Liberalism: Key Thinkers

John Locke - Father of liberal philosophy

- Book: ‘Two Treatises of Government’ 1690
1632-1704 generally regarded as the cornerstone to liberal
thought
- Central figure in classical liberalism

- Locke denied that the state was part of God’s

creation
- Disputed the idea that the state had been created
by a celestial power with monarchs ‘divine right’
- He rejected the notion that ordinary people were
subjects
- The true state would be created by mankind to
serve its interests
- Would only arise via consent

- Humans are naturally free and independent

- The state should represent directly the will of
property-owning individuals
- Priori to the states existence there was a ‘natural’
society that served mankind's interested well
- State of nature
- Locke had an optimistic view on human nature
and he believed human are guided by rationalism
- The state of nature should be underpinned by
‘natural laws, liberties and rights’
- The state of law was designed to improved the
state of nature by better solving disputes

- The ‘state of law’ would be legitimate only if it

respect natural right and laws
- Individuals should never be worse off than under
the state of nature
- Consent to rule in order to gain returns

- The state has to embody the principles of limited

government
- This would mean checks and balances

Mary - Developed classical liberal ideas

Wollenstone - Publication: ‘A vindication of the rights of women’
craft 1792 was hugely influential for feminism
- Whilst to her gender was crucial, here arguments
1759-1797 are rooted in liberal philosophy

- The optimistic view of human nature should apply

to both men and female
- 18th century society and state had implied
women were not rational and were denied
equality
- Women were rarely allowed land ownership and
had little legal protection against violent
- No vote which violated ‘government by consent
- Women should have formal equality to all things
men have

- By granting equality giving women access to

education, the state would increase society’s
resources of intellect, wisdom and morality to
enable social and economic progress

- By preventing female individualism, this left

society vulnerable to doctrines that threatened
the whole spirit of the Enlightenment

- She applauded the French revolution and was a

key opponent of custom, tradition and the divine
right of kings
- She argued these gave no basis for accepting the
laws or government
- They were irrational oppressive and ignorant
concepts

- Without further education for women they would

be complicit in their subjugation as mothers and
wives
- Without this tuition individual should never
develop rationality and never recognise the
absurdity of principles such as the divine right of
kings

- She argued for republicanism

John Stuart - One of the greatest English philosophers

- Immense contribution to liberal thought
Mill - He developed the ideas of Locke and
Wollstonecraft
1806-1873 - He provided a valuable bridge between classical
liberalism and the ‘modern’ liberalism
- ‘Transitional liberalism’
- Book: On liberty 1859

- Mill spoke about ‘negative freedom’

- Freedom was the absence of restraint as this
leaves the individual free to pursue their own
view of the good life
- Links with his ‘harm principle’ that individuals
should always be tolerate unless it harms others

- Mill divided actions into self-regarding and other

regarding
- The former involving religion and expression did
not impinge on others
- The latter involving riots or violence clearly did
harm others and so should not be tolerate in a
liberal state
- Tolerance of diversity was important as it meant
new ideas that could be discussed in rational
debate

- Mill's arguments were more sophisticated

- Not only did he see liberty as a natural right he
saw it as an engine of human development
- As such, Mill always found room for improvement
in human nature

- His work is coined developmental individualism as

he pondered what individuals could become, not
just what they are at present
- ‘It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig
satisfied’
- Any support for liberty had to be grounded on the
permanent interests of man as a progressive
being

- The role of the state, via education, is to enable

higher pleasures
- Limited government and society to foster
diversity
 - He feared that government by consent could lead
to ‘tyranny of the majority’ with an uneducated
electorate
- He feared the majority would infringe on the
individualism of the minorities

- Hence he promoted representative democracy,

with an educated electorate choosing other
representatives to make decisions on their behalf
- These representatives would aggregate the
demands of all individuals and parts of society to
create a broad consensus decision than following
the strict will of the majority

Thomas - Changed the approach of liberalism towards the

Green state and developed clear arguments for positive
freedom
1836-1882 - Book: ‘Lectures on the the principles of political
(Not a key obligation’ 1895
thinker)
- Freedom should not be understood in a purely
negative sense
- It should be understood positively
- The freedom of the individual to rise above the
narrow concerns of self-interest to contribute to
the common good of society by making the very
best of their own talent and ability

- Positive freedom can only be achieved by

removing hereditary privilege in society and
tackling poverty

- Green argued the state had to take a positive role

by freeing the poor from ignorance, disease, poor
quality housing and exploitation in the workplace

John Rawls - He is thought to be the most important exponent

of modern liberalism in the 21st century
1921-2002 - Major work: ‘A theory of Justice’ 1971 remains a
key reference for liberal thinking

- He restated the idea that the core liberal principle

of foundational equality meant individuals
 required not just formally under law but also
greater social and economic equality
- This was necessary so all lives could be fulfilled
- However he claims this can only be provided by a
significant redistribution of wealth via an enabling
state with extensive public spending and tax

- Shows that redistribution of wealth is not a

‘surrender to socialism’ but consisted with liberal
principles
- Rawls argued that if we as people had no
preconception of our existence, ‘veil of
ignorance’, and were told to choose a perfect
society, we would choose one in which the
poorest members fared far better then they do in
our society
- So an enlarge state, with higher tax and
significant redistribution of wealth was consistent
with government by consent

