core political ideas

politics paper 1

liberalism - human nature:an overview/introduction

all liberals hold a positive view on human nature - but this is “qualified”:

• focus on the individual and believe that society should be constructed in a way that promotes individuals developing + attaining their potential

• agree that humans are imperfect but rational + reasonable beings → selfish + self-seeking but this enables progress + competition - equal but unique

• but, humans can become become greedy + power-hungry = state controls this → disagree over individual freedoms.

classicals: humans beings are rational, egotistical individuals - who want the best for themselves and respect others wishes to do the same → liberty of the individual is a natural right - locke. this can be done through the economic free market (locke) where individuals are left alone to develop their potential

modern: driven by desire for self-fulfillment + personal development but are also altruistic + generous to eachother → pleasure seeking with high (educational) + low (simple) pleasures of this, according to mill. however, not all individuals have the same ability to develop their potential - supports a welfare state

liberalism + human nature: classical liberals

human beings are rational, guided by the pursuit of self interest - but are still mindful of others’ concerns. classical liberals believe in atomistic individualism - regardless of who they are, all individuals should be fre to develop their potentials → all individuals are the same + the theory pays little attention to individual differences + humanity

liberalism + human nature: feminist liberals

rationalism defines both genders → men are women are not very different in the intellectual sense (wollstonecraft)

human nature has evolved in a way that discourages self-advancement among women. (friedan)

liberalism + human nature: modern liberals

mankind is selfish, yet empathetic - values both individual liberty and the plight of those around them. supported the creation of a welfare state to support individual development. (rawls)

though fundamentally rational, human nature is not fixed → forever progressing to a higher level. humans are pleasure-seeking - he supports the primacy of the individual (mill)

liberalism - the state: an overview/introduction

all liberals agree that human nature is imperfect, so the state is required to support this + is designed to protect individual freedoms (locke). the state is necessary, but humans can become greedy + power-hungry → classical liberals believe the state must have:

• limited government - with only the necessary powers

• separation of powers - government branches stay balanced

• democracy - further entrenches limited government → but could lead to tyranny of the majority - which would have been the working class at the time.

classical liberals view the state as a “necessary evil” - using a “nightwatchman state” → the minimal state that only interferes when defence, diplomacy, or law + order is at hand (these activities that will impact individual freedom + private property.

in comparison, modern liberals believe in the enabling/interventionist state which allows all to attain personal development. the welfare state allows genuine equality of opportunity, enhancing positive freedom (mill)

all liberals support representative democracy + political pluralism - range of parties to choose between who priorities individual needs.

all liberals also believe in equality of opportunity, but not equality of outcome - survival of the fittest or “social darwinism”.

liberalism - society: an overview/introduction

society is a contested concept - best seen in abstract → tension over the relationship between society + the state, and whether the state should intervene in the private sphere. locke argued that society predates the state, whereas rawls argued it cannot exist without the state. there is also tension over the nature of society with classical liberals viewing society as individualists while rawls viewed it as quasi-collectivist (fake/appears differently). liberals also belive is a tolerant society which enables individuals to develop their self-worth → challenged by liberal feminists who argued that toleration did not extend far enough and excluded women.

liberalism + society: classical liberals

• locke saw individuals as “archaic” and that the state was need to create some form of society where individuals could flourish. society is a natural unit + it existed before the state. it was the result of rational interactions between individuals in a state of nature with natural rights (life, liberty + property) → as societies expand, potential for conflict increases → leads to the creation of a state which serves the interests of society (locke’s nightwatchman state). however, believed that individuals cannot be free if they experience poverty + deprivation

• bentham + utilitarians considered that those institutions within society which created the greatest happiness for the greatest number were those that should be promoted

• however, his critics pointed out that these had the potential to allow majorities to dominate minorities

• others, believed that the individuals owed nothing to society since it was through self-help + individual responsibility that individuals flourished

• the private sphere for classical liberals is more extensive than it is modern liberals

liberalism + society: modern liberals

modern liberals (rawls) argues that society cannot exist without a state + it is fused to the state → individuals cannot be free in society without help from the state (positive liberty) with welfare + education → impacts liberty as the state is in control

liberalism - the economy: an overview/introduction

liberals are not socialist → all reject socialist modes of production + socially planned economy. they also all reject common ownership of property, all liberals support capitalist forms of economic mode.

however, there is a tension over what type of capitalism liberals support + the extent to which the state should intervene in economic relations. key tension is between the supporters of laissez-faire free market capitalism and yellow book liberals who support keynesianism - mixed market economics.

private property is the best way to ensure individualism + liberty → however, there is a tension over the extent to which, individuals should be able to keep their wealth.

