Overcoming agonism: the idea of conflict in political liberalism

The thesis aims to explore two competing currents in political thinking, namely agonism and liberalism and to offer an argumentative defence for the latter by maintaining its consensual aspects while not discounting the idea of conflict as part of its political theory. Accordingly, it will offer a realist version of liberalism that goes beyond the mainstream liberal view that solely rest on normative consensus as it intends to revive liberalism through a non-utopian conception as envisioned by Judith Shklar. Consequently, the objective of the argument is to explain the attraction of fundamental liberalism components based on a specific type of liberalism that resists the moralist tendencies and the erasure of conflict as identified in Chantal Mouffe's political philosophy. To this end, the thesis will firstly highlight the Mouffean critique of liberalism as the fundamental anchor of agonism, while Judith Shklar's liberal philosophy will serve to articulate the ideal of political confrontation in the defence of liberalism based on realistic concerns. This is imperative since for political thinkers such as Shklar, who are grounded on realist perspectives regarding the societal ordinance, both conflict and plurality are unavoidable aspects of a liberal democratic society. This leads to an understanding of desirable social and institutional behaviours based on a particular liberal thought that is capable to offer a concrete answer to the question of how individuals can actually reach some kind of consensus for society’s order. The thesis will thus contribute to our understanding of how the realistic consensus aspect of Shklar’s idiosyncratic liberalism can be clearly distinguished from other major liberal strands.