1.
Liberalism
–
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Liberalism first became a political movement during the Age of Enlightenment. Liberalism rejected the social and political norms of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy. The 17th-century philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a philosophical tradition. Locke argued that man has a natural right to life, liberty and property. Liberals opposed traditional conservatism and sought to replace absolutism in government with representative democracy, prominent revolutionaries in the Glorious Revolution, the American Revolution, and the French Revolution used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of what they saw as tyrannical rule. Liberalism started to spread rapidly especially after the French Revolution, the 19th century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe, South America, and North America. During the 20th century, liberal ideas spread even further as liberal democracies found themselves on the side in both world wars. In Europe and North America, the establishment of social liberalism became a key component in the expansion of the welfare state, today, liberal parties continue to wield power and influence throughout the world. Words such as liberal, liberty, libertarian, and libertine all trace their history to the Latin liber, which means free. One of the first recorded instances of the word occurs in 1375. The words early connection with the education of a medieval university soon gave way to a proliferation of different denotations and connotations. In 16th century England, liberal could have positive or negative attributes in referring to someones generosity or indiscretion, in Much Ado About Nothing, Shakespeare wrote of a liberal villaine who hath. confest his vile encounters. With the rise of the Enlightenment, the word acquired decisively more positive undertones, being defined as free from narrow prejudice in 1781, in 1815, the first use of the word liberalism appeared in English. In Spain, the Liberales, the first group to use the label in a political context. From 1820 to 1823, during the Trienio Liberal, King Ferdinand VII was compelled by the liberales to swear to uphold the Constitution, by the middle of the 19th century, liberal was used as a politicised term for parties and movements worldwide. Over time, the meaning of the word began to diverge in different parts of the world. According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, In the United States, liberalism is associated with the policies of the New Deal programme of the Democratic administration of Pres
2.
History of liberalism
–
Liberalism is the belief in freedom and equal rights generally associated with such thinkers as John Locke and Montesquieu. A few years later, the French Revolution overthrew the hereditary aristocracy, with the liberty, equality, fraternity. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, Liberalism fully exploded as a comprehensive movement against the old order during the French Revolution, which influenced later events on the European continent and around the world. Isolated strands of thought that had existed in Western philosophy since the Ancient Greeks. Disputes between the Parliament and King Charles I over political supremacy sparked a civil war in the 1640s, which culminated in Charles execution. No man hath power over my rights and liberties, and I over no mans, sidney firmly rejected the Filmers reactionary principles and argued that the subjects of the monarch were entitled by right to share in the government through advice and counsel. These ideas were first drawn together and systematized as an ideology, by the English philosopher John Locke. His influential Two Treatises, the text of liberal ideology. And this is that, and that only, which did or could give beginning to any government in the world. Locke had other intellectual opponents besides Hobbes, in the First Treatise, Locke aimed his guns first and foremost at one of the doyens of 17th century English conservative philosophy, Robert Filmer. Locke disagreed so thoroughly and obsessively with Filmer, however, that the First Treatise is almost a sentence-by-sentence refutation of Patriarcha, reinforcing his respect for consensus, Locke argued that conjugal society is made up by a voluntary compact between men and women. Locke maintained that the grant of dominion in Genesis was not to men over women, as Filmer believed, Locke also originated the concept of the separation of church and state. For Locke, this created a right in the liberty of conscience. He also formulated a general defence for religious toleration in his Letters Concerning Toleration, Locke was also influenced by the liberal ideas of Presbyterian politician and poet John Milton, who was a staunch advocate of freedom in all its forms. Milton argued for disestablishment as the effective way of achieving broad toleration. Rather than force a mans conscience, government should recognise the persuasive force of the gospel, as assistant to Oliver Cromwell, Milton also took part in drafting a constitution of the Independents that strongly stressed the equality of all humans as a consequence of democratic tendencies. His central argument was that the individual is capable of using reason to distinguish right from wrong. To be able to exercise this right, everyone must have unlimited access to the ideas of his men in “a free and open encounter
3.
Civil and political rights
–
Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals freedom from infringement by governments, social organizations, and private individuals. They ensure ones ability to participate in the civil and political life of the society, Civil and political rights form the original and main part of international human rights. They comprise the first portion of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the phrase civil rights is a translation of Latin ius civis. Roman citizens could be either free or servile, but they all had rights in law. After the Edict of Milan in 313, these included the freedom of religion. Roman legal doctrine was lost during the Middle Ages, but claims of rights could still be made based on religious doctrine. According to the leaders of Ketts Rebellion, all men may be made free. In the 17th century, English common law judge Sir Edward Coke revived the idea of rights based on citizenship by arguing that Englishmen had historically enjoyed such rights, the Parliament of England adopted the English Bill of Rights in 1689. The Virginia Declaration of Rights, by George Mason and James Madison, was adopted in 1776, the Virginia declaration is the direct ancestor and model for the U. S. Bill of Rights. The removal by legislation of a civil right constitutes a civil disability, in early 19th century Britain, the phrase civil rights most commonly referred to the issue of such legal discrimination against Catholics. In the House of Commons support for civil rights was divided, the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 restored their civil rights. In the 1860s, Americans adapted this usage to newly freed blacks, congress enacted civil rights acts in 1866,1871,1875,1957,1960,1964,1968, and 1991. Marshall notes that civil rights were among the first to be recognized and codified, followed later by political rights, in many countries, they are constitutional rights and are included in a bill of rights or similar document. They are also defined in human rights instruments, such as the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Civil and political rights need not be codified to be protected, although most democracies worldwide do have formal written guarantees of civil, Civil rights are considered to be natural rights. Thomas Jefferson wrote in his A Summary View of the Rights of British America that a free people their rights as derived from the laws of nature, the question of to whom civil and political rights apply is a subject of controversy. According to political scientist Salvador Santino F. Regilme Jr. Custom also plays a role, the United States Declaration of Independence states that people have unalienable rights including Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. It is considered by some that the purpose of government is the protection of life. Ideas of self-ownership and cognitive liberty affirm rights to choose the food one eats, the one takes
4.
Democracy
–
Democracy, in modern usage, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. Democracy is sometimes referred to as rule of the majority, Democracy was originally conceived in Classical Greece, where political representatives were chosen by a jury from amongst the male citizens, rich and poor. The English word dates to the 16th century, from the older Middle French, in the 5th century BC, to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens, the term is an antonym to aristocracy, meaning rule of an elite. While theoretically these definitions are in opposition, in practice the distinction has been blurred historically, the political system of Classical Athens, for example, granted democratic citizenship to free men and excluded slaves and women from political participation. In 1906, Finland became the first government to harald a more inclusive democracy at the national level. Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is held by an individual, as in an absolute monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders, No consensus exists on how to define democracy, but legal equality, political freedom and rule of law have been identified as important characteristics. These principles are reflected in all eligible citizens being equal before the law, other uses of democracy include that of direct democracy. In some countries, notably in the United Kingdom which originated the Westminster system, in the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute. In India, parliamentary sovereignty is subject to the Constitution of India which includes judicial review, though the term democracy is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles also are applicable to private organisations. Majority rule is listed as a characteristic of democracy. Hence, democracy allows for political minorities to be oppressed by the tyranny of the majority in the absence of legal protections of individual or group rights. An essential part of a representative democracy is competitive elections that are substantively and procedurally fair, i. e. just. It has also suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of all voters to participate freely and fully in the life of their society. While representative democracy is sometimes equated with the form of government. Many democracies are constitutional monarchies, such as the United Kingdom, the term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity. The word comes from demos, common people and kratos, strength, led by Cleisthenes, Athenians established what is generally held as the first democracy in 508–507 BC
5.