all liberals are opposed to inherited wealth, with modern liberals (rawls) suggesting individuals should surrender an element of their wealth to fund welfare - progressive taxation.

liberalism + the economy: locke (classical)

state policy should respect the natural right to private property and arbitrate effectively between individuals competing for trade + resources. individual freedom in a free-market economy should be enshrined in law - reflecting negative liberty. stems from smith who believed that individual enterprise would allow individuals to develop their potential + enable them to acquire wealth + property - this is supported by mill. - support low taxation

liberalism + the economy: wollstonecraft (feminist)

argued that property laws should be extended to women who, with rationality, has the ability to acquire private property just like men. also argued that a free-market economy would be energised by the enterprise of liberated women. women should be free in the market economy to develop their potential (wollstonecraft). friedan believed that the free market economy could aid female emancipation, providing this was legislated by the state.

liberalism + the economy: wider reading

classical liberals (smith + ricardo) believed in market capitalism + limited state intervention - promotes freedom of choice + individualism. a market economy would be self regulating + would balance society. they believed that individual enterprise would allow individuals to develop their potential + enable them to acquire wealth/property - supported by mill.

modern liberals - capitalism creates issues (economic depressions - 1870s-80s + 1920-30s) so requires keynesian economics → state “injects money into the economy” with job creation + manipulation of interest + tax = a prosperous capitalist economy that prevents economic downturns + maintains employment.

conservatism - human nature

• hobbes -

• burke -

• oakeshott -

• rand -

• nozick -

conservatism - the state

• hobbes -

• burke -

• oakeshott -

• rand -

• nozick -

conservative views on key aspects of society (localism)

• traditional conservatives: individuals prefer to live in small communities (for the sense of belonging) = ruralism + hobbes

• one nation conservatives: emphasise the community as a form of identity, national community brings people together

• burke emphasise the need for “little platoons” - community group where everyone has a role to play → stifles individual selfishness

• new right reject localism as it stifles individual freedom + identity

• rand preferred objectivism - individuals see the world in an objective way + free from external constraints

conservative views on key aspects of society (organic society)

• conservatives see society as an organism

conservative views on key aspects of society (empiricism - accumulated evidence + history)

conservative views on key aspects of society (tradition - values, customs, institutions)

conservative views on key aspects of society (hierarchy - natural inequality)

conservative views on key aspects of society (christian morality)

conservatism - the economy: an overview/introduction

there is tension within traditional conservatism over how far capitalism should be supported + tension over the role of the state in the economy - however, since the industrial revolution, all conservatives have come to support capitalism in its various forms. there is also a clear tension between traditional conservatives + the new right over the free market

conservatism + the economy: paragraph 1

early conservatives were hostile towards capitalism - but capitalism provided the conditions that conservatives favour:

• conservatives became reluctant cpaitsalists - burke supported laissez-faire free market capitalism, while hobbes supported the free market as it enabl;ed the state to focus on defence

• yet, conservatives had massive concerns over the free market

conservatism + the economy: paragraph 2

conservatives overcome the dilemma of greater state intervention:

• tariffs with keynesian economics

• the need to raise progressive taxation to fund welfare + paternalism

• oakeshott argued that state intervention was needed for order + stability

conservatism + the economy: paragraph 3

clear departure by the new right

• enforce the free market + equality of opportunity

• reject the “dead hand of government”

• nozick - “rolling back the frontiers of the state”

• yet, the new right’s views on the economy are still consistent with conservative thinking - private property + destroying socialism

• rand - free market enforces individual objectivism

conclusion: there is tension - but it should not be overrexaggerated

socialism - human nature: an overview/introduction

• all socialists have a positive view of human nature

• early socialists believed in human perfectability - utopian concept

• all socialist believe human nature is shaped by the external environment BUT that humans have an innate desire for justice + fairness - also a duty to eachother: “no man is an island unto himself” - donné → brotherhood/fraternity

• there is, however, some tension within socialist thinking over human nature - not a surprise due to many strands of socialism

socialism + human nature: marx

believed that humans are inherently good + cooperative BUT capitalism has corrupted human nature → has caused greed + legitimate competition, leading to exploitation. this requires revolution and the move to socialism, eventually communism will “right the corruption” of human nature.

socialism + human nature: luxembourg

believed that marx overestimated the extent to which capitalism corrupted human nature → human altruism and cooperation still flourished amongst the working class. the reason for altruism was the resistance to capitalism from the working class.

socialism + human nature: webb

held a positive view of human nature - humans were damaged by capitalism but revolution would compound that damage. only by evolutionary means, humans could be guided back to the right path - tension with marx.

