Introduction
 John Rawls wrote A Theory of Justice in a bipolar environment in political relations between countries. This book is based on the ideas of "human rationality" and the monotony of the rational perception of the concept of good and truth, which is a comprehensive theory of liberalism. Gradually and with the emergence of doubts in the validity of metanarratives and the wave of postmodernism, Rawls also went towards justifying his desired principles based on new "foundations". He called this new foundation "political liberalism". In the book Political Liberalism, Rawls was looking for an answer to the question of how, over time, a stable and just society of equal and free citizens, who have been completely separated due to rational and of course incompatible religious, philosophical and moral teachings can it exist? Or to put it another way, how is it possible that comprehensive and of course completely opposite reasonable doctrines can coexist and all of them affirm a political conception of a constitutional regime? What is the structure and content of that political perception that can support such an overlapping consensus? Rawls' answer to these questions is "Political Liberalism". Considering the addition of the adjective of "political" to liberalism and Rawls's claim that his new theory is free-standing, as well as the universality of this conception of liberalism, in this article we try to determine the correctness of Rawls's claim by questioning the meaning of "being political" in this theory from an analytical point of view.
Methodology
 To consider the thoughts of a political philosopher, several methods can be used. Here we can compare the texts produced by Rawls regarding political liberalism with the thoughts of other thinkers in this field; Or the one who examined his thoughts with other presuppositions. It is also possible to consider his thought by analyzing the frequency of the word "political" in his speech; Or he read between the lines of Rawls' thoughts with Strauss's method (esoteric writing). In our opinion, the best way to deal with the thoughts of a thinker whose writings have become one of the classic texts of political philosophy is the Socratic method. Based on this method, we have to find keywords from within the text and analyze the coherence and meaningfulness of Rawls's thought based on them.
Conclusion
 The society resulting from Rawlsian political liberalism is like this: due to ignoring reasonable pluralism, there will be citizens (in the minority or the majority) who are unable to express their opposition to the ideas of political liberalism; Because in this case, they are not considered "cooperating" citizens. They will lose their equality and freedom in this society. This is what Rawls calls acceptance of the consequences of individual decisions. Therefore, the stability that exists in this society is not based on the right reasons but on the false reasons.
According to Rawls' accepted presuppositions, they are put in a no win situation; Because the society is a closed society and they enter it only by birth and they have no other choice; Because it is not possible to get rid of it except by death. This society is also self-sufficient and for that reason it is an efficient society; Because it provides all the tools needed to achieve people's goals. Therefore, the best rational option currently available to people is the society in which they are present. Therefore, the maximum support of the citizens for the political opinion is not based on its modus vivendi, but its modus vivendi is based on three reasons: first, put in a no win situation; Second, having no other solution; Third, the modus operandi of this system. These reasons lead to the acceptance of a superior reason that Rawls sought to avoid; It means that this acceptance is based on accepting the status quo.
We believe that Rawls's theory could not succeed in creating a minimal and universal narrative of liberalism. Paying attention to the idea of ​​basic structure, using ideas such as public reason, overlapping consensus, and historicizing liberalism could not free the theory presented in the book A Theory of Justice from being "comprehensive", even according to Rawlsian criteria. Rather than being "political", John Rawls's Political Liberalism seeks reconciliation between people with comprehensive ideas with current policies in a society that is formed around the theory of liberalism. In the society considered by Rawls, instead of being respected, comprehensive opinions are forced to be criticized and adjusted, and this is the beginning of applying a comprehensive idea of ​​liberalism under the pretext of creating stability in society.