The first question we need to address is "What exactly is Liberalism?" The word "liberalism" is from the Latin liber, "free", and everyone wants freedom! But different "liberalisms" have over the years emphasized the freedoms of widely disparate groups --
We are left with an unappetizing situation: Conservatives use the expression "liberal" as a term of opprobrium (and vice versa!), but the values espoused by "Classical Liberalism" and modern moderate-Conservatism are in fact quite similar. The values of "Classical Liberalism" and "Neoliberalism", on the other hand, are toward opposite ends of the spectrum.
.
On this page, and throughout this site, whenever I use the unqualified term "liberalism", I will mean "Classical Liberalism". Within quotations from other authors you'll have to use your own judgement on their definition.
Update 22 JUL 00:
I'm coming to believe that the presence of Classical Liberal institutions may be the most important factor in insuring the health of society.
I.e., The existence of Liberal institutions will get you through times of no (fill in blank with your choice) better than (blank) will get you through times of no Liberal institutions.
"The universal and homogenous state (of liberal democracy) that appears at the end of history can thus be seen as resting on the twin pillars of economics and recognition. The human historical process that leads up to it has been driven forward equally by the progressive unfolding of modern science, and by the struggle for recognition. The former emanates from the desiring part of the soul, which was liberated in early modern times and turned to the unlimited accumulation of wealth. This unlimited accumulation was made possible because of an alliance that was formed between desire and reason: capitalism is inextricably bound to modern natural science. The struggle for recognition, on the other hand, originated in the thymotic part of the soul."
The End of History and the Last Man
by Francis Fukuyama
page 204
For Fukuyama, a vital factor in the success of liberal democracy versus other societal systems is that it satisfies both desire and thymos
Fukuyama uses Plato's articulation (in the tale of Leontius, Republic, Book 4) of thymos as separate from desire and reason, in contra Hobbes, for whom the will is simply "the last appetite in deliberating" (Fukuyama, page 164).
However, considering the above quote from the perspective of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (Fukuyama does not explicitly do so), we might well take the Hobbesian view that the reason liberal democracy is the "end state" of human economic and political evolution is just because it optimizes the satisfaction of all human needs, including those of the body (Fukuyama's "desire"), those for social recognition (thymos), as well as providing a large and inclusive field for the pursuit of such "higher" needs as spirituality, aesthetics, etc.
(For Plato) "The best regime was extremely difficult to realize because it had to satisfy the whole of man simultaneously, his reason, desire, and thymos.... That regime was best that best satisfied all three parts of the soul simultaneously. By this standard, when compared to the historical alternatives available to us, it would seem that liberal democracy gives fullest scope to all three parts."
The End of History and the Last Man
by Francis Fukuyama
page 337
"... at its [Liberalism's] heart have stood four basic principles:- Links, emphasis, formatting are mine -- ed.(1) personal freedom and the ability of the individual to be free from coercion (of any kind),
(2) a limited or specially defined function for the government,
(3) equality of right (and before the law), and
(4) the consent of the governed.
Some people have maintained that there has been a fifth principle:
(5) concern for constitutions (which seems to have some justification).
...
As liberalism first developed, it initially stood as the protector of the new elites that appeared as a result of the Industrial Revolution (which has typically been called classical liberalism). In this form, it was concerned with negative rights, where the focus was on freedom *from* various forms of interference (state as well as market).
Late into the Industrial Revolution though, it was realized that there was an alternative way of conceiving rights: positive rights. This interpretation of rights focussed on the idea of freedom *to* achieve in this society."
"An open society is a society based on the recognition that nobody has a monopoly on the truth, that different people have different views and interests, and that there is a need for institutions to protect the rights of all people to allow them to live together in peace. The term "open society" was popularized by the philosopher Karl Popper in his 1945 book Open Society and Its Enemies (vol 1) (vol 2). Broadly speaking, an open society is characterized by a reliance on the rule of law, the existence of a democratically elected government, a diverse and vigorous civil society, and respect for minorities and minority opinions."-- A page on this site on / The Open Society /
"Every four years, as the November presidential election draws near, I have the same daydream: that I don't know or care who the president of the United States is. More importantly, I don't need to know or care. I don't have to vote or even pay attention to debates. I can ignore all campaign commercials. There are no high stakes for my family or my country. My liberty and property are so secure that, frankly, it doesn't matter who wins. I don't even need to know his name. ...
For those who do not vote and do not care about politics, their liberty is secure. They have no access to special rights, yet their rights to person, property, and self government are never in doubt. For that reason and for all practical purposes, they can forget about the president and, for that matter, the rest of the federal government. It might as well not exist. ...
As you may have already assumed, my daydream is was what our system was designed to be in every detail. It was created by the U.S. Constitution, or, at least, the system that the vast majority of Americans believed they were getting with the U.S. Constitution. It was the world's great free republic, however unrecognizable it is today.
