Should Immanuel Kant Be Considered A Political Moralist?

Immanuel Kant is often characterised by Political Realists as a Hard Political Moralist. As Kant builds his political philosophy on his absolute a priori ethics, the mainstream interpretation is that the state must follow Kant’s ethics in all situations. The realist therefore depicts Kant as a paradigm of ‘ethics-first’ political philosophy. I argue that Kant’s political philosophy is more closely related to Political Realism than contemporary realists portray it to be. In making my case, I argue that Bernard Williams mischaracterises Rawls and Nozick’s political philosophies. Similarly, I claim that the same mischaracterisation exists in Williams’s conception of Kant’s political philosophy. I propose a typical realist portrayal of Kant’s political philosophy that Williams would likely agree with. In Part IV, I consider Kant’s wider philosophy and the ‘impure’ aspect of his work. The upshot of my argument suggests that Kant’s political philosophy lies somewhere between Weak Political Moralism and Weak Political Realism. If one disagrees with this conclusion, I at least hope to show that the realist should think twice before labelling Kant a Political Moralist. Website: www.thepanpsychist.co