Editing Political philosophy

{{Short description|Study of the foundations of politics}}
{{Redirect2|Political Theory|political treatise|the academic journal|Political Theory (journal){{!}}''Political Theory'' (journal)|the work by Baruch Spinoza|Tractatus Politicus{{!}}''Tractatus Politicus''}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2024}}

'''Political philosophy''' studies the theoretical and conceptual foundations of [[politics]]. It examines the nature, scope, and [[Political legitimacy|legitimacy]] of political institutions, such as [[State (polity)|states]]. This field investigates different [[forms of government]], ranging from [[democracy]] to [[authoritarianism]], and the values guiding political action, like [[justice]], equality, and [[liberty]]. As a [[normative]] field, political philosophy focuses on desirable norms and values, in contrast to [[political science]], which emphasizes [[empirical]] description.

[[Political ideologies]] are systems of ideas and principles outlining how society should work. [[Anarchism]] rejects the coercive power of centralized governments. It proposes a [[stateless society]] to promote liberty and equality. [[Conservatism]] seeks to preserve traditional institutions and practices. It is skeptical of the human ability to radically [[Social change|reform society]], arguing that drastic changes can destroy the wisdom of past generations. [[Liberalism|Liberals]] advocate for individual [[right]]s and [[liberties]], the [[rule of law]], [[private property]], and [[Toleration|tolerance]]. They believe that governments should protect these values to enable individuals to pursue personal goals without external interference. [[Socialism]] emphasizes [[collective ownership]] and equal distribution of basic goods. It seeks to overcome sources of [[Social inequality|inequality]], including private ownership of the [[means of production]], [[class system]]s, and hereditary privileges. Other schools of political thought include [[environmentalism]], [[Realism (international relations)|realism]], [[Idealism in international relations|idealism]], [[consequentialism]], [[Perfectionism (philosophy)|perfectionism]], [[individualism]], and [[communitarianism]].

Political philosophers rely on various [[Philosophical methodology|methods]] to justify and criticize knowledge claims. Particularists use a bottom-up approach and systematize individual judgments, whereas foundationalists employ a top-down approach and construct comprehensive systems from a small number of basic principles. One foundationalist approach uses theories about [[human nature]] as the basis for political ideologies. [[Universalism|Universalists]] assert that basic moral and political principles apply equally to every culture, a view rejected by [[Cultural relativism|cultural relativists]].

Political philosophy has its roots in [[Ancient period|antiquity]], such as the theories of [[Plato]] and [[Aristotle]] in [[ancient Greek philosophy]]. [[Confucianism]], [[Taoism]], and [[Legalism (Chinese philosophy)|legalism]] emerged in [[ancient Chinese philosophy]] while [[Hinduism|Hindu]] and [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] political thought developed in [[ancient India]]. Political philosophy in the medieval period was characterized by the interplay between ancient Greek thought and religion in both the [[Christian world|Christian]] and [[Islamic world]]s. The modern period marked a shift towards [[secularism]] as diverse schools of thought developed, such as [[social contract theory]], liberalism, conservatism, [[utilitarianism]], [[Marxism]], and anarchism.

== Definition and related fields ==
Political philosophy is the branch of [[philosophy]] studying the theoretical and conceptual foundations of [[politics]]. It considers the relation between individual and society, the best organization of collective life, the distribution of goods and [[Power (social and political)|power]], the limits of state authority, and the values guiding political decisions. This field examines basic concepts like [[State (polity)|state]], [[government]], [[Power (social and political)|power]], [[Legitimacy (political)|legitimacy]], [[political obligation]], [[justice]], equality, and [[liberty]], analyzing their essential features and how they influence citizens, communities, and policies.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|p=730}} | {{harvnb|Bunnin|Yu|2008|p=536}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Miller|1998|loc=[https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/overview/political-philosophy/v-1 Lead section, § Political institutions and ideologies]}} | {{harvnb|Wolff|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=FVOcAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 1–2]}} }}</ref> Schools of political philosophy, such as [[liberalism]], [[conservatism]], [[socialism]], and [[anarchism]], offer diverse interpretations of these concepts. They are guided by different values and propose distinct frameworks for structuring societies.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=Lead section, § 3. Political Schools of Thought}} | {{harvnb|Miller|1998|loc=[https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/overview/political-philosophy/v-1 Lead section, § Political institutions and ideologies]}} }}</ref> As a systematic and critical inquiry, political philosophy scrutinizes established beliefs and explores alternative views.<ref>{{harvnb|Besussi|2016|loc=§ Preliminary}}</ref> A central motivation for this investigation is that forms of government are not predetermined facts of nature but human creations that can be actively shaped to the benefit or detriment of some or all.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Wolff|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=FVOcAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA2 2–3]}} | {{harvnb|Miller|2003|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=EegRDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 1–3]}} }}</ref>

Political philosophers address various evaluative or [[Normativity|normative]] issues. They examine ideal forms of government and describe the values and norms that should guide political decisions.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|p=730}} | {{harvnb|Bunnin|Yu|2008|p=536}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA533 533]}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Miller|1998|loc=[https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/overview/political-philosophy/v-1 Lead section]}} | {{harvnb|Wolff|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=FVOcAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA2 2–3]}} }}</ref> They differ in this regard from [[Political science|political scientists]], who focus on empirical descriptions of how governments and other political institutions actually work rather than how they ideally should work.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Bunnin|Yu|2008|p=536}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Wolff|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=FVOcAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA2 2–3]}} | {{harvnb|Heywood|Chin|2023|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=u_ioEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5 5–6]}} }}</ref> The term ''political theory'' is sometimes used as a synonym of ''political philosophy'', but some interpreters distinguish the two. According to this view, political philosophy seeks to answer general and fundamental questions, whereas political theory analyzes and compares more specific aspects of political institutions while being more closely associated to the sciences.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Bunnin|Yu|2008|p=536}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA533 533]}} | {{harvnb|Stevens|2010|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=q7IhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA264 264]}} | {{harvnb|Heywood|Chin|2023|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=u_ioEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5 5–6]}} }}</ref>

Political philosophy has its roots in [[ethics]]{{em dash}}the area of philosophy studying [[Morality|moral]] phenomena{{em dash}}and is sometimes considered a branch of ethics.{{efn|[[Political ethics]] is a subfield at the intersection of these disciplines, studying moral judgments about political actions.<ref>{{harvnb|Thompson|2019}}</ref>}} While ethics examines right conduct and the good life in the broadest sense, political philosophy has a more narrow scope, focusing on the political domain.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 1. Ethical Foundations}}</ref>{{efn|For example, [[classical utilitarianism]] in ethics is the general theory that an act is morally right if it produces "the greatest good for the greatest number". Applied to the field of politics, this principle is used to evaluate institutions and policies.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 1. Ethical Foundations}}</ref>}} Political philosophy is also closely related to [[social philosophy]] and philosophical treatises often discuss the two together without clearly distinguishing between them. Despite their overlap, one difference between the two is that social philosophy examines diverse kinds of social phenomena while political philosophy has a more specific focus on power and governance.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Bunnin|Yu|2008|p=536}} | {{harvnb|Miller|1998|loc=[https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/overview/political-philosophy/v-1 Lead section]}} | {{harvnb|Christman|2017|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=hmJQDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA21 21]}} }}</ref> Other connected fields include the [[philosophy of law]] and [[Philosophy of economics|economics]].<ref>{{harvnb|Moseley|loc=Lead section}}</ref>

The term ''political philosophy'' has its roots in the [[ancient Greek]] words {{lang|grc|Πολιτικά}} ({{tlit|grc|politiká}}, meaning {{gloss|affair of the state}}) and {{lang|grc|φιλοσοφία}} ({{tlit|grc|philosophía}}, meaning {{gloss|love of wisdom}}).<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Cresswell|2021|loc=§ Police}} | {{harvnb|Hoad|1996|p=350}} | {{harvnb|Knowles|2006|loc=§ Political Philosophy}} | {{harvnb|Stevens|2010|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=q7IhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA6 6, 77]}} }}</ref> It is one of the oldest branches of philosophy and has been practiced in many different cultures.<ref>{{harvnb|Miller|1998|loc=[https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/overview/political-philosophy/v-1 Lead section]}}</ref>

== Basic concepts ==
Political philosophers rely on various basic concepts to formulate theories and conceptualize the field of [[politics]]. Politics encompasses diverse activities associated with governance, [[Group decision-making|collective decision-making]], [[Conflict resolution|reconciliation of conflicting interests]], and exercise of power. Some theorists characterize it as the art of skillfully engaging in these activities.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=534–535}} | {{harvnb|Stevens|2010|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=q7IhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA52 52, 77]}} }}</ref>

=== Government, power, and laws ===
The state, a fundamental concept in political philosophy, is an organized political entity. States are associations of people, called ''citizens''. They typically exercise control over a specific [[territory]], implement the [[rule of law]], and function as [[juristic persons]] subject to rights and obligations while [[International relations|engaging with other states]]. However, the precise definition of statehood is disputed. Some philosophical characterizations emphasize the state's [[monopoly on violence]] and the subordination of the will of the many to the will of a dominant few. Another outlook sees the state as a [[social contract]] for mutual benefit and security. States are characterized by their level of organization and the power they wield, in contrast to [[stateless societies]], which are more loosely ordered social groups connected through a less centralized web of relationships. [[Nation]], a related concept, refers to a group of people with a common identity based on shared culture, history, or language. Many states today are [[nation-states]], meaning that their citizens share a common [[national identity]] that aligns with the state's political boundaries. Historically, the first states in [[Ancient period|antiquity]] were [[city-states]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=462, 604, 662–663}} | {{harvnb|Griffin|2005}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ State}} }}</ref>

A [[government]] is an institution that exercises control and governs the people belonging to a political entity, usually a state. Some political philosophers see the government as an end in itself, while others consider it a means to other goods, such as peace and prosperity. Some governments set down fundamental principles, called ''[[constitution]]'', that outline the structure, functions, and limitations of governmental authority, while others exercise unconstrained authority. [[Anarchy|Anarchists]] reject governments and advocate self-governance without a centralized authority.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=279–280}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Government}} }}</ref>

Political philosophers distinguish various [[forms of government]] based on who wields political power and how it is wielded. In [[democracies]], the main power lies with the people. In [[direct democracies]], citizens vote directly on laws and policies, whereas in [[Representative democracy|indirect democracies]], they elect leaders who make these decisions. Democracies contrast with [[authoritarian regimes]], which reject political plurality and suppress dissent through centralized, hierarchical power structures. In the case of [[autocracies]], absolute power is vested in a single person, such as a [[monarch]]{{efn|The belief that monarchy is the best form of government is known as ''[[monarchism]]''.<ref>{{harvnb|McLean|2005|loc=§ Monarchism}}</ref>}} or a [[dictator]]. For [[oligarchies]], power is concentrated in the hands of a few, typically the wealthy. An authoritarian regime is [[totalitarian]] if it seeks extensive control over public and private life, such as [[fascism]], which combines totalitarianism with nationalist and [[militarist]] political ideologies.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA233 233–234, 236, 244, 253]}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA36 36–38, 47–49, 169–170, 244–245, 491–492, 695–696]}} }}</ref>

