This article seeks to answer the question of how to live as an individual and citizen in today’s liberal society by reflecting on a Rortyan liberal society, culture, and citizen. The logical structure of Rortyan argument is as follows. If we affirm a liberal self-theory, we can justify a liberal society. And if we affirm a communitarian self-theory, we must reject liberal society. But we either affirm the former or the latter. To avoid this contradictory conclusion, Rorty offers an argument that straddles the two horns of the dilemma. Both liberals and communitarians assume that social theory can be justified or rejected from a philosophical self-theory, but Rorty doesn’t think that assumption is necessary. Rather, social theory can be justified by historical and sociological accounts of the concrete institutions and cultures of reality. Thus, it is not so much a conclusion that justifies or negates liberal societies by a self-theory, but rather a hopeful proposal for an improved picture of the institutions, cultures, and specific citizens of the liberal societies in question. This is the Rorty’s conclusion. Rorty proposes a utopian picture of an improved liberal society, culture, and citizen; the ideal liberal society is one in which ‘political and cultural freedom’ is the sole goal of society; the ideal liberal culture is a poetic culture, not a scientific culture; the ideal liberal citizen is a bold poet and theoretical ironist who has no qualms about pursuing his or her own unique private desires that cannot be shared by others; and the ideal liberal citizen is a practical liberal who feels responsible for the suffering of others and empathizes with and stands in solidarity with them. However, in the real world, when private desires and public responsibilities conflict, Rorty argues that public responsibility should be prioritized. He argues for the primacy of democracy (practice) over philosophy (theory). The theoretical desire for private self-fulfillment and the practical responsibility for expanding public solidarity are different directions of human concern and need not conflict with each other, but when they are simultaneously demanded in a person’s life at certain times or circumstances, Rorty suggests and invites us to prioritize public practice and responsibility over private fulfillment. Rortyan reflection on citizenship in a liberal society leads to reflection on the institutions of our society and the behavior of its members. For Rorty, the moral progress of a society is measured by the institutions and practices that seek to reduce cruelty. Moral progress is achieved when a society is institutionally less cruel to its members than it was in the past, or when its members behave less cruelly toward each other. Similarly, for a society to be morally better, it must have a functioning ‘rule of law’, in which institutionalized state’s violence against citizens is better controlled, and political freedoms, such as freedom of conscience, thought, and speech, must be realized. Furthermore, we need to reduce the political behavior that leads to hatred and hostility toward each other, both individually and collectively, because of differences in personal or collective beliefs. Instead, we need to think of each other as fellow citizens, working together in solidarity toward a larger, broader ‘we-intentions’.