Liberalism: Encyclopedia II - Liberalism - Contemporary liberalism

Liberalism - Contemporary liberalism

Liberalism - A general overview of political positions

The word liberalism is today used differently in various countries. (See Liberalism worldwide.) One of the greatest contrasts is between the usage in the United States and usage in Continental Europe. In the US, liberalism is usually contrasted with conservatism, and American liberals support broader tolerance and more readily embrace multiculturalism and affirmative action. In Europe, on the other hand, liberalism is not only contrasted with conservatism and Christian Democracy, but also with social democracy and socialism.

Most political parties which identify themselves as liberal claim to promote the rights and responsibilities of the individual, free choice within an open competitive process, the free market, and the dual responsibility of the state to protect the individual citizen and guarantee their liberty. Yet critics of these parties tend to understand the above liberal policies in different terms. "Free choice for all" is sometimes understood to bring about a gross inequality of wealth. The downside of "free speech for all" is the tolerance of obscene, blasphemous, or treasonous speech. The role of the state as promoter of freedom, and as protector of its citizens, are in both these ways taken to come into conflict.

Liberalism stresses the importance of liberal democracy as the best form of representative democracy. In a liberal democracy, the ability of elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and moderated by a constitution which emphasizes the protection of rights and freedoms of individuals and places constraints on the will of the majority. Liberals are in favour of a pluralist system in which differing political and social views, even extreme or fringe views, compete for political power on a democratic basis and have the opportunity to achieve power through periodically held elections. They stress the resolution of differences by peaceful means within the bounds of democratic or lawful processes. Many liberals seek ways to increase the involvement and participation of citizens in the democratic process. Some liberals favour to include forms of direct democracy in the political system. (Main article: Liberal democracy).

Liberalism is paired with the concept of civil rights: the protection and privileges of personal liberty given to all citizens by law. It includes the equal treatment of all citizens irrespective of race, gender and class. Liberals are divided over the degree for positive rights to be included in this concept. 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. Inequal treatment on the basis of nationality is therefore possible, especially in regard to citizenship itself. (Main article: Civil rights).

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, legal equality 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 inhumane punishment, e.g. capital punishment.

Racism is incompatible with liberalism. Liberals in Europe are generally hostile to any attempts by the state to enforce equality by legal action against employers, whereas in the United States this is a typical liberal policy (see 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 abandon gender and racial inequality. However, on all hands it is agreed that inequality on the basis of arbitrary factors such as race or gender is morally wrong.

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 (Main article: Economic liberalism). Modern 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 besides that insisting upon 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 opinions of the degree that the government ought to find task in these matters. Since poverty is a threat to personal liberty, liberalism seeks a balance between individual responsibility of people for their own future, and the community responsibility for those who are not able to earn a sufficient income to give security from the hazards of sickness, unemployment, disability and old age. ^[8]

European liberalism turned back to more laissez-faire policies in the 1980's and 1990's, and supported privatisation and liberalisation in health care and other public sectors. Modern European liberals generally tend to believe in a smaller role for government than would be supported by most social democrats, let alone socialists or communists. The European liberal consensus appears to involve a belief that economies should be decentralized. In general, contemporary European liberals do not believe that the government should directly control any industrial production through state owned enterprises, which places them in opposition to social democrats.

Liberals generally believe in neutral government, in the sense that it is not for the state to determine social 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 constitutional right to "pursue happiness". Therefore liberals believe the state should have an open mind in ethical questions, with regard to that narrow sense of "ethics".

Both in Europe as well as in the United States, liberals support the 'pro choice' movement and advocate equal rights for women and for homosexuals. In Europe, liberals were far more succcesful in realizing these goals than in America. All liberal parties are secular, insofar as they do not advocate a particular religion, but they differ on the issue of anti-clericalism. Liberal parties in Latin countries today tend to be very anti-clerical.

Some liberal parties are now among the opponents of multiculturalism, which they see as distancing of individuals within minority communities from the national whole, and as outright damaging to national unity. Others embrace multiculturalism as enriching society, but want also to defend individual rights within the minority communities. Critics argue that liberals are not neutral towards ethnic minorities and force their values upon members of these minority groups.

