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.
However, in my opinion, individual freedom and social equality are equally important, and a government should not promote one of them and suppress the other. In fact, they can be balanced in a liberal democratic system, due to the fact that this system is very flexible and allows changes. Liberal democracies were born mainly for two reasons: limiting the arbitrary power of a state and protect the individual freedoms of every citizen with a judicial system. Thus, the main aim of a liberal democratic regime is to promote freedom. Freedom not in
John Rawls and Political Liberalism Describe in detail the role that the ideas of “overlapping consensus” and “comprehensive doctrine” play in Rawl’s theoretical answer to the fundamental question of Political Liberalism: “How is it possible for there to exist over time a just and stable society of free and equal citizens, who remain profoundly divided by reasonable religious, philosophical, and moral doctrines?” (Rawls 4). More specifically, how do these concepts help to preserve the traditional liberal values of freedom and equality? And do these concepts help to preserve stability within a pluralistic society? John Rawls book, Political Liberalism, addresses the need for the reformation of the unjust democratic constitutional regime. According to Rawls, “there is at present no agreement on the way the basic institutions of constitutional democracy should be arranged if they are to satisfy the fair terms of cooperation between citizens regarded as free and equal,” (Rawls 4).
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.
John Stuart mill's essay "on liberalism and considerations of representative government" is often considered as the first systematic explication and defense of liberal democracy. A prodemocrat he welcomed the progress in equality, yet identified with toqueville's warning about the tyranny of the majority. In particular he agreed with the claims that majority mass culture stifles free and informed thought and that an omnipotent majority mat oppress a minority. Mill's essay in large may be read as a sustained effort to confront this problem by the straightforward method of combining democracy and liberalism. With the emergence of large democratic nations, he believed there was a need for the people to `limit their power over themselves', and seeks to identify the principles according to which people should set limitations.
Naturally, there are different variants of liberalism that may argue on the extent the government is allowed to interfere; classical liberalism strongly believes in the minimalism of the state while modern liberalism recognises the state as an active participant in the economy (Schapper, 2018). However more broadly, liberalism is essentially about ensuring and trusting that the government will respect the people’s individual freedom while there are perhaps more radical variants such as the one of libertarianism which is about considering individual freedom as a given due to as little government involvement as possible (Johnson,
Like Rauch says, people must not try to eradicate hate speech, rather criticize and try to correct it. There is no wrong in standing up for yourself but there is an enormous wrong in limiting speech, hateful or not. V. Conclusion If it wasn’t already obvious, I believe that Altman is wrong. I believe that strengthening the proverbial skin of society is more important that pitting it’s individuals against each other on issues of what’s ok and not ok to say. Altman appeals to his own morals in which giving individuals the equality that is due to them and the right to not be treated as a lesser member of society are of ultimate importance.
Nicholas H. (TITLE) The ideological perspective reflected in the source is supportive of political liberalism. Liberalism is a philosophy founded on the beliefs of liberty and equality. These qualities are clearly represented in the source examples being “guard the freedom of ideas at all costs” as well as “respect and preserve the rights of the people.” It also expresses concerns for authoritarian rule, “be alert that dictators have always played on the natural human tendency to blame other and to oversimplify.” Advocates of political liberalism rejected the absolutism of the past, in which individuals served the collective interests of the state, and instead, engaged in a political struggle for less authoritarian rule. These advocates displayed
I will confine my attention to the liberal principle of tolerance: the coercive powers of the society are limited by a commitment to the broadest toleration of rival religious and moral conceptions consistent with the protection of crucial social interests such as preventing harm to others and preserving institutions of law and government. The state is thus to be neutral in the religious and moral wars that rage over the point of human life and the detailed ways of life worthy of human beings; but, of course, the state must keep the peace between one ... ... middle of paper ... ...ral view as the sufficient definition of the principals [sic] of liberal democracy, this is not because I don't see its force. The political issue is, indeed, quite distinct from that of the nature of moral theory." Sources of the Self, p. 532, note 60. (5) Charles Taylor, Hegel and Modern Society, pp.
We have seen in this chapter that liberalism refers to a broad array of related ideas and theories of government that tend to consider individual liberty and equality of opportunity to be amongst the most important political goals. Different forms of liberalism may promote very different policies, but liberals are generally united by their support for a number of principles. These principles include: freedom of conscience and speech; limitations on the power of government; adherence to the rule of law; the free exchange of ideas and a transparent system of government. In the liberal perception, it is the individual citizen that truly represents the basis of law and society and therefore public institutions should exist to further the ends of individuals, without showing favour to those in higher social ranks. Thus, from a political standpoint, liberalism tend to stress the social contract ideal, under which citizens make the laws and agree to abide by those laws.