[[Aristocracy]], another form of government, implements rule by the elites, such as a privileged ruling class or [[nobility]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA227 227–228]}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA36 36–38]}} }}</ref> In the case of [[meritocracies]], the ruling elites are chosen by skill rather than social background.<ref>{{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Meritocracy}}</ref> For [[technocracies]], people with technical skills, such as engineers and scientists, wield political power.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Park|2007|loc=[https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780198609957.001.0001/acref-9780198609957-e-8113 Technocracy]}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA682 682–683]}} }}</ref> [[Theocracies]] prioritize religious authority in political decision-making, implement religious laws, and claim legitimacy by following the [[divine will]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA252 252]}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA687 687–688]}} }}</ref> Political philosophers further discuss [[federalism]] and [[confederalism]], which are systems of governance involving multiple levels: in addition to a central national government, there are several regional governments with distinct responsibilities and powers. These systems contrast with [[colonialism]],{{efn|Similar to colonialism, [[imperialism]] and [[expansionism]] are attempts by states to increase their territory and power over other states.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA230 230, 239–240]}} | {{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Imperialism}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA110 110, 235, 320–321]}} }}</ref>}} where occupied territories are exploited rather than treated as equal partners, and with [[unitary state]]s, where authority is centralized at the national level.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA230 230, 237, 239–240, 253]}} | {{harvnb|Law|Martin|2013}} }}</ref>

A key aspect of governments and other political institutions is the [[Power (social and political)|power]] they wield. Power is the ability to produce intended effects or control what people and institutions do. It can be based on [[consent]], like people following a charismatic leader, but can also take the form of [[coercion]], such as a tyrannical ruler enforcing compliance through fear and [[Political repression|repression]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=543–544}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Power}} }}</ref> The powers of government typically include the [[legislative power]] to establish new laws or revoke existing ones, the [[executive power]] to enforce laws, and the [[judicial power]] to arbitrate legal disputes. Governments following the [[separation of powers]] have distinct branches for each function to prevent overconcentration and [[abuse of power]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Separation of Power}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=627–628}} }}</ref> Language is a central aspect of political power, serving as a medium of [[communication]] and a force shaping public opinion. Linguistic power dynamics are reflected in the control of the [[means of communication]], such as [[mass media]], and in the [[freedom of speech]] of each individual.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA118 118, 379 379–380]}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Language}} }}</ref>

[[Legitimacy (political)|Legitimacy]], another fundamental concept, is the rightful or justified use of power. Political philosophers examine whether, why, and under what conditions the powers exercised by a government are legitimate. Often-discussed requirements include that power is acquired following established rules and used for rightful ends.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=388–389}} | {{harvnb|Beetham|1998|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref> For instance, the rules of [[representative democracies]] assert that [[elections]] determine who acquires power as the legitimate ruler. [[Authority]], a closely related concept, is the right to rule or the common belief that someone is legitimized to exercise power. In some cases, a person may have authority even if they lack the effective power to act. Some theorists also talk of ''illegitimate authority'' in situations where the common belief in the legitimacy of a use of power is mistaken.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=47–48, 169–171}} | {{harvnb|Friedrich|1972|pp=89–90}} | {{harvnb|Green|1998|loc=Lead section, § 1. The Nature and Forms of Authority}} }}</ref>

Governments typically use [[laws]] to wield power. Laws are rules of social conduct that describe how people and institutions may or may not act. According to [[natural law theory]], laws are or should be expressions of universal [[Morality|moral]] principles inherent in human nature. This view contrasts with [[legal positivism]], which sees laws as human [[Convention (norm)|conventions]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=381–382}} | {{harvnb|Jori|1998|loc=Lead section, § 1. Positivism Versus Natural Law Theory}} }}</ref> [[Political obligation]] is the [[duty]] of citizens to follow the laws of their political community. Political philosophers examine in what sense citizens are subject to political obligations even if they did not explicitly consent to them. Political obligation may or may not align with moral obligation{{em dash}}the duty to follow moral principles. For example, if an [[authoritarian state]] imposes laws that violate basic [[human rights]], citizens may have a moral obligation to [[Disobedience|disobey]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Walzer|2005}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=381–382}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Obligation}} }}</ref>

Laws governing [[property]] are foundational to many [[legal systems]]. Property is the right to control a good, including the rights to use, consume, lend, sell, and destroy it. It covers both material goods, like [[natural resources]], and immaterial goods, such as [[copyrights]] associated with [[intellectual property]]. [[Public property]] pertains to the state or community, whereas [[private property]] belongs to other entities, such as individual citizens. Various discussions in political philosophy address the advantages and disadvantages of private property.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=555, 562–563}} | {{harvnb|Grunebaum|2005}} }}</ref> For example, [[communism]] seeks to abolish most forms of private property in favor of [[collective ownership]] to promote economic equality.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=118–119}} | {{harvnb|Grunebaum|2005}} }}</ref>

=== Justice, equality, and liberty ===
[[File:John Rawls (1971 photo portrait).jpg|thumb|upright=.8|alt=Black-and-white photo of a man with glasses wearing a collared shirt under a sweater|[[John Rawls]] formulated an influential theory of [[justice as fairness]].<ref name="books.google.com">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA194 194]}} | {{harvnb|Wenar|2021|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref>]]
Diverse concepts in political philosophy act as values or goals of political processes.<ref>{{harvnb|Tuckness|Wolf|2016|pp=xiii–xiv, 5–6}}</ref> [[Justice]] is a complex concept at the core of many political concerns. It is specifically associated with the idea that people should be treated fairly and receive what they deserve. More broadly, it also refers to appropriate behavior and moral conduct, but its exact meaning varies by context: it can be an aspect of [[Action (philosophy)|actions]], a [[virtue]] of actors, or a structural feature of social situations. In the context of social life, [[social justice]] encompasses various aspects of fairness and equality in regard to wealth, assets, and other advantages. It includes the idea of [[distributive justice]], which promotes an impartial allocation of resources, goods, and opportunities. In legal contexts, [[retributive justice]] deals with [[punishment]], with one principle being that the harm inflicted on an offender is proportional to their [[crime]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=361–362, 643–644}} | {{harvnb|Miller|2025|loc=Lead section, § 1. Justice: Mapping the Concept}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Justice, § Social Justice}} }}</ref>

Justice is closely related to equality, the ideal that individuals should have the same rights, opportunities, or resources. [[Equality before the law]] is the principle that all individuals are subject to the same legal standards, rights, and obligations. [[Political equality]] concerns the abilities to vote for someone and to become a candidate for a political position. [[Equal opportunity]] is the ideal that everyone should have the same chances in life, meaning that success should be based on merit rather than circumstances of birth or social class. This contrasts with [[equality of outcome]], the idea that all people should have similar levels of material wealth and [[living standards]]. Philosophers of politics examine and compare different conceptions of equality, discussing which of its aspects should guide political action. They also consider the influence of [[discrimination]], which refers to unfair treatment based on [[Race (human categorization)|race]], [[gender]], [[sexuality]], and [[Social class|class]] that can undermine equality. The school of political thought known as [[egalitarianism]] sees equality as one of the main goals of political action.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=187, 217–218}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Equality, § Discrimination}} | {{harvnb|Carter|2016|loc=§ Preliminary}} }}</ref>

[[Liberty]] or [[freedom]]{{efn|The two terms are often used as synonyms, but some philosophers distinguish their meanings.<ref>{{harvnb|Feinberg|1998|loc=Lead section, § 1. Freedom and Liberty}}</ref>}} is the ideal that people may act according to their will without oppressive restrictions. Political philosophers typically distinguish two complementary aspects of liberty: [[positive liberty]]{{em dash}}the power to act in a certain way{{em dash}}and [[negative liberty]]{{em dash}}the absence of obstacles or interference from others. Liberty is a key value of [[liberalism]], a school of political philosophy.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=398–399}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Freedom}} | {{harvnb|Ricciardi|2016|loc=§ Preliminary}} | {{harvnb|Feinberg|1998|loc=Lead section, § 1. Freedom and Liberty}} }}</ref> Competing schools of thought debate whether laws necessarily limit liberty by restricting individual actions to protect the common good or enable it by creating a safe framework in which individuals can exercise their rights freely.<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|2013|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=WxAVSJlyIu4C&pg=PA137 137–138]}}</ref> Liberty as an ability to do something is sometimes distinguished from [[license]], which involves explicit [[Permission (philosophy)|permission]] to do something.<ref>{{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=398–399}}</ref> [[Autonomy]], another closely related concept, is the ability to make informed decisions and govern oneself by being one's own master.<ref>{{harvnb|Feinberg|1998|loc=Lead section, § 2 Freedom as Autonomy}}</ref>

Welfare, [[well-being]], and [[happiness]] express the general [[quality of life]] of an individual and are central standards for evaluating policies and political institutions. Some philosophers understand these phenomena as subjective experiences, linked to the presence of [[Pleasure|pleasant]] feelings, the absence of unpleasant ones, and a positive self-assessment of one's life. Others propose an [[Subjectivity and objectivity (philosophy)|objective interpretation]], arguing that the relevant factors can be objectively measured, such as economic prosperity, health, education, and security. Various schools of political thought, such as [[utilitarianism]] and [[welfarism]], see happiness or well-being as the ultimate goal of political actions.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Tuckness|Wolf|2016|pp=5–7, 23–24}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=732–733}} | {{harvnb|Bradley|2015|pp=80–82}} | {{harvnb|Bramble|2020|loc=§ What Is Welfarism?}} }}</ref> [[Welfare state]]s are states that prioritize the social and economic well-being of their citizens through measures such as affordable [[healthcare]] systems, [[social security]], and free access to education for all.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Welfare state}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|p=733}} }}</ref>

== Major schools of thought ==
=== Anarchism ===
{{main|Anarchism}}
[[File:Portrait Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (cropped).jpg|thumb|alt=Black-and-white photo of a bearded man with glasses wearing a dark coat|[[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] was a founding figure of anarchism and saw state authority as an obstacle to equality and liberty.<ref name="Laslett 2006 loc=§ Anarchism">{{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Anarchism}}</ref>]]
Anarchism is a school of political thought{{efn|In a slightly different sense, ''anarchism'' refers to a form of political activism that may or may not be motivated by philosophical considerations.<ref name="Fiala 2021 loc=§ 2. Anarchism in Political Philosophy">{{harvnb|Fiala|2021|loc=§ 2. Anarchism in Political Philosophy}}</ref>}} that rejects hierarchical systems, arguing for self-governing social structures and a stateless society, known as ''[[anarchy]]''. Anarchists typically see liberty and equality as their guiding values. They understand authority over others as a threat to individual autonomy and criticize hierarchical structures for perpetuating power imbalances and inequalities. As a result, they challenge the legitimacy of centralized governments wielding coercive power over others.{{efn|For example, some anarchists consider states as criminal organizations and the class division they require as inbuilt slavery.<ref>{{harvnb|Fiala|2021|loc=§ 1.1 Political Anarchism}}</ref>}} Anarchism maintains that freedom from domination is central to human flourishing. It promotes social structures based on voluntary association to advance universal [[egalitarianism]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3d. Anarchism}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2021|loc=Lead section, § 2. Anarchism in Political Philosophy}} | {{harvnb|Long|2013|pp=225–226}} | {{harvnb|Shipka|1984|pp=247–248}} }}</ref>

