Episode Summary: Paul Kelly on "Against Postliberalism: Why ‘Family, Faith and Flag’ is a Dead End for the Left"

Main Theme & Purpose

In this episode of the New Books Network, host Tim Jones interviews Paul Kelly about his new book Against Postliberalism: Why ‘Family, Faith and Flag’ is a Dead End for the Left (Polity, 2025). The conversation explores the rise of “postliberalism,” primarily in the UK but also in the US, examining its intellectual foundations, its appeal across left and right, and why its “family, faith, and flag” emphasis ultimately fails as a progressive project. Kelly presents a critical analysis, mapping postliberalism’s evolution and interrogating its practical and theoretical limitations for the left.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Origins and Intellectual Landscape of Postliberalism

• Kelly’s Academic Journey (02:42–04:43):

  • Kelly traces his interest back to the emergence of “Blue Labour” in the UK (with figures like Maurice Glassman, John Cruddas, and Adrian Pabst) that sought to rethink Labour’s political economy post-financial crisis, initially with a left-wing social conservatism.
  • He notes a rightward shift: “What had started off as a sort of left challenge … had started to shift more to the right on social and political conservatism. And then post-2016 Brexit had turned much more populist, but with the added fact that you now had this appearing in the United States.” (Paul Kelly, 02:53)

• Formation as a Movement (04:53–07:00):

  • The term “postliberalism” originally circulated in academic theology (e.g., John Milbank’s “radical orthodoxy”) before political thinkers and commentators adopted it.

2. Defining Features of Postliberalism

• Three-Part Structure (07:16–11:11)
  • Populism: Postliberalism incorporates a populist critique, seeing society dominated by disconnected elites. “Politics as dominated by various kind of elites who are increasingly remote from the masses…” (Kelly, 07:38)
  • Common Good Communitarianism: It advocates a “politics of the common good,” privileging social membership (family, faith, nation) over individual rights associated with neoliberalism.
  • Authoritarian Turn: Especially visible among American postliberals, this strand asserts a singular, authoritative version of the common good, entailing paternalistic or coercive politics: “They have a strong conception of the common good … the basis for a kind of authoritarian paternalistic politics that narrows the scope of liberal toleration.” (Kelly, 10:15)

3. Religion and Postliberalism

• Religious Foundations (11:11–12:47)
  • The movement’s leadership is notably religious (predominantly Catholic and Anglican). Kelly notes there are not really non-theist postliberals, but draws a parallel to the “strong conception of the common good” in Marxist-Leninism: “It isn't only a religious perspective that gives rise to a strong conception or a singular conception of the common good. I mean, it’s kind of classic Leninism.” (Kelly, 11:45)
  • He distinguishes the movement from “new atheists,” who tried (and failed) to create a secular liberal consensus.

4. Loss of Community & Populist Grievance

• Elite-Driven Degradation (15:42–22:42)
  • Postliberal commentators (e.g., Matt Goodwin, David Goodhart) and thinkers emphasize a narrative of traditional communal life being destroyed by neoliberalism (economic policy), “new atheists” (cultural policy), and universities (ideological capture).
  • This sentiment echoes in the US, with Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed: “It eviscerates the lived experience of communities and so on. And it ties nicely with J.D. Vance’s backstory Hillbilly Elegy… viable communities … destroyed by this promise of change.” (Kelly, 17:15)
  • Kelly is critical of these simplifications, highlighting complexities in class identity and how populists mobilize grievance regardless of objective economic interests.

5. Practical Alternatives: What is to be Done?

• Policy Challenges (24:13–28:27)
  • Jones notes that postliberals are stronger as critics than as practical policymakers: “It’s very easy to attack so-called neoliberal elites. But … ‘Post Liberal’s greatest challenge is the shift from a critical theory of modern politics to an account of what is to be done particularly in challenging liberal policy.’” (Tim Jones, 24:13)
  • Kelly credits John Cruddas with articulating more realistic ideas than most, focused not merely on welfare but on the value and dignity of work, industrial policy, and “levelling up.”
  • Theoretical postliberals (e.g., Pabst and Milbank) veer into utopianism: “Its advocacy is to completely transform political economy … it’s a sort of extreme utopianism.” (Kelly, 25:49)
  • Suggests the inability or refusal to engage with the realities of modernity is a core weakness.