- He made sure his ideology was still distinct from

socialism as he wanted considerable scope for
liberty and self fulfilment
- He did not argue the gap between rich and poor
be narrowed but advocated for equality of
opportunity

Betty - Mainly linked to the development of feminist

Friedan ideology
- Yet her ideas have also served to broaden
1921-2006 liberalism’s interest in equality of opportunity
- Book: ‘The feminine Mystique’ 1963

- All individuals should seek to control their own

lives and realise their potential
- Gender was a serious hindrance to all female
individuals

- It was liberal attitudes in society rather than

human nature than led most women to
underachievement
- These attitudes were nurtured and transmitted
via schools, religion and the media
- These channels of ‘cultural conditioning’ left
many women convinced their lot in life was
 determined by human nature rather than their
own rationality and enterprise
- Such as just being a mother
- She believed the state should actively intervene
to tackle gender inequality via equal job
opportunities or state grants to single mothers

- She always disdained violence or illegality as a

means of pursuing change arguing significant
progress was possible via legal equality
- She thus endorsed the American constitution and
its capacity to allow for continuous improvement

Summary: key themes and thinkers

Human State Society Economy

nature

John Locke Humans are The state must Society predates State policy
rational, guided be the state, there should respect
by the pursuit of representative, were ‘natural, the ‘natural
self-interest, but based on the societies with right’ to private
mindful of others consent of the natural laws and property and
concerns governed natural rights arbitrate
effectively
between
competing
individuals

Mary Rationalism The monarchical Society A free-market

defines both state should be ‘infantilised’ economy would
Wollendstonec genders, replaced with a women and thus be energised by
raft intellectual both republic that stifled female liberated women
are the same enshrines individualism
women's rights

JS Mill Though The state The best society Laissez-faire

fundamentally should proceed was one were capitalism was
rational, human cautiously to ‘individuality’ co- vital to progress,
nature is not representative existed with individual
fixed, forever democracy, tolerance and enterprise and
progressing mindful of self-improvement individual
minority rights initiative

John Rawls Mankind is selfish The state The Society most Free-market
yet empathetic, should enable individuals would capitalism
 valuing both less fortunate to choose would be should be
individual liberty advance via one where the tempered by the
and the plight of public spending condition of the state’s
those around and public poorest obligation to
them services improved advance its
poorest

Betty Friedan Human nature The state Society remained Free-market

has evolved in a should legislate chauvinistic to capitalism could
way that to prevented women, though be an ally of
discourages self- continued women were female
advancement discrimination complicit in their emancipation, if
among women against females repression allied to
legislation
precluding
sexual
discrimination

FrLiberalism: Core Ideas

Introduction/Origins

- Liberalism is a political ideology with the individual and their rights

at its core

- The roots of Liberalism can be found in the Enlightenment of the

17th + 18th century
- Early liberalism argued that humans were born both free and
morally equal and no one has a right to rule over others. This
directly attacked the natural form of government of the time,
absolute monarchy
- It promoted a belief in reason over faith and advocated for the
importance of the individual and freedom
- Early liberalism was radical and potentially revolutionary with its
ideas central to the American Declaration of Independence of 1776
and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man 1789
 - Liberalism has developed different variants
- Classical liberalism dominated until the late 19th century
- Modern liberalism dominated since that time

- Enlightenment, American + French revolution, absolute monarchy,

classical liberalism, modern liberalism

Core ideas of liberalism

Freedom and the individual

- Individualism is key to liberalism

- The individual rather than classes or races are the keys basis for all
- The individual is unique with their own talent and abilities but also
morally equal to all
- Locke argues individuals have natural rights to ‘life, liberty and
property’
- Freedom is core, humans flourish with the widest possible freedom
and property to establish their own beliefs, lifestyles and values
- Individuals seek goals and societies allows cooperation

Human nature

- Optimistic, reason, individuals, natural freedom

- Optimistic view of human nature

- Liberalism argues human nature has a huge capacity to bring about
progress and an ability to forge greater human happiness
- Humans are guided by reason and rationalism and thus can
calculate answers to problems

- Mankind's innate reason is manifested in debate and discussion

- Rather than accepting what life offers individuals can plan their own
future affecting their outcome
- Human nature allows us to shape our own destiny

- Human problems are merely challenges awaiting reasoned solutions

- Individuals who really want something can usually achieve it
through reason and determination
 - Liberals assume rationality is a universal feature of human nature
and so usually assume reasoned discussion leads to agreement

- Individuals are naturally self-seeking and self-serving and naturally

drawn to independence and freedom over their destiny
- It is mankind’s innate rationality and virtue that stops this leading to
destructive selfishness and competition
- Individuals are both egotistical and reasonable
- The natural conditions of humans are self-aware individuals,
peacefully living in mutual understanding

- Over time liberals began to view this approach as too optimistic and
simplistic
- Egotistically leads to inequality and the state needs to step in to
prevent this
- Green and Friedan argue the state needs to intervene to tackle
inequality and allow freedom
- Friedan saw that human nature, left unchecked, produced general
inequality stopping women from achieving individual happiness
- Green argued that human nature was not just self-sufficient but had
a social dimension, individuals can only grow and flourish in a
society where all grow and flourish
- Rawls argued human nature had the capacity for toleration and
mutual consent

