Liberalism (from the Latin
liberalis, "of
freedom; worthy of a free man, gentlemanlike, courteous, generous")
is the belief in the importance of individual freedom. This belief
is widely accepted today throughout the world, and was recognized
as an important value by many philosophers throughout history. The
Roman Emperor
Marcus Aurelius wrote
praising "the idea of a polity administered with regard to equal
rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly
government which respects most of all the freedom of the
governed".
Modern liberalism has its roots in the
Age of Enlightenment and rejects many
foundational assumptions that
dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the
Divine Right of Kings, hereditary
status, and
established religion.
John Locke is often credited with the
philosophical foundations of modern liberalism. He wrote "no one
ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or
possessions."
In the
17th Century, liberal ideas
began to influence governments in Europe, in nations such as The
Netherlands, Switzerland, England and Poland, but they were
strongly opposed, often by armed might, by those who favored
absolute monarchy and established religion. In the
18th Century, in America, the first modern
liberal state was founded, without a monarch or a hereditary
aristocracy. The American
Declaration of Independence
includes the words (which echo Locke) "all men are created equal;
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
rights; that among these are
life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights,
governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed."
Liberalism comes in many forms. According to
John N. Gray, the
essence of liberalism is toleration of different beliefs and of
different ideas as to what constitutes a good life.
Etymology and historical usage
The
earliest recorded governments in which free citizens played an
important role were the democracy in Athens
and the
republic in Rome
. The
Athenian lawgiver
Solon wrote, "...men who
wore the shameful brand of slavery and suffered the hideous moods
of brutal masters -- all these I freed." The Roman historian
Titus Livius, in his
History of Rome From
Its Foundation, describes the struggle of the
plebeians to win freedom from the domination of the
patrician. Largely dormant
during the
Middle Ages, the struggle for
freedom began again during the
Italian Renaissance in the conflict
between supporters of free city-states on the one hand and
supporters of the
Pope or of the
Holy Roman Emperor on the other.
Niccolò Machiavelli, in his
Discourses on Livy, laid down the principles of
republican government.
The
Oxford English
Dictionary (
OED) indicates that the word
liberal has long been in the
English language with the meanings of
"befitting free men, noble, generous" as in
liberal arts; also with the meaning "free
from restraint in speech or action", as in
liberal with the
purse, or
liberal tongue, usually as a term of
reproach but, beginning 1776–88, imbued with a more favorable sense
by
Edward Gibbon and others to mean
"free from prejudice, tolerant."
The first English language use to mean "tending in favor of freedom
and
democracy," according to the
OED, dates from about 1801 and comes from the French
libéral, "originally applied in English by its opponents
(often in Fr. form and with suggestions of foreign lawlessness)."
An early English language citation: "The extinction of every
vestige of freedom, and of every liberal idea with which they are
associated."
The
editors of the Spanish
Constitution of 1812, drafted in Cádiz
, may have
been the first to use the word liberal in a political
sense as a noun. They named themselves the
Liberales, to express their opposition to the
absolutist power of the Spanish
monarchy.
Liberalism in this sense became a widespread ideal during
Age of Enlightenment, when philosophers
such as
John Locke in England and
Jean-Jacques Rousseau in
France articulated the struggle for freedom in terms of the
Rights of Man.
The
American War of
Independence established the first nation to craft a
constitution based on the concept of liberal government, especially
the idea that governments rule by the consent of the governed. The
more moderate
bourgeois elements
of the
French Revolution tried to
establish a government based on liberal principles, but the radical
Robespierre seized power,
leading to the
Reign of Terror
followed by a reactionary movement which restored the
monarchy.
The main thrust of liberalism was freedom from despotic rule and
the replacement of aristocracy by social equality, but it also had
an economic side.
Adam Smith, in
The Wealth of Nations
(1776), enunciated the liberal principles of free trade and
progressive taxation.
Liberal philosophy
There were many precursors to liberalism, including certain aspects
of the
Magna Carta, which
reduced the power of the English monarch,and medieval
Islamic ethics, which allowed some
freedom of religion. But most histories
of modern liberal thought begin with
John
Locke (1632 - 1704).
Locke's
Two Treatises on
Government (1689) discussed two fundamental liberal ideas:
intellectual liberty, including freedom of conscience, which he
further expounded in the same year in
A Letter Concerning
Toleration, and economic liberty, the right to have and
use property. These early liberal ideas were tentative (and
published anonymously). Locke did not extend religious freedom to
Roman Catholics and considered slaves
to be lawful property. Locke developed further the earlier idea of
natural rights, a forerunner of the
modern conception of
human rights,
which Locke saw as the rights to life, liberty and property
(Locke's actual words are "life, health, liberty, or
possessions")..
Another 17th-century Englishman,
John
Lilburne (also known as
Freeborn John), argued for
basic human rights which he called
freeborn
rights, the
natural rights that
every human being is born with, as opposed to rights bestowed by
government or by human law.
On the European continent, the doctrine of laws restraining even
monarchs was expounded by
Charles de Secondat,
Baron de Montesquieu, whose
The Spirit of the Laws argues
that "Better is it to say, that the government most conformable to
nature is that which best agrees with the humour and disposition of
the people in whose favour it is established," rather than accept
as natural the mere rule of force. Following in his footsteps,
political economist
Jean-Baptiste
Say and
Destutt de Tracy were
ardent exponents of the "harmonies" of the market, and in all
probability it was they who coined the term
laissez-faire. This evolved into the
physiocrats, and to the
political economy of
Rousseau.
The late French enlightenment saw two figures who would have
tremendous influence on later liberal thought:
Voltaire, who argued that the French should adopt
constitutional monarchy and
disestablish the
Second Estate, and Rousseau, who argued
for a natural freedom for mankind.
Rousseau also argued the importance of a concept that appears
repeatedly in the history of liberal thought, namely, the
social contract. He rooted this in the
nature of the individual and asserted that each person knows their
own interest best. His assertion that man is born free, and that
education was sufficient to restrain him within society, rocked the
monarchical society of his age. His ideas were a key element in the
declaration of the
National
Assembly during the French Revolution, and in the thinking of
Americans such as
Benjamin
Franklin and
Thomas Jefferson.
In his view the unity of a state came from the concerted action of
consent, or the "national will". This unity of action would allow
states to exist without being chained to pre-existing social
orders, such as aristocracy.
The "
Scottish Enlightenment"
included the writers
David Hume and
Adam Smith.
David Hume's contributions were many and
varied, but most important was his assertion that fundamental rules
of human behavior would overwhelm attempts to restrict or regulate
them. In
A Treatise of
Human Nature, 1739-1740, he disparaged
mercantilism and the accumulation of gold and
silver by governments. He argued that prices were related to the
quantity of money, and that hoarding gold and issuing paper money
would only lead to inflation.
Although Adam Smith is the most famous of the economic liberal
thinkers, he was not without antecedents. The
physiocrats in France had proposed the
systematic study of political economy and asserted the
self-organizing nature of markets. Benjamin Franklin wrote in favor
of the freedom of American industry in 1750. In
Sweden-Finland the period of liberty and
parliamentary government from 1718 to 1772 produced a Finnish
parliamentarian,
Anders Chydenius,
who was one of the first to propose free trade and unregulated
industry, in
The National
Gain, 1765. His impact has proven to be lasting
particularly in the Nordic area, but it also had a powerful effect
in later developments elsewhere.
Adam Smith (1723–1790) expounded the
theory that individuals could structure both moral and economic
life without direction from the state, and that nations would be
strongest when their citizens were free to follow their own
initiative. He advocated an end to feudal and mercantile
regulations, to state-granted monopolies and patents, and he
promulgated "
laissez-faire" economics.
In
The Theory of
Moral Sentiments, 1759, he developed a theory of
motivation which tried to reconcile human self-interest and an
unregulated social order. In
The Wealth of Nations, 1776, he
argued that the market, under certain conditions, would naturally
regulate itself and would produce more than the heavily restricted
markets that were the norm at the time. He assigned to government
the role of taking on tasks which could not be entrusted to the
profit motive, such as preventing individuals from using force or
fraud to disrupt competition, trade, or production. His theory of
taxation was that governments should levy taxes only in ways which
did not harm the economy, and that "The subjects of every state
ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as
nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities;
that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy
under the protection of the state." He agreed with Hume that
capital, not gold, is the wealth of a nation.
