Are the Values of Liberalism Universal Essay

The further development of industrialisation led to social and economic inequality. This led to a revision of classical liberal ideas to prevent the spread of ignorance and poverty. It is suggested that modern liberals have betrayed classical liberal ideas as they embrace collectivism and diverge from classical liberalism on issues such as freedom. However, it can be argued that modern liberals have simply built on classical liberal ideas such as its commitment to the individual.

One has to try as much as possible to try to preserve the rest of humankind from any evil that can happen to the other people. Neo-liberalism emphasizes that all being are equal and independent and no man is supposed to harm each other’s innocent life, health or possession as it recognizes all being as workmanship of on omnipotent (God). Moreover, no man that has the liberty to destroy himself and man should not have more than other hence encourage sharing such thing as power. For example, although people punish each other for transgressions, the offender has the right to seek forgiveness from the offended and can assist the offended to recover from the offended to make satisfaction for the harm he or she suffered. On the other hand, classic liberalism encourages the practice of individualism. For example, the essential feature of individualism from the elements provided by Christianity and the philosophy of classical antiquity was first completely developed during the Renaissance and from that time, it has grown and spread into what is today recognized as Western European civilization. Classic liberalism emphasizes on freedom and liberty hence encouraging men to develop their own individual gifts and bents. Whenever, small one man’s sphere is, he is encouraged to view and observe himself as supreme (Friedrich 7-14).

Both the Declaration of the Rights of Man and The Universal Declaration of Human Rights explore the idea of how government enables and preserves its citizen’s rights to pursue the good life. No longer can individuals live outside the borders of a country, in which they would be considered truly free, therefore, it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that they are granted full rights and can live as if they were free. Put aptly in the Declaration of the Rights of Man, “The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man”. Without the rights warranted in these two documents the good life would be unattainable.

Typically Liberalism can be categorized into two different strands, Classical and Modern (yet some thinkers advocate a third strand that is referred to as Neo-Liberalism), each characterized by their differing and to some extent unavoidably overlapping attitudes regarding the theory behind the ideology and how it should be put into practice. Prior to examining how these relate to one another and before making any comparisons, it is important to give a definition, as best as possible, of Liberalism as a concept.

It was the government role to attempt to provide support for its citizens by overcoming poverty, disease and ignorance. Modern liberals defend welfarism on the basis of equality of opportunity. If particular individuals or groups are disadvantaged by their social circumstances, then the state possess a social responsibility to reduce or remove these disadvantages to create equal life chances. The effort made by both early liberals and modern liberals to enhance equality among human beings illustrated their full support to the principle of

For the purposes of this essay, I define liberalism as a school of political thought concerned with liberty,

Moreover, one way in which modern liberalism has departed from the ideas of classical liberalism is the extent to which the state should involve itself in the lives of the individual. Classical liberals, in particular John Stuart Mill, emphasised a minimal state and believed that an interfering state would impede upon the private lives of individuals. Yet modern liberals fully supported an enabling state; Beveridge believed that citizens should be protected by the state s from ‘the cradle to the grave.’ This implies that, unlike classical liberals, modern liberals supported a government which is fully involved in the lives of individuals and would therefore support policies such as benefits and the national health service. However, classical liberals, notably Samuel Smiles, thought that people should take responsibility for their own welfare because the individual is the guardian of their own prosperity and therefore state intervention is dangerous. This contradicts the belief of modern liberals, who believed that a state should be established in order to help people to help themselves.

Attempts to characterize Liberalism are typically futile, since their outcome is either a catalogue of existing definitions, from which we accumulate just that they are distinctive, fragmented and conflicting; or still another arbitrary definition that simply stretches this rundown without taking out any uncertainty and disagreements in drawing closer the same topic, which by its inclination is unclear and packed with natural inconsistencies. It is difficult to define Liberalism in the world today. Liberalism origins can be followed to the beliefs of the Enlightenment in Europe in the eighteenth century (Cheyne, O’Brien, & Belgrave,2008). This strain of liberal thought can likewise be seen to rise in the philosophy and actions of the French

Realism and Liberalism are two extremely prominent theories of international relations. These doctrines exhibit sagacious perceptions about war, foreign affairs and domestic relations. The fundamental principles of protocol in which we rely upon aren’t always apprehensive (Karle, Warren, 2003). By interpreting the data one could fathom these ideas. The assessment of these faculties wield noteworthy dominance about the concepts of international affairs. In analyzing this data, you will comprehend the variant relationship between Realism and Liberalism.

