Classical Liberalism Research Articles

Some issues regarding the principles and criteria of lawful restriction of human freedom

The article is devoted to the study of the content and peculiarities of implementation of the principles and criteria for limiting human freedoms. The author concludes that the principle of freedom should be studied through the following aspects: axiological, theoretical and practical. The first one involves maximum absolutisation of the principle of freedom for its further deployment in social relations. The theoretical dimension involves the study of the specifics of the content, types, features, and nature of freedom as a legal principle, which allows for a better understanding of it and its more harmonious implementation in legal relations. The practical dimension involves studying the problems of implementing the principle of freedom, the degree of its presence in various branches of law, and the specifics of its restrictions. The article notes that the principle of proportionality means that restriction of freedom can only be a means, not an aim, freedom is always the highest value for law and its restrictions as the ultimate goal are inadmissible, but only as a regulatory means to ensure rights and freedoms, national security, healthcare, public order, etc. The principle of public welfare as a criterion for restricting freedom is more complicated, since there are two doctrines: classical liberalism, which puts freedom above all else and limits state intervention, and social liberalism, which insists on the welfare of all and therefore more active state intervention in the economic life of society. The author concludes that restrictions on freedom must be in the general public interest in the economic, social and political spheres. The author notes that limitation of the principle of freedom is a reduction of its scope, but not a restriction of its content. By restricting freedom, its content remains unchanged, otherwise it will lose its legal value. The article provides the author’s definition of restriction of the principle of freedom as a lawful interference by the State with the capabilities of a person, which is expressed in setting limits for a possible model of behaviour in a certain territory, individually or for certain groups of persons. The author emphasises that one of the key problems with the implementation of measures restricting human freedom is excessiveness. An important public interest allows for the restriction of freedom to achieve it, but other interests and values may suffer. The principles of minimum possible restriction and priority social value should apply here.

LIBERALISM IN THE DISCOURSE OF THE THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

The article analyzes the genesis of liberal theory and the main stages of its development in the context of socio-political changes on the international arena. The main idea is formulated and the main provisions of classical liberalism in international relations are revealed. The essential factors of the emergence of social-democratic liberalism are studied and its influence on international relations is considered. The features and basic values of neoliberalism, declared the highest criteria for the stability of Western society, are analyzed. Special attention is paid to the analysis of certain theories of neoliberalism in the science of international relations: liberal institutionalism, commercial liberalism, and liberal internationalism.

Divided by the Atlantic: Classical Liberals and Libertarians on International Order

Divided by the Atlantic: Classical Liberals and Libertarians on International Order

Is “capitalism” a misnomer?: on Marx’s “capitalism” and knight’s “civilization”

The name “capitalism” derives from Marx’s false analogy between medieval land ownership and the “ownership of the means of production.” However, unlike medieval land, capital goods can be rented out, e.g., by Frank Knight’s entrepreneur, and then the capital owner does not hold those management or product rights. What then is the characteristic institution in our civilization? It is the voluntary renting of workers. What then is the relationship between Classical Liberalism, the dominant philosophy behind Economics, and a lifetime labour contract? Frank Knight had plenty to say about the doctrine of inalienable rights which disallows such contracts.

The Real Existing Real Reality 2022. Article 1. From the Victory of Neo-Liberalism to the Self-Destructive World Society

