Three ways to understanding liberty?

notes on the neo-republican critique of liberalism

Abstract

Contextualization: There is a substantial debate on republicanism in contemporary political theory. Republicanism is one of the most valuable traditions from Western political thought. This tradition was revived as autonomous in relation to liberalism by thinkers such as Quentin Skinner, Philip Pettit and Maurizio Viroli, who are inserted in a tradition of political thought that is conventionally called neo-republicanism. The central point of the neo-republican argument is the criticism of the liberal concept of liberty.

Objective: We seek to reconstruct the liberal argument about the concept of liberty in order to compare it with the neo-republican concept. Thus, in the end, an allegedly republican critique of the neo-republican argument is articulated.

Methodology: Taking an overview of the idea of liberty in liberal thinkers, as well as articulating this concept in the republican tradition, a philosophical argument was developed demonstrating supposed weaknesses of neo-republican criticism.

Contributions: Recovering the republican tradition from its classical origins, we seek to demonstrate that the critical argument towards liberalism, present in neo-republicanism, ends up moving this thought away from the classical foundations of the republican tradition.