John Gray argues in, “Two Faces of Liberalism” first that the idea of liberal toleration is an attempt to reach modus vivendi, which is a peaceful coexistence between groups who hold competing values. He states that liberal toleration has two faces. One that seeks to make liberal toleration into a universal value, as the best way to live. The other face is one that believes that in liberal toleration as a belief that, “human beings can flourish in many ways of life,” (Gray 1). Furthermore, in this first chapter, he states his belief in value-pluralism, which he goes into more depth on in chapter two, as well as the idea that some values are, “incommensurable,” or that they cannot be judged against each other. That one value being good doesn’t
Liberalism is an ideology which advocates equality of opportunity for all within the framework of a system of laws. It includes a belief in government as an institution whose primary function is to define and enforce the laws. Furthermore, a Constitution, must be developed not solely by one ruler but by representatives of the elite groups. Therefore, liberalism invariably involves a belief in the need for legislative bodies which represent the influential groups. The Constitution then defines ...
Looking at the United States in 1965, it would seem that the future of the liberal consensus was well entrenched. The anti-war movement was in full swing, civil rights were moving forward, and Johnson's Great Society was working to alleviate the plight of the poor in America. Yet, by 1968 the liberal consensus had fallen apart, which led to the triumph of conservatism with the election of President Reagan in 1980. The question must be posed, how in the course of 15 years did liberal consensus fall apart and conservatism rise to the forefront? What were the decisive factors that caused the fracturing of what seemed to be such a powerful political force? In looking at the period from 1968 to the triumph of Reagan in 1980, America was shaken to the core by the Watergate scandal, the stalling of economic growth, gas shortages, and the Vietnam War. In an era that included the amount of turbulence that the 1970's did, it is not difficult to imagine that conservatism come to power. In this paper I will analyze how the liberal consensus went from one of its high points in 1965 to one of its lows in 1968. From there I will show how conservatism rose to power by the 1980 elections. In doing so, I will look at how factors within the American economy, civil rights issues, and political workings of the United States contributed to the fracturing of the liberal consensus and the rise of conservatism.
As Schwartz introduces the topic of tolerance it seems as if he is going to describe an ideal liberal society with complete tolerance, in every form of the word. Then as he continues onto his forth sentence, this idea is disturbed. He states “And we reserve our strongest condemnation for individuals and institutions that are intolerant.” This shows that tolerance has conditions and limits. Therefore, the question “what are the multi-stages of tolerance, and how does one decide what is tolerable and what is not?” is formed.
Let us begin by noting that any basic social structure faithful to liberal principles of political justice will inevitably prove nonneutral in its effects on many comprehensive doctrines and ways of life. This will be true for politically unreasonable doctrines and ways of life (militantly theocratic doctrines, or ways of life centered on violating the basic rights of others). But it may also prove true for comprehensive doctrines and ways of life more or less unopposed to most liberal political values (perhaps the doctrines or ways of life of certain traditional or anti-modern religious sects).
Political ideas change and adapt their perceptions of the social and political world through the years to cope with all changing aspects of life. Liberalism is no different. It is these changes that allow the idea to maintain its identity. Sometimes it is hard for some political ideas to adapt and change for instance the divine monarchists. Liberalism goes back at least 300years; this means that it has had to change a great deal, the ideas behind the ideology have remained the same though. Liberalism started attacking the monarchy in Britain but soon moved on to social change. This relates back to the heart of liberalism, the concept of the individual. This can be difficult because ‘man is born free, but everywhere in chains’ (- Jean-Jaques Rousseau). Liberalism was a political idea adopted by many countries during the 19th and 20th century and has been the source of many economic and social policies. Liberalism believes that each person should be free to act as they wish, it also believes that each individual deserves respect no matter of race, religion, sexual preference, or social status. Most liberals believe that the government is detrimental to liberalism’s beliefs because it does not allow everyone to be an individual since laws are in place to limit freedom. John Locke advocated this when he attacked the government saying ‘no government allows absolute liberty”. This is true because if no laws were in place then absolute liberty would soon be replaced by anarchy. Liberalism not only influenced equality but it was the basic idea behind the United States of America constitution. This was easy for the American governments to adopt because unlike other countries, it did not have to contend with aristocratic traditions and institutions.
Somewhere near the heart of much contemporary liberal political theory is the claim that if the state restricts an agent's liberty, its restrictions should have some rationale that is defensible to each of those whose liberty is constrained. Liberals are committed to the "requirement that all aspects of the social order should either be made acceptable or be capable of being made acceptable to every last individual." But there are many kinds of claim which are particularly controversial, many about which we expect reasonable disagreement. Coercive policies should not be justified on the basis of such controversial grounds; rather, they should enjoy public justification. That coercive policy should enjoy public justification implies that political actors are subject to various principles of restraint, that is, that they should restrain themselves from supporting policies solely on the basis of excessively controversial grounds. The point of advocating restraint is to achieve a minimal moral conception, a core morality, which is rationally acceptable to all and which provides the ground rules for political association.
