Liberalism Notes- Ideologies

What does Locke think about rationality? (human nature)

• Rationality is not something humans develop or earn, but is a divine endowment

Locke begins with God. Because God created human beings, they are ‘his property whose workmanship they are’, meaning humans are not self-created beings but creatures equipped by their maker with what they need to live as intended, therefore rationality is not something humans develop or earn but a divine endowment, which means simply a gift fm God that carries moral weight from the moment of creation. This fixed and God-given rationality stands in contrast to later liberal thinkers who would argue rationality is something that grows and develops through expereince and social conditions

Evidence to back Locke’s view on rationality?

Locke argues that this God-given reason then ‘teaches all mankind’ that no one ought to harm another in their life, health, liberty or possessions, meaning reason does not just help humans survive or calculate, it actively instructs them in how to treat others, therefore making it a moral faculty rather than simply an intellectual one, that humans developed overtime, rather soemthing something natural. This means humans nature is already moral before any government or law exists, therefore humans do not need a sovreign to impose right and wrong on them because the capacity to recognise natural law is built into them by their creator, making the state of nature not a condition of war, but a tolerable and cooperative condition precisely because rationality and morality were present even before government. For Locke this moral rationality is universal and pre-social, meaning it exists independently of any community or institution, wich later modern liberals challenge by arguing genuine moral development requires social conditions to flourish

A consequence of Locke’s view on rationality?

Because rationality and natural rights are already present in human nature, Locke is calling for the protection of those rights rather than their creation. Governments must be limited and consent-based, and individuals must be free to excercise their rational faculties without intereference. Where the government oversteps and violates natural rights, rational individuals are not only justified in revolting but naturally compelled to, because protecting those rights is what reason itself demands. This minimal protective role of the state flows directly from Locke’s static conception of rationality, because if rational faculties are already complete at creation there is simply nothing for the state to develop or enable

What does Wollstonecraft think about rationality? (human nature)

• Rationality must be cultivated through education

Wollstonecraft accepts that rationality is a God-given faculty in all human beings, sharing Locke’s foundational premise that reason is divinely endowed and universal, rather than Mill who believes that is developed through experience, but she asks the question what happens when that faculty is never allowed to develop. And her answer to that is that without education, passions such as vanity will dominate rather than reason, meaning vanity and irrationality are not that natural state of women but what fills the space when reason is deliberately left uncultivated, therefore what society presents as natural female weakness, which is irrationality is an engineered outcome, pressed onto women by men

Evidence to back Wollstonecraft’s view on rationality?

Wollstonecraft argued that society kept women as ‘docile sexual objects’ meaning it reduced women to their appearnece and their usefulness to men rather than developing their minds, therefore denying them the very conditions their rational nature requires to grow. This means the inferiority is not natural but manufactured, and what human nature actually points toward in every person when properly developed is ‘power over themselves’ meaning genuine rational self-governance rather than dependence on others, therefore apparent female inferiority is a social distortion of human nature rather than an expression of it

A consequence of Wollstonecraft’s view on rationality?

Wollstonecraft is calling for women to be educated in the same way as men so that thier rational faculties can actually develop. Beyond that she is arguing that women must actively pursue rational independence rather than accepting the passive role in society assinged to them, striving to become autonomous rational beings capable of governing their own lives and decisions. Where Locke simply calls for the protection of rational faculties that already exists freely and Rawls calls for fair institutional conditions that allow reasonableness to flourish, Wollstonecraft’s means of change is more directly social, recognising that the conditions for rational development must be actively created through edducation and reform rather than just protected or instiutionally guranteed

What does JSM think about rationality? (human nature)

• Rationality drives individuality, judgement and progress

Mill’s starting point is that at birth the mind is a tabula rasa, meaning a blank slate with no fixed content or character, therefore who you become depends entirely on what expereinces, culture and habits shape you overtime, meaning that rationality is not a static God-given compass as Locke argues, but something that grows and develops through life. Therefore, because rationality develops this way, it allows humans to make ‘inductions’, meaning to observe the world, learn from experience and draw conclusions, thereofre humans are capable of genuine progress in a way that animals are not.

Evidence to back JSM’s view on rationality?