Liberal democracy
–
Liberal democracy is a liberal political ideology and a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of classical liberalism. It is also called western democracy, to define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either formally written or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world, a liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms, it may be a constitutional monarchy or a republic. It may have a system, a presidential system, or a semi-presidential system. Liberal democracies usually have universal suffrage, granting all citizens the right to vote regardless of race. Historically, however, some regarded as liberal democracies have had a more limited franchise. There may also be such as voters being required to register before being allowed to vote. The decisions made through elections are not by all of the citizens. The liberal democratic constitution defines the character of the state. The purpose of a constitution is seen as a limit on the authority of the government. Liberal democracy emphasises the separation of powers, an independent judiciary, Liberal democracies are likely to emphasise the importance of the state being a Rechtsstaat, i. e. a state that follows the principle of rule of law. Governmental authority is exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedure. In practice, democracies do have limits on certain freedoms, there are various legal limitations such as copyright and laws against defamation. There may be limits on speech, on attempts to undermine human rights. In the United States more than in Europe, during the Cold War, now they are more commonly applied to organisations perceived as promoting actual terrorism or the incitement of group hatred. Examples include anti-terrorism legislation, the shutting down of Hezbollah satellite broadcasts, critics claim that these limitations may go too far and that there may be no due and fair judicial process. The common justification for these limits is that they are necessary to guarantee the existence of democracy, for example, allowing free speech for those advocating mass murder undermines the right to life and security. Opinion is divided on how far democracy can extend to include the enemies of democracy in the democratic process, if relatively small numbers of people are excluded from such freedoms for these reasons, a country may still be seen as a liberal democracy
6.
Egalitarianism
–
Egalitarianism – or equalitarianism – is a trend of thought that favors equality for all people. Egalitarian doctrines maintain that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or social status, some sources define egalitarianism as the point of view that equality reflects the natural state of humanity. Common forms of egalitarianism include political and philosophical, the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, as the rest of the Constitution, in its operative language uses the term person, stating, for example, that. Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, an example of this form is the Tunisian Constitution of 2014 which provides that men and women shall be equal in their rights and duties. The motto Liberté, égalité, fraternité was used during the French Revolution and is used as an official motto of the French government. The 1789 Rights of Man and of the Citizen French Constitution is framed also with this basis in rights of men. This was satirized by Olympe de Gouges during this time with her Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen. The Declaration of Independence of the United States is an example of an assertion of equality of men, John Locke is sometimes considered the founder of this form. Many state constitutions in the US also use rights of man rather than rights of person. See, e. g. the Kentucky State Constitution, at a cultural level, egalitarian theories have developed in sophistication and acceptance during the past two hundred years. Several egalitarian ideas enjoy wide support among intellectuals and in the populations of many countries. Whether any of these ideas have been implemented in practice, however. A position of opposition to egalitarianism is antiegalitarianism, although the economist Karl Marx is sometimes mistaken to be an egalitarian, Marx eschewed normative theorizing on moral principles altogether. Marx did, however, have a theory of the evolution of moral principles in relation to economic systems. The American economist John Roemer has put forth a new perspective of equality, Roemer concludes that egalitarians must reject socialism as it is classically defined in order for equality to be realized. Sikhism The Sikh faith was founded upon egalitarian principles, going beyond most faiths to provide equality not only based upon race, within the wide range of Christianity, there are dissenting views to this from opposing groups, some of which are Complementarians and Patriarchalists. There are also those who may say that, whilst the Bible encourages equality, it also encourages law and order and these ideas are considered by some to be contrary to the ideals of egalitarianism. Various Christian groups have attempted to hold to this view and develop Christian oriented communities, in Acts, chapter 4, members of the early Christian community sell their possessions, give the proceeds to a common fund overseen by the disciples, then take according to their need
7.
Free market
–
Another view considers systems with significant market power, inequality of bargaining power, or information asymmetry to be less than free. It is a result of a need being, then the need being met, prices for goods and services are set freely by the forces of supply and demand and are allowed to reach their point of equilibrium without intervention by government policy. Others believe regulation might be part of a market, if the regulation is necessary to control significant market power, inequality of bargaining power. The latter view implies a free market is not necessarily deregulated, although some of those with the former belief speak of free markets, friedrich Hayek argued in The Pure Theory of Capital that the goal is the preservation of the unique information contained in the price itself. The definition of free market has been disputed and made complex by collectivist political philosophers, during the marginal revolution, subjective value theory was rediscovered. Various forms of socialism based on free markets have existed since the 19th century, early notable socialist proponents of free markets include Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Benjamin Tucker, and the Ricardian socialists. These economists believed that free markets and voluntary exchange could not exist within the exploitative conditions of capitalism. Advocates of free-market socialism such as Jaroslav Vanek argue that free markets are not possible under conditions of private ownership of productive property. Socialists also point out that free market capitalism leads to excessive disparities in the distribution of income, corporate monopolies run rampant in free markets, with endless agency over the consumer. Thus, free market capitalism desires government regulation of markets to prevent social instability and this implies that economic rents, i. e. profits generated from lack of perfect competition, must be reduced or eliminated as much as possible through free competition. Economic theory suggests the returns to land and other resources are economic rents that cannot be reduced in such a way because of their perfect inelastic supply. Some economic thinkers emphasize the need to share those rents as a requirement for a well functioning market. It is suggested this would eliminate the need for regular taxes that have a negative effect on trade as well as release land. Two features that improve the competition and free market mechanisms, winston Churchill supported this view by his statement Land is the mother of all monopoly. The American economist and social philosopher Henry George, the most famous proponent of this thesis, followers of his ideas are often called Georgists or Geoists and Geolibertarians. Léon Walras, one of the founders of the neoclassical economics who helped formulate the general theory, had a very similar view. He argued that competition could only be realized under conditions of state ownership of natural resources. Additionally, income taxes could be eliminated because the state would receive income to public services through owning such resources and enterprises
8.
Free trade
–
Free trade is one of the most debated topics in economics of the 19th, 20th, and 21st century. Arguments over free trade can be divided into economic, moral, the World Trade Organization was created to open up markets and promote international trade based on the Free Trade paradigm. The WTO creates and monitors agreements to reduce trade barriers, and arbitrates in disputes over foreign market access and its definition of Free Trade is trade on a level playing field, so that the unlimited exchange of goods between countries is not necessarily Free. Therefore, any import restriction makes the domestic society as a whole worse off than it would be with unlimited imports, the artificial handicap of a foreign subsidy seems much less just to local production than advantages deriving from geography, natural resources, or native skill. Electorates often prefer fairplay to Utilitarian considerations, if trade barriers are already low, the threat of a trade war of tit-for-tat tariff increases may reduce the temptation for either partner in bilateral trade to raise import barriers. It would tend to decrease the power and revenue flowing to government bureaucrats. In the history of trade, two types of arguments have been advanced in favor of allowing purchases from abroad, and free trade in the broader sense. One set of arguments for free trade could be classified as moral arguments listed below, another set of arguments is essentially economic, that free trade will make society more prosperous. These are mostly technical arguments from the discipline of economics, starting especially with Smiths The Wealth of Nations, the 18th and 19th century intellectuals who backed free trade rarely did so under the rubric of increasing material wealth. In many cases this was given as the least important reason for free trade, rather, they argued that international society would be improved by increased commerce. Some of these, and later, sociopolitical arguments are listed here, adam Smith thought that protectionism against free trade was a scam on the public on behalf of producers, carried out in the name of nationalism. Even if overall economic interests had not been harmed by tariffs, classical economic analysis shows that free trade increases the global level of output because free trade permits specialization among countries. Specialization allows nations to devote their resources to the production of the particular goods. The benefits of specialization, coupled with economies of scale, increase the production possibility frontier. An increase in the production possibility frontier indicates that the absolute quantity of goods. Not only are the quantity of goods and services higher. Free trade policies are often associated with general laissez-faire economic politics and parties, voluntary exchange, by virtue of its voluntary nature, is assumed to be beneficial to the parties involved—why else would they engage in the exchange. Thus, the restriction of voluntary exchange restricts commerce and ultimately the accumulation of wealth in the absence of real-world externalities such as infant industry protection, here is the production possibilities frontier for a fictional country, Country A
9.
