Today on television and in general on the Internet, many say: "Here they are liberals, liberal-minded citizens ..." Also, modern liberals are called worse: "liber @ stami", liberoids, etc. Why are these liberals so displeased with everyone who is their haet? What is liberalism? Now we will explain in simple words, and at the same time we will determine whether it is worth scolding modern liberals and for what.
The history of liberalism
Liberalism is an ideology - a system of ideas about the structure of society and the state. The word itself comes from the word Libertas (lat.) - which means freedom. What does it have to do with freedom now we will find out.
So, imagine the harsh Middle Ages. You are a craftsman in a European medieval city: a tanner, or a butcher in general. Your city is in the domain of a feudal lord: county, barony, or duchy. And the city pays him rent every month for what is on his land. Suppose the feudal lord wanted to introduce a new tax - for example, on air. And he will enter. And the townspeople will not go anywhere - they will pay.
Of course, there were cities that were redeemed for freedom and themselves already established more or less fair taxation. But those were extremely wealthy cities. And yours - such an average city - cannot afford such a luxury.
If your son wants to become a doctor or a priest, it will simply be impossible. Because the state law determines the life of each class. He can only do what you are doing - being a butcher. And when the tax burden ruins the city, then, probably, it will rise and overthrow the power of the feudal lord. But the royal troops, or the troops of the feudal lord, of a higher rank, will come and punish such a rebellious city.
By the end of the Middle Ages, this order of things was boring, first of all, to the townspeople: artisans, merchants, in a word, those who really earn their hard work. And Europe was engulfed in bourgeois revolutions: when the bourgeoisie began to dictate its terms. In 1649, the revolution in England,. And what are the interests of the bourgeoisie?
Definition of liberalism
Liberalism is an ideology, the key elements of which are: personal freedom, the idea of \u200b\u200bpublic good, the guarantee of legal and political equality. This is what the bourgeoisie needs. Liberty: if a person wants to do business, let him do what he wants - this is his right. The main thing is that he does not harm other people and does not encroach on their freedom.
Equality Is a very important idea. Of course, all people are not equal: in their intellect, perseverance, physical characteristics. But! We are talking about equal opportunities: if a person wants to do something, no one has the right to prevent him on the basis of racial, social or other other prejudices. Ideally, any person can break out into people, “rise” with hard work. Of course, not everyone will rise, because not everyone can and wants to work long and hard!
Common good: means a reasonable structure of society. Where the state guarantees the rights and freedoms of the individual, it protects this person from all kinds of threats. The state also protects the rules of life in society: it controls the observance of laws.
Another very important foundation of liberalism: natural rights idea... This idea was developed by the English thinkers John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. It consists in the fact that three rights are inherent in a person from birth: the right to life, to private property and to the pursuit of happiness.
No one has the right to take a person's life, except perhaps by the state and only by law. The private property rights were analyzed in detail. The pursuit of happiness means the same freedom of action, of course, within the framework of the law.
Classical liberalism ordered a long life in 1929, when a crisis broke out in the United States as a result of which tens of thousands of banks went bankrupt, millions of people died of hunger and all that stuff. Today we are talking about neoliberalism. That is, under the influence of various factors, liberalism has changed: it has transformed into neoliberalism.
What is neoliberalism, we analyze in detail in my exam preparation courses.
Why are the liberals in Russia today so “bad” that everyone is scolding them? The fact is that people who call themselves liberals defend not so much the ideology of liberalism, but the idea that Europe and the United States are the best countries and what exactly they need to be guided by: enter the European Union, NATO, in a word, bend to the West. At the same time, if you say that you do not think it is right, they prove to you that you are not right at all. That is, they knowingly violate your right to the same freedom of speech, freedom of opinion, position.
Why do we need Europe if they have a crisis economy? After all, all crises begin in the West. Look at the countries that have joined the European Union: Greece, Romania. Romanians now go to Germany to clean German toilets - they can't work at their bus factories - they were closed because of the fact that the bus supplies are made by Germany. And Greece - several years in the European Union brought this country to a financial collapse, not even a crisis - a collapse.
Looking at all this, you will inevitably think, why do we need the EU? So that we have at least destroyed, what else somehow works somewhere? Therefore, if I would call modern Russian "liberals" (those people who advocate reckless European integration) liberals, then only through quotation marks.
In conclusion, I present a common joke. To the question: "Do you need to blame?" the patriot answers "Whom?", and the liberal "Where?" 🙂
I hope you have received an exhaustive answer to the question "What is liberalism", put your likes, write in the comments about all this.
