| Political liberals aim to provide an account of how to achieve political unity under conditions of ethical pluralism. To that end, they invite us to think about the theoretical endeavor in a novel way: normative arguments are to be crafted out of the raw materials latent in the public political culture. From this methodological innovation derive two advantages---one epistemological, one motivational. Political liberals thus promise citizens a way to avoid intractable metaphysical debates over the meaning and value of life while identifying moral motives that can sustain a liberal regime with minimal coercion.; My doubts about the adequacy of political liberalism emerge when political liberals take up foreign affairs. Any theory that pretends to capture the right way for us to think about politics generally must help us to think through the full range of our political experience, so political liberals must look beyond liberal society. The central criticism emerging from my research is that, when theorizing foreign affairs, political liberals consistently violate their own methodological commitments as well as substantive liberal ideals. Indeed, despite their commitment to grounding theory in political culture, a universalizing instinct seems overriding in most political liberal treatments of foreign affairs. Like their metaphysical forebears, political liberals believe liberal values and institutions to be "the best hope for the species;" however, their mode of theorizing makes it impossible to support this conviction with good reasons.; Holding the commitment to grounding theory in political culture fixed, I argue that a more coherent political liberal treatment of foreign affairs begins from the recognition of two things. First, in moving from theorizing domestic politics to theorizing foreign affairs, the political culture and, consequently, the theorist's moral resources change. Second, the liberal tradition includes instincts---e.g., wariness of concentrated power and suspicion of uniformity---that countervail against universalism. Ultimately, a more tenable political liberal account of foreign affairs must be more forbearing, pausing at the frontier of liberal society to invite non-liberal others into conversation, the shared understandings emerging from which must serve as the basis of any claim to legitimate authority. |
