Classical Liberalism – A Primer. Eamonn Butler

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ liberals do not allow property to be acquired by force. In fact, most property is created – crops are raised, houses are built, innovations are developed. Property clearly benefits the owner. But, in fact, it benefits everyone because it promotes wider prosperity.

      9. Civil society

      Classical liberals believe that voluntary associations are better at providing individuals’ needs than are governments. While they emphasise the priority of individuals, they recognise that people are not isolated, atomistic, self-centred beings. On the contrary, they are social animals and live in families and groups and communities that partly shape their values – clubs, associations, unions, religions, schools, online communities, campaigns, self-help groups, charities and all the other institutions that we call civil society.

      These institutions are an important part of how people relate to each other. Our outlook, values and actions are shaped within them. And they provide the basis of mutual understanding on which cooperation can be built. Indeed, cooperation would be impossible without the freedom to associate like this.

      Civil society also provides a buffer between individuals and governments. If we really were all isolated individuals, our freedoms would be easily suppressed by a despotic government. But the complex intersecting circles of civil society not only demonstrate that alternatives to government action are possible – private charities, for example, instead of state welfare – but also give us the common interest and strength with which to resist.

      10. Common human values

      Classical liberals, then, wish to harness our common humanity for mutual benefit. They uphold the basic principles of life, liberty and property under the law. Those, they believe, are the foundations of a thriving, spontaneous social order based on mutual respect, toleration, non-­aggression, cooperation and voluntary exchange between free people.

      Politically, they favour free speech, free association, the rule of law and – since rulers are no more saintly than the rest of us – limits on government that prevent those in authority doing too much harm.

      They know that a good society cannot rest solely on human benevolence. It rests more on the peaceful cooperation of different, self-interested individuals. So they favour freedom and equality under the law, with a strong, trustworthy justice system that prevents us harming others, but does not try to direct our lives.

      Economically, classical liberals favour freedom in production and exchange, and the free movement of people, goods and capital. They defend private property and wish to keep taxation to what is necessary to provide the public with defence and any other ‘public goods’ that are underprovided by the market.

      This is far from the common caricature of classical liberalism as a tiny, laissez-faire, night-watchman state. Justice alone, for example, is a hugely complex institution that needs great and continuing effort to maintain. Classical liberals know that the protection of life, liberty and property are no small tasks.

      1 A note on American liberalismWhen Americans speak of ‘liberalism’, they are talking about something very different from classical liberalism. Classical liberalism, also known as ‘old liberalism’ or ‘liberalism in the European sense’ focuses on the freedom of individuals; the minimisation of coercion; property and free exchange; and a limited, accountable government that protects and expands freedom.American or ‘new liberalism’ or ‘modern liberalism’ shares a strong belief in personal freedom, but considers that freedom is more than merely the absence of coercion – it can be fostered by paternalist and interventionist government.American liberals say that the state has a duty to protect people from themselves and from the unjust inequalities of power that it believes are often created by property ownership. They call for a generous welfare system to compensate the poor and support for workers against their (more powerful) employers. They are sceptical that economic freedom produces public benefits (such as high employment) and believe that the state should intervene in order to expand opportunities, provide public goods and make markets serve the public interest.Classical liberals are very suspicious of such policies. They fear that government power easily grows far beyond its usefulness; and point out that even the best-intentioned policies often have dismal and unintended consequences.

      Classical liberalism: the family tree

      Early ancestors

      Some classical liberals trace their ideas back to the Chinese philosopher Lao-Tzu, who advocated restraint in leadership. Twenty centuries ago, the Indian emperor Ashoka was also calling for freedom and political tolerance. And Islam embraced economic freedom from its earliest origins in the sixth century.

      But these are distant cousins of modern classical liberalism. The direct line is European, indeed specifically English. According to the classical liberal thinker and politician Daniel Hannan (1971–), it starts with the ­Anglo-Saxons, who from around the year 400 started to settle in what we now call England.

      Anglo-Saxon England

      As an island nation, hard to invade, England enjoyed greater stability than continental Europe, and there arose a secure system of property tenure and justice. It was not something anyone intended – just the gradual result of independent-minded Anglo-Saxons standing ox-like in their furrows and establishing their rights against interlopers.

      Later, the need to co-exist with the Vikings, who started settling from around 800, led to the equally unintended emergence of a common language and common legal arrangements. In the absence of any European-style feudal authority, what came out of this melting pot was the common law – the law of the land that evolved through the interactions of individuals, rather than the law of princes laid down by the powerful.

      The common law remains a key foundation of classical liberalism today. It was not monarchical, but determined by the people themselves. It respected private ownership and contract. It recognised liberty under the law. Nobody had to ask permission before acting: anything not specifically prohibited was legal. The law was everyone’s business, and law officers were accountable. Even kings were chosen by a council of elders (the Witan), which would demand their loyalty – rather than the reverse.

      Invasion and rebirth

      This came to a sudden end in 1066, with the Norman invasion and military occupation. England became ruled by a European elite, whose language and authoritarian ways separated them from the English population. They imposed feudalism, serfdom, social stratification and top-down law-making – the complete opposite of the freedoms and limited government that the Anglo-Saxons had known.

      But within a few generations, the Norman landowners identified more and more with the locals; while King John (1166–1216), insulated behind his French courtiers, came to look increasingly detached and despotic, arbitrarily manipulating the law in order to maximise his tax revenues.

      The result, in 1215, was the barons forcing the king to sign a great charter – Magna Carta – of rights and privileges.

      Most of the charter is about reasserting people’s ancient property rights, and protecting them from the arbitrary predations of officialdom – the sort of secure rights of tenure that classical liberals deem of crucial importance today.

      But a key part of the charter crystallised ancient freedoms – of the church, of cities and of the general population – and classical liberal principles such as trial by jury and the due process of law. It even asserted that the king, like everyone else, would be bound by the ‘law of the land’. Government, in other words, would be subject to the rule of law.

      Though John disavowed the charter, he died soon after. His СКАЧАТЬ