Liberalism

Section 1 - Core Ideas and Principles Overview

Liberalism is an ideology located on the libertarian axis of the political spectrum. Liberalism is characterised by a
positive view of human nature and a belief in social progress. Liberals also favour notions such as capitalism,
meritocracy, rationalism and constitutionalism. However, the main concept within liberalism is that of freedom. There
are several illustrations one might consider. For instance, Thomas Paine spoke for many liberals when he said that
"the liberty of speaking and writing ... guards our other liberties." The liberal stance on free speech is also
encapsulated by the French philosopher Voltaire's famous comment that "I detest what you write, but I would give
my life to make it possible for you to continue to write." Furthermore, liberals are sympathetic towards freedom of
assembly and freedom of worship.

Key terminology
Foundational equality and formal equality
Liberalism holds a firm belief in foundational equality and formal equality. In terms of the former, liberals claim that
we are born equal with an equal entitlement. This is reflected in their support for the inalienable rights of man. In
terms of formal equality, the liberal world-view favours equal status for all members of society regardless of social
background. Liberalism could therefore be described as 'difference blind.' In practical terms, liberalism entails an
emphasis upon everyone being equal before the law and that all adults are entitled to vote.

Equality of opportunity
The essentials:
It is an article of faith amongst liberals that society should be based upon equality of opportunity. Liberals throughout
the ages have endorsed measures designed to break down those barriers that hold people back (such as racism,
homophobia, sexism and transphobia).

Extension material:
Support for equality amongst liberals is very different to that of socialists. Whereas liberals argue in favour of state
intervention to enhance equal opportunities, socialists favour a more equitable distribution of wealth and resources.
The distinction between a liberal and a socialist in terms of equality is analogous to a race. Liberals will always support
legislative measures designed to ensure a more even start in life. However, liberals tend to oppose those measures
that confiscate wealth from those who work hard. Liberals take the view that people's abilities and aptitude for work
differs greatly. Provided the start is relatively equal, the outcome should be viewed as a fair one. An uneven
distribution of wealth is therefore entirely compatible with liberalism. Liberals claim that an unequal outcome is
socially just. In contrast, equality of outcome, as in socialism, treats unlike individuals alike - which is anathema to any
genuine liberal.
The liberal perspective is based upon the premise that a dichotomy exists between equality and liberty. Inevitably,
society must make a choice between equality of outcome or the preservation of individual liberty. This argument is
particularly vociferous amongst classical liberals. For instance, Milton Friedman observed that "a society that puts
equality ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom." From a similar position, Friedrich Hayek
(1988) argued that "a society that does not recognise that each individual has
values of his own which he is entitled to follow can have no respect for the dignity of the individual and cannot really
know freedom."

Social contract
The essentials:
The social contract is a common term within political discourse which refers to an invisible contract between the
people and the state. Both parties to the contract should behave as if it was tangible and real. Thomas Paine once
observed that the social contract "is the only mode in which governments have a right to arise, and the only principle
on which they have a right to exist."
The liberal position on the social contract derives almost entirely from the pioneering work of John Locke (1690). John
Locke argued that individuals consent to be governed. This consent may be tacit; in that it is not formally expressed,
but consent exists and is provided to the government. Locke also believed that individuals are shaped by their rational
interest. For instance, they leave the state of nature (in which no social contract exists) to protect their individual

1
rights. Crucially, only the agents of the state are powerful enough to provide the required level of protection against
that which threatens our liberty. By entering a social contract with the state, the individual is seeking to protect their
liberty from the actions of those that pose a threat to it. Far from representing a loss of liberty, offering consent to the
state strengthens the liberty of the individual.
As with any contract, there are rights and duties that both parties must abide by. To illustrate, the state has the right
to punish those who break the law in some way. Equally, the state must limit itself to that which protects our liberties
and freedom. In Locke's words "government has no other end than the preservation of property." If the state were
to exceed this power, it would violate the social contract. Individuals would therefore be within their rights to
withdraw their consent to be governed. This right is enshrined in the American Declaration of Independence.
Extension material:
The Lockean notion of the social contract remains one of the most enduring aspects of liberal thought. As with all
liberal theorists, Locke believes that authority should arise from below rather than above and can only be based solely
upon the consent of the governed. In other words, the role and legitimacy of the state must be based upon the
agreement of the people. Locke was also the first to put forward the liberal view that law is an essential prerequisite
of freedom itself with his maxim "where laws do not exist, man has no freedom."
The central themes of the social contract have been explored further by latter-day liberals such as Karl Popper. He
argued that good government can only exist in an open society in which we are free to express our thoughts
effectively and replace the government by peaceful means. He also claimed that restrictions upon freedom of speech
tend to serve the vested interests of the powerful. Partly because of this, liberals strongly support dissidents who
express opinions that are critical of the ruling regime. They also celebrate those who seek to impose change via
peaceful measures.
In the contemporary era, the issue of consent remains as relevant as ever. The principle that consent should derive
from the people holds a large degree of consensus (particularly in the West), although its application is hardly applied
in a consistent manner. Where power is exercised without the consent of the people, the principle of gaining the
consent of the people offers the hope of a more democratic way of life. In doing so, Lockean ideas are brought to life.

Meritocracy
The essentials:
Meritocracy strives to ensure that we are defined by merit and ability rather than the social circumstances of our
birth. In a meritocratic society, the emphasis is firmly upon achieved status rather than acquired status. As such, a
meritocracy is underpinned by liberal notions such as equal opportunities and opposition to the hereditary principle.
Meritocracy is also contrary to those ideologies that prevent social mobility (namely feudalism).
Extension material:
Some of the most potent arguments in favour of meritocracy derive from those who experienced life under
communism, a system that rejected liberal notions concerning the individual. The Soviet prisoner and dissident
Alexander Solzhenitsyn (1963) published a powerful polemic over how a system based upon equality of outcome
tramples over the rights of so-called 'enemies of the state' and those who associated with them. From a more
economic perspective, the Russian-born philosopher Ayn Rand wrote extensively upon the dangers of collectivism to
the rights of the individual. For instance, in 'We the Living' (1936) she demonstrates how altruism in the form of living
not for oneself but for others leads to evil. Rand argues that it is unfair and morally wrong to lead one's life for others;
be it in the form of communism, fascism or religious fundamentalism. In a particularly revealing passage, the central
character Kira asserts that "I know no worse injustice than the giving of the undeserved. Because men are not equal in
ability and one can't treat them as if they were."

Mechanistic theory
The essentials:
Liberals believe that the state is akin to an artificial machine and is created by individuals with the express purpose to
protect their freedoms. Take the case of the social contract outlined by John Locke. He argued that individuals move
from a state of nature towards a social contract with rights and duties on both sides. The purpose of the social
contract is to uphold personal freedom, the government is created by the people and can be replaced if it fails to
maintain the core value of liberty.
Mechanistic theory also stipulates that our behaviour is determined by the interactions between individuals.
Mechanistic theory is therefore the opposite of the conservative view that society is an organism in which the state
evolves over time. Mechanical societies are also based upon the equal worth of individuals. This reflects the liberal

2
support for foundational and formal equality explored in the opening section. Mechanistic theories emerged from the
Enlightenment, a crucial period of history within the context of political ideas.

