Ideological communitarianism Postliberalism contends that liberalism, in both its
economic and
social forms, weakens social and communal bonds that contribute to human well-being. A central idea in postliberal thought is that individuals are shaped by their social and cultural contexts rather than existing as purely autonomous agents. Postliberals argue that the liberal emphases on
individual rights and freedoms have diminished the roles of community, family, and
tradition in fostering meaning and belonging. They posit that a stable society requires a shared sense of purpose and commitment to the common good, which they claim liberalism has not sufficiently provided. Postliberals reference
social contract theorists such as
Thomas Hobbes and
John Locke, as well as figures like
John Stuart Mill and
John Rawls, to argue that liberalism promotes an
individualism that they see as incompatible with human sociability. Patrick Deneen contends that liberalism encourages individuals to approach commitments and relationships with flexibility, treating them as interchangeable and subject to renegotiation, leading to weaker social ties.
Pluralism Postliberals critique the liberal conception of the
state as a neutral mediator, arguing instead that it should actively promote an ideal vision of social well-being grounded in the values and traditions of the community it serves. They promote political
opposition to immigration and
cultural diversity while advocating for conservative institutions like the
nuclear family and religion. Postliberals reject a value-free state, arguing it should actively foster social cohesion and the common good. Liberal theorists such as John Rawls have framed liberalism as a system in which the state remains neutral on personal values. In contrast, Deneen argues that neutrality is an illusion, asserting that every
social order is built on fundamental beliefs and commitments. Postliberals emphasize a political approach centered on the
common good, seeking to balance
individual and group rights with social responsibilities. Some critique economic liberalism, advocating for greater regulation and social
embeddedness, while others emphasize the role of cultural traditions and
national identity in maintaining social cohesion.
Free market Postliberal critics of economic liberalism argue that economic liberalism has contributed to the concentration of wealth and power among a small segment of society, leading to
economic stratification between
elites and the
working class. They advocate for
market intervention by the state, including
protectionist policies and measures aimed at reducing economic inequality, protecting
labor rights, and
community development.
John Gray has argued that free markets and
globalization have weakened the foundations of modern market economies. Similarly, Patrick Deneen contends that liberalism leads to a cycle of state expansion to manage social
fragmentation, requiring legal and administrative mechanisms to replace communal institutions such as
schools, healthcare, and
charitable organizations, ultimately diminishing a shared sense of community and
collective identity.
International relations Postliberal perspectives on
international relations and
global politics have been developed by scholars such as
John Milbank,
Adrian Pabst, and Patrick Deneen. Postliberalism attributes contemporary challenges in international relations to what it sees as an intensification of liberalism. In contrast to
John Ikenberry's view that the
liberal international order is threatened by
illiberal forces and requires further liberalization to counteract these challenges, postliberals interpret the rise of illiberal movements as a reaction to what they perceive as contradictions within liberalism itself. Pabst suggests that the emergence of
populism and
civilizational states reflects a response to global politics that, in this view, prioritizes
utopian ideals over national and local concerns, emphasizing individual identity at the expense of collective belonging. From this perspective, liberalism no longer advances a substantive common good, resulting in ambiguity that both promotes individual freedoms and struggles to manage their broader consequences at national and international levels. Some scholars argue that the United States-led liberal order, established after
World War II, follows a trajectory similar to domestic liberalism. Milbank and Pabst argue that
U.S. imperialism promotes liberal principles to nation-states, influenced by American individualism and
voluntaryism, and is pursued through imperial means to achieve national objectives. They argue that since the 1970s,
global governance has strengthened state power and expanded individual freedoms while reducing local decision-making and distancing authority from national democratic institutions. According to their analysis, "
Enlightenment liberalism" has the potential to frame conflict as an unlimited struggle against perceived enemies of civilization—an idea associated with
Carl Schmitt. They suggest that this
universalist liberal expansion has contributed to the formation of civilizational blocs. == Criticism ==