inevitability of gradualism - this would enable human nature to heal.

socialism + human nature: crosland

humans have an innate sense of justice + fairness, therefore they reject inequality and deprivation. this means that humans will always seek to reform capitalism (a tension with marx)

socialism + human nature: giddens

capitalism itself is not inherently corrupting. human nature is affected by changing socioeconomic circumstances e.g. free-market individualism. the sense of fairness remains the same, but humans place an emphasis on choice + individualism .

socialism - the state: an overview/introduction

• socialists view the state as playing a vital role in the improvement of the “human condition”

• however, socialists disagree over the role and nature of the state in these 3 ways:

  1. some (e.g. marx) sees the state as a means to an end, while others see the state as an end in itself - stalinism

  2. there is also tension over what the state does e.g. promote equality of outcome (marx), redistributing equality (crosland), equality of opportunity (giddens) - associate with narrow + broad definitions of collectivism (broad = social, narrow = economic) e.g. welfare estate → nationalisation

  3. there is also tension over the capitalist state - whether to overthrow it or reform it?

• therefore, there are clear tensions between those socialists who embrace a fundamentalist stance - chiefly marx, webb + luxembourg → and those who embrace revisionism - crosland + giddens (neo-revisionist)

socialism - society: an overview/introduction

socialists, like liberals have a mechanistic view of society - it can be radically changed. to make society equal, it must be transformed. society is a collectivist concept - broad, people need to belong to societies - “no man is an island unto himself” - donné. society defines the groups within it.

in modern societies, class is the most important social division - prime source of inequality + conflict - or is it?

socialists believe in a society that embraces equality as a fundamental goal. they are, however, divided over what type of equality should exist in a just society:

• equality of outcome - (egalitarian, marxist + communist), classless society

• re-distributive equality - welfare (social democratic - crosland), justice

• equality of opportunity - more individualist (third way - giddens)

all socialists agree that capitalist societies generate inequality and must be improved - either through revolution or reform. the tension within socialist vies on society is over how society can be changed to improve the “human condition”. societies predate the existence of the state (engels) - a stateless society is equal.

socialism - the economy: an overview/introduction

• socialism (in its fundamental form) is a critique of capitalism - marking it as an economic theory

• it seems to expose the contradictions in capitalism (wage vs profit) → marxist theory of dialectical materialism - and offer an alternate economic mode to capitalism → communism, the common ownership of the means of production

• marx gave central focus to the capitalist economy and the exploitation of the working class by capitalists - it was thus irredeemable → it needed to be destroyed through revolution

• socialism is thus a critique of private property and the inequality this causes → narrow definition of collectivism.

• however, tony wright uses the phrase “socialisms” when describing the broad nature of the ideology

• revisionism has affected socialist views on the economy:

  • social democrats have sought to reform capitalism through keynesian economics and corporatism.

  • neo-revisionists, such as giddens, have embraced neo-liberal economic markets

  • even stalinism departs from marxist economic doctrine through state socialism and central economic planning

thus, there is clear tension over the economy.

socialism + society: crosland

class is no longer the dominant feature of society. there are other social divisions which make society complicated e.g. the rise of the salariat class (money without the ownership of a business). this means that capitalist society has changed, therefore capitalist society can be improved through reform + legislation.

socialism + society: webb

critical of capitalist society → it generates + legitimates exploitation + inequality. BUT, society may not be improved by revolution. she believes that society can gradually be improved through the slow dismantling of capitalist structures. capitalism encourages competition + stifles cooperation. yet, she still believes in a classless society with equality of outcome → just tension over the means of achieving this, inevitability of gradualism

socialism + society: luxembourg

capitalist societies are highly unequal, where the working class are exploited (in line with marx). BUT she argues that marx overrexaggerates the impact of capitalism on society. she argues that inequality + exploitation exists in other non-capitalist societies. she is critical of marxist reductionism + highlights working-class subcultures, while marx believes the working class are the result of capitalism.

socialism + society: marx + engels

capitalist society serves capitalist interests - both in its institutions + ideas - legitimates inequality - society is defined by class conflict. in a primitive communist society, there are no classes → no conflict. marx believed in a classless society, which would end social division → achieved through revolution, move to socialism + the state withers away = communism → equality of outcome → end of history.

socialism + society: giddens (third way)

rejects the view that society is dominated by class. society is more focussed on individual liberty + freedom. capitalism can be harnessed to improve society. it has undergone a process of embourgeoisiement (embracing middle class values) - blair “we are all middle class now”, hence the move towards equality of opportunity.

