And the George Orwell piece! In our day and age, liberalism seems more like a fact than a position, but it’s not one that impresses me all that much. I will certainly read the pieces to come with interest (I have Mill all printed out and ready to read).
We are, as the writer implies, in the decision frame described as “Freedom to Act”. How wide should that Freedom be? Spend a day on X/Twitter and you will see much of the discourse is between those who believe that ultimately the State has to set limits and those who decry the State, or its agents, and argue for personal choice. The latter see Man as born free, but everywhere in chains.
Elective democracy is often seen as the guarantor of liberalism - perhaps after Trump we will at last recognise that this is far from certain. Maybe Churchill was right that it is the best governance system - ahead of all the others. But in modern times it’s given us some turkeys. There are benevolent dictatorships which eschew Elective democracy that are more liberal than the phoney democracy of (say) Hungary or Turkey or Trump’s America,
So to promote classical liberalism you cannot rest in a comfort zone of ideology. You have to answer not just ‘What?” But “How?. As Bismarck said Politics is the Art of the Possible. The drafters of the American Constitution included checks and balances to institutionalise this. Until 2016 they mainly worked a Civil War and Watergate and its gruesome aftermath aside. Now who knows?
Perhaps I’m confusing liberalism and democracy a bit. I believe historically human rights did improve with the spread of Christianity in the world, although not perfectly.
I'm entirely naive on this topic, but as a guy who happened to read Augustine's Confessions right after reading The Illiad, it did strike me that the former seemed like a massive step towards a modern liberal worldview (whatever that means) relative to the latter.
Sorry, gauche of me; it was in response to the titular question. Nice piece — hints at, I think, the problematic history with liberalism experienced by other, less individualistic (and more Catholic) countries. Most of Spain's premier classical liberals for example were absorbed into the stronger forces of nationalism or socialism. Shame.
It is complicated but it can be summed up succinctly by Goya's painting "Fight with Cudgels". Equally, Peréz Galdós' novel Doña Perfecta. That is, the sometimes violent tension between pueblo and city.
Ah, given your great love of Johnson, I thought you might be a Jacobite like the rest of us. Alas
oh I have a soft spot for them...
And the George Orwell piece! In our day and age, liberalism seems more like a fact than a position, but it’s not one that impresses me all that much. I will certainly read the pieces to come with interest (I have Mill all printed out and ready to read).
so glad you are reading Mill, really one of the greats
Your link to the Klein paper is dead. Link to the newly published version or here: https://lawliberty.org/when-scottish-sages-christened-liberal/
oh weird, thanks very much for the new link!
We are, as the writer implies, in the decision frame described as “Freedom to Act”. How wide should that Freedom be? Spend a day on X/Twitter and you will see much of the discourse is between those who believe that ultimately the State has to set limits and those who decry the State, or its agents, and argue for personal choice. The latter see Man as born free, but everywhere in chains.
Elective democracy is often seen as the guarantor of liberalism - perhaps after Trump we will at last recognise that this is far from certain. Maybe Churchill was right that it is the best governance system - ahead of all the others. But in modern times it’s given us some turkeys. There are benevolent dictatorships which eschew Elective democracy that are more liberal than the phoney democracy of (say) Hungary or Turkey or Trump’s America,
So to promote classical liberalism you cannot rest in a comfort zone of ideology. You have to answer not just ‘What?” But “How?. As Bismarck said Politics is the Art of the Possible. The drafters of the American Constitution included checks and balances to institutionalise this. Until 2016 they mainly worked a Civil War and Watergate and its gruesome aftermath aside. Now who knows?
Any thoughts on Christianity’s role on liberalism?
I dont really diverge from the standard account there
Perhaps I’m confusing liberalism and democracy a bit. I believe historically human rights did improve with the spread of Christianity in the world, although not perfectly.
I'm entirely naive on this topic, but as a guy who happened to read Augustine's Confessions right after reading The Illiad, it did strike me that the former seemed like a massive step towards a modern liberal worldview (whatever that means) relative to the latter.
Judging by today’s standards and performance Christianity’s role is to oppose it.
I’m thinking historically, not so so much today or the present. It seems we’re in a post liberal world today.
It’s my big brain.
?
Sorry, gauche of me; it was in response to the titular question. Nice piece — hints at, I think, the problematic history with liberalism experienced by other, less individualistic (and more Catholic) countries. Most of Spain's premier classical liberals for example were absorbed into the stronger forces of nationalism or socialism. Shame.
I don't know much about the Spanish tradition, but yes I think this is significant
It is complicated but it can be summed up succinctly by Goya's painting "Fight with Cudgels". Equally, Peréz Galdós' novel Doña Perfecta. That is, the sometimes violent tension between pueblo and city.