The U.S.A. was founded on a concept of democracy that has philosophical roots in the Euro-western classical liberal theory of Locke (1632-1704) and Rousseau (1712-78). For classical liberal political philosophers such as Locke and Rousseau, the role of government/the state is to protect individuals from others, and otherwise to stay out of individuals’ lives and allow them to live as they freely choose.1 The goal of liberalism is to secure opportunities for individuals to realize their full potential. Classical liberal democracy emphasizes a negative view of freedom as “freedom from.” “Freedom from” focuses on individual rights as natural rights and emphasizes the need to protect these natural rights for they belong to individuals prior to the formation of political governments and social relations. It is an argument for the primacy of the individual over the state. Arguments are made that individuals need protection from invasion, criminals, the lack of honoring of legal contracts, etc., as well as protection from others trying to take away an individual’s rights to free speech, to carry arms, etc. Individuals need freedom from restrictions. Such a view of democracy is based on a strong assumption of individualism that treats individuals as if they develop atomistically on their own. It is also based on a strong assumption of rationalism, on freed intelligence, that individuals can learn to think for hemselves and use their reasoning capacity to critique their government’s actions and change the government if it is not meeting their individual needs. Liberal democratic theories, even in their more recent forms such as Rorty’s social hope, are vulnerable to criticisms that they continue to focus on individual freedom and autonomy.2 They are also vulnerable to charges that they continue to count on an Enlightenment-type of rationalism to use as its method of critique, even in Habermas’ form as ideal speech acts, or in Rawls’ form as the veil of ignorance.3