Tolerance
The essentials:
The liberal position on tolerance may at first appear quite straight-forward. In everyday language, to be liberal is to be
tolerant of diversity. Everyone holds an equal moral worth and everyone should therefore be granted the same rights
as others. Consequently, a liberal society is entirely comfortable with what the liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill
called "experiments in living."
Liberals loudly celebrate the right of the individual to chart their own path in life. Human beings possess free will and
we should all be allowed to make the very most of our abilities and potential. Ultimately, society must welcome the
vast array of lifestyle choices provided no-one is being harmed by such actions. We should therefore adopt
forbearance towards those who differ from the norm no matter how eccentric or strange.
This argument also applies to diverse cultures. Liberals are comfortable within a multi-ethnic society in which
immigrants celebrate their own distinct cultures. The only proviso here is that such actions are consistent with liberal
principles. To illustrate the point, laws to prevent arranged marriages or FGM are entirely consistent with the ideology
of liberalism. This is because liberalism seeks to enable us to pursue our own path rather than being coerced into the
supposedly proper way to live.

Extension material and application:

The reality of implementing the liberal stance on tolerance is of course not so straight-forward. Whereas liberals fully
accept a wide diversity of lifestyle choices they do not tolerate the intolerable. This line of argument is most readily
applicable towards those laws which restrict freedom of speech. It is perfectly fine to express one's religious beliefs,
but not if those beliefs provoke hatred and prejudice against those who do not conform to those beliefs. Another
important distinction to be aware of is that illiberal thoughts are tolerated provided they do not in any way influence
other-regarding actions. A government that seeks to control or monitor our private conversations would be contrary
to liberal principles. It is essential that we have a sphere of privacy that is outside the range of the official authorities.
The argument about the private sphere is particularly relevant to cyberspace. This presents a real and genuine
dilemma for any liberal democracy. A balance must be reached between honouring the social contract by protecting
the people from terrorism whilst respecting our right to online privacy. For example, the state needs to protect its
people from harm and therefore has a legitimate interest in monitoring Internet chatter on hate-fuelled websites.
However, it should also ensure that those who seek to cast light upon the secretive decision-making process such as
Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and the website WikiLeaks have a forum by which to do so. Finding a balance is
essential towards the maintenance of a truly liberal democratic society.
To tolerate is to show a degree of forbearance of the immense diversity of human life. Liberals are comfortable with
such diversity because it reflects an expression of the individual. They also believe that exposure to diverse ways of
living is beneficial towards society. This 'marketplace of ideas' is an essential feature of a liberal democracy. In the
classic text On Liberty (1859), John Stuart Mill famously argued that "if all mankind minus one, were of one opinion,
and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person
than he - if he had the power - would be justified in silencing mankind." This is a seminal argument within liberalism
and one worthy of further reflection.

Limited government
A limited government is one in which the powers of the state are limited by law, usually in a written/codified
constitution. The distinction between the two main strands of liberalism holds significant implications for the role of
the state. Under classical liberalism the state performs the role of a night-watchman. A minimal state ensures that
contracts are honoured and that the marketplace performs effectively. However, under social liberalism the state
performs an enabling role based on positive liberty. T.H. Green defines positive liberty in the following terms - "when
we speak of freedom ... we mean a positive power or capacity of doing or enjoying something worth doing". He also
argued that the government should emancipate the poor from the limitations of poverty.
Based on this understanding, the role of the state can incorporate the provision of welfare from the cradle to the
grave and the maintenance of a mixed economy. Yet despite this level of state intervention, social liberals fully accept
the desirability of unequal outcomes. Even John Maynard Keynes - a figure widely celebrated as a champion of state
intervention in the economy - once argued that "there is social and psychological justification for significant

3
inequalities of income and wealth." He also believed that the efficient allocation of scarce resources requires an
economic system that facilitates the "animal spirits" of market competition. In
other words, liberals of all persuasions believe the role of the state should be limited to that of providing liberal
values such as equal opportunities.

The core ideas and principles of liberalism

The core ideas include:
• Individualism
• Freedom and liberty
• State
• Rationalism
• Equality and social justice
• Liberal democracy
Ideologies are conventionally labelled along a horizontal and vertical axis. The horizontal axis consists of left- wing to
right-wing, whereas the vertical axis goes from authoritarian to libertarian. Ideologies of the left believe in equality
whereas those on the right contend that society is inherently unequal. Following on from this, those on the left of the
political spectrum favour social justice whereas those on the right approve of natural justice. With regards to the
vertical axis, liberals are opposed to authoritarianism.

Individualism
• the primacy of the individual in society over any group The essentials:
Liberalism is a term which derives from the Latin word "liber" meaning free men. All liberals would agree
wholeheartedly with John Stuart Mill's words that "over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign." This
argument applies to both main strands of liberalism. At this early stage, it is sufficient to note that classical liberalism
is on the right-libertarian axis whereas social liberalism is left-libertarian. Liberals also concur with Immanuel Kant's
conception of the individual as an end in themselves rather than the means towards the satisfaction of a collective
goal.
Individualism is the beating heart of liberal ideology, and nowhere is this more apparent than in the relationship
between the individual and the state. Indeed, to qualify as a liberal is to be instinctively suspicious of how the various
agents of the state might use their power. Regardless of the country in question, liberals share an automatic distaste
for an excessive level of power held by the state. Fundamentally, liberalism places a high degree of trust and
responsibility upon the shoulders of individuals. For an ideology that is so strongly associated with a secular (i.e. non-
religious) mindset, it is very much an article of faith amongst liberals that the individual is a rational human being
responsible for their own behaviour. Ultimately, liberals seek to empower the individual with as much freedom as is
practically possible. As the former Liberal Party leader William Gladstone once so neatly observed, "liberalism is trust
in the people."
Extension material:
Authoritarian ideologies offer an intriguing critique of liberalism. Marxists for instance perceive liberalism as flawed
by its bourgeois assumptions, whereas fascists associate the liberal celebration of the individual with decadence and
immorality. However, in the modern era it is religious fundamentalists who routinely face the forces of liberalism. This
conflict is evident within the United States between the religious right and progressive forces such as pro-abortion
groups. Christian fundamentalist groups like the Moral Majority criticise liberalism for its moral relativism and
aggressive secularism. On an international level, a great many of the conflicts fought during the twentieth century
were between liberal democracies and forces hostile
towards individualism. As predicted by the political scientist Samuel Huntingdon (2002) the twenty-first century has
thus far been characterised by a "clash of civilisations" between the liberal West and Islamic fundamentalism. To
support his argument, one might consider events such as 9/11 and military conflict in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and
Libya.

Freedom / liberty
• the ability and right to make decisions in your own interests The essentials:
The essence of liberalism is the pursuit of individual freedom. Naturally, this comes with an important caveat.
Expressing our own personal liberty must be exercised with a degree of responsibility. We have a duty that our
actions should not harm others or limit the freedom of others. The individual should therefore avoid those actions
that are detrimental to others within that society. Thus, in a practical sense, it is permissible to hold illiberal thoughts
provided they do not lead towards behaviour inconsistent with liberalism. Within a liberal society, we are free to post
and upload what we like on social media provided we do not in any way violate another's freedom.