This feeds directly into Mill’s distinction between higher and lower pleasures. It is ‘better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied’, meaning that a pig lives entirely on the level of basic appetite and cannot reflect or aspire beyond it. This means to settle for lower pleasures is not just a lifestyle choice but a failure to live in accordance with what human nature actually makes possible, therefore rationality for Mill is not just about recognising rights as Locke argued but about excercising judgement and individuality in the pursut of higher pleasures and genuine self development

A consequence of JSM’s view on rationality?

Mill is calling for individuals to actively cultivate their higher faculties rather than settling fot base satisfaction, pursuing intellectual and moral creative development rather than mere comfort. Society must protect free speech and individual liberty through the harm principle, limiting liberty only when it harms others, because without freedom to think, experiment and express oneself rational development cannot happen.

What does Rawls think about rationality? (human nature)

• Rationality is expressed as reasonableness, guiding citizens to fairness and cooperation

Rawls distinguishes between being rational and being reasonable and is is the second one that defines his view of human nature. Being rational is the basic sense just means pursuing your own goals effectively, but Rawls argues that human nature contains something beyond this. To be reasonable means accepting ‘the fact of pluralism’, meaning that the reality that people thinking carefully and in good faith will still reach completely different conclusions about deep moral and religious questions, therefore disagreement is not a failure of reason but simply the nature of those questions

Evidence to back Rawls’ view on rationality?

E.g think of a debate around abortion. Two people can both think carefully, reason logically and act in complete good faith, yet one concludes that life begins at conception making abortion morally wrong, while the other concludes that a woman’s bodily autonomy takes priority making the abortion morally acceptable. Neither is being irrational or dishonest, they are simply starting from 2 different fundamental values and reaching different conclusions, therefore their disagreement is not a failure of reason but simply a reflection of how genuniely complex and contested these deep moral questions are, meaning no amount of rational argument will produce a single uninversally agreed answer

A consequence of Rawls’ view on rationality?

This means humans are faced with a choice about how to live alongside people they fundamentally disagree with and Rawls argues human nature contains the capacity to respond ti that reality constructively, because reasonable citizens are willing to propose and abide by fair terms of cooperation even at personal cost, meaning they can step outside their own interests and treat others as equally deserving of respect, therefore this capacity for reasonableness is for Rawls the most defining and most important feature of human nature, leading not just to autonomy but to toleration and mutual respect within political institutions

What does Locke think about individualism? (human nature)

• Individuals as self owners, and soceity only exists to protect natural rights

Locke’s starting point is that ‘each man has a property in his own person’ meaning every individual owns themselves, their body, their mind and their labour, therefore self-ownership is the foundation from which all individuals rights and freedoms flow flow

Evidence to back Locke’s view on individualism? (human nature)

This produces possessive individualism, meaning individuals are self-seeking and self reliant, owing nothing to society beyond respect for the equivalent rights of others, therefore the individuals exists prior to independently of society rather than being defined or shaped by it. This atomistic view, leads Locke to treat society as little more than a political community that individuals have chosen to form in order to protect their natural rights.

A consequence of Locke’s view on individualism?

Therefore, individuals are self-owners with natural rights that precede and limit political authority, Locke is calling for limited government based on consent that protects individual rights without interfering in how people choose to live their own lives. Where the government exceeds this function and violates individuals rights, rational self-owning individuals are justified in withdrawing and revolting

What does JSM think about individualism? (human nature)

• Individuality is essential for human flourishing

Mill rejects narrow egosim of classical liberalism, which meant that individuals are simply self seeking and self-reliant with no deeper purpose, because for Mill individuality is not just about protecting yourself from interference but about actively developing and expressing your unique character as a way of life

Evidence to back JSM’s view of individualism?

Mill argues that genuine individualism is creative and developmental rather than simply defensive. Mill argues against the ‘depotism of custom’ meaning the tyranny of social convention and conformity that pressues individuals to think and live in the same way as everyone else, is preventing individuals from discovering anf developing what is genuienly their own. Meaning individuality requires active experimentation with different ways of living rather than passive acceptance of what society expects

A consequence of JSM’s view on individualism?