Freedom of the press
–
Freedom of the press or freedom of the media through various mediums, such as electronic media and published materials. Wherever such freedom exists mostly implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state, with respect to governmental information, any government may distinguish which materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public. Many governments are subject to sunshine laws or freedom of information legislation that are used to define the ambit of national interest. This philosophy is usually accompanied by legislation ensuring various degrees of freedom of research, publishing. The depth to which laws are entrenched in a countrys legal system can go as far down as its constitution. The concept of freedom of speech is often covered by the laws as freedom of the press, thereby giving equal treatment to spoken. This idea was famously summarized by the 20th century American journalist, A. J. Liebling, Freedom of the press gives the printer or publisher exclusive control over what the publisher chooses to publish, including the right to refuse to print anything for any reason. If the author cannot reach a agreement with a publisher to produce the authors work. CPJ shares information on breaking cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the International Freedom of Expression Exchange, CPJ also tracks journalist deaths and detentions. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case, researchers independently investigate, so the concept of independence of the press is one closely linked with the concept of press freedom. Every year, Reporters Without Borders establishes a ranking of countries in terms of their freedom of the press, the survey asks questions about direct attacks on journalists and the media as well as other indirect sources of pressure against the free press, such as non-governmental groups. RWB is careful to note that the only deals with press freedom. In 2016, the countries where press was the most free were Finland, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and New Zealand, followed by Costa Rica, Switzerland, Sweden, Ireland and Jamaica. The country with the least degree of freedom was Eritrea, followed by North Korea, Turkmenistan, Syria, China, Vietnam. The problem with media in India, the worlds largest democracy, is enormous, India doesnt have a model for a democratic press. The report written by Ravi S Jha says Indian journalism, with its lack of freedom and self-regulation, cannot be trusted now—it is currently known for manipulation, levels of freedom are scored on a scale from 1 to 100. Depending on the basics, the nations are then classified as Free, Partly Free, in 2009 Iceland, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Sweden topped the list with North Korea, Turkmenistan, Myanmar, Libya, Eritrea at the bottom. According to Reporters Without Borders, more than a third of the people live in countries where there is no press freedom
10.
Freedom of religion
–
It also includes the freedom to change ones religion or belief. Freedom of religion is considered by people and most of the nations to be a fundamental human right. Historically, freedom of religion has been used to refer to the tolerance of different theological systems of belief, each of these have existed to varying degrees. Compare examples of individual freedom in Italy or the Muslim tradition of dhimmis, in Antiquity, a syncretic point of view often allowed communities of traders to operate under their own customs. When street mobs of separate quarters clashed in a Hellenistic or Roman city, Cyrus the Great established the Achaemenid Empire ca.550 BC, and initiated a general policy of permitting religious freedom throughout the empire, documenting this on the Cyrus Cylinder. Some of the exceptions have been in regions where one of the revealed religions has been in a position of power, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity. This was the core for resentment and the persecution of early Christian communities, Freedom of religious worship was established in the Buddhist Maurya Empire of ancient India by Ashoka the Great in the 3rd century BC, which was encapsulated in the Edicts of Ashoka. Greek-Jewish clashes at Cyrene in 73 AD and 117 AD and in Alexandria in 115 AD provide examples of cities as scenes of tumult. Dhimmis were allowed to operate their own courts following their own systems in cases that did not involve other religious groups. ISIS re-established the punitive jizya tax and forbade Christians in Syria from building places of worship, ringing bells, wearing crosses or criticizing Islam, ancient Jews fleeing from persecution in their homeland 2,500 years ago settled in India and never faced anti-Semitism. Freedom of religion edicts have been written during Ashoka the Greats reign in the 3rd century BC. Freedom to practise, preach and propagate any religion is a right in Modern India. Most major religious festivals of the communities are included in the list of national holidays. Although India is an 80% Hindu country, India is a state without any state religions. Many scholars and intellectuals believe that Indias predominant religion, Hinduism, has long been a most tolerant religion, rajni Kothari, founder of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies has written, is a country built on the foundations of a civilisation that is fundamentally non-religious. The Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader in exile, said that religious tolerance of Aryabhoomi, not only Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism which are the native religions but also Christianity and Islam have flourished here. Religious tolerance is inherent in Indian tradition, the Dalai Lama said, Freedom of religion in the Indian subcontinent is exemplified by the reign of King Piyadasi. One of King Ashokas main concerns was to reform governmental institutes and exercise moral principles in his attempt to create a just and humane society
11.
Freedom of speech
–
Freedom of speech is the right to articulate ones opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship, or societal sanction. The term freedom of expression is used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas. The right to freedom of expression includes the right to take, concepts of freedom of speech can be found in early human rights documents. Englands Bill of Rights 1689 legally established the right of freedom of speech in Parliament which is still in effect. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, adopted during the French Revolution in 1789, specifically affirmed freedom of speech as an inalienable right. The Declaration provides for freedom of expression in Article 11, which states that, The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, Today, freedom of speech, or the freedom of expression, is recognized in international and regional human rights law. This means that the protection of freedom of speech as a right not only the content. The right to freedom of speech and expression is related to other rights. As a general freedom of expression may not limit the right to privacy, as well as the honor. However greater latitude is given when criticism of public figures is involved, the right to freedom of expression is particularly important for media, which plays a special role as the bearer of the general right to freedom of expression for all. However, freedom of the press is not necessarily enabling freedom of speech, lichtenberg argues that freedom of the press is simply a form of property right summed up by the principle no money, no voice. Freedom of speech is understood to be fundamental in a democracy, the norms on limiting freedom of expression mean that public debate may not be completely suppressed even in times of emergency. One of the most notable proponents of the link between freedom of speech and democracy is Alexander Meiklejohn and he argues that the concept of democracy is that of self-government by the people. For such a system to work an informed electorate is necessary, in order to be appropriately knowledgeable, there must be no constraints on the free flow of information and ideas. According to Meiklejohn, democracy will not be true to its essential ideal if those in power are able to manipulate the electorate by withholding information, Meiklejohn acknowledges that the desire to manipulate opinion can stem from the motive of seeking to benefit society. However, he argues, choosing manipulation negates, in its means, eric Barendt has called this defense of free speech on the grounds of democracy probably the most attractive and certainly the most fashionable free speech theory in modern Western democracies. Emerson expanded on this defense when he argued that freedom of speech helps to provide a balance between stability and change, Freedom of speech acts as a safety valve to let off steam when people might otherwise be bent on revolution
12.
Internationalism (politics)
–
Internationalism is a political principle which transcends nationalism and advocates a greater political or economic cooperation among nations and people. In 19th-century UK there was a liberal internationalist strand of political thought epitomized by Richard Cobden, Cobden and Bright were against the protectionist Corn Laws and in a speech at Covent Garden on September 28,1843 Cobden outlined his utopian brand of internationalism, Free Trade. Cobden believed that Free Trade would pacify the world by interdependence, a belief in the idea of the moral law and an inherent goodness in human nature also inspired their faith in internationalism. One of the first international organisations in the world was the International Workingmens Association, in this sense, the socialist understanding of internationalism is closely related to the concept of international solidarity. From this perspective, it is in the ruling class interest to promote nationalism in order to hide the inherent class conflicts at play within a given society, therefore, socialists see nationalism as a form of ideological control arising from a societys given mode of economic production. The First, Second, Third, and Fourth Internationals were socialist political groupings which sought to advance workers revolution across the globe and achieve international socialism. Socialist internationalism is anti-imperialist, and therefore supports the liberation of peoples from all forms of colonialism and foreign domination, therefore, socialists have often aligned themselves politically with anti-colonial independence movements, and actively opposed the exploitation of one country by another. In socialist theory, world peace can only come once economic competition has been ended, in proportion as the antagonism between classes within the nation vanishes, the hostility of one nation to another will come to an end. The idea was reiterated later by Lenin and advanced as the policy of the Bolshevik party during World War I. But our attitude towards war is different from that of the bourgeois pacifists. Figures such as Karl Marx and anarchist revolutionary Mikhail Bakunin would play prominent roles in the First International, one faction, with Marx as the figurehead, argued that workers and radicals must work within parliaments in order to win political supremacy and create a workers government. The Socialist International, known as the Second International, was founded in 1889 after the disintegration of the International Workingmens Association, unlike the First International, it was a federation of socialist political parties from various countries, including both reformist and revolutionary groupings. The parties of the Second International were the first socialist parties to win support among the working class and have representatives elected to parliaments. Ostensibly committed to peace and anti-imperialism, the International Socialist Congress held its meeting in Basel, Switzerland in 1912. This betrayal led the few anti-war delegates left within the Second International to organize the International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald, known as the Zimmerwald Conference, its purpose was to formulate a platform of opposition to the war. The conference was unable to reach agreement on all points, but ultimately was able to publish the Zimmerwald Manifesto, the most left-wing and stringently internationalist delegates at the conference were organized around Lenin and the Russian Social Democrats, and known as the Zimmerwald Left. The Zimmerwald Left resolutions urged all socialists who were committed to the internationalist principles of socialism to struggle against the war and it was an association of communist political parties from throughout the world dedicated to proletarian internationalism and the revolutionary overthrow of the world bourgeoisie. A variety of still active left-wing political organizations claim to be the successors of Trotskys original Fourth International
13.
