Suchergebnisse

Abstract. Among twentieth-century political philosophers, Americans
John Rawls and Robert Nozick are generally recognized as giants – both
for the boldness of their arguments and for the influence they have exerted. They sketched rival visions. Rawls, inspired by Immanuel Kant, argued for a world characterized by tolerance, equality, and justice as fairness. Nozick, claiming a Lockean heritage but actually inspired by Adam Smith (the "invisible hand") and Herbert Spencer ("survival of the fittest"), outlined a program for a minimal state, with very little taxation, offering no cushion at all against poverty, and providing no state assistance for the poor, the sick, the disabled, or the widowed. Rawls' vision is clearly part of the liberal tradition, while Nozick's championing of a minimal state contains illiberal elements.
Keywords: John Rawls, Robert Nozick, political liberalism, libertarianism, taxation, equality, justice.

Spinoza, Pufendorf and Locke all championed freedom of thought (including freedom of religion) and of speech; all three thinkers deserve credit for having forged the fundamental principles of the liberal tradition. Spinoza, in particular, was the first writer in modern times to articulate a systematic defence of democracy. He believed that the state should promote the welfare of its citizens, while maximising their freedom. Although he equated right with power, he also advocated respect for the moral law, stressing the importance of being good to other people. Keywords: Spinoza, Pufendorf, Locke, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, liberalism

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was one of the philosophic giants of the nineteenth century. Well versed in both ancient and more recent philosophical tracts, he rejected the individualism of Hobbes and Locke, as well as their notion that the state was an agency set up in the first place to protect life and property, and, drawing inspiration from Aristotle, outlined a vision of the state as an agency bound, in the first place, to protect the weak and the powerless. Hegel further rejected Kant's individualistic ethics and counseled that ethical behavior had to be understood as taking place in a social context, with real duties toward other people. For Hegel, an individual had rights and duties within the context of the family, in the community, and, as a citizen, vis-à-vis the state. He emphasized the network of duties in which each individual finds himself, urging political moderation and concern for the good of the entire community. He has been condemned as a proto-totalitarian, lauded as a democrat of sorts, and described variously as liberal, anti-liberal, authoritarian, conservative-monarchist, and constitutionalist. This essay will argue that Hegel came to champion a constitutional-legal order (Rechtsstaat) under an autocratic monarch, with protection for liberal values. The absolute authority of the monarch, thus, was limited to those powers which he needed in order to advance and protect the interests of the citizens of the realm.