Degrees of Freedom

Liberal Political Philosophy and Ideology

Edwin Van de Haar

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN:
  9781412855754
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351523080
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Liberalism has been the leading political theory of the past three hundred years and, by far, the most dominant ideology. Many think tanks are associated with liberal ideas, and most Western countries are considered liberal democracies. But does liberalism really cover the wide range of political ideas found in Western civilization? Degrees of Freedom examines liberalism's universal claims and explains how liberal thinkers formulated insights that apply to all aspects of politics. It also contrasts liberalism and conservatism.

Edwin van de Haar divides liberalism into three main variants: classical liberalism, social liberalism, and libertarianism. Without claiming that this is the only possible categorization of liberalism, he argues that this subdivision is the most comprehensible way out of liberal confusion. He explores how these forms of liberalism, found in popular parlance, relate to liberal political theory and ideology. Domestic politics and international relations are presented as a whole, in the firm belief that one cannot meaningfully present an overview of any tradition in political theory by stopping at national borders.

1

Introduction

It is hard to understand the world without knowing about liberalism. Liberalism is popular, but understanding liberalism has become very complicated. This is due to many factors, both within and outside liberalism. The main issue is that so many ideas and people claim to be part of liberalism, or are said to be liberal by others. If everything is liberal, liberalism loses its meaning.

Around the world numerous political parties have embraced liberal ideas, ranging from the American Democrats to the British Conservatives, the Philippine Liberal Party to the Japanese Liberal Democrats, the German Free Market Liberals to the Dutch conservationist Green Left Party. Numerous think tanks are associated with liberal ideas and most Western countries are considered “liberal democracies.” This says something about the appeal of liberalism, but it also raises many questions: How does this political diversity relate to liberalism as a political philosophy? Does liberalism really cover such a wide range of ideas? Does it make sense that so many different political parties rightfully draw from liberal thought? Is this diversity a sign that liberalism is a way too general set of ideas? What is the core of liberalism, who are the most important liberal thinkers, and what are the different forms of liberalism? What binds liberals and in what ways do their ideas fundamentally differ? And increasingly important in a globalized world, what is the liberal view on international relations? And how about the differences between liberalism and conservatism?

Despite the popularity of liberalism, attempts to answer these questions are rare. Few journalists, political scientists, and other political observers, if they are even aware of a problem, subject this liberal diversity to critical scrutiny. In everyday life, a thinker or politician who calls on “liberty,” who advocates “the market,” or who believes “individual freedom” to be important, is routinely labeled as liberal. A prefix such as “market,” “social,” “neo” or “conservative” is as often added. It serves as an easy shorthand and categorization tool for journalists and public intellectuals alike, even though the meaning of these terms is fuzzy at best. Journalists are seldom well informed about the theory and history of liberal thought. One should think this is where the responsibility of the academics comes in. Yet the situation in academia is not much better. Only a few thinkers oversee the full diversity of liberal thought.¹

As Hayek aptly pointed out, journalists and the people they draw on are “second-hand dealers of ideas.” They are influential in spreading ideas, but need not be experts or original thinkers.² The result of their influential but poor dealing with liberalism is confusion and uncertainty regarding its meaning.

It must be noted that liberals themselves have barely attempted to alter this situation. In politics, political opponents have met little resistance in their attempts to provide one-sided interpretations of liberalism to their own benefit. In academia, modern liberal thinkers all too often get away with ignoring the width and variation of liberalism. Liberals of different persuasions, inside and outside academia, have largely put up with this, or tried to benefit from it, perhaps out of opportunism, pragmatism, laziness, or a lack of interest, but probably simply out of ignorance.

As a political idea liberalism originates from the seventeenth and eighteenth-century Enlightenment. It was the time of the rise of the modern industrial states; the American and French revolutions, the turbulent advance of scientific knowledge, trade and markets; the rise of the middle class; and the separation of powers, and other ways of curbing government power. Put briefly, liberalism is associated with dynamics and progress.³ The Netherlands may serve as a good example. Since the fifteenth century, it has had several features which later liberal thinkers, such as David Hume and Adam Smith, enviously referred to. Compared to other countries, economic freedom was an important issue,⁴ just as the larger degree of religious freedom. Trade, tolerance, and cultural developments turned the Dutch into an early manifestation of liberalism.⁵ However, with the possible exception of Erasmus, Spinoza, and perhaps the Rotterdam-born but London-based Bernard Mandeville, the Dutch lacked great thinkers who could provide this liberal practice with a theoretical base. Luckily, this void was filled by thinkers in other countries.

Liberalism has been the leading political theory of the past three hundred years and by far the most dominant ideology.⁶ Compared to the immense literature on other political theories, particularly socialism and Marxism, only a limited number of books about liberalism have been published.⁷ This is remarkable, because even political opponents rarely contest liberalism’s prime importance in politics.

The crucial question is how the several forms of liberalism found in popular parlance relate to liberal political theory and ideology. This is the neglected issue this book seeks to address. The book will search for the origin, the meaning, and the most important embodiments of liberalism as a political theory. Two main convictions underpin this work. The first is that thinking and talking about liberalism should and can be much simpler. This alone enables a clearer sight on the depth of liberal thought. It also makes it easier to compare liberalism and conservatism, another point of confusion. The second conviction is that the divide between domestic and international political theory is to a large extent artificial.

