Abstract
In my response I take issue mainly with the conception of ‘political liberalism’, as defended by David Rasmussen, and of ‘civic republicanism’, as championed by Bernard Flynn. In opposition to the interest-based individualism of the former, and the state-centered conception of the latter, I support the perspective of an ethically sustained and pluralistic democracy, where democratic politics means the open-ended striving for the ‘good life’ of all people.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.