The present study ‘The Real Existing Real Reality 2022’ consists of two related articles. These are reflections on societies, and perhaps the world on the road to self-destruction. The author wanted to add a subtitle to the article ‘The three-quarter time waltz of the self-destructive society, the new social structure of the Three Societies and a war, where good can at least fight against evil.’ In this work we discuss the currently urgent issue of how to interpret the rapidly increasing peaceful and non-peaceful transformations in the definitive global world. We point out the common features of the current events. Our title (The Real Existing Real Reality 2022) goes back to Boris Ponomarjov's phrase about ‘real existing socialism,’ which should have been higher than all ‘utopian’ concepts. All references to ‘reality’ seem to have two different directions. In the first case, ‘reality’ is more valuable than utopias (as in Ponomarjov). In the second case, reality is poor and negative compared to the ideas. But we have actually to deal with a third case. ‘Reality’ becomes the highest value, because the possession of the definition of Reality becomes the real goal of the present war. In the first article, ‘From the Victory of Neo-Liberalism to the Self-Destructive World Society,’ we show the ‘real’ process, and not yet reflected, of the political and social transformations. The triumphant neo-liberalism has appeared in every point and as the personification of every value in the current discussions. The greatest problem of the present is to identify liberalism with the monetarist economic system. The really existing socialism of the 1970s and 1980s was the subject against which a classical political liberalism of the human rights, a neo-liberal epistemology (Karl R. Popper) and a market-economy neo-liberalism could unite. Real socialism did not misunderstand this new situation. It has simply not recognized it. A new description of global society is only possible with a hypothesis of three ‘societies’ of this global world. The first society would be the society of the good will, for which the value-oriented life of this year (1989) can no longer be an open problem. We define the second society as the one that is not fundamentally constituted by the good will described above. We see the third society in that political class or elite whose power came into being in the year 1989. The ‘third’ society is the object of self-identification of the ‘first’; the ‘first’ is the product of 1989. The ‘second’ society, as the majority, lived in the shadows for a long time after 1989, its emancipation began after the first elementary shocks (economic crises or the imperialist turn) of globalization. When we talk about the further social embedding of these Three Societies, the phenomenon of public debt seems to be one of the most relevant constitutive factors of our society in the plan. The correlations are more than obvious. The third society suggests to the first society that the heavily indebted state is not a really relevant social fact. It also suggests that today's world economy is the realm of normality, in which only the bad and undisciplined policies of individual governments or the oil price are the real movers.

Communication Strategy for Deliberalization of Islamic Thought at UNIDA Gontor

Liberalism, when viewed from its development, has two main streams that mutually use the term liberal. Classical liberalism or economic liberalism emphasizes individual freedom in carrying out activities in the economic field, and social liberalism, emphasizes the state's role in defending individual rights, usually formed as anti-discrimination laws. In addition to the trend of liberalization which emphasizes economic, political, and social rights, liberalism is also found in the field of religious thought. Indeed, liberalism in Western civilization's social and political fields has slowly separated religion from social and political affairs. Religion has no place in social and political interests. Concepts such as pluralism, multiculturalism, feminism, gender equality, democratization, humanism, freedom, and human rights are several layers of elements in the liberalization movement. Even theses and dissertations in Islamic universities are written to seek Islamic justification for these concepts. To stem this massive liberalization movement, researchers take the example of preventing the liberalization of Islamic thought in Islamic tertiary institutions, namely at the University of Darussalam (UNIDA) Gontor. This type of research is qualitative, with in-depth interview data collection techniques, and data analysis techniques namely triangulation of data sources (results of interviews and previous research). The result of this research is that UNIDA Gontor uses a curriculum based on the Islamization of Science. In addition, Islamization activities are also carried out through weekly student discussions guided by mentors, bi-weekly studies for lecturers and staff, scientific papers written by students and lecturers, and community service activities.

Human and Divine Law at the Secular University: The Divide between Classical Liberalism and Post-Classical Liberalism

The American university has been guided by classical liberalism in its defense of the freedom of speech and academic freedom. The idea is that a university is a place where all ideas and perspectives can be debated. However, this idea is increasingly being challenged by those who want the secular university to be a place that advances a social philosophy that promises to transform society by dismantling structural racism and providing for greater equity. In this article, I will argue that both of these models have been shaped by democratic legal ideals and both share a common skeptical assumption about the basic questions of meaning that each person must answer. The legal structures developed by Westphalian modernity attempt neutrality on questions about meaning. This can be seen even in recent Supreme Court decisions affirming the individual’s right to determine meaning for themselves. This skeptical root has produced the conflict between classical liberals and the social transformation that we are witnessing at our universities. I argue for a third option that I find in the Declaration of Independence, which affirms that we can and should know the answers to basic questions which then provide the foundation for education and law.