Best regards, Andrey Puchkov
The concept of "liberalism" appeared at the beginning of the 19th century. Initially, a group of nationalist deputies in the Cortes, the Spanish parliament, was called liberals. Then this concept entered all European languages, but in a slightly different meaning.
The essence of liberalism has remained unchanged throughout its history. Liberalism is the affirmation of the value of the human person, its rights and freedoms. Liberalism borrowed the idea of \u200b\u200bnatural human rights from the ideology of the Enlightenment, therefore, liberals included and include the right to life, freedom, happiness and property among the inalienable rights of the individual, with the greatest attention being paid to private property and freedom, since it is believed that property provides freedom, which in its turn is a prerequisite for success in the life of an individual, the prosperity of society and the state.
Freedom is inseparable from responsibility and ends where the freedom of another person begins. The “rules of the game” in society are fixed in laws adopted by a democratic state, in which political freedoms (conscience, speech, assembly, association, etc.) are proclaimed. Market economy based on private property and competition. Such an economic system is the embodiment of the principle of freedom and a condition for the country's successful economic development.
The first historical type of worldview containing the aforementioned complex of ideas was classical liberalism (late 18th - 70s - 80s of the 19th century). It can be seen as a direct continuation of the political philosophy of the Enlightenment. No wonder John Locke is called the "father of liberalism", and the creators of classical liberalism, Jeremiah Bentham and Adam Smith, are considered the largest representatives of the late Enlightenment in England. Throughout the 19th century, liberal ideas were developed by John Stuart Mill (England), Benjamin Constant and Alexis de Tocqueville (France), Wilhelm von Humboldt and Lorenz Stein (Germany).
Classical liberalism differs from the ideology of the Enlightenment, first of all, by the lack of connection with revolutionary processes, as well as by its negative attitude towards revolutions in general and towards the Great French Revolution in particular. Liberals accept and justify the social reality that has developed in Europe after the Great French Revolution, and actively strive to improve it, believing in boundless social progress and the power of the human mind.
Classical liberalism includes a number of principles and concepts. Its philosophical basis is the nominalistic postulate of the priority of the individual over the general. Accordingly, the central principle is the principle of individualism: the interests of the individual are higher than the interests of society and the state. Therefore, the state cannot violate human rights and freedoms, and the individual has the right to protect them against encroachments from other persons, organizations, society and the state.
If we consider the principle of individualism from the point of view of its correspondence to the actual state of affairs, it should be stated that it is false. In no state can the interests of an individual be higher than public and state interests. The opposite situation would mean the death of the state. It is curious that for the first time one of the founders of classical liberalism I. Bentham drew attention to this. He wrote that "natural, inalienable and sacred rights never existed", since they are incompatible with the state; "... the citizens, demanding them, would only ask for anarchy ..." Nevertheless, the principle of individualism has played an eminently progressive role in the development of Western civilization. And in our time, it still gives the individual the legal right to defend their interests in the face of the state.
The principle of utilitarianism is a further development and concretization of the principle of individualism. I. Bentham, who formulated it, believed that society is a fictitious body, consisting of individuals. The common good is also fiction. The real interest of society is nothing more than the sum of the interests of its constituent individuals. Therefore, any actions of politicians and any institutions should be assessed solely in terms of the extent to which they contribute to a decrease in suffering and increase the happiness of individuals. The construction of a model of an ideal society, according to I. Bentham, is not necessary and dangerous from the point of view of possible consequences.
Based on the principles of individualism and utilitarianism, classical liberalism proposed a very specific model of society and the state as the optimal one. The state should not interfere in socio-economic relations: it is capable of disrupting harmony rather than helping to establish it.
The concept of the rule of law corresponds to the concept of public self-regulation in the sphere of politics. The goal of such a state is formal equality of opportunities for citizens, the means is the adoption of appropriate laws and ensuring their strict implementation by all, including government officials. At the same time, the material well-being of each individual person is considered his personal business, and not the sphere of concern of the state. Alleviating the extremes of poverty is envisaged through private charity. The essence of the rule of law is briefly expressed by the formula: "the law is above all."
A legal "small state" should be secular. Classical liberalism advocated the separation of church and state. The adherents of this ideology considered religion to be the personal affair of an individual. We can say that any liberalism, including classical, is generally indifferent to religion, which is not viewed as either a positive or a negative value.
Liberal party programs usually included the following requirements: separation of powers; the approval of the principle of parliamentarism, that is, the transition to such forms of state organization in which the government is formed by the parliament; proclamation and implementation of democratic rights and freedoms; separation of church from state.