Society

- Natural society, natural rights, society promotes individual freedom,

private property

- JS Mill emphasised ‘Natural’ society with ‘natural laws and therefore

natural rights all of which precede the state
- So for liberals life before the state was not ‘nasty’ but rather
‘pleasant and civilised’

- Liberal belief in a ‘natural society’ with ‘natural rights’ helps explain

why there is so much focus on the individual
- The main purpose of a society is to facilitate individualism
- Each individual has a unique personality and talents, each are
rationally in pursuit of self-interest and are egotistical, driven by a
wish to fulfil their potential and be independent
 - Each individual hence seeks freedom

- Liberals believe that the ‘default setting’ of any society is a focus

upon individual freedom and that any society which seeks to deny
this is dysfunctional
- Hence, the ‘right’ to property is regarded as particularly important
as it is a tangible expression of an individual within society
- Property is also the ‘prism’ in which individuals develop their
potential, providing opportunities in civilised communities, for
people to nurture their taste and judgement

- Wollenstonecraft was critical of society for its failure to recognise

the rights of women, she argued that women should benefit from all
rights so society would benefit from their talent
- Love and Mill believed in toleration to all and diversity
- Liberals have championed the rights of all groups of people
- Friedan argued the state had to take a more proactive approach to
ensure real equality of opportunity

The economy

- Capitalism, economic liberalism, market-based capitalism, invisible

hand

- Liberalisms devotion to private property informs its approach to the

economy
- It believes property is a natural right so should support an economy
that puts private property at the heart of economic arrangements
- They should support capitalism

- Liberalism has been strongly associated with private enterprise and

private ownership of the economy
- Capitalism is described as ‘economic liberalism’
- This is the key difference between liberalism and socialism
- Although they may share objectives and criticise the same things,
liberals will ultimately defende a market-based economy and refute
the anti-capitalist message of ‘fundamentalist’ socialism

- Liberalism’s endorsement of capitalism is strongly linked to its

positive view of human nature
 - If obstacles to free trade were swept away the ‘invisible hand’
(Adam Smith) of market forces would guide traders to success,
wealth would trickle down

- Modern liberals such as Green saw free-market capitalism as

creating social and economic obstacles to individuals achieving their
full potential
- This led to endorsement of Keynesian economics

The state

- Limited government, social contract, meritocracy, equality, checks

and balances

- Although individualism and capitalism are central to their view of

society and economy, this is not unique to liberalism it also applied
to some anarchists
- Liberalism is distinctive to anarchists due to the state
- Liberals believe that individualism and capitalism work best when
accompanied by some kind of state
- To understand why it is necessary to explain how the ‘ideal’ state
originates and how it should be structured

The liberal state: origins

- While liberalism takes an optimistic view of human nature, it still

accepts that within the state of nature, there would have been
clashes of interest
- Locke was worried that without the formal structures a state
provides, clashes may not be swiftly and effectively solved
- Individualism could have been impeded by stalemated disputes
between competing individuals
- A state is required to arbitrate effectively between the competing
claims off rational individuals

- Can be represented as a football match

- Whilst a fair game could be played without a referee, all would
agree it is fairer with one
- The state of nature is tolerable but still inferior to the liberal
‘formalised’ state
The liberal state: objectives

- Whilst root justification for the ‘liberal state’ is effective resolution of

disputes there are grander principles
- These principles were significantly developed by England’s Bill of
Rights 1689, the American Constitution of 1787 and the first French
Republic of 1789
- From these comes objectives that are central to understanding what
the liberal state seeks to achieve

- Rejection of the ‘traditional’ state

- Explicit rejection of the type of state common in europe pre
enlightenment
- A state marked by monarchical, absolutist rule
- Renounces a state where power is concentrated in the hands of one
individual randomly
- Very against a government that claimed a ‘divine right’ to govern as
this is an irrational perception of God’s will

- Government by consent
- The state is only legitimate if those under it have volunteered to be
under it
- The people in the state should have control over it
- Locke ‘government should always be the servant of the people’
- Can be linked to ‘government by contract’ (Jean Jaques Rousseau),
social contract
- Individuals who agree to the contract accept restrictions but are
promised something in return, promised what…?(see below)

- Promotion of natural rights/individualism

- Liberals always assume that, before any formal state was created,
individuals enjoyed ‘natural rights’ that enable individualism
- It would be irrational to abandoned both natural rights and
individualism by submitting unconditionally to a state
- The only rational reason to submit would be if they promoted
natural rights, ensuring they are better exercise than in the state of
nature

- Promotion of tolerance
- Linked to its devotion of natural rights, the liberal state is also
concerned to ensure to tolerance to individuals who exercise their
natural rights in various ways
- JS Mill says The state should tolerate all actions and opinions unless
they violate the harm principle
- The principle that individuals should be free to do and say anything
unless it could be proves to have harmed the rights and freedoms of
others
- Liberalism does recognise that individuals do not seek isolation but
are drawn to societies that accommodate their individualism
- The state should show tolerance to religious groups to allow those
who congregate to them their rights
- After the Glorious Revolution in 1688 Locke was keen on extended
tolerance to Catholics
- Betty Friedan has sought to further Locke’s belief in tolerance to
ethnicity, sexuality and gender

