2 Differing views and Tensions within Liberalism Flashcards
differing views and tensions
why do the 2 strands often disagree?
- each strand understands what constitutes freedom differently
- this INFORMS the role of the state in regard to society and the economy
freedom and the individual
classic liberalism - what type of freedom did they prefer?
++++ JSMs principle
- negative freedom
- freedom FROM not freedom TO
- JSM argued individuals actions should not be stopped unless they harm others, ‘the harm principle
- Mill and Locke supported tolerance of the views/actions of others (Eg. freedom of speech)
freedom of the individual: classic liberalism
Locke and Mill’s idea of individualism
different to modern liberalism
extra k… who did this influence?
- egotistical individualism
- individuals were self-reliant, interested, and RATIONAL
- Mill argued indiivduals should organise their own lives.
- they would be free and able to develop as individuals
- influenced the founding fathers
freedom of the individual: classic liberalism
Locke and state involvement: what would it do to their lives? what is paternalism to classic and neo-liberals?
extra k: Isaiah Berlin
- state involvement would enslave individuals
- Isaiah Berlin argued when modern liberals expand the role of the state for paternalistic functions their individual liberty withers
- paternalism for classic/neo liberals is oppressive
freedom of the individual: classic liberalism
why do classic/neo-liberals aruge paternalism is oppressive?
what did Nozick believe about suicide?
- welfare states require taxation, which individuals cannot opt out of
- Nozick argued individuals should have the right to consume drugs and end their own life if they wish…it should not be illegal to do so
- Eg. the Spanner case 1990: 15 gay men were convicted of assult occasioning actual bodily harm, even though all injured people were engaged in consenaul sadomasochism
freedom and the individual: modern liberalism
what did Green argue about freedom?
- should be viewed positively, with the state there to encourage individual freedom
freedom and the individual: modern liberalism
what do modern liberals believe about self reliance? what should the state offer
- broadly agree with classic liberals over self reliance
- but argue the state must offer a ‘hand up’ if every individual is to achieve their goals (the state is a crutch not a wheelchair)
freedom and the individual: modern liberalism
problem with negative freedom (in modern libs opinion)
- lack of assistance encourages inequality
- positive freedom evens playing field so all individuals can enjoy similiar equality of opportunity
freedom and the individual: modern liberalism
who did Green’s ideas inform?
- Rawls Theory of Justice
- which explained societal posotion and circumstance were of huge importance in whether an individual thrived.
freedom and the individual: modern liberalism
liberal feminists in this debate: What did Friedan and Wollstonecraft think about freedom@
- Friedan cited Wollstonecraft’s ideas that the freedom of women was being harmed (harm principle mill) by inequality, which is also inconsistent with the social contract (locke)
freedom and the individual: neoliberalism
what did neoliberals argue about individuals freedom? what did this involve reducing? what type of economy? what type of capitalism? who did this influence?
- individuals should not be used as a resource
- reducing state welfare
- free market economy
- laissez-faire capitalism
- Thatcher and Reagan
Rand and Nozick viewed modern liberalism as a betrayal to key liberal values of limited state and egotistical individualism
the role of the state in economy and society
all liberals agree on: what theory of the state
mechanistic theory of the state
- as if it were a machine to serve the individual
the role of the state in economy and society
classic vs modern liberals on the state: what size do they think it should be? what should the state be limited to?
- classic: small
- modern: larger
- classic libs believe it should be limited to maintaining law and order
- moderns think it should create conditions of freedom to allow individuals to reach their full potential
mill and the role of the state
Negative freedom: mill’s classic liberal ideas. What should the state not do? Why should it not be overloaded/overachieving? what does more power mean for a state?
- should not interfere with individual development, too much interference arrests development
- an overaloded state is a burdened one
- an overachieving state limits enterprise
- more power means more likely abuse of power
mill and the role of the state
positive freedom: when should the state interfere? what is necessary to maintain freedom? what should there be a regulation of?
JSMs exceptions
- to protect children, provide education, basic welfare, and public goods in default of private provision
- extra responsibilities of the state
- regulation of working hours
the role of the state in economy and society
how did Green counter classic liberalism’s idea of liberty? how was it contradicting? what must the state therefor erecognise?
- liberty was useless if they didn’t have the capacity to exercise it
- state must recognise common duties to promote an individual’s capacity.
the role of the state in economy and society
beveridge’s 5 evils
- ignorance
- want
- squalor
- disease
- idleness
the role of the state in economy and society
examples of the state trying to facilitate freedom of the individual
- old age pensions
- assisting unemployed
- workers rights
- benefits
the role of the state in economy and society
what did modern liberalism inspire? (bev)
beveridge report
- intelectual foundation for the postwar welfare state
the role of the state in economy and society
what effect did this have on society?