Various schools of anarchism have been proposed.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3d. Anarchism}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2021|loc=§ 1.1 Political Anarchism, § 2. Anarchism in Political Philosophy}} }}</ref> Absolute or ''a priori'' anarchism rejects any form of state, arguing that state power is inherently illegitimate and unjust. Contingent or ''a posteriori'' anarchism presents a less radical view, suggesting that states are not inherently bad but nonetheless usually fail in practice. For example, utilitarian anarchists reject states based on the claim that they typically do not promote the greatest good for the greatest number of people because their disadvantages outweigh their advantages.<ref name="Fiala 2021 loc=§ 2. Anarchism in Political Philosophy">{{harvnb|Fiala|2021|loc=§ 2. Anarchism in Political Philosophy}}</ref> [[Individualist anarchism|Individualist anarchists]] emphasize the importance of individual freedom, seeking to defend it against any social structure that restricts personal autonomy, including parental authority and legal institutions. This outlook can take the form of libertarian anarchism or [[anarcho-capitalism]]. [[Collectivist anarchism|Collectivist or socialist anarchists]], by contrast, stress the importance of community and voluntary cooperation within society, advocating collective ownership of resources and the means of production. For example, [[anarchist communism]] argues for decentralized social organization and communal sharing to promote well-being for all.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3d. Anarchism}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2021|loc=§ 2.4 Individualism, Libertarianism, and Socialist Anarchism}} | {{harvnb|Long|2013|pp=228–231}} }}</ref>

Diverse criticisms of anarchism have been articulated. Some see anarchism as primarily a negative attitude that seeks to destroy established institutions without providing viable alternatives, thereby simply replacing order with chaos. Another objection holds that anarchy is inherently unstable since hierarchical structures emerge naturally, meaning that [[stateless societies]] will inevitably evolve back into some form of state. Further arguments assert that the guiding anarchist goal is based on an unreachable utopian ideal and that anarchism is incoherent since the attempt to undermine all forms of authority paradoxically is itself a new form of authority.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2021|loc=§ 4. Objections and Replies}} | {{harvnb|Shipka|1984|pp=247–248}} }}</ref>

=== Conservatism ===
{{main|Conservatism}}
[[File:Edmund Burke EMWEA.jpg|thumb|alt=Black-and-white portrait of a man in a formal attire sitting next to a desk|[[Edmund Burke]] was an early defender of conservatism, stressing the importance of the accumulated wisdom of past generations and the danger of radical change.<ref name="Laslett 2006 loc=§ The Federalist, Burke, and Paine">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ The Federalist, Burke, and Paine}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3b. Conservatism}} }}</ref>]]
Conservatism is a school of political thought that seeks to preserve and promote traditional institutions and practices. It is typically driven by [[skepticism]] about the human ability to radically reconceive and reform society, arguing that such attempts, guided by a limited understanding of the consequences, often result in more harm than good. Conservatives give more weight to the wisdom of historical experience than the abstract ideals of [[reason]]. They assert that since established institutions and practices have passed the test of time, they serve as foundations of stability and continuity. Despite its preference for the [[status quo]], conservatism is not opposed to political and social change in general but advocates for a cautious approach. It maintains that change should happen as a gradual and natural evolution rather than through radical reform to ensure that political arrangements deemed valuable are preserved.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3b. Conservatism}} | {{harvnb|Hamilton|2020|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Kekes|2013|pp=249–250}} | {{harvnb|Vincent|2009|pp=56–59}} }}</ref>

While the exact institutions and practices to be preserved depend on the specific cultural and historical context of a society, conservatives generally emphasize the importance of family, religion, and national identity. They tend to support private property as a safeguard against state power and some forms of social security for the poor to maintain societal stability.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3b. Conservatism}} | {{harvnb|Hamilton|2020|loc=Lead section, § 1.3 Tradition and Gradual Reform: Conservatism vs. Reaction}} }}</ref>

Distinct strands of conservative thought follow different but overlapping approaches. [[Authoritarian conservatism]] prioritizes centralized, established authorities over the judgment of individuals. [[Traditionalist conservatism]] sees general customs, conventions, and traditions as the guiding principles that inform both established institutions and individual judgments. Romantic or [[reactionary]] conservatism is driven by [[nostalgia]] and seeks to restore an earlier state of society deemed superior. Other discussed types include [[paternalistic conservatism]], which argues that those in power should care for the less privileged, and [[liberal conservatism]], which includes the emphasis on individual liberties and economic freedoms in the conservative agenda.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Kekes|2013|pp=250–252}} | {{harvnb|Vincent|2009|pp=63–67}} | {{harvnb|Stenner|2009|pp=142–143}} }}</ref>

Different criticisms of conservatism have been proposed. Some focus on its resistance to change and lack of innovation, arguing that the prioritization of the status quo perpetuates existing problems and stifles progress. In particular, this concerns situations in which rapidly evolving societal challenges require dynamic, flexible, and creative responses. Another objection targets conservative skepticism about the capacity of reason to effectively address complex social issues, arguing that this skepticism is exaggerated and hinders well-thought-out reforms and meaningful improvements. Some critics state that conservatism reinforces established social hierarchies and inequalities, benefiting primarily privileged social classes.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Hamilton|2020|loc=§ 3. Critiques of conservatism}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3b. Conservatism}} }}</ref>

=== Liberalism ===
{{main|Liberalism}}
[[File:John Locke.jpg|thumb|alt=Oil painting of a man with long, gray hair wearing a dark brown cloak over a white shirt|As a founder of liberalism, [[John Locke]] prioritized individual freedom over state power.<ref name="Sankowski 2005 731–732">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|pp=731–732}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA188 188]}} | {{harvnb|Tuckness|2024|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref>]]
Liberalism is a philosophical tradition emphasizing individual [[Liberty|liberties]] and [[rights]], the [[rule of law]], [[Toleration|tolerance]], and [[constitutional democracy]]. It encompasses a variety of ideas without a precise definition. Some liberals follow [[John Locke]]'s view that all individuals are born free and equal, highlighting the government's role in protecting this natural state. Others associate liberalism more with the individual's ability to participate in democratic institutions than with equality. Central commitments for most liberals are support of various forms of liberty, such as [[freedom of speech]], [[freedom of religion]], and free choice of profession. Liberalism allows for diverse life choices and advocates tolerance of lifestyles different from one's own. This outlook is grounded in an [[Humanism|optimism about human nature]]{{efn|[[Progressivism]] is closely related to liberalism in this regard by its optimistic outlook towards human progress and societal improvement, often combined with liberal or socialist ideologies.<ref>{{harvnb|Fiala|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA246 246]}}</ref>}}}} and trust in the individual's responsibility to make sensible decisions. As a result, liberals assert that the government should remain neutral and allow individuals to pursue their goals without external interference. Other key liberal topics include the defense of [[private property]] and the rule of law.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Waldron|1998|loc=§ Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Knowles|2006|pp=70–71}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3a. Liberalism}} | {{harvnb|Freeden|2024|pp=237–238}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA394 394–395]}} }}</ref>

Most forms of liberalism support some form of [[Free market|free-market economy]] and [[capitalism]]. In a free market, the exchange of goods and services occurs with minimal state control and regulation. Instead, privately owned businesses compete with each other, and prices are primarily influenced by [[supply and demand]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA258 258]}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA240 240]}} }}</ref> Capitalism is an economic system in which the [[means of production]] are mainly privately owned. This system is typically characterized by a contrast between capitalist owners, who aim to [[Profit maximization|maximize the profit]] of their investment, and workers, who sell their [[Work (human activity)|labor]] in exchange for a [[salary]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA78 78–79]}} | {{harvnb|Zimbalist|Sherman|1984|p=[https://archive.org/details/comparingeconomi0000zimb_q8i6/page/4/mode/2up 5]}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA228 228]}} }}</ref>

One broad characterization distinguishes between [[Classical liberalism|classical]] and [[Social liberalism|modern liberalism]], also called social democratic liberalism, based on the role of the state. Classical liberalism seeks to protect the liberties and rights of individuals from government interference, arguing for a limited role of the state. It promotes [[negative liberty]] and tasks the state with safeguarding individuals from obstacles or interference from others, such as aggression and theft.{{efn|The resurgence of certain classical liberal principles in the late-20th-century, especially in regard to free markets and limited government, is sometimes termed ''[[neoliberalism]]''.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA472 472]}} | {{harvnb|Vallier|2022|loc=Lead section, § 1. Explicating A Challenging Term}} }}</ref>}} Modern liberalism emphasizes [[positive liberty]], arguing that the state should foster conditions that enable individuals to achieve their personal goals. This approach advocates for a more active role of the state to promote [[social justice]], [[equality of opportunity]], and the right to a minimal [[standard of living]]. This can include state programs to ensure affordable [[healthcare]], education for all, and [[social security]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3a. Liberalism}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA394 394–395]}} }}</ref>

[[Libertarianism]] is closely related to classical liberalism. It emphasizes individual liberties and argues that people should be free to do as they want without coercion as long as they do not infringe on the liberty of others. Some libertarians consider the [[non-aggression principle]]{{em dash}}the principle forbidding aggression against a person and their property{{em dash}} as the foundational tenet of libertarianism. Libertarians typically support a free-market economy based on private property and voluntary cooperation. They disapprove of governmental attempts to redistribute wealth and other forms of economic regulation. This view seeks to limit the role of government to [[collective defense]], the protection of individual rights, and the enforcement of contracts.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Van der Vossen|Christmas|2024|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Knowles|2006|p=71}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA397 397–398]}} | {{harvnb|Zwolinski|2016|pp=62–63}} }}</ref>

Various criticisms of liberalism have been formulated. One objection asserts that its individualistic focus on personal liberties undermines community, arguing that the prioritization of personal freedoms leads to [[social fragmentation]]. A different criticism proposes that private property and unregulated markets threaten [[Economic inequality|economic equality]] and tend to create unjust hierarchies. Further objections argue that liberalism diminishes the common good by reinforcing individualistic social disputes and that its commitments to tolerance and pluralism result in [[cultural relativism]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Galston|1991|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=88N-1mITdzYC&pg=PA42 42–44]}} | {{harvnb|Quong|2011|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=nSkUDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA151 151]}} }}</ref>

