by Summary:
Backgrounder in the history of the development of liberalism. While it written from a Libertarian point of view, it is useful in understanding the historical background. For a more thorough treatment although still a summary backgrounder, see the entry on liberalism at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Where it falls short is assuming the John Locke somehow discovered the foundations of genuine liberalism, when the fundamentals emerged in ancient Greece and where treated throughout the history of Western thought and manifested differently in Britain, the Continent, and America. Both the Gordon and Stanford Encyclopedia summaries focus on liberalism as an Anglo-American phenomenon and neither mentions either the history or Continental approach to liberalism, or the
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: classical liberalism, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, liberalism, libertarianism, philosophy of economics, social and political theory
This could be interesting, too:
Backgrounder in the history of the development of liberalism. While it written from a Libertarian point of view, it is useful in understanding the historical background. For a more thorough treatment although still a summary backgrounder, see the entry on liberalism at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Where it falls short is assuming the John Locke somehow discovered the foundations of genuine liberalism, when the fundamentals emerged in ancient Greece and where treated throughout the history of Western thought and manifested differently in Britain, the Continent, and America. Both the Gordon and Stanford Encyclopedia summaries focus on liberalism as an Anglo-American phenomenon and neither mentions either the history or Continental approach to liberalism, or the
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: classical liberalism, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, liberalism, libertarianism, philosophy of economics, social and political theory
This could be interesting, too:
Matias Vernengo writes Was Keynes a Liberal or a Socialist?
Joel Eissenberg writes Libertarianism
Joel Eissenberg writes Libertarianism
Chris Blattman writes Up with international relations theory, down with the -isms, and down with the certainty
For a more thorough treatment although still a summary backgrounder, see the entry on liberalism at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Where it falls short is assuming the John Locke somehow discovered the foundations of genuine liberalism, when the fundamentals emerged in ancient Greece and where treated throughout the history of Western thought and manifested differently in Britain, the Continent, and America.
Both the Gordon and Stanford Encyclopedia summaries focus on liberalism as an Anglo-American phenomenon and neither mentions either the history or Continental approach to liberalism, or the antecedents. "Laissez-faire" is, of course, a French term, and the early French writers on economics and political theory were highly influential in the development of economic and political liberalism. Gordon mentions only Frédéric Bastiat.
Gordon and Stanford Encyclopedia also ignore the German contribution to the development of liberalism is ignored, which is understandable given the scope of their summary. But it is a major omission in that many consider Kant rather than Locke to be the father of modern liberalism. Prussian philosopher and educationist Wilhelm von Humboldt, who today is not adequately recognized for his contributions to the Western intellectual tradition, was also a major influence. The Stanford Encyclopedia article on liberalism does make mention of him but only in a brief sentence about his influence on J. S. Mill and it cites Humboldt's The Limits of State Action in the bibliography.
Of course, Anarchists were the the arch-liberals in the sense of advocating for complete freedom from government intrusion in the lives of individuals. While Marx and Engels disagreed with the anarchists of the time over means, they were in agreement over the principle of freedom from state control of individuals and proposed what they concluded from their analysis to be an optimal means for means of achieving this goal.
After witnessing the French Revolution, Marx and Engels did not simply assume that getting rid of the state through overthrowing the state would lead to utopia immediately. That would take a gradual process of development that would need an interim arrangement to manage the transition as peacefully as possible under the circumstances. They also recognized that the elites in power and their regimes would not just roll over.
Another point that is interesting is that Mises, Hayek and Rothbard all wrote books specifically on liberalism from the classical liberal point of view updated in terms of modern Libertarianism.
A work I like in the tradition of welfare liberalism is John Kenneth Galbraith's The Good Society: The Humane Agenda.
In order to really understand your position, you have to think a thing through carefully using creative and critical thinking. This is best accomplished by writing. At the end of the process, there is something to share with others that may be of value — and could even change the world.
Mises Wire
Liberalism and "Classical Liberalism" — An Unfortunate Evolution
Liberalism and "Classical Liberalism" — An Unfortunate Evolution
David Gordon | Senior Fellow at the Mises Institute, and editor of The Mises Review