The second idea, borrowed by social liberalism from social democracy, is the idea of \u200b\u200bsocial justice, understood as the right of everyone to a dignified life. The broad social programs proposed by the Social Democrats, which imply the redistribution of profits from the rich to the poor through the system of state taxes, also became a concrete way of its implementation.
Social insurance for sickness, unemployment, old age, health insurance, free education, etc. - all these programs, gradually introduced and expanded in the countries of Western civilization during the late 19 - 70s of the 20th century, existed and continue to exist thanks to the introduction of a progressive taxation scale. Such a tax system assumes that people with more income or capital pay a higher percentage of that income or capital than people with less livelihood. Social programs simultaneously contribute to the development of the economy, as they expand effective demand.
At present, the influence of liberalism as a political worldview is growing. This is connected both with the resurrection of a number of fundamental provisions of classical liberalism by the neoconservatives, and with the collapse of the USSR, the world socialist system, with the transition of the European countries that entered it to a liberal economic model and Western-style political democracy, in the establishment of which liberalism and liberal parties played a decisive role. At the same time, the crisis of the liberal parties continues.
Socialism
The concept of "socialism", which came into general use in the third decade of the 19th century, was intended to designate the direction of social thought seeking to develop a fundamentally new model of the structure of society as a whole based on the transformation of socio-economic relations. It is difficult to give a brief meaningful definition of this ideology, since the concept of socialism unites a large number of very different concepts, which can be divided into two large groups: proper socialist and communist.
The concepts of the first group assume that a decent life for workers can be achieved in a society based on a combination of public and private ownership of the means of production, and universal absolute equality is neither necessary nor desirable. The concepts of the second group propose to create a society based solely on public forms of property, which presupposes complete social and property equality of citizens.
The characteristic of socialist ideology, taking into account the existence of the two directions of socialist thought indicated above, can be given as follows. Socialism presupposes criticism of bourgeois society from the standpoint of some ideal, "located" in the mind of socialists in the future. The formulation of the main features of the future society is given from the standpoint of the most disadvantaged part of the population who earn their living by their labor. The society of social justice itself presupposes an essential role of public forms of ownership, the convergence of the extremes of wealth and poverty, the replacement of competition with solidarity and mutual assistance. The new society is conceived of as capable of providing faster and more comprehensive social progress than the bourgeois one.
The first historical type of socialist ideology is humanistic socialism of the first half of the 19th century, also called utopian socialism (at present, the second name seems unfounded, since Marxism also turned out to be a utopia, albeit in a different sense). Its founders and largest representatives are Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier (France), Robert Owen (England). This socialism is called humanistic because its creators, formulating the main features of a society of social justice, proceeded from the interests of a person in general, and not a representative of any class or stratum, although the implementation of the proposed model should have brought the greatest gains to people of labor.
The specific systems of views of the founders of humanistic socialism were different, but in general, a society of social justice was conceived of as based on a combination of public and private forms of property, on the cooperation of classes. The preservation of social and property inequality was assumed due to the difference in contributions - financial and labor - to the development of the enterprise, with the different roles of representatives of different social strata in society. The transition to a new social organization was thought of as gradual and occurring exclusively in a peaceful way. The following were proposed as means of transition: appeal to those in power, to representatives of big business, the creation of exemplary enterprises on new principles, and the promotion of positive experience. It was the designated means of transition to a society of social justice that gave rise to the name “utopian socialism”.
In the 40s of the 19th century, Marxism arose, also called workers' or economic socialism, as well as scientific communism. This ideology emerged on the basis of Karl Marx's analysis of the economic relations of bourgeois society under the conditions of the growth of the labor movement. The main provisions of Marxism are as follows.
Capitalist society will inevitably lose its economic efficiency because of the inherent contradiction between the social nature of production and the private form of appropriation. In order to eliminate this contradiction and open up space for the development of productive forces, private ownership of the means of production should be abolished. Accordingly, the future society of social justice will simultaneously become the most economically efficient. It will have public ownership of the means of production, there will be no classes, exploitation will disappear, complete social and property equality will be established, the state will cease to exist as a political organization of the economically ruling class (it will be replaced by social self-government), and the creative self-realization of each person will become possible.
The transition to a new society is possible only through the class struggle and social revolution, which will be carried out by the working class led by the Communist Party, armed with knowledge of the laws of social development. Immediately after the victory of the revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat will be established, which will become the new, highest form of democracy, since by that time the proletariat will constitute the majority of the population in society.
The development of Marxism in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries led to the emergence of two modern types of socialist ideology: Marxism-Leninism and the ideology of social democracy. Marxism-Leninism, also called Bolshevism and scientific communism, arose as an adaptation of Marxism to the conditions of Russia and to the practice of socialist construction after the victory of the Russian revolution in 1917. The parties that adopted this ideology began, as a rule, to be called communist.
