According to John Stuart Mill, ‘the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others’. Therefore, the role of government is to protect the liberty of individuals against others who may seek to exploit them for their own gain. In the liberal view, government powers should not extend beyond this minimal role. However, government officials may exploit their position for their own personal gain, and therefore the people should have a ... ... middle of paper ... ...this also links with the liberal idea of limited government - the state should not become involved with the economy, or any other matter which does not concern the protection and defence of human rights. In conclusion liberalism is not entirely compatible with democracy - some important liberal ideas, in particular the principle that every individual opinion should be taken into account, directly conflict with the system of democracy.
Factions and the Constitution The framers designed the Constitution in such a way as to lessen the influence of political parties in American government, however at the same time, the very essence to the formation of political parties, liberty, was left in the Constitution. Both Madison and Schattschneider cite that while the Constitution does not support factions, it cannot abolish them because of the fact that the Constitution was designed to protect the liberties of the citizens. They both go on to say that liberty is the spark, which causes political parties to develop. In Madison's Federalist 10, it is evident that he was not in favor of the formation of factions. He states, "…The public good is often disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties…" Madison made the point that the dangers of factions can only be limited by controlling its effects.
Therefore, it is opposed to revolution or change and instead finds pride in traditions (Conservatism vs. Liberalism, 2008). Liberalism supports a number of issues. Firstly, liberalists believe that there should be a contract or formal agreement between the people and their democratically elected government on a number of issues. For instance, the government, while ensuring the common good of all, has the duty to protect people’s rights under the compact of limited powers. In other words, the government is expected to govern with restraint and never attempt to interfere with people’s private rights and liberty.
Throughout the ages, the principles of equality and liberty have been a subject of great disputes. Liberal minimalism  holds a distinct outlook in the explicit implications of these expressions. For a minimalist democracy must strive to primary reduce control of authoritarian power through restraining most if not all constraints to the individual, allowing them to dictate their own lives by implementing a representative government. In addition, it implements an equal, consistent, and indiscriminate regulation. Thus effectively preventing tyranny, and creating equality before the law, irrelevant to the citizen’s position, which denies high ranking individuals legal advantages seen during the feudal era.
This then leads to helping to ensure that there is individual freedom and rights, and that individuals have autonomy. Liberals tend to be suspicious of the government and the power that they posses to limit an individual and their freedom. By limiting the government, it makes sure that they are not using their power to target citizens and to constrain their liberty. Friedrich von Hayek (1960) debated for the rule of law, where individuals under this law can make choices and act upon them without constraint. With the rule of law and separation of powers, it ensures that no single person can rule over the people and rob them of their freedom.
Locke (1995) claims that it is the living under the government which provides freedom through the use rules, no restraint besides the law, and free from arbitrary power. Liberalism tends to support the idea of limiting constitution government and their power. It was liberal thinkers James Madison and Baron de Montesquieu that designed the idea of the separation of powers, to equally distribute the power the government has (Young 2002). This then causes it to help to ensure that there are individual freedom, rights and that individuals have autonomy. Liberals tend to be suspicious of the government and the power that they possess which can be used to limit an individual and their freedom.
The source reflects a perspective that supports illiberalism. It suggests that the government must protect its citizens in time of crisis but it mentions that in times of stability people will be free from unnecessary government intervention. It does not however suggest that people should be free from unnecessary government intervention in times of crisis. The illiberal view opposing the principles of liberalism, suggests that governments should use unnecessary intervention in times of crisis and so does the source (indirectly as mentioned above). But who can confirm that the government will only intervene and suspend civil liberties in times of crisis?
Thomas Jefferson called these rights "inalienable rights" and indicative of the classical liberal belief that rights do not come from the law, but that the law serves to guard natural individual rights. And government exists to protect those moral rights, ensured by a constitution that defends individual ... ... middle of paper ... ...ood of their society. But to draw the today’s conclusion the lineage of contemporary Liberalism is frequently flawed, regularly contradictory and sometimes tarnished with the blood of the innocent. Nowadays, liberal values propose a type of abundant life the liberty and independence to sin and to set one's own standards in every area of life. But we harvest what we sow and the modern western societies are now reaping the rewards of this faulty "liberty" in unparalleled abortions, numerous teenage pregnancies, high rates of drug abuse, high divorce rates, and high suicide rate that stuns those who come from the very poorest nations.
Secondly, they guarantee the fundamental rights and freedoms of their citizens. Lastly, the government is accountable to citizens who democratic rights are not only protected but also promoted. Another perspective would argue that ideological perspective of political liberalism should never be embraced or embraced to a minimal extent showing a near complete rejection of liberalism, as effective decision-making is inefficient due to a long legislative process; citizen apathy shows the mediocrity of society. Also security and national unity is threatened by competing interests in society. It is apparent that the ideological perspective of political liberalism should be fully embraced so as to protect the civil liberties of both the majority and minority, to promote the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals, and to ensure the accountability of governments through the promotion and protection of democratic
However, it should be borne in mind that Classical Liberals do not accept any constraints upon the individual that prevent him from damaging himself, physically or mentally, since the individual still remains sovereign. Such a view of freedom means that classical liberals generally advocate the establishment of a minimal or “nightwatch” state, whose role is limited to the protection of individuals from other individuals. Tom Paine described the state as a “necessary evil”. It is necessary in that it establishes order and security and ensures that contracts are carried out. Yet, it is “evil” since it enforces collective will upon society, thus constraining individual freedom.