Liberalism strands knowledge flashcards

Classical Liberalism:

- Liberty of the individual

- Individuals free to pursue self-interest

- Tolerance of different beliefs, religions and cultures

- Minimal government

- Free market economy

- Representative democracy

New Liberalism:

- Sense of social obligation

- Promotion of positive liberty

- Promotion of choice and opportunity

- Equality of opportunity

- Limited welfare provision

Welfare Liberalism:

- State-sponsored welfare schemes

- State management of the economy

- Greater concentration on equality of opportunity

- Freedom from social deprivation

Modern Liberalism:

- Promotion of greater economic equality or justice.

- Political and constitutional reform to control state power.

- More popular democracy.

- Defence of group rights, worker and consumer rights.

- Support for a tolerant, multicultural society.

Libertarianism:

- A very restricted state, largely confined to defence and regulation of the currency.

- Abolition of laws that restrict choice of lifestyles and personal morality.

- Minimal law and order protection.

- A completely free market economy with no regulation.

Early Liberalism:

The first true liberals did not call themselves ‘liberals’. They tended to be referred to as ‘radicals’ or ‘republicans’, or sometimes even ‘rationalists’. In retrospect, however, we may correctly describe them as early liberals. The main principle of the early liberal movement was …

natural rights. The champions of natural rights theory came from all parts of the Western World and included such historically significant figures as John Locke, Jean-Jaques Rousseau, Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson.

The emphasis on natural rights gave rise to the various practical developments given below:

• A government has no authority to encroach upon the rights of its people, unless the people expressly consent to sacrifice some of their rights to that government. 
  

• Furthermore, even if individual rights have been sacrificed, people must retain the option of reclaiming them by dissolving the government.

• All are born with equal rights, although this perhaps excluded women, governments should respect and promote these.

• The most important right that nature grants to all, after the basic right to life, is the right to be free. Freedom in this context means the right to pursue one’s own interests. Here again, governments must respect and protect the freedom of its citizens.

• The exercise of power without the expressed authority of the people cannot be justified since it denies fundamental rights.

Early liberal ideas were revolutionary and it is therefore no surprise that they gave rise to revolutions. The old world of hereditary rulers, strict social hierarchies and limited individual liberty was either …

swept away or dramatically reformed by these early radical thinkers.

Utilitarianism:

The concept of utility was developed by early economists in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. The term meant satisfaction or perhaps even happiness - whatever gave an individual pleasure. The utilitarians, led in Britain by Jeremey Bentham, believed it is possible to calculate how much utility each individual could derive from consuming certain goods, and that it was therefore…

also possible to calculate the total amount of utility a whole society was achieving. However, it was not for external powers to decide what gave people utility. Individuals were to decide what gave them more or less utility for themselves.

The significance of this concept for economists of the period was that if there were free trade within and between countries and if each consumer were able to purchase whatever goods he or she liked within his or her income constraints …

total utility in a society would be automatically maximised. Put another way, a free-market economy, inhabited by free individuals, would guarantee the common good.

The political utilitarians agreed, but added a further element. They admitted the possibility that governments could add to the total sum of utility by taking certain actions. Indeed, Bentham argued that all actions by government should be…

judged on the basis of a kind of algebra or calculus, which would establish whether total utility would be increased or reduced.

 This implied two principles. First, that government had to accept what people asserted would give them satisfaction and second, that …

government should be limited to providing what the people as a whole preferred. The principle was famously summarised in the idea that governments should pursue ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’.

Utilitarians can be described as liberals in that they accepted the freedom of individuals to determine their own best interests and insisted that the role of government should be limited. However, the liberals who followed them identified two main problems with utilitarianism:

1. It took a simplistic view of what motivated individuals and what gave them pleasure eg. the consumption of goods may give pleasure, but it is not a high form of pleasure, as say gaining a good education and appreciating the arts.

2. That the doctrine opened the door to excessive state intervention. As long as total social utility was increased, the utilitarians argued, the state could take positive action, but early liberals feared that any state activity would threaten the freedom of individuals.

Thus, utilitarianism declined in influence as the 19th century progressed. It was replaced in the world of radical politics by a purer form of liberalism known as classical liberalism. 