Mill is calling for individuals to actively resist the despotism of custom and experiment with different ways of living rather than conforming to social expectations. Society must protect this space for individuals experimentation through free speech and the harm principle. because without genuine freedom to think, express and experiment individuality cannot develop and human flourishing in stunted

What does TH Green think about individualism? (human nature)

• True self-realisation requires participation in a community and pursuit of the common good (communal conception of individualism)

Green argues that pursuing private pleasure or individual gain at the expense of others does not constitute genuine self-realisation, but actually impoverishes the individual, therefore genuine individual development is not achieved through self-seeking behaviour but through participation in a community oriented toward the common good

Evidence to back Green's view on individualism?

Green argues that the reason for this is that rationality, when fully developed, makes you genuinely self aware, and this self awareness necessarilty produces awareness of others as selves with equivalent worth and interests, therefore the fully developed individual cannot treat their own flourshing as seperate of others because their rational self awareness connects them inherently to the community around them. E.g a doctor when they develop their rational faculties treat patients as themselves in the exact same way with equivalent needs, vulnerabilities and worth. This awareness of others makes it impossible for them to pursure their own flourshing caring about the well being of those they treat. This demonstrates Green’s point that genuine self-awareness connects you to others rather than isolating you from them.

A consequence of Green’s view on individualism?

This means developmental individualism, meaning Green’s conception of individuality is something that grows and develops through social participation rather than existing prior to society, is fundamentally diiferent from Locke’s possessive indivualism, beacuase for Green you cannt become a fully realised individaul in isolation or pureply through self-seeking behaviour but only through genuine engagement and contribution to the common good

What is Freidan’s view of individualism? (human nature)

• Societal barries prevent genuine self-realisation

Friedan’s starting point is the problem with no name, meaning the widespread unarticulated sense of dissatisfaction and unfulfillment experienced by women confined to the private sphere of home and domesticity, meaning women were being systematically denied the opportunity to develop and express their individuality.

Evidence to back Friedan’s view on individualism?

Friedan argues that gender norms and discrimination blocked women from achieving genuine individuality and self-fulfilment. This was because gender norms defined women’s purpose entirely around domesticity, meaning being a wife and homemaker, therefore women were expected to fulfill that and only that, rather than developing and expressing their own potential, meaning the problem is not just individual but strucutual, where women were not allowed o develop beyond the private sphere

A consequence of Friedan’s view on individualism?

This led Freidan to believe that the conditions of society must change to allow women the same opportunity for genuine individual development that men take for granted. Women have the same rational faculties as men, therefore confining them to the private sphere and denying them access to education, career and public life is not just persoanlly limiting but a fundamental violation of their individual right to self actualise. Furthermore when free, the social conditions must change to allow genuine individual development. because it is not enough to simply tell women they are free if the social structures of gender discrimination and domesticity continue to prevent them from excercising that freedom in practice

What is Locke’s view on the malleabiility of human nature? (human nature)

• Human nature has a fixed stable core that exists independently of the environment a person is raised in

This is because rational faculties given from God exists regardless of environment, therefore a person raised in any culture or social condition, still has the same God given faculties, giving them fixed human nature.

Evidence to back Locke’s view on malleability of human nature?

Natural rights flow directly from this God-given rationality, meaning they too are fixed and universal rather than variable across different social context, therefore Locke’s account of human nature is relatively static compared to other liberals because the most important features of what human beings are are determined by their divine origin rather than by social experience. This does not mean humans are completely unaffected by their environment, but it does mean that the fundamental features of human nature are not malleable but remain constant across different individuals and social conditions

A consequence of Locke’s view on malleability?

Locke is calling for the protection of the conditions under which those fixed rational capacities can be freely excercised rather than social reform to develop or reshape human nature itself. The gov must be limited and consent-based, protecting natural rights without interfernce in how individuals excercise their naturally given rational faculties

What does Wollstonecraft think about malleability of human nature? (human nature)

• Development of rational faculties is profoundly shaped by social structures and educational systems surrounding them

She hs a far more malleable view than Locke

Evidence to back Wollstonecraft’s view on malleability?

Gender stereotypes corrupt human nature by denying women the education needed to cultivate their rational faculties, meaning without that cultivation, passions such as vanity will dominate, rather than reason, therefore what appears to be natural female weakness is actually a socially produced distortion of human potential rather than a fixed feature of female nature. Wollstonecraft argues that this malleability can work in both directions, just as social structures can corrupt and distort human potential they can also be used to impove it, with proper education and social reform women can be transformed from dependent and vain creatures into virtuous independent rational beings.