Part of the contemporary liberal movement incorporates green values into policy. 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 when necessary will enact legislation in order to achieve sustainable development. The paradigm held by Green thinkers insists that more attention be drawn towards ecology and human affairs. According to one strain of the Green view, environmental damage itself can be a threat to the life and liberty of persons, such as through the influence of externalities like pollution. Other liberals do not accept government regulation in this matter and argue that the market should regulate itself in some fashion (Main article: Green liberalism).

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. ^[9] Social liberals claim to believe that war can be abolished and world peace and economic prosperity can flourish if all nations loyally adhere to a world organization of all nations (the United Nations Organization), under the same law and equity, and with power to enforce strict observance of all international obligations freely entered into. 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, unhampered by 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, like the European Union. They want these organizations to be democratic and open to the world. They see globalisation as a phenomenon to be governed by states rather than fought, or left alone as economic liberals would prefer. ^[10]. In this way what social liberals see as its positive effects can be promoted and developed, and the perceived negative effects to be combated. In the social liberal view a global free and fair market can only work if companies worldwide respect a set of common minimum social and ecological standards. Some non-liberal critics argue that liberals in fact do not open up their countries and supra-national organizations for people from outside, by limiting immigration. Since liberalism is broad, there is no hard and fast list of practical policy prescriptions which can be universally assumed to be "liberal". In some circumstances there may be tax increases, in others tax decreases. In some cases there will be the creation of a quasi-public entity to perform a function, in other cases privatization. Sometimes liberalism emphasizes financial aid to poorer citizens (e.g. as unemployment benefits or negative income tax or basic income, guaranteed minimum income or citizen's dividend). Most liberal parties argue that the government should provide some form of health services and basic education. Also, most liberals believe that social security benefits should be financed from taxes, whereas perks must be purchased by private insurances. In order to provide fuller choice for individuals, they may sometimes support vouchers in utilisation of government-paid benefits, such as education or senior care.

Other liberals believe this is too much of an intrusion into the market and suggest the government run no retirement system, nor any healthcare system. Instead, they believe the market can provide these things as and when people desire them. They also believe that minimum incomes have little impact on helping the poor, and often can harm the poor by removing current jobs or eliminating future jobs. To compromise, some liberals suggest voluntary retirement programs, no raises in minimum wages, and the elimination of the income tax to be replaced with a consumption tax such as the FairTax.

Liberalism - Political deviances

Recently, however, "Liberal" parties in Europe have begun to rethink their positions, in response to the confrontation with radical forms of Islam, with political Islamism. They are confronted with a dilemma between respect for other cultures and individual rights. Liberalism traditionally holds that state and society should have very limited interests in the private behavior of its citizens in the areas of private sexual relations, free speech, personal conscience, religious beliefs, and political association. European "liberals" are less willing to extend freedom to people who require others the wearing of the burqa, arranged marriage, and female circumcision, which they see as contradictory to individual freedom (especially for women). Many European liberals now think that the state should actively promote 'western values', 'European values' and/or 'Enlightenment values'.

Liberalism - Comparative critiques

Statist opponents of liberalism reject its emphasis on individual rights, and instead emphasize the collective or the community to a degree where the rights of the individual are either diminished or abolished. This position is called collectivism.

Collectivism can be found both to the right and to the left of liberalism. On the left, the collective that tends to be enhanced is the state, often in the form of state socialism. On the right, conservative and religious opponents argue that individual freedom in the non-economic sphere can lead to indifference, selfishness, and immorality.

A softer critique of liberalism can be found in communitarianism, which emphasizes a return to communities without necessarily denigrating individual rights.

Beyond these clear theoretical differences, some liberal principles can be treated piecemeal, with some portions kept and others abandoned (see Liberal democracy and Neoliberalism.) This ongoing process - where putatively liberal agents accept some traditionally liberal values and reject others - causes some critics to question whether or not the word "liberal" has any useful meaning at all.

In terms of international politics, the universal claims of human rights which liberalism tends to endorse is disputed by rigid adherants of non-interventionism, since intervention in the interests of human rights can conflict with the sovereignty of countries. By contrast, World federalists criticize liberalism for its adherance to the doctrine of sovereign nation-states, which the World federalists believe is not helpful in the face of genocide and other mass human rights abuses.