4
The freedom of the individual lies at the fulcrum of liberal ideology. Liberalism is at heart an ideological movement
that seeks to extend rights for all. Once again, this comes with a caveat to consider. Most importantly, individual
rights should only apply to rational and responsible human beings. As such, children are not entitled to be in
possession of full rights. Following on from this, the unborn foetus cannot be said to possess the right to life. The
liberal position is therefore pro-choice rather than pro-life. Liberals also seek to empower the disadvantaged
regardless of their circumstances of birth. This may take the form of antidiscrimination laws and positive
discrimination.
Liberals also seek to provide the widest possible expression of thought, association and lifestyle available. Liberalism
seeks to open people's minds to new and exciting possibilities. It often challenges conventional wisdom and seeks the
emancipation of the individual from outdated conventions. It asks us all to think differently and more deeply about
the most appealing pathway in life. In doing so, we all benefit from the promotion of innovation, creativity and self-
realisation. Significantly, a liberal society is no sense constrained by dull conformity or outdated notions of 'proper'
behaviour.
Finally, all liberals believe that the capitalist system represents the fullest expression of individualism. This is because
the marketplace is based on the fundamental liberal principle of free choice. In the words of the classical economist
Milton Friedman we should possess the "freedom to use the resources we possess in accordance with our own
values." Liberals also favour capitalism as it enables economic agents to maximise their utility. Furthermore, the
capitalist system is more efficient in terms of allocating scarce resources than any statist alternative. Social liberals
such as John Maynard Keynes are however more favourable towards state intervention to correct market failure. That
said, the original intention behind Keynesianism was to save capitalism from its seemingly imminent collapse.
Extension material:
It is important to note that freedom can be defined in two distinct ways. Isaiah Berlin
(1969) proclaims that positive liberty is based upon the desire "on the part of the individual to be
his own master" whereas negative liberty is "the area within which a man can act unobstructed by others."
Berlin's typology was based partly upon earlier work during the early-nineteenth
century from Benjamin Constant who distinguished between "the liberty of the ancients"
and "the liberty of the moderns." The liberty of the ancients meant direct participation in
political life, whereas the liberty of the moderns refers to independence from
government and the notion of private rights.

The State
• 'necessary' to avoid disorder, but 'evil' as it has potential to remove individual liberty, thus should be limited.
The essentials:
The principal enemy of liberalism is the state. All liberals fear that the state may act in an arbitrary manner to
persecute certain groups. Even a moderate form of paternalism is inconsistent with liberal ideology. As such, the role
of the state must be limited via constitutionalism, an independent judiciary and the rule of law. It is imperative that
the state remains a minimal influence in our lives due to its discernible habit of encroaching upon the private lives of
its citizens. In the realm of the economy, the state should facilitate laissez-faire economics. The state must also enable
full religious expression, a notion that finds its most obvious example within the United States. The framers of the
American constitution included a religious test clause which stipulates that no-one may be denied public office due to
their religious affiliation. The constitution also insists upon a wall of separation between the church and state.
Unlike conservatism, liberalism is built upon a positive view of human nature. Liberals are resolutely optimistic about
the capacity for human achievement and self-improvement. True to this mindset, liberals believe that we should place
our faith firmly on the shoulders of the individual. In the words of John Stuart Mill; an individual is the best judge of
their own interests and no authority (such as religious institutions) can claim superior knowledge. This positive view of
human nature also shines through any number of theoretical contributors ranging from the Rawlsian difference
principle to utilitarianism.
Having said this, all liberals accept the need for state involvement within society and the economy. This marks a
fundamental point of departure between liberals and anarchists. Whilst both ideologies share a sunny outlook on
human nature, liberalism specifies a limited role for the government. There are several case studies to consider,
although the most illuminating is surely that of the Lockean social contract.
John Locke depicted the social contract as binding on everyone. He added that "every man, by consenting with others
to make one body politic under one government, puts himself under an obligation to everyone of that society to
submit to the determination of the majority." Under this contract, the existence of government is justified upon the
basis of consent. Crucially, the people have periodic opportunities to renew the government's mandate or elect an
alternative. The government also agrees to operate in accordance with natural law and to uphold our rights whilst the

5
 people accept the government's authority. Furthermore, the people may also consent to some curtailment of their
civil liberties provided they retain the option of reclaiming such rights.

Rationalism
• the belief that humans are rational creatures, capable of reason and logic The essentials:
The logical starting-point towards understanding any ideology concerns its view of human nature. In straightforward
terms, liberals share an optimistic attitude towards human nature. This is based upon an assumption that our
behaviour is determined by rational interest rather than irrational emotions and prejudice. We are therefore
governed by reason and should be entrusted with as much freedom as possible.
The liberal belief that humans are rational creatures holds several implications. Firstly, it promotes the view that we
are free to choose our own path in life regardless of what society dictates as the 'norm.' Liberals firmly believe that
we should be allowed to express ourselves fully as guided by our own free will. There is a lengthy tradition amongst
liberal figures and pressure groups of championing the rights of minority groups such as political dissidents and the
LGBT community. Secondly, liberals instinctively welcome those fleeing from persecution and discrimination in their
native homeland. Freedom of movement is a central tenant of liberalism, and the only logical conclusion amongst
people who place reason above prejudice.
Another important implication derived from this rationalist perspective is the importance of human happiness. All
liberals would concur with Aristotle's observation that "happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole
aim and end of human existence." There are a number of practical illustrations of this liberal attitude. The right of all
adults; regardless of their sexuality, to marry the person they love is a recent illustration of this line of argument. In
addition, the liberal concept of utilitarianism seeks to maximise the level of human happiness. According to utilitarian
philosophers like James Mill and Jeremy Bentham; society should be geared towards "the greatest happiness for the
greatest number."
Extension material and application:
On the basis of their optimistic outlook on human nature, liberals seek to empower the individual provided our
actions do not undermine the freedom of others. As one of the most prominent liberal thinkers of all time (John
Stuart Mill) argued "the liberty of the individual must be this far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other
people." It is on this liberal cornerstone that laws exist in order to prevent incitement to racial and religious hatred.
Targeting minority groups on the basis of bigotry is particularly abhorrent to any true liberal.
In all countries and throughout the ages, liberals refute the notion that human behaviour is shaped by the irrational
forces of superstition and religion. Instead, they claim that adults are fully capable of making decisions based upon
their own reasoning. As a consequence, liberalism is on a collision course with religious fundamentalists of all faiths.
Whereas religious fundamentalists believe that our actions are shaped by forces beyond our reasoning, liberals assert
that human beings are rational creatures. Indeed, it is the ability to reason that frees us from the outdated traditions
and customs of the past. Moreover, no group of people are any less rational than any other. Human rights should
therefore apply on a universal basis regardless of gender, ethnicity, social background or sexuality. Consistent with
this view, contemporary liberals argue in favour of women's rights within countries that have traditionally imposed
suppression (as in Saudi Arabia which now allows women to register to vote and stand for election).

Equality /social justice

• the belief that individuals are of equal value and that they should be treated impartially and fairly by society
The essentials:
Both liberals and socialists argue in favour of equality and social justice. However, there are important distinctions to
be aware of between these two ideologies. Firstly, liberals favour equality of opportunity whereas socialists endorse a
more equitable distribution of wealth. Whilst liberals fully accept that individuals are of equal value, they also
recognise that any attempt to impose equality of outcome would inevitably lead to an excessive degree of state
intervention. This would undermine our individual liberty and freedom.
Social justice can be defined as those policies and measures designed to ensure a fairer distribution of life chances
within society. The term tends to be associated with those on the left of the political spectrum. Those liberals who
employ the term are social rather than classical liberals. Social justice also consists of various attempts to address
problems such as social exclusion and social inequality. Under the coalition government, the Liberal Democrats sought
to create a degree of social justice via policies such as the pupil premium.
Extension material and application:
From a historical angle, the creation of the welfare state owes an ideological debt to social liberalism. Those on the
libertarian-left claim that the free-market is unable to provide social justice. The state must therefore intervene to

6
 tackle inequality of opportunity and the post-code lottery. Without some assistance from the state, those who are
disadvantaged would be unable to experience true liberty.
Despite the good intentions behind the welfare state, there are those on the right of the political spectrum such as
Theodore Dalrymple who take a more critical stance. Conservatives seek to restore a sense of responsibility and duty
to others, particularly the central bond between a parent and a child. Feckless families who try to shuffle off their
parental responsibilities towards the state have come under fire from conservative politicians such as John Major
(who launched a 'back to basics' campaign in order to restore traditional social values). It is down to the individual to
accept responsibility for their own welfare needs alongside a role for their own families. Fundamentally, it is not the
role of the state to cater for our welfare needs.

