Classical liberalism

Classical liberalism is a term used primarily by modern American libertarians to describe the following:

• early liberalism as it developed from the Enlightenment until John Stuart Mill
• modern libertarian ideology, whose believers describe as rooted in the views of early liberals such as those described below, especially their views on political economy.

Early liberalism is discussed extensively in the main article on liberalism. This entry is about both part of early liberalism and the ideology mentioned above.

Those who claim to be classical liberals believe in negative individual rights, private property, a laissez-faire economic policy, a government that exists to protect the liberty of each individual from others, and a constitution that protects individual autonomy from governmental power. Many elements of this ideology developed in the 17th and 18th centuries. As such, it is often seen as being the natural ideology of the industrial revolution and its subsequent capitalist system. The early liberal figures that libertarians now describe as their fellow "classical liberals" rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion, and focuses on individual freedom, reason, justice and tolerance.. Such thinkers and their ideas helped to inspire the American Revolution and French Revolution.

Introduction

Those who claim to be classical liberals place a particular emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual, with private property rights being seen as essential to individual liberty. This forms the philosophical basis for laissez-faire public policy. The ideology of those who claim to be classical liberals is "not necessarily a democratic doctrine, for there is nothing in the bare idea of majority rule to show that majorities will always respect the rights of property or maintain rule of law." They believe that "an unfettered market" is most efficacious mechanism for satisfying human needs and channeling resources to their most productive uses and "are more suspicious than conservatives of all but the most minimal government." They do not believe that government creates individual rights (in a moral sense), but rather that moral rights exist independently of government (Thomas Jefferson called these "inalienable rights"). These rights are of a negative nature --rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others. Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are "hostile to the welfare state."

Origins

Modern libertarians trace their "classical liberal" ideology to ancient Greek and medieval thought. They cite as an expression the 16th century School of Salamanca in Spain and its classic formulation in the Enlightenment tradition. The Wealth of Nations (1776) by Scottish philosopher Adam Smith is one of the classic works that rejects the philosophy of mercantilism, which advocated state interventionism in the economy and protectionism. These early liberals saw mercantilism as enriching privileged elites at the expense of well being of the populace. Another early expression is the tradition of a Nordic school of liberalism set in motion by a Finnish parliamentarian Anders Chydenius.

Use of the Term "Classical Liberalism"

Libertarians claim that they use the phrase "classical liberalism" in order to delineate the older philosophy called liberalism from modern liberalism, in order to avoid semantic confusion. Opponents of libertarians on the other hand claim that libertarians' use of the term "classical liberal" is part of their propagandic effort to claim to be the true heirs of the American Founding Fathers and other early liberal thinkers. Modern liberals are supposed by modern libertarians to have greatly deviated from these principles that guided the American Revolution.

Some Key Thinkers Who Are Called Classical Liberals by Libertarians

John Locke

Main article: John Locke

John Locke

As the industrial revolution began in the United Kingdom, so did the first conceptions of liberalism. John Locke (1632-1704) defended religious freedom in his important work A Letter Concerning Toleration published, along with his other important work Two Treatises of Government in 1689. However, Locke would not extend his view on religious freedom to Catholics.

Locke was responsible for the idea of "natural rights" which he saw as "life, liberty and property". To Locke, property was a more compelling natural right than the right to participate in collective decision-making: he would not endorse democracy in government, as he feared that the "tyranny of the majority" would seek to deny people their rights to property. Nevertheless, the idea of natural rights played a key role in providing the ideological justification for the American revolution and French revolution.

Baron de Montesquieu

Main article: Baron de Montesquieu

Voltaire

Main article: Voltaire

Denis Diderot

Main article: Denis Diderot

David Hume

Main article: David Hume

Immanuel Kant

Main article: Immanuel Kant

Kant further advanced the idea of a liberal peace by demonstrating conditions and requisites for international peace among states in his work, the Perpetual Peace As an early liberal, Kant opposed the concept of majority rule over the individual. In opposition to democracy, he advocates a constitutional republic. He says, "Democracy is necessarily despotism, as it establishes an executive power contrary to the general will; all being able to decide against one whose opinion may differ, the will of all is therefore not that of all: which is contradictory and opposite to liberty." (Perpetual Peace, II, 1795)

The Founding Fathers

Main article: Founding Fathers of the United States

Adam Smith

Main article: Adam Smith

Adam Smith believed that the government had three and only three roles to play: 1.) "protecting the society from the violence and invasion of other independent societies...which can only be performed by means of a military force" 2.) "protecting, as far as possible, every member of the society from the injustice or oppression of every other member of it..." and 3.) "erecting and maintaining those public institutions and those public works, which...though most advantageous...are such that the profit could never repay the expense to any individual or small group of individuals" which implies that governments should work to correct market externalities, but Smith did not argue for government run monopolies to permanently solve externality problems.

Marquis de Condorcet

Main article: Marquis de Condorcet

Mary Wollstonecraft

Main article: Mary Wollstonecraft

John Stuart Mill

Main article: John Stuart Mill

Though Mill is considered a utilitarian, he did seek to reconcile it with an advocacy of a minimal state. In a quote from "On Liberty" (1859) he says, "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant."

Friedrich von Hayek

Hayek was a contemporary critic of John Maynard Keynes and believed that the outcomes of Keynes' interventionist policies would result in the destruction of civil liberal society. He further demonstrated this thesis in his work, the Road to Serfdom arguing that restrictions among economic freedom result in a loss of civil and political freedom.