A consequence of Wollstonecraft’s view on malleability?

This reflects a deeply optimistic view of human malleability, because it means the damage done by social corruption is not permanent but can be reversed through the right educational and social conditions/

What does JSM say about the malleability of human nature? (human nature)

• Human nature is not fixed or predetermined but shaped and rreshaped by experiences, culture, habits and envrionment that surround a person throughout their life

This connects to Mill’s conception of the mind as tabula rasa, which explains how human nature is largely determined by the experiences and conditions that shape you over time, making human character enormously responsive to environmental influence

Evidence to back JSM’s view on malleability?

Mill does not reduce individuals to mere products of their environment, beacuse he insists that we are able to modify our own character, meaning that individuals retain genuine agency over their own development and can actively reshape their own character through deliberate self-directed effort, combining what Mill calls determinism, meaning the shaping force of experience and culture, with the possibility of self-directed development that preserves individual moral freedom

A consequence of JSM’s view on malleability?

This means for Mill, human malleability is not a passive condition but an active opportunity, because the flexibility of human nature means individuals are not trapped by their circumstances but are genuinely capable of developing and improving themselves through concious effort and the cultivation of higher faculties. Therefore human character is shaped by expereinces and culture but can also be self-directed. Mill is calling for both the social conditions that allow higher development and the individual effort to actively cultivate higher faculties rather than passively accpeting whatever chraccter circumstances that have been produced. Free speech, education and the harm principle must protect the space needed for self-directed development

What does Locke think about private property? (economy)

• Private property is a natural right tied to individual labour and self preservation

This means property exists even in th state of nature before any government or legal system exists to create or protect it, because it flows naturally from self ownership

Evidence to back Locke’s view on private property?

Locke does set limits on accumulation, arguing that individuals may only appropriate what they can use without spoiling, meaning property rights are not unlimited but are constrained by rhe requirement that appropriation does not leave others worse off, therefore the natural right is bounded by a fairness condition that prevents individuals from simply taking everything at the expense of others. This is therefore possible as humans are ratioanl creatutres

A conseeuence of Locke’s view on private property?

By setting these limits, Locke ensures that inequlaity is only justified when it arises from effort or skill, not just exploitation or deprivation, therefore balancing liberty with fairness and reward.. A limit consent based governemnt must also protect individuals legitmately acquired property from interferene, and any government tha violates property rights loses its legitimacy and can be resisted

What does Wollstonecraft think about private property? (economy)

• Property is necessary for women’s independence and rational development

Evidence to back Wollstonecraft’s view on private property?

Wollstonecraft argues that women cannot develop virtue or rational faculties without material independence, noting that women must be independent to cultivate virtue. She critiques inherited wealth and conerntrated property, linking it to social vices and dependence. Ownership gives women control over their own lives enabling rational decision making and self mastery. Without property, women remain dependent on men, blocked from education, public participation and ethical development.

A consequence of Wollstonecraft’s view on private property?

Wollstonecraft’s argument influenced early feminisit movements, including campaigns for women’s property rights, legal independence and education

What does JSM think about private property? (economy)

• Private Property promotes personal development and independence

Owning property gives individuals the material independence needed to make genuine choices, excercising self-direction and developing their rational faculties without being dependent on others, Property is not just economically valuable but essential to the kind of individual development Mill sees as the highest experession of human nature

Evidence to back JSM’s view on private property?

Mill sees property as a tool for excercising rationality and self-direction. He states there is a limit to what any one may acquire by the mere favour of others, withou any excercise of his faculties, meaning that wealth should only be earned through effort, skill and rational decision-making. Property enables individuals to choose make choices, develop their faculties and achieve self-mastery, linking economic independence to personal growth. However Mill is critical of inherited wealth or unregulated capitalism, as these can concerntrate power, create dependence and block fair access to opportunity.

A consequence to JSM’s view on private property?

To address this he proposes reforms such as cooperatives, small holdings and profit sharing. These allow workes to benefit from their labour directly, preventing property from undermining liberty while maintaining incentives for effort

What does Rawls think about private property? (economy)

• Property is only legitmate if it supports fairness and real equality of opportunity

Evidence to back Rawls’ view on private property?