- UK became an enabling state
- also transformed by Keynesian economics over Adam Smith’s laissez-faire
the role of the state in economy and society
what were Rawl’s 3 principles of justice
A Theory of Justice 1971
- individuals are entitled to the same set of absolute liberties
- equal opportunities for all
- some inequalities inevitable, but the disadvantaged should be prioritised
the role of the state in economy and society
the difference principle
what was it?
‘some inequalities are inevitable, but there must be a priority to help the disadvantaged’
the role of the state in economy and society
how did Rawls justify his 3rd principle? what was inevitable? further, what should be ensured?
- some inequalities are inevitable because of the meritocracy
- state would have to ensure equality of opportunity through minimum wage
the role of the state in economy and society
how does Rawl’s differnece principle differ from socialist egalitarianism?
- he did allow variation to be justified
- for example, if the inventors of a vaccine became billionaires but helped save the lives of lots of people, that would be inequality that would be justified
classic vs modern liberalism
similarities over how society should be run? type of freedom, opportunity, ownership, economy?
- individual freedom
- equality of opportunity
- private ownership
- state controlled economy
neoliberals
examples
- robert nozick
- fredrich von hayek
- milton friedman
neoliberals
why did they oppose modern liberals ideas? what did they think about the states involvement? what does it limit? what was the analogy? What did Hayek argue about paternalism
- expanding the state limits individualism.
- individuals become dependent on the state that supports them ‘cradle to grave’
- Hayek argued paternalism created a dependancy culture
neoliberals
What did Hayek argue about welfare in terms of cost? What did they say about western democracies?
- the cost of welfare would bankrupt society
- western democracies such as the USA and the UK have huge deficits because they spend more than they recieve
neoliberals
what di Nozick believe about tax? what did he say about Rawls’ idea of tax?
- taxation was theft and enroached on individual freedom
- Rawls’ principles of redistribution and social justice were socialiasm and a betrayal of egotistical individualism
neoliberals
What did Nozick believe modern liberalism betrayed?
- classic liberal notions of Immanuel Kant who argued the individual is not a resource
- modern liberalism oppresses individuals in every sense
neoliberals
Milton Friedman and economics: what did he argue?
- he was critical of Keynesian economics
- he argued the state was ill-equipped to plan or intervene in the economy
neoliberals
what do neoliberals see the government as limited to?
- controlling inflation through ‘monetarism’
- the states tendancy to print money leads to infaltion only, eroding the value of private citizens wages and savings
classic liberalism
who do the ideas of classic librealism inform?
- modern US republican party
- modern libs - democrats
to what extent do liberals agree/disagree on human nature
agreement? (view of humans, rational equality, individualism, individual rights and democracy)
+ tyranny of who?
- positive view of human nature
- both strands argue men and women are equally rational, calling for enfranchisement
- individualism should be protected and encouraged, with a toleration of different values
- concerns about popular democracy conflicting with individual rights (Mill - tyranny of the majority)
to what extent do liberals agree/disagree on human nature
disagreement? (classic libs individualism, type of society vs social justice, type of state and freedom, feminist liberals, type of equality, type of democracy)
- classic liberals are far more individualistic than modern liberals
- Locke and early Mill viewed society as atomistic, but social justice of Rawls is more collective and organic
- classic liberals argue for a minimal state and negative freedom, and modern libs prefer positive freedom to assist individual development
- Wollstonecraft/Mill considered classic liberalism to be concerned mostly about men
- Classic liberals argue for formal equality where modern libs argue that human nature has a clear social dimension and equality of opportunity
- classic libes prefer representative democracy filtering the majority, where modern libs insist everyone should vot
to what extent do liberals agree/disagree on society
agreement? (society predates what, what should society allow, what type of law(?), views on rights, ideal society?)
- society predates the state and is a collection of diverse individuals
- society should allow individuals to flourish
- constitutionalism creates best conditions for society
- foundational equality and human rights should be recognised within society (Eg. the Univresal Declaration of Human Rights agreed by the UN in 1948)
- ideal society where ‘individuality’ coexisted with tolerance and self improvement
to what extent do liberals agree/disagree on society
disagreement? (classic libs and type of society, modern libs and type of society and state, rawls and help from society + priorities, neoliberals and rawls principles)
- classic libs (locke) argued for atomistic society where individuals are minimally constrained by a nightwatchman state
- modern libs argue industrialised societies mean individual autonomy is curtailed and sthe state should act as an enabling state to assist individual freedom
- modern libs argue for a state funded welfare system
- rawls argues it is rational for individuals to choose a society that offers opportunities for the less fortunate
- neoliberals believe principles of redistribution and social justice betray egotistical individualism
key themes + thinkers