- Meritocracy
- Political power should be exercised only by those worthy of it
- Government should be conducted by individuals who through their
own efforts and talents have won the trust of the government
- No guarantee responsibility will be conferred upon their
descendants unless they too prove themselves
- This contrasts the pre-enlightenment regimes
- Thomas Paine, during the French revolution, claimed that hereditary
rule was ‘beyond equity, beyond reason and most certainly beyond
wisdom’
- Aristocracy has not place in the meritocratic state

- Equality of opportunity
- It is an article of faith that all individuals are born equal with equal
right and value
- Foundational equality
- Within a liberal state, all individuals must all have equal opportunity
to develop their potential and achieve control of their own lives
- If an individual fails to fulfil their potential, this is their total
responsibility, not the states

- Justice
- The state should embody justice, all should be treated fairly or justly
without regard to identity
 - Individual within the liberal state must assume a just outcome from
complaints and a satisfactory resolution to any grievances

The liberal state: methods and structures

- Constitutional/limited government
- Consistent with its faith in government by consent, liberalism hold
the contract between government and governed should be
cemented by a formal constitution
- This constitution should be preceded by extensive discussion and
consensus over what it should do and how it should do it
- Constitutional government may be described as limited government
with 2 limitations
- Government must govern according to prearranged rules and
procedures and not in a random ad hoc fashion
- It should also prevented government from eroding natural rights, a
restriction brought about often by mechanisms such as the Bill of
rights

- Fragmented government
- Dispersal or fragmentation of state power
- This was brought about due to pre-enlightenment structure where
power was concentrated in the monarchy
- ‘Power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt
absolutely’
- Furthermore, if individuals are generally reasonable and self-
determined, it seems logical to empower as many individuals as
possible in the exercise of a states functions
- Checks and balances

- Formal equality
- Liberal state strives for formal equality where all have the same
legal and political rights in society
- Emphasis on the ‘rule of law’ holding that laws passed on a liberal
state are applicable to all with no exemptions granted on the basis
of status
- No one should be outside of the law but no one should be above it
either
- The procedures will apply to all
- Modern liberals are more positive about the state’s ability to
improve people’s lives and seen an expanded role for the state in
helping people
- Green argued the removing of poverty was essential to enable full
potential e.g. public healthcare and housing
- Rawls claimed taxation and public spending should be introduced to
ensure there was social justice and equality of opportunity for all
- The power of government must not be concentrated in the hands of
one
- Limited government good idea
Liberalism: Main strands

Classical liberalism (late 17th - late 19th centuries)

Early classical liberalism (late 17th and 18th century)

- Attempts to relate the ideologies core beliefs to the political and

economic climate of the time

Revolutionary potential

- Locke’s argument for government by consent and the notion a state

should be driven by the representatives is very important to
liberalism
- In the context to the 17th century and 18th century it needs to be
emphasised that these ideas required vigorous argument and
sometimes revolutionary upheaval

- By repudiating absolute monarchy and the divine right of Kings

Locke’s philosophy was associated with England's glorious
revolution of 1688 which secured constitutional government and
ended concentrated political power
- It also inspired the American revolution and American constitution of
1787 both insisting on natural rights, government by consent and
separation of powers

- Since rationalism was not firmly accepted, the idea society should
provide maximal individual freedom was not either
- Wollsetonecrafy argued the treatment of women in this period was a
general affront to reason and affront to individual liberty of 50% of
the population
- Wollstonecraft contested English society only conceived women as
mothers and marriage but little else
- Wollstonecraft's argument hence was that women needed education
to release their innate power of reason

Negatives liberty
 - Early classical liberals such as Voltaire and Montesqieu were
conscious that individual liberty was vital for self-determination and
self-reliance as well as being crucial for a government vy consent
- Wollstoncraft also tried to relate this to women
- Liberty was define by negative liberty, absence of restraint
- Individuals should assume they are ‘naturally’ free until someone
puts a break to their actions, they believed in a state of nature
where natural liberties were held

Minimal state

- The notion of negative freedom meant there should be a minimal

state
- Given liberty was the absence of restraint, government should be
limited in terms of how they can act and what they can do
- Thomas Jefferson - ‘The government that is best, is that which
governs least, when government grows, our liberty withers’
- Strengthened dispersal of political power
- Checks and balance where bold state action was hard and
infrequent

Laissez-faire capitalism

- Negative liberty and a belief in minal government led into economy

- Smith argued that capitalism, via the ‘invisible hand’ of market
forces, had a limitless capacity to enrich society and the individuals
within
- The wealth acquired by individual would ‘trickle down’ to the rest of
the population as long as the state took a laissez faire approach to
the workings of a market economy
- Adam Smith advocated an end to tariffs and duties which had
‘protected’ domestic producers and the spread of free trade
between nation states and commercial classes
- These ideas were radical in 1776 but became orthodox in the
following century

Later classical liberalism (early-mid 19th century)

- By the 1800s, countries like Britain and US looked very different to

Locke and the founding father societies
- More industrialised and most individuals now worked and lived an
urban environment
- Growing sense of class consciousness and hence a growing interest
on concepts like democracy and socialism