Liberty
–
Liberty, in philosophy, involves free will as contrasted with determinism. In politics, liberty consists of the social and political freedoms to all community members are entitled. In theology, liberty is freedom from the effects of sin, spiritual servitude, as such, the exercise of liberty is subject to capability and limited by the rights of others. Philosophers from earliest times have considered the question of liberty, according to Thomas Hobbes, a free man is he that in those things which by his strength and wit he is able to do is not hindered to do what he hath the will to do. John Locke rejected that definition of liberty, while not specifically mentioning Hobbes, he attacks Sir Robert Filmer who had the same definition. According to Locke, In the state of nature, liberty consists of being free from any power on Earth. People are not under the will or lawmaking authority of others but have only the law of nature for their rule, in political society, liberty consists of being under no other lawmaking power except that established by consent in the commonwealth. People are free from the dominion of any will or legal restraint apart from that enacted by their own constituted lawmaking power according to the trust put in it. Thus, freedom is not as Sir Robert Filmer defines it, A liberty for everyone to do what he likes, to live as he pleases, freedom is constrained by laws in both the state of nature and political society. Freedom of nature is to be no other restraint but the law of nature. Freedom of people under government is to be under no restraint apart from standing rules to live by that are common to everyone in the society and made by the lawmaking power established in it. Persons have a right or liberty to follow their own will in all things that the law has not prohibited and not be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, and arbitrary wills of others. John Stuart Mill, in his work, On Liberty, was the first to recognize the difference between liberty as the freedom to act and liberty as the absence of coercion, the modern concept of political liberty has its origins in the Greek concepts of freedom and slavery. To be free, to the Greeks, was to not have a master and that was the original Greek concept of freedom. It is closely linked with the concept of democracy, as Aristotle put it, This, another is that a man should live as he likes. This, they say, is the privilege of a freeman, since, on the other hand and this applied only to free men. In Athens, for instance, women could not vote or hold office and were legally and socially dependent on a male relative, the populations of the Persian Empire enjoyed some degree of freedom. Citizens of all religions and ethnic groups were given the rights and had the same freedom of religion, women had the same rights as men
14.
Natural and legal rights
–
Natural and legal rights are two types of rights. Legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by a legal system. Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any culture or government. The concept of law is closely related to the concept of natural rights. Conversely, the concept of rights is used by others to challenge the legitimacy of all such establishments. Natural rights, in particular, are considered beyond the authority of any government or international body to dismiss, the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an important legal instrument enshrining one conception of natural rights into international soft law. Natural rights were traditionally viewed as exclusively negative rights, whereas human rights also comprise positive rights, even on a natural rights conception of human rights, the two terms may not be synonymous. The proposition that animals have natural rights is one that gained the interest of philosophers and legal scholars in the 20th century, the existence of natural rights has been asserted by different individuals on different premises, such as a priori philosophical reasoning or religious principles. For example, Immanuel Kant claimed to derive natural rights through reason alone, the United States Declaration of Independence, meanwhile, is based upon the self-evident truth that all men are. Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, likewise, different philosophers and statesmen have designed different lists of what they believe to be natural rights, almost all include the right to life and liberty as the two highest priorities. H. L. A. Hart argued that if there are any rights at all, there must be the right to liberty, for all the others would depend upon this. T. H. Green argued that “if there are things as rights at all, then, there must be a right to life and liberty, or, to put it more properly to free life. ”John Locke emphasized life. However, despite Lockes influential defense of the right of revolution, leaders are seen as representative of God on earth, but they deserve allegiance only as long as they have farr, a kind of divine blessing that they must earn by moral behavior. The Stoics held that no one was a slave by nature, of fundamental importance to the development of the idea of natural rights was the emergence of the idea of natural human equality. Carlyle notes, There is no change in theory so startling in its completeness as the change from the theory of Aristotle to the later philosophical view represented by Cicero. We think that this cannot be better exemplified than with regard to the theory of the equality of human nature, charles H. Cicero argues in De Legibus that we are born for Justice, and that right is based, not upon opinions, but upon Nature. Centuries later, the Stoic doctrine that the part cannot be delivered into bondage re-emerged in the Reformation doctrine of liberty of conscience. Martin Luther wrote, Furthermore, every man is responsible for his own faith, preservation of the natural rights to life, liberty, and property was claimed as justification for the rebellion of the American colonies
15.
Private property
–
Private property is a legal designation for the ownership of property by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is distinguishable from public property, which is owned by an entity, and from collective property. Private property is distinguished from personal property, which refers to property for personal use. Private property is a concept defined and enforced by a countrys political system. Prior to the 18th century, English-speakers generally used the property in reference to land ownership. In England, property did not have a legal definition until the 17th century, private property as commercial property was invented with the great European trading companies of the 17th century. John Locke, in arguing against supporters of monarchy, conceptualized property as a natural right that God had not bestowed exclusively on the monarchy. Influenced by the rise of mercantilism, Locke argued that property was antecedent to. Locke distinguished between common property, by which he meant open-access property, and property in goods and producer-goods. His chief argument for property in land was improved land management, smith confined natural rights to liberty and life. Smith further argued that government could not exist without property. Economic liberals consider private property to be essential for the construction of a prosperous society and they believe private ownership of land ensures the land will be put to productive use and its value protected by the landowner. If the owners must pay property taxes, this forces the owners to maintain a productive output from the land to keep taxes current, private property also attaches a monetary value to land, which can be used to trade or as collateral. Private property thus is an important part of capitalization within the economy, socialist economists are critical of private property as socialism aims to substitute private property in the means of production for social ownership or public property. Socialists generally favor social ownership either to eliminate the distinctions between owners and workers, and as a component of the development of a post-capitalist economic system. According to Mises, this problem would make rational socialist calculation impossible, in Marxian economics and socialist politics, there is distinction between private property and personal property. Prior to the 18th century, private property usually referred to land ownership, private property in the means of production is criticized by socialists, who use the term in a different meaning. The socialist critique of private ownership is heavily influenced by the Marxian analysis of capitalist property forms as part of its critique of alienation and exploitation in capitalism
16.
