ABSTRACT
This chapter explores the impact of the former on the theory of legitimacy. With the goal of clarifying and eventually moving beyond such conundrums, it begins with an overview of the theoretical situation regarding legitimacy from the point of view of both ideal liberal and contemporary realist approaches. The chapter shows that the same philosophical presuppositions employed by both camps impact the assessment of the normative justification of the political order in theoretically identifiable ways. In his mature work, Rawls abandons the prospect of a consensus on a specific set of political principles and ideals, admitting that no “reasonable comprehensive doctrine [can] secure the basis of social unity, nor can it provide the content of public reason on fundamental political questions.” The chapter concludes that, once again, despite significant gains made through their critique of ideal liberalism, these presuppositions impede realists from arriving at an adequate account of legitimacy.