Classical liberalisms core belief is …

the commitment to egotistical individualism

Modern liberalisms core belief is …

the commitment to development individualism

Classical liberalism - human nature:

• Optimistic view of human nature

• Positive view of human potential

• Belief that the individual is a rational actor

Modern liberalism - human nature:

• Humans are seen as self-seeking utility maximisers.

• Suggest a more optimistic view where individuals have sympathy for each other -their egoism thus constrained by a degree of altruism

Classical liberalism - society:

• Individualism is the ‘end goal’ of politics and society.

• Support equality of opportunity and disapprove of equality of outcome.

• Personal growth - individuals to be ultimately responsible for their own development (although strands differ a lot on the role of the state to facilitate that).

• Tolerance of minorities and diversity. 

Modern liberalism - society:

• Hold concern for the poor and marginalised over a strict classical meritocracy.

• Classical liberalism defined liberty as individuals benign left alone (negative freedom) whilst modern liberals think individuals aren’t truly free unless they are ‘actively enabled’ by positive freedom.

• Argues the individuals also have a responsibility to society.

Classical liberalism - economy:

• Believe in low tax - some even see tax as theft.

• Believe in capitalism and criticise a state run (command) economy (albeit strands differ fundamentally over the economic role of the state).

• State to play some role in the economy (albeit strands differ enormously in the extent).

Modern liberalism - economy:

• Classical liberals favour laissez-faire capitalism - modern liberals favour Keynesian capitalism, with the state 'managing market forces’. 

• Higher tax is the means to increase public spending to achieve social justice and equality of opportunity.

Classical liberalism - state:

• A limited (constitutional) state and ‘government by consent’.

• Some form of democratic system 

• Rejection of other ideologies views on the state.

• The conservative paternalistic state.

• The socialist state is trying to create equality of outcome.

• The anarchist position of abolishing the state.

Modern liberalism - state:

• Champions of an enlarged enabling state

• Whilst classical liberals see welfare as a ‘safety-net’ only, modern liberals support ‘cradle-to-grave’ welfare. 

• Modern liberals support representative democracy - classical liberals hold an ambivalent view of democracy.

Origins of classical liberalism: The earliest liberal tradition - reaching its high point during the early industrialisation of the C19th. The cradle of classical liberalism was the UK, where capitalists and industrial revolutions were most advanced. Its ideas have always been deeply rooted in Anglo-Saxon countries, particularly the UK/USA. In the C20th…

classical liberalism was overtaken by the perspectives of modern liberalism. Since then, central beliefs of classical liberalism have been revived and updated by influential neoliberals, such as philosopher Friedrich von Hayek (1899-1992) and think tanks like the Adam Smith Institute. Neoliberalism initially had the greatest impact in the UK/USA, but its influence has spread far more broadly with the advance of globalisation.

Common characteristics of classical liberal ideas are …

1. Subscription to egotistical individualism (the view of human beings as rationally self-interested creatures.

2. Society is therefore seen as atomistic, composed of a collection of largely self-sufficient individuals, meaning the characteristics of society can be traced back to individualism.

3. Belief in negative freedom - the individual is free in so far as they are left alone. Freedom in this sense is the absence of external constraints on the individual.

1. Regard for the state as, in Thomas Paine’s words, a ‘necessary evil’. It lays down the conditions for orderly existence whilst limiting the freedom and responsibilities of the individual. Thus they believe in a minimal state that acts as a ‘nightwatchman’ - only to maintain domestic order, enforce contracts and protect society from external forces.

2. Hold a positive view of civil society. Civil society is a real of choice, personal freedom and individual responsibility.

3. Belief in the self-regulating market economy - free from state interference. Left to its own devices, the market will provide a natural equilibrium.

Key classical liberal thinkers include …

John Locke, Mary Wollstonecraft and John Stuart Mill, the US founding fathers of the late C18th and economists like Adam Smith. 

Origins of modern liberalism (i): Modern liberalism emerged in the late C19th, remaining the most powerful form of liberalism since in Europe and the USA. Liberalism overlaps considerably with other ideologies - …

all Western modern democratic parties accept liberal democracy, whilst One Nation conservatism accepts the need for an enhanced state, and Third Way Socialism accepts ideas on the atomisation of society.