Rule of law
–
The rule of law is the legal principle that law should govern a nation, as opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions of individual government officials. It primarily refers to the influence and authority of law within society, particularly as a constraint upon behaviour, including behaviour of government officials. The phrase can be traced back to 16th century Britain, John Locke defined freedom under the rule of law as follows, “Freedom is constrained by laws in both the state of nature and political society. Freedom of nature is to be no other restraint but the law of nature. Freedom of people under government is to be under no restraint apart from standing rules to live by that are common to everyone in the society and made by the lawmaking power established in it. Persons have a right or liberty to follow their own will in all things that the law has not prohibited and not be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, and arbitrary wills of others. ”The rule of law was further popularized in the 19th century by British jurist A. V. Dicey. The concept, if not the phrase, was familiar to ancient philosophers such as Aristotle, Rule of law implies that every citizen is subject to the law, including lawmakers themselves. In this sense, it stands in contrast to an autocracy, dictatorship, Government based upon the rule of law is called nomocracy. In the West, the ancient Greeks initially regarded the best form of government as rule by the best men, Plato advocated a benevolent monarchy ruled by an idealized philosopher king, who was above the law. More than Plato attempted to do, Aristotle flatly opposed letting the highest officials wield power beyond guarding and serving the laws, according to the Roman statesman Cicero, We are all servants of the laws in order that we may be free. During the Roman Republic, controversial magistrates might be put on trial when their terms of office expired, under the Roman Empire, the sovereign was personally immune, but those with grievances could sue the treasury. In contrast, the Huang-Lao school of Daoism rejected legal positivism in favor of a law that even the ruler would be subject to. There has recently been an effort to reevaluate the influence of the Bible on Western constitutional law, according to Professor Bernard M. Levinson, This legislation was so utopian in its own time that it seems never to have been implemented. The Deuteronomic social vision may have influenced opponents of the right of kings. In Islamic jurisprudence rule of law was formulated in the century, so that no official could claim to be above the law. However, this was not a reference to law. Alfred the Great, Anglo-Saxon King of the 9th century, reformed the law of his kingdom and created a law code with the biblical Mosaic law and he ruled that justice had to be equal between people, whether rich or poor, friends or enemies. This was likely inspired from Leviticus 19, You shall do no injustice in judgment and you shall not be partial to the poor, nor defer to the great
17.
Secularism
–
Secularism is the principle of the separation of government institutions and persons mandated to represent the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. Another manifestation of secularism is the view that public activities and decisions, especially political ones, the purposes and arguments in support of secularism vary widely. In European laicism, it has argued that secularism is a movement toward modernization. This type of secularism, on a social or philosophical level, has occurred while maintaining an official state church or other state support of religion. Within countries as well, differing political movements support secularism for varying reasons, the term secularism was first used by the British writer George Jacob Holyoake in 1851. Although the term was new, the notions of freethought on which it was based had existed throughout history. Holyoake invented the term secularism to describe his views of promoting a social order separate from religion, an agnostic himself, Holyoake argued that Secularism is not an argument against Christianity, it is one independent of it. It does not question the pretensions of Christianity, it advances others, Secularism does not say there is no light or guidance elsewhere, but maintains that there is light and guidance in secular truth, whose conditions and sanctions exist independently, and act forever. Barry Kosmin of the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society, according to Kosmin, the hard secularist considers religious propositions to be epistemologically illegitimate, warranted by neither reason nor experience. In political terms, secularism is a movement towards the separation of religion and this can refer to reducing ties between a government and a state religion, replacing laws based on scripture with civil laws, and eliminating discrimination on the basis of religion. This is said to add to democracy by protecting the rights of religious minorities, what all secular governments, from the democratic to the authoritarian, share is a concern about the relationship between the church and the state. Each secular government may find its own unique policy prescriptions for dealing with that concern, maharaja Ranjeet Singh of the Sikh empire of the first half of the 19th century successfully established a secular rule in the Punjab. Ranjit Singh also extensively funded education, religion, and arts of various different religions, Secularism is most often associated with the Age of Enlightenment in Europe and it plays a major role in Western society. The principles, but not necessarily the practices, of separation of church and state in the United States, Secular states also existed in the Islamic world during the Middle Ages. Due in part to the belief in the separation of church and state, the most significant forces of religious fundamentalism in the contemporary world are Christian fundamentalism and Islamic fundamentalism. At the same time, one significant stream of secularism has come from religious minorities who see governmental and political secularism as integral to the preservation of equal rights, in studies of religion, modern democracies are generally recognized as secular. This is due to the freedom of religion, and the lack of authority of religious leaders over political decisions. Nevertheless, religious beliefs are considered by many people to be a relevant part of the political discourse in many of these countries
18.
Separation of church and state
–
The separation of church and state is a concept defining the distance in the relationship between organized religion and the nation state. It may refer to creating a state, with or without explicit reference to such separation. The concept parallels various other social and political ideas, including secularism, disestablishmentarianism, religious liberty. Whitman observes that in many European countries, the state has, over the centuries, taken over the roles of the church. Many societies in antiquity had imperial cults where heads of state were worshiped as messiahs, ancient history is replete with examples of political leaders who derived legitimacy through religious titles. Sargon of Akkad was referred to as the deputy of Ishtar, julius Caesar was elected as Pontifex Maximus, the chief priest of the Roman state religion before he became the consul of Rome. Caligula referred to himself as a god when meeting with politicians, in this work, Augustine posited that major points of overlap were to be found between the earthly city and the city of God, especially as people need to live together and get along on earth. Thus Augustine held that it was the work of the city to make it possible for a heavenly city to be established on earth. For centuries, monarchs ruled by the idea of divine right, sometimes this began to be used by a monarch to support the notion that the king ruled both his own kingdom and Church within its boundaries, a theory known as caesaropapism. On the other side was the Catholic doctrine that the Pope, as the Vicar of Christ on earth, should have the authority over the Church. In the West the issue of the separation of church and state during the medieval period centered on monarchs who ruled in the secular sphere, at the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther articulated a doctrine of the two kingdoms. While there was a diversity of views in the days of the Radical Reformation. Anabaptists came to teach that religion should never be compelled by state power, approaching the issue of church-state relations primarily from the position of protecting the church from the state. In the 1530s, Henry VIII, angered by the Pope Clement VIIs refusal to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon, decided to break with the Church and set himself as ruler of the Church of England. The monarchs of Great Britain have retained ecclesiastical authority in the Church of England since Henry VIII, having the current title, englands ecclesiastical intermixing did not spread widely, however, due to the extensive persecution of Catholics that resulted from Henrys power grab. Some of these people voluntarily sailed to the American Colonies specifically for this purpose, the concept of separating church and state is often credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke. For Locke, this created a right in the liberty of conscience. At the same period of the 17th century, Pierre Bayle and some fideists were forerunners of the separation of Church and State, maintaining that faith was independent of reason
19.
Social contract
–
The question of the relation between natural and legal rights, therefore, is often an aspect of social contract theory. The term takes its name from The Social Contract, a 1762 book by Jean-Jacques Rousseau that discussed this concept, the starting point for most social contract theories is an examination of the human condition absent any political order that Thomas Hobbes termed the state of nature. In this condition, individuals actions are only by their personal power. Each solved the problem of authority in a different way. Grotius posited that human beings had natural rights. Thomas Hobbes famously said that in a state of nature, human life would be solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, though the sovereigns edicts may well be arbitrary and tyrannical, Hobbes saw absolute government as the only alternative to the terrifying anarchy of a state of nature. Hobbes asserted that humans consent to abdicate their rights in favor of the authority of government. Pufendorf disputed Hobbess equation of a state of nature with war, the central assertion of social contract approaches is that law and political order are not natural, but are instead human creations. According to Hobbes citizens are not obligated to submit to the government when it is too weak to act effectively to suppress factionalism, the Lockean concept of the social contract was invoked in the United States Declaration of Independence. The concept of the contract is posed by Glaucon, as described by Plato in The Republic. They say that to do injustice is, by nature, good, to suffer injustice, evil, for no man who is worthy to be called a man would ever submit to such an agreement if he were able to resist, he would be mad if he did. Such is the account, Socrates, of the nature. The social contract theory also appears in Crito, another dialogue from Plato, Social contract formulations are preserved in many of the worlds oldest records. The Buddhist text of the second century BCE, Mahāvastu, recounts the legend of Mahasammata, then gradually the process of cosmic decay began its work, and mankind became earthbound, and felt the need of food and shelter. As men lost their glory, distinctions of class arose, and they entered into agreements with one another, accepting the institution of private property. He was called the Great Chosen One, and he received the title of raja because he pleased the people, in his rock edicts, the Buddhist king Asoka was said to have argued for a broad and far-reaching social contract. Natural justice is a pledge of reciprocal benefit, to prevent one man from harming or being harmed by another. There never was such a thing as justice, but only agreements made in mutual dealings among men in whatever places at various times providing against the infliction or suffering of harm
20.