Liberal democracy
• a democracy that balances the will of the people, as shown through elections, with limited government (state) and a
respect for civil liberties in society
Democracy is probably the most commonly associated word with the ideology of liberalism. Democratic values like
accountability, open government, a codified constitution and the separation of powers are all endorsed by liberals.
Constitutional and legislative reform on the premise of greater democracy will always garner support amongst liberal
pressure groups such as Unlock Democracy and Charter 88. Ultimately, this rests upon a deep commitment to people
power and an optimistic view of human nature.
First and foremost, it is absolutely central to the liberal outlook that politicians who exercise power must be held
accountable for their actions to the people and their elected representatives. Furthermore, the decisionmaking
process should be as transparent and open as possible. Under New Labour (1997-2010), the government passed the
Freedom of Information Act and the Human Rights Act. Both these reforms to the constitution were designed to
strengthen the concept of accountability and open government.
Consistent with their overall world-view, liberals also believe in the need to protect and guarantee our civil liberties
under a codified constitution. In the UK, the Liberal Democrats have long championed the need for the constitution to
be written down in one document. They argue that codification is necessary to adequately protect the citizen against
the abuse of power by the agents of the state. Alas, the UK's uncodified constitution enables what Lord Hailsham
dubbed the "elected dictatorship" to undermine the rights of outsiders. For instance, the Thatcher government
targeted the rights of trade unions whereas New Labour implemented a series of authoritarian measures in their 'war
against terror.' A written constitution would also bring Britain into line with the rest of the world. Finally, the Liberal
Democrats favour codification in order to prevent those who hold power acting in an illiberal manner. Lord Acton's
(1956) view that "all power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" and that "great men are almost always
bad men" encapsulate the liberal perspective.
Extension material:
It must be acknowledged that democracy is by no means accepted in an uncritical manner amongst liberals.
Originally, liberals have viewed democracy as a form of mob rule that could threaten our liberty. This is referred to as
the paradox of democracy in which the views of the majority are considered more important than the concerns of the
minority. Naturally, this could result in a form of tyranny that undermines the rights of minority groups.
To counter the dangers of majoritarianism, liberals support a system of checks and balances. During the formation of
the United States, liberal figures like James Madison argued in favour of a separation of powers in order to avoid the
problems that had beset the 'old' world. The American system of governance is based upon a system of checks and
balances and echoes the view expressed by Montesquieu that "power should be a check to power." In contrast, the
UK system is essentially a fusion of powers which awards an excessive level of power to the executive branch of
government. Democracy may also enable the populism of the uneducated to override the more enlightened views of
the educated elite. During the seventeenth century, John Locke argued that the right to vote should be limited to
those with property so that they might defend themselves against a government acting on behalf of the masses.
Locke's argument was later incorporated into the slogan of the American War of Independence ("No taxation without
representation."). In later years, John Stuart Mill favoured a system of plural voting that would effectively
disenfranchise the illiterate whilst providing more votes to the educated. Modern-day liberals also believe that the
rights of minority groups must be protected via legislative measures and the constitution.

7
Having said this, supporters of liberal democracy claim that it holds significant benefits for
humanity. Perhaps the most persuasive argument is that democracies tend not to fight
each other as they are fearful of the electoral consequences. Whereas a dictatorial regime
can largely ignore the wishes of their people; the ruling party in a democracy could face a
potential electoral backlash. Furthermore, the spread of democracy enables the individual
to play their full part in the political process. In addition, liberals such as John Stuart Mill
argue that democratic participation promotes the development of the individual and is
therefore the best system available for ensuring maximum happiness for the greatest
number. Democracy could also be said to promote stability within society in that all groups
have the opportunity to express their beliefs.

8
Section 2 - Differing views and tensions within liberalism Key terminology

Egotistical and developmental individualism

Classical liberals are associated with egotistical individualism whereas social liberals take the view of developmental
individualism. Classical liberals believe that individuals aim to satisfy their own wants and needs. As such, there is no
such thing as society - merely a collection of egotistical, self-interested and self- reliant individuals. Social liberalism
however takes a less atomised view. Instead, they adopt a more developed view of humanity which recognises our
desire to live in harmony with one another. Developmental individualism assumes that we may choose to make social
progress and express a degree of altruism.
The distinction between egotistical and developmental individualism holds overt implications for the role of the state.
Egotistical individualism advocates a minimal state. Ultimately, self-interest individuals know what is best for them.
Individuals should therefore be self-reliant rather than relying upon the state to look after them. Moreover,
individuals should be allowed to keep as much of their wealth as possible. In contrast, developmental individualism
takes a more positive view of state intervention. According to those on the libertarian-left of the political spectrum,
the government should provide essential welfare services and some level of wealth distribution. This inevitably leads
us towards a consideration of the distinction between negative and positive freedom.

Negative and positive freedom

The essentials:
Negative freedom (or negative liberty) consists of freedom from something whereas positive freedom (or positive
liberty) consists of the ability to do something. Negative freedom therefore consists of laws to combat discrimination
whereas positive freedom enables those on limited incomes to lead a more fulfilled and meaningful existence. In
regard to the two main strands of liberal thought, classical liberals advocate negative freedom whereas social liberals
favour positive freedom.
The distinction between positive and negative freedom is a significant one in terms of the proper role of the state. The
goal of negative freedom demands a limited role for the state, whereas positive freedom results in a larger role for
the state. Following on from this, the role of the state is an absolutely key dividing line within liberal thought between
those on the right of the libertarian axis and those on the left.
In the realm of economic policy, classical liberals such as the Austrian school of economists extol the virtues of laissez-
faire economies. The role of the state must therefore be limited to that of a night-watchman (e.g. to ensure that legal
contracts are upheld and the marketplace runs smoothly). In contrast, social liberals such as the founder of the
modern welfare state William Beveridge (1942) believe that the most vulnerable within society require a degree of
state assistance. Frankly, it is difficult to disagree with his assertion that "a starving man is not free."
Extension material:
In later work on the concept of freedom, Isaiah Berlin (1969) argued that positive liberty enables the individual to
take control of their life. Positive liberty can therefore be understood to mean the freedom to perform an action of
some description. As such, positive liberty facilitates the creation of a welfare state. Negative liberty however reflects
the absence of barriers and constraints. We thereby possess negative liberty to the extent that actions are available to
us. Of the two, Berlin actually favoured negative freedom because it means we are the masters of our own destiny.
Negative freedom upholds the notion of the unencumbered self, whereas despotism is made possible when the state
decides what is in our best interests. A state that provides for our welfare needs from cradle to grave ultimately has
the ability to take liberty away from us.
The distinction between negative and positive freedom was developed further by the liberal theorist T.H. Green. He
fully recognised that laws alone cannot make people good, but they can at least enable individuals to make
themselves good. T.H. Green thereby reflects a non-utopian view as to what legislation can achieve (in contrast to
utopian socialists such as Robert Owen). He also believed that our ego is constrained by a degree of altruism.

