Liberalism Essay Plans Flashcards
Liberalism economy paragraph 1 - agreement
-agreement as all believe in capitalism
-this comes from importance of private property - Locke believes it’s a natural right under individualism
- Rawls would agree because he still justifies inequality of outcome, given people still want scope for liberty and freedom
-capitalism is the elite system overall
Liberalism economy Intro
More agreement than disagreement
-agreement on capitalism due to property
-some disagreement over the state’s role in the economy
Liberalism economy paragraph 2 - role of the state - disagreement
-neoliberals like Hayek and Classicals like Locke and Smith believe in lassiez faire economics - invisible hand an trickle down if left unmanaged
-justified because of Mill’s idea that negative liberty is the absence of restraint
-Spencer would agree - social Darwinism - those who cannot be self reliant will be eliminated in survival of the fittest - doesn’t want to justify a bigger state
-modern liberals = Keynesian because socio-economic forces make a mockery of autonomous individuals - must help people to help themselves
Liberalism economy P3 - disagreement - taxation
- negative rights means tax is theft
-neoliberals believe it creates dependency culture
-Rawls argues for greater taxation - Veil of Ignorance test means redistribution of wealth aligns with government by consent
-Jeremy Bentham may also justify taxation to create the largest pleasure for largest number of people.
-clear divide
Liberalism economy conclusion
- more agreement over capitalism and it’s purpose is to aid individualism
- while state intervention shows a large divide, they are arguably just adapting to socio-economic forces of the time and have the same intent over the economy
Liberalism society intro
They disagree more than they agree. While they agree on the purpose of society to facilitate the individual, they disagree on the nature on individualism and how the state should respond
Liberalism Paragraph 1 - society - agree
Agree of the purpose of the society to facilitate the individual: Mill’s harm principle.
Any society must improve upon the state of nature under an extended state otherwise it’s irrational and dysfunction.
Locke’s property rights emphasis
Overall agreement
Liberalism - paragraph 2 - society - disagreement
Disagree over the nature of individualism: Egotistical individualism versus individuality which is altruistic. They hence disagree on the extent of welfare support in society. Bentham wants the greatest happiness for greatest number, while Spencer emphasises Social Darwinism.
Large disagreement
Liberalism - paragraph 3 - society - disagreement
Disagreement on how the state should respond to society. Negative liberty means limited government. Intervention = dependency.
Meanwhile, modern thinkers believe in positive liberty and helping others to help themselves: more in line with altruistic individuality.
Large disagreement
Liberalism - conclusion - society
Agreement on purpose is superficial because their ideal state is very different in terms of the nature of individualism and how the state should respond
Liberalism - human nature introduction
broad agreement
Individual and rational beings
Cracks in agreement show as Lock believes in individualism while Mill is focused on individuality and so they differ on how the state should respond.
Liberalism - human nature - agreement
Rational beings - deny divine right of kings
Locke and Mill deny negative view of human nature- instead we are individualistic and drawn to situations that forward our advancement. Egotistical yet sensitive. Therefore Rawls, Wollstonecraft and Mill all advocate for education as it helps us to improve our own lives
Overall agreement
Liberalism - Paragraph 2 - disagreement
How should the state respond to these qualities. Enabling state v Locke, Smiles and Spencer want minimal state as tyranny of minority could curb everybody’s rights. Social Darwinism and harm principle. This argument isn’t as strong as the agreement however, because they fundamentally agree on human nature just disagree on how to respond
Paragraph 3 - liberalism - human nature - agree
should be inequality of outcome in society because of meritocracy. Rawl’s veil of ignorance shows people still want some scope for difference. Locke and classical liberals believe people have their own ability to forge greater human happiness, simply poor have to overcome more hurdles. Overall, they all want inequality of outcome to create more room for liberty and individualism
liberalism - human nature - conclusion
Broad agreement - all rational beings with the ability to forge greater human happiness so there should be some inequality to provide scope for liberty. Some disagreement on how the state should respond to human nature