=== Socialism ===
{{main|Socialism}}
[[File:Marx-Engels-Denkmal (Berlin-Mitte).jpg|thumb|alt=Photo of a statue of two men, one sitting and the other standing|[[Karl Marx]] and [[Friedrich Engels]] developed [[Marxism|a radical form of socialism]], calling for a [[communist revolution]] to overcome [[capitalism]].<ref name="Sankowski 2005 733">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|p=733}} | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Marx and Marxism}} }}</ref>]]
Socialism is a family of political views emphasizing [[collective ownership]] and equal distribution of basic goods.{{efn|[[Left-wing politics]] is a broad label for political positions associated with socialist and [[Progressivism|progressive]] views, promoting social equality, egalitarianism, the welfare state, and a classless society. It contrasts with [[right-wing politics]], which is linked to conservatism and liberalism, supporting private property, free markets, and nationalism. The two are often understood as poles of [[Left–right political spectrum|a political spectrum]] with [[centrism]], such as the [[Third Way]], as a middle position.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA84 85, 384–385, 601]}} | {{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Left, § Right(-wing)}} | {{harvnb|Bobbio|2016|pp=8–10}} }}</ref>}} It argues that the [[means of production]] belong to the people in general and the workers in particular and should therefore form part of social ownership rather than private property.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3c. Socialism}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA646 646–648]}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA250 250]}} | {{harvnb|Gilabert|O’Neill|2024|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref> This outlook understands the state as a complex administrative device that manages resources and production to ensure social welfare and a fair distribution of goods.<ref>{{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA646 646–648]}}</ref>

A key motivation underlying the socialist perspective is the establishment of equality, which is seen as the natural state of humans. Socialists seek to overcome sources of inequality, such as class systems and hereditary privileges. They are critical of [[capitalism]], arguing that private property and free markets reinforce inequalities by leading to large-scale accumulation of private wealth.<ref name="646–648">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3c. Socialism}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA646 646–648]}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA250 250]}} }}</ref> Some socialists propose systems of regulation and [[taxation]] to mitigate the negative effects of free-market economies.{{efn|This type of approach is common for [[social democracies]], which typically aim to balance free markets with social welfare while promoting democratic governance.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Social Democracy}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA642 642]}} }}</ref>}} Others reject free-market systems in general and promote different mechanisms to manage the production and distribution of goods, ranging from centralized state control and ownership to decentralized systems that plan and direct economic activity.<ref name="646–648"/>

[[Marxism]] is an influential school of socialism that focuses on the analysis of class relations and social conflicts. It rejects capitalism, arguing that it leads to inequality by dividing society into a capitalist class, which owns the means of production, and a working class, which has to sell its labor and is thereby [[Marx's theory of alienation|alienated]] from the products of its labor. According to this view, economic forces and [[class struggle]]s are the primary drivers of [[Historical materialism|the historical development of political systems]], eventually leading to the downfall of capitalism and the emergence of socialism and [[communism]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Wolff|Leopold|2025|loc=Lead section, § 1. Alienation and Human Flourishing}} | {{harvnb|Howell|Prevenier|2001|pp=13–14}} | {{harvnb|Tosh|2002|pp=27, 224–225}} }}</ref> Communism is usually understood as a radical form of socialism that aims to replace private property with collective ownership and dissolve all class distinctions. In [[Marxist theory]], socialism and communism are considered distinct types of [[Post-capitalism|post-capitalist societies]]. From this perspective, socialism is an intermediate stage between capitalism and communism that still carries some features of capitalism, such as material scarcity, a ruling government, and [[division of labor]]. Marx argued that these features would gradually dissolve, leading to a communist society characterized by material abundance, absence of occupational specialization, and self-organization without a central government.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Arnold|loc=§ 2. Socialism vs. Communism in Marxist Thought}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA646 646–648]}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA231 231]}} }}</ref>{{efn|[[Syndicalism]], another form of socialism, seeks to transfer ownership and control of the means of production to [[Trade union|unions of workers]], often [[Anarcho-syndicalism|in combination with anarchist ideals]].<ref>{{harvnb|Belsey|2005}}</ref>}}

Various objections to socialism focus on its economic theory. Some argue that central planning and the absence of competition and market-driven price signals result in lower productivity and economic stagnation. Another line of criticism asserts that the different ideals motivating socialism are in conflict with each other. For example, the establishment of a massive state required to manage economic activity and social welfare may create new class distinctions, thereby undermining equality.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3c. Socialism}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA646 646–648]}} }}</ref>

=== Others ===
[[Environmentalism]] is a political ideology concerned with the relation between humans and nature. It seeks to preserve, restore, and enhance the [[natural environment]], including the protection of landscapes and animals. [[Anthropocentric]] environmentalism advocates such policies to improve human life, for example, to mitigate the global consequences of [[climate change]] or to promote local [[environmental justice]] by protecting [[marginalized groups]] from regional [[environmental degradation]]. This form of environmentalism can be integrated in various other political ideologies, such as conservatism and socialism. Non-anthropocentric environmentalism, also called [[ecocentrism]] and [[deep ecology]], differs by focusing on the [[Value theory#Intrinsic and instrumental|intrinsic value]] of nature itself. This view emphasizes that humans are only a small part of the [[ecosystem]] as a whole. It seeks to protect and improve nature for its own sake, not only because it serves human interests. This outlook covers diverse and sometimes contrasting interpretations of the relation between humans and nature, including the belief that humans should act as custodians of nature and the idea that modern human civilizations are the source of the problem and threaten natural balance.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 3e. Environmentalism}} | {{harvnb|Humphrey|2013|pp=293–299}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA235 235]}} }}</ref>

[[File:Portret van Niccolò Machiavelli, RP-P-1909-5432.jpg|thumb|alt=Black-and-white portrait of a bearded man wearing a high-collared shirt|Realism is closely associated with [[Niccolò Machiavelli]]'s emphasis on power, self-interest, and pragmatic governance.<ref name="186–187">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA186 186–187]}} | {{harvnb|Stevens|2010|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=q7IhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA191 191, 214–215]}} | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Machiavelli and Realpolitik}} }}</ref>]]

[[Realism (international relations)|Realism]] and [[Idealism in international relations|idealism]]{{efn|The specific meaning of these terms depends on the context: they denote different theories in other branches of philosophy, such as [[metaphysics]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Zuolo|2016|loc=§ Preliminary, § Political Realism: Towards a definition, § Three Basic Features and Main Instances of Political Idealism}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA238 238–239, 247]}} | {{harvnb|Cerbone|2024|loc=§ Introduction}} }}</ref>}} are two opposing approaches to explaining and guiding political action. According to realism, political activity is primarily driven by [[self-interest]] and power. It asserts that actors use both [[Soft power|soft]] and [[hard power]] to expand their own [[sphere of influence]]. Realists argue that politics should not be limited by moral constraints or shy away from violent conflicts when the power aspirations of different actors collide. They emphasize the importance of responding to concrete practical factors, with the primary goal of effectively shaping historical reality rather than pursuing ideals. Idealism, by contrast, asserts that political action should follow [[Morality|moral principles]]. It seeks to establish a just and fair social order based on universal ethical norms rather than narrow self-interest. Idealists reject established practices and institutions that promote unjust use of power and seek to replace them with fair governance, even if their idealized vision reflects a [[utopian]] aspiration distant from current circumstances.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Zuolo|2016|loc=§ Preliminary, § Political Realism: Towards a definition, § Three Basic Features and Main Instances of Political Idealism}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA238 238–239, 247]}} }}</ref>

[[Consequentialism]], [[Perfectionism (philosophy)|perfectionism]], and [[Pluralism (political philosophy)|pluralism]] are distinct but overlapping views about which things are valuable and how values should guide political activity. According to consequentialism, the value of any action depends on its concrete consequences. [[Classical utilitarianism]], an influential form of consequentialism, asserts that only [[happiness]] or [[pleasure]] is ultimately valuable. This view argues that politics should strive to produce the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Miller|2013|pp=333–334}} | {{harvnb|Wall|2013|pp=345–346}} }}</ref> [[Welfarism]], a closely related view, promotes [[well-being]], which can cover other features in addition to pleasure, such as health, [[personal growth]], meaningful [[Interpersonal relationship|relationships]], and a sense of [[Meaning of life|purpose in life]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Crisp|2021|loc=Lead section, § 5.1 Welfarism}} | {{harvnb|Hall|Tiberius|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=zZdGCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA175 175–176]}} | {{harvnb|Nebel|2024|loc=§ Introduction}} | {{harvnb|Hooker|2015|pp=15–16}} }}</ref> Perfectionism, a different evaluative outlook, asserts that there are certain objective goods, covering fields like morality, art, and culture, that promote the development of human nature. Although perfectionists disagree about what exactly those goods are, they all maintain that states should establish conditions that promote human excellence among their citizens.<ref>{{harvnb|Wall|2013|pp=345–346}}</ref> Value pluralists assert that diverse values influence political action. They often emphasize that different values can be opposed to each other and that value conflicts cannot always be resolved. For example, [[Isaiah Berlin]] argued that liberty and equality are conflicting values and that a gain in one value cannot make up for the loss in the other.<ref>{{harvnb|Crowder|2013|pp=356–357}}</ref>

[[Individualism]] prioritizes the importance of individuals over the community, an ideal typically promoted by liberal political systems. It emphasizes that society is at its core made up of individuals and seeks to defend them from social attempts to interfere with their preferred lifestyles. Individualism contrasts with [[collectivism]], which prioritizes the well-being of groups over individual interests and emphasizes the importance of group cohesion and unity. [[Communitarianism]] is a similar outlook that supports a social structure in which individuals are connected through strong social relationships and shared values. It argues that the personality and [[social identity]] of individuals are deeply influenced by community relations and social norms.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA230 230–231, 240]}} | {{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Collectivism, § Communitarianism, § Individualism}} }}</ref> [[Nationalism]] extends the focus on social relations to the state as a whole. It is closely associated with [[patriotism]] and promotes social cohesion through [[national identity]] based on shared customs, culture, and language.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA243 243]}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA465 465–466]}} | {{harvnb|Hill|Moore|2013|pp=485–486}} }}</ref>

[[Republicanism]] is a broad philosophical tradition that emphasizes [[civic virtue]], [[political participation]], and the rule of law. It argues that political action should promote the common good and social equality. This tradition is opposed to oppressive and authoritarian governance, advocating the separation of powers to prevent overconcentration of authority, encouraging citizens to participate in the political process, and seeking to hold the government accountable to the people.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Lovett|2022|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA248 248]}} }}</ref> [[Populism]] encompasses a variety of political outlooks that seek to promote the interests of ordinary people, typically contrasting the will of the people with the agenda of corrupt elites wielding power. The term is often associated with the negative connotation of attempting to gain support from uninformed people by appealing to popular sentiment.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA537 537]}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Populism}} }}</ref> Conversely, [[elitism]] is the belief that elites, rather than common people, should run the government.<ref>{{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Elitism}}</ref>

Various ideologies integrate religious values and principles into their political outlook. [[Christian democracy]], an influential tradition in [[Western Europe]], blends traditional [[Catholic social teaching]]s with democratic principles, emphasizing community, family, a harmonious social order, [[Personalism|respect for each person]], and tradition together with a critique of the modern [[Economic materialism|focus on material wealth and power]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Accetti|2019|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=QIGxDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 1, 8, 53]}} | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Christian Democracy}} }}</ref> [[Islamism]] seeks to incorporate [[Islam]]ic principles into governance, including the implementation of [[Sharia|Islamic law]] while maintaining a critical attitude towards Western influences.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Islamic politics}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA349 349]}} }}</ref> [[Hindu nationalism]] promotes governance and national identity rooted in [[Hinduism|Hindu]] values and traditions.<ref>{{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Hindu Nationalism}}</ref> Other religion-inspired political ideologies include [[Zionism]], [[Buddhist socialism]], and [[Confucianism]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Brown|McLean|McMillan|2018|loc=§ Chinese political thought, § Zionism}} | {{harvnb|Bajpai|Bonura|2013|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=IZo2AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA674 674]}} }}</ref> Contrasting with these approaches, [[Secularism]] opposes the integration of religious principles into politics.<ref>{{harvnb|Zala|2019}}</ref>