- Classical liberals hence faced a serious challenge of their core ideas

were to remain relevant
- The response came but was not consistent, variable responses

- Jeremy Bentham 1748 to 1832, known as the father of utilitarianism

developed a scientific alternative to natural rights theory based on
the idea that each individual would seek to maximise their own
‘utility’
- Bentham also acknowledge in an industrialised society this could
produce more clashes between individuals than early Classical
liberals have envisaged
- He suggested that the liberal state would need to be more proactive
using utilitarinaism to inform legislation and government policy
- He laid the foundation for political science and provided liberalism
the earliest justification for democracy
- Governments were more likely to follow the ‘greatest happiness for
the greatest number’ if they were elected by and accountable to the
‘greatest number’ of voters

- Samuel Smiles 182-1904, feared individualism was threatened by

socialism with calls for state provision
- He argues in Self Help 1859, that self-reliance was still perfectly
feasible for individuals, including the working classes
- He acknowledged that industrialization made it harder for self-
reliance due to an increasing number of faceless employees in
factories
- But her argued in overcoming the new obstacles, individuals would
be challenge more and in the process more developed
- If ‘self-help were usurped by state help, human beings would remain
stunted, their talents unknown and liberty squandered’

- Herbert Spencer 1820-1903, acknowledge the importance of self-

help and dislike of state intervention
- However in ‘Man versus the state’ 1884 he questioned Smiles belief
that all individuals could rise to the challenge of self-help noting the
presence of the feeble and failing in the cities
- He feared this feeble minority could justify the extension of state
power and erode the majorities freedom
- Spencer sought to apply the principle of ‘natural selection’
- ‘Social darwinism’, classical liberal belief in a minimal state and
negative freedom would lead to ‘survival of the fittest’ and the
gradual elimination of those who could not enjoy the benefits of
individualism
- The eventual outcome would be that self-reliance was the norm and
individual freedom could thrive

- JS Mill’s contribution however was the most influential

- Developmental individualism
- He worked at a time when many liberals struggled to work out how
liberalism could harness trends towards suffrage
- His response would have a profound impact on the way later
liberalis reconciled themselves to democracy

- Mill updates Locke’s case for representative government into a case

for representative democracy anticipating universal suffrage
- Under this model the enlarged electorate would not make policy
decisions themselves but elect liberally minded representatives to
make decision for them
- These representatives would not side with the majority view but
aggregate the various opinions to produce a broad consensus of all
- He refuted direct democracy in fear of the ‘tyranny of the majority’

- He still feared some would be ill-equipped to choose intelligent

representatives to act rationally on their behalf
- Mill argued universal suffrage must be preceded by universal
education
- Promoting developmental individualism
- The advance of education to give reason and individualism
- Those uneducated could not vote but educated could

- Mill argued once this education was achieved, democracy could

further liberal values, promoting political education and debate
- A progressive society could allow a refinement of utilitarianism
- This would aggregate all interests

- Mill remained vague on how mass education would be provided

- We wedded minimal state and negative freedom and reluctant to
state provision of schools
 - This was something modern liberals were prepared to answer with
more clarity and boldness

Summary

- Radical politically: Government by consent promoted the idea the

government should represent rather than master the people
- Radical in gender terms: Optimistic view humans are rational was
extended to women
- Egotistical individualism: Humans are self-seeking, rational and
independent although this does involved practice of restraint and
cooperation, society is comprised of individuals rather than small
groups
- Negative freedom: Liberty means absence of restraint leaving the
individual free to pursue their own view of the good life, the state
can only legitimately intervene to prevent harm to others
- Night-watchman state: The state must act only to protect the peace,
safety and public good of the people, it can only impose its power
on the basis of the harm principle
- Free-market capitalismL The market economy based around
property rights can deliver prosperity for the individual and society,
so long as there is free trade and competition, the state must not
interfere with taxes or monopolies but plays a crucial role in
ensuring property is protected and contracts are enforced

Modern liberalism (late 19th century - Now)

- Mill did not just offer solutions to the dilemmas of liberalism but also
raised possibilities later liberals could develop
- Mill’s notion of individuality began to prompt fresh questions about
the precise nature of ‘liberty’
- In order to liberate individuals was it really just to leave them alone
- There came a new interpretation of liberty which led to a very
different form of liberalism

Positive liberty/Social justice

- Green, Hobhouse and Hobson argued that modern, advanced

societies make a mockery of the idea that individuals are innately
autonomous
 - The nature of modern economics and society meant individuals
were increasingly subject to socio-economic forces beyond their
control
- These forces would make it impossible for affected individuals to
seek self-determination and self-realisation, even though they may
not have caused these problems
- These liberals argued justice was needed for these people to reach
their potential

- Green revised the meaning of liberty to positive

- Freedom would not be interpreted as something cooperative and
altruistic enabling individuals
- This approach would allow certain individuals to act in a way not
possible if left alone
- Positive freedom
- Individuals had to be enable to be free from socio-economic
problems (such as poor health care, unemployment, or a lack of
education) and for justice to be secured