Origins of modern liberalism (ii): Like the development of classical liberalism, it is closely linked to the rise of industrial capitalism in the C19th. Industrialisation brought a massive expansion of wealth for some, but was accompanied by the spread of slums, poverty, ignorance and disease. Social inequality became more difficult to ignore as a growing industrial working class was seen to be …

disadvantaged by low pay, unemployment and degrading living/working conditions. These changes made many aspects of classical liberalism such as ‘autonomous individuals’ and ‘atomised societies’ seem absurd.  Such developments had an impact on UK liberalism from the late C19th onwards, but in other countries they didn’t take effect until much later eg. US liberalism until the depression of the 1930s. 

Origins of modern liberalism (iii): In these changing historical circumstances, liberals found it more difficult to maintain the belief that arrival of industrial capitalism had brought with it general prosperity and liberty for all. Many came to revise the early liberal expectation that the unrestrained pursuit of self-interest produced a socially just society. As the idea of economic individualism came increasingly under attack, liberals rethought their attitude towards the state. It became increasingly …

hard for classical theory to work in a civil society of inequalities and injustices. Modern liberals were therefore prepared to advocate the development of an interventionist state. Philosophers such as T.H Green made a crucial acknowledgement that having conquered the original enemies of liberty - monarchical absolutism and arbitrary power. Liberals now faced new enemies that were social and economic.

Key modern liberal thinkers include …

John Rawls, Betty Friedan and T.H Green, but is also closely linked to US presidents like F.D Roosevelt and economists like John Maynard Keynes. 

John Locke is seen as the father of liberalism, perceiving individuals as rational and self-sufficient actors that were driven by self-interest. He believed this human rationality meant all humans could….

understand the ‘natural rights’ of others and the ‘natural laws’ which dictate that individuals should not harm each other’s lives, liberty or property.

Nevertheless, Locke saw that man’s self interest meant that people were largely indifferent to each other. Provided everyone had formal equality in law, then individuals should be …

left alone to develop as best their talents allow. He therefore embraced ‘negative freedom’ i.e. the absence of restraint, and saw only a minimal role for the state. 

Classical liberalism influenced the American revolutionaries, who refer to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' in the US Declaration of Independence. These are human rights that the state must uphold and protect. John Stuart Mill took the existing classical liberal view, and…

developed its thinking on the benefits of altruism, both for the pleasure it gives the individual engaging in it, and the wider benefit for society.   A happier society could also subsequently benefit the individual too. 

Modern liberals reject the classical liberal conception of human beings as essentially self-seeking utility maximisers, and suggest a more optimistic view of human nature. Individuals have…

sympathy for one another; their egoism is therefore constrained by some degree of altruism. Individuals possess social responsibilities and not merely individual responsibilities, and are therefore linked to others by ties of caring and empathy.

Whilst not disputing the primacy of individualism, modern liberals argue the extent that people are autonomous is overstated by classical liberals. Hence …

they see the need for an enhanced role of the state that ‘aggregates’ the individual's compassion towards a form of state-led action to tackle social and economic injustice.

John Stuart Mill in ‘On Liberty’ (1859) made bold statements in favour of individual freedom, but he later came to see the need for an ‘enabling state’ to ensure individual freedom could be enjoyed by all. John Rawls (1921-2002) argued that one's societal position and particular circumstance (race, gender, social class, innate intelligence, etc.) were important in determining whether …

an individual thrived or underachieved.  He argued classical liberalism’s approach of egotistical individualism could never solve these issues. Instead he promoted the altruistic & compassionate parts of human nature, plus the individual’s connection to others through society, meant action needed to be taken to ensure a happier society via social justice.

Differences:

• Classical liberals view human nature as far more individualistic than modern liberals. Locke and early Mill view society as atomistic in nature. The social justice of Rawls is more collective in its understanding of human nature, with individuals’ interactions with society more interconnected and organic.

• Classical liberals argue for a minimal state free of government interference. Classical liberals argue for negative freedom allowing individuals freedom from government interference wherever possible. Modern liberals prefer positive freedom to assist individual development, such as state funded education systems. 

• Liberals disagree on what constitutes the common good. Classical liberals such as Locke argue for …

• … formal equality while modern liberals such as Rawls argue that human nature has a clear social dimension, with his ideas of social justice and that formal equality is not enough and the state must offer equality of opportunity. 

• Wollstonecraft and Mill considered classical liberalism to be concerned primarily about men. Wollstonecraft argued that rationalism defined both genders, concluding that women were as intellectually capable as men. 