Laissez-faire capitalism
The essentials:
The liberal perspective is strongly in favour of a capitalist economic system, which may be defined as an economic
system based upon private ownership and market forces. This observation applies to both main strands of liberal
thought, although they differ over the extent to which the state should intervene in order to uphold the smooth
functioning of the marketplace.
Classical liberals argue that a free-market ('free' that is from government intervention) facilitates the optimum
allocation of scarce resources within an economy. Over time, prices reach a state of equilibrium based on the

9
interplay of supply and demand. Those on the right-wing of the Liberal Democrats (such as the Orange Bookers)
believe that a laissez-faire system is compatible with freedom because economic agents are allowed to make
decisions on a voluntary basis. This argument applies to firms, customers and workers themselves.
Equally, classic liberals offer a firm rebuke to the left-wing argument that the owners of the means of production
exploit their workforce. As workers are free to offer their labour in return for wages, employers have every incentive
to treat their workforce in a fair and reasonable manner. If they do not, workers will either leave or become
demotivated. Either way, the level of service provided by that firm will be adversely affected and that would be bad
for business.
Extension material:
Classical liberals also offer an insightful argument in regard to reducing trading barriers within the global economy. It
has long been a fundamental tenant of classical liberalism that free trade raises living standards for all. According to
contemporary theorists such as Thomas Friedman (2000), globalisation represents a positive force within
international relations. Free trade generates prosperity and opportunity whereas state control denies people the
chance to better themselves. There are few better illustrations of this argument than China, a country that once
experienced dreadful famines during the cultural revolution under Chairman Mao is now responsible for the largest
number of people being lifted out of poverty in world history. China demonstrates that free-market reforms (as
instigated by Deng Xiaoping) represent the best route available towards the eradication of poverty. Deng's theory is
known as 'one centre and two bases' - the centre being economic constriction and the two bases being adherence to
one-party rule and furthering economic reform.
It should also be noted that social liberals are as favourable towards capitalism as classical liberals. However, there is
a major line of disagreement between these two strands over the proper role of the state and the level of welfare
provided. The social liberal stance facilitates an enabling role for the state to correct market failure. Social liberals
argue that the allocation of resources derived from the free exchange of economic agents can lead to undesirable
consequences. In order to resolve this, social liberals argue in favour of state intervention to make the market work
more effectively - which leads neatly onto the next section.

Keynesianism
The most persuasive account of the social liberal perspective originates from the English economist John Maynard
Keynes. Keynes rejected the argument that the market is a self-correcting mechanism naturally inclined towards
reaching a state of equilibrium. State intervention is therefore both necessary and justified to prevent the collapse of
capitalism. Despite this seemingly critical stance upon the unregulated market, Keynes was no socialist.
Keynes argued that government intervention was vital to uphold the capitalist system. For instance, the government
should implement a system of automatic stabilisers to smooth out the trade cycle. In essence, he believed that the
state could 'fine-tune' the economy by manipulating the level of demand within the economy. An increase in
government spending and a reduction in taxation would bolster demand, whereas a cut in government spending and
an increase in taxation would lower consumer demand. In doing so, the government could deal with the twin issues of
inflation and unemployment. During the post-war consensus (1945-1979) both main parties implemented a form of
Keynesian economics. It matched both the Tory notion of paternalism and the social democratic strand of socialism.
Recently, Keynesianism has experienced a revival from the response of governments and central banks to the credit
crunch of 2008.

10
The differing views and tensions within liberalism

Classical liberalism
• early liberals who believed that individual freedom would best be achieved with the state playing a minimal
role
The classical liberal school of thought is opposed to an expansion in the role of the state. With regards to social
justice, classical liberals believe that social problems should be solved by market forces. This faith in the market even
extends to the privatisation of essential public services. Ultimately, the marketplace is by far the best system for
meeting our needs. For instance, Adam Smith claimed an equitable society originates from a process of bargaining
based on mutual self-interest. In contrast, the dead hand of the state can lead to over- regulation and excessive
bureaucracy that undermines the economy.

Modern liberalism
• this emerged as a reaction against free-market capitalism, believing this had led to many individuals not
being free. Freedom could no longer simply be defined as 'being left alone'
Whereas early forms of liberalism viewed freedom as achieved via a limited role for the
state, modern forms of liberalism took a very different approach. According to many
historians, the laissez-faire approach became associated with causing the Great
Depression of the 1930s. Individuals could not be described as free when exposed to the
whims of the marketplace. Free-market capitalism had failed to provide freedom to all;
and a very different approach was required. This led to a shift away from classical
economics towards a form of Keynesianism. A mixed economy became preferable to a
system in which the marketplace was left alone.

A comparison between classical and modern liberalism

The role of the state

John Stuart Mill plays a significant role here in the distinction between the two main strands of liberalism. Mill can
readily be identified as the intellectual bridge between the eclipse of classical liberalism and the emergence of social
liberalism of the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century. There is a considerable change of emphasis amongst
liberal figures at the time in terms of how to maximise the concept of individual liberty. The primary focus here
concerns the role of the state.
According to Mill, the laissez-faire economic system is consistent with liberal notions of free exchange of labour and
the importance of consumer choice. Equally, Mill warned that when everyone expects the state to do things for them
they naturally hold the state responsible for every misfortune that befalls them. However, as time progressed we can
chart a more progressive outlook that eventually led to his support for worker cooperatives and an enabling role for
the state.

Freedom
Another important distinction between the two main strands of liberalism concerns the typology of freedom.
Whereas those on the right-libertarian axis favour negative liberty, social liberals endorse a form of positive liberty. In
his seminal work (1969) on 'two concepts of liberty,' Isaiah Berlin did more than any other theorist to explain how this
categorisation should work. He begins with the notion that the very existence of freedom implies both a negative and
positive conception. At a basic level, positive liberty consists of the right to do something. As such, it entails the
freedom to perform an action of some kind. Negative liberty however consists of the absence of obstacles, barriers or
constraints. We therefore possess negative liberty to the extent that actions are available to us.

Individualism vs constructivism
It is also possible to make a distinction between two different manifestations of liberalism, that of the individualistic
and the constructivist. The former perceives liberty as the result of limitations placed upon the state, whereas the
latter aims to create new rights via an enabling state. Naturally, these distinctions fit very comfortably within the two
main strands of liberalism.

11
Social justice
Yet perhaps the most important dividing line between classical liberalism and modern forms of liberalism concerns
that of social justice. A concept associated with those on the left, social justice may not at first appear to match the
liberal desire for greater freedom. However, the context and concerns voiced by liberal theorists (notably T.H. Green,
Tawney, Rawls and Beveridge) and political figures (such as Lloyd George) during the nineteenth and twentieth
century changed the direction and emphasis of liberal ideology. Their contributions did much to revive liberalism
during an era in which the franchise expanded towards women and the working-class.
The goal of social justice holds overt implications for the scope and scale of welfare provision. According to one of its
pioneering figures T.H. Green, society is more than the sum of its individual parts. We are both interdependent as well
as independent, and we achieve self-fulfilment not merely via the pursuit of our own happiness but also by altruistic
motivations such as concern for others. Inevitably, these assumptions shift the entire basis of the state away from the
night-watchman role towards an enabling state. In short, it is the government's responsibility to ensure that everyone
can experience the maximisation of liberty.
With regards to social liberalism, the philosopher John Rawls argued that inequality
can only be justified if it raises the level of prosperity for all. According to his
conception of social justice, inequality cannot be justified if it means the poorest
within society are made worse off than they were before. The Rawlsian difference
principle seeks to demonstrate how individual liberty and inequality can co-exist with
the concept of social justice. To this day, the work of John Rawls remains essential
towards any understanding of social liberalism. Given its importance, the
contribution from John Rawls will be considered in the 'Key Thinkers' section.
Section 3 - Key Thinkers within liberalism Key terminology

Harm principle
The essentials
Perhaps the most thought-provoking contribution to consider within liberalism is the harm principle. John Stuart Mill
(1859) made a clear distinction between self-regarding and other-regarding actions. He argued that the individual is
free to engage in self-regarding actions even when society considers those actions to be improper. However, a
sanction may be imposed when such actions impinge upon the freedom of others.
Extension material and application:
Societal attitudes towards pornography are a good illustration of Mill's distinction between self-regarding actions and
other-regarding actions. Whereas graphic images of pornographic acts undoubtedly have the capacity to offend,
access to such material in the private realm does not directly impact upon others provided it does not cause actions
that threaten other people's liberty. John Stuart Mill also put forward the renowned liberal argument that "the only
purpose for which power can be rightly exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to
prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." This is a key point of
departure between liberals and anarchists in terms of the libertarian side of the political spectrum.

