Mark Lillas Kritik der „collegelich“ induzierten Identitätspolitik nach dem Wahlsieg Trumps ist auch bei uns eine Lektüre wert. In der Tradition Hannah Arendts wird die Frage nach der Zukunft der gemeinwohltragenden citizenship gestellt. So beschließt er sein Buch The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics mit den Worten:
Whatever you wish to say about the political wanderings of the sixties generation—and I’ve said a lot—they were, in their own way, patriots. They cared about what happened to their fellow citizens and cared when they felt America’s democratic principles had been violated. […] The fact that they received a relatively nonpartisan education in an environment that encouraged debates over ideas and that developed emotional toughness and intellectual conviction, surely had a great deal to do with it. You can still find such people teaching on campuses, and some are my friends. Most remain well to the left of me but we enjoy disagreeing and respect arguments based on evidence. I still think they are unrealistic; they think I don’t see that dreaming is sometimes the most realistic thing one can do. (The older I get the more I think they have a point.) But we shake our heads in unison when we discuss what passes for politics and civic education in our country.
It would not be such a terrible thing to raise another generation of citizens like them. The old model, with a few tweaks, is worth following: passion and commitment, but also knowledge and argument. Curiosity about the world outside your own head and about people unlike yourself. Care for this country and its citizens, all of them, and a willingness to sacrifice for them. And the ambition to imagine a common future for all of us. Any parent or educator who teaches these things is engaged in political work—the work of building citizens. Only when we have citizens can we hope that they will become liberal ones. And only when we have liberal ones can we hope to put the country on a better path. If you want to resist Donald Trump and everything he represents, this is where you must begin.
Was Lilla jedoch nicht beantworten kann ist, ob das Ethos einer gemeinwohlorientierten Bürgerschaft noch einmal gesellschaftlich geltend gemacht werden kann. Andernfalls gewinnt der Segregationalismus die Oberhand, so dass es keinen gemeinsamen öffentlichen Raum mehr geben wird.