• Liberals differ on how best to deal with the conflict between popular democracy and individual rights. Classical liberals prefer representative democracy, which allows filters to control the tyranny of the majority, while modern liberals insist that liberal democratic theory means every individual should vote.

Similarities:

• Classical and modern liberals have an optimistic view of human nature. Individuals are rational, morally equal and independent, each wishing to pursue their version of the good life.

• Classical and modern liberals agree that individualism needs to be protected and encouraged. Correspondingly, they also agree that there should be a toleration of different values, beliefs and therefore that there should be a wide variety of versions of what constitutes the ‘ideal life’. 

• Classical liberalism (Wollstonecraft and Mill) and modern liberalism (Friedan) have both argued that women are as rational as men, calling for enfranchisement and equality of opportunity in the public sphere of society.

• Classical and modern liberals share concerns about popular democracy conflicting with individual rights. Mill conceptualised this concern with his tyranny of the majority theory: that the interests of the few could be subjected to the interests of the majority. 

Classical liberals see society as atomistic - composed of a collection of rational and predominantly autonomous & self-sufficient individuals. They therefore …

advocate a society based on egotistical individualism, whereby individuals are sovereign and free to organise their own lives unencumbered by encroachment from the state - which would limit freedom & weaken their self-development.

Classical liberals support an active civil society operating outside the realm of politics - where individuals choose to band together to form organisations, charities, religious groups etc. They also see …

the free market as an extension of individual freedom, where people are free to buy and sell as they choose. However within classical liberalism there are disagreements around the actual principles society should be constructed around.

John Locke argued the individualistic society of classical liberalism should be based on the ‘natural rights’ every person should have the opportunity to enjoy in order to live a ‘true human existence’.  For Locke …

 these rights were God-given and consisted of 'life, liberty and property'.  For Thomas Jefferson one of the Founding Fathers of the USA these natural rights consisted of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) however regarded the idea of rights as 'nonsense' and called natural rights 'nonsense on stilts'. In their place, he proposed …

what he believed to be the more scientific idea that individuals are motivated by self-interest to achieve happiness - which he called ‘utility’.

Bentham argued that each individual is the sole judge of what will give them pleasure, and therefore what is ‘morally right’. Bentham then applied the idea of individual ‘utility’ to the operation of …

 wider society and the state - arguing decisions should be based on what produces 'the greatest happiness for the greatest number’.  However, this formula was criticised by other liberals due to its majoritarian implications, because this formula allows the interests of the majority to outweigh those of the minority or the rights of the individual.

Modern liberals share some classical liberal beliefs - that society is made up of autonomous individuals, that the protection and promotion of freedom is paramount and that society should be set up to allow the individual to choose their own goals and be able to pursue them so as to make the best life they can.  They also fundamentally …

share the belief that the individual has a responsibility to help themselves in the ‘race of life’. However modern liberals differ considerably beyond these points.  They argue that in industrialised societies, individual autonomy is curtailed and the state must act as an enabling state to assist individual freedom via positive freedom.

Modern liberals argue for a state-funded welfare state to get everyone onto the ‘rung of the ladder’ where they can begin to ‘self-help’, which isn’t possible for the individual, if for example they find themselves in abject poverty. As a result …

society must be more altruistic and individuals focused not on egotistical individualism, but instead on developmental individualism. In developmental individualism society will acknowledge the need, utility and pleasure that helping others brings, and the benefits for all individuals of living in a happier, more socially just society. People contribute to society (e.g via taxes), to ensure everyone can reach the position that they can start to maximise their talents and abilities, and live a fulfilling life.  Modern liberals believe this sort of society is achievable based on their views of human nature.

They reject classical liberalism's belief of human nature being purely self-seeking, and argue instead for a more optimistic view where they show some altruistic empathy & sympathy for one another, and thus demonstrate they possess social responsibilities to care for others.  Rawls argues …

that it is rational for individuals to choose to construct a society that offers opportunities for the less fortunate to improve their condition

Differences:

• Classical liberals advocate an atomistic society.  Modern liberals recognise the individualistic nature of society, but equally believe human’s altruistic nature means people will seek to create a more coherent & caring society.

• Classical liberals focus on negative freedom, whilst modern liberals promote positive freedom.

