%0 Journal Article
%T Are Cities Illiberal? Municipal Jurisdictions and the Scope of Liberal Neutrality
%A Patrick Turmel
%J Les Ateliers de l¡¯¨¦thique
%D 2009
%I Universit¨¦ de Montr¨¦al
%X One of the main characteristics of today¡¯s democratic societies is their pluralism. As a result, liberal political philosophers often claim that the state should remain neutral with respect to different conceptions of the good. Legal and social policies should be acceptable to everyone regardless of their culture, their religion or their comprehensive moral views. One might think that this commitment to neutrality should be especially pronounced in urban centres, with their culturally diverse populations. However, there are a large number of laws and policies adopted at the municipal level that contradict the liberal principle of neutrality. In this paper, I want to suggest that these perfectionistlaws and policies are legitimate at the urban level. Specifically, I will argue that the principle of neutrality applies only indirectly to social institutions within the broader framework of the nation-state. This is clear in the case of voluntary associations, but to a certain extent this rationale applies also to cities. In a liberal regime, private associations are allowed to hold and defend perfectionist views, focused on a particular conception of the good life. One problem is to determine the limits of this perfectionism at the urban level, since cities, unlike private associations, are publicinstitutions. My aim here is therefore to give a liberal justification to a limited form of perfectionism of municipal laws and policies.Une caract¨¦ristique centrale des soci¨¦t¨¦s lib¨¦rales d¨¦mocratiques contemporaines est leur pluralisme. Cons¨¦quemment, les philosophes politiques lib¨¦raux affirment souvent que l¡¯¨¦tat devrait demeurer neutre face aux diff¨¦rentes conceptions du bien. Les lois et politiques sociales devraient ¨ºtre acceptables aux yeux de tous, peu importe leur culture, leur religion ou leurs valeurs morales. On pourrait croire que ce principe de neutralit¨¦ devrait s¡¯appliquer ¨¤ plus fortes raisons dans les centres urbains, caract¨¦ris¨¦s par une population culturellement tr¨¨s diversifi¨¦e. Il existe pourtant un nombre important de r¨¨glements et de politiques ¨¤ l¡¯¨¦chelle municipale qui contredisent ce principe lib¨¦ral. Dans cet article, nous d¨¦fendrons l¡¯id¨¦e selon laquelle ces lois et politiques perfectionnistes, fond¨¦es sur des raisons qui font appel ¨¤ une vision particuli¨¨re du bien, trouvent une l¨¦gitimit¨¦ lib¨¦rale ¨¤ l¡¯¨¦chelle urbaine. Nous nous appuierons sur l¡¯id¨¦e que le principe de neutralit¨¦ ne s¡¯applique qu¡¯indirectement aux institutions sociales ¨¤ l¡¯int¨¦rieur du cadre plus large de l¡¯¨¦tat-nation. Cela est clair dans le cas des associations libr
%K ¨¦thique appliqu¨¦e
%K neutralit¨¦
%K lib¨¦ralisme
%U http://creum.umontreal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/pdf_16_Turmel.pdf