Classical Liberalism and IR Theory

Author(s):  
Edwin van de Haar
Author(s):  
Samuel Freeman

This chapter discusses the main distinguishing features of two liberal traditions—classical liberalism and what I call “the high liberal tradition”—and their respective positions regarding capitalism as an economic and social system. It also compares the two traditions’ different positions regarding equality of opportunity and the distributive role of markets in establishing economic justice. I critically assess the classical liberal principle that economic agents deserve to be rewarded according to their marginal contribution to economic product. The chapter concludes with some reflections upon the essential role that dissimilar conceptions of persons and society play in grounding the different positions on economic justice that classical and high liberals advocate.


Author(s):  
Samuel Freeman

This introductory chapter begins with a discussion of liberalism, which is best understood as an expansive, philosophical notion. Liberalism is a collection of political, social, and economic doctrines and institutions that encompasses classical liberalism, left liberalism, liberal market socialism, and certain central values. This chapter then introduces subsequent chapters, which are divided into three parts. Part I, “Liberalism, Libertarianism, and Economic Justice,” clarifies the distinction between classical liberalism and the high liberal tradition and their relation to capitalism, and then argues that libertarianism is not a liberal view. Part II, “Distributive Justice and the Difference Principle,” analyzes and applies John Rawls’s principles of justice to economic systems and private law. Part III, “Liberal Institutions and Distributive Justice,” focuses on the crucial role of liberal institutions and procedures in determinations of distributive justice and addresses why the first principles of a moral conception of justice should presuppose general facts in their justification.


2021 ◽  
pp. 147821032110313
Author(s):  
Jaakko Honkanen ◽  
Rauno Huttunen

This article attempts to start an in-depth consideration and analysis of modern neoliberal education policy through its philosophical roots. To achieve this, the article considers the ideology and philosophy of the classical liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill and the relationship of his philosophy with the modern-day neoliberalist education policy. The purpose of the article is to discuss the philosophical groundwork that drives Mill’s ideas on the establishment of education and compares it to the philosophical groundwork and implications present in modern neoliberal education policy, and through this begin to assert what neoliberalist education policy is. The paper asserts that while Mill’s version of classical liberalism holds similar views and forms of occurrence with modern neoliberalist policies, in many cases Mill’s philosophical groundwork seems to disagree fundamentally with that of neoliberalism. The study is based on literature detailing both the philosophical as well as polity aspects of both Mill’s ideas and modern neoliberalism from the viewpoint of education, and it presents considerations for the nature of neoliberal education policy and its future analysis.


2021 ◽  
pp. 004711782110214
Author(s):  
King-Ho Leung

This article offers a reading of Plato in light of the recent debates concerning the unique ‘ontology’ of International Relations (IR) as an academic discipline. In particular, this article suggests that Plato’s metaphysical account of the integral connection between human individual, the domestic state and world order can offer IR an alternative outlook to the ‘political scientific’ schema of ‘levels of analysis’. This article argues that Plato’s metaphysical conception of world order can not only provide IR theory with a way to re-imagine the relation between the human, the state and world order. Moreover, Plato’s outlook can highlight or even call into question the post-metaphysical presuppositions of contemporary IR theory in its ‘borrowed ontology’ from modern social science, which can in turn facilitate IR’s re-interpretation of its own ‘ontology’ as well as its distinct contributions to the understanding of the various aspects of the social world and human life.


Society ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (6) ◽  
pp. 614-626
Author(s):  
Daniel B. Klein
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document