Rawls argues that economic arrangements must satisfy the difference principle, therefore the mere fact that some people work harder or are more talented doesn’t automatically justify unlimited inequality, because justice requires that the economic system as a whole works to the advantage of those at the bottom rather than simply rewarding those at the top.

A consequence of Rawls’ view on private property?

Rawls argues that in order to fufill the difference principle, things such as progressive tax etc, are not just pratical policy tools but requirements of justice because it prevents the kind of wealth concerntration that undermines the fair background condtiions needed for real eqaulity of opportunity, therefore property arrangments must be continously regulated to ensure they remain consistent with the demands of fairness an the difference princple, rather than being left to produce whatever distribution the market happens to generate

What does Locke think about capitalism? (economy)

• Capitalism isn’t just conveinient because of the system of voluntary exchange, but it is morally justified as the economic arrangement most consistent with natural rights

Evidence to back Locke’s view on capitalism?

Locke argued that inequalities capitalism produces reflect the genuine differences in effort and capacity rather than arbitary privilege, which means advantages held by the accident of birth, make them morally acceptable rather than unjust

A consequence of Locke’s view on capitalism?

Locke still maintains natural limits on accumulation, individuals may only appropriate what they can use without spoloing as long as enough is left for others, therefore capitalism is justified as an expression of natural rights but not as system of unlimited accumulation, meaning the natural right to property and inequalities it produces are legitimate only within the bounds of the fairness conditions that Locke’s theory of property establishes

What does JSM think about capitalism? (economy)

• Capitalism is valuable for its potential to improve human wellbeing and enable individual development

but unregulated markets generate problems that undermine rather than support genuine human flourshing, therefore capitalism requires reform rather than simple acceptance or rejection

Evidence to back JSM’s view on capitalism?

Mill argued that unregulated capitalism tends to concerntrate wealth among those born into advantage, meaning the market left to iself does not reward genuine talent and effort but reinforces inherited privilege, therefore success is detemrined by accident, therefore capitalism fails to reflect the genuine differences in industriousness and rational capacity. Mill argued that ‘there is a limit to what one may acquire by the mere favour of others without excercising his faculties’, meaning inherited concerntrated wealth is not just economically inefficient but morally unjust becuase it rewards privilege rather thn effort, eaning their material advantage has no moral justification because it reflects no genuine excerciseof their own rational faculties, which volatates the principle that rewards should reflect genuine effort. Therefore capitalism must be reformed to ensure it genuinely rewards individual development and effort rather than simply entrenching exisiting inequalities

A consequence of JSM’s view on capitalism?

Mill proposed reforms incldue cooperatives, profit sharing schemes and inheritance reform to ensure equality of opportunity, therefore capitalism is not rejected but reshaped so that is genuienly serves the individual development and self-mastery it is suppose to enable.

What does Green think about capitalism? (economy)

• Capitalism and markets are useful mechanism for distributing resources and enabling individual development

So capitalism is only justified if it supports moral self-realisation

Evidence to back Green’s view on capitalism?

Green argues that if capitalism is unregulated it simply reinforces selfishness and social hierachies, as without any frameworks guiding it, capitalism simply rewards the people who inherit. Intervention ensures ‘fulfillment of himself’ allowing people to pursure higher goods and moral purpose.

A consequence of Green’s view on capitalism?

Green argues for intervention, and that is the only way markets can be corrected, and this intervention has to be done education and social welfare to ensure that capitalism to contribute to the common good rather than just individual profit

What does Rawls’ think about capitalism? (economy)

• Capitalism must be structured to ensure justice and real equality of opportunity

This is through mechanism such as progressive tax

Evidence to back Rawls’ view on capitalism?

Rawls heavily critques welfare state capitalism, arguing it falls short of genuine justice because simply redistributing income does not change the underlying strucute of who owns the capital, those born into wealthy famiies will start with a massive disadvantage that welfare payments cannot overcome, the playing field remains fundamentally unequal

A consequence of Rawls’ view on capitalism?

Rawls therefore concldues that genuine injustice requires going beyond welfare state capitalism toward a property-owning democracy, ensuring the wide distribution of productive assests rather than simply redistributing income after the fact

What does JSM think about welfare and taxation? (economy, state)

• Redistribution must be carefully balanced to avoid creating dependency while also promoting opportunity

Evidence to back JSM’s view on welfare and tax?

