Society vs. the Market: Alain de Benoist’s Case Against Liberalism
Alexander RaynorAlain de Benoist
Against Liberalism: Society Is Not a Market
Translated by F. Roger Devlin
Middle Europe Books, 2024
What if the very foundations of our modern society—individualism, free markets, and universal rights—are not pillars of progress but harbingers of decay? Alain de Benoist’s Against Liberalism: Society Is Not a Market offers a provocative critique of the ideological forces shaping the West.By dissecting liberalism’s philosophical premises and societal consequences, Benoist calls for a reimagining of our communal and cultural priorities. This review explores his arguments and their implications for our understanding of politics, economics, and identity.
Alain de Benoist’s Against Liberalism: Society Is Not a Market profoundly critiques liberalism, the dominant ideology in contemporary Western societies. Originally published in 2019 under the title Contre le libéralisme: La société n’est pas un marché, translated by F. Roger Devlin, the work dissects liberalism’s philosophical premises, societal impacts, and its manifestation as an economic, political, and cultural force. Benoist’s central thesis revolves around the assertion that liberalism reduces society to a marketplace, undermining the very fabric of communal, cultural, and moral life. This review explores the book’s structure, key arguments, strengths, and potential shortcomings.
Alain de Benoist’s Against Liberalism opens by establishing liberalism as the dominant ideology of the modern West, characterized by its roots in individualism, market values, and economic rationality. From the outset, Benoist critiques the Enlightenment’s legacy, particularly its emphasis on universal reason and individual liberty. He argues that liberalism’s prioritization of self-interest and economic growth over communal and cultural considerations has contributed to societal decay. This framing sets the tone for a work that seeks to expose liberalism’s philosophical inconsistencies and its societal consequences.
Central to Benoist’s critique is his rejection of individualism as the foundation of social organization. Liberalism, he contends, isolates individuals by prioritizing self-interest and reducing social bonds to contractual relationships. This atomization undermines collective structures such as families, communities, and traditions, which give life its deeper meaning. In contrast, Benoist advocates for communitarian and conservative values that emphasize the interconnectedness of individuals within a shared cultural and moral framework.

You can buy Alain de Benoist’s Against Liberalism here.
Benoist also critiques the dominance of market logic in liberal thought, which he argues reduces society to a marketplace where all values are subordinated to economic principles. He takes aim at the concept of homo economicus—the model of humans as purely self-interested agents—and argues that it commodifies every aspect of life. Neoliberalism, in Benoist’s view, represents an intensification of classical liberal principles, marked by deregulation, privatization, and the erosion of state sovereignty. This, he contends, exacerbates social inequalities and undermines societal cohesion.
A particularly notable section of the book examines Benoist’s critique of Friedrich Hayek, a leading figure in the Austrian School of Economics. Benoist challenges Hayek’s emphasis on spontaneous order and market efficiency, arguing that this perspective overlooks the social and moral costs of unfettered capitalism. He accuses Hayek of advancing a vision of society that prioritizes profit over human dignity and cultural continuity, framing it as an inadequate response to the complex needs of human communities.
Another key dimension of Benoist’s analysis is his interrogation of the relationship between liberalism and democracy. He questions whether liberalism is truly compatible with democratic values, suggesting that liberal democracy often privileges individual rights over collective well-being. In his view, this emphasis on procedural fairness and neutrality undermines the substantive values necessary for a cohesive and flourishing democratic society. Benoist argues that participative democracy, rooted in shared cultural and moral principles, is compromised by liberalism’s focus on individual autonomy.
Benoist further critiques liberalism’s embrace of cultural and moral relativism, which he sees as a denial of shared values and traditions. By promoting radical individual autonomy, liberalism erodes the foundations of identity and belonging. This is particularly evident in debates over multiculturalism and globalization, where Benoist argues that liberalism contributes to the dissolution of distinct cultural and national identities.
Grounded in philosophical tradition, Benoist engages with thinkers such as John Locke, Friedrich Hayek, and John Stuart Mill to develop his critique. His arguments draw on communitarian and conservative perspectives, offering a compelling counterpoint to liberal orthodoxy. Benoist’s analysis of neoliberalism and its impact on societal cohesion is especially relevant in light of contemporary challenges, including rising economic inequality, cultural polarization, and the erosion of public trust. His insights resonate with current debates about the limits of market logic and the need for alternative frameworks of social organization.
Importantly, Benoist does not dismiss liberalism outright but acknowledges its internal diversity and historical evolution. He distinguishes between classical and modern liberalism, as well as between economic and political liberalism, providing a nuanced critique that avoids oversimplification. His analysis invites readers to reconsider the premises of liberal thought and its impact on society.
In Against Liberalism, Benoist delivers a thought-provoking critique of liberalism, capitalism, and individualism. The work challenges readers to reflect on the societal consequences of these ideologies and to explore alternative frameworks rooted in communal values and cultural identity. While the book has its limitations—particularly in articulating concrete alternatives—it succeeds in sparking a necessary and urgent debate about the future of modern societies. For those interested in critiques of capitalism from a non-leftist perspective, Against Liberalism offers an essential and stimulating read.
This article first appeared on the European New Right Revue Substack. It has been republished here with permission.
Society%20vs.%20the%20Market%3A%20Alain%20de%20Benoist%E2%80%99s%20Case%20Against%20Liberalism%0A
Share
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
4 comments
Haven’t read it yet but plan to. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Gilbert Doctorow recommend this book on Michael Farris’s podcast a couple of days ago.
Word games promoted by commercially minded enemies with high verbal IQs have done us harm. When, top-down and from the universities, we were pushed to speak of “values” and not any more of “principles,” this was harmful to us.
“Principles” are meant to be followed. They can have the force of taboos. Our clever word-spinning enemies retained forceful taboos for their use but not for our use. Our vital principles became “values.”
“Values” are meant to be traded off, weighed on scales, bought and sold. A society of “values” is like a woman who affirms that she will bang a stranger for a lot of money and then wants to say she is not a prostitute. She has already established what she is; the rest is haggling over the price.
In the new era of “values” everything is for sale. This is useful for some people, who can use their wealth and influence in new ways. It is harmful to other people, such as children, who by nature have to rely for their protection on taboos or on “principles” that have now faded into a tepid sludge of readily tradeable “values.”
This is a commercialization of morality that goes beyond the problem of money power in a market that poses as a society.
This is a great insight. I haven’t seen this or had it myself. Well done and well said. I am going to spread this idea far and wide.
One of De benoist’s wikiquotes is ‘a value is not a weight.’ I find him to be a somewhat more difficult writer to easily digest but these “values” of today just come off as petty wants. Profit. A gibsmedat. ‘Family values’ to republican pukes means more war fodder for israel and a pool of consumer units to fleece. I’m reluctant to call them even negative values cause value suggests desirability, the stuff that makes things constructive and brings good form, not personal fortune. All I see today is the cult of ‘gimme! Right now! And fuck you!’ and to hell with everyone else. I doubt the rulers and their minion-stooges even have an ideology or pledge allegiance to neo-liberal individualism, just to raw, unalloyed selfishness. Their support for the current world outlook in vogue, a nicholas van hoogstraten for the murderous kaffir mugabe or these pro-invasion hoteliers, only jives to the weasels’ extent their enrichment and gains continue undisturbed by revenge violence.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.