Welfare state
–
The welfare state is a concept of government in which the state plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the social and economic well-being of its citizens. It is based on the principles of equality of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, the general term may cover a variety of forms of economic and social organization. Marshall described the modern state as a distinctive combination of democracy, welfare. Esping-Andersen classified the most developed welfare state systems into three categories, Social Democratic, Conservative, and Liberal, the welfare state involves a transfer of funds from the state, to the services provided, as well as directly to individuals. It is funded through redistributionist taxation and is referred to as a type of mixed economy. Such taxation usually includes an income tax for people with higher incomes. Proponents argue that this helps reduce the gap between the rich and poor. The German term Sozialstaat has been used since 1870 to describe state support programs devised by German Sozialpolitiker, the literal English equivalent social state didnt catch on in Anglophone countries. However, during the Second World War, Anglican Archbishop William Temple, author of the book Christianity and the Social Order, popularized the concept using the phrase welfare state. Bishop Temples use of state has been connected to Benjamin Disraelis 1845 novel Sybil, or the Two Nations, which speaks of the only duty of power. In Germany, the term Wohlfahrtsstaat, a translation of the English welfare state, is used to describe Swedens social insurance arrangements. The Italian term stato sociale reproduces the original German term, spanish and many other languages employ an analogous term, estado del bienestar – literally, state of well-being. In Brazil, the concept is referred to as previdência social, in French, welfare state is translated into LÉtat-providence. Modern welfare programs are distinguished from earlier forms of poverty relief by their universal. The institution of social insurance in Germany under Bismarck was an influential template, some schemes were based largely in the development of autonomous, mutualist provision of benefits. Others were founded on state provision, in an influential essay, Citizenship and Social Class, British sociologist T. H. Examples of such states are Germany, all of the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, France, Uruguay and New Zealand, since that time, the term welfare state applies only to states where social rights are accompanied by civil and political rights. Changed attitudes in reaction to the worldwide Great Depression, which brought unemployment, during the Great Depression, the welfare state was seen as a middle way between the extremes of communism on the left and unregulated laissez-faire capitalism on the right
21.
Civic nationalism
–
Ernest Renan and John Stuart Mill are often thought to be early civic nationalists. Civic nationhood is an identity built around shared citizenship in a liberal-democratic state. Thus, a civic nation isnt defined by its language or culture, but by its institutions and liberal principles. Membership in the nation is open to anyone who shares these values. A civic nation or state does not aim to promote one culture over another, german philosopher Jürgen Habermas argued that immigrants to a liberal state need not assimilate into the host culture, but only need to accept the principles of the countrys Constitution. Civic nationalism is often contrasted with ethnic nationalism, michael Ignatieff points out the following distinctions between the two nationalism. Civic nationalism is a form of nationalism in which the state derives political legitimacy from the participation of its citizenry. It is often seen as originating with Jean-Jacques Rousseau and especially the social contract theories which take their name from his 1762 book The Social Contract, civic nationalism lies within the traditions of rationalism and liberalism, but as a form of nationalism it is contrasted with ethnic nationalism. Membership of the nation is considered voluntary, as in Ernest Renans classical definition in Quest-ce quune nation. Of the nation as a daily referendum characterized by the will to live together, civic-national ideals influenced the development of representative democracy in countries such as the United States and France. A notable exception is India where civic nationalism has predominated due to the linguistic, religious. In the United Kingdom, UKIP encourage a form of nationalism with more controlled immigration often confused with more sinister forms of nationalism. Civic nationalism in post-Soviet Ukraine has prevailed since the Orange Revolution, in Flanders, Belgium the regionalist New Flemish Alliance is considered the advocate of civic nationalism. Whereas in Catalonia, a region of Spain, parties such as Ciu. Furthermore, in Spain, there is the Eusko Alkartasuna which is becoming increasingly civic, outside Europe, it has also been used to describe the Civil War-era Republican Party in the United States. Civic nationalism contrasts with more restrictive forms, such as ethnic nationalism
22.
Classical liberalism
–
Classical liberalism was first called that in the early 19th century, but was built on ideas of the previous century. It was a response to urbanization, and to the Industrial Revolution in Europe, notable individuals whose ideas contributed to classical liberalism include John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo. It drew on the economics of Adam Smith and on a belief in natural law, utilitarianism, the term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism. These beliefs were complemented by a belief that labourers could be best motivated by financial incentive and they opposed any income or wealth redistribution, which they believed would be dissipated by the lowest orders. Drawing on ideas of Adam Smith, classical liberals believed that it is in the common interest that all individuals be able to secure their own economic self-interest and they were critical of what would come to be the ideas of the welfare state as interfering in a free market. A landlord, a farmer, a manufacturer, a merchant, though they did not employ a single workman. Many workmen could not subsist a week, few could subsist a month, in the long run the workman may be as necessary to his master as his master is to him, but the necessity is not so immediate. The workmen desire to get as much, the masters to give as little as possible, in a free market, both labour and capital would receive the greatest possible reward, while production would be organised efficiently to meet consumer demand. For society to guarantee positive rights requires taxation over and above the minimum needed to enforce negative rights. in the late 19th century, classical liberalism developed into neo-classical liberalism, which argued for government to be as small as possible to allow the exercise of individual freedom. In its most extreme form, neo-classical liberalism advocated Social Darwinism, right-libertarianism is a modern form of neo-classical liberalism. Friedrich Hayek identified two different traditions within classical liberalism, the British tradition and the French tradition, the French tradition included Rousseau, Condorcet, the Encyclopedists and the Physiocrats. This tradition believed in rationalism and sometimes showed hostility to tradition and religion, Hayek also rejected the label laissez faire as originating from the French tradition and alien to the beliefs of Hume and Smith. Classical liberalism in Britain developed from Whiggery and radicalism, and was heavily influenced by French physiocracy. Whiggery had become a dominant ideology following the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the origins of rights were seen as being in an ancient constitution, which had existed from time immemorial. These rights, which some Whigs considered to include freedom of the press and they believed that the power of the executive had to be constrained. While they supported limited suffrage, they saw voting as a privilege, British radicals, from the 1790s to the 1820s, concentrated on parliamentary and electoral reform, emphasising natural rights and popular sovereignty. Richard Price and Joseph Priestley adapted the language of Locke to the ideology of radicalism, the radicals saw parliamentary reform as a first step toward dealing with their many grievances, including the treatment of Protestant Dissenters, the slave trade, high prices and high taxes. There was greater unity to classical liberalism ideology than there had been with Whiggery, classical liberals were committed to individualism, liberty and equal rights
23.
Equity feminism
–
Equity feminism is a form of liberal feminism discussed since the 1980s, specifically a kind of classically liberal or libertarian feminism. Barry Kuhle asserts that equity feminism is compatible with evolutionary psychology, distinctions have been made between conservative and radical forms of equity feminism. Many young conservative women have accepted equity feminism, there are differences between this and equality feminism or social feminism or difference feminism
24.
Liberal conservatism
–
It is a political position which incorporates support for civil liberties and capitalism, along with some social-conservative positions. As both conservatism and liberalism have had different meanings over time and across countries, the liberal conservatism has been used in quite different ways. It usually contrasts with aristocratic conservatism, which rejects the principle of equality as something in discordance with human nature, consequently, in the United States the term liberal conservatism is not used and American modern liberalism happens to be quite different from the European brand. The opposite is true in Latin America, where economically liberal conservatism is often labelled under the rubric of neoliberalism both in culture and academic discourse. In much of central and northwestern Europe, especially in Germanic and traditionally Protestant countries, often this involves stressing free-market economics and the belief in individual responsibility together with the defense of civil rights, and support for a limited welfare state. In the modern European discourse, liberal conservatism usually encompasses centre-right political outlooks that reject, at least to some extent and this position is also associated with support for moderate forms of social safety net and environmentalism. Historically, in the 18th and 19th centuries, conservatism comprised a set of principles based on concern for established tradition, respect for authority, and religious values. This form of traditionalist or classical conservatism is often considered to be exemplified by the writings of Joseph de Maistre, contemporaneous liberalism – now recalled as classical liberalism – advocated both political freedom for individuals and a free market in the economic sphere. The maxim of liberal conservatism, according to scholar Andrew Vincent, is economics is prior to politics, nonetheless, in most countries the term liberal is used to describe those with free-market economic views. This is the case, for example, in continental Europe, Australia and Latin America
25.
