Importance Of Classical Liberalism

The Classical Liberalist, would oppose any regulation on the economy. As they believe that those who are able to make money based on the principle of supply and demand already have helped the welfare of other in the process. Classical Liberalist’s understand inequality as an inevitable result of free competition, and actually see it as beneficial in the long run as capital is reinvested, to create new technology, employment and opportunities. If this capital were to be taxed heavily instead, many opportunities and jobs would be lost further adding to the inequality of wealth and opportunity for the poor.

The further development of industrialisation led to social and economic inequality. This led to a revision of classical liberal ideas to prevent the spread of ignorance and poverty. It is suggested that modern liberals have betrayed classical liberal ideas as they embrace collectivism and diverge from classical liberalism on issues such as freedom. However, it can be argued that modern liberals have simply built on classical liberal ideas such as its commitment to the individual.

It is worth noting that is so as long as the liberties of others are not restricted. It is from this perspective that the basis for opposition is viable as opposed to the use of government to attain social objectives. Classical liberalism focuses on private initiatives or the free market to guide and foster the best outcomes. From history, classical liberalism has fueled support for religious and civil liberties. Classical liberalism can be rather viewed as an embrace of an individual’s right to do his or her own thing.

During the period beginning at the end of WWII and the early 1980’s, there was period of liberalism throughout all aspects of American politics and culture. The liberalism during this era was referred to as rights liberalism, which was predicated on the idea that the state had the responsibility to protect individuals from discrimination. This directly deviates from the classical liberalism that was very common before the Progressive Era, which was based on the idea that liberty came from the government having a set role in society and never attempting to affect aspects of society it was never prescribed. Rights liberalism also deviated from the social welfare during the 1930’s in promoting the need for a more egalitarian society. This version

Classical liberalism allow an individual to use primary social value of liberty in the political culture that extent until liberties of the others disturbed. Classical liberal ideas often form the basis for opposition to the use of government to attain social and personal objectives. They stress reliance on private the free market to determine the best outcomes rather than the private initiatives [1].

Typically, liberalism is categorised into two separate components; classical liberalism, which was fashioned during the 19th century as a result of the industrial revolution, and the more recent Modern Liberalism which emerged as industrialisation continued within the UK. Although both divisions of Liberalism unavoidably overlap in attitudes and approaches regarding the theory behind the ideology, I believe, fundamentally, that clear tensions between these aspects of Liberalism are more evident when analysing this ideology.

Liberalism: where “people understand their own business, and their own interests better, and care for them more, than the government does or can be expected to do”, as defined by John Mill. Many individuals considered this ideology as the solution to their political, economic, and possibly their social needs; where a renewed acknowledgement of human worth and rationality materialized. Citizens were given the opportunity to delve and pursue their own desires of wealth without any government involvement. This contemporary kind of thinking ultimately increased the wealth of both the individual and the state immensely. Life was rather pleasant…for the privileged. The wealth and prosperity of classical liberalism only applied to people who had

This essay will assess the relationship between liberalism and conservatism by exploring the differences in ideological beliefs of these two ideologies. Ideology can be defined as “set of interrelated and more or less coherent ideas” that constitutes of both “descriptive and normative element” on how a society works (Heywood, 2007, pp. 6-7). One of the most popular ideology in contemporary politics is liberalism which accord individual liberty and free market as its primary priority. On the other hand, conservatism is generally known for advocating tradition, societal state and authority. Firstly, we will look at theories developed by liberalism and conservatism on creation of state. It would then be followed by liberalism’s notion of individuality and individual liberty versus conservatism’s emphasis on individual imperfectionism and need for society. Thereafter, we will observe liberalism and conservatism as political ideology and how it has evolved over time. The essay will be summed up by a conclusion in the end. The terms, liberalism and conservatism mentioned in this essay are intended to be synonymous to their traditional or classical thoughts and beliefs. Every argument presented in this essay are intended to support the claim that liberalism and conservatism are not compatible ideologies. By compatible, I meant being consistent without any disagreements.

The attraction of liberalism is its unrelenting commitment to individual freedom, reasoned debate and the balance within diversity. Indeed, it has become fashionable to portray liberalism not simply as an ideology but as a ‘meta-ideology’, that is, as a body of rules that lays down the grounds upon which political and ideological debate can take place. This reflects the belief that liberalism gives priority to the ‘the right’ over ‘the good’. In other words, liberalism strives to establish the conditions in which people and groups can pursue the good life as each defines it, but it does not prescribe or try to promote any particular notion of what is good. Criticisms of liberalism nevertheless come from various directions. Marxists have argued

The liberal perspective on political economy is embodied in the discipline of the Western economics (Gilpin, 1987). It emphasizes the individual interests, the freedom and the maximization of economic benefit. Economic

Neo-liberalism is a political ideology that suggests that ‘human well-being can be advanced by the maximisation of entrepreneurial freedom, characterised by private property rights, individual liberty, free markets and free trade’ (Geografiskar, A 2006). In today’s modern society neo-liberalism is widespread around the globe with various stakeholders offering conflicting views. Some advocates, namely the capitalistic portion of society argue that a liberal market is

2. Classical liberalism says that the state should only take over an institution to ensure that citizens can freely benefit from that particular institution’s services. Classical liberalism does not require the thorough enforcing of law and order to reach economic progress and equality.

Freedoms of choice and self-determination have become key features of life that are largely viewed in Western Europe as natural rights. However, in light of the present global recession, it can be contemplated if greater state control in present liberal democracies is necessary to ensure the survival of the state. Whilst some may believe that the individual should remain the main priority, a liberal society increases inequality and widens the class gap which continues to suppress the poor. If the focus is primarily on the individual then, overall, society may suffer more than if it were state-driven.

Liberalism was an important concept but it also lost some of its importance in order to emerge as a new form. In the today’s world hardly any one speaks for the freedom and democracy

Liberalism is a political philosophy that is founded on the ideas of liberty and equality and controls how a society functions. Since liberalism is expressed as a political ideology, it helps dictate how a nation can achieve its national security, its stable economy and the extent of control a government should possess. The perspective of the source illustrates how government intervention is needed during the threat of national security. Although, during times that national security is not being threatened, the collective society should have the freedom to break from the unnecessary government control. A philosopher such as Rousseau would have agreed with the position of the source as it gave an option of security to the people - but also gave them the choice to break the contract if they believed their rights were being violated. While a philosopher such as Hobbes would have disagreed with the source on the terms that he believed in a monarchy and believed that people needed government control at all times. Furthermore, as liberalism provides people their freedoms but also allows a certain extent of government control, the source should be taken to an full extent on the grounds that government control should only be emplaced considering national security, government control, and economic stability - which is shown through the internment of Japanese-Canadians, the New Deal, and the Patriotic Act.