After Liberalism
In: Millennium: journal of international studies, Band 38, Heft 3, S. 553-560
ISSN: 1477-9021
Taking Daniel Deudney and John Ikenberry's demand for a 'more selfconscious and robust liberal statecraft' as its point of departure, this article considers whether this demand can be realised in practice, given the apparent contradiction between a desire for a self-conscious Liberalism and a desire for a robust Liberalism. By weaving a path through the work of Deudney, Ikenberry and Kant, and through the film District 9, this article suggests that Liberalism and especially Liberal Internationalism 3.0 fail to provide an ethical basis that could supply a 'non-negotiable demand of human [and "alien"] dignity', which is what a more self-conscious Liberalism ought to strive for. This failure is down to the way Liberalism draws its limits on political subjectivity. It is these Liberal practices that we cannot be 'after' in a temporal sense so long as Liberalism carries on. And so we need to be 'after Liberalism' in a different sense of being after — of calling it to account by being aware ourselves of how the core principles of Liberalism are both beneficial and destructive in their crafting of all political subjectivities.