Liberal socialism
–
Liberal socialism is a socialist political philosophy that includes liberal principles within it. Although liberal socialism unequivocally favors a mixed economy, it identifies legalistic and artificial monopolies to be the fault of capitalism. It considers both liberty and equality to be compatible and mutually dependent on each other, Principles that can be described as liberal socialist are based on the works of philosophers such as Mill, Bernstein, Dewey, Rosselli, Bobbio, Mouffe and Polanyi. Other important liberal socialist figures include Calogero, Gobetti, Hobhouse, Keynes, liberal socialism has been particularly prominent in British and Italian politics. Liberal socialists seminal ideas can be traced to John Stuart Mill, Mill theorised that capitalist societies should experience a gradual process of socialisation through work-controlled enterprises, coexisting with private enterprises. The main liberal English thinker John Stuart Mills early economic philosophy was one of free markets, however, he accepted interventions in the economy, such as a tax on alcohol, if there were sufficient utilitarian grounds. He also accepted the principle of intervention for the purpose of animal welfare. Mill originally believed that equality of taxation meant equality of sacrifice, given an equal tax rate regardless of income, Mill agreed that inheritance should be taxed. A utilitarian society would agree that everyone should be one way or another. Therefore, receiving inheritance would put one ahead of society unless taxed on the inheritance and those who donate should consider and choose carefully where their money goes—some charities are more deserving than others. Considering public charities boards such as a government will disburse the money equally, however, a private charity board like a church would disburse the monies fairly to those who are in more need than others. Later he altered his views toward a more socialist bent, adding chapters to his Principles of Political Economy in defence of a socialist outlook, within this revised work he also made the radical proposal that the whole wage system be abolished in favour of a co-operative wage system. Mills Principles, first published in 1848, was one of the most widely read of all books on economics in the period, as Adam Smiths Wealth of Nations had during an earlier period, Mills Principles dominated economics teaching. In the case of Oxford University it was the text until 1919. Mill also at some point promoted substituting capitalist businesses with worker cooperatives, liberal socialism has exercised influence in British politics, especially in the variant known as ethical socialism. Ethical socialists advocated an economy that involves an acceptance of a role of both public enterprise as well as socially-responsible private enterprise. Ethical socialism was founded by the R. H. Tawney, a Christian socialist and it emphasizes the need for a morally-conscious economy based upon the principles of service, cooperation, and social justice while opposing possessive individualism. Ethical socialism is distinct in its focus on criticism of the ethics of capitalism and its founder, Tawney, denounced the self-seeking amoral and immoral behaviour that he claimed is supported by capitalism
26.
Libertarianism
–
Libertarianism is a collection of political philosophies that uphold liberty as a core principle. Libertarians seek to maximize freedom and autonomy, emphasizing freedom of choice, voluntary association, individual judgment. Libertarians share a skepticism of authority and state power, however, they diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing political and economic systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the functions of state and private power. Some libertarians advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights, such as in land, infrastructure, an additional line of division is between minarchists and anarchists. While minarchists think that a centralized government is necessary, anarchists and anarcho-capitalists propose to completely eliminate the state. The first recorded use of the term libertarian was in 1789, the word was again used in a political sense in 1802, in a short piece critiquing a poem by the author of Gebir, and has since been used with this meaning. Déjacque also used the term for his anarchist publication Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social, in the mid-1890s, Sébastien Faure began publishing a new Le Libertaire while Frances Third Republic enacted the lois scélérates, which banned anarchist publications in France. Libertarianism has frequently used as a synonym for anarchism since this time. Although the word continues to be widely used to refer to socialists internationally. Libertarianism in the United States has been described as conservative on issues and liberal on personal freedom. There is contention about whether right, left, and socialist libertarianism represent distinct ideologies as opposed to variations on a theme, all libertarians begin with a conception of personal autonomy from which they argue in favor of civil liberties and a reduction or elimination of the state. Right-libertarianism developed in the United States in the century and is the most popular conception of libertarianism in that region. It is commonly referred to as a continuation or radicalization of classical liberalism, right-libertarians value the social institutions that enforce conditions of capitalism, while rejecting institutions that function in opposition to these institutions. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific, but they are not its animating purpose. Such a view might seem miles away from the defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals, he sees private, often hierarchical, groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees. Left-libertarianism encompasses those libertarian beliefs that claim the Earths natural resources belong to everyone in a manner, either unowned or owned collectively
27.
Agorism
–
It was first proposed by libertarian philosopher Samuel Edward Konkin III. The term was coined by Konkin, and comes from the Classical Greek word ἀγορά referring to a place for assembly. According to Konkin, counter-economics and were originally fighting concepts forged in the atmosphere of 1972–73. Konkin credits the Austrian School, particularly Ludwig von Mises, as the base of economic thought leading to agorism, in the 1960–70s, there was an abundance of political alienation in the United States, particularly for those in favor of libertarian ideologies. Whereas Murray Rothbard chose to create political alliances between the Old Right and the New Left, Robert LeFevre and his West Coast followers pursued a non-participatory form of civil disobedience, ultimately, LeFevres anti-collaboration methods lost favor and faded away. After the creation of the Libertarian Party in 1971, the debate shifted from anarchy vs. minarchism to partyarchy vs. agorism, Konkin characterized agorism as a form of left-libertarianism, and, generally, that agorism is a strategic branch of market anarchism. The goal of agorism is the agora, the society of the open marketplace as near to untainted by theft, assault, and fraud as can be humanly attained is as close to a free society as can be achieved. And a free society is the one in which each and every one of us can satisfy his or her subjective values without crushing others’ values by violence. The concept of counter-economics is the most critical element of agorism and it can be described as, The Counter-Economy is the sum of all non-aggressive Human Action which is forbidden by the State. Counter-economics is the study of the Counter-Economy and its practices, the Counter-Economy excludes all State-approved action and the Red Market. Starving the state of its revenue and purpose by transferring these responsibilities over to decentralized institutions is the most feasible way to free markets according to agorism. Partyarchy, the anti-concept of pursuing libertarian ends through statist means, the methods of the Libertarian Party are not compatible with agorist principles. Konkin referred to attempts to fight for free markets through state approved channels of operation as Partyarchy. The agorists prefer the free market to capitalism, mostly since they bear no ties with the implications that the latter term has in history. The favoritism of the government towards determined corporations is seen by agorists as the characteristic that renders much more illegitimate the intervention of the state in various sectors. State-imposed restrictions in favor of certain companies, according to agorists, distort the market, thus making the aforementioned businesses less responsible and less capable. The agorists claim that the debts of businesses cannot be cleared through a decree. Konkin opposed the concept of property, and wrote in an article, entitled Copywrongs
28.
Anarcho-capitalism
–
Anarcho-capitalism is a political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty, private property, and free markets. Anarcho-capitalists believe that, in the absence of statute, society would improve itself through the discipline of the free market, in an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be operated by privately funded competitors rather than centrally through taxation. Money, along all other goods and services, would be privately and competitively provided in an open market. Various theorists have espoused legal philosophies similar to anarcho-capitalism, a Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist society would operate under a mutually agreed-upon libertarian legal code which would be generally accepted, and which the courts would pledge themselves to follow. This pact would recognize self-ownership and the principle, although methods of enforcement vary. Anarcho-capitalists argue for a society based on the trade of private property. However, they also recognize charity and communal arrangements as part of the same voluntary ethic, though anarcho-capitalists are known for asserting a right to private property, some propose that non-state public or community property can also exist in an anarcho-capitalist society. For them, what is important is that it is acquired and transferred without help or hindrance from the compulsory state, anarcho-capitalists see free-market capitalism as the basis for a free and prosperous society. Many anarchists view capitalism as an authoritarian and hierarchical system. On the Nolan chart, anarcho-capitalists are located at the northernmost apex of the libertarian quadrant – since they reject state involvement in economic and personal affairs. Many also argue that subsidized monopolies tend to be corrupt and inefficient, many anarchists also argue that private defense and court agencies would have to have a good reputation in order to stay in business. Rothbard bases his philosophy on natural law grounds and also provides economic explanations of why he thinks anarcho-capitalism is preferable on pragmatic grounds as well. David D. Friedman says he is not an absolutist rights theorist but is not a utilitarian, however. Peter Leeson argues that the case for anarchy derives its strength from empirical evidence, hans-Hermann Hoppe, meanwhile, uses argumentation ethics for his foundation of private property anarchism, which is closer to Rothbards natural law approach. I define anarchist society as one where there is no possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of any individual. In effect, this means no one else may justly invade, or aggress against. It follows then that each person justly owns whatever previously unowned resources he appropriates or mixes his labor with, from these twin axioms – self-ownership and homesteading – stem the justification for the entire system of property rights titles in a free-market society. This system establishes the right of man to his own person, the right of donation, of bequest
29.