Immanuel Kant was strongly influenced
by both Hume's empiricism and continental rationalism. His most
important contributions to liberal thinking are in the realm of
ethics, particularly his assertion of the
categorical imperative. Kant argued
that received systems of reason and morals were subordinate to
natural law, and that, therefore, attempts to stifle this basic law
would meet with failure. His idealism would become increasingly
influential, since it asserted that there were fundamental truths
upon which systems of knowledge could be based. This meshed well
with the ideas of the English Enlightenment about natural
rights.
Liberal revolutions
The philosophers of liberalism wrote in a political framework in
which a monarch, a hereditary aristocracy, and an established
religion were the norm. The first European country to officially
permit
freedom of religion was
the
Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth, during the reign of
Zygmunt I and Zygmunt II
(1506 - 1572). According to
Adam
Zamoyski in
The Polish Way, "They encouraged every
form of creative activity throughout the most dynamic period of
Europe's artistic development, and they graciously allowed their
subjects to do anything they wanted -- except butcher each other in
the name of religion." The Netherlands also showed a degree of
religious tolerance that was rare in an age of religious
warfare.
England had a brief experiment with republican government, when the
Wars of the Three
Kingdoms led to the establishment of a
Commonwealth between 1649 and 1660,
but the idea that ordinary human beings could structure their own
affairs was suppressed with
the
Restoration.
The
American Revolution of 1776
established the first government based on liberal principles
without a monarch or an aristocracy, and with a
Bill of Rights that guaranteed
freedom of religion. The
French
Revolution attempted to do the same, but radicals took power,
leading to the
Reign of Terror, and
a reaction which restored the monarchy.
The American
Declaration of
Independence proclaimed the liberal ideals of
life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness.
Benjamin
Franklin,
Thomas Paine,
Thomas Jefferson, and
John Adams were instrumental in creating a
country whose constitution was based on liberal principles. But
this new government allowed
slavery and the
states, which determined the
qualifications for voting, initially limited suffrage to white
males who owned property.
James Madison was prominent among the
next generation of political theorists in America, arguing that in
a republic self-government depended on setting "interest against
interest", thus providing protection for the rights of minorities,
particularly economic minorities. The
United States Constitution
contained a system of checks and balances: federal government
balanced against states' rights; executive, legislative, and
judicial branches; and a
bicameral
legislature. The goal was to ensure liberty by preventing the
concentration of power in the hands of any one man. Standing armies
were held in suspicion, and the belief was that the
militia would be enough for defense, along with a
navy maintained by the government to protect
American trading vessels.
The
French Revolution overthrew
monarchy,
aristocracy, and an established
Roman Catholic Church. Representatives
of the
Third Estate set themselves up
as a "National Assembly", and claimed for themselves the right to
speak for the French people. During the first few years the
revolution was guided by liberal ideas, but the transition from
revolt to stability was to prove more difficult than the similar
American transition. In addition to native Enlightenment
traditions, some leaders of the early phase of the revolution, such
as
Lafayette, had
fought in the U.S. War of Independence against Britain, and brought
home Anglo-American liberal ideas, but later, under the leadership
of
Maximilien Robespierre, a
Jacobin faction greatly centralized power
and dispensed with most aspects of
due
process, resulting in the
Reign of
Terror. Instead of an ultimately republican constitution,
Napoleon Bonaparte rose from
Director, to Consul, to Emperor. On his death bed he confessed
"They wanted another Washington", meaning a man who could
militarily establish a new state, without desiring a dynasty.
Despite the eventual restoration of the monarchy, in many ways the
French Revolution went farther than the American Revolution in
establishing liberal ideals. The
French Constitution of 1793
established universal adult male
suffrage
and included a far reaching
Declaration
of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, paralleling the
United States Bill of
Rights. One of the side-effects of Napoleon's military
campaigns was to carry these ideas throughout Europe. Some were
adopted by those opposing Napoleon's advances.
The examples of United States and France were followed in many
other countries. Following the usurpation of the Spanish monarchy
by Napoleon's forces in 1808, autonomist and independence movements
began in
Spain,
Portugal, and
Latin America,
which often turned to liberal ideas as alternatives to the
monarchical-clerical corporatism of the old regime and the colonial
era. Movements such as those led by the
Cádiz Cortes in Spain and by
Simón Bolívar in the Andean
countries aspired to constitutional government, individual rights,
and free trade. The struggle between liberals and corporatist
conservatives continued for the rest of the century in Spain,
Portugal, and Latin America, with
anti-clerical liberals such as
Benito Juárez of Mexico attacking the
traditional role of the
Roman
Catholic Church.
The transition to liberal society in Europe sometimes came through
revolutionary or
secessionist violence, and there were many liberal
revolutions and revolts throughout Europe in the first half of the
19th century. In Britain, however, and in many other nations, the
process was driven more by politics than revolution, even when the
process was not entirely tranquil. The
anti-clerical violence during the
French Revolution was seen by opponents of
liberalism at the time,and for most of the 19th century, as proof
that liberal doctrine led to mob rule, and that a strong monarch
was necessary for stability.
Liberal notions moved from being proposals for reform of existing
governments to demands for change. The
American Revolution and the
French Revolution added
democracy to the list of liberal values. The idea
that the people were sovereign and capable of making all necessary
laws and enforcing them went beyond the conceptions of the
Enlightenment. Instead of merely asserting the rights of
individuals within the state, liberal revolutionaries asserted that
all of the state's powers were either derived from the nature of
man (
natural law), given by God
(supernatural law), or established by contract ("the just consent
of the governed"). This made compromise with previously autocratic
orders far less likely, and the resulting violence was justified by
the monarchists as necessary to restore order.
Between 1774 and 1848, there were several
waves of revolutions, each revolution
demanding greater and greater primacy for individual rights. The
revolutions placed increasing value on
self-governance. This could lead to
secession – a particularly important concept in the American
Revolution and in the revolutions which ended Spanish control over
much of her colonial
empire in the Americas.
European liberals, particularly after the French Constitution of
1793, thought that democracy, considered as majority rule by
propertyless men, would be a danger to private property, and
favored a franchise limited to those with a certain amount of
property. Later liberal democrats, like
de Tocqueville, disagreed. In countries where
feudal property arrangements still held sway, liberals generally
supported unification as the path to liberty. The strongest
examples of this were Germany and Italy, which at the time were not
nations but aggregations of independent states. As part of this
revolutionary program, the importance of
education in enlightened self-rule, a value
repeatedly stressed from
Erasmus onward,
became more and more central to the idea of liberty.
Liberal parties in many European monarchies agitated for
parliamentary government, increased representation, expansion of
the franchise where present, and the creation of a counterweight to
monarchical power and feudal privilege. These forces were seen even
in autocracies such as Turkey, Russia and Japan. As the Russian
Empire crumbled under the weight of economic failure and military
defeat, it was the liberal parties who took control of the Duma,
and in 1905 and 1917 began revolutions against the government.
Later,
Piero Gobetti would formulate a
theory of "Liberal Revolution" to explain what he felt was the
radical element in liberal ideology.
Another example of
this form of liberal revolution is from Ecuador
, where
Eloy Alfaro in 1895 lead a "radical
liberal" revolution that secularized the state, opened marriage
laws, engaged in the development of infrastructure and the
economy.
In the United States, there were two major liberal revolutions in
the 19th Century, the first political, the second leading to Civil
War. In 1829,
populist candidate and war
hero
Andrew Jackson was elected to
the first of two terms as the 7th president of the United States.
During the era of
Jacksonian
democracy, the franchise was extended to include, for the first
time, all White adult male citizens. Jackson also attempted to
change economic policy in the direction of
laissez-faire economics, in what
came to be known as the "Bank War". Jacksonian democracy came to an
end during turmoil surrounding the anti-slavery movement. Before
the
Civil War, in the North as
well as the South, Blacks were not allowed to vote, to serve on
juries, to go to school, to testify in court in any case involving
a White person, or to hold public office. The Civil War led to the
Emancipation Proclamation,
which freed those slaves in states in rebellion, and to the 13th,
14th, and 15th amendments to the US Constitution, which abolished
slavery throughout the United States, and extended equal rights to
people of all races, in theory if not always in practice.
Modern Liberalism
By the beginning of the 20th century, political liberalism had
become the norm throughout the West, but economic liberalism had
resulted in a vast concentration of wealth, with the majority of
mankind living in a state of poverty. The economic world was shaken
by a series of depressions. Freedom, which in the past had been
threatened by autocratic governments, was now threatened by the
despotism of the rich.