• Correspondingly classical liberals advocate a minimalistic nightwatchman state which interferes as little as possible in society and the economy.  Modern liberals believe that modern life has curtailed the opportunity for the individual to be fully autonomous.  Therefore they want an ‘enabling state’ to intervene in society and the economy to create policies that allow disadvantaged individuals to have the opportunity to achieve a fulfilling life.

• Liberals such as Wollstonecraft and Friedan view liberalism through the role of women in society. Wollstonecraft argued that society 'infantilised' women and stifled female individualism, while Friedan argued that post-war America remained chauvinistic towards women.

• Neoliberalism (the modern version of classical liberalism) disagrees with modern liberals like Rawls and his assessment of the altruistic society. Neoliberals see modern liberals redistribution or wealth and social justice as socialism and as betraying the core idea of egotistical individualism.

Similarities:

• Classical and modern liberals broadly agree that human society predates the state (unlike conservative belief that the state created order and therefore society).

• Both strands of liberals see society as a collection of diverse and potentially autonomous individuals.

• Classical liberals and modern liberals both stress that society should be arranged to promote individualism and allow the individual to flourish.

• Classical and modern liberalism agree with Mill that the ideal society would be one where 'individuality' coexisted with tolerance and diversity.

• Classical liberals and modern liberals promote foundational equality (all people are born with equal worth & therefore entitlement).

• Both strands would support the idea of universal human rights and that these should be formally recognised within society.

• Classical liberalism argues the state's attitude towards the economy should be laissez-faire and instead restricted to protecting property & enforcing legal contracts. Modern liberalism, while supportive of free-market capitalism, supports Keynesian economics, where the state directly intervenes to stimulate the economy (‘mixed economy’).

• Classical liberals argue that the …

• unencumbered free market is the best way of generating wealth 

• free market is self-correcting and therefore ‘the invisible hand’ of market forces will rectify booms and busts

• free market is the ultimate meritocracy where people will thrive, survive or fall due to their own individual talents and work ethic

• there should be low taxation and privatisation 

Neoliberals like Robert Nozick see …

• taxation as ‘legalised theft’

• argue modern liberalism has abandoned individualism for 

• collectivism because of its focus on social justice to be achieved by ‘cradle-to-grave’ state welfare 

• is paternalistic which breeds dependency and a lack of initiative and self-reliance.  

• Modern liberals favour

  • managed capitalism as a means to facilitate social justice

  • using progressive taxation to fund a welfare state ensuring all have a standard of living that allows them to enjoy freedom

• ensuring everyone has a level of provision to allow ‘economic equality of opportunity’ so all can access & maximise their talents within the marketplace

• higher level of taxation and the state controlling key aspects of the economy crucial to the ‘national wellbeing’ e.g. healthcare, education, energy, transportation etc

Classical liberals argue order comes from the market - Adam Smith‘s ‘invisible hand’ which stabilises society, since people had to act rationally in order to thrive within the free market. This includes the fact people will have to respect others freedoms.  Modern liberals argue order comes from social stability - and that needs a state that is active & interventionist in the economy, raising taxes, creating jobs, providing rules to protect workers, and working on reducing levels of inequality etc.

Modern liberalism's belief in modern capitalism has seen a growth in the state that neoliberals disapprove of.  At the international level neoliberals see supranational organisations like the EU trading bloc, as an obstacle to global free trade and incompatible with the classical liberal idea of limited state involvement in the economy

Similarities:

• Classical and modern liberals are all enthusiastic supporters of the free-market economy ideas as being the best route to generate wealth

• Both strands support some role for the state in the economy (albeit to very very different degrees).  Even Adam Smith backed limited progressive taxation, state run education programmes and the role of the state to enforce contracts & protect property, whilst free market neoliberalism radicals such as Robert Nozick and Milton Freedman do not support the anarcho-capitalist position that sees no role for the state economically at all 

• Classical and modern liberals are all influenced by Locke's idea that the state should respect the 'natural right' to private property. Private property is an essential tenet of freedom and protecting the individual from the state.  Female liberal thinkers Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-97) & Betty Friedan (1921-2006) focused on the lack of property rights enjoyed by women within a patriarchal society. 

• Inequality is inevitable and acceptable - both classical and modern liberals accept that capitalism will lead to unequal outcomes for individuals within the economy, which is consistent with the idea of meritocracy (albeit they differ greatly over how concerning gross inequality is and modern liberalism's idea of the enabling state).

