Communitarian and Feminist Conceptions of Justice and the Self
Introduction
Contemporary political theory has been deeply shaped by critiques of liberalism, particularly its emphasis on abstract individualism and universal principles of justice. Two influential strands of critique come from communitarianism and feminist political theory, both of which question liberal assumptions about the self, justice, and morality. While communitarian theorists emphasize the moral importance of community, shared values, and social practices, feminist theorists highlight gender, power, and the private sphere as neglected dimensions of political theory.
This article examines communitarian and feminist conceptions through the works of Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel, and Susan Moller Okin. These thinkers offer distinct but intersecting critiques of liberal theory, especially Rawlsian liberalism, and their arguments form a key part of the Debates in Political Theory paper in the Delhi University MA Political Science curriculum.
Conceptual Background: Liberalism and Its Critics
Liberal political theory, particularly in its Rawlsian form, presents justice as a matter of fair principles chosen by rational individuals abstracted from their social identities. The liberal self is typically conceived as autonomous, rational, and prior to its ends. While this framework aims at impartiality and fairness, critics argue that it neglects the social and historical contexts that shape moral reasoning.
Communitarian and feminist theorists challenge this abstraction. They argue that individuals are socially embedded beings whose identities, values, and choices are deeply influenced by communal norms and power relations. In this sense, both approaches question the liberal separation between the public and private spheres and the idea of a morally neutral state.
Communitarianism: Core Assumptions
Communitarianism is not a unified doctrine but a family of arguments united by skepticism toward liberal individualism. Communitarians argue that moral values and political principles arise from shared traditions and social practices rather than abstract reasoning. Justice, from this perspective, must be interpreted within specific cultural and historical contexts.
Communitarians do not necessarily reject individual rights, but they insist that rights gain meaning only within a moral community. This emphasis on social embeddedness stands in contrast to liberal universalism and has important implications for debates on justice, citizenship, and democracy.
Michael Walzer: Justice as Spheres and Social Meaning
Michael Walzer is one of the most influential communitarian thinkers. In Spheres of Justice, Walzer argues that justice is a matter of distributing social goods according to their social meanings. Different goods—such as political power, education, and money—belong to different “spheres” and should be distributed by distinct principles.
Walzer rejects the idea of a single universal principle of justice, such as equality or utility. Instead, he emphasizes complex equality, where dominance in one sphere should not translate into dominance in others. For example, wealth should not buy political power. Walzer’s approach highlights the contextual nature of justice and challenges liberal theories that rely on abstract distributive principles.
Michael Sandel: The Critique of the Unencumbered Self
Michael Sandel offers a philosophical critique of liberalism’s conception of the self. In Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, Sandel argues that Rawlsian liberalism assumes an “unencumbered self”, detached from its social roles, commitments, and communal identities.
Sandel contends that individuals are constituted by their attachments to family, community, and tradition. Moral reasoning, therefore, cannot be fully abstract or procedural. Justice must account for the values embedded in communal life. Sandel’s critique challenges the liberal priority of the right over the good and calls for a more substantive moral politics.
Feminist Political Theory: Core Concerns
Feminist political theory shares communitarianism’s critique of abstract individualism but adds a distinct focus on gender, power, and patriarchy. Feminist theorists argue that traditional political theory has ignored or marginalized women’s experiences, particularly in the private sphere of family and care.
By exposing the political nature of the private sphere, feminist theory challenges the liberal distinction between public and private. It emphasizes that justice cannot be achieved without addressing gendered power relations embedded in social institutions such as marriage, family, and labor markets.
Susan Moller Okin: Justice, Gender, and the Family
Susan Moller Okin provides one of the most systematic feminist critiques of liberal political theory. In Justice, Gender, and the Family, Okin argues that theories of justice fail if they ignore the family as a site of inequality and domination.
While Okin remains broadly committed to liberal ideals of equality and autonomy, she criticizes liberalism for treating the family as a private, non-political institution. Okin demonstrates how gender inequality within the family shapes individuals’ opportunities and undermines fair equality of opportunity. Her work bridges liberal and feminist perspectives, calling for a rethinking of justice that includes the private sphere.
Comparative Analysis: Communitarian vs Feminist Conceptions
Although communitarian and feminist theories share critiques of liberal abstraction, they diverge in important ways. Communitarians focus on shared values and cultural traditions, sometimes risking the reinforcement of oppressive norms. Feminist theorists, by contrast, are deeply critical of traditions that sustain gender inequality.
Walzer and Sandel emphasize community and social meaning, whereas Okin emphasizes justice and equality within intimate and domestic relations. Feminist theory thus introduces a critical lens that questions whether communities themselves are just.
Criticism and Counter-Criticism
Communitarianism has been criticized for relativism and for potentially justifying oppressive practices in the name of tradition. Feminist critics argue that community-based norms often marginalize women and minorities.
Conversely, feminist theory is sometimes criticized for relying on liberal principles it seeks to critique. Okin, for example, is accused of selectively defending liberal equality while rejecting liberal neutrality. Defenders respond that this reflects the need for critical engagement rather than wholesale rejection of liberalism.
Contemporary Relevance
Communitarian and feminist conceptions remain highly relevant in debates over multiculturalism, identity politics, gender justice, and democratic citizenship. Questions about cultural rights, family policy, and social recognition continue to draw on these theoretical frameworks.
In political theory, these perspectives enrich debates on justice by emphasizing context, power, and social relations, making them indispensable for contemporary analysis.
Conclusion
Communitarian and feminist conceptions offer powerful critiques of liberal political theory by challenging its abstract individualism and moral neutrality. Through the works of Walzer, Sandel, and Okin, political theory gains a deeper understanding of how justice is shaped by community, gender, and social relations. These perspectives do not merely reject liberalism but push it toward a more inclusive and socially grounded conception of justice.
Suggested Readings
- Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice
- Michael Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice
- Susan Moller Okin, Justice, Gender, and the Family
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Communitarianism”
- Iris Marion Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference
FAQs
Q1. What is the main communitarian critique of liberalism?
It argues that liberalism ignores the social embeddedness of individuals.
Q2. How does Walzer define justice?
As distribution according to social meanings within distinct spheres.
Q3. What does Sandel mean by the ‘unencumbered self’?
A liberal conception of a self detached from social commitments.
Q4. Why is Okin critical of the public–private divide?
Because it hides gender inequality within the family.
Q5. Do feminist and communitarian theories reject liberalism completely?
No, they critically engage with liberalism rather than fully rejecting it.
Q6. Why is this topic important for DU exams?
It tests critical understanding of alternative conceptions of justice.