Mill argues that some intervention is necessary to create genuine fair conditions under which individual development and self-mastery can flourish for all not just those born into advantage. Mill preferred interventions such as education so everyone has the intellectual tools to develop their rational faculties, and also interventions around profit-sharing to prevent accident of birth

A consequence of JSM’s view on welfare and tax?

Mill is calling for carefully targetted interventions which lead to equlity of opportunity rather than equality of outcome, ensring individual development and self-mastery are determined by genuine effort and talent rather than inherited privilege

What does Friedan think about welfare and tax? (economy, state)

• These mechanism are necesary conditions for genuine equality and human dignitiy, helping women gain economic indepenece to make genuine free choices

Evidence to back Friedan’s view on welfare and tax? (economy)

Friedan argues that if a woman has no income to support herself, she cannot afford to leave a relationship that makes her unhappy, meaning she has no real choice, therefore her behaviour is distorted and she cannt act according to her own rational judgment due to her dependencies

A consequence of Friedan’s view on welfare and tax?

She adovcates for things such as Equal Pay, afforable childcare and full participation of women in the workforce, meaning welfare and taxation must specifically address these structural barriers rather than just providing genuine social support, therefore economic empowerment is the necessary material condition for women’s rational autonomy and full participation in public and political life

What does Rawls think about welfare and taxation (economy, state)

• Welfare and taxation are necessary to structure society fairly, ensuring real equality of opportunity and protecting the least disadvanatged

Evidence to back Rawls’ view on welfare and tax?

Rawls’ difference principle explains how inequalities are good, such as progressive tax, it it benefits those at the bottom, if it is redistributed

A consequence of Rawls’ view on redistribution and tax?

Rawls is calling for progressive taxation and welfare measures to protect politcal liberty, secure real equality of opportunity etc. Howver genuine justice requires going beyond welfare state capitlaism toward a property owning democracy that ensures wide distribution of productive assests rather than simply redistributing income after the fact

What does Locke think about the origins of the state? (state)

• Humans are divinely equipped with reason and natural rights that exists before any government therefore the state does not create rights but exists to protect rights that belong to individuals by virtue of their divine creation.

So were in a state of nature- which is a condtion before any government exists

Evidence to back Locke’s view on origins of th state?

Locke argues that the state of nature is no utopia, because without any neutral enforcement mechanism self-interested individuals could violate the rights and there would be no impartial authority to resolve disputes or correct wrongdoings. And this leads to to Locke’s social contract meaning that rational individuals consent to form a government, surrending their individual executive power for protection of their natural rights.

A consequence to Locke’s view on the origins of the state?

Locke describes the government as nothing beyond a ‘glorified secretary’, meaning it exists purely to serve and protect the rights people already hold rather than impose its own will on them, therefore if governement ceases to protect natural rights, citizens retain the right to withdraw their consent and replace it, justifying events like the American Revolution where a government that violated natural rights was legitimately overthrown by the rational consent of the governed

What does JSM think about origins of the state? (state)

• State exist not to protecting pre-exisitng natural rights but to produce the greatest happiness for people, meaning legitimacy rests on maximising wellbeing

Evidence to back JSM’s view on the origins of the state?

Mill argued that the state is not a natural of divine institution but a human creation made by people for people, therefore people must be willing to accept it, meaning consent is not just practically useful but the necessary condtiton for poltical legitimacy.

A consequence of JSM’s view on the origins of the state?

This means for Mill that the state derives its authority not from God or nature as Locke argues, but from ongoing consent and acceptance from the people that it governs, therefore the mechansim for expresssing and maintaining that consent is through democratic elections in which the government is held accountable to the people

What does Rawls’ think about origins of the state (state)

• The state is justified, not because people actually agreed to it in the past but because it is based on rules that everyone would agree to under fair conditions

Evience to back Rawls’ view about origins of the state?

Rawls’ came up with the veil of ignorance, which was a thought experiment where individuals chose the principles of justice without them knowing their own, wealth, talents, gender or social position, and this was Rawls’ mechanism for deriving the terms of a genuinely fair social contract. Behind the veil of ignorance rational individuals would consent to a state that secures basic liberties for all and organises inequalities to benefit the least advantaged through the difference principle, because not knowing where they would end up in society means they would choose the principles that protect everyone rather than just those at the top.

