Political Liberalism

Modus Vivendi Liberalism

Progressive Liberalism

Utilitarianism (not a liberal theory
according to the author)

Liberal Idealism (not a liberal theory according to the author)

Primary goal of politics: overall happiness of society

Contradictions with Liberalism:

  • Absence of individualism ("general well-being"
  • Reject "natural rights" (instead rights are determined by the government)
  • Rights can be abolished when they no longer serve the "common good"

State's principal role: manage the bargaining process
(no emphasis on night watchman)

Main concern people : finding happiness
Main concern government : determining what pleases them to design policies to achieve that

Optimism:
most people are intelligent + reasonable, thus capable of doing the right thing

Barganing: at the core

  • trade-offs
  • interests are "negotiable, divisible, exchangeable"

Reason has little to do with determining what makes people happy: it matters for figuring out the best way to maximise collective utility

instrumental rationality

  • Public opinion: powerful force for good
  • Progressive view of history

Not a laissez-faire approach:

  • interventionest
  • actively engaged in social engineering

Leaders play an essential role

Contradictions with Liberalism:

  • Human beings are social animals (no room for individualism)
  • Individual freedom but individuals are first and foremost social beings

Agreement on the possibility to design an organic society that allows citizens to take max. advantage of their individual rights

Patriotism :

  • highly effective means of unifying a society

Nationalism widely admired because it was seen to embody popular sovereignty (which is closely tied to democracy)

Point of agreement political liberals (esp. MVL) and liberal idealists:

  • fear of a too-powerful state

State plays a central role in nationalism, so one would expect LI to favour a formidable state with abundant capacity to intervene in civil society for the common good, but they only embrace the notion of a strong state reluctantly (tend to worry that a state with too much power will bring serious trouble)

Politics is about the pursuit of moral goodness

  • "moral progress of man" (not the utilitarian goal of maximising happiness)
    however:
  • inability to nail down what human perfectibility (morality) would look like

Another deep-rooted belief:

  • reason as the key tool for realising moral goodness

Liberal idealists have more faith in the common people's ability to use their critical faculties in smart ways

Utilitarians tend to be elitists: great faith in the mental faculties of the governing elites

Dewey on how reason can help build the ideal society:

  • given the right educational opportunities
  • average individual would rise to undreamed heights of social and political intelligence
  • cumulative intelligence of cooperating individuals would take society to even greater heights

Intelligence as an alternative method of social action

Zimmern: "the road to internationalism lies through nationalism"

Power of reason kept passionate disagreements at bay: so states in the international system (like individuals in a society) could realise a natural harmony of interests.

Unbounded Progressivism

Bounded Progressivism

Deeply pessimistic about our ability to reach agreement on core principles. As individuals often make decisions without the help of reason, it seems to not point us to any objective truth about what political order is best

Individualism

Ability to reason

Essential function of rights:

  • give individuals maximum personal freedom to pursue their own interests

Emphasis almost exclusively on negative rights, largely involving freedom from government interference in individual action:

  • freedom to assemble
  • freedom of the press
  • freedom of speech
  • all individuals are equal, but equality does not require government intervention
  • right to own and exchange property (closely tied to capitalism)

Dealing with the possibility of deadly conflict:

  • Right to life: the right to choose whatever lifestyle they want, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others

  • Norm of toleration: accept that others will sometimes disagree about core principles (live-and-let-live approach to life) However, tolerance has its limits, some people cannot abide disagreement


  • A strong state that sits above society and maintains order

Roots in Enlightenment

Three principles roles of the state to maintain order:

  • Acts as a night watchman (protects individual rights and prevents portal combat between people or factions with conflicting views
  • Writes rules that define acceptable/unacceptable conduct
  • Acts as an arbiter (ensure that conflicts do not lead to violence)

Modern liberalism cannot work without a strong state

do not like the idea of the state interfering in society to promote any kind of individual rights (gov. paramount goal is to protect rights that might be threatened)

Pessimism about our critical faculties goes beyond this:

  • governments do not make meaningful progress; they hinder
  • no place for an expansive welfare state

Everyone has a right to equal opportunity

  • Governments have both a responsibility and the ability to pursue policies that ensure that outcome

Dworkin, Fukuyama, Pinker

Rawls

Sounds like Modus Vivendi Liberals

Fukuyama: we have reached the "endpoint of mankind's ideological evolution"

Pinker: however much people differ, there can be, in principle, a meeting of the minds

Unpersuasive: difficult to reach a consensus on public issues / universal agreement

Unbounded progressives' profound optimism about our ability to reason is undermined by their own writings + failure to offer a compelling explanation for why human nature has changed so profoundly in just a few centuries

Tolerance: of central importance

Tolerance is less important:

  • agreement on first principles may make it unnecessary

No empirical basis for claims about deep tolerance

"No natural inclination toward reasonableness or tolerance"

Occasionally makes arguments that contradict his fundamental claims about peacefulness of liberal societies (leaving him sounding like a MVL)

Friedrich Hayek

Emphasis on positive rights, requires a serious effort by the state to help its citizens:

  • right to equal opportunity
  • right to health care
  • right to a decent education
  • right to live free of poverty

Negative rights can conflict with positive rights

  • equal opportunity often conflicts with the right to private property

Do not want social engineering

Interventionist state, but remain wary of big government