Minimal state
The essentials:
All liberals believe vociferously in the rights of the individual and by implication belong on the libertarian axis of the
political spectrum. Both classical and social liberalism would concur with the German philosopher Immanuel Kant's
depiction of freedom as "the absence of external constraints upon the individual." For liberals, history warns us that
the biggest threat to individual liberty is the state.
Extension material and application:
There are a number of significant contributions from classical liberals as to the need for limited government. The
eighteenth century Scottish economist Adam Smith argued that a laissez-faire economic system based upon market
forces of supply and demand achieves the most efficient allocation of scarce resources. He believed that "we are led
by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of our intention." In Smith's eloquent words; "it is not from
the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own
interest." The invisible hand may be contrasted to what liberals call the 'dead hand' of a planned economy in which
resources are distributed by bureaucrats rather than the interaction of individuals.

12
The liberal perspective is also hostile to state intervention within the personal realm. A truly liberal society is one that
respects our private space and one in which the state does not impose a moral code upon us. As such, liberals believe
that we should tolerate any form of sexual conduct between consenting adults. Society has no right whatsoever to
impose its morality upon our personal lives. Adults are rational enough to be entrusted with as much freedom as
possible, and only those actions that harm others (notably children) should face a legal penalty. Otherwise, the liberal
outlook is a permissive one that facilitates the pursuit of personal pleasure.
The liberal stance upon such matters is particularly pertinent to sexual minorities. Liberals rightly fear that the agents
of the state are able to exercise their power to persecute minorities. That is why liberals believe that consenting
adults must have a personal realm outside the reach of government. Regimes that seek to regulate or ban acts of
what official authorities label as sexual deviance are intimately associated with illiberal measures. The morality police
used within theocratic regimes are entirely contrary to the liberal theorist Alexis de Tocqueville's dire warning about
the "tyranny of the majority."
It is important that students can properly differentiate between ideologies that may at first appear to share much
common ground. In the case of liberalism and anarchism, both adopt a firmly libertarian stance on issues such as
personal freedom and the relationship between the individual and society. However, there is an absolutely
fundamental point of departure between these two libertarian ideologies over the existence of the state. Liberals
believe that the government should implement a series of legislative measures to uphold our individual freedom.
Even classical liberals such as Thomas Jefferson argue "that government which governs best governs least." In stark
contrast, anarchists are implacably opposed to the state. In the words of Henry David Thoreau; "government is best
which governs not at all."

Enabling state
The essentials:
The creation of the modern welfare state owes much to the ideological outlook of social liberalism. Those on the
libertarian-left of the political spectrum argue that the state should accept some level of responsibility towards
meeting our welfare needs. In the UK, the Liberal government of 1906-11 implemented a coherent package of
measures to address the four spectres of old age, accident, sickness and unemployment. However, the modern
welfare state owes much to the Liberal peer Sir William Beveridge. In his best-selling report (1942) Beveridge
outlined a welfare scheme to combat the "five evils of want, squalor, idleness, disease and ignorance." In a
particularly famous phrase, the Beveridge Report laid the blueprint for a welfare state that would provide for its
citizens from "the cradle to the grave."
According to the social liberal perspective, the welfare state is entirely consistent with liberal goals such as the
maximisation of freedom and equal opportunities. Those who are disadvantaged within society require a degree of
state assistance in order to truly experience a life of liberty. The state is therefore entirely justified in allocating a
modest redistribution of wealth within society. Without sufficient resources, it is unlikely that the poorest could do
that which most people would consider worth doing.
In order to fund the welfare state, social liberals favour a degree of progressive taxation. Whilst this enables a modest
level of wealth redistribution, there is no justification whatsoever within liberal ideology for punitive levels of
taxation. In modern times, a very clear illustration of this argument is the pupil premium. The premise of the pupil
premium is to help those born into poorer families via state intervention. It therefore seeks to ensure equality of
opportunity within the early years of education when our life chances are already being shaped and determined.
There is also some degree of support amongst social liberals within the Liberal Democrats for a mansion tax.
Extension material:
It is in the realm of welfare policy that we can identify the largest division of all within the ideology of liberalism. In
essence, classical liberals are morally opposed to the welfare state. As befitting those further to the right of the
political spectrum, classical liberals argue that the welfare state undermines our sense of responsibility and self-
reliance. Recipients become reliant on the largesse of the state, which in turn contributes to a form of dependency.
Far from enhancing liberty, the provision of welfare services actually threatens it. Doling out benefits on the basis of
something for nothing strengthens the state at the expense of the individual. For classical liberals within the Liberal
Democrats and the Conservative Party, this represents the slippery slope towards socialism.

13
In terms of helping those in need, classical liberals do at least concede that some state
intervention is required. However, they firmly advocate a night-watchman state rather
than an enabling state that provides welfare to its citizens. Consistent with their
conception of negative freedom, the role of the state must always be limited. Ultimately,
the solution to poverty lies with the individual and their family. Richard Cobden for instance
argued that the less well-off should look to "their own efforts and self-reliance rather than from the
law." Hard work, thrift and self-reliance enable those with fewest resources in society to
escape their situation. It is not the role of the state to provide for our welfare needs, and
this would undermine the proper route out of poverty. As the blunt words of the American
social scientist and classical liberal William Sumner remind us; "the drunkard in the gutter is just
where he ought to be."

Key Thinkers
In this section, we will cover the key ideas of five liberal theorists:
• John Locke (1632 - 1704)
• Mary Wollstonecraft (1759 - 1797)
• J.S. Mill (1806 - 1873)
• John Rawls (1921 - 2002)
• Betty Friedan (1921 - 2006)
•
John Locke (1632-1704)
• Social contract theory - society, state and government are based on a theoretical voluntary agreement
• Limited government - that government should be limited and based on consent from below
• The essentials on the social contract:
The most lasting contribution offered by Locke towards the field of political theory is that of the social contract. To
fully comprehend his work on the social contract, it is important to recognise that he aims to construct a liberal
framework centred upon limited government, individual rights and government by consent. In seeking to achieve this,
Locke begins with the assumption that individuals are rational entities. When offering their consent to the state, they
are at the same time promoting their own self-interest. As rational entities, we fully acknowledge that our liberties
are best protected via governance by the state. It is only the state that can properly uphold our basic liberties and
protect us from the threat of foreign invasion and social disorder.
According to Locke, consent may be provided on a formal basis via an election or on an informal setting as a
consequence of tacit consent. The former is easily recognisable to those with even a cursory understanding of politics.
Within a liberal democratic regime, the government seeks a mandate from the people during a nationwide election. It
is said to be legitimate on this basis. In terms of the latter, Locke declared that consent could be taken as assumed
from the general behaviour of the people and the absence of major social disorder.
As with all legal relationships, the social contract imposes duties on both sides. The state is obliged to protect its
citizens whilst we in turn must accept the laws of the land. If we do not, a sanction may be imposed. However, if the
state were to act in violation of the contract, the people are entitled to withdraw their consent. As befits a liberal
theorist, legitimacy is based upon the consent of the people rather than say divine providence.
Locke was the first liberal theorist to outline the social contract, and for that he is rightly considered to be a pioneer.
He outlines in a clear and succinct manner how we might leave a state of nature and create a system that maintains
our fundamental liberties. Lockean notions can be identified throughout the liberal democratic world, not least when
the ruling government seeks to renew their mandate during an election. Locke's ideas also explain why the people
accept the legitimacy of the government and obey laws that they might disagree with.
Extension material: In terms of influence, Locke's depiction of the social contract provided the theoretical basis for the
American Declaration of Independence and to a lesser extent the glorious revolution in the UK (which Locke
supported). It also had some influence upon the Rights of Man drawn up soon after the French Revolution. As well as
the social contract and the question of representative government, John Locke was also deeply concerned with the
issue of religious tolerance. Taking a solidly liberal line, he argued that using force to change someone's beliefs is
irrational. Whilst they may say that they have changed their beliefs to avoid further torture, this does not mean
they've changed their beliefs. Locke was commenting at a time when Catholics and Protestants were tortured for
their religious beliefs, and his understanding of tolerance is primarily located within the broader issue of religion. That
said, Locke's argument is applicable towards the post-9/11 debate concerning the use of torture in relation to the
'war against terror.' Locke's insights would also explain why religious persecution is at odds with a liberal society.