Communism offered a revolutionary
alternative to liberalism, promising a more just distribution of
wealth. The political history of the 20th Century can be seen as a
cold war between liberal democracy and
communism, although other enemies of liberalism,
fascism and more recently
Islamism, have also struggled for dominance.
Liberalism's answer to communism came in the form of
social liberalism, as proposed by the
British philosopher
T. H. Green. His writing
stressed the interdependence of human beings, and the need for a
government that would promote freedom by providing health care and
education, and fight the forces of prejudice and ignorance.
Another brand of liberalism arose at this time in opposition to
social liberalism, called
Social
Darwinism, as discussed in the writing of another British
philosopher,
Herbert Spencer. Where
Green stressed community and interdependence, Spencer stressed
individuality and self-interest. In his view, government should get
out of the way, or at most serve as a "night-watchman", and allow
human beings freedom to compete. In this competition, the weak
would die and the strong survive, to the eventual improvement of
the human race.
While the social liberals strove to eliminate the poverty that made
communism attractive, the followers of social Darwinism considered
that a weak response, and favored war as the only sure method of
destroying communism. Communist parties were outlawed in many parts
of Europe, and communist demonstrations violently suppressed. The
communists also chose violence as the best method of attaining
their ends, and communist revolutions were successful in Russia and
China.
At the same time that communist revolutions were changing the
political landscape in the East, the social liberals were making
major changes in the West. They recognized the power of
capitalism to produce wealth, and believed that
communism would fail on economic rather than military grounds. At
the same time, they argued that the benefits of the wealth produced
by capitalism should be shared with the general population, and not
left in the hands of the few. They sponsored programs of civic
improvement, building of schools, hospitals, public transportation
systems, and sewage systems. During times of depression, these
programs provided jobs for the unemployed, who would otherwise
either starve or be a threat to orderly society.
The Great Depression
For ten years,from 1929 to the start of
World War II, the West was in the grip of what
has come to be called The Great Depression. In Europe, the turmoil
and poverty of depression contributed to the rise of a new power,
fascism, which held that dictatorship was
the only form of government strong enough to combat
communism.
The British economist
John Maynard
Keynes offered a plan that he claimed could end the Great
Depression without fascism or communism. He argued that government,
while leaving the market free in most respects, could manage the
money supply in a way that would smooth out the highs and lows of
the
boom and bust cycle that had
plagued capitalism since the 19th Century.
In the United States, President
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
instituted the
New Deal, which eased the
suffering of the unemployed with a variety of measures, such as the
WPA and
social security. He also supported laws to
encourage
trade unions and to regulate
banking. These measures did not, however, end the Great Depression,
which continued until the vast increase in government spending
which occurred when the nation moved to a wartime economy leading
up to
World War II.
During the war, liberalism and communism become uneasy allies to
defeat fascism, but almost as soon as the war ended, they renewed
their hostile stance, although the
Cold War
stopped short of actual warfare.
Totalitarianism
In mid-20th century, liberalism began to define itself in
opposition to
totalitarianism. The
term was first used by
Giovanni
Gentile to describe the socio-political system set up by
Benito Mussolini.
Joseph Stalin would apply it to German
Nazism, and after the war it became a
descriptive term for what liberalism considered the common
characteristics of
fascist, Nazi, and
Marxist-Leninist regimes.
Totalitarian
regimes sought and tried to
implement absolute centralized control over all aspects of society,
in order to achieve prosperity and stability. These governments
often justified such absolutism by arguing that the survival of
their civilization was at risk. Opposition to totalitarian regimes
acquired great importance in liberal and democratic thinking, and
totalitarian regimes were often portrayed as trying to destroy
liberal democracy. On the other hand, the opponents of liberalism
strongly objected to the classification that unified mutually
hostile fascist and communist ideologies, and argued that fascism
and communism are fundamentally different.
In Italy and Germany, nationalist governments linked
corporate capitalism to the state, and
promoted the idea that their nations were culturally and racially
superior, and that conquest would give them their "rightful" place
in the world. The propaganda machines of these countries argued
that democracy was weak and incapable of decisive action, and that
only a strong leader could impose necessary discipline. In the
Soviet Union, the ruling communists banned private property,
claiming to act for the sake of economic and social justice, and
the government had full control over the
planned economy. The regime insisted that
personal interests be linked to and inferior to those of society.
This became an excuse for persecuting not only those who opposed
communism but also dissidents within the communists ranks.
The rise of totalitarianism became a lens for liberal thought. Many
liberals began to analyze their own beliefs and principles, and
came to the conclusion that totalitarianism arose because people in
a degraded condition turn to dictatorships for solutions. From
this, it was argued that the state had the duty to protect the
economic well being of its citizens. As
Isaiah Berlin said, "Freedom for the wolves
has often meant death to the sheep." This growing body of liberal
thought argued that reason requires a government to act as a
balancing force in economics.
Other liberal interpretations on the rise of totalitarianism were
quite contrary to the growing body of thought on government
regulation, and supported the market and capitalism. This included
Friedrich Hayek's work,
The Road to Serfdom. He argued that
the rise of totalitarian dictatorships was the result of too much
government intervention and regulation upon the market, which
caused loss of political and civil freedoms. Hayek also saw these
economic controls being instituted in the United Kingdom, the
United States, and in Canada and warned against these "Keynesian"
institutions, believing that they can and will lead to the same
totalitarian governments "Keynesians liberals" were attempting to
avoid. Hayek saw authoritarian regimes such as the fascists, Nazis,
and communists as the same totalitarian branch; all of which sought
the elimination or reduction of economic freedom. To him the
elimination of economic freedom brought about the elimination of
political freedom. Thus Hayek asserted that the differences between
Nazis and communists are only rhetorical.
Friedrich Hayek and
Milton Friedman wrote that economic freedom
is a necessary condition for the creation and sustainability of
civil and political freedoms. Hayek believed the same totalitarian
outcomes could occur in Britain (or anywhere else) if the state
sought to control the economic freedom of the individual with the
policy prescriptions outlined by people like Dewey, Keynes, or
Roosevelt.
Another influential critic of totalitarianism was
Karl Popper. In
The Open Society and Its
Enemies he defended
liberal
democracy and advocated
open
society, in which the government can be changed without
bloodshed. Popper argued that the process of the accumulation of
human knowledge is unpredictable and that the theory of ideal
government cannot possibly exist. Therefore, the political system
should be flexible enough so that governmental policy would be able
to evolve and adjust to the needs of the society; in particular, it
should encourage
pluralism and
multiculturalism.
After World War II
As it became increasingly clear that totalitarianism failed to
produce the benefits it claimed to provide, Western liberalism
split into two branches. In the UK, for example, the
Liberal Party, even after it joined
forces with the
Social
Democratic Party to become the
Liberal Democrats, is in third place,
behind the
Labour Party and the
Conservative Party. All
three parties embrace liberalism as a philosophy. The divisions are
along the lines outlined in the preceding section, between
followers of Berlin and Popper on the one hand and followers of
Hayek and Friedman on the other. The same process occurred in many
other countries, as the social democratic parties took the leading
role in the
Left, while pro-business
conservative parties took the leading role in the
Right.
The period immediately after World War II saw the dominance of
social liberalism. Linking
modernism and
progressivism to the notion that a populace in
possession of rights and sufficient economic and educational means
would be the best defense against totalitarian threats, the
liberalism of this period took the stance that by enlightened use
of liberal institutions, individual liberties could be maximized,
and
self-actualization could be
reached by the broad use of technology. Liberal writers in this
period include economist
John
Kenneth Galbraith, philosopher
John
Rawls and sociologist
Ralf
Dahrendorf. A dissenting strain of thought developed that
viewed any government involvement in the economy as a betrayal of
liberal principles. Calling itself
libertarianism, this movement was centered
around such schools of thought as
Austrian Economics.
After the 1970s, the
liberal pendulum swung away from the
idea of increasing the role of government, and towards a greater
use of the
free market and
laissez-faire principles. In theory, many of
the old pre-World War I ideas were making a comeback. In fact, all
governments increased in both power and spending, under liberal and
conservative leaders alike. Deregulation in the early 21st century,
especially of the banking industry, led the world not to the
predicted prosperity, but to the brink of economic collapse.