An attempt to implement the Marxist model, carried out in the USSR and other countries of the world socialist system, led to the emergence of a society in which the state economy was controlled from a single center in the absence of political democracy. This was another attempt to overcome the crisis of liberalism and the liberal economic model. However, the created society did not become either more humane or more economically efficient than the capitalist one in the long term, and therefore left the historical arena.
The ideology of social democracy, formed in the 90s of the 19th century, emerged as a criticism, a revision of Marxism. Its main provisions were developed by the German Social Democrat Eduard Bernstein and were gradually adopted by the international Social Democracy, although not without a sharp struggle of opinions. There was a rejection of such fundamental provisions of Marxism as the social (socialist) revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat, the complete replacement of private ownership of the means of production by public property.
The revision of Marxism turned out to be possible and inevitable, since in the last decades of the 19th century it became obvious that the position of the working class does not deteriorate with the development of capitalism, as K. Marx predicted, but improves. From this fact, E. Bernstein drew far-reaching conclusions, which have not lost their significance today, and developed a program for building democratic socialism.
Since economic development under capitalism leads to an increase in the material well-being of the workers, the task of the social democratic parties should be to improve the existing society, and not to liquidate it and replace it with something fundamentally different from the bourgeois one.
A necessary condition for such improvement is political democracy. E. Bernstein drew attention to the fact that the consistent implementation of the basic liberal principles of the political system leads to the elimination of the political domination of the bourgeoisie, if the working class is able to organize and will constantly support its party in elections.
Thus, it was necessary to fight for the deepening of political democracy, the victory of the party of the working class in the parliamentary elections, and the formation of a social democratic government. Such a government, with the support of the parliamentary majority, must unswervingly implement a program of reforms extended over time, aimed at improving the material situation of the working class, increasing its social security, raising the cultural and educational level, etc.
For this purpose, as well as for the sake of increasing economic efficiency, it was necessary to gradually carry out a partial nationalization of industry, primarily unprofitable enterprises and industries, establish state regulation of the private capitalist sector, develop and implement broad social programs based on the redistribution of profits from the haves to the poor through the tax system.
At the beginning of the 21st century, the main values \u200b\u200bof international social democracy continue to be solidarity, freedom, equality, political democracy, state-regulated market mixed economy, social security of the population. A gradual increase in the public sector of the economy is no longer considered appropriate.
At present, despite the fact that social democratic parties periodically come to power in European countries, replacing neoconservatives, the crisis of social democratic ideology cannot be considered overcome, since new constructive ideas capable of renewing the program and practice of democratic socialism among the international social there is no democracy.
Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus
Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics
Department of Humanities
by discipline: “Fundamentals of the ideology of the Belarusian state”.
On the topic: “Basic principles of liberalism. Social liberalism ”.
Completed: Checked:
Student gr. 863001 Rudakovsky N.K.
Zhitkevich Inna
Liberalism
Historically, the first formulated political ideology was the ideology of liberalism, which emerged in the 18th century. By this time, a class of free owners who did not belong to the nobility and the clergy, the so-called third estate or bourgeoisie, had matured in European cities. It was an active part of society, dissatisfied with their own good financial situation and saw their way in political influence.
The British are considered the founders of the theoretical foundation of liberalism. Englishman John Locke (1632-1704), first put forward the idea of \u200b\u200bseparation of powers and interpreted the role of the state as a contractual obligation to protect the natural and inalienable human rights to life, freedom and property. Scotsman Adam Smith (1723-1790), "the father of economics", showed, in particular, that the exchange of goods occurs if and only if it is beneficial to both parties. "In order to raise the state from the lowest level of barbarism to the highest level of prosperity, only peace, light taxes and tolerance in government are needed; everything else will do the natural course of things. All governments that forcefully direct events in a different way or try to stop the development of society are unnatural . To stay in power, they are forced to carry out oppression and tyranny. "
The basic value of liberalism, as the name of this ideology suggests, is freedom personality. Spiritual freedom is the right to choose in a religious matter, freedom of speech. Material freedom is the right to property, the right to buy and sell for reasons of one's own benefit. Political freedom is freedom in the literal sense of the word, subject to the observance of the laws, freedom in political expression. Individual rights and freedoms have priority over the interests of society and the state.