Milton Friedman

Milton Friedman considered himself a liberal, though he has long been associated with Republicans and the conservative movement in America. He is known for his monetarist and shock therapy theories. Friedman, like Hayek believed that economic freedom created and protected civil and political freedom and that the loss of economic freedom lead to a loss in civil and political freedom. His most famous popular works include Capitalism and Freedom and Free to Choose where he advances the ideas of laissez-faire free market liberal government. Friedman also classifies himself as both a "libertarian" and a "classical liberal."

The libertarian conception of the split between classical liberalism and modern liberalism

The Industrial Revolution greatly increased material wealth, but made social problems more visible, such as pollution, child labor, and overcrowding in the cities. Material and scientific progress led to greater longevity and a reduced mortality rate. The population increased dramatically. The downside of this an increase of the supply of labor relative to capital, which led to declining wages. Many laissez-faire economists felt that these problems of industrial society would correct themselves without government action.

In the 19th century, the voting franchise in most democracies was extended, and these newly enfranchised citizens often voted in favor of government intervention into the economy. Rising literacy rates and the spread of knowledge led to social activism in a variety of forms. Those calling themselves liberals instigated laws against child labor and laws requiring minimum standards of worker safety. The laissez faire economic liberals considered such measures to be an unjust imposition upon liberty, as well as a hindrance to economic development. This 19th century social liberalism is considered by libertarians as the first significant split of modern liberalism from "classical liberalism."

By the end of the 19th century, a growing body of liberal thought asserted that, in order to be free, individuals needed access to the basic necessities of life, including education, and protection from economic exploitation. In 1911, L.T. Hobhouse published Liberalism, which summarized what libertarians believe is a "new liberalism," including qualified acceptance of government intervention in the economy, and the collective right to equality in dealings, what he called "just consent."

Libertarians believe their philosophy supports the expansion of freedom in all areas and generally disagree with ideas advocated by many modern liberals, such as gun control, affirmative action, progressive taxation, social security, and support of public schools.

See liberalism for further explanation.

Neo-classical economists share a similar viewpoint

Proponents of the Austrian School and the Chicago School (sometimes called neo-classical economists), such as Milton Friedman, Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek, reject claims that modern liberalism represents a continuous development from classical liberalism. According to Friedman

Their view is that beginning in the late nineteenth century, and especially after 1930 in the United States, the term liberalism came to be associated with a very different emphasis, particularly in economic policy. It came to be associated with a readiness to rely primarily on the state rather than on private arrangements to achieve objectives regarded as desirable. Their catchwords became welfare and equality rather than freedom.

Neo-classical economists instead see themselves as the true inheritors of classical liberalism. For example, Hayek argued that he was not a conservative because he was a liberal; and had refused to give up that label to modern usurpers.

Criticism of neo-classical economists as classical liberals

However, others have rejected this claim describing the neo-classical economists as "right-wing economic liberals", "liberal conservatives" and as the "new right" viewing their efforts at co-opting the term as ignoring the political side of early liberalism and only focusing on the work of the classical economists such as Smith and Ricardo. Furthermore, it has been argued that "Hayek's view of classical liberal principles is a peculiar one" which ignores the work of pre-eminent thinkers such as Locke and Mill.

"Classical Liberalism" and Libertarianism

Libertarians tend to use the phrase "classical liberal" interchangeably with "libertarian". An example of this is the CATO Institute sees Classical Liberals, liberals, and libertarians being from the same ideological family. Thus the CATO Institute prefers to call itself "liberal" because they see themselves as the only rightful inheritors of Liberalism. Libertarians do share many philosophical, political, and economic undertones with classical liberalism, including the ideas of laissez-faire government, free markets, and individual freedom. Classical liberals maintained that in order to protect individual liberty the government must be limited in what it can do. The Libertarian party takes this classical liberal understanding further by arguing for greater restrictions upon the government.

Raimondo Cubeddu of the Department of Political Science of the University of Pisa says "It is often difficult to distinguish between "Libertarianism" and "Classical Liberalism." Those two labels are used almost interchangeably by those who we may call libertarians of a "minarchist" persuasion: scholars who, following Locke and Nozick, believe a State is needed in order to achieve effective protection of property rights."

Criticism of Libertarian as Classical Liberalism

The modern traditions of libertarianism and neoliberalism claim the ideological inheritance of classical liberalism. However, many object to this blending of what they see as two separate, opposing philosophies. Samuel Freeman states that:

"that libertarianism’s resemblance to liberalism is superficial; in the end, libertarians reject essential liberal institutions. Correctly understood, libertarianism resembles a view that liberalism historically defined itself against, the doctrine of private political power that underlies feudalism. Like feudalism, libertarianism conceives of justified political power as based in a network of private contracts. It rejects the idea, essential to liberalism, that political power is a public power, to be impartially exercised for the common good."

Those who emphasize the distinction between early liberalism and libertarianism argue that libertarianism and liberalism are fundamentally incompatible because the checks and balances provided by liberal institutions conflict with the support by most libertarians of complete economic deregulation.

See also

• Austrian School
• Capitalism
• Free market
• Globalization
• Privatization
• Liberalization
• Liberalism
• Libertarianism
• Contributions to liberal theory