Focusing on the speeches and actions of the Platonic Socrates, this book argues that Plato's political philosophy is a crucial source for reflection on the hazards and possibilities of democratic politics.

"Gerald Mara has written a thoughtful, lively, yet wide-ranging book about the contributions of Platonic political philosophy to contemporary debates in political theory. By showing how Socrates' logos (the insistence that we go beyond ordinary sense for the rational solution of political problems) is tempered by if not opposed to his ergon (the particular behavior within practical discursive contexts) and insisting that Plato is both a metaphysician and an ironist, Mara enriches our understanding of various dialogues and the central subjects of Platonic philosophy and scholarship. On this basis he goes on to argue, persuasively I think, that Athenian democracy provided context and referent point for Plato's project even when that project included sharp warnings about democracy. The Plato that emerges provides the grounds for Mara's notion of a 'discursive democracy.' Mara does all this while entering into a respectful but critical engagement with an impressive range of contemporary political theorists and philosophers". -- J. Peter Euben, University of California, Santa Cruz

"What makes this book so good is the way Mara brings his understanding of Plato to bear on contemporary theory. He juxtaposes Plato's position, as he understands it, with those of contemporary theorists such as Rorty, Habermas, Barber, Sandel, Rawls, and MacIntyre. Particularly intriguing is his discussion of the philosophic significance of the differences between Derrida's treatment of Plato and his own. Itis indeed a wonderful book". -- Mary Nichols, Fordham University

First published in 1990. Liberalism and the Good is a collection of critical essays by an inter-disciplinary group of American and English scholars that seeks to address the long-standing problem of the good in light of the most recent developments in liberal theory. With contributions from both liberal apologists and critics who pursue arguments informed by sources as disparate as Nietzsche and Aristotle, it breaks fresh ground in a number of different directions and offers proposals for the future of the discussion.

First published in 1990. Liberalism and the Good is a collection of critical essays by an inter-disciplinary group of American and English scholars that seeks to address the long-standing problem of the good in light of the most recent developments in liberal theory. With contributions from both liberal apologists and critics who pursue arguments informed by sources as disparate as Nietzsche and Aristotle, it breaks fresh ground in a number of different directions and offers proposals for the future of the discussion.

Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, recurring political violence at both state and non-state levels has eroded confidence in the progressively peaceful character of international relations, and has unsettled the parameters of political thought. Frames of peace and frames of war have, throughout Western thought, colored the questions that we ask about politics, the descriptions of the pragmatic and moral alternatives that we face, and the ideas and metaphors that we use at any given moment. These frames, as this book argues, also obscure too much of political life. Gerald M. Mara proposes, instead, a political philosophy that takes both war and peace seriously, and a style of theory committed to questioning rather than closure. He challenges two powerful currents in contemporary political philosophy: the verdict that "premodern" or "metaphysical" texts cannot speak to modern and postmodern societies and the insistence that all forms of political theory be some form of democratic theory. Mara reexamines seminal texts in the history of political theory, from Thucydides to Jacques Derrida, and from Machiavelli to Judith Butler, to examine how frames of reference of war and peace have structured both the writing of these texts, as well as interpretations of them. The result is not a linear history of ideas, but a series of conversations between them, and a democratic justification for moving beyond democratic theory.