[[Contractarianism]] and [[contractualism]] are views about the sources and legitimacy of power. They argue that political authority should be based on some form of consent among the citizens, for example, as an implicit social contract or as what people would reasonably agree to under ideal circumstances.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Finkelstein|2013|pp=307–308}} | {{harvnb|James|2013|pp=321–322}} }}</ref>

[[Postmodernism]] rejects ideological systems that claim to offer objective, universal truths, with a particularly critical attitude towards [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] ideals of reason and progress. They oppose hierarchical power structures that perpetuate and enforce these ideals, calling instead for resistance to this type of centralized power while promoting a pluralism of local practices and ideologies.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|McLean|McMillan|2009|loc=§ Post-modernism}} | {{harvnb|May|2013|pp=665–667}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA542 542]}} }}</ref> [[Feminism]], another critical approach, targets injustice based on [[gender]], aiming to empower women and liberate them from unfair [[patriarchal]] social structures. Feminists focus on various forms of inequality, including social, economic, political, and legal inequality.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fiala|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA236 236]}} | {{harvnb|Scruton|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA247 247–248]}} }}</ref>

== Methodology ==
The [[Philosophical methodology|methodology]] of political philosophy{{efn|[[Political methodology]], a closely related subdiscipline of political science, examines how to measure political phenomena using [[Quantitative research|quantitative]] and [[Qualitative research|qualitative methods]].<ref>{{harvnb|Roberts|2018|p=597}}</ref>}} involves the critical examination of how to arrive at, [[Justification (epistemology)|justify]], and criticize [[knowledge]] claims. It is particularly relevant in attempts to solve theoretical [[Disagreement (epistemology)|disagreements]], such as disputes about the ideal form of government. Central to many methodological discussions is the evaluative or [[Normativity|normative]] nature of political philosophy as a discipline that examines which values, norms, and societal arrangements are desirable. Disagreements about normative claims are usually less tractable than disagreements about [[empirical]] facts, which can typically be resolved through [[observation]] and [[experimentation]]. As a result, the different arguments presented in normative disagreements are frequently not sufficient to lead to generally accepted solutions. One interpretation suggests that these difficulties indicate that major parts of political philosophy{{efn|Some areas of political philosophy avoid these problems associated with normativity by focusing on the description and definition of political concepts, such as ''power'' and ''sovereignty''. They aim to characterize foundational concepts of political thought rather than recommending what should be done, thereby providing an [[ontology]] of politics.<ref>{{harvnb|Ronzoni|2016|loc=§ Political Philosophy as Ontology of the Political}}</ref>}} primarily express [[Subjectivity and objectivity (philosophy)|subjective]] views without a universally accepted rational foundation.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Besussi|2016|loc=§ Preliminary, § Philosophy and Politics: Why, § Philosophy and Politics: How}} | {{harvnb|Knowles|2006|pp=3–4}} | {{harvnb|Plant|1998|loc=Lead section, § 2. The Critique of Political Philosophy, § 3. The communitarian response}} | {{harvnb|Das|1969|pp=30–31}} }}</ref>

Political philosophers sometimes start from [[common sense]] and established beliefs, which they systematically and critically review to assess their validity. This process includes the [[Conceptual analysis|clarification of basic concepts]], which can be used to formalize the underlying beliefs into precise theories while also considering arguments for and against them and exploring alternative views.<ref>{{harvnb|Besussi|2016|loc=§ Preliminary, § Philosophy and Politics: Why, § Philosophy and Politics: How}}</ref> The methodologies of particularism and foundationalism propose different approaches to this enterprise. Particularists use a [[Bottom-up and top-down design|bottom-up approach]] and take individual intuitions or assessments of specific circumstances as their starting point. They seek to systematize these individual judgments into a coherent theoretical framework. Foundationalists, by contrast, employ a top-down approach. They begin their inquiry from wide-reaching principles, such as the maxim of [[classical utilitarianism]], which evaluates actions and policies based on the pain-pleasure balance they produce. Foundationalism aims to construct comprehensive systems of political thought from a small number of basic principles.<ref>{{harvnb|Knowles|2006|pp=3–4, 8–9}}</ref> The method of [[reflective equilibrium]] forms a middle ground between particularism and foundationalism. It tries to reconcile general principles with individual intuitions to arrive at a balanced and coherent framework that incorporates the perspectives from both approaches.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Knowles|2006|pp=9–12}} | {{harvnb|Pettit|2012|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=f53Bjn60IEIC&pg=PA11 11]}} }}</ref>

[[File:Thomas Hobbes (portrait).jpg|thumb|alt=Oil painting of a man with gray hear wearing a formal attire|A historically influential method seeks to justify political theories by reference to human nature, such as [[Thomas Hobbes]]'s social contract theory proceeding from the assumed brutish natural state of humans in a perpetual conflict.<ref name="Moseley 2007 https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA187 187">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA187 187]}} | {{harvnb|Plant|1998|loc=§ 1. Universalism in Political Philosophy}} }}</ref>]]

A historically influential form of foundationalism grounds political ideologies in theories about [[human nature]]. It can take different forms, like reflections on human needs, abilities, and goals as well as the role of humans in the natural order or in a divine plan. Philosophers use these assumptions about human nature to infer political ideologies about the ideal form of government and other normative theories.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Plant|1998|loc=§ 1. Universalism in Political Philosophy}} | {{harvnb|Neal|2016|loc=§ Preliminary}} }}</ref> For example, [[Thomas Hobbes]] believed that the natural state of humans is a perpetual conflict, arguing that a strong state based on a general social contract is necessary to ensure stability and security.<ref name="Moseley 2007 https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA187 187"/> An influential criticism of foundationalist approaches centered on human nature argues that one cannot infer [[Is–ought problem|normative claims from empirical facts]], meaning that empirical facts about human nature do not provide a secure foundation for normative theories about the right form of government.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Plant|1998|loc=§ 2. The Critique of Political Philosophy, § 3. The Communitarian Response}} | {{harvnb|Ronzoni|2016|loc=§ Preliminary, § How to Derive an Ought from an Is}} }}</ref>

Foundationalism is typically combined with [[universalism]], which asserts that basic moral and political principles apply equally to every culture. Universalists suggest that the foundational values and standards of political action are the same for all societies and remain constant across historical periods. [[Cultural relativism]] rejects this transcultural perspective, arguing that norms and values are inherently tied to specific cultures. This view asserts that political principles represent assumptions of specific communities and cannot serve as universal standards for evaluating other cultures.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Caney|2005|pp=3–4, 25–26}} | {{harvnb|Plant|1998|loc=§ 1. Universalism in Political Philosophy}} | {{harvnb|Miller|1998|loc=[https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/overview/political-philosophy/v-1 § Lead section]}} }}</ref>

[[Methodological individualism]] and [[Holism in science|holism]] are perspectives about the basic units of society. According to methodological individualism, societies are ultimately nothing but the individuals that comprise them. As a result, it analyzes political actions as the actions of the particular people who make decisions and participate within the social structure. This view sees collective entities, like states, nations, and other institutions, as a mere byproduct of individual actions. Methodological holists, by contrast, argue for the irreducible existence of collective entities in addition to individuals. They contend that collective entities are more than the sum of their parts and see them as essential elements of political explanations.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 2. Methodological Issues}} | {{harvnb|List|Spiekermann|2013|pp=629–630}} }}</ref>

Another methodological distinction is between [[rationalism]] and [[irrationalism]]. Rationalists assume that universal [[reason]] is or should be the guiding principle underlying political action. They see reason as a common thread that unites diverse societies and can ensure peace between them. Irrationalists reject this assumption and focus on other factors influencing human behavior, including emotions, cultural traditions, and social expectations. Some irrationalists argue for [[polylogism]], the view that the laws of reason or logic are not universal but depend on cultural context, meaning that the same course of action may be rational from the perspective of one culture and irrational from another.<ref>{{harvnb|Moseley|loc=§ 2. Methodological Issues}}</ref>{{efn|Political epistemology is the branch of political philosophy dedicated to the study of knowledge, [[rationality]], and [[ignorance]] in political contexts. For example, it examines political effects of [[fake news]] and voter ignorance.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Kogelmann|Manor|2013|pp=726–727}} | {{harvnb|Edenberg|Hannon|2021|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=fcUqEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 1]}} }}</ref>}}

[[Thought experiments]] are methodological devices in which political philosophers construct imagined situations to test the validity of political ideologies and explore alternative social arrangements. For example, in his thought experiment ''[[original position]]'', [[John Rawls]] explores the underlying framework of a just society by imagining a situation in which individuals collectively decide the rules of their society. To ensure [[impartiality]], individuals do not know which position they will occupy in this society, a condition termed ''veil of ignorance''.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Miščević|2017|pp=153–155}} | {{harvnb|Freeman|2023|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref>

== History ==
{{Main|History of political thought}}
[[File:Half Portraits of the Great Sage and Virtuous Men of Old - Confucius.jpg|thumb|upright=.8|alt=Painting of a man with a long beard and mustache wearing traditional Chinese scholarly robes|[[Confucius]] saw the virtue of [[Ren (philosophy)|humaneness or benevolence]] as the foundation of social order.<ref name="Bai 2013 191–195">{{harvnb|Bai|2013|pp=191–195}}</ref>]]

Political philosophy has its roots in [[Ancient history|antiquity]] and many foundational concepts of Western political thought emerged in [[ancient Greek philosophy]]. Early influential contributions were made by the historian [[Thucydides]] (460–400 BCE), who inspired the school of realism by analyzing power relations and self-interest as central political factors.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA183 183]}} | {{harvnb|Korab-Karpowicz|2016|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=PfcoCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 1, 6–7]}} }}</ref> [[Plato]] (428–348 BCE) discussed the role of the state, its relation to the citizens, the nature of justice, and forms of government. He was critical of democracy and favored a [[utopian]] monarchy ruled by a wise and benevolent [[philosopher king]] to promote the common good.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|pp=730–731}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA183 183–184]}} | {{harvnb|Korab-Karpowicz|2016|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=PfcoCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA16 16, 20, 23–26]}} }}</ref> His student [[Aristotle]] (384–322 BCE) objected to Plato's utopianism, preferring a more practical approach to ensure [[political stability]] and avoid [[extremism]]. He defended [[Perfectionism (philosophy)|perfectionism]], asserting that humans have an inborn goal to develop their [[Rationality|rational]] and moral capacities and that the state should foster this tendency.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|p=731}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA184 184]}} | {{harvnb|Korab-Karpowicz|2016|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=PfcoCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA34 34, 44–45, 51, 53]}} }}</ref> In [[Roman philosophy]], the stateman [[Cicero]] (106–43 BCE) infused earlier Greek philosophy with [[Stoicism]]. He asserted that political action should be guided by [[reason]] rather than emotion and supported political participation following the [[meritocratic]] ideal of rule by the capable.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Stevens|2010|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=q7IhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA158 158–159]}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA184 184–185]}} }}</ref>

