Content area
Full Text
Idealist Political Philosophy: Pluralism and Conflict in the Absolute Idealist Tradition, by Colin Tyler; pp. x + 220. London and New York: Continuum, 2006, £70.00, £24.99 paper, $140.00.
In his Idealist Political Philosophy, Colin Tyler argues for a reappraisal of idealist political philosophy and for the recognition of its relevance to contemporary political theory. The absolute idealist tradition, Tyler contends, provides a live alternative to mainstream liberalism by marrying respect for the individual with a "culturally sensitive politics" (5). It also offers a political philosophy grounded in praxis, in the dynamic and essentially conflictual nature of democratic politics, rather than in abstract principles or in "the philosophical self-indulgence . . . all-too-prevalent in certain strands of contemporary political philosophy" (3).
Admittedly, this may seem an odd agenda. After all, Tyler notes, the absolute idealist tradition has frequently been thought of as "repressive and monolithic . . . glorifying the state at the expense of spontaneously generated civil society groups and individuals" (1). The idealists, it is said, were "dangerous collectivists" (167), for whom "the pluralism of meanings and values and the conflicts which they generate . . . [are] temporary imperfections that should be suppressed through force so as to foster the realisation of the Absolute" (2). Not, it would seem, a promising place to start. But this is precisely the picture of absolute idealism that Tyler contests-at least as concerns the philosophers on whom he focuses, namely G. W. F. Hegel, Thomas Hill Green, Edward Caird, and Bernard Bosanquet.
He begins by discussing Hegel's views on state formation and war, arguing that it is deeply misleading to claim (as many do) that Hegel "glorified . . . war" or saw "domination by 'civilized states'" as the culmination of historical progress (4). Instead, Hegel viewed conflict as both tragic and necessary in international politics-the primary means...