This was the country where people were to govern themselves and to plan their own economy, not have it planned by Washington, D.C."
"Today people in the United States and around the world who believe in the principles of the American Revolution-- individual liberty, limited government, the free market, and the rule of law-- call themselves by a variety of terms, including conservative, libertarian, classical liberal, and liberal. We see problems with all those terms.".
"P.J. O'Rourke is the Cato Institute's Mencken research fellow. He delivered these remarks at a May 6, 1993 gala dinner celebrating the opening of the Cato Institute's new headquarters in Washington."
Am I suggesting you accept Kangas' assertions at face value?
No. But consider them, yes.
-- and non-liberals might well agree with Kangas' diagnosis
but not with his prescription
"I thought it might be interesting to try to articulate 10 propositions that seem to me to define "liberal" today. Undoubtedly, not all liberals embrace all of these propositions, and many conservatives embrace at least some of them.
Moreover, because 10 is a small number, the list is not exhaustive. And because these propositions will in some instances conflict, the "liberal" position on a specific issue may not always be predictable. My goal, however, is not to end discussion, but to invite debate.
1. Liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others. This is at the very heart of liberalism. ... Liberals are skeptical of censorship and celebrate free and open debate.
2. Liberals believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference. It is liberals who have supported and continue to support the civil rights movement, affirmative action, the Equal Rights Amendment and the rights of gays and lesbians. (Note that a conflict between propositions 1 and 2 leads to divisions among liberals on issues like pornography and hate speech.)
3. Liberals believe individuals have a right and a responsibility to participate in public debate. ... They believe, with Justice Louis Brandeis, that 'the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people.'
4. Liberals believe "we the people" are the governors and not the subjects of government, and that government must treat each person with that in mind. It is liberals who have defended and continue to defend the freedom of the press to investigate and challenge the government, the protection of individual privacy from overbearing government monitoring, and the right of individuals to reproductive freedom. (Note that libertarians, often thought of as "conservatives," share this value with liberals.)
5. Liberals believe government must respect and affirmatively safeguard the liberty, equality and dignity of each individual. It is liberals who have championed and continue to champion the rights of racial, religious and ethnic minorities, political dissidents, persons accused of crime and the outcasts of society. It is liberals who have insisted on the right to counsel, a broad application of the right to due process of law and the principle of equal protection for all people.
6. Liberals believe government has a fundamental responsibility to help those who are less fortunate. It is liberals who have supported and continue to support government programs to improve health care, education, social security, job training and welfare for the neediest members of society. It is liberals who maintain that a national community is like a family and that government exists in part to "promote the general welfare."
7. Liberals believe government should never act on the basis of sectarian faith. ...
8. Liberals believe courts have a special responsibility to protect individual liberties. It is principally liberal judges and justices who have preserved and continue to preserve freedom of expression, individual privacy, freedom of religion and due process of law. (Conservative judges and justices more often wield judicial authority to protect property rights and the interests of corporations, commercial advertisers and the wealthy.)
9. Liberals believe government must protect the safety and security of the people, for without such protection liberalism is impossible. This, of course, is less a tenet of liberalism than a reply to those who attack liberalism. The accusation that liberals are unwilling to protect the nation from internal and external dangers is false. Because liberals respect competing values, such as procedural fairness and individual dignity, they weigh more carefully particular exercises of government power (such as the use of secret evidence, hearsay and torture), but they are no less willing to use government authority in other forms (such as expanded police forces and international diplomacy) to protect the nation and its citizens.
10. Liberals believe government must protect the safety and security of the people, without unnecessarily sacrificing constitutional values. It is liberals who have demanded and continue to demand legal protections to avoid the conviction of innocent people in the criminal justice system, reasonable restraints on government surveillance of American citizens, and fair procedures to ensure that alleged enemy combatants are in fact enemy combatants. Liberals adhere to the view expressed by Brandeis some 80 years ago: 'Those who won our independence ... did not exalt order at the cost of liberty.' "
"All the data supporting these points can be found at the Center For American Progress, which uses polling data from the major surveys.
Here are some positions that are often characterized as “liberal,” and some information on how many Americans support these positions. ...
... they enjoy very strong support among the American people. A lot of people may reject the “liberal” label, but their thinking makes them more liberal than they might realize."
"I am a liberal. And I make no apologies for it. Hell, I'm proud of it.
Too many people run away from the label. They whisper it like you'd whisper "I'm a Nazi." Like it's a dirty word."
"Liberalism is a disease, just like tuberculosis of the spine.
... disbelief in conspiracy is the first unmistakable symptom of the liberalism that dessicates the soul. ...."
an opposing view (wouldn't you say?)
from Friedrich Wilhelm IV
quoted at
The March Days of 1848 :
Friedrich Wilhelm IV of Prussia and his "Dear Berliners"
by Justine Davis Randers-Pehrson