Alasdair MacIntyre is that rarest of intellectuals: an author of such obvious intelligence and depth that his insights have been claimed by figures across the political spectrum. This includes many important intellectuals on the political right. Robert Bork, a founding figure of constitutional originalism who Ronald Reagan tried and failed to appoint to the Supreme Court, saw MacIntyre as convincingly disproving that “moral philosophy can ever arrive at a universally accepted system.” In his essay collection Conserving America?: Essays on Present Discontents, prominent conservative writer Patrick Deneen endorses MacIntyre’s claim that we “live on the cusp of a New Dark Ages,” which, Deneen argues, can only be avoided by an “end to liberalism” and a transition “into a post-liberal and hopeful future.”

This conservative interpretation of MacIntyre draws heavily on his condemnation of liberal modernity. Conservatives read MacIntyre as offering a typically right-wing story of decline and fall, from the auspicious heights of an objective understanding of human flourishing and virtue articulated by Aristotelian and Thomistic philosophy to a libertine philosophy that cannot discriminate between better and worse desires or ways of living. But few of these conservative appropriations of MacIntyre take seriously a constant through line in his work: his unremitting condemnation of capitalism and his abiding appreciation for the thought of Karl Marx.

Right-wing interpreters usually take one of two stances on MacIntyre’s critiques of liberalism and capitalism. Either they reject both, or they follow MacIntyre in rejecting liberalism while remaining silent on — or continuing to endorse — capitalism. In fact, much in MacIntyre’s critique of capitalism is vital, as are many of his positive claims about the importance of virtue and community. But I believe that a progressive liberalism, or liberal socialism, can answer his objections by rejecting most of what is noxious about modernity while preserving its core achievements.