本文對羅爾斯版本的政治自由主義提出了兩個批評：第一，政治自由主義沒有現實地對待自由民主社會與非自由民主社會中的政治。這對於一種政治學說而言是一種缺陷。第二，政治自由主義所依賴的公共證成本質上是一種內部證成，最終沒有被好的理由徹底支持，因此在哲學上是不徹底的。基於這兩個批評本文刻畫了替代政治自由主義的自由主義學說所應具備的兩個要素。其一，在理論上，自由主義學說應該對自由主義獨特價值進行徹底的哲學證成，這種證成不能僅僅是政治的。其二，在實踐中，自由主義者應該現實地對待現實政治，並區分自由主義在自由民主社會和非自由民主社會的任務。如此一來，自由主義者會既給出一個強韌的自由主義理論，又認真現實地對待其實踐任務，從而克服政治自由主義的缺點。

In this paper, I offer two critiques of Rawlsian political liberalism. First, political liberalism is not realistic of real politics in both liberal and non-liberal democratic societies, which makes it defective as a political doctrine. Second, it is not supported by good reasons through and through, because the public justification it relies on is internal in nature and does not provide good reasons ultimately. I then propose that a liberal ought to develop alternatives to political liberalism along two lines. First, liberals should try to provide a thorough philosophical justification for liberal ideals; such justification goes beyond (mere) political justification. Second, in practice, liberals should be realistic about real politics and face their respective tasks in both liberal and non-liberal democratic societies. In so doing, liberals will not only offer a strong liberal theory but also take its practical implications seriously and realistically.