No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 April 2017
Liberal political theorists commend a comparatively orderly form of life. It is one in which individuals and groups who care about different things, and live in different ways, nevertheless share an overriding commitment to liberty and toleration, together with an ability to resolve conflicts and disagreements in ways that do not violate these values. Both citizens and states are taken to be capable of negotiating points of contention without resorting to forms of coercion such as abuse, blackmail, brainwashing, intimidation, torture or other types of violence. In explaining what makes such a state of affairs possible, such theorists have tended to present the citizens of liberal polities as more or less rational individuals who are aware of the advantages of a pluralist, yet co-operative way of life, and understand what it takes to maintain them. Liberalism works best, they have suggested, when, and because, individuals understand its benefits, and therefore act broadly in accordance with the norms it prescribes.
1 See for example Bubeck, Diemut, Care, Gender and Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Prress, 1995Google Scholar; Held, Virginia, The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global (Oxford University Press, 2005).Google Scholar
2 O'Neill, Onora, A Question of Trust: The BBC Reith Lectures 2002 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002).Google Scholar
3 Margalit, Avishai, The Decent Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
4 See for example, Massumi, Brian (ed.), The Politics of Everyday Fear (University of Minnesota Press, 1993).Google Scholar
5 Rorty, Richard, Achieving our Country. Leftist Thought in Twentieth-century America (Cambridge Mass., 1999)Google Scholar
6 Boltanski, Luc and Thévenot, Laurent, De la justification: les économies de la grandeur (Paris, 1991).Google Scholar
7 Spelman, Elizabeth, ‘Anger and Insubordination’, in Garry, A. & Pearsall, M., Women, Knowledge & Reality: Explorations in Femimist Philosophy (Boston & London: Unwin Hyman, 1989).Google Scholar
8 Agamben, Giorgio, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life (Stanford, Stamford University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
9 Nussbaum, Martha, Upheavals of Thought (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
10 Brennan, Teresa, The Transmission of Affect (Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 2004).Google Scholar
11 The image of an emotion ‘sticking’ to a belief is used by Ahmed, Sara in The Cultural Politics of Emotion (Edinburgh, 2004).Google Scholar
12 Nussbaum, , Upheavals of Thought, 33.Google Scholar
13 Spelman, Elizabeth, Fruits of Sorrow: Framing Our Attention to Suffering (Beacon Press, 1998).Google Scholar