Liberalism And Economic Liberalism

Political ideology within a state is established by examining individual ideas about politics and how they are related (Shively, 2014). Even though, not every political ideas are equal, however, they bear some sort of relationship or resemblance. Generally within a state, “ideologies are usually determine by intellectual structure from which one can derive number of disparate policy positions” (Shively, 2014, p. 25).

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.

From a conservative point of view, this liberalist position is flawed with limitations. Instead, conservatives advocate for a government that acts in a resolute and strong manner in order to maintain order, traditions, and customs that have been tested and proven to be effective. In any case, conservatives regard human nature as being selfish and inclined towards acting cruelly and violently. Therefore, as opposed to entering into a compact with the people on the basis of limited powers, liberalism encourages governments to act strongly and impose harsh punishment on those who go against the law. A sense of community and adherence to social values is paramount and never dependent on voluntary, conscious, or rational decision (Riley, 1990).

Typically, liberalism is categorised into two separate components; classical liberalism, which was fashioned during the 19th century as a result of the industrial revolution, and the more recent Modern Liberalism which emerged as industrialisation continued within the UK. Although both divisions of Liberalism unavoidably overlap in attitudes and approaches regarding the theory behind the ideology, I believe, fundamentally, that clear tensions between these aspects of Liberalism are more evident when analysing this ideology.

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.

Before the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, liberalism and conservatism were two big ideologies in European society; many citizens were fighting towards liberalism while some were still standing behind conservatism. Meanwhile, many individuals, along with several organizations, were moving closer towards socialist ideals. Socialism’s role in society during the nineteenth and twentieth century changed how various thinkers approached the issues of labor, production, and property.

There are different opinions towards inequality, some people are accepting of it while others dislike the whole idea of inequality. Is it okay to let the wealthy have more control than the poor? Should their ideas matter more than the non-wealthy? And most importantly should the poor be okay with this, if not what must they do? In “Gospel of Wealth” by Andrew Carnegie and “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx, both Carnegie and Marx expose their thoughts behind inequality and its traits. They both focus and touch upon the poor (proletarians) and the rich (bourgeoisie). They bring up the pros and cons about inequality, capitalism, and communism. Inequality was in Carnegie 's view. In his opinion progress required the processes of competition. Making capitalism an engine of progress. Carnegie believed that there is good to inequality while Marx begs to differ. Marx had his own view on capitalism, he believed that it would eventually result disastrous. Marx believed communism was the best solution to keep both the proletarians and bourgeoisie in an equal place. Both of these socialists have much to say about capitalism and communism and also for economic inequality. They both share different points of view, neither wrong or right. Their opinions are based towards their life experiences and this essay will be noting the differences between they share on inequality, the means of production, and capitalism.

The distribution of income in the United States, is a growing controversy. Far left and far right groups have distinctly differing opinions on income inequality and whether it is beneficial or detrimental to the economic growth of the nation. Mainstream politics, however, tend to be relatively devoid of discussion about the extreme wealth gap. The rising levels, factors, and opinions of income inequality as well as methods of income redistribution will be discussed.

Within today’s society we are commonly faced with the moral question, what seems logically correct vs what seems ethically correct. It is an inquiry that goes hand in hand with if people are born naturally evil, or if that trait itself is developed over time. However, as a whole the overriding debate is not directed towards human nature itself, but rather to what degree should the government really be involved in our economic system in order to create an accommodating society. Over time human nature has drastically evolved to what it is today, but what is still undeniable is that there has, and likely always will be a division among individuals. Those divisions being based upon class structure. The source given states, “Individuals are, by nature, unique and unequal. Efforts by the state to interfere with the lives of individuals will result in a restrictive and inefficient society.” This is a direct link to the perspectives and ideologies presented with the idea of Classic Liberalism. By definition classic liberalism is an ideology that values individual freedoms in the sense of religion, speech, press, etc, as well as supporting limited government involvement economically. This idea has been supported by many in the past, including philosophers such as John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith. The author of the source is clearly a supporter of right wing economics. They believe in individualism over collectivism, and like many philosophers, they also believe that government is only

Oftentimes in society conflict arises between people over what is best for our economy and overall society. In modern day America, citizens and politicians alike debate with far-right ideas like Donald Trump along with far-left views like Bernie Sanders. Those in favor of the far-right are often in agreement with theories of the economist, Adam Smith, an inspiration to today’s capitalism. On the other end of the spectrum, the far-left have similar perspectives as those of the philosopher, Karl Marx who believe in socialism. To better understand why people, such as Marx are against our current economic system one must acknowledge that capitalism is an ideology that gives rise to inequality in the world, and human inequality is a result of

In America, there are three major civic stances: conservatism, liberalism, and libertarianism. The liberal stance is the only stance, which offers the foundation to move forward. The following paper will briefly explain, certain aspects of conservatism and libertarianism, and will advance the idea, America must move forward with a more liberal attitude. At heart, this writing will argue a strong government is of the utmost importance in moving this country forward to the future. While other political agendas advocate liberty and freedom, the liberal stance truly offers a realistic approach and method of achieving those aspects of American life.

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.

Unfortunately some people do not have the ability to earn a living in a market economy. Others benefit from inherited wealth, hard dedicating work, or owning their business. Governments in market economies inevitably engage in programs that redistribute income, and they often do so with the overt intention of making tax policies. On the other hand, advocates of extensive redistribution disagree and allege that role of government limits the concentration of wealth and maintains a wider diffusion of economic power among households, presently as antitrust laws are designed to maintain competition and a wider diffusion of power and resources among producers. Those who oppose major redistribution programs counter that additional taxes on high-income families decrease the incentives

Income redistribution refers to the concept of transferring income from the wealthy individuals to the less wealthy individuals through social mechanisms such as monetary policies, charity, welfare, land reforms, and taxation among others. Income redistribution affects the entire economy rather than selected groups of individuals. The concept of income redistribution emanates from the existence of income inequalities within an economy. Income inequality depicts a gap between the highest and the lowest income earners in an economy (Tullock 13). Income inequality is sometimes considered appropriate in societies since it acts as an incentive in free market economies, whereby in the absence of inequality, elements of economic stagnation and lack of enterprise would emerge. Conversely, income inequality is criticized on the basis of introducing contributing towards the development of key problems in the society, including progression of poverty levels. This paper seeks to explore the concept of income redistribution and its key pros and cons.

The terms ‘socialism’ and liberalism’ are used a lot nowadays, and many people often mistake one for the other. In order to differentiate between these two terms, one must keep in mind the clear-cut differences by defining the prevailing ideology of each term. The tenets of socialism assert that the state should wield total economic power by manipulating prices of goods and wages of workers.