Enlarged and enabling state

- Modern liberalism claims only a larger state could repel the new
socio-economic threats to freedom and individualism
- John Rawls justified substantial extension of the state in the name of
individual liberty
- More laws, more state spending, more tax and more state
bureaucracy
- This brand of liberalism became more strongly linked to collectivism
- By embracing collectivism, modern liberals aced the charge is had
betrayed fundamental principles of classical liberalism and blurred
liberalism and socialism
- Rawls argued only an enlarged state could give equality of
opportunity
- Whilst some would be taxed more, those could still see it was good
and necessary, follows government of consent (veil of perception
example)

- Furthermore, whilst it wanted to change equality of opportunity it

remained indifferent to inequality of outcome, if individuals have
capability to thrive then this class difference is not an issue,
contrasts to socialism
Constitutional reform/liberal democracy

- Passion for ongoing, constitui change

- Because it has sought to extend the state, modern liberalism is keen
to reform it
- Hobhous ‘If the state is to be enlarged it must also be improved’
- If only to secure the principle of government by consent, modern
liberalism wants ongoing constitutional reform to updates this
principles
- In the UK these demands have come as a codified constitution,
electoral reform and devolution and a more accountable house of
lords

- The most important facet of modern liberalism’s interest in

constitutional reform is its support for liberal democracy
- This means completing the link between core liberal values and
universal adult suffrage
- In the UK it was a liberal PM in 1918 who oversaw the
enfranchisement of most women and all men irrespective of
property ownership
- Since 1945 liberals have attempted to lower the voting to 18 in
1969 and recently to 16

- Little interest in direct democracy over fear of ‘tyranny of the

majority’
- Willing to dilute even representative democracy to protect ‘liberal’
values
- This can be seen through support for the Human Rights Act given
powers to judges and enthusiasm for the EU
- They are accused of being ‘liberal-bereaucrats’
- Many modern liberals found the EU election of 48% remain to be a
an unfortunate example of ‘tyranny of the majority

Social liberalism

- Attempts to update modern liberalism’s stress on tolerance

- Social liberalism
- More racial and sexual toleration with Betty Friedan arguing too
many individuals held back on account of innate factors such as
gender or ethnicity
- Given their acceptance of positive freedom and an enlarged state
they see ‘positive discrimination’ as the answer
 - The state and employees correct the historial imbalance by
discriminating in favour of minorities

- From 1960s onwards, modern liberalism became associated with

initiatives such as President Kennedy’s Employment Opportunity
Commission which required managing projects finance by the state
to take ‘affirmative action’ to hire minorities
- UK modern liberals gave strong backing to legislation like the Race
Relations Act 1976 and Sex Discrimination act 1975 which
criminalised negative discrimination

- Freidan insisted these reforms were perfectly consisting with liberal

values
- She claimed it followed the harm principle
- Protected natural rights

Summary

- Modern liberals question what is meant by liberty

- This question was made particularly powerful by the rise of modern
advanced societies and economies
- Poverty appeared to restrict the individuals ability to develop, grow
and pursue their own version of the good life

Positive freedom

- Individualism was not about the freedom to allow self-seeking

individuals to achieve their own pleasures but allow the individual to
flourish and grow both morally and intellectual to achieve their own
individuality - developmental individualism
- Green built on this to argue that modern capitalist societies
produced poverty and inequality that should be tackled to ‘maintain
the conditions without which a free exercise of human faculties is
impossible’
- Liberty needed to be redefine to positive freedom where the state
would enable individuals their individuality
- The led to a revision of the role of the state, from the idea that it
was a potential restriction on freedom to the idea the state could
promote freedom by protecting people from social injustice

Enabling state
 - To enable positive freedom the role of the state must change
- The provision of a welfare state could be justified by equality of
opportunity so all can flourish and develop through tax and public
spending
- Keynes argued the state had to intervene in the economy to bring
full employment and economic growth, to ensure the necessary
prosperity for all to be free to pursue their version of the good life

Social liberalism

- Modern liberalism revises classic liberalism’s position on toleration

that aims to safeguard minorities granting formal equality to all
- Modern liberalism argues society had discriminated against
minorities and hence there should be greater toleration and equality
of opportunity
- The playing field must be level for all
- Modern examples include support for same-sex marriage and the
use of posititive drscirmination to promote equality for women and
minorities

Neoliberalism: liberalism or conservatism?

- By the end of the 20th century, neo-liberalism was widely

recognised as an ideology and was used to describe UK and US
- However there is confusion on whether it reflects liberalism or
conservatism

- For Hayek 1899-1992, there was absolute certainty that

neoliberalism was the ‘third strand’ of liberal ideology
- In the ‘Road to Serfdom’ 1944 he was adamant he was not a
conservative arguing he favoured radical change, not stability, a
choice be argued was based upon faith in human potential

- He was a self-proclaimed liberal, he had little time for

conservatism’s rigid defence of the constitutional status quo and
was passionate about constitutional reform that checked executive
power
- Smith has also opposed some social policies of conservatism
- Cameron's government's promotion of marriage via the tax system
has been attacked an an unwelcome state intrusion on people's
private lives
 - Neo-liberalism seeks to update the principles of classical liberalism
within the modern setting
- It offers a liberal critique of modern liberalism accusing it of a
betrayal of individualism and a ‘sell out’ to both socialism and
conservatism
- The Beveridge Report, for example, talking about supporting the
people ‘from cradle to grave’ was criticised of fostering dependency
culture wuhl legitimising an extension of state restraint