The Influence of Enlightenment Ideas on Human Progress and Well-Being

The Influence of Enlightenment Ideas on Human Progress and Well-Being

The Business of Virtues: The Theological Virtues in the Moral Conception of Commercial Organizations

In her 2006 book, The Bourgeois Virtues, economist and philosopher Deirdre McCloskey argued that what fundamentally drives economic development and growth is not so much government intervention or unrestricted libertinism but a set of “bourgeois virtues” that celebrates classical liberalism while powering the innovation that gave rise to modern economies. Drawing on the seven virtues proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas, McCloskey discusses the ways in which each virtue interfaced with the other six and their critical roles in the history of economic development. This article builds on her insights by making two moves. McCloskey, a skeptic of neo-institutional philosophies, does not consider significantly virtue’s application to commercial organizations. I argue, however, that these ideas do matter to the organization and operation of businesses and similar institutions. In fact, I suggest that the ideology and ethics of institutions function as part of a dialectical conversation between the institutional “ontology” that forms the moral character of its members and those members, who, in turn, (re)form the institution’s ethics. Second, if institutions can embody virtues, how the cardinal virtues—prudentia, temperantia, fortitudo, and iustitia—figure institutionally is not difficult. More challenging is how the theological virtues—love, faith, and hope—which seem to apply to individuals, can apply. Thus, this article argues for how these virtues can be embodied in business organizations, concluding that such a framework allows for a “trinitarian” understanding of the economy as a perichoretic dynamic between the consumer, business organizations, and political/legal structures. In doing so, it criticizes and provides a way out of prevailing political dynamics that often pit individual freedom against institutions.

Political and legal ideas of Friedrich Hayek regarding the development and significance of the concept of the rule of law

The article examines the concept of the rule of law in the context of the political and legal views of Friedrich Hayek, a famous Austrian economist and philosopher who had a significant impact on modern political and legal theory. The article examines the essence of the concept of «rule of law» from the point of view of F. Hayek, and also analyzes his vision of the interaction of law, the state, and society. The main aspects of the concept of the rule of law, which F. Hayek developed in his writings, are considered. The views of F. Hayek on the role of the state in ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens, the influence of legal norms on the functioning of the economy and society as a whole are analyzed.
 Attention is drawn to the fact that F. Hayek was one of the most influential economists and philosophers of the 20th century, who defended the ideas of classical liberalism and criticized socialism, interventionism and collectivism. It is shown that in the views of F. Hayek, the rule of law is a necessary condition for the development of freedom, democracy and market economy and actually means that laws should be general, abstract, stable, known and fair, and not aimed at achieving certain goals or interests. Such laws create equal conditions for all market participants and allow the use of scattered knowledge that exists in society.
 The concept of the rule of law is studied in the context of classical liberal ideas and ideals. It is analyzed how F.\ Hayek perceived the idea of limiting the power of the state through legal mechanisms and means protecting the individual rights of citizens. Within the framework of F. Hayek’s political and legal views, special emphasis is placed on the idea of «constitutional liberalism» and the determination of the limits of power. It is studied how these ideas contributed to the formation of the rule of law as a system that guarantees a balance between individual freedoms and the need for state regulation. The main aspects of F. Hayek’s philosophical and political views are highlighted, which have become key to understanding the essence and significance of the rule of law in modern legal discourse.
 The interaction between the rule of law and the economy is analyzed, paying special attention to F. Hayek’s contribution to the formation of the concept and the development of relevant practices. Key aspects such as the role of law, property, and market relations in the context of the rule of law are considered. It is highlighted how F. Hayek determined the importance of the legal foundation for ensuring the stability, transparency and efficiency of the economic environment. In addition, attention is drawn to F. Hayek’s views on the role of the law as a stabilizing factor that should protect the rights of citizens and ensure the efficient operation of economic structures.

The Balance between "Negative Liberty" and "Positive Liberty"

John Stuart Mill, a prominent figure in classical liberalism, inherits the emphasis on individual spirit from earlier liberals such as Locke. He expanded this notion to include social liberty on the basis of political liberty, deepening the public understanding of individual freedom. To some extent, Mill's recognition of negative liberty and human diversity also corrects the classical political philosophy's singular and universal natural purpose. Moreover, his proposal of positive standards and purposes, based on negative liberty, not only complements and corrects classical liberalism but also offers solutions to the problems arising from neoliberalism in the contemporary world.