Christian libertarianism
–
Christian libertarianism describes the synthesis of Christian beliefs concerning free will, human nature, and God-given inalienable rights with libertarian political philosophy. It is also an ideology to the extent its supporters promote their cause to others, in contrast to the Christian left and the Christian right respectively, they believe that charity and enforcement of personal-level morality should be the purview of the church and not the state. These responsibilities must not be abrogated, though any non-governmental organization not publicly financed is free to pursue them as well, as with secular libertarianism, socialism, fascism, and crony capitalism are strongly opposed, as is theocracy. The use of force is never justified to achieve political, social, or religious goals. Individual freedom of religion without state interference is absolutely supported regardless of ones beliefs, nevertheless, a majority religion in a given locale could display its faith on government-owned property if it had the popular votes to do so. Public sector discrimination is strictly forbidden, while in the sector, it is permitted. Christian libertarians believe these principles are supported by the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, which are recorded in the Bible, and His criticism of the laws observed by the Pharisees. For example, in Jesus day, it was prohibited to heal someone on the Sabbath, because this was considered doing actual work on the day of rest. He opposed the Pharisees due to their self-righteous, man-made regulations added to Gods law, which they obeyed outwardly, also, most Christians believe the ceremonial and civic laws found in the Old Testament have been superseded by the New Covenant. For these reasons, Christian libertarians may consider Jesus as the greatest libertarian in history, according to Andrew Sandlin, an American theologian and author, Christian libertarianism is the view that mature individuals are permitted maximum freedom under Gods law. Alex Barron, an American blogger and podcast host, states that Christian libertarianism can be summed up like this, Christian libertarians are people who believe in maximum liberty for individuals, but recognize there are universal and objective moral truths, such as murder is wrong. For Christian libertarians, an understanding and appreciation of moral absolutes is formed in large part by their Christian faith. Christians in this school of political thought tend to describe such basic directives in terms of law or natural rights. In keeping with the fundamentals of libertarianism, laws of the state should be kept to the bare minimum. Acts that merely annoy others or slowly degrade their health might be dealt with at the local level, there is great concern that even in relatively free societies, laws and regulations are becoming increasingly numerous, irrelevant, and too complex for the average person to understand. While those on the Christian right may wish to outlaw what they see as immoral, as Jesus did not call upon the political and legal authorities to enforce piety or discourage sinful behavior, Christian libertarians do not believe in a political mandate to Christianize culture. Behavior considered sinful by the Church—but which does not violate the lives, liberty, even if such behavior warrants cultural opposition amongst the general public, it must not be prohibited by the state. On an international scale, non-interventionism is promoted based upon the principles of state sovereignty, the right of people to immigrate is fully supported, as is free trade
30.
Libertarian Christianity
–
Libertarian Christianity is a facet of Christian theology. Its advocates believe that it is the most biblically, rationally and this type of libertarianism derives from a specific blending of systematic theology and biblical theology. Advocates claim to be Christians first, and libertarians second, Libertarian Christians claim to be distinct from secular libertarians and Christian libertarians. They claim to be distinct from secular libertarians by deriving their libertarian legal and political philosophy from the Bible, more specifically, they find large areas of agreement with categories of libertarianism and anarchism that generally espouse private property and natural rights. These include anarcho-capitalism, minarchism, paleolibertarianism, left-libertarianism, and Christian libertarianism and they also believe in free will to the extent that free will is a necessary prerequisite to moral accountability. Following the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter III, they believe that God from all eternity did, by believing in predestination, libertarian Christians believe in determinism to the extent that determinism is congruent with their view of predestination. Since metaphysical libertarianism patently rejects the precept that God has from all eternity, ordain whatsoever comes to pass, libertarian Christians patently reject metaphysical libertarianism. On the other hand, libertarian Christians reject so-called hard determinism due to the fact that its rejection of free will eliminates the possibility of moral accountability, the difference between Christian libertarianism and libertarian Christianity starts in their respective ideological foundations. Libertarian Christianity has its foundation in biblical theology, and sees its libertarian political / legal philosophy as an outgrowth of that theology, on the other hand, Christian libertarianism, at its most systematic, is seen by libertarian Christians as being more ad hoc and less systematic. Libertarian Christians believe that Christian libertarianism, at its most systematic, is a blend of secular libertarianism, instead, they believe that their libertarianism is a seamless outgrowth of their biblical theology. The only theological system commonly cited by Christian libertarians is theonomic reconstructionism, Libertarian Christianity is compatible with a few of the basic tenets of theonomic reconstructionism. For example, libertarian Christians and theonomic reconstructionists agree about Abraham Kuypers basic approach to life, as Ligon Duncan puts it, Kuyper argued for an over-arching philosophy of life resting upon God alone as the epistemological foundation. There is not an inch in the whole of life which Christ, as Lord of all men, does not say, Mine. Reconstructionists, and Christian libertarians who claim to be reconstructionists, assume that positive law can be discovered by deducing it directly from Bible-based moral law. Some Christian libertarians might not use the Bible as authority at all, Libertarian Christians agree with reconstructionists with regard to the manner in which Bible-based moral law is discovered, specifically, with the analogy-of-faith interpretive principle. But libertarian Christians disagree with theonomic reconstructionism / Christian libertarianism in regards to the proper hermeneutics to use to discover the biblical prescription of human law, Christian libertarians deduce the biblical prescription of human law directly from their beliefs about Bible-based moral law. In contrast, libertarian Christians believe that the prescription of human law cannot be deduced directly from biblical moral law. The most obvious point where results of these two hermeneutical agendas conflict is in regard to so-called victimless crimes, from the libertarian Christians perspective, the comparison shows that Christian libertarianisms attempted amalgamation of secular libertarianism lacks rational integrity
31.
Geolibertarianism
–
Geolibertarianism is a political and economic ideology particularly committed to tax reform that integrates libertarianism with Georgism. It is most often associated with the left or the radical center. Also, along with non-Georgists in the movement, they advocate full civil liberties. Prominent geolibertarians since George have included Albert Jay Nock, Frank Chodorov, since land, by economic definition, is not the product of human labor, its ownership cannot be justified by appealing to natural human rights. Perhaps the best summary of the philosophy is Thomas Paines assertion in his 1797 pamphlet Agrarian Justice that Men did not make the earth. It is the value of the only, and not the earth itself. Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds and this strict definition of private property, as the fruits of a persons labor, leads geolibertarians to advocate a free marketplace and the protection of workers rights to their full earnings. Geolibertarians generally support redistributing land rent from private landholders to all community members by way of a land tax, as proposed by Henry George. Some geolibertarians claim the reasoning behind taxing land values likewise justifies a complementary pollution tax for degrading the shared value of the natural commons, the common and inelastic character of the radio wave spectrum is understood to justify the taxation of its exclusive use, as well. American economist and political philosopher Fred E. Foldvary coined the term geo-libertarianism in an article appearing in the magazine Land. A Landlord is a Government – The Libertarian Basis for Land Rights Geo-Rent, A Plea to public economists by Fred E. Foldvary Between State and Anarchy, A Model of Governance by Fred E
