Grad - Muldoon

Abstract

A triumph of the Western Liberal political tradition is the enshrinement of the division of the public and private spheres.  This distinction, aided by the development of individual rights, specifies the limits of the state, and the extent of the freedom of individuals.  If we view the private sphere as prior to the public sphere, a question arises as to how we ought to create the public sphere.  This becomes particularly relevant as democratic societies become increasingly diverse: diverse societies face problems and opportunities that do not arise in more homogenous societies.  To investigate this challenge of diversity, I consider two prominent accounts of the public sphere from two distinct branches of the western liberal tradition, social contract theory and classical economic theory, and contend that each branch has a problematic view.  Social contract theorists attempt to develop the public sphere without taking into regard any private-sphere considerations, and in doing so, shut out any consideration of diversity in the public sphere.  Classical economic approaches attempt to form the public sphere by claiming it is merely a continuation of the private sphere, but in doing so fail to adequately deal with public goods and negative externalities.  I claim that an account of the public sphere that can be used to addressany concerns raised by diversity will have to take a position between these two approaches.