Basic Political Values
Liberty
1 Introduction
In simple words, freedom
means absence of constraints. Thus an individual is free if she/he is not
subject to external controls and can take independent decisions in a free
manner. However, freedom also requires the conditions in society that help
people to develop their capabilities and skills. Thus a free society is the one
that aims at removing social limitations/constraints that obstruct individual
development. Finally, freedom is considered valuable because it allows us to
make choices and to exercise our judgement.
On the basis of above the following can be
stated as features of liberty:
1. It is an
important principle of political philosophy and recognised as a universal principle.
However, there are different ideas of how to
achieve liberty/freedom.
2. It has inspired struggles world over of
exploited people against the privileged classes.
3. Struggles for liberty have always been
based on equality that challenged the superiority of the
dominant class.
4. Thus those in
power always favour no change, while those who lack in power/privileges
demand change that leads to liberty/freedom.
2 Liberty and Restraints/Limits
"The need of liberty for each is
necessarily qualified and conditioned by the need of liberty of
all…." Ernest Barker, ‘Principles
of Social and Political Theory', 1951.
1. Liberty of an individual has to be balanced against
the needs of a society. In other words excess of individual freedom or of
unreasonable limits/restrictions on it
is undesirable and harmful.
2. Ideally a proper balance between freedom and
restraints is desirable to ensure wellbeing of individual and society.
3. In case an individual is given complete and
unrestrained liberty, it is bound to go conflict with interests of others
4. E.g. A Car driver's
liberty to drive at any speed and without any traffic rules would be dangerous
for freedom of others to move on the streets.
5. Thus freedom for one person should not deny/ limit of
freedom of others.
3 Liberty and State Authority
1. Thus it can be now said that it is essential to
restrict liberty by equal liberty for others.
2. Hence, liberty is to be used by individual to achieve
rational goals or aims. In other words,
such goals
have to be beneficial for society.
3. But, in practice, limits on liberty become necessary
to preserve liberty for all.
4. Such limits on
liberty are in the form of authority of state over the individual.
5. However if the individual can misuse liberty so can
the state. And in any case state cannot
have unlimited
authority over individual.
6. Thus for authority of state to remain meaningful and
socially useful, it has to be limited. State
has to have
moral support and legitimacy from people to justify its authority.
4 Types of Liberty
Liberty thus means 'absence of restraint' in various
spheres of individual life. These spheres are identified as civil, political
and economic liberty of the individual.
1) Civil Liberty-
Includes
freedom from threat to life and movement and relates to physical liberty with
due restrictions in place to protect law and order and safety
; intellectual freedom to express thoughts and belief
essential to further knowledge, self
criticism and progress in society
; and freedom to engage into economic relations or
contractual
agreement with
anybody. However modern idea of justice allows reasonable restriction to
prevent exploitation.
2) Political Liberty
This category
deals with freedoms included under citizenship. It provides freedom to
participate in elections and other decision-making processes; to be represented
in government bodies.
3) Economic Liberty
It is related to
an individual as a worker with hands or brain has the right to proper wages,
work conditions, health and retirement benefits. It mainly protects the
individual from exploitation at work place.
As it has been a tricky area of freedom, this sphere
requires adjustment between liberty and equality.
It is mainly here that negative and positive liberty
clash and conflict with each other. Hence now we turn to difference between
negative and positive liberty.
5 Distinction between Negative and Positive Liberty
1 The struggle for liberty started in 17th
century Europe during the Industrial Revolution that focused on
negative liberty mainly in the economic field.
2 It led to establishment of capitalism and
the idea of 'laissez-faire' supported by thinkers like Adam
Smith, Jeremy Bentham, James Mill and others.
3 Thus the concept of negative liberty was
significant in the growth and spread of capitalism in Europe.
4 However by the middle of 19th century,
capitalism, supported by, negative liberty led to increased
exploitation and suffering of the workers and consumers.
5 The workers were under constant threat of
unemployment, in addition to decreased wages and
unhealthy work conditions leading to poverty and suffering. The pressure
thus increased to extend
the benefits of liberty to the European working class.
6 At the same time John S. Mill introduced
the concept of ‘Positive liberty’ in
his 'On Liberty'. His
main argument was that where ever liberty was harmful to society, the
state could interfere to ensure
social welfare. Hence Mill favoured taxation and universal education.
This also laid the foundation of a ‘Welfare State’ in the 20th
century.