The ideal of liberalism is a society with freedom of action for everyone, free exchange of politically significant information, restriction of the power of the state and the church, the rule of law, private property and freedom of private enterprise. Liberalism rejected many of the assumptions that were the basis of previous theories of the state, such as the divine right of monarchs to power and the role of religion as the sole source of knowledge. The fundamental principles of liberalism include the recognition of:
data from nature of natural rights (including the right to life, personal freedom and property), as well as other civil rights;
equality and equality before the law;
market economy;
responsibility of the government and transparency of government.
At the same time, the function of state power is reduced to the minimum necessary to ensure these principles. Modern liberalism also favors an open society based on pluralism and democratic government, while protecting the rights of minorities and individuals.
Some modern liberal currents are more tolerant of government regulation of free markets to ensure equality of opportunity for success, universal education, and narrowing income gaps. Proponents of such views believe that the political system should contain elements of the welfare state, including state unemployment benefits, homeless shelters and free health care.
According to the views of the liberals, state power exists for the good of the people under its control, and the political leadership of the country should be carried out on the basis of the consent of the majority of those who govern. Today, the political system that is most consonant with the convictions of liberals is liberal democracy.
Initially, liberalism proceeded from the fact that all rights should be in the hands of individuals and legal entities, and the state should exist exclusively to protect these rights. Modern liberalism has significantly expanded the framework of the classical interpretation and includes many currents, between which there are deep contradictions and sometimes conflicts arise. Modern liberalism in most developed countries is a mixture of all these forms. In third world countries, “third generation liberalism” often comes to the fore - a movement for a healthy living environment and against.
Liberalism is distinguished by a number of features within the framework of different national traditions. Certain aspects of his theory (economic, political, ethical) are sometimes opposed to each other. Thus, there is a certain sense in the conclusion of T. Spragens: "Liberalism as something united has never existed, there was only a family of liberalisms." Apparently, we are dealing with many theories, united by some common principles, adherence to which distinguishes liberalism from other ideologies. Moreover, these principles admit of different interpretations, can be combined in a very bizarre way, are the basis for the most unexpected, sometimes contradicting arguments.
In my opinion, these principles include, first, individualism, the priority of the interests of individuals over the interests of society or a group. This principle received various justifications: from ontological concepts in which the individual with his natural rights precedes society, to the ethical understanding of individuality as the highest value. It was embodied in different interpretations of the relationship between the individual and society: from the idea of \u200b\u200bsociety as a mechanical sum of individuals realizing their own interests, to a more comprehensive approach, within which a person is viewed as a social being, in need of both cooperation with other people and autonomy. ... However, the idea of \u200b\u200bindividual rights, from which the basic requirements for social order follow, undoubtedly underlies all liberal theories, distinguishing them from illiberal approaches.
Second, liberalism is characterized by adherence to the idea of \u200b\u200bhuman rights and the value of individual freedom. Although the content of rights, as well as the interpretation of freedom, have undergone significant changes in the course of the long history of liberal ideas, the priority of freedom as the main value for liberals has remained unchanged. Supporters of "classical" liberalism interpret freedom negatively, as the absence of coercion and see its natural limitations in the equal rights of other people. They consider the equality of formal rights to be the only type of equality compatible with freedom as a priority value. The rights of individuals are reduced by them to the sum of "fundamental rights", which include political freedoms, freedom of thought and freedom of conscience, as well as rights concerning the independence of the individual, backed up by guarantees of private property. The New Liberals offer a positive understanding of freedom that complements freedom with equality of opportunity as a guarantee of the exercise of rights. Freedom in their understanding is a real possibility of choice, which is not predetermined either by other people or by the circumstances of the life of the individual himself. In this regard, the “new liberals” expand the framework of “fundamental rights” to include the most essential social rights.
But one way or another, the main premise of liberalism is the idea that each person has his own idea of \u200b\u200blife, and he has the right to realize this idea to the best of his ability, therefore society should be tolerant of his thoughts and actions, if the latter do not affect the rights of others. Over its long history, liberalism has developed a whole system of institutional guarantees of the rights of individuals, which includes the inviolability of private property and the principle of religious tolerance, limitation of state interference in private life, supported by law, constitutional representative government, separation of powers, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe rule of law, etc.
Third, an important principle characteristic of the liberal approach is rationalism, the belief in the possibility of a gradual purposeful improvement of society by reformist, but not revolutionary, measures. Liberal doctrine makes certain demands on the nature of the reforms. According to V. Leontovich, “the method of liberalism is the elimination of obstacles to personal freedom. Such elimination, however, cannot take the form of a violent coup or destruction ... According to the liberal worldview, it is necessary to eliminate, first of all, the unlimited powers of state power ... On the contrary, liberalism treats with the greatest respect the subjective rights of individuals ... In general, the liberal state violent interference in existing life relationships of people and any violation of habitual life forms are completely alien ... ”. This characteristic quite fully reflects the principles arising from the liberal theory. Although in practice liberals more than once happened to retreat from them, since social transformations are always “a violation of habitual life forms,” however, the imperative of liberal reforms is the principle of minimal violation of existing individual rights.