Diverse traditions of political thought also developed in [[ancient China]]. [[Confucianism]], initiated by [[Confucius]] (551–479 BCE), saw the virtue of [[Ren (philosophy)|humaneness or benevolence]] as the foundation of social order and norms. It sought to balance conflicting interests between [[Private sphere|private]] and [[public sphere]]s, seeing society as an extension of the family.<ref name="Bai 2013 191–195"/> [[Taoism]], another tradition, focused on the relation between humans and nature, arguing that humans should act in harmony with [[Tao|the natural order of the universe]] while avoiding excessive desires. It is sometimes associated with anarchism because of its emphasis on natural order, spontaneity, and rejection of coercive authority.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Bai|2013|pp=195–196}} | {{harvnb|Ames|1983|pp=27–28, 30, 33–34}} | {{harvnb|Angle|2022|loc=§ 2.5 Zhuangzi: Rejecting Governance}} }}</ref> [[Legalism (Chinese philosophy)|Legalism]], a realist school of thought, proposed that effective governance of large states requires strict laws based on rewards and punishments to control the harmful effects of personal self-interest.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pines|2023|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Bai|2013|pp=197–198}} }}</ref> In [[ancient India]], various social and political theories emerged in the 2nd millennium BCE, recorded in the [[Rig Veda]], like the idea that the social order is naturally divided into [[Caste system in India|castes]], each fulfilling a different role in society.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Raghuramaraju|2013|pp=200, 204}} | {{harvnb|Inayatullah|1998|loc=§ Varna}} }}</ref> The [[Arthashastra]], traditionally attributed to [[Chanakya|Kautilya]] (375–283 BCE),<ref>{{harvnb|Whatmore|2021|loc=§ Definitions and Justifications}}</ref> was a political treatise on the essential components of states, such as king, ministers, territory, and army, describing their nature and interaction.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Raghuramaraju|2013|pp=202–204}} | {{harvnb|Inayatullah|1998|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref> [[Buddhist]] political thought, starting in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE, rejected the strict caste division of Hindu society, focusing instead on universal equality, [[Sangha|brotherhood]], and the reduction of everyone's [[Duḥkha|suffering]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Raghuramaraju|2013|pp=204–207}} | {{harvnb|Moore|2023|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref>

[[File:Bust of Ibn Khaldun (Casbah of Bejaia, Algeria).jpg|thumb|upright=.8|alt=Bust of a man with a turban and a beard|[[Ibn Khaldun]] distinguished different types of states depending on the primary interests they serve.<ref name="Khan 2019 183–184">{{harvnb|Khan|2019|pp=183–184}}</ref>]]

Political philosophy in the [[medieval period]] was characterized by the interplay between ancient Greek thought and religion.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sigmund|2013|p=25}} | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|p=731}} | {{harvnb|Hampsher-Monk|1998|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref> [[Augustine]] (354–430 CE) saw states in the human world as fundamentally flawed compared to the divine ideal but also regarded them as vehicles for human improvement and the establishment of peace and order.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sigmund|2013|p=27}} | {{harvnb|Mattox|loc=Lead section, § 1c. The Augustinian World View}} }}</ref> Influenced by Augustine's philosophy, [[Thomas Aquinas]] (1225–1274 CE) developed [[natural law theory]] by synthesizing [[Aristotelianism|Aristotelian]] and [[Christian philosophy]]. He argued that law serves the common good, positing that God rules the world according to the [[eternal law]] while humans participate in this plan by following the natural law, which reflects the moral order and can be known directly.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sigmund|2013|p=28}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA186 186]}} | {{harvnb|Hampsher-Monk|1998|loc=4. Medieval}} }}</ref>

In the Arabic–Persian tradition, philosophers sought to integrate Ancient Greek philosophy with [[Islamic philosophy|Islamic thought]]. According to [[Al-Farabi]] (872–950), the state is a cooperative entity in which individuals voluntarily work together for common prosperity. Similar to Plato's vision, he imagines a hierarchical structure in which wise philosophers rule.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Khan|2019|pp=172–173}} | {{harvnb|March|2013|pp=216–217}} }}</ref> [[Al-Mawardi]] (972–1058) developed a complex theory of [[caliphates]], examining how this form of government combines religious and political authority in the person of the caliph.<ref>{{harvnb|Khan|2019|pp=176–178}}</ref> Following a descriptive approach, [[Ibn Khaldun]] (1332–1406) distinguished between natural states, which serve the worldly interests of the rulers, rational states, which serve the worldly interests of the people, and caliphates, which serve both worldly and [[Afterlife|otherworldly]] interests of the people.<ref name="Khan 2019 183–184"/> Other influential contributions were made by [[Avicenna]] (980–1037), [[Al-Ghazali]] (1058–1111), and [[Averroes]] (1126–1198).<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Khan|2019|p=172}} | {{harvnb|March|2013|pp=216–217}} }}</ref> Meanwhile in China starting roughly 960 CE, [[neo-Confucian]] thinkers argued for [[decentralized]] governance. They identified two main functions of the government: to organize the social order and to [[Moral education|morally educate]] citizens.<ref>{{harvnb|Angle|2022|loc=§ 4. The Neo-Confucian Era}}</ref>

In [[early modern philosophy]], the medieval focus on religion was replaced by a [[Secularism|secular]] outlook. The statesman [[Niccolò Machiavelli]] (1469–1527) defended a radical form of political realism, emphasizing the importance of power and pragmatic governance in which [[the ends justify the means]].<ref name="186–187"/> [[Thomas Hobbes]] (1588–1679) tried to provide a rational foundation for secular states. He argued that humans are naturally driven by [[Psychological egoism|egoism]], leading to a [[Bellum omnium contra omnes|war of all against all]] that can only be avoided through an [[authoritarian state]] justified by a common [[social contract]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|p=731}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA188 188]}} }}</ref> As a founder of liberalism, [[John Locke]] (1632–1704) also based the state on the consent of the governed but prioritized individual freedom over state power. He suggested that humans are born free and equal, and that the primary objective of the state is to protect this natural condition.<ref name="Sankowski 2005 731–732"/> [[David Hume]] (1711–1776) rejected social contracts as the foundation of the state, asserting instead that governments typically evolve without a prior plan and are accepted by the people because of their utility.<ref>{{harvnb|McArthur|2016|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=szXcCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA489 489–490]}}</ref> [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] (1712–1778) introduced the concept of the [[general will]], which is the will of the people to realize the common good.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|p=732}} | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA188 188]}} | {{harvnb|Stevens|2010|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=q7IhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA250 250]}} | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Rousseau and the General Will}} }}</ref> Influenced by Rousseau, [[Immanuel Kant]] (1724–1804) argued that laws should reflect the general will of the people, asserting that every citizen has the fundamental right to freedom and the duty to uphold the social contract.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Rauscher|2024|loc=Lead section, § 2. Freedom as the Basis of the State, § 3. Social Contract}} | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Kant}} }}</ref> [[Edmund Burke]] (1729–1797), often considered the father of conservatism, stressed the importance of the accumulated wisdom of past generations while opposing radical change, such as the [[French Revolution]].<ref name="Laslett 2006 loc=§ The Federalist, Burke, and Paine"/>

[[File:Hannah Arendt auf dem 1. Kulturkritikerkongress, Barbara Niggl Radloff, FM-2019-1-5-9-16 (cropped) (cropped).jpg|thumb|upright=.8|alt=Black-and-white photo of a smiling woman with curly hair|[[Hannah Arendt]] examined the nature of totalitarian regimes.<ref name="Tömmel 2025 loc=§ 3. Arendt's Concept of Totalitarianism">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Yar|loc=§ 3. On Totalitarianism}} | {{harvnb|Tömmel|d'Entreves|2025|loc=§ 3. Arendt's Concept of Totalitarianism}} }}</ref>]]

[[Jeremy Bentham]] (1748–1832) developed [[utilitarianism]], promoting the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. [[John Stuart Mill]] (1806–1873) adapted this philosophy to support classical liberalism.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA189 189, 191]}} | {{harvnb|Sankowski|2005|pp=732–733}} | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ The Utilitarian Tradition}} }}</ref> According to [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel]] (1770–1831), the role of the state is the embodiment of ethical life and rational freedom, which he saw best realized in conservative, constitutional monarchies.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA190 190]}} | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Hegel}} }}</ref> Influenced by Hegel, [[Karl Marx]] (1818–1883) and [[Friedrich Engels]] (1820–1895) analyzed the economic forces and class conflicts in capitalist societies, calling for a [[Communist revolution|revolution to replace capitalism with socialism and communism]].<ref name="Sankowski 2005 733"/> Another radical reconceptualization of the social order was proposed by [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] (1809–1865), often regarded as the father of [[anarchism]], who rejected state authority as an obstacle to liberty and equality.<ref name="Laslett 2006 loc=§ Anarchism">{{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Anarchism}}</ref>{{efn|He is known for the slogan ''[[Property is theft]]''.<ref name="Laslett 2006 loc=§ Anarchism">{{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Anarchism}}</ref>}}

In the 20th century, interest in political philosophy declined as a result of criticisms of its normative claims and a shifting interest towards the more descriptive discipline of [[political science]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Laslett|Cummings|2006|loc=§ Twentieth-Century Political Thought}} | {{harvnb|Plant|1998|loc=§ 2. The Critique of Political Philosophy}} }}</ref> A central topic in the philosophy of [[Hannah Arendt]] (1906–1975) was the nature of [[totalitarian regimes]], exemplified by [[Nazi Germany]] and Soviet [[Stalinism]]. She highlighted both their ability to mobilize the population through simplistic ideologies and their use of terror as an [[end in itself]].<ref name="Tömmel 2025 loc=§ 3. Arendt's Concept of Totalitarianism"/> [[John Rawls]] (1921–2002) explored the nature of [[justice as fairness]] and examined the legitimate use of power in liberal democracies.<ref name="books.google.com"/> Inspired by Rawls, [[Robert Nozick]] (1938–2002) defended libertarianism, supporting a minimal state that protects individual rights and liberties.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA195 195]}} | {{harvnb|Mack|2024|loc=Lead}} }}</ref> The [[Postmodern philosophy|postmodern]] thinker [[Michel Foucault]] (1926–1984) analyzed power dynamics within society, with particular interest in how various societal institutions, such as [[medical]] and [[correctional institution]]s, shape human behavior through [[Power-knowledge|the interplay of knowledge and power]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Whatmore|2021|loc=§ Michel Foucault and governmentality}} | {{harvnb|Gutting|Oksala|2022|loc=§ 3. Major Works}} }}</ref> In [[Indian political philosophy]], [[Mahatma Gandhi]] (1869–1948) argued for [[Swaraj|self-rule]] and [[Satyagraha|nonviolent resistance]] to [[colonialism]] while seeking to dismantle the caste system to achieve equality.<ref>{{harvnb|Inayatullah|1998|loc=§ 4. Varna}}</ref> [[Sri Aurobindo]] (1872–1950) advocated for [[religious nationalism]], which formed part of his broader philosophical worldview describing the spiritual evolution of the world as a whole.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Verma|2000|pp=47–48}} | {{harvnb|Inayatullah|1998|loc=§ 5. Structure, history and the cycle}} }}</ref> In China, [[Chinese Marxism|Marxism was reinterpreted]] and combined with Confucian thought, considering [[peasantry]] rather than the working class as the main force behind the communist revolution.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Qi|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=nxWkAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA99 99]}} | {{harvnb|Tian|2009|pp=512–513}} }}</ref> In the [[Islamic world]], [[Islamic modernism]] sought to reconcile traditional Muslim teachings with [[modernity]].<ref>{{harvnb|March|2009|loc=Lead section}}</ref>