The Development of New Liberalism There were many reasons of why New Liberalism developed in the early 20th century. The two main reasons were political pragmatism and compassion for the poor. New Liberalism developed because Lloyd George, Asquith and Churchill believed that the government should help the vulnerable, which could not stand on their own two feet, such as the young, old, sick and unemployed. The other reasons could be Britain’s economic position, the Boer war, the Laissez-faire approach, international competition, work of social researchers such as Booth and Rowntree, socialist ideas and finally municipal socialism.
Jonathan Haidt explores this ideas in his recent book, The Righteous Mind, and documents the differences between the moral code between liberals and conservatives. He discovers that significant differences in the moral codes in conservatives, liberals, and libertarians. (Conservatives value all six of his morality pillars (authority, care, fairness, liberty, loyalty, sanctity): liberals value care, fairness, and liberty, and libertarians value mostly liberty). The dissimilar perspectives lead to dissimilar value judgments over similar things, which in turn creates beliefs that the other side is “evil,” “immoral,” or “perverted.” To add to this issue, religiosity has decreased over the recent decades. Before, the country bounded around a Christian (and mostly Protestant in many areas) identity. In today’s more secular US, this progression augments the differences between political
In essence, liberalism emphasizes equal opportunity so everyone has equal access to goods. For this to work, political theorist John Rawls proposes a monolithic society, one that creates principles bound by his proposition of an original position (a set of political principles that to which every member of society agrees) behind a veil of ignorance (though experiment which freeing man from current attachments). This form of egalitarianism requires people start at the same realms in life and compensate for what disadvantages may have been made either through socially or naturally. Walzer, however, does not agree with this system. He insists that this system is practically impossible since human cannot detach themselves from their history and membership since the choices have been made. The questions he says is not what rational individuals would choose under universalizing conditions but rather what would ...
Liberalism is an ideology and due to the changing views of historical persons, who have each viewed themselves to be Liberals, is difficult to define precisely. There are five agreed defining tenants of Liberalism. The most important of these, percolating through the ideology, is the ‘Importance of the Individual’, and closely interlinked with this is ‘Freedom’, which leads on to the concept of ‘Individual Freedom or liberty’. Liberals believe that humankind is a rational species, and thus ‘Reason’ is a third tenant. Furthermore Liberalism advocates that the principle of ‘Justice’ and Toleration’ are fundamental in the well being of society and each of these aspects relates directly back to the quintessential first tenant. Liberalism, according to Habermas “emphasizes individual freedom from restraint and is usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard; c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties.” As an individualist, rather than a collectivist ideology the individual is placed as the building block of society. J. S. Mill says ...
Paul Krugman, the author of “The Conscience of a Liberal,” argues that the reform needed for the health care system is a challenging and daunting task but needs to be addressed and improved. Krugman debates the morals and economics of the current system and exploits the inequalities the failing system. Similarly, T.R. Reid, the author of “The Healing of America, “argues that a possible way of reforming the problematic health care system is to have a cooperation between the insurance companies and the government in which the government regulates health care and provides insurance to all. On the other hand, Kevin C. Fleming, the author of “High-Priced Pain: What to Expect from a Single-Payer Health Care System,” argues that the single-payer health
Throughout the course, the ideologies that resonated with me most are conservatism and parts of liberalism. I can see how the way I live and view things are similar to the ideologies present in these readings. Furthermore, I can greatly relate to the concepts and definition presented in these readings, as liberalism and conservatism are two major political ideologies not just in the U.S., but also in many other parts of the world. The readings on these subject have challenged today's view of the two ideologies.
Finally, the major theme both sides agree with is that “there exists a transcendent moral order, which we ought to try and conform the ways of society.” (Kirk 7). A big fear for both sides is that liberals hold no absolute morals because “there is a secular faith here in the capacity of the ‘autonomous’ individual to create his own moral order, to perfect his humanity by a process of original ‘creativity’” (Kristol 2. 157). This is problematic because it can lead to arbitrary laws not based on moral grounds; “If society—if the state gives us the rights, it can take them away—they’re not inalienable” (Schaeffer 2). Conservatives hold that there are absolute morals which should guide the way our society is shaped. If there are no absolute morals,
Modern American Liberalism combines social liberalism with support for social justice and a mixed economy and value institutions that defend against economic inequality It is a form of social liberalism developed from progressive ideals. It enhances social liberalism and social progressivism while also supporting the important social issues of todays society. These include addressing inequality, voting rights for minorities, reproductive and other women's rights, support for same-sex marriage, and immigration reform. John F. Kennedy defined a liberal as follows:
In order to enforce it, however, ideal liberalism calls for mass action. This is due to the fact that the government holds power to execute administrative functions of a state, meaning that an individual has minimal bargaining power. All types of liberalism are founded on this aspect of democracy. Examples include classic liberalism and modern American liberalism. Classic liberalism is based on the limitation of state power. (Hansen 1). This type of liberalism recognizes the state as a powerful being and therefore a threat to individual freedom. On the other hand, modern American liberalism advocates for an advancement of social justice and the rights of individuals. (Hansen 1). The common factor between the two is the need for mass action to enforce them. Therefore, in order to protect the rights of individuals, people have to take it upon themselves to voice concern for violation and to address the risks to their