Related to this is another feature of liberal methods - their "anti-constructivism": liberals usually support "social engineering" only to the extent that it removes obstacles to the development of already established institutions and relations. Their goal is not to invent specific designs for a “good society” and to enforce some arbitrary design.
These, in our opinion, are the basic principles of liberalism. However, this list can be continued. However, no matter how detailed it is, you can always refer to some liberal concepts that do not fit into it. As E. Shatskiy writes, “whatever we may assert about the views allegedly characteristic of liberalism, it should be remembered that during its long history it served different purposes and interests, adapted to different local traditions and used different theoretical languages. For this reason, every description that suggests a high level of generalization will inevitably be wrong. The same can be said about all "isms" with the exception of those that created dogmatic systems ... ". Therefore, one should not see any strict definition in the above description. Liberalism is not a system consisting of a once and for all set of elements, it is rather a certain area of \u200b\u200bideas that allows for various combinations, but at the same time has quite definite boundaries.
Social liberalism
Social liberalism emerged at the end of the 19th century in many developed countries under the influence of Utilitarianism. Some liberals have embraced, in part or in whole, Marxism and the socialist theory of exploitation and have concluded that the state must use its power to restore social justice. Thinkers like John Dewey or Mortimer Adler have explained that everything individuals, as the foundation of society, must have access to basic needs such as education, economic opportunity, protection from harmful large-scale events outside their control in order to realize their abilities. Such positive rights that are provided by society are qualitatively different from the classic Negative rights, the provision of which requires non-interference from others. Proponents of social liberalism argue that the fair exercise of negative rights is impossible without a guarantee of positive rights, since in practice the poor sacrifice their rights for the sake of survival, and the courts tend to favor the rich. Social liberalism supports the introduction of some restrictions on economic competition. He also expects the government to provide social protection to the population (through taxes) to create conditions for the development of all talented people, to prevent social riots, and simply "for the common good."
There is a fundamental contradiction between economic and social liberalism. Economic liberals believe that positive rights inevitably violate negative ones and are therefore unacceptable. They see the function of the state as limited mainly to issues of rule of law, security and defense. From their point of view, these functions already require a strong centralized state power. On the contrary, social liberals believe that the main task of the state is social protection and ensuring social stability: providing food and housing to those in need, health care, schooling, retirement benefits, child care, disabled people and the elderly, helping victims of natural disasters, protecting minorities, preventing crime, support for science and art. This approach makes it impossible to impose large-scale restrictions on the government. Despite the unity of the ultimate goal - personal freedom - economic and social liberalism fundamentally diverge in the means to achieve it. Right-wing and conservative movements often lean in favor of economic liberalism versus cultural liberalism. Left movements tend to focus on cultural and social liberalism.
Some researchers point out that the opposition of “positive” and “negative” rights is in fact imaginary, since social costs are also required to ensure “negative” rights in practice (for example, the maintenance of courts to protect property).
It is difficult for a citizen of any modern democratic society to imagine that just 100 years ago his ancestors did not have a good half of those rights and opportunities that are taken for granted by everyone today. Moreover, not everyone knows that many of the civil liberties that we are so proud of today are the most important values \u200b\u200bof liberalism. Let's find out what this philosophical trend is and what are its main ideas.
What is liberalism?
This word is the name that served as the basis for the formation of an ideology, which considers the highest value of human society that its members have a number of rights and freedoms.
The adherents of these ideas believe that individual independence should be extended to all areas of life. For this reason, cultural, social, economic and political liberalism is distinguished.
The main values \u200b\u200bof the ideology under consideration are not focused on the welfare of society as a whole, but on each individual representative. Thus, liberals believe that the good of every citizen automatically leads to the prosperity of the whole country, and not vice versa.
Etymology of the term and a brief historical background
The word "liberalism", oddly enough, is related to the names of two well-known brands of hygiene products - Libero and Libresse. All these terms are derived from the Latin words liber - "free" and libertatem - "freedom".
Subsequently, the word "freedom" arose from them in many languages. In Italian it is libertà, in English it is liberty, in French it is liberté, in Spanish it is libertad.
The origins of the ideology in question should be sought in Ancient Rome. So, throughout the history of this empire between patricians (an analogue of the nobility) and plebeians (citizens of low origin, were considered second class), there were constant disputes about equality in rights and obligations before the law. At the same time, one of the emperor-philosophers in his works on the political structure of society presented an ideal state as one in which all citizens are equal, regardless of origin.