A consequence of Rawls’ view on the origin of the state?

This means that the modern liberal state remains consensual but the consent is derived through a rational hypothetical argument rather than actualy historical agreement and that purpose of that consent is not just to protect property and natural rights, but to construct institutions that are genuinely fair to everyone regardless of their position in society. Therefore things like progressive tax and a property owning democracy are practical expressions of they hypothetical contract that ratioanl individuals agree on.

What does Locke think about limited government? (state)

• Government must be limited, controlled and bound by laws to prevent abuse of power

Locke argues that humans are rational, but also self-interested, so because of that anyone given power, like a ruler of government will be tempted to use it for their own benefit.

Evidence to back Locke’s view on limited government?

Locke argues for sepeation of powers, meaning dividing political authority between different institutions so that no single body holds all power simultaneously, because it might be too ‘great a temptation’ to abuse power for personal gain, therefore seperating these powers provides a strucural check on the self-interested tendancies of human nature that no amount of good intentions can reliably overcome

A consequence of Locke’s view on limited government?

Locke is calling for constitutional limits on government authority and a seperation of powers that prevent any single institution from accumulating enough power to rule arbitrarily, meaning making decisions based on self-interest. Govenment must operate within established legal principles than through arbitary decrees, and citizens retain the right to withdraw consent from any government that exceeds these constitutional limits

What does JSM think about limtied government? (state)

• Limited government is necessary becuase of humans self self-interested and naturally prioritisng their own interest above the goals of others

So those who hold political power fave a constant temptation to abuse it for personal gain. Seperating poltical authority between different institutions provides the strucutural check on power that is driven by self-interest, so therefore it is not just a technical constitutional arrangement but a practical necessity given the faliibale nature of those who hold authority

Evidence to back JSM’s view on limited government? (state)

JSM also argues that a limited government must protect against democratic excess as well as executive abuse because both produce the same outcome of individual freedom being crushed by concerntrated power

A consequence of JSM’s view on limtied government?

Mill stressed on the importance of representative assemblies as a mechanism of accountability, arguing that ‘the proper office of a representative assembly’ is to watch and control the government, and if ‘men who compose the government abuse their trust, they are to be expelled’, meaning that elected representatives serve as a check on executive power on behalf of the people. Therefore robust checks and balances between the executive are representative institutions are essential to ensure that those excercising power remain genuinley accountable

What does Rawls think about limited government? (state)

• Government must be limited to ensure real equality of opportunity and fairness, (should be limited through constitutional limits)

So to Rawls the constitution is not just a mechanism for preventing tyranny but a gurantee of basic liberties that rational individuals whould choose behind the veil of ignorance, therefore constitutional limits on government power serve a dual purpose of both preventing abuse and securing the just background conditions that genuine equality and fairness require

Evidence to back Rawls’ view on limited government?

Rawls argues that limited government must do more than simply restrain power; it must actively secure the fair value of political liberties, ensuring all citizens have a genuine, equal ability to participate in politics. As John Rawls suggests, without fair social and economic conditions, formal rights are meaningless, so constitutional limits are needed both to prevent abuse and to guarantee justice as fairness.

A consequence of Rawl’s view on limited governement?

Therefore, the constitution must ensure that everyone has a genuinely fair opportunity to excercise their political liberties rather than allowing wealth and power to give some citizens disproportionate political influence that effectivelt negates the equal political liberty of others. This means limited government for Rawls is not just about what that state cannot do, but also what is must do, such as maintainin the background conditions that allow all citizens to excercise their constiutional rights as genuine equals rather than just possessiing them on paper.

What does Locke think about the role of the state? (state)

• State exists purely to protect the natural rights individuals already possess

therefore its functions are strictly defined as protecting libery, life, property, enforcing contacts between individuals and mainitaing order as well as defending agaisnt internal division

Evidence to back Locke’s view on the role of the state? (state)

Locke explains this more in his conception of the nightwatchman state, which is a minimal state that stands guard over individuals rights without interfering in how individuals choose to live their lives within that framework because for Locke individuals possess all they need. So the state doesn’t need to create or develop anything, simply humanity has agreed through rationality to protect natural rights.

