Abstract
Anthony Langlois has recently charged that a central claim of my book Republicanism in the Modern World about modern republicanism's distinctiveness when compared to the liberalisms of John Rawls and Will Kymlicka cannot be extended to all varieties of liberalism. In particular, he suggests that modern republicanism may be best thought of as a form of perfectionist liberalism. I disagree with this characterisation for two main reasons. The first concerns the difference between the scope and robustness of republican and liberal conceptions of liberty. The second focuses on the difference in the intensity and the object of the virtues and values that accompany republican liberty as non-domination.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