14
The essentials on limited government:
Another important element of Locke's work is his concept of limited government. He firmly believed that we need a
state to protect our freedom. In doing so, Locke rejects the anarchist perspective. According to Locke, a stateless
society is one in which we would be devoid of freedom. This is encapsulated in arguably his most famous comment
"where laws do not exist, man has no freedom." It is only the state that can ever hope to adequately protect us from
harm. This Lockean conception of the state could be said to place the rights of individual as secondary to the majority
will. Locke might therefore be considered a collectivist in that he subordinates the purposes of the individual for the
needs of society. As such, Locke could be seen as something of a forerunner to Rousseau's notion of the general will.
Extension material:
In common with other liberal figures of the time, Locke placed great emphasis upon property rights. In his second
treatise on government; he boldly states that "the chief end of people placing themselves under government is the
preservation of property." It must be understood here that Locke's understanding of property encapsulates "life,
liberty and estate." Locke even stipulates that the law of nature requires that no- one should harm another in regard
to his life, liberty or propositions. However, this is largely taken as a given. In addition, Locke claims that the natural
right to property derives from the right to one's life and labour. Men also have a right to preserve their life and that a
man's labour is his own.

Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-97)

• Reason - women are rational and independent beings capable of reason
• Formal equality - in order to be free, women should enjoy full civil liberties and be allowed to have a career
The essentials:
Mary Wollstonecraft is one of the predominant figures within the first-wave of feminism. She is also a leading figure
within the branch of theory described as liberal feminism. Wollstonecraft is best-known for her work 'A vindication of
the rights of woman' in which she argued that both men and women should be treated equally as rational human
beings. She also claimed that women were not naturally inferior to men, but may appear to be because they've been
denied educational opportunities. In order to substantiate her perspective, she once argued that "the mind has no
gender." This is one of the most well-known quotes within the ideology of feminism (along with "the personal is the
political" and "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"). Wollstonecraft advocated formal equality in which
women were entitled to the same civil liberties as men. In doing so, women would be able to experience a life of
genuine liberty free from the constraints of patriarchy. This would even extend towards women being allowed to
have a career outside of the home, an argument that was well ahead of its time. For such reasons, Wollstonecraft is
rightly regarded as one of the founding mothers of the feminist movement and managed to establish an impressive
legacy given her short life. That said, attention towards her unorthodox lifestyle has perhaps gained a
disproportionate amount of attention. Her reputation was tarnished and the double standards imposed on women
who are prepared to speak their mind is still a relevant point to consider today. Wollstonecraft was a true pioneer and
should be properly recognised for that. A great many feminists that came afterward owe a debt of gratitude to her
trail-blazing approach.

John Stuart Mill (1806-73)

• Harm principle - that individuals should be free to do anything except harm other individuals
• Tolerance - belief that the popularity of a view does not necessarily make it correct
John Stuart Mill dominated liberal thought during the nineteenth century with insights offered into the harm
principle, free will, the despotism of custom, experiments in living, utilitarianism, the marketplace of ideas and
electoral reform. Taken together, no theorist has contributed more to liberalism than John Stuart Mill.
Given its broader legacy towards political theory and the legal system, it seems fitting to begin with the harm
principle. John Stuart Mill makes a crucial distinction between self-regarding and other-regarding actions. Ultimately,
we should be free to pursue those actions that in no way constrain the liberty of others. We should therefore be able
to engage in self-regarding actions. The state (on behalf of society) is only justifying in limiting our actions when those
actions impinge upon the freedom of others. Mill's conception of free will flows seamlessly from his previous work on
the harm principle. John Stuart Mill begins with the proposition that we are sovereign entities capable of exercising
free will. As such, we should accept responsibility for charting our own path in life. In contrast, "he who lets the
world... choose his plan of life for him has no need of any other faculty than the apelike one of imitation."
With regards to the despotism of custom, Mill warns us against the mediocrity of public opinion. He believes there is
a tendency to tell everyone to act in the same manner. Sadly, the despotism of custom seeks to crush self-expression
and is therefore contrary to the right and proper goal of a liberal society. We need to facilitate "experiments in living"
in order that freedom is experienced to the very full. A liberal society is one that tolerates the full diversity of
lifestyles.

15
In order to guard against the despotism of custom, we must avoid forcing our opinions on others unless we are
certain of their truth. In order to ascertain the truth, assumptions must be subject to the marketplace of ideas. In
doing so, the truth will emerge from discussion and experience. For instance, it is essential that we play Devil's
advocate in order to establish that which holds true. In addition, Mill states that a 'fact' must face the rigours of open
debate. This is arguably most relevant in the context of religion. Belief in a deity often comes with the proviso that
followers seek to convert others. However, throughout history the desire to convert has come at a price of appalling
bloodshed and repression. Many people have subconsciously followed Mill's advice and not sought to convert others
towards their faith.
Mill also points out that majority opinion can be wrong as the majority holds no true authority and no absolute
certainty. To support this argument, Mill cites popular opinion of the past which has since been rejected by
contemporary society. What was therefore received wisdom in the past may no longer hold that status. Similarly, that
which is accepted as right in the present day may well be rejected at some point in the future as sexist or racist (i.e.
Mill himself assumed that the British Empire was part of the white man's burden of civilising lesser people).
Ultimately, Mill believed that we must also be free to question beliefs within society. The majority can easily misjudge
potentially good ideas for society. They may adopt a reactionary
mindset grounded in tradition. In doing so, they prevent the emergence of measures that would improve society.
With regards to utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill believed that "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote
happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." However, he departs from Bentham in his view of
what constitutes happiness - claiming that higher pleasures are superior to the simple pursuit of pleasure. This is
expressed quite clearly in his famous assertion that "it is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied." Mill
therefore adopts a more qualitative aspect to his search for the greatest happiness for the greatest number than
Jeremy Bentham. Indeed, it is worth noting that Bentham believed that in regard to quantifying pleasure "pushpin
was as good as poetry."
Throughout his life, John Stuart Mill was a passionate advocate of electoral reform. Most notably, Mill is one of the
very few male theorists who could credibly be labelled as a feminist. He advocated female emancipation long before
the issue was on the political agenda. Indeed, it is not unfair to call him a pioneer of the first-wave of feminist
thought. Mill also favoured proportional representation long before it was a mainstream cause.