6 The Contemporary Debate on Liberty
Isaiah Berlin
In his ‘Two Concepts of Liberty’ (1958) gave a new meaning to the
difference between negative and positive liberty. For Berlin negative liberty
consisted in an individual not being prevented by others from achieving desired
goals in life. While positive liberty meant individual was the master of his
own life.
Thus State could only ensure
negative liberty and positive liberty depended entirely on the individuals own
will and capacity. E.g. If cannot fly like a bird does not mean absence of
freedom. Similarly if one is poor and cannot afford bread it is not a case of
lack of liberty.
In other words, availability or
non-availability of means/resources is entirely an individual’s own concern and
the state is not responsible to provide the means/resources to acquire freedom.
However Berlin’s concept of liberty
has been criticised as it does not help to deal with social inequalities.
Because enjoyment of freedom is obstructed by absence of material means. Such
an understanding of liberty does not correspond to positive liberalism.
It is important here to remember
that many people are poor not due to any fault of their own but because of
social injustice.
The more sound distinction between
negative liberty and positive liberty is one that focuses on the role of state
under different situations. Any state regulation that attempts to adjust liberty
with equal opportunity is in effect the transition of negative liberty into
positive liberty.
In simple words any effort for removal of social obstacles in achieving
liberty is positive liberty.
Milton Friedman
Friedman in his ‘Capitalism and Freedom’,
1962, defines freedom as ‘the absence of coercion of a man by his fellow men’.
He argued that capitalism is a necessary condition for enjoyment of freedom.
Any attempt to bring equality is harmful for freedom. Government’s role is to
ensure favourable conditions for the market and nothing beyond that. Hence government should only interfere in
matters that cannot be effectively handled through the market. Thus in effect
Friedman advocated government withdrawal from its welfare and regulatory role.
However, Friedman is criticised for
failing to look at the ill-effects of capitalism which gives little choice or
creative freedom to the worker. In such an arrangement intervention by a
welfare state becomes necessary to ensure freedom for all.
Robert Nozick
Another important liberal thinker who strongly opposes principle of
liberty. In his ‘Anarchy, State and Utopia’, 1974, argues that state comes into
existence mainly for the protection of right to property of individuals. Hence,
it has no right to interfere and redistribute property/wealth among its
citizens to reduce inequalities. He argues that inequalities of wealth and
power are a result of differences of individual capabilities, skills and
talent. Thus steps to reduce inequalities would lead to injustice.
But thinkers like Nozick can be
criticised for ignoring the fact that social status significantly affects the
skills and capabilities of individuals.
Marxist Thinkers
For Karl Marx, individual cannot
enjoy freedom in isolation from society (Marx and Engels, ‘Holy Family’, 1844).
Ensuring healthy socio-economic conditions by promoting common interest will
lead to the enjoyment of freedom for everyone in society. On the economic side,
instead of capitalism, he favoured a system of economic production that
provides satisfaction of wants and opportunity for self-development. Thus for
him capitalism obstructs full enjoyment of freedom and hence should be
transformed to secure full freedom.
Herbert Marcuse, a 20th
century Marxist thinker in his ‘One Dimensional Man’, 1964, gave a brilliant
analysis of the problem of freedom in western society. He argued that
capitalism, through manipulation of mass media creates artificial desires and
demands or ‘consumerism’ in people. Under such conditions of satisfaction of
artificial demands the desire for genuine freedom disappears. Hence, the need
is to make people aware of their condition in order to arouse their need for
freedom. However, Marcuse was criticised for not clearly stating as to how his
ideas would be transformed into reality without a revolution of the masses.
Another neo-Marxist thinker, C B
Macpherson in his ‘Democratic Theory’, 1973, argued that
that true freedom lies in the
maximum development of individual’s creative skills and capacities. Capitalism
kills creative capacities of man. Only a welfare state can ensure freedom in a
capitalist society.
7 Conclusion
Sunday, November 20, 2011
10:25 PM
The need to define freedom
was felt in order to protect individual from undue interference from the state.
The industrial revolution and rise of capitalism led to freedom being defined
as ‘absence of restraints on individual’ mainly in the economic sphere. However
we also saw that the 19th century conditions of workers forced
interference of state to ensure freedom for all through welfare provisions.
This came to be understood as positive freedom that ensured reduction of
inequalities in society through satisfaction of basic needs and opportunities
for individuals. However such a concept was criticised by liberal thinkers as
denial of liberty/freedom. But Marxists thinkers favoured revolutionary changes
to replace capitalism and establish society that ensures full development of
human creativity. Thus the search for freedom is a never ending process. Real
freedom can be enjoyed only in a society where each individual's development is
essential for the free development of all.
