A reader asked me to write more about post-liberalism, and since it's relatively unknown to the general public, I figured I would write up a quick primer. I won't be able to do full justice to the ideological movement here, and some post-liberals may disagree with my characterization of them. Like all ideological movements, post-liberalism is something of a big tent divided into smaller sub-factions who disagree amongst themselves over various points of ideology.

With that said, post-liberalism is one faction within the New Right. The New Right is a diverse movement on the right which mostly appeared in the last ten years (although some of the ideas and figures associated with it have been around much longer).1 It is loosely associated with Donald Trump, although it is also a response to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the 2007-2008 financial collapse. Some elements of the New Right are little more than a populist updating of Pat Buchanan's paleoconservatism (or Ross Perot's anti-trade campaign).

Share

Broadly speaking, the New Right is skeptical of, or hostile to, free markets, global trade, immigration, entangling alliances or international agreements, and foreign military interventions. Compared to the Reagan Right, they are more sympathetic to state intervention, social welfare, expanded government, and progressive interpretations of the Constitution. A popular genre in New Right discourse is the "Why the Left was Correct on [fill-in-the-blank], and Why the Right Lost Because of its Blindness" variety of article. The New Right includes the nationalists (National Conservatives), neo-pagan reactionaries (mostly in the manosphere), the alt-right (neo-Nazis and "race realists"), and post-liberals.

Post-liberalism is usually associated with Catholic integralism, so much so that it is sometimes called "Post-Liberal Catholic Integralism," although there are Protestant post-liberals. Thinkers associated with post-liberalism include Patrick Deneen and Adrian Vermuele.

The 'liberalism' in 'post-liberalism' is classical liberalism, or Enlightenment liberalism – the philosophy of John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, etc., rather than 'Franklin Roosevelt progressivism' (many post-liberals like FDR a lot). Supposedly, capitalism, natural rights, the rule of law, democracy, religious freedom, separation of church and state, individualism, the consent of the governed, limited government, due process, equality before the law, meritocracy, etc. are the poisoned fruit which atomized society, hollowed out the working class, destroyed religion, and basically led to all the problems post-liberals say we face today. Many post-liberals argue that liberal (free) society is on the verge of a collapse. Hence, post-liberalism is a vision for what will come after.

This vision is grounded to some extent in an attempt to recapture the integral social order post-liberals argue medieval societies had (and classical liberalism destroyed). Integralism refers both to the integration of church and state, and a holistic, integrated social order in which individuals are embedded in communities and subsidiary institutions which define their roles and orient their lives. It is partially rooted in the Catholic social teachings emanating out of encyclicals written by Pope Leo XIII around the turn of the twentieth century.

Among other things, these teachings posited a middle ground between socialism and capitalism in which coordination between all the major stakeholders in society – guilds, trade unions, corporations, government, church, etc. – would prevent both the rapacity and atomization of capitalism, and the revolutionary character of socialism. Many libertarians look at this coordination and call it socialism, but it has just enough profit-making and private property that many socialists deride it as capitalistic. This economic philosophy was once called corporatism, but today this is confusing, because most people think that means "rule by corporations." Corporatism comes from the Latin corpore and refers to all of society being a single body. This borrows from medieval views about societies as organisms (rather than the modern view of societies comprised of individuals).

In an integrated society, there is less mobility, but everyone has a place and knows it and therefore doesn't suffer from the existential angst supposedly caused by the soulless greed or untethered emptiness of free markets. Before we leave, it should be said that this economic philosophy was a key tenet of Mussolini's fascism (although, it's complicated), but I am not (necessarily) accusing post-liberals of being fascists (mainly because most people think of Hitler and concentration camps when they hear the word ‘fascist,’ and I think it's a mistake to accuse post-liberals of supporting Hitler's concentration camps).

Not all post-liberals are necessarily anti-capitalist theocrats, however all are localist and mercantilist (anti-trade), and most are pretty sympathetic to Marxist arguments about capitalism. They view free societies as having destroyed traditional ways of life.

Some would prefer to maintain at least some elements of liberalism in a post-liberal society, but others want to scrap the whole thing. Many are unclear exactly what their vision of a better society looks like, other than that our current society is severely lacking.

It should go without saying that I am extremely unsympathetic to these positions. I like free markets, free trade, individual liberty, the rule of law, the American Founding, and due process. I believe God gave human beings certain natural rights, including those outlined in the Declaration of Independence. But post-liberals have offered interesting and complex challenges to these, and I enjoy the debates (usually)2 even as I am unpersuaded both by their ends and by many of their criticisms. I hope this primer has been clarifying. I'm sure I've left something out. If anyone has any questions, please go read The Haeft or other post-liberals on Substack.