Varieties of liberalism
The impact of liberalism on the modern world is profound. The ideas
of individual liberty, personal dignity, free expression, religious
tolerance, private property, universal human rights, transparency
of government, limitations on government power, popular
sovereignty, national self-determination, privacy, "enlightened"
and "rational" policy, the rule of law, respect for science,
fundamental equality, a free market economy, and free trade were
all radical notions some 250 years ago.
Liberal democracy, in its typical form of
multiparty political pluralism, has spread to much of the world.
Today all of these ideals are accepted as the goals of policy in
most nations, even where there is a wide gap between what
governments say and what they do. Not only liberal parties honor
these principles, but
social
democrats,
conservatives, and
Christian Democrats at least pay
lip service to them as well. Most debate is within a liberal
framework. This has led to the word "liberal" being used in many
different ways.
Elitism and democracy
Critics of liberalism, such as
Edmund
Burke, feared that it would lead to
mob
rule, and pointed to the excesses of the
French Revolution, to claim that a
monarchy and an established religion led to stability and security.
John Locke did not believe in liberty for
the
Negro.
On the eve of the American Civil War, the Supreme Court of
the United States
, in the Dred
Scott decision, ruled that only White men were included in the
rights granted by the Constitution and that other races had no
rights whatsoever, either legal or moral, that the White man was
obligated to recognize.
However, the history of liberalism has been a history of ever wider
extension of the ideal of freedom. In 1867, New Zealand allowed
non-Whites to vote, and in 1893, they became the first nation to
allow women to vote, followed by Australia in 1894. (Australia did
not allow Blacks to vote until 1962.) In 1870, The United States of
America officially extended the vote to Blacks, although in many
parts of the country methods were found to prevent Blacks from
voting. Women were allowed to vote in the United States in 1920,
while women in the United Kingdom were granted equal voting rights
with men in 1928 (women over 30 who met certain property
qualifications had been entitled to vote since 1918).
Outside the West,
women were given the right to vote in Japan in 1946; in Iran
in
1963. Women are still not allowed to vote in
Saudi
Arabia
and in a few other countries. Property
restrictions, religious restrictions, and age restrictions on
voting rights have also been eased in most nations over the last
200 years, so that now almost all members of the
United Nations (at least in theory) allow
universal suffrage for citizens age 18 years or older, with some
exceptions based on mental incapacity or criminal conviction.
Economic liberalism
Free market
Economic liberals today stress the importance of a free market and
free trade, and seek to limit
government intervention in both the
domestic
economy and foreign trade. Social
liberal movements often agree in principle with the idea of free
trade, but maintain some skepticism, seeing unrestricted trade as
leading to the growth of multi-national corporations and the
concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few. In the
post-war consensus on the
welfare state in Europe, liberals
supported government responsibility for health, education, and
alleviating poverty while still calling for a market based on
independent exchange. Liberals agree that a high quality of health
care and education should be available for all citizens, but differ
in their views on the degree to which governments should supply
these benefits. Liberal movements seek a balance between individual
responsibility and community responsibility. In particular, many
liberals favor special protection for children and old people, as
well as the sick and the disabled, and the aged.
European liberalism turned back to more
laissez-faire policies in the 1980s and
1990s, and supported
privatisation of
industry. Modern European liberals generally believe that
governments have gone too far in providing for their citizens, and
decry what they call the "nanny state". It is important to
distinguish, however, between government provision of health care
and education, which most European liberals support, and government
ownership of industry, which most European liberals oppose.
The debate between personal liberty and social optimality occupies
much of the theory of liberalism since the Second World War,
particularly centering around the questions of social choice and
market mechanisms required to produce a "liberal" society. One of
the central parts of this argument concerns
Kenneth Arrow's
General Possibility Theorem.
This thesis states that there is no consistent social choice
function which satisfies unbounded decision making, independence of
choices,
Pareto optimality, and
non-dictatorship. In short, according to the thesis which includes
the problem of
liberal paradox, it
is not possible to have unlimited liberty, a maximum amount of
utility, and an unlimited range of choices at the same time.
Another important argument within liberalism is the importance of
rationality in decision-making (whether
people make decisions rationally or irrationally). There is also
the question of the relationship, if any, between freedom and
material inequality.
Libertarians phrase this debate in terms
of
positive rights and
negative rights. By
positive rights
they mean such things as the "right" to an education, the "right"
to healthcare, or the "right" to a minimum wage. By
negative
rights they mean such things as the "right" to enforce
contracts, the "right" of protection against lawlessness, and the
"right" to be left alone by the government as long as you honor
contracts and obey the law.
Utilitarians use different language for
the same ideas. Instead of the word "rights" they use the word
"good", and argue that an educated, healthy populace, able to
support itself by its labor, is for the "good" of society.
Key liberal thinkers, such as
Lujo
Brentano,
Leonard Trelawny
Hobhouse,
Thomas Hill Green,
John Maynard Keynes,
Bertil Ohlin and
John
Dewey, described how a government should intervene in the
economy to protect liberty while avoiding
socialism. These liberals developed the theory of
social liberalism (also "new
liberalism," not to be confused with present-day
neoliberalism). Social liberals rejected both
radical capitalism and the
revolutionary elements of the
socialist school.
John Maynard Keynes, in particular, had
a significant impact on liberal thought throughout the world. The
Liberal Party in Britain,
particularly since Lloyd George's
People's Budget, was heavily influenced by
Keynes, as was the
Liberal
International, the Oxford Liberal Manifesto of 1947 of the
world organization of
liberal
parties. In the United States and in Canada, the influence of
Keynesianism on
Franklin D. Roosevelt's
New
Deal and on
William Lyon
Mackenzie King has led
social
liberalism to be identified with
American liberalism and
Canadian liberalism.
Other liberals, including
F. A. Hayek,
Milton Friedman, and
Ludwig von Mises, argued that the great
depression was not a result of "laissez-faire" capitalism but a
result of too much government intervention and regulation upon the
market. In Friedman's work "Capitalism and Freedom" he discussed
government regulation that occurred before the great depression,
including heavy regulations upon banks that prevented them, he
argued, from reacting to the markets' demand for money.
Furthermore, the U.S. Federal government had created a fixed
currency pegged to the value of gold. At first the pegged value
created a massive surplus of gold, but later the pegged value was
too low, which created an equally massive migration of gold from
the U.S. Friedman and Hayek both believed that this inability to
react to currency demand created a run on the banks that the banks
were no longer able to handle, and that the currency demand
combined with fixed exchange rates between the dollar and gold both
worked to cause the
Great
Depression, by creating, and then not fixing, deflationary
pressures. He further argued in this thesis, that the government
inflicted more pain upon the American public by first raising
taxes, then by printing money to pay debts (thus causing
inflation), the combination of which helped to wipe out the savings
of the middle class.
In 1974 Hayek was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for, among
other reasons, his theory of business cycles and his conception of
the effects of monetary and credit policies, and for being "one of
the few economists who gave warning of the possibility of a major
economic crisis before the great crash came in the autumn of
1929."
In the 21st Century, the debate is often put in terms of the
conflict between states and multinational corporations.
Conservatives tend to distrust states, and see liberty as arising
spontaneously from unrestricted international trade. Liberals tend
to distrust corporations, and look to states to protect
liberty.
Environment
Many liberals share values with environmentalists, such as the
Green Party. They seek to minimize the
damage done by the human species on the natural world, and to
maximize the regeneration of damaged areas. Some such activists
attempt to make changes on an economic level by acting together
with businesses, but others favor legislation in order to achieve
sustainable development.
Other liberals do not accept government regulation in this matter
and argue that the market should regulate itself in some
fashion.
International relations
There is no consensus about liberal doctrine in international
politics, though there are some central notions, which can be
deduced from, for example, the opinions of
Liberal International. Social liberals
often believe that
war can be abolished. Some
favor internationalism, and support the
United Nations. Economic liberals, on the
other hand, favor non-interventionism rather than collective
security. Liberals believe in the right of every individual to
enjoy the essential human liberties, and support self-determination
for national minorities. Essential also is the free exchange of
ideas, news, goods and services between people, as well as freedom
of travel within and between all countries. Liberals generally
oppose
censorship, protective trade
barriers, and exchange regulations.
Some liberals were among the strongest advocates of international
co-operation and the building of supra-national organizations, such
as the
European Union. In the view of
social liberals, a global free and fair market can only work if
companies worldwide respect a set of common minimal social and
ecological standards. A controversial question, on which there is
no liberal consensus, is
immigration. Do
nations have a right to limit the flow of immigrants from countries
with growing populations to countries with stable or declining
populations?