Minimal Government: The classical liberal position is that the state is a necessary evil - in line with   Thomas Jefferson quote that 'when government grows, our liberty withers'. Yet …

whilst the state should be minimal, acting only as a ‘night watchman’, classical liberals still see it as necessary.  Its role is to protect 'life, liberty and estate', and so it must intervene to uphold rule of law as well as protecting society from foreign invasion.

Such interventions require institutions such as police forces, armies, laws and a judiciary to uphold the laws. As such, …

the typical liberal state, with its various roles and with a government system built on multi-institutional checks and balances, is actually quite extensive.  Nevertheless the term ‘minimal state’ is still valid, as it really refers to the amount of power the state and its government should have, not the size as such. Locke advocated for government by consent: the state would be the result of a social contract enshrining the natural state of freedom into the law of government.

 This was in direct contrast to the arbitrary governments of absolute monarchies which dominated the political system in his age. Instead, in a liberal state individuals would enter the social contract voluntarily.  The government would be formed by the people, and remain …

subject to their direct consent (e.g via elections), and in return individuals would agree to obey the government’s laws. This would ensure that 'government should always be the servant, and not master, of the people'.

 Locke's belief in government by consent, and his assertion that a state should be the servant not master of the people seem mainstream today. Yet, in the context of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, such ideas were …

revolutionary and potentially violent.  Locke’s concept of liberal government became associated with the Glorious Revolution of 1688 which established constitutional government in England, and the American revolt against British rule in 1775, when Locke's belief in natural rights and government by consent were proclaimed by the rebels.

The classical liberal state was envisaged as being built from scratch (like a machine) and designed to safeguard individual freedom and liberty through:

• Limiting government power by …

• The use of a constitution, which specifies and limits government powers, and sets out the rights a citizen can expect to enjoy

• Power being divided between different branches of government (separation of powers).  The three branches of government - legislative, executive and judiciary - should have the ability to act as a check on the others

• Ensuring 'government by consent' by it being chosen by regular elections, which also keep it accountable to the people 

Self-Help and Social Darwinism (i): Classical liberalism takes quite an uncompromising position on poverty and social inequality. As an individualistic political creed, it explains different social circumstances as a result of the differing talents and hard work of each individual human being. Individuals make what they want, and what they can, of their own lives. Those with ability and a willingness to work will prosper, while …

the incompetent or the lazy will not. This idea was memorably expressed in the title of Samuel Smiles' book Self-Help [1859], which begins by reiterating the well-tried maxim that 'Heaven helps those who help themselves'.

Self-Help and Social Darwinism (ii): The UK economist and politician Richard Cobden (1804-65) argued that improvements of the lot of the poor in industrial revolution Britain should come about through 'their own efforts’ and urged them to be self-reliant and 'look not to Parliament, look only to yourselves'. Ideas of individual self-reliance reached their boldest expression in …

Herbert Spencer's The Man versus the State [1884] which developed a vigorous defence of the doctrine of laissez-faire, drawing on ideas of Darwin's process of 'natural selection' and applying them to the human race. Spencer's US disciple William Sumner (1840-1910) stated this principle in 1884, when he asserted that 'the drunkard in the gutter is just where he ought to be'.

Enabling State: Modern liberals reject classical liberalism’s idea of minimal government based on negative freedom.  Instead they want the state to play a much much greater role in society and the economy, where it will pursue policies on the basis of positive freedom - enabling people, via the state’s helping hand, to become the best version of themselves they can be. Only …

 ‘more government’ can create the conditions to enable individuals to overcome socioeconomic threats to freedom. For this reason, modern liberals such as John Rawls argue that individual liberty generally requires more laws, more state spending and more taxation.

As a result, this brand of liberalism has become strongly linked to the UK's post-war welfare state and other 'big government' initiatives (such as the 1930s 'New Deal' in the USA). Key thinker John Stuart Mill illustrates the tensions within liberal thought when attempting to balance human individuality and autonomy while furthering developmental individualism in relation to a more interventionist state. Starting as a classical liberalist, Mill later adapted his view of …

 limited government, anticipating modern liberalism when he called for state intervention to assist the poor who were experiencing economic and social injustice. He also advocated mass education to advance both individual potential and create a progressive society, where he hoped electors wouldn’t based decisions solely on rational self-interest or on Bentham's 'the greatest happiness of the greatest number' utilitarianism, but instead on a more complex and nuanced understanding of the need to aggregate everyone’s interests in society, not just their own.