- The 1970 crises, when both Keynesian and welfare spending were
brought into the question, neo-liberals re-advertised the merits of
negative freedom and a minimal state calling for politicians to let
people be free
- They demand a reduction in public spending with privatisation and
less state economy regulation
- This would allow lower tax rates and a replacement of dependency
culture

- Neo-liberals have often been labelled conservatives

- This is as their views are reactionary not progressive, seeking to
restore the prior arrangements
- They have also had an impact of New Right conservatism, with
Thatcher and Raegen
Liberalism: Tensions/Debates/Today

Agreement Tension

Human - Optimistic view of - Classical liberals see these qualities as

Nature human nature and innate and that individuals develop best
progress when left free to pursue their own
happiness

- View individuals as
morally equal, - Modern liberals build on Mill’s view that
independent, rational rationalism needs to be developed and
and desiring a pursuit that individualism is more of a reflection of
of their good life what humans can become via education
not what they are

- Individualism needs
to be protected and - Green saw human nature as having a
promoted and there clear social dimension and freedom is
 should be toleration of achieved by working towards the common
different values and good, state should enable individuals to
beliefs help themselves and give equality of
opportunity

State - All liberals agree the - Classical liberals argued the state should
state should be limited have a night-watchmen role, justified by
by constitutionalism, the concept of negative freedom and with
checks and balances, intervention only justified to prevent
formal equality for harmful actions, this leaves individuals
citizens and the rule of free
law

- Modern liberals make the case for an

enabling state by which intervention
should be far greater in order to enable
people to be free and to pursue their own
individuality, in line with the concept of
positive freedom

- Classical liberals such as Locke favoured

a representative government reflecting
the interest of property-owning individuals

- Modern liberals favour representative

democracy with universal suffrage and
strong constitutional limits, they are
concerned democracy may lead to
‘tyranny of the majority, they view
education as crucial to the wise use of the
ballot

Society - All liberals stress - Classical liberals stressed the natural

individualism and society that existed before the state and
freedom, and that was one of peace, self seeking and
society should be independent individuals constrained by
arrange to allow the rationality leading to respect of rights for
individual to flourish all so they are respect in return

- Modern liberals see modern industrial

societies based around free-market
capitalism as restricting the ability of
individuals to be free. Leads to support for
social justice where poverty and inequality
as well as discrimination are tackled by
the state for positive freedom

- Neo-liberals argue for negative freedom,

arguing the enabling state has unjustly
 reduced liberty and created a dependency
culture which limits individualism by
taking away self-reliance

Economy - Emerging from - Classical liberal and neo-liberals adopt

Locke’s natural laws, the view that the state’s only role is to
all liberals emphasise protect property and enforce contracts,
the right to property the market should be left to guide rational
and advocate an individuals
economy based on
private property as the
best route to wealth - Free trade, without subsidies, taxes, or
regulations, will provide the most efficient
outcomes and drive economic creativity
- Property is seen as and prosperity for all
essential to freedom
and protecting
individuals from the - Modern liberals argue that the state is
state justified in intervening in the economy
using tools of tax and public spending to
manage capitalism so it delivers full
employment for all

- Full employment provides the necessary

wealth to reduce poverty so all can be free
to choose their own versions of the good
life, the means of production should be left
in the hands of private companies as a
safeguard of personal liberty

Liberal democracy: a contradiction in terms?

Yes No

Democracy tends to be guided by Democracy compliments

majorities so ‘tyranny of the individualism, allowing individuals
majority’ can be a threat to shape their lives via the ballot
box

Classical liberal favoured a limited

electorate, to safeguard property Democracy complements
rights ‘government by consent’

JS Mill thoughts voted should only Democracy helps avoid the

be given to those who are concentration of political power
educated

Democracy is optimistic about

Modern liberals flirt with human nature by presupposing an
supernatural bodies like the EU intelligent electorate capable of
where there is a ‘democracy rational decisions
deficit’

JS Mill thought democracy would

Liberals seek to mitigate have an ‘educative’ effect on
democracy’s effects via voters and thus abet
constitutional devices e.g. Supreme developmental individualism
court and Bill of Rights

Restricts concentration of power

Representatives democracy, rather
than direct democracy, dilutes
majority rule as the elected
representative make the decisions,
not the people

Has modern liberalism abandoned the principles of classical

liberalism?

Yes No

Classical liberalism define liberty as Both classical and modern

individuals being left alone, liberalism have an optimistic view
modern liberal think individuals are on human potential
not free unless actively ‘enabled’
via interference
Both believe in rationalism and
tolerance of minorities
Classical liberalism championed a
minimal state, modern liberals
championed an enlarged enabling Both see individualism as the goal
state of politics and society (but disagree
on how to achieve it)

Classical liberalism was included to

see tax as theft and sought to Both believe in capitalism and
restrict it, modern liberals see tax oppose state ownership
as the key method for positive
freedom
Both believe in a conditional state,
limited, with consent of the people
Classical liberalism favoured
laissez-faire capitalism from which
the state is detached, modern
liberals favour Keynesian
capitalism where the state seeks to
manage market forces

Classical liberalism had a doubtful

view of democracy, prioritising
instead the interests of property
owners, modern liberalism
championed a representatives
democracy

Do liberals have a coherent view of the state?