Over the next centuries, periodically the most progressive politicians and philosophers came to the idea of \u200b\u200bthe need to reorient society to the values \u200b\u200bof liberalism. Most often, this happened at moments when the citizens of states were disappointed in the absolute monarchy (all power and rights of the nobility) or the management of society by the church.
The most famous thinkers promoting the values \u200b\u200band ideals of liberalism are John Locke, Charles Louis de Montesquieu, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, David Hume, Immanuel Kant and Adam Smith.
It should be noted that all of the abovementioned figures were not always united in their understanding of exactly what the ideology they were promoting should be.
For example, one of the stumbling blocks was the issue of private property. The fact is that its presence was considered one of the main values \u200b\u200bof society. However, in the XVIII-XIX centuries. most of the property in any state was concentrated with the ruling elite, which means that only it could fully enjoy all the rights and freedoms of liberalistic ideology. However, this was contrary to the principle of equal opportunities for all citizens.
By the way, there were disputes over practically every value of liberalism. So, the functions of power raised a lot of questions. Some thinkers believed that she should only monitor compliance with the law, without interfering in any processes.
However, such a position played into the hands of only those in power, for it canceled any state aid to socially unprotected members of society. In addition, it created fertile ground for monopolization in business, which was contrary to the principle of a free market economy. By the way, in the United States (the first country in the world to decide to build its society on the basis of liberal values) non-interference of the state in the development of economic processes led to the Great Depression. After it, it was decided to revise this principle and allow the authorities to exercise a regulatory function in the economic sphere. Paradoxically, just over 70 years later, abuse of this right contributed to the 2008 crisis.
Why in the Russian Empire the word "liberal" had a negative connotation
As is clear from the etymology of the term "liberalism", this ideology stands for giving the individual freedom. Why, then, does this term have a negative connotation in the Russian language?
The fact is that liberal-minded thinkers in almost all centuries protested against the unlimited rights of rulers and demanded that all citizens be equal before the law, regardless of their position and welfare.
They also criticized the idea of \u200b\u200bthe divine origin of power, believing that the head of state should serve for the good of his people, and not use him to satisfy his own ambitions and whims.
Naturally, such an attitude towards the ruling elite in many monarchist countries simply could not be well received. Because of this, in the XVIII century. in the Russian Empire and Great Britain, those in power negatively perceived liberal ideas, and the term itself was positioned as dangerous freethinking.
Paradoxically, after 100 years, the British Empire revised its views on this ideology, and the term acquired a positive meaning, as in the whole world.
But in Russia, despite the 1917 revolution and a radical change in the country's social structure, the name of the philosophical trend and ideology still carries a negative connotation.
Basic values \u200b\u200bof liberalism
Having dealt with the meaning and origin of the term in question, it is worth finding out on which principles it is based:
- Liberty.
- Individualism.
- Human rights.
- Pluralism
- Nomocracy.
- Egalitarianism.
- Rationalism.
- Progressism.
Liberty
Once you learn about the fundamental values \u200b\u200bof liberalism, it is worth considering each of them in more detail.
First of all, personalities. This means that every member of society has the right to freely choose a profession, religion, lifestyle and style of dress, sexual orientation, marital status, number of children, etc.
Absolutely all people have the right to independence, without dividing them into races and classes. In other words, the freedom of each individual determines the freedom of the whole society, and not vice versa.
At the same time, the theorists and practitioners of liberalism were well aware that the line between independence and permissiveness is extremely thin. And often behavior that one considers permissible can cause irreparable harm to another. For this reason, the ideology in question implies personal freedom within the framework of the law.
Individualism
Among other values \u200b\u200bof liberalism is individualism. Unlike socialism, here society is not focused on trying to unite all citizens into collectives (trying to make everyone as equal as possible). Its goal is to strive to maximize the development of the creative individuality of everyone.
Rights
Also, in a liberal society, a citizen has a fairly wide range of rights. One of the most important is the ability to own private property and business.
At the same time, it is worth remembering that if a person has a right to something, this does not mean that he must have it.
The core values \u200b\u200bof liberalism: nomocracy and egalitarianism
Despite the seemingly conniving attitude towards the behavior of its citizens, the liberal ideology is quite balanced. In addition to many rights and freedoms, a person in a society (built on its basis) is responsible before the law. And before him absolutely everyone is equal: from the king / president / ruler to the poorest rootless citizen.
Other important principles and values \u200b\u200bof liberalism include the absence of division of society into classes (egalitarianism). According to this, all citizens have not only equal rights and obligations, but also opportunities.