T.H. Green (1836-92) was an early advocate for modern liberalism who continued to reinterpret the role of the state so that …

it had a larger role in both society and the economy arguing in the latter half of the nineteenth century that the main question for liberalism was no longer about state and society leaving the individual alone, but whether the state was assisting the individual in fulfilling their potential.

T.H Green also argued that  liberty as defined by classical liberalism was worthless if individuals lacked the capacity to exercise those liberties.The social constraints on freedom were manifest and the state must promote …

 equality of opportunity through education & organise welfare to help those unable to defend themselves against deprivation via unemployment, sickness and old age.

The ideas of the enabling state were influential on Asquith's Liberal government which introduced the Old-Age Pensions Act in 1908 and National Insurance Act of 1911 - examples of …

state intervention to reduce need and therefore facilitate improved individual freedom. Later Beveridge's 1942 report identified the 'five giants' that plagued society (and therefore impeded individual freedom) - and so modern liberalism’s vision of the enabling state was key to the establishment of the modern welfare state.

Positive Discrimination: Rejects classical liberalism’s position on self-help and instead …

 embraces ‘positive discrimination’ - an idea neoliberals see as an anathema to liberalism’s core value of individualism.  Positive discrimination is the idea that the state should promote socially active programmes to tackle perceived social injustice

 Modern liberals like Betty Friedan called on the state to introduce legislation to prevent e.g. gender and racial discrimination, and for 'affirmative action' - that is, discrimination favouring groups that had, historically …

 been discriminated against (often referred to as 'positive discrimination').  This led to ideas such as the establishment of the USA’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1964), which required 'affirmative action or 'positive discrimination' in respect of hiring employees from racial minorities and the UK 2010 Equality Act. Friedan argued such 'corrective' legislation was perfectly consistent with the original aim of the liberal state: namely, the promotion of tolerance and equality of opportunity.

Differences:

• Classical liberals believe the state should play a nightwatchman role driven by the principle of negative freedom.  Its role should be limited to enforcing the rule of law, preventing actions harmful to others, and protecting borders.  Modern liberals argue for an enabling state which intervenes to stimulate positive freedom and create conditions where individuals could help themselves e.g. via education & welfare.  Neoliberals like von Hayek, argue positive liberty is merely 'socialism in disguise' and leads therefore 'the road to serfdom' (or long-term dependence on others), creating a situation where liberty and enterprise were stifled by state welfare, all funded by enforced illiberal high taxation

• Classical liberals promote a laissez-faire approach to the the role of state in economics, whilst modern liberals support the managed capitalism of Keynesianism

• Classical liberalism promote a fairly uncompromising position on the responsibility of the individual to self-help, whereas modern liberalism -  whilst agreeing on the need for some self-reliance - is prepared to endorse positive discrimination to challenge social justice

• Classical liberals were distrustful of majoritarian democracy and favoured methods such as a limited franchise to avoid ignorant decisions, or a representative democracy to mitigate the threat of the ‘tyranny of the majority’.  Modern liberals favour representative democracy based upon universal suffrage for men and women.

Similarities:

• All strands of liberalism subscribe to a mechanistic theory of the state - the state can be built like a machine from scratch in order to serve the core aim of creating an individualistic society

• Classical and modern liberals would agree that the government must be ‘of the people, and for the people’.  They would therefore both agree any non-liberal forms of government, such as a traditional monarchy, are illegitimate and must be opposed

• They would also agree that …

the power and autonomy of the state must be limited through methods such as 

• Constitutionalism

• Consent via regular elections

• A separation of powers between the executive, the legislative and judicial branches of the state

Both strands see that democracy can enhance an individual's capacity to shape their lives via the ballot box, and believe humans will act as rational actors.  Mill - as the thinker who straddles both strands - thought democracy would have an 'educative' effect upon voters, and thus aid developmental individualism. But …

classical liberals and modern liberals also both have reservations about the nature of democracy, and believe the will of the majority must be mitigated to protect individual rights, e.g. via investing constitutional protection powers in judges.  Neither strand has much liking for direct democracy which could lead to poor decision-making and possible illiberal outcomes, unless the popular will is percolate through the intellectual shield of politicians via a representative democracy