== See also ==
*[[Political journalism]]
*[[Political theology]]

== References ==
=== Notes ===
{{notelist}}

=== Citations ===
{{reflist}}

=== Sources ===
{{refbegin|30em}}
* {{cite book |last1=Accetti |first1=Carlo Invernizzi |title=What is Christian Democracy?: Politics, Religion and Ideology |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-38615-9 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QIGxDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2019 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Ames |first1=Roger T. |title=Is Political Taoism Anarchism |journal=Journal of Chinese Philosophy |volume=10 |issue=1 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6253.1983.tb00272.x |date=1983 |pages=27–47 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Angle |first1=Stephen C. |title=Social and Political Thought in Chinese Philosophy |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-social-political/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=10 May 2025  |date=2022 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Arnold |first1=Samuel |title=Socialism |url=https://iep.utm.edu/socialis/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=20 April 2025}}
* {{cite book |last1=Bai |first1=Tongdong |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=18. The Political Philosophy of China |pages=189–199 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Bajpai |first1=Rochana |last2=Bonura |first2=Carlo |editor1-last=Freeden |editor1-first=Michael |editor2-last=Sargent |editor2-first=Lyman Tower |editor3-last=Stears |editor3-first=Marc |title=The Oxford Handbook of Political Ideologies |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-958597-7 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IZo2AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA674 |language=en |chapter=South Asian and Southeast Asian Ideologies |date=2013 |pages=661–682 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Beetham |first1=David |editor-last=Craig |editor-first1=Edward |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S034-1 |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/legitimacy/v-1 |chapter=Legitimacy |date=1998 |isbn=978-0415073103}}
* {{cite book |last1=Belsey |first1=Andrew  |chapter=Syndicalism |editor1-last=Honderich |editor1-first=Ted |title=The Oxford Companion to Philosophy |date=2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-926479-7 |pages=906 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Besussi |first1=Antonella |editor1-last=Besussi |editor1-first=Antonella |title=A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-18868-1 |doi=10.4324/9781315564555 |language=en |chapter=1. Philosophy and Politics |date=2016 |pages=3–16}}
* {{cite book |last1=Bobbio |first1=Norberto |title=Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-1-5095-1412-0 |language=en |date=2016 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Bradley |first1=Ben |title=Well-being |publisher=Polity Press |isbn=978-0-7456-6272-5 |date=2015 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Bramble |first1=Ben |editor1-last=LaFollette |editor1-first=Hugh |title=International Encyclopedia of Ethics |publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |isbn=978-1-4443-6707-2 |language=en |chapter=Welfarism |date=2020 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Brown |first1=Garrett Wallace |last2=McLean |first2=Iain |last3=McMillan |first3=Alistair |title=The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics and International Relations |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-967084-0 |language=en |date=2018 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Bunnin |first1=Nicholas |last2=Yu |first2=Jiyuan |author2-link=Jiyuan Yu |title=The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-0-470-99721-5 |language=en |date=2008 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Caney |first1=Simon |title=Justice Beyond Borders |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0-19-829350-X |language=en |date=2005 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Carter |first1=Ian |editor1-last=Besussi |editor1-first=Antonella |title=A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-18867-4 |language=en |chapter=14. Equality |date=2016 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Cerbone |first1=David R. |title=Wittgenstein on Realism and Idealism |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-92221-0 |language=en |date=2024 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Christman |first1=John |title=Social and Political Philosophy: A Contemporary Introduction |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-43599-0 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hmJQDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA21 |language=en |date=2017 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Cresswell |first1=Julia |title=Oxford Dictionary of Word Origins |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-886875-0 |edition=3 |date=2021 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Crisp |first1=Roger |title=Well-Being |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/well-being/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=15 December 2024  |date=2021 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Crowder |first1=George |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=32. Pluralism |pages=356–366 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Das |first1=Frank Thakur |title=The Dilemma of Criticism in Political Philosophy |journal=The Indian Journal of Political Science |volume=30 |issue=1 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41854306 |issn=0019-5510 |date=1969 |pages=30–49|jstor=41854306 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Edenberg |first1=Elizabeth |last2=Hannon |first2=Michael |editor1-last=Edenberg |editor1-first=Elizabeth |editor2-last=Hannon |editor2-first=Michael |title=Political Epistemology |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-289333-8 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fcUqEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |chapter=Introduction |date=2021 |pages=1–10}}
* {{cite book |last1=Feinberg |first1=Joel |editor-last=Craig |editor-first1=Edward |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S026-1 |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/freedom-and-liberty/v-1 |chapter=Freedom and Liberty |date=1998 |isbn=978-0415073103}}
* {{cite book |last1=Fiala |first1=Andrew |editor1-last=Fiala |editor1-first=Andrew |title=The Bloomsbury Companion to Political Philosophy |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-1-4411-1434-1 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XXApBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA238 |language=en |chapter=Glossary |date=2015 |pages=227–254}}
* {{cite web |last1=Fiala |first1=Andrew |title=Anarchism |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anarchism/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=21 April 2025  |date=2021 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Finkelstein |first1=Claire |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=28. Contractarianism |pages=307–320 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Freeden |first1=Michael |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-003-41159-8 |edition=2 |doi=10.4324/9781003411598-24 |language=en |chapter=Liberalism |date=2024 |pages=237–248}}
* {{cite web |last1=Freeman |first1=Samuel |title=Original Position |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/original-position/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=4 May 2025  |date=2023 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Friedrich |first1=Carl J. |title=Tradition and Authority |publisher=Macmillan Education UK |isbn=978-1-349-01046-2 |chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-01046-2_8 |language=en |chapter=Authority and Legitimacy |date=1972 |pages=89–98|doi=10.1007/978-1-349-01046-2_8 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Galston |first1=William A. |title=Liberal Purposes: Goods, Virtues, and Diversity in the Liberal State |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-42250-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=88N-1mITdzYC&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=1991 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Gilabert |first1=Pablo |last2=O’Neill |first2=Martin |title=Socialism |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socialism/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=19 April 2025  |date=2024 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Green |first1=Leslie |editor-last=Craig |editor-first1=Edward |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S004-1 |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/authority/v-1 |chapter=Authority |date=1998 |isbn=978-0415073103}}
* {{cite book |last1=Griffin |first1=James P.  |chapter=State, The |editor1-last=Honderich |editor1-first=Ted |title=The Oxford Companion to Philosophy |date=2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-926479-7 |pages=893–894 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Grunebaum |first1=James O. |chapter=Property |editor1-last=Honderich |editor1-first=Ted |title=The Oxford Companion to Philosophy |date=2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-926479-7 |pages=762–763 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Gutting |first1=Gary |last2=Oksala |first2=Johanna |title=Michel Foucault |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=11 May 2025  |date=2022 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Hall |first1=Alicia |last2=Tiberius |first2=Valerie |editor1-last=Fletcher |editor1-first=Guy |title=The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Well-Being |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-40265-7 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zZdGCgAAQBAJ |language=en |chapter=Well-Being and Subject Dependence |date=2015 |pages=175–186}}
* {{cite web |last1=Hamilton |first1=Andy |title=Conservatism |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/conservatism/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=16 April 2025  |date=2020 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Hampsher-Monk |first1=Iain |chapter=Political Philosophy, History of |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/political-philosophy-history-of/v-1 |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S043-1  |date=1998 |isbn=978-0-415-25069-6 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Heywood |first1=Andrew |last2=Chin |first2=Clayton |title=Political Theory: An Introduction |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-1-350-32859-4 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=u_ioEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5 |language=en |date=2023 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Hill |first1=Arthur |last2=Moore |first2=Margaret |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=Nationalism |pages=485–495 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Hoad |first1=T. F. |title=The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology |date=1996 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0-19-283098-8 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Hooker |first1=Brad |title=The Elements of Well-Being |journal=Journal of Practical Ethics |volume=3 |issue=1 |url=https://philarchive.org/rec/HOOTEO-8 |date=2015 |ssrn=2624595 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Howell |first1=Martha C. |last2=Prevenier |first2=Walter |title=From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods |publisher=Cornell University Press |isbn=978-0-8014-8560-2 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wSqgwOZPjJ4C&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2001}}
* {{cite book |last1=Humphrey |first1=Mathew |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan  |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |chapter=27. Environmentalism |date=2013 |pages=293–304 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Inayatullah |first1=Sohail |chapter=Political Philosophy, Indian |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/political-philosophy-indian/v-1 |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-F083-1  |date=1998 |isbn=978-0-415-25069-6 }}
* {{cite book |last1=James |first1=Aaron |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=29. Contractualism and Political Liberalism |pages=321–332 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Jori |first1=Mario |editor-last=Craig |editor-first1=Edward |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-T008-1 |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/legal-positivism/v-1 |chapter=Legal Positivism |date=1998 |isbn=978-0415073103}}
* {{cite book |last1=Kekes |first1=John |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |chapter=23. Conservatism |date=2013 |pages=249–258 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Khan |first1=M. A. Muqtedar |title=Islam and Good Governance |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan US |isbn=978-1-137-55718-6 |language=en |date=2019 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Knowles |first1=Dudley |title=Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-135-36086-3 |language=en |date=2006 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Kogelmann |first1=Brian |last2=Manor |first2=Aylon |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |chapter=64. Political Epistemology |date=2013 |pages=726–736}}
* {{cite book |last1=Korab-Karpowicz |first1=W. Julian |title=On the History of Political Philosophy: Great Political Thinkers from Thucydides to Locke |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-34601-2 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PfcoCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2016 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Laslett |first1=Peter |last2=Cummings |first2=Philip W. |editor1-last=Borchert |editor1-first=Donald M. |title=Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 7: Oakeshott - Presupposition |date=2006 |publisher=Thomson Gale, Macmillan Reference |isbn=978-0-02-865787-5 |edition=2. |url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/political-philosophy-history |chapter=Political Philosophy, History of }}
* {{cite book |last1=Law |first1=Jonathan |last2=Martin |first2=Elizabeth A. |title=A Dictionary of Law |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095631435 |chapter=Confederation |date=2013}}
* {{cite journal |last1=List |first1=Christian |last2=Spiekermann |first2=Kai |title=Methodological Individualism and Holism in Political Science: A Reconciliation |journal=American Political Science Review |volume=107 |issue=4 |doi=10.1017/S0003055413000373 |date=2013 |pages=629–643|url=http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/53455/1/List_Spiekermann_Methodological-individualism-and-holism-in-political-science_2013.pdf }}
