Liberalism vs Communitarianism: Differences Explained

Liberalism and communitarianism offer two different answers to a basic political question: should society be organised mainly to protect individual freedom, or to protect shared values and social cohesion?

What is liberalism?

Liberalism puts the individual first. It argues that each person has equal moral worth and should be free to choose their beliefs, goals, and way of life. Because people disagree about religion, morality, and their ideas about “the good life”, liberalism supports a political system that protects rights, liberties, and fair rules rather than enforcing one shared moral doctrine.

In practice, liberalism is closely linked to constitutional democracy, equal legal rights, freedom of speech and religion, and limits on state power. The state is mainly seen as a referee: it protects the framework that allows people to live differently without being coerced.

What is communitarianism?

Communitarianism argues that political life cannot be understood by focusing only on individuals. People are shaped by families, communities, traditions, roles, and social duties. A society is not just a collection of separate individuals making choices; it is also a shared way of life that influences identity, moral development, and belonging.

Communitarianism thus emphasizes social responsibilities alongside rights, civic loyalty and shared obligations, the importance of cultural norms and institutions, as well as social stability and community trust.

Instead of treating values as purely private choices, communitarian thinking often treats moral life as something learned and sustained through membership in a community. 

Liberalism vs communitarianism: main differences

1) The person

  • Liberalism: individuals are primary, and society should respect personal autonomy. Individuals are thought of as autonomous entities.

  • Communitarianism: individuals are socially formed, and communities matter for identity and morality. Individuals are embedded within their communities. 

2) Rights vs duties

  • Liberalism: rights protect individuals from interference, including from the majority. They help to protect from the tyranny of the majority. 

  • Communitarianism: duties and responsibilities are central, and rights may be justified partly because they protect social order and the common good. The

3) The role of the state

  • Liberalism: the state should be neutral between competing moral or religious views.

  • Communitarianism: the state may legitimately support shared values, social cohesion, and moral education (at least to some extent) to promote a shared idea of the "common good".

Communitarianism in the West

Communitarianism is often presented as a modern critique of liberal individualism, but the basic idea is older and widespread in Western thought.

You can see communitarian themes in:

  • Contemporary philosophical theory, particularly after the 1980s as a direct response to John Rawls's A Theory of Justice, wherein Rawls provides a justification for individual rights that each person could agree on within a liberal framework. Modern thinkers include Michael Sandel, Michael Walzer, Charles Taylor, and Alasdair MacIntyre.       

  • Aristotle, who treats humans as political and social by nature, with flourishing tied to civic life.

  • Civic republican traditions, where citizenship includes duties, public virtue, and commitment to the common good.

  • Conservative social theory, which emphasizes tradition, inherited practices, and the danger of weakening social institutions too quickly.

  • Religious, Marxist, and social-democratic movements, where solidarity and mutual obligation are seen as essential to a decent society.

In these Western forms, communitarianism often appears as a defense of social trust, stable institutions, and the idea that freedom works best when people share certain norms.

Communitarianism in the East

Communitarianism also has clear parallels in many East Asian political and ethical traditions. In these settings, the individual is often understood less as an independent chooser and more as a person defined through relationships: family roles, social harmony, and obligations to others.

Confucianism emphasizes harmony and social order, respect for hierarchy and role-based duties, moral development through education and ritual, and the idea that personal conduct affects collective well being.

These ideas do not automatically reject freedom, but they often treat freedom as something exercised within social limits, not as the highest political value.

Confucianism as a communitarian example

A major example is Confucianism, which is strongly focused on moral cultivation through relationships: parent and child, ruler and subject, older and younger, friend and friend. Confucian ethics tends to prioritize social harmony, proper conduct, and responsibility within roles.

Confucianism is sometimes contrasted with liberalism because it does not start from the idea of individuals as separate rights-holders. Instead, it starts from the idea that good societies depend on virtuous people acting well within a network of duties. That said, Confucian thought can still support protections for individuals (including criticism of rulers), but usually by arguing that such protections serve the stability and moral health of the community (for example, if a ruler is doing something to severely harm the common good, it may be justified for their advisor to call them out on it). 

Conclusion

Liberalism prioritizes individual rights and personal autonomy, for liberalism, the right comes before the good. Communitarianism prioritizes the social foundations of identity, morality, and stability. For communitarianism, the good comes before the right. Both traditions address real political problems: liberalism protects freedom in diverse societies, while communitarianism explains why communities, traditions, and shared obligations remain politically important.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plato's Political Philosophy Briefly Explained (Why We Should All Be Ruled By Philosopher-Kings)

Introduction to The Republic More than two thousand years ago, a certain philosopher you may have heard of, a man from the Greek city-state of Athens called Plato, came up with some ideas on what he thought should be the ideal state , that is, the best possible form of government mankind should try and aspire to. Plato's political philosophy has subsequently inspired pretty much all of political philosophy today.  To give you some examples of some very famous people you may have heard of, who have been inspired (or offended) by Plato's political philosophy:  Aristotle, Cicero, Plotinus, Augustine of Hippo, Al-Farabi, Thomas More, Marsilio Ficino, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Leo Strauss, and Karl Popper. Thus, in order to understand political philosophy, we must first understand the core of Plato's political philosophy. Most importantly, we will try and show Plato's answer to the central question he proposes in his magnum opus of a book in po...
Read more

Jan Patočka's Phenomenology and The Three Movements Explained

Who in the world is Jan Patočka?! ...That is probably the question you're asking. Jan Patočka is a far lesser-known Czech 20th century philosopher compared to the great phenomenologists like Edmund Husserl or Martin Heidegger.  He is mainly known only by Czech philosophy students and professors, particularly at his home university, Charles University, in Prague. But Patočka, much like Husserl and Heidegger, had some very interesting things to say about phenomenology, so I will explain his ideas here, so that hopefully you can be exposed to the ideas of somebody you might never have heard of otherwise. Patočka wasn't working in a vacuum. He deeply engaged with Husserl's ideas about the Lebenswelt (the life-world) – that everyday, pre-scientific reality we all live in. Like Husserl, he was wary of science becoming the only lens through which we see the world, potentially reducing rich human experience to mere objective calculation (think of how a breathtaking sunset can ...
Read more

A Summary of Machiavelli's Political Philosophy (How to Get Power and Keep It)

Brief Summary and Intro to The Prince Following the return of the Medici noble family to Florence in 1512, Niccolo Machiavelli fell from power, was imprisoned, tortured and then exiled, and subsequently wrote a book attempting to gain favor with the family (and hopefully a job). This famous book, The Prince , describes exactly how a prince (or nobleman) should gain power and the steps needed to keep it. Machiavelli describes, among other things, that it is better for a prince to be feared than to be loved, that a prince must possess virtù , a character trait which combines the "cunning of the fox" and the "boldness of a lion", must be morally flexible and willing to do evil, and must at all times try to resist the powerful force of luck that Machiavelli calls fortuna . Virt ù , Fortuna, and Cesare Borgia In The Prince , Machiavelli's key point is that a prince should at all times possess virtù , which approximately translates to "virtue" in English, th...
Read more