Public Reason Naturalism

Abstract I will argue that the natural law theory of morality, when extended into a political theory of justice, results in a picture of political justice much like that of public reason liberalism. However, natural law political theory, I argue, need not entail a natural law theory of morality. While facts about what societies ought to do supervene upon facts about what is good for human beings, there are distinct goods involved and distinct reasons for action. Rather, considerations taken from the common good as guiding public policy results in a two-layer approach to public reasonability, resembling features of both consensus and convergence accounts of public reason. Consequently, the differences between natural law and classical public reason liberalism are significant but are not as significant as might have otherwise appeared. In fact, natural law political theory might be a more consistent development of the idea of a public reason than those of classical liberalism.

Epistemic problems in Hayek’s defence of free markets

Abstract Friedrich von Hayek’s classical liberalism argued that free markets allow individuals the greatest opportunity to achieve their ends. This paper develops an internal critique of this claim. It argues that once externalities are introduced, the forms of economic knowledge Hayek thought to undermine government action and orthodox utilitarianism also rule out relative welfarist assessments of more or less regulated markets. Given the pervasiveness of externalities in modern economies, Hayek will frequently be unable to make comparative welfarist claims, or he must relax his epistemic assumptions and allow for greater government action than his classical liberalism would wish to accept.

Liberal fatalism, COVID 19 and the politics of impossibility

How liberal governments manage knowledge, ignorance, prediction and uncertainty has attracted increased attention across the social sciences. In this paper, we analyse the strategy and rhetoric of the UK government during the COVID-19 pandemic, with particular attention to the first half of 2020. We see the initial UK policy response – as well as its later legitimation – as a form of ‘politics of impossibility’, effecting political change through claims of incapacity or impotence. We argue this approach departs from the uses of knowledge and ignorance in both classical liberalism and neoliberalism, and suggests the emergence of a new, hybrid form of governance which can be dubbed liberal fatalism. We discuss the relevance of this new form of governance for political futures of an increasingly volatile world.

Classical Liberalism: Some Historical Influences from Religion and Natural Law

Classical Liberalism: Some Historical Influences from Religion and Natural Law

1834년 신빈민법의 이데올로기적 양면성과 그 실제

This paper seeks to trace the ideological trends surrounding the enactment of the New Poor Law and explore the essence of the act itself and the changes it brought about. The Swing Riots of 1830 sparked a substantial demand for reforming poor laws, resulting in the organisation of the Royal Commission into the Operation of the Poor Laws. Edwin Chadwick, a Benthamite, and Nassau Senior, a liberal political economist, played key roles in leading the compilation of the final report of the commission that served as the foundational material for the New Poor Law. Their divergent ideological orientations translated into the dual nature of the act. Utilitarian Benthamites prioritised expanding government functions, the growth of bureaucracy, and the restructuring and rationalisation of administrative structures as needed. On the other hand, advocates of classical liberalism, who championed laissez-faire, emphasized minimizing government intervention, local autonomy, and economic individualism. The specific legal provisions of the New Poor Law and the socio-economic changes following its enactment were an exquisite compromise between these two ideologies. According to the act, a central authority specialising in poor administration was established. Locally, the parish-based Old Poor Law system was dismantled, and poor law unions took the place of parishes, establishing large joint workhouses. These structural changes clearly aligned with the direction pursued by the Benthamites. At the same time, in specific matters, the New Poor Law, however, embodied elements of classical liberalism. The newly established central authority performed only a passive supervisory role, and the operation of local unions still remained under the influence of local elites. The ultimate goal of the union workhouses was not the expected rehabilitation of or care for the poor but rather a deterrent effect. In conclusion, the 19th-century New Poor Law system encapsulated elements of classical liberalism within the Benthamite framework.

Taking Political Determinants of Planetary Health Seriously: Expanding from P4 to P5 Medicine.

