Abstract
What do the victims of tyranny owe each other? In this paper, I examine whether they can be condemned for betraying their friends, and I do so through a novel interpretation of Judith Shklar’s political thought. Shklar is a widely acknowledged and significant influence on non-ideal theory and political realism. However, there is also a previously unnoticed transformation between her early and mature work, for although she remains a sceptic her approach to moral conflict changes from value pluralism to value monism. In addition, it is only in her mature work, as a monist, she believes tyranny cancels obligations of justice. I argue here that Shklar’s monism fails, and this in turn has important implications for political realism and non-ideal theory. While attention has been focused on developing a sceptical critique of ideal theory, this interpretation of Shklar’s work illustrates that greater awareness is needed of the pitfalls of monist strands of scepticism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ashenden, Samantha, and Andreas Hess. 2016. Totalitarianism and justice: Hannah Arendt’s and Judith N. Shklar’s political reflections in historical and theoretical perspective. Economy and Society 45(3–4): 505–529.
Berlin, Isaiah. 2004 [1958]. Two concepts of liberty. In Liberty, ed. Henry Hardy, 166–217. Oxford University Press.
Berlin, Isaiah, and Bernard Williams. 1994. Pluralism and liberalism: A reply. Political Studies 17: 306–309.
Fives, Allyn. 2019. The freedom of extremists: Pluralist and non-pluralist responses to moral conflict. Philosophia 47(3): 663–680.
Fives, Allyn. 2020a. Utopia and pluralism: Demanding too much in the name of justice. The European Legacy. https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2020.1715099.
Fives, Allyn. 2020b. The unnoticed monism of Judith Shklar’s liberalism of fear. Philosophy and Social Criticism 46(1): 45–63.
Forrester, Katrina. 2011. Hope and memory in the thought of Judith Shklar. Modern Intellectual History 8(3): 591–620.
Forrester, Katrina. 2012. Judith Shklar, Bernard Williams and political realism. European Journal of Political Theory 11(3): 247–272.
Gatta, Giunia. 2018. Rethinking liberalism for the 21st century: The skeptical radicalism of Judith Shklar. New York and London: Routledge.
Galston, William A. 2005. The practice of liberal pluralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Galston, William A. 2010. Realism in political theory. European Journal of Political Theory 9(4): 385–411.
Gray, John. 1998. Where pluralists and liberals part company. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 6: 17–36.
Gray, John. 2000. Two faces of liberalism. Cambridge: Polity.
Hall, Edward. 2014. Contingency, confidence, and liberalism in the political thought of Bernard Williams. Social Theory and Practice 40(4): 545–569.
Hall, Edward, and Matt Sleat. 2017. Ethics, morality and the case for realist political theory. CRISPP 20(3): 278–295.
Hess, Andreas. 2016. The meaning of exile: Judith N. Shklar’s maieutic discourse. European Journal of Social Theory. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431016681575.
Horton, John. 2017. What might it mean for political theory to be more ‘realistic’? Philosophia 45(2): 487–501.
Mill, John Stuart. 1991 [1861]. Utilitarianism. In On liberty and other essays, ed. John Gray, 131–201. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Misra, Shefali. 2016. Doubt and commitment: Justice and skepticism in Judith Shklar’s thought. European Journal of Political Theory 15(1): 77–96.
Moyn, Samuel. 2014. Judith Shklar on the philosophy of international criminal law. International Criminal Law Review 14: 717–737.
Philp, Mark. 2012. Realism without illusions. Political Theory 40(5): 629–649.
Rosenblum, Nancy L. 1996. The democracy of everyday life. In Liberalism without illusions, ed. Bernard Yack, 25–44. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1948 [1762]. Émile [E] (trans: Barbara Foxley). London: Dent.
Sagar, Paul. 2016. From scepticism to liberalism? Political Studies 62(2): 368–384.
Shklar, Judith N. 1957. After utopia: The decline of political faith. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 1964a. Legalism: Law, morals, and political trials. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 1964b. Rousseau’s images of authority. The American Political Science Review 58(4): 919–932.
Shklar, Judith N. 1969. Men and citizens: A study of Rousseau’s social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 2006 [1982]. Putting cruelty first. Democratiya, 4: 81–94.
Shklar, Judith N. 1984. Ordinary vices. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, Harvard University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 1987. Montesquieu. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 1989. The liberalism of fear. In Liberalism and the moral life, ed. Nancy Rosenblum, 21–38. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 1996 [1989b]. A life of learning. In Liberalism without illusions, ed. Bernard Yack, 263–279. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 1990. The faces of injustice. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 2019 [1992b]. On political obligation, ed. Samantha Ashenden and Andreas Hess. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Shklar, Judith N. 1993. Obligation, loyalty, exile. Political Theory 21(2): 181–197.
Stullerova, Kamila. 2014. The knowledge of suffering. Contemporary Political Theory 13(1): 23–45.
Thaler, Mathias. 2017. Hope abjuring hope: On the place of utopia in realist political theory. Political Theory. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591717740324.
Valentini, Laura. 2012. Ideal vs non-ideal theory: A conceptual map. Philosophy Compass 7(9): 654–664.
Williams, Bernard. 2005. In the beginning was the deed, ed. Geoffrey Hawthorn. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Yack, Bernard. 2017. Political liberalism: Political, not philosophical. Perspectives on Politics 15(1): 116–121.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fives, A. What the Victims of Tyranny Owe Each Other: On Judith Shklar’s Value Monism. Res Publica 26, 505–521 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-020-09459-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-020-09459-z