Thanks for your thought-provoking comment, Lorna. I agree with you from a rhetorical perspective, and I’m inclined to agree with you on substance. I intuitively understand that by focusing on particular groups of individuals by class, race, religion, we lose sight of universal principles and values that serve to unite us. But I’m concerned that by focusing on general principles in the abstract and neglecting to examine the consequences of these principles on society—particularly on people’s material well-being—we won’t understand a potentially significant reason why these principles lose their appeal with the general public. That’s not to say that the public wouldn’t agree with these principles in the abstract, but much like today, they wouldn’t truly understand what these principles demand of their own actions when engaging in public debate and political action.

As you can probably guess, my hunch is that this is part of the reason why liberal principles have lost their sway on the left today (I’m not sure this applies to the illiberalism on the right). The ascendant social justice warriors believe that liberal principles and ideals just keep economic and political power in the hands of those who already have it. And this balance of power only seems to benefit an increasingly smaller share of society. I think it’s incumbent upon those of us who believe in the power of liberal principles and ideals to create a more fair and just society to concern ourselves with these critiques and to openly and honestly grapple with the questions that arise when examining the practical consequences and effects of liberal values.

Wouldn’t this then necessitate some kind of focus on the historically oppressed and those being left behind? (That’s an honest question…)