"Libertarians recognize the inevitable pluralism of the modern world and for that reason assert that individual liberty is at least part of the common good"
About this Quote
Palmer’s line is a quiet act of rhetorical jujitsu: it tries to rebrand libertarianism from a lone-wolf creed into a civic-minded philosophy built for a messy, diverse society. The key move is “inevitable pluralism.” He’s not celebrating diversity as a vibe; he’s treating it as a hard constraint of modern life - different religions, values, lifestyles, identities, and ambitions bumping into each other in shared institutions. If pluralism can’t be wished away, then any political theory premised on a single, enforceable moral consensus starts to look not just illiberal but unrealistic.
The subtext is defensive and strategic. Libertarians are often painted as indifferent to “the common good,” as if freedom is merely a private luxury. Palmer counters by arguing that liberty isn’t an alternative to social cohesion; it’s one ingredient of it. “At least part” is doing careful work here: it signals moderation, an attempt to sound reasonable rather than absolutist. He concedes that communities can pursue shared aims, but insists they can’t do so by overriding individual choice without shredding the very peace pluralism requires.
Context matters: this is the post-Cold War, late-20th-century liberalism-versus-communitarianism debate, filtered through culture wars and expanding state capacity. Palmer is pitching libertarianism as the political operating system for disagreement: a framework that doesn’t demand we settle the deepest questions before we can live together.
The subtext is defensive and strategic. Libertarians are often painted as indifferent to “the common good,” as if freedom is merely a private luxury. Palmer counters by arguing that liberty isn’t an alternative to social cohesion; it’s one ingredient of it. “At least part” is doing careful work here: it signals moderation, an attempt to sound reasonable rather than absolutist. He concedes that communities can pursue shared aims, but insists they can’t do so by overriding individual choice without shredding the very peace pluralism requires.
Context matters: this is the post-Cold War, late-20th-century liberalism-versus-communitarianism debate, filtered through culture wars and expanding state capacity. Palmer is pitching libertarianism as the political operating system for disagreement: a framework that doesn’t demand we settle the deepest questions before we can live together.
Quote Details
| Topic | Freedom |
|---|
More Quotes by Tom
Add to List