socialism + the state: marx + engels

the state is an instrument of ruling class control. the capitalist state protects the interests of the ruling class (private property) by exploiting the working class - the state legitimates class inequality.

the capitalist state is nothing more than a committee for cleansing the affairs of the bourgeoisie - it must be overthrown through revolution which arises through working-class alienation.

the state has always served the ruling class throughout history (historical materialism) - it emerges with a surplus of production - when a ruling class emerges so does the state.

the state can never serve the interests of different classes at the same time.

the state is not central to marxist analysis - it is instrumental, while the capitalist economy is central.

the socialist state emerges from the capitalist state - led by a dictatorship of the proletariat, performing 2 functions:

• prevents counter revolution

• transfers private property to state/common property

without social classes, the state becomes redundant + withers away

socialism + the state: luxembourg

she agreed with marx that the capitalist state was exploitative and must be overthrown through revolution. however, she rejected the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat - instead, favouring elections + a socialist democracy

socialism + the state: webb - democratic socialism

there is no need for revolution. the capitalist state can be dismantled from within and replaced with a socialist state. this is achieved through universal suffrage. workers would elect a parliamentary socialist party. this would transform capitalism through the ballot box (evolutionary + gradualism) - however, webb still shared marx’s vision of a communist, stateless society.

socialism + the state: crosland - social democratic

adopts a different view towards the capitalist state. it was no longer seen as the exploitative force which served for the ruling class - it could only be reformed. socialist governments could radically transform society through the state → wealth redistribution + welfare state + progressive taxation. the capitalist state had changed - revisionist, the state expands to provide welfare + economic planning.

socialism + the state: giddens - third way

by adopting a third way approach → neo-revisionist, many of the responsibilities of the state can be realised through the free market (market socialism). state should focus more on providing opportunities for individual freedom and equality of opportunity e.g. means-tested “hand-up welfare”.

is this really socialist?

socialism + the economy: marx

1. socialism is a scientific theory which critiques capitalism and the inequality it causes- private property ownership and class conflict - the economic base is supported and legitimated by the state super structure

2. the capitalist economy seeks to exploit workers by extracting surplus value and making workers live in poverty. the contradictions of capitalism cause alienation

3. the job of capitalism is to create a revolutionary consciousness which will lead to revolution. workers will smash the capitalist economy - due, in part to, the immiseration of the proletariat

4. socialism is, in part, process and must offer an alternate economic model to capitalism. marx argued for common ownership of the means of production (common property and equality of outcomes)

5. the socialist phase needs a dictatorship of the proletariat who will transform private wealth into state property. communist forms of economics will emerge once the state has withered away → classless society leads to common ownership

socialism + the economy: luxembourg

believed that marx was wrong in this view that capitalism would collapse easily. she believed it to be more resilient that assumed by marx = tension. however, she still believed that capitalism needed to be destroyed by socialist economic modes + replaced, to be run by workers → therefore, agrees with marx, just that revolution would require more effort

socialism + the economy: webb

capitalism was morally wrong for all classes. this echoes fabianism → she believed that capitalism must be dismantled - it has no future (agrees with marx). however, she rejected marx’s views on revolution, instead believing that a socialist party with universal suffrage could move towards common ownership - by dismantling capitalism from within - tension + revisionism

socialism + the economy: crosland

revisionist - adopts a social democratic view. capitalism adapts and survives - it starts to benefit more than just the ruling class (popular capitalism). there is no need to remove capitalism through revolution. socialist aims can be reconciled with reformed capitalism - clear tension. wealth redistribution can occur through progressive taxation. the mixed market economy can benefit all with the state playing a key role in economic planing (corporatism) → tension.

socialism + the economy: giddens

third way socialism - endorses neo-liberal economies as a way of achieving “market socialism” = neo-revisionist → rejects equality of outcome in favour of equality of opportunity + endorses private property - tension

liberalism + the economy: rawls (modern)

argued for greater state intervention in the economy = keynesianism, which would create the mixed-market economy moderated by the state = positive liberty where the creation of a welfare state enhanced the liberty of the poor. keynesianism highlighted unemployment as a key issue as it constrained liberty. → all individuals should have jobs, supported by the welfare state, funded through progressive taxation for those who could not fund themselves. → by design, reduce wealth of the individual

liberalism + the economy: nozick (neo-liberal)

nozick + murray distance liberalism from keynesianism - rather than embrace liberty the mixed-market economy stifles it. the welfare state created welfare dependency (murray) constrained liberty + individualism. nozick argued state intervention created more problems than it solved. → “roll back the frontiers of the state” through privatisation + selling off state property (e.g. council housing) - support low taxation