Search results

Communitarianism has both a general sense, with a long history in social and political thought, and a specific connection to the "liberal-communitarian debate" of the 1980s and 1990s. In the general sense, anyone who believes that community is somehow vital to a worthwhile life - and is therefore a good to be protected against various threats - is a communitarian. Such a person may be either left-wing or rightwing politically. Communitarianism, in this sense, began to take shape as a self-conscious way of thinking about society and politics in the late 19th century. According to one line of thought that developed at the time, the primary threat to community is the movement from the settled, family-focused life of villages and small towns to the unsettled, individualistic life of commerce and cities, which may lead to greater affluence and personal freedom, but at the cost of alienation, isolation, and rootlessness. TONNIES, with his distinction between Gemeinschaft (community) and Gesellschaft (association or society), has been especially influential in this regard. Gemeinschaft, as he defines it, is an intimate, organic, and traditional form of human association; Gesellschaft is impersonal, mechanical, and rational. To exchange the former for the latter, then, is to trade warmth and support for coldness and calculation.

This article presents 'Communitarianism' in political theory as a 'Blind Alley'. This is on the grounds that it is difficult to find a political theorist who is willing to be called a communitarian, because the literature lacks any well delineated concept of community, and because a number of awkward theoretical questions, notably about power, arise which are not clearly addressed within the literature. Furthermore, communitarianism has been a blind alley for feminists. Although feminism and so-called communitarianism share an opposition to some other varieties of social and political theory, the apparent affinities between feminism and communitarianism mask significant differences.

Argues that communitarianism in political theory represents a "blind alley," based on the grounds that it is difficult to find a political theorist who is willing to be called a communitarian, because the literature lacks any well-delineated concept of community, & because a number of awkward theoretical questions, notably about power, arise that are not clearly addressed. Communitarianism has also been a blind alley for feminists. Although feminism & so-called communitarianism share an opposition to some other varieties of social & political theory, the apparent affinities between them mask significant differences. 30 References. Adapted from the source document.

Communitarianism and republicanism are closely related schools of thought - so closely related that friend and foe alike sometimes conflate them. The relationship is evident in their Latin roots: communitarians are concerned with communitas, the common life of people who form a community, and republicans are devoted to the res publica, the good of the public. Of the two, however, only republicanism traces its lineage as well as its name to ancient Rome. Indeed, scholars often look beyond Rome to the philosophers and city-states of ancient Greece, particularly Aristotle and Sparta, for the origins of republicanism. For the origins of communitarianism, though, one need look no farther back than the nineteenth century, and it is only since the 1980s that the term 'communitarian' has gained its present currency as a result of the so-called liberal-communitarian debate.

Classical/radical communitarians argue that the community is morally supreme - whenever there is conflict between the interests of the individual and those of the community, the interests of the community come first. This is called the community primacy thesis. Kwame Gyekye, a reputable African philosopher, has argued otherwise. He believes that it is extreme and hyperbolic when radical communitarians emphasize the moral supremacy of the community and its values over the individual's (morality). He proposes moderate communitarianism, a theory, he believes, maintains the well-being of the community as a whole, and at the same time gives equal recognition to the individual and his or her rights. Moderate communitarianism balances responsibilities with rights. In this article, we argue that Gyekye's moderate communitarianism re-echo's the radical version he criticizes and rejects.Keywords: Communitarianism, individual, community, rights, duties/responsibilities, autonomy, individual good, common good