Predictive, Personalized, Preventive, and Participatory (P4) Medicine is embedded in the precision medicine conceptual framework to achieve the overarching goal of "the right drug, for the right patient, at the right dose, and at the right time." Science cultures and political determinants of health have normative and instrumental impacts on P4 medicine. Yet, since the age of Enlightenment in the 17th century, science and economics have been disarticulated from politics along the lines of classical liberalism, and with an ahistorical approach that continues into the 21st century. The consequence of this liberal disarticulation is that science is falsely and narrowly understood as an invariably technocratic and objective field. In the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, it is clearer that political determinants of health are the causes-of-causes for disease and health. I propose that we need P5 medicine with a fifth P, political determinants of planetary health. The new "P" can engage not only with instrumental aspects of P4 medicine research and clinical implementation but also with the structural factors that are an integral part of the politics of the P4 medicine. For example, the living legacies of colonialism contribute to the unequal relationships in trade, labor, provision, and production of materials among nation-states and between the Global South and the Global North and shape the class struggles in contemporary society, science, and medicine. A decolonial politics of care in which the political determinants of planetary health are taken seriously is therefore crucial and relevant to building a robust, ethical, responsible, and just P5 medicine in the 21st century.

Ekonomia polityczna a demokracja w pismach klasyków liberalizmu – John Stuart Mill i Herbert Spencer

POLITICAL ECONOMY AND DEMOCRACY IN THE WRITINGS OF CLASSICAL LIBERALS – JOHN STUART MILL AND HERBERT SPENCER The main aim of this paper is showing mainstream economic theory as an important factor shaping the evolution of political liberalism. The role of the economic theory in this process seems underestimated. The paper analyses the writings of two classical liberal thinkers – John Stuart Mill and Herbert Spencer, the former a pioneer of egalitarian liberalism, the latter of laissez-faire liberalism. Both Mill and Spencer were the followers of the classical political economy accepting the classical theory of distribution. Both saw the distribution of wealth as a spontaneous process, seeing no possibility correcting it for the people’s sake without disturbances or damages. According to the classical theory of wage fund, workers would get higher incomes only through accumulation of capital by owners and repressing their own fertility. Such statement was fundamentally opposite to all postulates of the workers’ movement. Workers always claimed bigger share in social income and legislation favoring laborers. The inevitable result of this contradiction was a conflict between liberal and democratic ideas. Mill and Spencer proposed two different solutions. J. S. Mill found a specific compromise and proposed enlarging franchise on working class, but with a still dominant position of the educated classes. Mill was against equal franchise for the working class because he did not conceive them as liable, rational and sober people. This position results from the wage fund doctrine; according to it, abundant workers’ fertility is wasteful for them and only sexual restraint (or chastity) would make their wages higher. Spencer in his early writing was an enthusiast of democracy, supposing the working class’ affinity to free market solutions. His later disappointment with democracy turned him into a strong critic of democratic parliamentarism from the standpoint of laissez-faire individualism. The case of these two liberal thinkers shows fundamental difficulty in reconciliation between the ideas of democracy and free market. We could choose democracy accepting welfare state or choose free market solution and become unambiguous critics of democracy. Spencer was a forerunner of all later ‘neoliberal’ critics of welfare state. Mill’s opinion was halfway between laissez-faire liberalism and modern egalitarian liberalism. Democracy and equal voting rights became acceptable by mainstream economist only when they had abandoned the wage fund doctrine and other constructs of the classical political economy. Thus changes in the economic theory had a significant impact on the evolution of political liberalism.

The Digital Public Square: Christian Ethics in a Technological Society

The Digital Public Square: Christian Ethics in a Technological Society

Doğu’dan Batı’ya Kolektiviteler Üzerinden Birey-Devlet İlişkisi: Konfüçyan, Hegelyan ve Komüniteryan Siyaset Felsefelerinde Toplumsal Birey Anlayışı

This study aims to analyze the nature of the individual-state relationship from a descriptive approach and a holistic perspective. The importance attributed to the sociality of the individual is embedded in both Eastern and Western political philosophies. The position of the individual vis-à-vis the state and other social structures depends on the philosophical understanding of the period and context. The emphasis on the sociality of the individual, which is put forward in the critique of classical liberalism’s perception of the individual is also observed in Confucian ethics and Hegel’s philosophical approach and thus implies a linear understanding. Especially since the last quarter of the 20th century, liberal communitarians have revived the debate by criticizing classical liberal conception of the individual. In contrast to classical liberalism’s understanding of transcendental individual who is free from social/collective features, liberal communitarians highlight the significance of social ties and structures. Recognizing the importance of the individual’s collective ties, this study examines the individual’s relationship with collective structures, especially the state, in Confucianism, Hegelian political thought, and communitarianism and argues that the relationship between the two has been a subject of constant debate from past to present.