* {{cite book |last1=Long |first1=Roderick T. |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |chapter=21. Anarchism |date=2013 |pages=225–236 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Lovett |first1=Frank |title=Republicanism |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/republicanism/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=7 May 2025  |date=2022 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Mack |first1=Eric |title=Robert Nozick's Political Philosophy |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nozick-political/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=10 May 2025  |date=2024 }}
* {{cite book |last1=March |first1=Andrew F. |chapter=Political Thought, Modern Islamic |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/political-thought-modern-islamic/v-1 |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S111-1  |date=2009 |isbn=978-0-415-25069-6 }}
* {{cite book |last1=March |first1=Andrew F. |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=20. Islamic Political Thought |pages=211–222 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Mattox |first1=John Mark |title=Augustine: Political and Social Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/augustine-political-and-social-philosophy/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=8 May 2025}}
* {{cite book |last1=May |first1=Todd |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=Postmodernism and Politics |pages=665–675 }}
* {{cite book |last1=McArthur |first1=Neil |editor1-last=Russell |editor1-first=Paul |title=The Oxford Handbook of Hume |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-049392-9 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=szXcCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA489 |language=en |chapter=Hume's Political Philosophy |date=2016 |pages=489–506 }}
* {{cite book |last1=McLean |first1=Iain |last2=McMillan |first2=Alistair |title=The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-101827-5 |language=en |date=2009 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Miller |first1=David |editor-last=Craig |editor-first1=Edward |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S099-1 |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/overview/political-philosophy/v-1 |chapter=Political Philosophy |date=1998 |isbn=978-0415073103}}
* {{cite book |last1=Miller |first1=David |title=Political Philosophy: A Very Short Introduction |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-280395-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EegRDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2003 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Miller |first1=Dale E. |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=30. Utilitarianism and consequentialism |pages=333–344 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Miller |first1=David |title=Justice |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=11 April 2025  |date=2025 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Miščević |first1=Nenad |editor1-last=Stuart |editor1-first=Michael T. |editor2-last=Fehige |editor2-first=Yiftach |editor3-last=Brown |editor3-first=James Robert |title=The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-351-70551-6 |language=en |chapter=Thought Experiments in Political Philosophy |date=2017 |pages=153–170}}
* {{cite book |last1=Moore |first1=Matthew J. |chapter=Buddhist Political Theory |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/buddhist-political-theory/v-1 |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-ZB007-1  |date=2023 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-25069-6 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Moseley |first1=Alexander |title=Political Philosophy: Methodology |url=https://iep.utm.edu/polphil/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=6 April 2025}}
* {{cite book |last1=Moseley |first1=Alexander |title=An Introduction to Political Philosophy |publisher=Bloomsbury |isbn=978-1-4411-8861-8 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bXU8CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2007 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Neal |first1=Patrick |editor1-last=Besussi |editor1-first=Antonella |title=A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-18868-1 |doi=10.4324/9781315564555 |language=en |chapter=Politics / Metaphysics |date=2016 |pages=79–90}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Nebel |first1=Jacob M. |title=A Choice-Functional Characterization of Welfarism |journal=Journal of Economic Theory |volume=222 |doi=10.1016/j.jet.2024.105918 |date=2024 |url=https://philarchive.org/rec/NEBACC }}
* {{cite book |last1=Park |first1=Chris |title=A Dictionary of Environment and Conservation |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-860995-7 |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780198609957.001.0001/acref-9780198609957-e-8113 |language=en |chapter=Technocracy |date=2007 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Pettit |first1=Philip |editor1-last=Goodin |editor1-first=Robert E. |editor2-last=Pettit |editor2-first=Philip |editor3-last=Pogge |editor3-first=Thomas W. |title=A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-1-4443-5087-6 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f53Bjn60IEIC&pg=PA11 |language=en |chapter=Analytic Philosophy |date=2012 |pages=5–35}}
* {{cite web |last1=Pines |first1=Yuri |title=Legalism in Chinese Philosophy |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-legalism/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=8 May 2025  |date=2023 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Plant |first1=Raymond |chapter=Political Philosophy, Nature of |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/political-philosophy-nature-of/v-1 |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |access-date=3 May 2025 |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S044-1  |date=1998 |isbn=978-0-415-25069-6 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Qi |first1=Xiaoying |title=Globalized Knowledge Flows and Chinese Social Theory |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-134-69162-3 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nxWkAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA99 |language=en |date=2014 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Quong |first1=Jonathan |title=Liberalism Without Perfection |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-959487-0 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nSkUDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA151 |language=en |date=2011 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Raghuramaraju |first1=A. |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=19. Indian Political Philosophy |pages=200–210 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Rauscher |first1=Frederick |title=Kant's Social and Political Philosophy |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-social-political/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=11 May 2025  |date=2024 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Ricciardi |first1=Mario |editor1-last=Besussi |editor1-first=Antonella |title=A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-18867-4 |language=en |chapter=13. Liberty |date=2016 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Roberts |first1=Margaret E. |title=What is Political Methodology? |journal=PS: Political Science & Politics |volume=51 |issue=3 |doi=10.1017/S1049096518000537 |date=2018 |pages=597–601}}
* {{cite book |last1=Ronzoni |first1=Miriam |editor1-last=Besussi |editor1-first=Antonella |title=A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-18868-1 |doi=10.4324/9781315564555 |language=en |chapter=Facts and Principles |date=2016 |pages=53–64}}
* {{cite book |last1=Sankowski |first1=Edward |chapter=Political Philosophy, History of |editor1-last=Honderich |editor1-first=Ted |title=The Oxford Companion to Philosophy |date=2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-926479-7 |pages=730–734 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Scruton |first1=Roger |title=The Palgrave Macmillan Dictionary of Political Thought |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-0-230-62509-9 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=t9uGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2007 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Shipka |first1=Thomas A. |title=A Critique of Anarchism |journal=Studies in Soviet Thought |volume=27 |issue=3 |doi=10.1007/bf00831906 |date=1984 |pages=247–261}}
* {{cite book |last1=Sigmund |first1=Paul |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=3. Aquinas |pages=25–35 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Smith |first1=George H. |title=The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-107-00507-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WxAVSJlyIu4C&pg=PA137 |language=en |date=2013 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Stenner |first1=Karen |title=Three Kinds of 'Conservatism' |journal=Psychological Inquiry |volume=20 |issue=2–3 |doi=10.1080/10478400903028615 |date=2009 |pages=142–159}}
* {{cite book |last1=Stevens |first1=Richard G. |title=Political Philosophy: An Introduction |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-139-49371-0 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=q7IhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2010 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Thompson |first1=Dennis F. |chapter=Political Ethics |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee633.pub2 |title=International Encyclopedia of Ethics |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |language=en |doi=10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee633.pub2  |date=2019 |pages=1–11 |isbn=978-1-4051-8641-4 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Tian |first1=Chenshan |editor1-last=Mou |editor1-first=Bo |title=History of Chinese philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-203-00286-5 |chapter=16. Development of Dialectical Materialism in China |date=2009 |pages=512–538}}
* {{cite web |last1=Tömmel |first1=Tatjana |last2=d'Entreves |first2=Maurizio Passerin |title=Hannah Arendt |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/arendt/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=9 May 2025  |date=2025 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Tosh |first1=John |title=The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions in the Study of Modern History |publisher=Pearson Education |isbn=978-0-582-77254-0 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bM1mAAAAMAAJ |language=en |date=2002}}
* {{cite web |last1=Tuckness |first1=Alex |title=Locke's Political Philosophy |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=10 May 2025  |date=2024 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Tuckness |first1=Alex |last2=Wolf |first2=Clark |title=This Is Political Philosophy: An Introduction |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-1-118-76600-2 |language=en |date=2016 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Vallier |first1=Kevin |title=Neoliberalism |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/neoliberalism/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=19 May 2025  |date=2022 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Van der Vossen |first1=Bas |last2=Christmas |first2=Billy |title=Libertarianism |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libertarianism/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=15 April 2025  |date=2024 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Verma |first1=K. D. |title=The Indian Imagination |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan US |isbn=978-1-349-61825-5 |url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-61823-1_3 |doi=10.1007/978-1-349-61823-1 |language=en |date=2000 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Vincent |first1=Andrew |title=Modern political ideologies |publisher=Wiley-Blackwell |isbn=978-1-4051-5495-6 |edition=3 |date=2009 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Waldron |first1=Jeremy |editor-last=Craig |editor-first1=Edward |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-S035-1 |url=https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/liberalism/v-1 |chapter=Liberalism |date=1998 |isbn=978-0415073103}}
* {{cite book |last1=Wall |first1=Steven |editor1-last=Gaus |editor1-first=Gerald F. |editor2-last=D'Agostino |editor2-first=Fred |editor3-last=Muldoon |editor3-first=Ryan |title=The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-87456-4 |language=en |date=2013 |chapter=Perfectionism |pages=345–355 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Walzer |first1=Michael |chapter=Political Obligation |editor1-last=Honderich |editor1-first=Ted |title=The Oxford Companion to Philosophy |date=2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-926479-7 |page=730 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Wenar |first1=Leif |title=John Rawls |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rawls/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=10 May 2025  |date=2021 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Whatmore |first1=Richard |title=The History of Political Thought: A Very Short Introduction |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-259535-5 |language=en |date=2021 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Wolff |first1=Jonathan |title=An Introduction to Political Philosophy |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-929609-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FVOcAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |language=en |date=2006 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Wolff |first1=Jonathan |last2=Leopold |first2=David |title=Karl Marx |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=7 May 2025  |date=2025 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Yar |first1=Majid |title=Arendt, Hannah |url=https://iep.utm.edu/hannah-arendt/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=9 May 2025}}
* {{cite book |last1=Zala |first1=Miklos |title=Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-022863-7 |doi=10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1388 |language=en |chapter=Secularism in Political Philosophy |date=2019 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Zimbalist |first1=Andrew S. |last2=Sherman |first2=Howard J. |title=Comparing Economic Systems: A Political-Economic Approach |publisher=Academic Press |isbn=9780127810508 |url=https://archive.org/details/comparingeconomi0000zimb_q8i6/page/4/mode/2up |date=1984 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Zuolo |first1=Federico |editor1-last=Besussi |editor1-first=Antonella |title=A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-18868-1 |doi=10.4324/9781315564555 |language=en |chapter=Realism and Idealism |date=2016 |pages=65–78}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Zwolinski |first1=Matt |title=The Libertarian Nonagression Principle |journal=Social Philosophy and Policy |volume=32 |issue=2 |doi=10.1017/S026505251600011X |date=2016 |pages=62–90}}
{{refend}}

== External links ==
{{Wikiquote}}
{{Library resources box}}
* {{PhilPapers|category|social-and-political-philosophy}}
* {{InPho|taxonomy|2244}}

{{Political philosophy}}
{{Social and political philosophy}}
{{Philosophy topics}}
{{Portal bar|Philosophy|Politics}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Political philosophy| ]]