Liberalism has increasingly been the target of criticism, worldwide. At the vanguard of this critique is a group of intellectuals known as “post-liberals” who lament radical individualism and the corrosive effects that the market economy has on communities. Matt McManus argues that while post-liberals offer some compelling critiques again liberalism, ultimately the movement poses a danger to democracy.

Since liberalism burst onto the scene as a revolutionary credo in the 17^th (or 18^th or 19^th, depending on who is asking) century it has never wanted for one thing: critics. Many of the most famous have appeared on the political left, from Marx famously launching bromides against the exploitative alienation of “bourgeois” society, to Foucault’s denunciation of our emerging disciplinary society. But, ever since Robert Filmer felt compelled to defend the divine right of kings in De Patriarcha, and arch-Catholic Joseph de Maistre felt compelled to rail against the destructive power of Enlightenment reason, just as many have come from the political right. One of the most distinctive new critiques have come from self-described “post-liberals” insisting on “regime change” in the United States and beyond. While there is a lot in the post-liberal critique that echoes reactionary screeds past, the movement is influential and novel enough to warrant a closer look.  Some of the most sophisticated and probing post-liberals offer critiques of liberalism that really do bite. They rightly highlight the effacement of community consequent to the liberal emphasis on individualism and its marketization of society. Liberals should learn from these criticisms; but they should also be wary. Through their flirtation with authoritarianism and theocracy, the most fundamentalist post-liberals represent a real threat to democracy - particularly as their ideals are taken up by the right.