The Liberal Tradition and the Politics of Exclusion

Louis Hartz's “liberal tradition” thesis, which argued that the United States was born and has remained essentially “liberal,” has been the subject of vigorous and sustained criticism in recent years. Prominent among that criticism has been the charge that the thesis cannot explain “the politics of exclusion”: the process whereby members of particular social groups (especially racial groups) have been denied equal access to the rights enjoyed by other Americans. As such, many scholars have sought to replace the thesis with alternative accounts of the political identity of the United States. This review critically analyzes these new accounts. Three in particular stand out from the field: the “multiple traditions” thesis, the “liberalism as exclusion” thesis, and the “liberal multiplicity” thesis. I describe and criticize each in turn before concluding that the thesis closest to the original Hartzian view offers the most to future students of American politics.