A consequence of Locke’s view of the role of the state?

Locke is calling for a strictly minimal state whos functions are limited to rights protection, contract enforcement, internal order and external defence. Any expansion of state functions beyond this undermines the individual freedom the state exists to serve

What does Rawls’ think about the role of the state? (state)

• State should actively arrange social and economic inequalties to benefit the least advanatged members of society

Evidence to back Rawls’ view on the role of the state?

Rawls refers to his difference principle. Also Rawls criticising what he calls welfare state capitalism (what we are in right now) as falling short of genuine justice, because simply giving welfare payments does not chnage the underlying structure of who owns productive assests so those who do continue to benefit. Also welfare state capitalism leaves many depedent, meaning people become passive receiptants of state support rather than genuine participants in the productive economy, it also allows far too significant income and welath inequalities to persist and leads to the accumulation of poltical power of those who control the system

A consequence of Rawls’ view on the role of the state?

Rawls argues that without these redistributive functons the background of genuine equality of opportunity cannot be maintained, meaning those born into disadvanatge will remain structurally unable to excercise their formal rights and liberties as genuine equals. Therefore the state’s redistributive function is the practical mechanism through which just background conditions that genuin equality requires are contonously maintained rather than just formally declared.

What does Friedan think about the role of the state? (state)

• State should intervence to remove strucrual barriers that stop women from acheiving equality

She believes that ‘the problem with no name’ isn’t individual failure but caused by social strucutes

Evidence to back Friedan’s view on the role of the state?

Friedan argues that state must remove strucutral barriers of gender discrimination and domestic confinement that prevent half of humanity accessing the public sphere opportunities needed for genuine self-actualisation, leading to self mastery and producive potential, therefore the state’s enabling function must extend specifically to the gendered structural barriers that classical liberals ignored entirely

A consequence of Friedan’s view of the role of the state?

Friedan demonstrated this practically through her creation of the National Organisation of Women (NOW) in 1966 which successfully lobbied the Equal Opportunity Commission to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibiting sex discrimination. Friedan is actively calling for the state to remove structural barriers through legislation, however that is insufficient without active state enforcement and infrastruture that genuninely enables women to participate fully in pulbic life and realise their individuals potential

What does Locke think about the strucuture of society? (society)

• Individuals exists prior to and independently of society, and this is due to individuals already possessing their natural rights rationality and self ownership before society was made

Evidence to back Locke’s view on the structure of society?

Locke argues that the only reason individuals choose to form a society is to ensure the ‘comfotable, safe and peaceable living amongst another’, meaning society exists to serve the practical needs of individuals, so therefore society is atomistic meaning it is just a collection of seperate autonmous individuals who have chosen to associate for mutual protection of natural rights as thats the rational thing to do, to ensure living to peace

A consequence of Locke view on the structure of society?

Locke calls for a minimral state that protects individual rights without imposing any collective purpose on its members. Society must remain the servant of individuals, meaning any expansion of collective authority beyond what individuals consented to beyond their own protection is illegitmate.

What does Green think about the structure of society? (society)

• Society is not just a tool individuals create to self their own interests, but the necessary condition within which genuine human development can occur at all

He argues that individuals flourishing is simpy impossible outside of a community oriented toward the common good.

Evidence to back Green’s view about the structure of society?

Green argues that freedom is best understood as ‘the liberation of powers of all men equally for contributions to a common good’ meaning genuine liberty is not just the absence of interference, but the postive capacity to develop your powers and contribute meaningfully ro the community around you. Therefore freedom and community are not in tension but mutually dependent. This means self-realisation inherently involves recognising others and contributing to the wider community. meaning you develop your rational moral capacities, you become aware that others are equivalent with the same worth, meaning being with their own goals and dignity deserve respect.

A consequence of Green’s view on the strucute of society?

Individual flourishing is inseperable from collective wellbeing. Green argues that genuine human development requies a deeper and more constiutive relationship with community, meaning community is not just useful for individuals but is part of what makes genuine individual development possible in the first place

What does Wollstonecraft think about the strucuture of society? (society)

• Society is unjust because it artificially restricts women’s rational development through social norms disgused as civility (patriachal society)