liberalism Flashcards
paragraphing on Liberalism and the state
- Role of the state
- Meritocracy/ equality through state control
- Nature of the state and government
agreement over role of the state
role of the state to protect individual freedoms and property
- Locke’s ‘nightwatchman state’ that will arbitrate in disputes and guarantee property rights
- modern liberals see necessity in the state eg Rawls believes the state is needed to rectify injustice in society and therefore he too understands the importance of the protection of the individual and for there to be order/ certain rules
disagreement over the state’s role
- Locke- state’s role ends at its nightwatchman role- “the state has no other end but the preservation of property”
- Modern liberals believe in an enlarged state
eg Friedan believes the state has a duty to provide women with an education and equal opportunities to men- “Who knows what women’s intelligence will contribute when it can be nourished”
Rawls argues that the state should play a role in providing education/ the economy
agreement over equality and meritocracy in the state
- People should be able to gain as result of their own merit. the state should not intervene so much that everyone is equal
- Mill’s harm principle ensures the governments role is limited to preventing individuals from infringing on others rights, not to ensure general equality
- Rawls argues that inequality should remain despite providing greater quality of opportunity, as he doesn’t argue for equal wealth distribution (not communism)
disagreement over equality and meritocracy in the state
- Modern liberals such as Rawls and Friedan Believe that the state should provide equal opportunities. For example freedom argues for the same education for both men and women, rawls argues that “it may be expedient but it is not just that some should have less well others may prosper”
- Opposingly, Locke believes that individuals are entitled only to what they gain from their own merit. “all wealth is the product of labour”
Agreement over the nature of the state
all advocate for supremacy of the people and thus the government requires consent of the governed, a codified constitution and checks and balances
- Lock argued that the state should be based on a social contract between governors and governed
- Rawls and other modern liberals argue that every adult should have the vote
Disagreement over the nature of the state
- Lock believe that an autocratic figure is fine as long as they governed by the social contract and constitution and are constrained by checks and balances
- Full democracy is required according to Rawls- “each person is to have an equal right… compatible with a similar liberty for others”
Agreement over rationalism and human nature
Will have an optimistic view of human nature – humans are innately rational
- Locke argued that life before the state was civilised- “the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it”
- Friedan argued that both men and women were equally rational
disagreement over rationalism and human nature
- Mill believed that our rationality was a governing power as because of it we can be trusted with freedom. We are free as a result of our rationality.
- Rawls believes are rationality results in us helping the less fortunate through social justice. This in turn ensures our individual freedoms
Agreement over the static/innate part of our human nature
Agree that all humans are born with some level of rationality for example
- Mary Wollstonecraft advocated that both men and women were rational creatures
- Rawls and Frieden argued similarly
disagreement over the static/innate part of our human nature
- Mill argued that human nature, especially rationality could develop through education and assess the state should provide us with an education for free. “to bring a child into existence without… Training for its mind, is a moral crime… The state ought to see it fulfilled”
- Friedan similarly believed human nature had developed to be discriminatory towards women
- Locke believed human nature was fixed from birth
Agreement over the extent to which humans are individual (human nature)
individualism is central to human nature. All humans are innately independent beings
- Locke saw individualism as central to and the goal of any society
- Rawls understood that humans want what’s best for them and why from the original position they would want some form of welfare
disagreement over the extent to which humans are individual (human nature)
- Classical liberals such as Locke believe in egotistical individualism. Human nature is driven by self interest and a belief in self-reliance
- Modern liberals such as Rawls believe in developmental individualism. Humans are empathetic with a desire to live in harmony hence his belief in the veil of ignorance and wealth redistribution
Agreement over the goal of society
Tolerance of others from which society can be built around
Mill advocated for tolerance of diverse opinions as did Locke who argued for tolerance of alternative religions and political views
Disagreement over the goal of society
- Rawls believed society’s goal was to secure equality of opportunity and the means to survive. This is what his veil of ignorance was based off. Betty Friedan believed that the goal of the society should be the equality of men and women
- Lock argued that societies goal was individualism. Men are naturally in a “state of perfect freedom to order their actions… without… depending on the will of any other man”
