Grand Days, Dark Palaces

Abstract

Exploring contradictions inherent in liberal orders, this chapter questions the treatment of liberalism in the International Relations academy as a relatively straightforward set of beliefs about the individual, the state, the market, and political justice. It asserts that the contradictions and tensions within liberal internationalism are in fact deep and troubling. Highlighting some of liberalism's obscured and sometimes denied contradictions — between liberal ‘statism’ and liberal ‘cosmopolitanism’; between liberal ‘proceduralism’ and liberal ‘consequentialism’; and between liberal ‘absolutism’ and liberal ‘toleration’ — the chapter explores their implications for liberal ordering practices internationally. It concludes that liberal political engagement necessitates a more reflective standpoint and more historical sensibility if we are to be aware of how contradictions have shaped liberal orders in the past and are likely to continue to do so in the future.

From ‘Westlessness’ to renewal of the liberal international order: whose vision for the ‘good life’ will matter?

“…Although the current LIO was established in the aftermath of World War Two, it is a continuation of previous forms of liberal orders, most notably the British-led Pax Britannica. The problem is that there has been considerable tensions, contradictions, disruptions and ambiguities surrounding the purpose, development and values both in the current LIO and in previous forms of liberal orders (Rae & Reus-Smit 2013). However, the tensions, contradictions, disruptions, and ambiguities of the LIO have been successfully hidden in a highly successful and prevalent narrative about the origins, development, and gradual expansion of a specific form of ordering that originated in 16 th century Europe.…”