Felipe Moraes

In this article, I analyze Habermas's work through the lens of the problem of neoconservatism. First, I demonstrate that this was one of the reasons for abandoning the critical theory of knowledge and recovering the critical theory of reason in Theory of communicative action. Second, I present the diagnosis concerning the conjunction between neoconservatism and neoliberalism in The new obscurity and explain why it led to the development of a theory of justice in Between facts and norms. Based on this internal perspective of Habermas's work, I reconstruct his theory of neoconservatism and argue that it provides a basis for understanding current far right movements, explaining their ability to shield citizens from learning from others' experiences and their own mistakes, as well as the distinction between these movements and historical fascism. Finally, I acknowledge the limitations of Habermas's theory of neoconservatism for understanding the current far right.

Este artigo defende a tese da colonização do mundo da vida proposta por Jürgen Habermas como modelo de crítica do capitalismo tardio, incluindo sua fase neoliberal. A introdução apresenta a teoria dual da sociedade moderna que está na base do modelo habermasiano. Nos capítulos seguintes, enfrentam-se três críticas a esse modelo por intérpretes nacionais e internacionais: o abandono da luta de classes, o abandono da teoria das crises do capitalismo e o abandono da crítica da ideologia. A partir das respostas a essas críticas, analisam-se os diferentes sentidos da tese da colonização (reificação, violência, ideologia e alienação) e sintetiza-se o seu sentido mais geral. As considerações finais explicitam a atualidade desse modelo para a crítica do neoliberalismo.

This article engages with the discussion between Rawls and Habermas concerning the interplay of political realism and normativity to address a fundamental question in contemporary political philosophy. How realistic is a normative theory of politics that critiques or rejects many deep religious, philosophical, and metaphysical commitments? Rawls contends that political theory achieves realism and objectivity by avoiding pronouncements on metaphysical theories (non-metaphysical). In contrast, Habermas argues that realism emerges when grappling with metaphysical theories and prioritizing praxis over metaphysics (post-metaphysical). The article critically examines Rawls’s objections to metaphysical content, lack of practical interest, and the instability of the foundations of Habermas’s democratic theory. By addressing these objections, it advocates for the greater political realism of the post-metaphysical normative approach.