Role of the State
From the beginning of liberal thinking, there was a vigorous debate
over the proper role of the state. For example, in the newly
founded United States government, a government based on liberal
principles,
Thomas Paine accused
George Washington of trying to set
himself up as a king, while
John Adams
supported
Washington, arguing that
a strong federal government was necessary to prevent
mob rule. Benjamin Franklin discussed the question
of what measures a liberal government should take to protect the
poor.
This debate has continued throughout modern history. To what extent
should a liberal government take an active role in the welfare of
its citizens? By the end of the 19th century, some liberals
asserted that, in order to be free, individuals needed access to
food, shelter, and education, and government protection from
exploitation. In 1911,
L.T. Hobhouse published
Liberalism, which
summarized these ideas, including qualified acceptance of
government intervention in the economy, and the collective right to
equality in dealings, what he called "just consent."
Opposed to these changes was a strain of liberalism which became
increasingly anti-government, in some cases adopting
anarchism. Gustave de Molinari in France and
Herbert Spencer in England were prominent examples of this
trend.
The debate continues today.
Natural rights vs. utilitarianism vs. contractarianism
In 1810, the German
Wilhelm von
Humboldt developed the modern concepts of liberalism in his
book
The Limits of State
Action.
John Stuart Mill
popularized and expanded these ideas in
On Liberty (1859) and other works. He
opposed
collectivist tendencies while
still placing emphasis on quality of life for the individual. He
also had sympathy for female suffrage and (later in life) for labor
co-operatives.
One of Mill's most important contributions was his
utilitarian justification of liberalism. Mill
grounded liberal ideas in the instrumental and pragmatic, allowing
the unification of subjective ideas of liberty gained from the
French thinkers in the tradition of
Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the more
rights-based philosophies of
John Locke
in the British tradition.
A third school of thought is based on the
social contract theory. According to this
view, agents negotiating about the form of society would create a
liberal society. There are several variants of this theory, some of
them reaching contradiciting conclusions. Famous proponents of this
theory that have at least certain liberal elements include
Thomas Hobbes,
Jean-Jacques Rousseau,
John Locke and
Immanuel
Kant. In modern times, proponents include
John Rawls,
Robert
Nozick,
David Gauthier and
Jan Narveson.
Democracy
The relationship between liberalism and democracy may be summed up
by
Winston Churchill's famous
remark, "...democracy is the worst form of Government except all
those other forms..." In short, there is nothing about democracy
per se that guarantees freedom rather than a tyranny of the masses.
The coinage
liberal democracy
suggests a more harmonious marriage between the two principles than
actually exists. Liberals strive after the replacement of
absolutism by limited government: government by consent. The idea
of consent suggests democracy. At the same time, the founders of
the first liberal democracies feared both government power and
mob rule, and so they built into the
constitutions of liberal democracies both
checks and balances intended to limit
the power of government by dividing those powers among several
branches, and a
bill of rights
intended to protect the rights of individuals. For liberals,
democracy is not an end in itself, but an essential means to secure
liberty, individuality and diversity.
Extension of liberalism to the disadvantaged
Civil rights
Liberalism advocates
civil rights for
all citizens: the protection and privileges of personal liberty
extended to all
citizens equally by law.
This includes the equal treatment of all citizens irrespective of
race, gender
and
class. Critics from an
internationalist human rights school of thought argue that the
civil rights advocated in the liberal view are not extended to all
people, but are limited to citizens of particular states. Unequal
treatment on the basis of nationality is therefore possible,
especially in regard to
citizenship
itself.
Liberals generally believe in neutral government, in the sense that
it is not for the state to determine personal values. As
John Rawls put it, "The state has no right to
determine a particular conception of
the good life". In
the United States this neutrality is expressed in the
Declaration of
Independence as the right to the pursuit of happiness. Both in
Europe and in the United States, liberals often support the
pro-choice movement and advocate equal
rights for women and homosexuals.
Liberals in Europe are generally hostile to any attempts by the
state to enforce equality in employment by legal action against
employers, whereas in the United States many social liberals favor
such
affirmative action. Liberals
in general support equal opportunity, but not necessarily equal
outcome. Most European liberal parties do not favour employment
quotas for women and ethnic minorities as the
best way to end
gender and racial
inequality. However, all agree that arbitrary discrimination on the
basis of race or gender is morally wrong.
Rule of law
The
rule of law and equality before the
law are fundamental to liberalism. Government authority may only be
legitimately exercised in accordance with laws that are adopted
through an established procedure. Another aspect of the rule of law
is an insistence upon the guarantee of an independent
judiciary, whose political independence is
intended to act as a safeguard against arbitrary rulings in
individual cases. The rule of law includes concepts such as the
presumption of innocence,
no
double jeopardy, and
habeas corpus. Rule of law is seen by liberals
as a guard against despotism and as enforcing limitations on the
power of government. In the penal system, liberals in general
reject punishments they see as inhumane, including
capital punishment
Liberal parties
Today the word "liberalism" is used differently in different
countries. (
See Liberalism
worldwide.) One of the greatest contrasts is between the
usage in the United States and usage in the rest of the world, most
sharply in Continental Europe. In the US, liberalism is usually
understood to refer to
social
liberalism, as contrasted with
conservatism. American liberals
endorse regulation for business, a limited
social welfare state, and support broad
racial, ethnic, sexual and religious
tolerance, and thus more readily embrace
Pluralism, and
affirmative action. In Europe, on the
other hand, liberalism is characterized by beliefs in free trade
and limited government; it is not only contrasted with conservatism
and
Christian Democracy, but
also with
socialism and
social democracy. In some countries,
European liberals share common positions with Christian
Democrats.
The
Liberal International is
the main international organisation of liberal parties. It affirms
the following principles:
human rights,
free and fair
elections and
multiparty-democracy,
social justice,
tolerance,
social market economy,
free trade,
economic
freedom,
environmental
sustainability and a strong sense of international solidarity.
These ideals are described in further detail in the various
manifestos of the LI.
Before an explanation of this subject proceeds, it is important to
add this disclaimer: There is always a disconnect between
philosophical ideals and political realities. Also, opponents of
any belief are apt to describe that belief in different terms from
those used by adherents. What follows is a record of those goals
that overtly appear most consistently across major liberal
manifestos (e.g., the
Oxford
Manifesto of 1947). It is not an attempt to catalogue the
idiosyncratic views of particular persons, parties, or countries,
nor is it an attempt to investigate any covert goals, since both
are beyond the scope of this article.
Radicalism
In various countries in Europe and Latin-America, in the nineteenth
century and the beginning of the twentieth century, a radical
tendency arose next to or as a successor to traditional liberalism.
In the United Kingdom the
Radicals united with traditionally
liberal
Whigs to form the Liberal
Party.
In
other countries, including Switzerland, Germany, Bulgaria
, Denmark,
Spain and the Netherlands, these left-wing liberals formed their
own radical parties with various names. Similar events
occurred in Argentina
and Chile
. In
French political literature it is normal to make clear separation
between liberalism and radicalism. In Serbia liberalism and
radicalism have and have had almost nothing in common. But even the
French radicals were aligned to the international liberal movement
in the first half of the twentieth century, in the
Entente
Internationale des Partis Radicaux et des Partis Démocratiques
similaires
Conservative liberalism
Examples include the
People's Party for
Freedom and Democracy in the Netherlands, the
Moderate Party (Sweden), the
Liberal Party of Denmark and, in some
ways, the
Free
Democratic Party of Germany.
Liberal conservatism
Liberal conservatism is a widespread liberal movement. Examples
include the
Liberal
Democratic Party in Japan,
Conservative Party of Canada,
the
Liberal Front Party
(Brazil),
Forza Italia,
Civic Platform (Poland), and the
Liberal Party of Australia.
International relations theory
"Liberalism" in international relations is a theory that holds that
state preferences, rather than state capabilities, are the primary
determinant of state behavior. Unlike
realism where the state
is seen as a unitary actor, liberalism allows for plurality in
state actions. Thus, preferences will vary from state to state,
depending on factors such as
culture,
economic system or
government type. Liberalism also holds
that interaction between states is not limited to the
political/security ("high politics"), but also economic/cultural
("low politics") whether through commercial firms, organizations or
individuals. Thus, instead of an anarchic international system,
there are plenty of opportunities for cooperation and broader
notions of power, such as cultural capital (for example, the
influence of a country's films leading to the popularity of its
culture and the creation of a market for its exports worldwide).