The audience this book seeks to address comprises academics, liberals, political observers, students, and others who are interested in politics, liberalism, or the history of ideas. It is written for people searching for the core concepts and ideas of liberalism, and for those who want to be able to contextualize the manifestations of liberalism in the history of ideas. Consequently, the book will not deal with the history of liberal parties or other forms of organized liberalism. It is not about party programs, statements of party principles, or the thoughts of liberal politicians. Such matters have been the subject of numerous other writings. If the substance of liberal thinking is treated in such works at all, it is often sketchy. That is a shame, because in the end, as Hume argued, all forms of government are based on ideas.⁸

This book differs from existing literature on liberalism in a number of ways. First, it divides liberalism into three main variants. Without claiming that this is the only possible categorization, this subdivision offers the most comprehensible way out of the liberal confusion. It gives its own logical and recognizable place to the most important thinkers and their followers. The text does not argue in favor of one variant or another. It simply tries to present the most important strengths and weaknesses of all three. Secondly, and uniquely, views on domestic politics and international relations are presented as a whole, in the firm belief that one cannot meaningfully present an overview of any tradition in political theory by stopping at the national borders. This has been noted before, for example by Dryzek, Honig, and Phillips in one of the leading handbooks of political theory,⁹ yet has seen scant follow-up. Political philosophy has become, through academic specialization, almost fully detached from the theory of international relations, and vice versa. This ignores the identical task of both specializations, the explanation of political developments, which are often influenced by the interaction of developments in both domains. As will become clear, all three liberal variants also have distinct views on international politics. Liberalism makes universal claims, and many liberal thinkers have formulated insights into all aspects of politics.¹⁰ This example will be followed in this book.

Liberalism and Conservatism

Liberalism does not exist, nor is it developed, in isolation. It differs from, but also shares ideas with other political theories and ideologies. For example, the divide between social-democracy and social-liberalism is sometimes blurred and difficult to determine. In the past years there has also been a lot of confusion about the divide between liberalism and conservatism. This is partly due to the close relations between the two in the Thatcher and Reagan era, or those between some liberals and the neoconservatives during the G. W. Bush presidency. Recently this has been followed by the entanglement of the American Tea Party activists and well known libertarians such as Senator Rand Paul, son of former Congressman and leading libertarian Ron Paul, who has been a candidate in several Republican presidential primaries. In addition, there are many think tanks in America, Britain, and elsewhere that appear to operate in both conservative and liberal “orbits.” This has led a number of people to argue there is no difference at all between conservatism and liberalism.

This warrants a separate chapter in this book (chapter 5). With the help of Freeden’s analysis of political theories and ideologies, elaborated on below, it will be shown that there are fundamental differences between liberalism and conservatism, although sometimes conservatism and parts of the liberal tradition are indeed entangled. They remain fundamentally different kinds of political thought, though.

That Which Binds Liberals

The largest part of this book concerns the differences among liberals. But what binds liberals should not be overlooked. The differences between liberal variants discussed in this book are still variations within one tradition.¹¹ The term “liberal” has only been used since the early nineteenth century, most notably when a group in Spanish parliament started calling itself “Liberales.” Yet some of the main ideas that still form the core of liberalism were formulated earlier. According to the British philosopher John Gray all liberals are:

• Individualist: the individual is seen as the moral and political benchmark. That is: the individual is of ultimate value, not the family, the social economic class, or any other collective;
• Egalitarian: not every person is equal, but every person is of an equal moral value. Every juridical or political order that goes against this principle is rejected by liberals;
• Universalist: the whole of human kind has this equal moral value. The individual can therefore not be subjected to specific cultural or historic bonds, or forms of government that deny or curtail this moral value;
• Meliorist: liberals believe in the corrigibility and improvability of all social institutions and political arrangements.

With the help of this—admittedly broad—categorization, it is possible and still meaningful to regard diverse thinkers such as Locke, Kant, Mill, Hayek, and Rawls as liberals.¹² These core views of man and society underlie all their liberal differences. They also provide liberalism with its own identity compared to other political philosophies or ideologies.¹³ As Heywood indicates, modern liberals are further unified in their appreciation of individual liberty, classical human rights, and democracy. These elements combined constitute a fundamental difference between liberalism and other political theories and ideologies. Socialism, for example, has traditionally focused on the socio-economic class, and within Christian-democracy, especially within Catholicism, a key position is occupied by the family.¹⁴

The history of liberalism can be seen as the struggle for greater individual freedom.¹⁵ At first this was a struggle for religious freedom and the right to resist tyranny, aimed against authoritarian kings and princes, all-powerful nobles, protectionist large landowners, and oppressive forms of religion. The fight against slavery was added almost simultaneously.¹⁶ The rise of the modern state in the nineteenth century led liberals to focus their opposition to all-powerful and meddlesome governments, often accompanied by increasingly excessive legislation and regulation. For many modern liberals this fight is their main focal point.¹⁷ The fights of other issues have been successful, such as the struggle for equal political rights for women in most Western countries. Liberalism has traditionally been a movement for emancipation, a force for change of the status quo. Yet it is not working toward a particular well-described social situation or order. Instead it fights to provide a certain amount of liberty, without some end-state paradise or utopia in sight. Any optimal liberal situation will be dynamic, because free people will innovate, change, and propose new ideas. Or in the words of Kukathas, “a free society is an o...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Foreword
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Classical Liberalism
• 3 Social Liberalism
• 4 Libertarianism
• 5 Liberalism and Conservatism
• 6 Further Refinements and Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index