Abstract:
This study examines critiques from several strands of contemporary political theory toward Rawls’ political theory. These critiques converge to suggest that, although Rawls claims that his theory is political, it would be considered a non-political or anti-political theory. This study aims to analyze these objections to the inadequacy of Rawls’ theory as political theory to understand the limits and scope of this critical interpretation. To do so, this research will analyze the criticisms of Rawlsian theory that have been formulated by Habermas, Walzer, and Mouffe. The central question is to understand if Rawls’ theory, which is considered by many as responsible for contributing to the revitalization of contemporary political theory, would ultimately be a non-political theory. This study intends to evaluate the arguments that distance the Rawlsian project from the political realm, especially from public political discussion and political conflicts. The defended hypothesis is that a political interpretation of Rawlsian theory is justifiable as it recognizes the existence of deep political conflicts and considers the public political culture of pluralistic societies.
Keywords:
Normative Political Theory
;
Rawlsian Justice
;
Political Constructivism
;
Political Conflict