Liberalism and conservatism have been political ideas and thoughts from the very birth of our democracy. Their views and points of the government's role in a democratic society have changed over the years, but the basic ideas and principles have remained the same. There are many different degrees of liberalism and conservatism as almost anyone can be labeled. Some individuals are radical and extreme while others stand on more of a neutral territory, but the debates between the understood ideas of each group have continued throughout the history of the United States. We will take liberalism's Gary Doore and conservatism's Irving Kristol as modern day examples and compare and contrast the

In exercising this role, sometimes fine distinctions will need to be made, and there is room for worry that in the guise of peace-keeping the state will really work to promote a favored vision of the worthy way of life. Still, this liberal principle tells us what to worry about in such controversies, though its abstractness means that by itself it cannot deal with difficult issues. However, the principle of tolerance does not even abstractly address questions about property rights and the distribution of wealth, so here the liberal tradition includes opposing approaches.

Throughout the last section’s readings, there have been many examples of different political thought through different aspects, from economic to social. One of these ideologies includes Classical Liberalism, which was argued by the philosophers Hobbes, Locke, and Adam Smith. Over time though, many of the future political writers began to alter their views from what Classical Liberalism’s core beliefs were. The political writers in the course we have been reading from have differed from the ideas of Classical Liberalism, and in effect have caused their generations to think differently about the place of people in social, economic, and individualistic ways.

This essay will assess the relationship between liberalism and conservatism by exploring the differences in ideological beliefs of these two ideologies. Ideology can be defined as “set of interrelated and more or less coherent ideas” that constitutes of both “descriptive and normative element” on how a society works (Heywood, 2007, pp. 6-7). One of the most popular ideology in contemporary politics is liberalism which accord individual liberty and free market as its primary priority. On the other hand, conservatism is generally known for advocating tradition, societal state and authority. Firstly, we will look at theories developed by liberalism and conservatism on creation of state. It would then be followed by liberalism’s notion of individuality and individual liberty versus conservatism’s emphasis on individual imperfectionism and need for society. Thereafter, we will observe liberalism and conservatism as political ideology and how it has evolved over time. The essay will be summed up by a conclusion in the end. The terms, liberalism and conservatism mentioned in this essay are intended to be synonymous to their traditional or classical thoughts and beliefs. Every argument presented in this essay are intended to support the claim that liberalism and conservatism are not compatible ideologies. By compatible, I meant being consistent without any disagreements.

Liberalism is a political philosophy that is founded on the ideas of liberty and equality and controls how a society functions. Since liberalism is expressed as a political ideology, it helps dictate how a nation can achieve its national security, its stable economy and the extent of control a government should possess. The perspective of the source illustrates how government intervention is needed during the threat of national security. Although, during times that national security is not being threatened, the collective society should have the freedom to break from the unnecessary government control. A philosopher such as Rousseau would have agreed with the position of the source as it gave an option of security to the people - but also gave them the choice to break the contract if they believed their rights were being violated. While a philosopher such as Hobbes would have disagreed with the source on the terms that he believed in a monarchy and believed that people needed government control at all times. Furthermore, as liberalism provides people their freedoms but also allows a certain extent of government control, the source should be taken to an full extent on the grounds that government control should only be emplaced considering national security, government control, and economic stability - which is shown through the internment of Japanese-Canadians, the New Deal, and the Patriotic Act.

within the confinements of liberalism and with respect to traditional human rights, however, the central governments have managed to bypass the creed of liberalism and human rights. 2) Redrawing the boundaries, or reducing the powers, of internal political subunits controlled by the national minority; decisions on the boundaries and powers of internal political subunits. Some liberal democratic states engaged in redrawing boundaries which are within the confinement of liberalism and the liberal state, but encroaches the rights of national minorities. The central states draw boundaries to disempower national minorities. For instance, a minority 's territory are divided into several units to make cohesive political action impossible. For example, the division of France into 83 ‘departments’ after the Revolution, which intentionally subdivided the historical regions of the Basques, Bretons, and other linguistic minorities; or the division of Catalonia region in Spain. 3) Language policies; decisions on official languages. In many liberal democratic states, the majority language is adopted as official or de facto official language where it is used in government, bureaucracy, courts, schools, and business. While there are exceptions to this – many liberal democratic states allow for multilingualism – yet the policies related to language should be more robustly clarified within the human rights creed of democratic liberalism. Because the human rights creed adopted by several