Yes No

Liberals are optimistic, believing The liberal state supposedly

humans are rational, therefore it is supports foundational equality yet
coherent they believe in a the liberal state was slow to adopt
constitutional state drawn up by democracy, sexual equality and
rational discussion universal adult suffrage

Liberals believe in ‘government by The liberal state extols the natural

consent’, it is hence coherent their right to property but fails to
conditional state should be seen as recognise most individuals under
a ‘contract’ between government the state’s jurisdiction have not
and governed owned property

Because of the ‘contractual’ nature The liberal state defences

of the liberal state, it is coherent ‘government by consent’ yes its
that liberals believe in ‘limited constitution allows the consent of a
government’ with politicians majority to be defied in courts via
restrained by the constitution checks and balances
Liberal philosophers like Locke The liberal state is supposed to be
speak of a ‘natural’ society with ‘limited yet modern liberal
natural rights, so it is coherent for advocate much intervention in the
liberals to support a limited state name of ‘positive liberty’
that embodies natural advantages
via mechanisms like the Bill of
Rights Modern liberals have compromised
their belief in ‘government by
consent’ by supporting
The liberal state was a reaction supranational bodies like the EU
against the mediaeval state in which erodes the authority of
which power was concentrated in elective parliament and elected
the monarch, it is therefore representatives
coherent the liberal state should be
one where power is more dispersed

Can liberalism be reconciled to conservatism?

Yes No

Both support private property and Liberals have an optimistic view of

capitalism human nature, conservatives are
sceptical

Both see inequality of outcome a

sign of liberty Liberals see rationalism as central
to human behaviour, conservatives
stress habit, emotion and instinct
Both deny the inevitably of class
conflict
Liberals prioritise individual
liberation, conservatives stress
Modern liberals and conservatives order and restraint
support gradual reform and reject
revolution
Liberals see individuals as
potentially autonomous,
Neo liberals and New Right conservatives see individual as
conservatives reject keynesian communal
economics and champion a laissez-
faire economy
 Liberals extol free-market
capitalism, traditional
conservatives are more spectacle
and protectionist

Liberalism today:

- Collapse of the Soviet communism in 1989 and the emergence of

new capitalist state in eastern Europe strengthened the idea that
market economics and liberal democracy represent the ‘end of
history’, the goals to which all states eventually aspire

- This was reinforced by the the recognition of ‘globalisation’, the

spread of economic liberalism, with illiberal states like China and
Russia embracing market forces and modern capitalism
- As many modern liberals point out, when individuals are given
economic choices, it is hard to deny them political and philosophical
choices too

- The established democracies in the UK and US, seem to be

assuming an even more liberal character
- Individual choice and self-determination, fueled already by the
expansion of capitalism was extended by state-sponsored toleration
of diverse lifestyles e.g. same sex marriage, and by communications
revolution via phones and social media, all served to make society
increasingly oriented towards individualism

- In the UK, Labour embraced economic liberalism by revising Clause

IV of the partys consition that committed to ‘common ownership’
and Camerons conservatives embraced social liberalism with same-
sex marriage promotion
- Furthermore, both Blair and Cameron undertook conditional
initiative to bolster ‘government by consent’

- Other developments after 200 gave liberals cause for concern

- 9/11 and June 7th London bombimngs marked the rise of terrorism
 - Liberal democracies were forced to respond to this with increased
security and heightened surveillance which challenged most liberal
values

- Fears grow that certain religious communities were growing support

for radical, faith-based politics that defied the enlightenment
principles
- While globalisation had brought positives it also brought problems,
migration
- This led to fear from people and increased support for parties such
as UKIP and Trump
- This went against liberalism

- More concern came after the financial crash of 2008 and economic
crisis affecting Eurozone in 2013 revised criticisms of market
economics and capitalism
- This led to an increase in anti-austerity parties in Greece, Spain and
Portugal and the emergence of Corbyn and Bernie Sanders

- When the world seems anything but peaceful, Locke’s views on

human nature and the relevance of liberalism itself become
questionable

The quest for social justice: examples of modern liberalism

collectivism

- Liberal government 1906-1910: in the UK it was a Liberal

government led by Herbert Asquith that provided the ‘people's
budget’ of 1908 introducing a state pension design to liberal people
from the financial problems of old age by increased tax on land
owners
- John Maynard Keyens committed to the maintenance of a capitalist
economy but the 1920 and 1930 depression convinced him neither
individual freedom nor the survival of capitalist economies and
constitutional states was served by the cyclical nature of laissez-
faire capitalism, there was mass unemployment he feared would
pave the way for communism
- In his work ‘The general theory of employment, interest and money’
1936 he argued the state must ‘steer’ the economy to secure full
employment and without which individual liberty would be hard.
This shaped state-directed capitalism influencing Roosevels ‘New
 Deal’ in the US 1930s and the economy strategy of every UK
government between 1945 and 1979
- The Beveridge Report: William Beveridge was a liberal scientists
whose 1942 report ‘Social Insurance and Allied Services’, proved the
bedrock of Britain’s post-war ‘welfare state’. Beveridge predicted
individuals post war faced freedom and potential through: poverty,
unemployment, poor education, poor housing and poor health care.
Beveridge argues these threats could only be overcome through
state provision such as a national health service