Another assumption is that
absolute
gains can be made through co-operation and
interdependence – thus peace can be achieved.
Liberalism as an international relations theory is not inherently
linked to liberalism as a more general domestic political ideology.
Increasingly, modern liberals are integrating
critical international
relations theory into their foreign policy positions.
Neoliberalism
Originally coined 1938 at the
Colloque Walter Lippmann by the
German
sociologist and
economist Alexander Rüstow, "
neoliberalism" is a label referring to the
recent reemergence of
classical
liberalism among political and economic scholars and
policy-makers. The label is usually used by people who oppose
liberalism; proponents usually describe themselves simply as
"liberals".
The emerged liberalism—like
classical liberalism—supports
free markets,
free
trade, and
decentralized
decision-making. Despite favoring less regulation and maximizing
free trade, neoliberals differ on their support of domestic
taxes, beliefs can range from
anarcho-capitalist to
social democrat in this field. Higher
economic freedom has been found to correlate strongly with higher
living standards, self-reported happiness, and peace. Since the
1970s, most of the world's countries have become more liberal.
Between 1985 and 2005, only a small amount of surveyed countries
did not increase their
Economic Freedom of the
World score.
Neoconservatism
Despite its name, Neoconservatism can be considered a liberal
political philosophy that
emerged in the United States of America, which supports actively
using American economic and military power to bring liberalism,
democracy, and
human rights to other countries. Unlike
traditional American conservatives, neoconservatives are generally
comfortable with a minimally-bureaucratic
welfare state; and, while generally supportive
of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding
social purposes. Neoconservative philosophy was originally born out
of the aggressive idealism of former socialists and social liberals
such as
Irving Kristol. Since then,
neoconservatism has arguably branched out into various forms.
Social democracy
The basic ideological difference between liberalism and
social democracy lies in the role of the
State in relation to the individual. Liberals value liberty,
rights, freedoms, and private property as fundamental to individual
happiness, and regard democracy as an instrument to maintain a
society where each individual enjoys the greatest amount of liberty
possible (subject to the
Harm
Principle). Hence, democracy and parliamentarianism are mere
political systems which legitimize themselves only through the
amount of liberty they promote, and are not valued
per se.
While the state does have an important role in ensuring positive
liberty, liberals tend to trust that individuals are usually
capable in deciding their own affairs, and generally do not need
deliberate steering towards happiness.
Social democracy, on the other hand, has its roots in
socialism (especially in
democratic socialism), and typically
favours a more community-based view. While social democrats also
value individual liberty, they do not believe that real liberty can
be achieved for the majority without transforming the nature of the
state itself. Having rejected the revolutionary approach of
Marxism, and choosing to further their goals
through the democratic process, social democrats nevertheless
retain a strong skepticism for
capitalism, which they believe needs to be
regulated or managed for the greater good. This focus on the
greater good may, potentially, make social democrats more ready to
step in and steer society in a direction that is deemed to be more
equitable.
In practice, however, the differences between the two may be harder
to perceive. This is especially the case nowadays, as many social
democratic parties have shifted towards the center and adopted
Third Way politics.
Libertarianism
Libertarianism is a term adopted by a broad
spectrum of
political philosophies which advocate
the maximization of individual
liberty and
the minimization or even abolition of the
state. Libertarians embrace viewpoints
across that spectrum, ranging from pro-
property to anti-property, from
minarchist to openly
anarchist.
Quotations
- "The remission of debts was peculiar to Solon; it was his great
means for confirming the citizens' liberty; for a mere law to give
all men equal rights is but useless, if the poor must sacrifice
those rights to their debts, and, in the very seats and sanctuaries
of equality, the courts of justice, the offices of state, and the
public discussions, be more than anywhere at the beck and bidding
of the rich." Plutarch, Parallel
Lives.
- "The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or
collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of
their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which
power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized
community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own
good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." -
John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"
- "Liberalism wagers that a state ... can be strong but
constrained – strong because constrained ... Rights to
education and other requirements for human development and security
aim to advance equal opportunity and personal dignity and to
promote a creative and productive society. To guarantee those
rights, liberals have supported a wider social and economic role
for the state, counterbalanced by more robust guarantees of civil
liberties and a wider social system of checks and balances anchored
in an independent press and pluralistic society." - Paul Starr
See also
Notes
-
http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=liberalis&ending=
- Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Oxford University Press,
2008, ISBN 9780199540594.
- Paul E. Sigmund, editor, The Selected Political Writings of
John Locke, Norton, 2003, ISBN 0393964515 p. iv "(Locke's
thoughts) underlie many of the fundamental political ideas of
American liberal constitutional democracy...", "At the time Locke
wrote, his principles were accepted in theory by a few and in
practice by none."
- Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence, July 4,
1776.
- John Gray, Two Faces of Liberalism, The New Press,
2008, ISBN 9781565846784
- Solon, Where did I fail?", from The Norton Book of
Classical Literature, Bernard Knox, editor, Norton,
1993.
- Livy, History of Rome From Its Foundation, Penguin
Classics, 1960.
- Niccolo Machiavelli, Discourses on Livy, University of
Chicago Press, 1998, ISBN 978-0226500362
- Hel. M. WILLIAMS, Sk. Fr. Rep. I. xi. 113," (presumably
Helen Maria Williams) Sketches of
the State of Manners and Opinions in the French Republic.
1801. Cited in the Oxford English
Dictionary.
- John Locke, Two Treatises of Government and A Letter
Concerning Toleration, Digireads.com, 2005, ISBN
9781420924930
- Jean-Jacques Rousseau The Social Contract and
Discourses, BN Publishing, 2007, ISBN 9789562915410
- Will and Ariel Durant, Rousseau and Revolution, Simon
and Schuster, 1967.
- Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Bantam Classics,
2003, ISBN 9780553585971
- "Magna Carta" in Encyclopedia Britannica
Online
- Pauline Gregg, Free-Born John: A Biography of John
Lilburne, Phoenix Press, 2001, ISBN 9781842122006
- Charles de Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws,
Cambridge University Press, 1989, ISBN 9780521369749
- Richard Whatmore, Republicanism and the French Revolution:
An Intellectual History of Jean-Baptiste Say's Political
Economy, Oxford University Press, 2001, ISBN
9780199241156
- Will and Ariel Durant, Rousseau and Revolution, MJF
Books, 1997, ISBN 9781567310214
- David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, Cornell
University, 2009, ISBN 9781112156120
- A. Marisson, Free Trade and Its Reception 1815-1960:
Freedom and Trade, Routledge, 1998, ISBN 9780415155274
- Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Bantam
Classics,2003, ISBN 9780553585971
- Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Book
Jungle, 2007, ISBN 9781604244199
- Immanuel Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of
Morals, 3rd ed.. Hackett, 1993, ISBN 9780872201675
- Adam Zamoyski, The Polish Way, Hippocrene Books, 1993,
ISBN 9780781802000
- Mark T. Hooker, The History of Holland, Greenwood
Press, 1999, ISBN 9780313306587
- Pierre Manent and Rebecca Balinski, An Intellectual History
of Liberalism, Princeton University Press, 1996, ISBN
9780691029115
-
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/339173/liberalism
- Marshall C. Eakin, The History of Latin America: Collision
of Cultures, Palgrave Macmillan, 2007, ISBN 9781403980816
- Pierre Manent, An Intellectual History of Liberalism,
Princeton University Press, 1996, ISBN 9780691029115
- David Blackbourn, History of Germany, 1780-1918: The Long
Nineteenth Century, Wiley-Blackwell, 2002, ISBN
9780631231967
- Christopher Duggan, A Concise History of Italy,
Cambridge University Press, 1994, ISBN 9780521408486
- James Martin, Piero Gobetti and the Politics of Liberal
Revolution, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, ISBN 9780230602748
- Richard E. Ellis, The Union at Risk: Jacksonian Democracy,
States' Rights, and Nullification Crisis, Oxford University
Press, 1989, ISBN 9780195061871
- Bruce Catton, The Civil War, Mariner Books, 2004, ISBN
9780618001873
- "By the end of the 19th century ... the ideal of a market
economy ... concentrated vast wealth in the hands of a relatively
small number of industrialists and financiers ... great masses of
people ... lived in poverty." "The system periodically came to a
near halt in periods of stagnation that came to be called
depressions." "those who owned or managed the means of production
had acquired enormous economic power that they used to influence
and control government ... some of the very energies that had
demolished the power of despots now nourished a new despotism.",
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/339173/liberalism
- "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They
openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible
overthrow of all existing social institutions." "The proletarians
have nothing to loose but their chains.", Karl Marx and Frederick
Engels, The Communist Manifesto, Filiquarian, 2007, ISBN
9781599867526
- Archie Brown, The Rise and Fall of Communism, Ecco,
2009, ISBN 9780061138799
- David E. Ingersoll, The Philosophic Roots of Modern
Ideology: Liberalism, Communism, Fascism, Prentice Hall, 1990,
ISBN 9780136626442
- Maria Dimova-Cookson and William J. Mander, T. H. Green:
Ethics, Metaphysics, and Political Philosophy, Oxford
University Press, 2006, ISBN 9780199271665.
