate, supporting the interests of all citizens. The failure of liberal and nonliberal theory to achieve this reconciliation is believed to result from their excessively ambiguous, incomplete views of central issues—freedom, authority, and normative reasoning—and a related tendency to examine these problems in isolation. The analysis presented here proposes a more complete view of their meaning and integrates this understanding into a conception of legitimate political authority. The conclusion seriously challenges the view of political legitimacy presented by liberal theory and suggests that a different set of problems must be addressed if political authority is to be legitimate and support individuals' freedom.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 77 , Issue 3 , September 1983 , pp. 666 - 674
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1983

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

Ackerman, B. A. Social justice in the liberal state. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Berlin, I. Two concepts of liberty. London: Oxford University Press, 1958.Google Scholar
Emmet, D. Universalizability and moral judgment. Philosophical Quarterly, 1963, 73, 214–218.Google Scholar
Feinberg, J. Social philosophy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Gewirth, A. Positive “ethics” and normative “science.” Philosophical Review, 1960, 69, 311–325.Google Scholar
Gewirth, A. The generalization principle. Philosophical Review, 1964, 73, 229–242.Google Scholar
Gewirth, A. Reason and morality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Gutmann, A. Liberal equality. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. Legitimation crisis. Boston: Beacon Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Hare, R. M. The language of morals. New York: Oxford University Press, 1952.Google Scholar
Hare, R. M. Freedom and reason. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. The road to serfdom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. Leviathan. Cleveland: Meridian Books, 1963. (Originally published, 1651.)Google Scholar
Kalleberg, A. L., & Preston, L. M. Normative political analysis and the problem of justification: the cognitive status of basic political norms. Journal of Politics, 1975, 73, 650–684.Google Scholar
Lindblom, C. E. The intelligence of democracy. New York: Free Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Locke, J. Two treatises of government, 2d Ed. Laslett, P. (Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Lowi, T. J. The end of liberalism. New York: W.W. Norton, 1969.Google Scholar
MacCallum, G. Jr. Negative and positive freedom. Philosophical Review, 1967, 76, 321–334.Google Scholar
MacPherson, C. B. Democratic theory: essays in retrieval. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.Google Scholar
McConnell, G. Private power and American democracy. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1966.Google Scholar
Marcuse, H. One dimensional man. Boston: Beacon Press, 1961.Google Scholar
Marcuse, H. Repressive tolerance. In Wolff, R. P., Moore, B. Jr., & Marcuse, H., A critique of pure tolerance. Boston: Beacon Press, 1963.Google Scholar
Marx, K. The economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. Struik, D. J. (Ed.). New York: International Publishers, 1964.Google Scholar
Marx, K., & Engels, F. Manifesto of the Communist Party. In Feuer, L. S. (Ed.). Basic writings on politics and philosophy: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. On liberty. Shields, C. (Ed.). Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1956.Google Scholar
Nozick, R. Anarchy, state, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books, 1974.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, F. Dimensions of freedom. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1961.Google Scholar
Popper, K. The open society and its enemies. London: G. Routledge, 1945.Google Scholar
Preston, L. M. Individual and political freedom. Polity, 1982, 15, 72–89.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. A theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Reimann, J. In defense of political philosophy. Evanston, Ill.: Harper and Row, 1972.Google Scholar
Rousseau, J. J. The social contract. In The social contract and discourses. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1930a.Google Scholar
Rousseau, J. J. A discourse on the origin of inequality. In The social contract and discourses. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1930b.Google Scholar
Singer, M. Generalization in ethics. Mind, 1955, 64, 361–375.Google Scholar
Singer, M. Generalization in ethics. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1961.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. The man versus the state. Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Printers, 1954.Google Scholar
Wolfe, A. The limits of legitimacy. New York: Free Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Wolff, R. P. In defense of anarchism. Evanston, Ill.: Harper and Row, 1970.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.