John Rawls (1921-2002)

• Theory of justice - opinion that society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living
• The veil of ignorance - a hypothetical scenario where individuals agree on the type of society they want, from
a position where they lack knowledge of their own position in society
The essentials:
The American philosopher John Rawls explored the question of fairness via a concept known as the veil of ignorance.
This requires us to place ourselves in the position of others. It also requires us to consider the danger of being born
into poverty. Rather than take that risk, Rawls assumed that people would want a fairer society with adequate
housing, safe neighbourhoods, a good education system and an unbiased criminal justice system. Society can be said
to be fair when we can state that no-one would care what circumstances we would be born into. When given the
choice, we would prefer to live in a country like Denmark rather than risk the post-code lottery that characterised his
native land.
Rawlsian philosophy ultimately seeks to promote the notion of 'justice as fairness.' The principles of justice are those
everyone would agree to from a position of ignorance. To create a just society, we first need to agree on the
principles behind justice. These can be established from his famous thought experiment. The original position means
we are all equal in our ignorance. Under these conditions, we would agree to the liberty principle (such as freedom of
expression and freedom from arbitrary arrest) and the difference principle (in which inequalities are permitted
provided they are positions open to all and benefit the least advantaged within society).
Extension material and application:
Rawlsian philosophy is unusual in its claim that we can establish something beneficial from ignorance. An analogy may
be drawn with jurors who are prevented from accessing outside information because it might influence their decision.
This conception of justice however is not accepted by everyone, and we should be wary of labelling fairness with
social justice (not least the challenge posed by Robert Nozick, the conservative philosopher). Moreover, the veil of
ignorance has been criticised for its assumption that individuals are risk- averse. Some people may be prepared to
accept the risk due to the possibility of being born into favourable social circumstances.
Rawls also recognised the corrosive and regressive influence of the American Dream. According to Rawls, the 'rags to
riches' narrative merely prevented the rich and powerful doing something about the profound unfairness of society.
Instead, he sought to create a simple polemic way to improve society. Throughout his life, Rawls was deeply moved

16
by the arbitrariness of suffering and offered inspiration for those who believed in the power of ideas to alleviate social
injustice.

Betty Friedan (1921-2006)

• Legal equality - women are as capable as men and that oppressive laws and social views must be overturned
• Equal opportunity - women are being held back from their potential because of the limited number of jobs
that are 'acceptable' for women
Betty Friedan is widely considered to be the mother of women's liberation, a leading exponent within liberal feminism
and the figure who instigated the second-wave of the feminist movement. Her most important contribution towards
the ideology of feminism is 'The Feminine Mystique' in which she sought to highlight the manifold issues facing the
American housewife. Friedan exposed the stifling boundaries placed upon women (particularly mothers and
housewives) and identified the multiple frustrations of those who felt trapped by the confines of social expectations.
During her interviews with American women, Friedan found that very few of them had ever seen a positive female
role-model who worked outside of the home whilst having a family. She also found that housewives were 'tied to the
kitchen sink' due to the constraints of family life. Friedan concludes that women were afraid to ask themselves the
devastating question - "is this all?" Her research identified what she memorably called "the problem with no name,"
a tangible sense of dissatisfaction that lay buried deep within the minds of the American housewife. Friedan claimed
that women were prevented from fulfilling their potential in life (especially in the public realm) due to the confines of
this cultural myth. In doing so, she pointed out in graphic language that "the shores are strewn with the casualties of
the feminine mystique."
As her investigation progressed, Friedan came to identify the importance of advertising in the creation of the feminine
mystique. Ultimately, the feminine mystique was an illusion maintained by the male-dominated advertising industry.
According to Friedman; "the feminine mystique says that the highest value and the only commitment for women is the
fulfilment of their own femininity." Women were therefore sold a lifestyle that centred around marriage, the home,
the family and their associated material goods. However, many women wanted more from life than that on offer to
them.
Friedan believed passionately in the emancipation of women from the confines of a
patriarchal society. During a time of conservative social mores, Friedan argued
that women were as capable as men in terms of performing any type of work or
career path. She was also an advocate of raising consciousness and lobbied in
favour of legislative reform to address gender inequality. Friedan's approach to the
problems facing women typify the liberal feminist position on the path towards
female emancipation. Whilst the political process is dominated by men, Friedan and
others believe there is sufficient scope within its boundaries for women to advance
the feminist position.

Additional Definitions
Accountability A key concept within a liberal democracy consisting of two related elements. The first element is
where elected representatives are answerable to the people. Accountability also consists of the government facing
scrutiny by elected representatives within the legislature.
Capitalism An economic system based on the market forces of supply and demand, private ownership and minimal
state intervention. During the cold war, the economic system of capitalism was in ideological conflict with
communism.
Enlightenment A philosophical movement that emerged within Europe during the seventeenth and eighteenth
century. The Enlightenment represented a challenge to the prevalent ecclesiastical orthodoxy of the time in which the
natural order of things reflected God's will, and any challenge to the status quo was a challenge to the will of God. The
Enlightenment should therefore be understood, first and foremost, as a revolution of ideas against the conventional
wisdom of the day.
Equality of opportunity Where individuals are provided with an equal chance in life regardless of social class,
ethnicity, age, gender, sexuality or religion. Liberalism is commonly associated with policies to enhance equality of
opportunity.
Freedom An expression of individual liberty closely aligned to the notion of a democratic society. In common with
other democratic societies, Britain is a relatively free country. However, there are laws which limit our freedom to
protect us from those who wish to do harm. In ideological terms, the concept is usually divided into positive and
negative freedom.

17
Individualism A political stance applied to those who place an emphasis upon the individual as opposed to the
collective.
Laissez-faire economics An economic system based upon the free-market and minimal state intervention. The most
ardent supporters of this economic approach are classical liberals.
Liberal democracy A synergy of two political concepts; 'liberal' freedoms alongside a 'democratic' method of electing
representatives and the governing party involving periodic competitive elections in which almost all adults are
entitled to vote. A liberal democracy is therefore liberal in the sense that the power of decisionmakers is limited,
and democratic in the sense that there is competition for power between politicians and political parties.
Mixed economy An economic system with a sizeable element of the private sector and the public sector.
A mixed economy is most closely associated with social liberals.
Moral relativism The view that one set of morals is no better or worse than another. Moral relativism is
a manifestation of liberal views on lifestyle issues. Those on the right of the political spectrum however
believe in moral absolutism.
Open government The widespread availability of official records and official information to the general public. In
a liberal democracy, it is argued that the public have the right to access information from the government.
Participatory democracy A form of democracy in which citizens are actively involved in the decision-making
process. John Locke favoured a form of participatory democracy to facilitate the moral betterment of individuals.
Pluralism A political philosophy influenced by liberalism in which power is dispersed within society amongst a
variety of organisations. The dispersal of power avoids the creation of a dictatorship and helps to ensure that
power is used for the good of society as opposed to one social group/ruling class. Pluralism is a key concept
within a liberal democracy.
Rights An entitlement held by an individual or group. There are many different types of rights - such as positive
rights, legal rights, negative rights and moral rights. The concept of rights is related in some manner to the
notion of responsibilities or duties.
Social justice Those policies and measures designed to ensure a more equitable distribution of life chances within
society. The term tends to be associated with those on the left of the political spectrum, including social liberals and
socialists. It also consists of various attempts made to address the problem of social exclusion and inequality within
society.
Utilitarianism A political philosophy aimed at attaining the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To its
supporters, a society based upon utilitarianism would provide the basis for a liberal utopia. To its critics, utilitarianism
provides leaders with the ability to discriminate against minorities to protect the interests of the majority.

18