Abstract

This thesis explores Rawls's and Kymlicka's arguments for political liberalism as major liberal defenses against the communitarian critique. It is done through the conceptual analysis and comparison of their versions of liberalism in terms of the five communitarian themes---the relationship between the self and community, individualism, the right vs. the good, neutrality, and self-development. ;Rawls and Kymlicka try to accommodate communitarian themes and at the same time deflect communitarian criticism, by adopting a contextualist approach. In his later works, Rawls argues that his principles of justice can be defended in contextual terms as the most reasonable doctrine for the contemporary society characterized by 'the fact of pluralism.' His strategy is the distinction between public or political and nonpublic or private. His self-conscious movement away from moral to political theory reflects a de-emphasis of the Kantian elements so prominent in A Theory of Justice and a seemingly communitarian effort to find and justify the moral foundations of contemporary liberalism. ;Kymlicka's response depends on his grounding liberal principles in terms of our essential interest in living a good life and emphasizing the value of cultural membership as a context of choice for the fulfillment of this interest. Against the accepted wisdom of liberals, by finding in liberalism's thin communitarianism grounds for the protection of cultural minorities through collective cultural rights, Kymlicka tries to justify and defend liberal political principles against communitarian criticisms. ;My argument is that even though Rawls and Kymlicka attempt to transcend universalism, formalism, and metaphysical abstraction, the liberal ideal of the person as free and equal, the liberal culture of choice based on individual autonomy, liberal individualism, the priority of the right over the good, and liberal neutrality are still their firm bases. Since they sustain and/or retreat to, liberal principles, their liberalisms encounter uneasy theoretical difficulties as contextualist accounts of justice. Therefore, Rawls and Kymlicka cannot blunt the force of the communitarian attack effectively. Most simply, in their justification of their theories and in their responses to the communitarian critique Rawls and Kymlicka justify their liberalisms with liberalism.