Freedom is a topic which is strongly debated on and is entwined with the ideas of liberalism and other ideologies (Anderson, 2012, What is Liberty, para.1).Freedom can be divided into two sub- sections known as negative freedom and positive freedom (Heywood, 2007; 324). Negative freedom is the exemption from any external influences which include the exemption from any interference (Pettit, 1989:1). Negative freedom thus means the absence of external forces on an individual which results in the individual being able to pursue decisions as he/ she desires. Positive freedom is the possibility where a person can act in such a way to achieve an identifiable goal; this would include personal development, self- realization or even self- mastery (Heywood, 2007; 324). This essay will criticise negative and positive freedom, outlining the concepts of them and their relevance to the concept of democracy.
Liberal internationalism Two main bases; The first is the fear of and international ‘state of nature’ Idea that self-determination is a mixed blessing, While preserves self-government it creates a world of sovereign nation states controlling own freedoms and interests, possibly at the extent of other nations. In conditions of international anarchy, self-restraint may not be enough to ensure enduring peace. Two forms of prevention have been proposed First being international independence with the intention of promoting cooperation; (this is why liberal s support free trade between free nations) material cost would be huge in conflict, war would therefore be unthinkable. Libs also proposed a supernatural body/ bodies to bring order to otherwise lawless international structure. Seen in social contract theory; government is the solution to problem of disorder.
However, the New Right incorporates neo-liberalism, which is a moderation of liberalism that supports free market economics and the minimal role of the state. But it also incorporates neo-conservatism which contrasts from neo-liberalism as it has a strong stance on law and order and the authoritarian state, focusing on nationalism. Firstly the New Right can be said to internally coherent in a political sense and in terms of the compatibility of its goals. All members of the New Right are capable of accepting a strong but minimal state as neo-conservatives believe in an authoritarian strong state in which they prevent excessive freedom due to their view on human nature, but not excessive state so there is not a dependency culture created. The neo liberals also believe that there should be minimal state but in an economic sense, and this is in order to allow capitalism to flourish without excessive restraints and laws imposed on business, and this is to encourage competition in the market to improve efficiency and profit.
The state assumes that it has power over individuals, which a view blights human freedom as was expressed by Proudhon ‘to be governed is to be inspected by creatures who neither have the right nor virtue to do so’. Liberals on the over hand do not view the state in such an pessimistic way, however believe that if the state was so have too much power it could indeed become oppressive and tyrannic thus threatening the sovereign individual: something that liberals heavily endorse. Therefore, liberals argue for a minimum ‘night watchman’ state (Nozick). This essay will argue that the state is not an oppressive body but instead a paternal figure, which serves to protect individuals more than it oppresses them. It can be argued from the anarchist perspective that the state is an oppressive body, which undermines human reason and the capacity for self governance.
The Declaration of Independence is one of the greatest political documents in history due to its powerful and distinctive combination of universal principles and also an abstract theory of government. The Declaration of Independence had a huge effect on the U.S, it confirmed the United States free from Britain rule, it united the North and the South since at the time America was divided in two because of the American Civil War, and it expressed the basic principles on which the U.S government should be based off of. America was instituted on the First Principle that the safety of unalienable rights is the legitimate purpose of government, and that government ought to be limited so that it cannot rule over the people of its country. The Declaration
Liberalism is a political current embracing several historical and present-day ideologies that claim defense of individual liberty as the purpose of government. It typically favors the right to dissent from orthodox tenets or established authorities in political or religious matters. Liberalism is also defined and understood in contradistinction to other political ideologies such as conservatism and particularly to totalitarianism, which represent the antithesis of liberal freedom. The term liberal stems from the Latin "liber" or "free", and this emphasizes the liberal ideal of being free from the rules and tenet of authority The tradition if liberalism has undergone numerous mutations and developments in political history. The origins of liberalism can be traced to the ideals of the Enlightenment in Europe.
Critical Review International Relations 1810 Z3376197 Micheal Doyle. 1986 “Liberalism and World Politics” American Science Review. Vol 80, No.4 The theoretical premise of liberalism is the belief in the importance of liberty, peace and equality of rights throughout a nation. In Micheal W. Doyles 'Liberalism and World Politics' 1986, Doyle compares and contrasts three distinct theoretical traditions of liberalism attributable to three theorists; democratic capitalist Schumpeter, Machiavelli, and Kant. Doyle argues that liberal states although in theory are peaceful, they are also “prone to war.
First generation rights are rights that are civil and political in nature, in the words of DeLaet they “…include the right to life, liberty, and security of person, the right to property, the right to freedom of speech and thought, the right to a fair trial, and the right to vote” (DeLaet, Debra “The Global Struggle for Human Rights” (Coursepack # 4)). They are also generally associated with being negative rights, meaning that they are rights “… [that] require the state to refrain from abusing the rights in question, a claim for a negative right is generally formulated as a “freedom from” something…” (DeLaet, Debra “The Global Struggle for Human Rights” (Coursepack # 4)) these rights generally have to do with civil liberties and the population’s ability to participate in politics. Some examples of these rights are freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, and other rights such as right to a fair trial.
Liberalism and realism are the two most dominant ideologies in international politics. Realism is the older ideology, and dates back to ancient Greece,1 while liberalism has its roots mainly in enlightenment thinkers.2 Both ideologies are based on very fundamental assumptions about human nature. These assumptions lead to their respective moral and societal values. Realism is generally pessimistic and believes the focus of global politics is in individual states fighting for security and power; liberalism is generally optimistic and believes that international peace and cooperation can be achieved through institutions that create cohesion between people and states.3 Obviously, both ideologies have very legitimate reasons for their global outlooks, but both cannot explain all international politics on their own. There are various exceptions and anomalies that defy the beliefs of both, which is to be expected.
Hobbes sees natural law as a state of war in which every man is an enemy to every man. (Hobbs, T. 1991 p.94) Locke on the other hand, sees natural law as a state of equality and freedom. (Locke, J. 1967 p. 289). This difference of opinion flows through to their views on social contract and this essay will discuss this difference in theory as Locke is of the belief that government is necessary in order to preserve natural law, and on the contrary, Hobbes sees government as necessary in order to control natural law.