- Herbert Spencer, The Man Versus the State, Liberty
Fund Inc., 1982, ISBN 9780913966983
- Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of a Conservative,
"Communism is an enemy bound to destroy us." p. 3; "...American
leaders, both political and intellectual, are searching desperately
for 'appeasing' or 'accommodating' the Soviet Union as the price of
national survival.", CreateSpace, 2009, ISBN13: 9781442174740
- Sharon L. Wolchik and Jane L. Curry, editors, Central and
East European Politics: From Communism to Democracy, Rowman
& Littlefield, 2007, ISBN 9780742540682
- "The specter of regimentation in centrally planned economies
and the dangers of bureaucracy even in mixed economies deterred
them from jettisoning the market and substituting a putatively
omnicompetent state. On the other hand — and this is a basic
difference between classical and modern liberalism — most
liberals came to recognize that the operation of the market needed
to be supplemented and corrected." [1]
- Robert Skidelsky, John Maynard Keynes: 1883-1946:
Economist, Philosopher, Statesman, Penguin, 2005, ISBN
9780143036159.
- "Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt to lift the United States out of
the Great Depression, typified modern liberalism in its vast
expansion of the scope of governmental activities and its increased
regulation of business. Among the measures that New Deal
legislation provided were emergency assistance and temporary jobs
to the unemployed, restrictions on banking and financial
industries, more power for trade unions to organize and bargain
with employers, and establishment of the Social Security program."
[2]
- [3]
- Ian McLean and Alistair McMillan, Concise Oxford Dictionary
of Politics, Third Edition, "Totalitarianism", Oxford
University Press, 2009, ISBN 9780199205165
- Ian McLean and Alistair McMillan, Concise Oxford Dictionary
of Politics, Third Edition, "Fascism", Oxford University
Press, 2009, ISBN 9780199205165
- Ian McLean and Alistair McMillan, Concise Oxford Dictionary
of Politics, Third Edition, "Communism", Oxford University
Press, 2009, ISBN 9780199205165
- Isaiah Berlin and Henry Hardy, Liberty, Incorporating Four
Essays on Liberty, p. 38, Oxford Univesity Press, 2002, ISBN
9780199249893
- F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, University of
Chicago Press, 1994, ISBN 9780226320595
- Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies,
Routledge, 2002, ISBN 9780226320595
- John Kenneth Galbraith, The Affluent Society, Houghton
Mifflin, 1958
- David Boaz, Libertarianism: A Primer, Free Press,
1998, ISBN 9780684847689
- Colin Read, Global Financial Meltdown: How We Can Avoid the
Next Economic Crisis, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, ISBN
9780230222182
- Doris Kearns Goodwin, Team of Rivals, Simon &
Schuster, 2006, ISBN 9780743270755
- Oxford Manifesto, 1947
- Kenneth Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values,
Second Edition, Yale Univesity Press, ISBN 9780300013641
-
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1974/press.html
- Harry K. Girvetz, Kenneth Minogue, Terence Ball, and Richard
Dagger, "Liberalism", Encyclopedia Britannica,
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Liberalism&action=edit§ion=11
- Liberal International > The
International
- David McCullough, John Adams, Simon & Schuster,
2008, ISBN 9781416575887
- Walter Isaacson, Benjamin Franklin, An American Life,
Simon & Schuster, 2004, ISBN 9780743258074
- L.T.
Hobhouse: Liberalism, 1911.
- Gustave de Molinari: The Private
Production of Security, 1849.
- Herbert Spencer: The Right to Ignore the State, 1851.
- Wilhelm von Humboldt: The Limits of State Action, 1792.
- Anthony Alblaster: The Rise and Decline of Western Liberalism,
New York, Basil Blackwell, 1984, page 353
- compare: Guide de Ruggeiro: The History of European Liberalism,
Bacon press, 1954, page 379
- See for example the Oxford Manifesto 1997 of the Liberal
International.
- See for example Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. in 1962:
Liberalism in the American usage has little in common with the
word as used in the politics of any European country, save possibly
Britain in Liberalism in America: A Note for Europeans from
The Politics of Hope, Riverside Press, Boston. See for a
similar view Jamie F. Metzl: In the same "Liberalism" as the
term is used in America today is not used in the "older, European
sense, but has come to mean something quite different,
namely policies upholding the modern welfare state in The Rise of Illiberal Democracy by
Fareed
Zakaria, Foreign Affairs, November/December, 1997, Vol 76, No.
6
- See for more information the Liberale und radikale Parteien in
Klaus von Beyme: Parteien in westlichen Demokratien, München,
1982
- Compare page 255 and further in the Guide to the Political
Parties of South America (Pelican Books, 1973
- See page 1 and further of A sense of liberty, by Julie Smith,
published by the Liberal International in 1997.
- Oliver Marc Hartwich: Neoliberalism: The Genesis of a Political
Swearword
- Economic Freedom of the World 2005, Fraser Institute
- Polity, 2008 Robinson, Paul. Dictionary of International
Security. Polity, 2008. p. 135
- Fiala, Andrew. The Just War Myth. Rowman &
Littlefield. 2008. p. 133
- Vaughn, Stephen L. Encylcopedia of American
Journalism. CRC Press, 2007 p. 329
- Tanner, Michael. Leviathan on the Right. Cato
Institute, 2007. pp 33-34.
- See, for example, "The overlap between social democracy and
social liberalism".[4]
- Peter Vallentine, Libertarianism, in Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, Stanford University, July 24, 2006
version.
- Professor Brian Martin, Eliminating state crime by abolishing the state;
Murray Rothbard, Do You Hate the State?, The
Libertarian Forum, Vol. 10, No. 7, July 1977; Libertarian Does Not Equal Libertine; What
Libertarianism Isn't; A
Libertarian Cheat Sheet by Wilton D. Alston; Myth and Truth About Libertarianism Murrary Rothbard;
Do You Consider Yourself a Libertarian?
- Sciabarra, Chris Mathew. Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical
Libertarianism. Penn State Press, 2000, p. 193
- Woodcock, George, Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and
Movements, Broadview Press, 2004.
- Hans-Hermann Hoppe's An Annotated Bibliography presents a long list
of individuals who use both terms.
- Plutarch, Plutarch's Lives, Modern Library, 2001, ISBN
9780375756764
- John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, Longman, 2006, ISBN
9780321276148
- The New Republic, March 2007
References
- Willard, Charles Arthur. Liberalism and the Problem of
Knowledge: A New Rhetoric for Modern Democracy, University of
Chicago Press, 1996.
- Michael Scott Christofferson "An Antitotalitarian History of
the French Revolution: François Furet's Penser la Révolution
française in the Intellectual Politics of the Late 1970s" (in
French Historical Studies, Fall 1999)
- Piero Gobetti La Rivoluzione liberale. Saggio sulla lotta
politica in Italia, Bologna, Rocca San Casciano, 1924
Further reading
Prominent law scholars
- Putting liberalism in its place / Paul W
Kahn, 2005 (Yale
University
)
- Liberalism divided: freedom of speech and the many uses of
State power / Owen M Fiss, 1996 (Yale University)
- The future of liberal revolution / Bruce A Ackerman, 1992 (Yale
University)
- Social justice in the liberal state / Bruce A Ackerman, 1980
(Yale University)
- Notions of fairness versus the Pareto
principle: on the role of logical consistency / Louis Kaplow, 2000
(Harvard
University
)
- Knowledge & politics / Roberto Mangabeira Unger., 1975
(Harvard University)
- Principles for a free society / Richard
Allen Epstein, 1999 (University of Chicago
)
- Fairness in a liberal society / Richard Allen Epstein, 2005
(University of Chicago)
- Skepticism and freedom: a modern case for classical liberalism
/ Richard Allen Epstein., 2003 (University of Chicago)
- Cultivating humanity: a classical defense of reform in liberal
education / Martha Nussbaum, 1997 (University of Chicago)
- Free markets and social justice / Cass R Sunstein, 1997
(University of Chicago)
- Reasonably radical: deliberative liberalism and the politics of
identity / Anthony Simon Laden, 2001 (University of Chicago)
- The new inequality: creating solutions for poor America / ed.