Thus, regardless of the family in which a child was born, if he has a talent and seeks to develop it, he can study and work in the best institutions of the state.
If the offspring of a well-born or wealthy family is mediocre, he cannot get a diploma from a good university and take an important position under the patronage of his parents, but will only have what he deserves.
It is worth noting that the beginnings of egalitarianism were still in the Roman Empire. Then this phenomenon was called "clientela". The bottom line was that rootless, but talented people (they were called "clients") could earn the patronage of noble families and even join them on equal terms. By concluding a bilateral support contract with patrons, such citizens were given the opportunity to make a political or any other career. Thus, talented citizens were given the opportunity to realize their abilities for the benefit of the state.
The Roman nobility (patricians) throughout history fought against clientele, although it was she who contributed to the prosperity of the empire. When the rights of clients were limited, within several decades the strongest state in the world fell.
It is interesting that a similar trend was subsequently observed more than once in history. If a society completely or at least partially renounced elitism, it flourished. And when they abandoned egalitarianism, stagnation began, and then decline.
Pluralism
Considering the political values \u200b\u200bof liberalism, it is worth paying attention to pluralism. This name is the position according to which there can be several opinions on any issue at the same time, and none of them has superiority.
In politics, this phenomenon contributes to the emergence of a multi-party system; in religion - the possibility of peaceful coexistence of different denominations (super-ecumenism).
Rationalism and progressivism
In addition to all of the above, adherents of liberalism believe in the triumph of progress and the ability to change the world for the better using a rational approach.
In their opinion, the possibilities of science and the human mind are very great, and if all this is correctly used for public good, the planet will prosper for many millennia.
Having considered the basic principles and values \u200b\u200bof liberalism, we can conclude that this ideology, in theory, is one of the most progressive in the world. However, despite the beauty of the ideas, the implementation of some of them in practice does not always lead to the desired result. For this reason, in the modern world, the most progressive ideology for society is, although it is still far from perfect.
In 2012, through the efforts of the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM), a survey was conducted, during which Russians were asked to explain who a liberal was. More than half of the participants in this test (or rather, 56%) found it difficult to disclose this term. It is unlikely that this situation has radically changed in several years, and therefore let's consider what principles liberalism professes and what this socio-political and philosophical trend actually consists of.
Who is a liberal?
In the most general terms, we can say that a person who is an adherent of this trend welcomes and approves the idea of \u200b\u200blimited intervention of state bodies in the basis of this system is based on a private entrepreneurial economy, which, in turn, is organized on market principles.
Answering the question of who a liberal is, many experts argue that he is the one who considers political, personal and economic freedom the highest priority in the life of the state and society. For the supporters of this ideology, freedom and the rights of each person are a kind of legal basis on which, in their opinion, the economic and social order should be built. Now let's look at who a liberal democrat is. This is a person who, defending freedom, is an opponent of authoritarianism. according to Western political analysts, this is the ideal that many developed countries are striving for. However, this term can be talked about not only from the point of view of politics. In its original meaning, this word called all free-thinkers and free-thinkers. Sometimes those who in society were inclined to excessive indulgence were among them.
Modern liberals
As an independent worldview, the considered ideological trend arose at the end of the 17th century. The basis for its development was the works of such famous authors as J. Locke, A. Smith and J. Mill. At the time, it was believed that free enterprise and government privacy would inevitably lead to prosperity and better social welfare. However, as it turned out later, the classical model of liberalism did not justify itself. Free competition uncontrolled by the state led to the emergence of monopolies, which inflated prices. Interest groups of lobbyists have appeared in politics. All this made legal equality impossible and significantly narrowed the opportunities for everyone who wanted to do business. In the 80-90s. In the 19th century, the ideas of liberalism began to experience a serious crisis. As a result of lengthy theoretical searches at the beginning of the 20th century, a new concept was developed, called neoliberalism or social liberalism. Its supporters advocate protecting individuals from negative consequences and abuse in the market system. In classical liberalism, the state was something of a "night watchman". Modern liberals admitted that this was a mistake and included in their program such ideas as: 
Russian liberals
In the political discussions of the modern Russian Federation, this trend causes a lot of controversy. For some, liberals are conformists who play along with the West, while for others, they are a panacea that can save the country from the undivided power of the state. This inconsistency is largely due to the fact that several varieties of this ideology operate simultaneously on the territory of Russia. The most notable of them are liberal fundamentalism (represented by Alexei Venediktov, editor-in-chief of the Echo Moscow station), neoliberalism (represented by social liberalism (Yabloko party) and legal liberalism (Republican Party and PARNAS party).