6. Authoritarian Temptations: Schmitt & Strong Executive Power

• The Schmittian Influence (28:46–32:03)
  • Jones notes Kelly provocatively recommends Carl Schmitt to postliberals. Kelly clarifies that many (especially in the US, e.g., Adrian Vermeule) are already influenced by Schmitt, who argued for a strong executive capable of transcending “artificial liberal democracy.” “Schmitt really is the thinker they go to. And Vermeule’s very particular about this … Strong executive presidency straight out of Schmitt.” (Kelly, 29:20)
  • He acknowledges the dangers and historical reality (Schmitt’s Nazi affiliations), drawing analogies to the Chinese Communist Party’s model of executive authority.

7. Liberalism’s Response: Thin Conceptions of the Common Good

• Liberalism & the Common Good Debate (32:03–35:09)
  • The challenge for liberalism is its avoidance of a substantive common good, relying instead on “thin” consensus (economic prosperity, basic freedoms).
  • Kelly favors Rawls’s “political liberalism” over Dworkin’s “comprehensive liberalism,” stressing the permanence of “reasonable pluralism”: “If you’re going to have a broadly democratic order, you're going to have structural disagreement about people. You don’t have homogeneity.” (Kelly, 35:15)
  • He uses concrete issues (abortion, assisted dying) to show how even thin consensus is difficult, making utopian postliberal solutions impossible in practice.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Movement’s Religious Core:
  “I can’t name any non theistic post liberals … but it isn’t just a religious movement. It is a movement that draws on these encompassing worldviews. Religions are perhaps the easiest way to show people.” (Paul Kelly, 11:40)

• On the Populist Critique:
  “The main currency of populism is to focus on the opposition between the beneficiaries of social change … and those who didn’t. I kind of have lived through that in some way, although I’m not from a mining community, but I was first in my family to go to university and all those sorts of things.” (Paul Kelly, 17:00)

• On Authoritarian Threats:
  “There really is a common good, not many common goods. And that common good, because it’s authoritative and singular, is the basis for a kind of authoritarian paternalistic politics…” (Paul Kelly, 10:15)

• On Policy Utopianism v. Practical Politics:
  “Its advocacy is to completely transform political economy International relations and so on. So it’s a sort of extreme utopianism.” (Paul Kelly, 25:49)

• On Liberal Pluralism’s Limits:
  “If you’re going to have a broadly democratic order, you're going to have structural disagreement about people. You don’t have homogeneity. So that kind of shifted me back to Rawls … to look for the terms of cooperation between people who are sufficiently motivated to try and get on.” (Paul Kelly, 35:15)

Timestamps for Major Segments

• Introduction & Origins of Postliberalism: 01:43–07:00
• Defining the Three Faces of Postliberalism: 07:16–11:11
• Religion, Atheism, and Encompassing Worldviews: 11:11–12:47
• Populist Politics & Community Loss: 15:42–22:42
• Practical Solutions and John Cruddas: 24:13–28:27
• Schmittian Authoritarianism: 28:46–32:03
• Liberalism, Common Good, and Pluralism: 32:03–35:09

Tone & Style

The conversation is academic, critical, and at times wry, mirroring Kelly's blend of intellectual provocation and political realism. Both Jones and Kelly probe the philosophical underpinnings and practical limits of postliberalism without rhetorical excess. Kelly maintains a respectful but unsparing critique of postliberal theory, emphasizing complexity, realism, and the necessity of pluralism.

Takeaway

Paul Kelly’s analysis exposes both the allure and the dead-end nature of postliberalism, especially for those on the left. The movement’s populist grievance, nostalgia for lost community, and authoritarian temptations offer powerful criticism but little practical or viable alternative to the ongoing challenge of pluralistic, liberal democracy. Rather than emboldening the left, “family, faith, and flag” politics risk replicating the coercive mistakes of the past—what’s needed instead is an honest reckoning with complexity, disagreement, and mutual cooperation in democratic life.