Joshua
Cohen, 1999 (Stanford
University
)
- The rise and fall of British liberalism, 1776-1988 / Alan
Sykes, 1997 (Stanford University)
- A stream of windows: unsettling reflections on trade,
immigration, and democracy / Jagdish Bhagwati, 1998 (Columbia University)
- Nature and politics: liberalism in the philosophies of Hobbes,
Locke, and Rousseau / Andrzej Rapaczynski, 1987 (Columbia
University)
- Law and liberalism in the 1980s: the Rubin lectures at Columbia
University / Vincent Blasi, 1991 (Columbia University)
- Ways of war and peace: realism, liberalism, and socialism /
Michael W Doyle, 1997 (Columbia University)
- The Liberal future in America: essays in renewal / ed.
Michael B
Levy, 1985 (University of California,
Berkeley
)
- Boundaries and allegiances: problems of justice and
responsibility in liberal thought / Samuel Scheffler, 2001
(University of California, Berkeley)
- The anatomy of antiliberalism / Stephen Holmes, 1993 (University of New York)
- Passions and constraint: on the theory of liberal democracy /
Stephen Holmes, 1995 (University of New York)
- Benjamin Constant and the making of modern liberalism / Stephen
Holmes, 1984 (University of New York)
- Liberal rights: collected papers, 1981-1991 / Jeremy Waldron,
1993 (University of New York)
- Liberals and social democrats / Peter
Clarke., 1978 (University of Oxford
)
- Law and the community: the end of individualism? / ed. Leslie
Green, 1989 (University of Oxford)
- From promise to contract: towards a liberal theory of contract
/ Dori Kimel, 2003 (University of Oxford)
- The new enlightenment: the rebirth of liberalism / ed. Peter
Clarke, 1986 (University of Oxford)
- Constitutional justice: a liberal theory of
the rule of law / T.R.S Allan, 2001 (University
of Cambridge
)
Prominent philosophers
- Liberalism and social action / John Dewey, 1963 (University of
Chicago)
- Combat liberalism / Mao Zedong, 1954
(Peking
University
)
- Free thought and official propaganda / Bertrand Russell, 1922
(University of Cambridge)
- Political Liberalism / John Rawls, 2005 (Harvard
University)
- Lectures on the history of political philosophy / John Rawls,
2007 (Harvard University)
- The law of peoples; with, The idea of public reason revisited /
John Rawls., 1999 (Harvard University)
- Conditions of liberty: civil society and its rivals / Ernest
Gellner, 1994 (University of Cambridge)
- Liberty: incorporating four essays on liberty / Isaiah Berlin.,
2002 (University of Oxford)
- Objectivity and liberal scholarship / Noam
Chomsky, 2003 (Massachusetts Institute of
Technology
)
- Profit over people: neoliberalism and global order / Noam
Chomsky, 1999 (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
- Democracy in a neoliberal order: doctrines and reality / Noam
Chomsky, 1997 (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
- Liberal politics and the public sphere / Charles Taylor, 1995
(McGill University)
- Beyond liberalization: social opportunity and human capability
/ Amartya Kumar Sen., 1994 (Harvard University)
- Sovereign virtue: the theory and practice of equality / Ronald
Dworkin, 2000 (University of New York))
- The legacy of Isaiah Berlin / ed. Ronald Dworkin., 2001
(University of New York)
- Concealment and exposure: and other essays / Thomas Nagel, 2002
(University of New York)
- Liberals and communitarians / Stephen Mulhall., 1992
(University of Oxford)
- John Dewey and the High Tide of American Liberalism / Alan
Ryan, 1995 (University of Oxford)
- Liberal reform in an illiberal regime: the creation of private
property in Russia / Stephen Williams, 2006 (University of
Oxford)
- Liberalism, religion, and the sources of value / Simon
Blackburn, 2005 (University of Cambridge)
- Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century
America / Richard Rorty, 1999 (Stanford University)
- Bridging Liberalism and Multiculturalism in American Education
/ Bob Reich, 2002 (Stanford University)
- Boundaries and allegiances: problems of justice and
responsibility in liberal thought / Samuel Scheffler, 2001
(University of California, Berkeley)
- The logos reader: rational radicalism and the future of
politics / ed. Michael Thompson, 2006 (University of
Pittsburgh)
- The feminist critique of liberalism / Martha Craven Nussbaum,
1997 (University of Chicago)
- Nietzsche, politics, and modernity: a critique of liberal
reason / David Owen, 1995 (University of Arizona)
- Contemporary Theories of Liberalism / Gerald Gaus, 2003
(University of Arizona)
- Pragmatic Liberalism and the Critique of Modernity / Gary
Gutting, 1999 (University of Notre Dame)
Prominent political scientists
- Communities and Law: Politics and Cultures
of Legal Identities/Gad Barzilai, 2003 University
of Michigan

- Liberal America and the Third World; political development
ideas in foreign aid and social science / Robert A Packenham, 1973
(Stanford University)
- Structural conflict: the Third World against global liberalism
/ Stephen D Krasner, 1985 (Stanford University)
- Democracy's discontent: America in search of a public
philosophy / Michael J Sandel, 1998 (Harvard University)
- Liberalism and the limits of justice / Michael J Sandel, 1998
(Harvard University)
- The spirit of liberalism / Harvey Claflin Mansfield., 1978
(Harvard University)
- Liberalism and the moral life / Nancy L Rosenblum, 1989
(Harvard University)
- Bentham's theory of the modern state / Nancy L Rosenblum, 1978
(Harvard University)
- Another liberalism: romanticism and the reconstruction of
liberal thought / Nancy L Rosenblum., 1987 (Harvard
University)
- Liberalism and its critics / Michael J Sandel, 1984 (Harvard
University)
- Technopols: freeing politics and markets in Latin America in
the 1990s / Jorge I Domínguez., 1997 (Harvard University)
- The new majority: towards a popular progressive politics /
Theda Skocpol, 1999 (Harvard University)
- Tyranny and liberty: big government and the individual in
Tocqueville's science of politics / Harvey Mansfield., 1999
(Harvard University)
- The new American dilemma: liberal democracy and school
desegregation / Jennifer L Hochschild, 1984 (Harvard
University)
- Politics out of history / Wendy Brown, 2001 (University of
California, Berkeley)
- Radicals and conservatives / William McGovern; David S Collier,
1957 (University of California, Berkeley)
- Tocqueville's revenge: state, society, and economy in
contemporary France / Jonah D Levy, 1999 (University of California,
Berkeley)
- Liberalism's crooked circle: letters to Adam Michnik / Ira
Katznelson, 1996 (Columbia University)
- Liberal socialism (Carlo Rosselli) / ed. Nadia Urbinati, 1994
(Columbia University)
- On liberal revolution (Piero Gobetti) / ed. Nadia Urbinati,
2000 (Columbia University)
- The
clash of orthodoxies: law, religion, and morality in crisis /
Robert P George, 2001 (Princeton University
)
- Liberal equality / Amy Gutmann., 1980 (Princeton
University)
- Diversity and distrust : civic education in a multicultural
democracy / Stephen Macedo, 1999 (Princeton University)
- Liberal virtues: citizenship, virtue, and community in liberal
constitutionalism / Stephen Macedo, 1991 (Princeton
University)
- The inner ocean: individualism and democratic culture / George
Kateb, 1992 (Princeton University)
- Economic change and political liberalization in Sub-Saharan
Africa / Jennifer A Widner, 1994 (Princeton University)
- Natural law, liberalism, and morality: contemporary essays /
Robert P George, 1996 (Princeton University)
- Natural law and public reason / Robert P George, 2000
(Princeton University)
- Liberal international relations theory: a social scientific
assessment / Andrew Moravcsik., 2001 (Princeton University)
- Liberalism and international relations theory / Andrew
Moravcsik, 1992 (Princeton University)
External links