Left-leaning opponents of economic liberalism reject the view that the private sector can be for the collective benefit, often citing the harm done to those individuals who lose out in competition. They oppose the use of the state to impose market principles on non-liberals, usually through an enforced market mechanism in a previously non-market sector. They argue that the dominance of liberal principles in economy and society has contributed to inequality among states, and inequality within states. They argue that liberal societies are characterised by long-term poverty, and by ethnic and class differentials in health, (infant) mortality and life expectancy. Some would even say they have much higher unemployment than centrally planned economies.

Liberalism shares many basic goals and methods with social democracy, but in some places diverges. The fundamental difference between liberalism and social democracy, is a disagreement over the role of the state in the economy. Social democracy can be understood to be the common trait, or broader ideology, that overlaps between social liberalism and democratic socialism. Democratic socialism seeks to achieve some minimum equality of outcome. Democratic socialists support a large public sector and the nationalization of utilities such as gas and electricity in order to avoid private monopolies, and to achieve social justice and to raise the standard of living. By contrast, liberalism, in its distrust of monopolies (both public and private), prefers much less state intervention, choosing for example subsidies and regulation rather than outright nationalization. Liberalism also emphasizes equality of opportunity, and not equality of outcome, citing the desire for a meritocracy.

Anti-statist critiques of liberalism, like some forms of anarchism, emphasize the illegitimacy of the state for any purposes.

Liberalism - Liberal conservatism

Liberal conservatism is a hybrid of economic liberalism and conservative social philosophy. This strain often emerged in countries with strong socialist and/or labour parties, and is often strongly influenced by the writings of Edmund Burke. Examples include the Reform Party of Canada, Canadian Alliance, Fine Gael (Republic of Ireland), Party of the Liberal Front (Brazil), Moderate Party (Sweden), the Liberal Democratic Party (Japan), and the Liberal Party of Australia.

Liberalism - Liberal 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.

Liberalism - Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is an economic ideology rather than a broader political ideology. The swing away from government action in the 1970s led to the introduction of this term, which refers to a program of reducing trade barriers and internal market restrictions, while using government power to enforce opening of foreign markets. This is strongly opposed by economic liberals, who favor a free market and free trade. Neoliberalism accepts a certain degree of government involvement in the domestic economy, particularly a central bank with the power to print fiat money. It also favors an interventionist military. While neoliberalism is sometimes described as overlapping with Thatcherism, economists as diverse as Joseph Stiglitz and Milton Friedman have been described — by others — as "neoliberal". This economic agenda is not necessarily combined with a liberal agenda in politics: neoliberals often do not subscribe to individual liberty on ethical issues or in sexual mores. An extreme example was the Pinochet regime in Chile, but some also classify Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and even Tony Blair and Gerhard Schröder as being neo-liberal.

It should be noted that, in the 1990s, many social democratic parties adopted 'neoliberal' economic policies such as privatization of industry and open markets, much to the dismay of many of their own voters. This has led these parties to become de facto neoliberal, and has often resulted in a drastic loss of popular support. For example, critics to the left of the German Social Democratic Party and the British Labour Party accuse them of pursuing neoliberal policies by refusing to renationalise industry. As a result of this, much support for these parties has been lost to the Christian Democratic Union and the Liberal Democrats, respectively.

Sometimes 'Neoliberalism' is used as a catch-all term for the anti-socialist reaction which swept through some countries during the period between the 70s and 90s. 'Neoliberalism' in the form of Thatcher, Reagan, and Pinochet claimed to move from a bureacratic welfare-based society toward a meritocracy acting in the interests of business. In actuality, these governments cut funding for education and taxed income more heavily than wealth, which increased the influence of big business and the upper class.

Some conservatives see themselves as the true inheritors of classical liberalism. Jonah Goldberg of National Review argues that "most conservatives are closer to classical liberals than a lot of Reason (magazine)-libertarians" because conservatives want to preserve some institutions that they see as needed for liberty. ^[11] Further confusing the classification of liberalism and conservatism is that some conservatives claim liberal values as their own.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Contemporary liberalism", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki