Political realism as reformist conservatism

Abstract

For realists, political theories exhibit an anti-moralist character when their normativity stems from an appraisal of the value and the specificities of real political practices. While realists agree on such a characterisation of the realist project, they split when it comes to explaining to what extent realist political normativity can provide us with a critical perspective on the status quo. The most recent contributions on this topic are polarised. Some contributors interpret political realism as an approach to politics that leads to an affirmation of the status quo. Others suggest that political realism might lead to radical transformations of the status quo. In this paper, I argue that it is possible to identify a consistent middle ground between these alternative interpretations: the interpretation of political realism as a form of reformist conservatism. Moreover, I defend the reformistconservative interpretation of political realism as superior to the extant ones. Contrary to the rival interpretations, I show that the reformist-conservative interpretation consistently reconciles all the fundamental tenets of political realism. Furthermore, I explain that while the conservatist interpretation risks undermining the normative commitment of realism and the radical interpretation leans towards an irresponsible form of political theorising, the reformistconservative reading avoids these pitfalls. | INTRODUCTIONSince its recent resurgence, political realism has been defined by its proponents as a normative approach to political theorising whose originality and appeal lie in its anti-moralist character (Galston, 2010;Jubb, 2017;Rossi & Sleat, 2014). For realists, political theories exhibit an anti-moralist character when they are construed without relying

Political realism and the quest for political progress

“…Recall that for realists, political standards must have a bottom‐up source; that is, they need to be extrapolated from the political practice. Put differently, the ordering principles of a political community must match the values that are salient for the subjects living in that political community (Cozzaglio, 2021; Favara, 2021; Horton, 2012; Sagar, 2018; Sleat, 2014). Although the dimension of inclusivity considers the value of security as the primary and necessary one in a political relationship, we can plausibly expect that subjects require more than the provision of security and protection by the political authority.…”

“…Others have taken steps beyond the CTP by developing internalist accounts of political legitimacy (Cozzaglio, 2021;Sagar, 2018). Still others have invoked it in order to delineate the difference between a political relationship and a relationship of domination, while eschewing an appeal to universal moral standards (Favara, 2021;Hall, 2017;Sleat, 2014). Regardless of these different emphases, realists agree that the CTP represents a form of critique that is compatible with antimoralism precisely because it is a form of internal critique-that is, one that does not presuppose a set of independent standards against which to measure power relationships.…”

“…If our attempt is convincing, political realism will advance in two respects. First, our interpretation of political progress represents a theoretical effort that stands between purely methodological works on political realism (for example, Favara, 2021; Galston, 2010; Hall, 2017; Rossi & Sleat, 2014) and the scholarship on applied realist normativity (for example, Beetz & Rossi, 2017; Bellamy, 2010; Cozzaglio, 2020; Jubb, 2015), which allows it to offer tools to bridge the gap between abstract and practical interpretations of realist normativity. Our account stands between these two theoretical efforts in the following ways.…”

“…77Rossi (2019) distinguishes between three types of realism: “ordorealism,” “contextual realism,” and “radical realism.” Though they place emphasis on different aspects of politics—respectively order, political contexts, and vindicatory genealogy—they all share the same conception of politics as a sphere distinct from the moral one, and, hence, they all commit themselves to antimoralism. Similarly, Favara (2021) shows how the different camps in the realist literature have as a common denominator a shared conception of the traits of politics.…”

“…Addressing this question is beyond the scope of this article, although it is surely a related inquiry. For discussion of whether political realism can develop a critique that is not purely internalist, we refer to the growing debate in the realist literature on the role of the theorist (for example, Cozzaglio, 2021; Favara, 2021).…”