This is a paper I wrote in 2017 for my Liberalism and its Critics class. There are similarities between the Communitarian and Feminist critiques of Liberalism, and the Anarchist critiques are quite different. While putting these three together in a week may seem quite strange, it does make some sense as they are often critiques from the left.
Feminist critiques of Liberalism tend to fall on two of Liberalism’s main claims, the private and public divide and making the individual the highest value. Feminism states there should not be a divide between the public and the private as the private sphere is where the patriarchy can continue to be perpetuated. Feminism states keeping the private sphere out of the public light allows men to maintain their dominance over women. On individualism, Feminism states there cannot be true individualism for women as women cannot see themselves as true individuals because of how women are genetically linked to birth. Feminism states only men can see themselves as true individuals, and perpetuating individualism is a source of patriarchy.
Communitarians critique Liberalism in similar ways Feminism does, but without any gendered language. Communitarians argue Liberalism’s view of each individual creating their own conception of the Good is not how people should create their own conception of the Good. Further, Communitarians state it is impossible for an individual to create their own conception of the good. Communitarians state the community should come together to synthesize a conception of the Good that everyone can live by. Communitarians believe this is the best way to live by because no one can create a truly unique conception of the good, and if everyone creates their own version of the Good, there will be competing versions. Competing versions of the Good will lead to social conflict. A society should not just tolerate competing conceptions of the Good but should come together to create a complete Good.
Anarchists criticize Liberalism from a complete different side. Liberalism states the only legitimate government is one which derives authority from the consent of the governed, which is why Liberalism advocates for a representative government. Anarchists counter this argument stating any form of domination is illegitimate. No one can consent to be dominated, therefore no one can consent to be governed as governance is domination. The act of voting is a false choice because there is never going to be a “no government” choice.
The links between Feminism and Anarchism are deeper than the surface might show. There are Anarcho-Feminists, who connect patriarchy as a form of domination. There are Anarcho-communists and there is no shortage of Feminists who advocate Marxist ideologies. There are Anarcho-capitalists and a few Feminists, like Christina Hoff-Sommers, who say the way to true equality is through capitalism. The differences between the two ideologies lie in most Feminists attempt to use the state to further their goals, where an Anarchist would argue the state itself was the problem.
Communitarians don’t seem to say much of anything on the state. The Communitarian stance seems to be state-neutral, only talking about the community, in direct opposition to the Anarchist view. Anarchists might state the community synthesizing a conception of the Good to be a form of domination, as the community has made a conception of the Good barring the individual from forming his or her own conception of the Good.
[…] can be used in Chapter 21 and those in the guard like in Chapter […]
[…] The counter to the previous two chapters is the same as any low thrust, to pass back with the…
how much cbd drops for depression
how many mg of cbd ointment for pain
where can i buy cbd oil in the us
0 Comments