Suchergebnisse

Comments on Aleksandras Shtromas's article on peace & how it can achieved & Gordon L. Anderson's consequent comment (see abstracts in SA 45:3). When social life was depoliticized & the private sector dominated the state, 1815-1914, there were relatively few wars & few cries for a global political organization for peace. Once the ideal of political & economic collectivism superseded the classic liberal ideal, man & society were repoliticized. This led to WWI & the drive for monopolized markets, regulation of trade, & militarization of internal relations. Private interests became subservient to the state & welfare statism. Shtromas's call for peace comes with the prerequisite of social justice, but there is no world consensus about politics or justice. It is argued that social justice is just powerful group interests espousing an ideology of redistributivism. In contrast, Anderson suggests that social justice is best left to private sector financing. On the topic of self-determination, Anderson also espouses privatization of foreign intervention, while Shtromas calls for the supranational institution of the League of Peace. M. Pflum

"Without Justice for All: The New Liberalism and Our Retreat from Racial Equality questions, examines, and explains the way a new orthodoxy of American leaders has contributed to the social stratification and inequality which plagues America today. By looking at the history of our social policies since the New Deal, as well as the status of specific policy arenas, essayists show how political shifts over the past fifty years have moved us away from a more egalitarian politics. Throughout, the book responds critically to the now conventional argument that liberalism must be reconfigured in ways that retreat from immediate identification with the interests of labor, minorities, and the poor. From a look at federal housing policy and the failure of New Deal social programs to an examination of long established public assistance programs and Affirmative Action, Without Justice for All is a timely and important contribution to the dialogue on race in modern America."--Provided by publisher.

F.A. von Hayek (1899-1992) was a Nobel Prize winning economist, famous for promoting an Austrian version of classical liberalism. The multi-volume Hayek: A Collaborative Biography examines the evolution of his life and influence. Two concepts of civilization revolve around power - should it be separated or concentrated? Liberalism in the non-Austrian classical tradition remains fearful of power concentrated in the hands of government, labour unions or corporations; Red Terrorists sought to monopolize power to liquidate enemies and competitors as a prelude to utopia (the 'withering away of the State'); and behind the 'slogan of liberty, ' White Terror promoters (Mises and Hayek) sought to concentrate power in the hands of a 'dictatorial democracy' where henchmen would liquidate enemies, and - 'guided' by 'utopia' (the 'spontaneous' order) - follow orders from their social superiors. This volume, Part XII, examines the 'free' market Use of Knowledge in Society; examines the foundations of 'free' market educational credentials; and asks whether those funded by the tobacco industry and the carbon lobby should be accorded 'independent policy expert' status.

This article explores Michael Bond's A Bear Called Paddington as a vernacular political text about bordering practices and foreignness. With the foreign subject in the UK positioned as both a cause of and a solution to politico-cultural problems, the Paddington stories illustrate how this ambivalence is deeply embedded within liberalism. It is argued that A Bear Called Paddington unpacks liberal conceptions of identity, migration and tolerance while drawing attention to specific negotiations of difference that render Paddington (and others like him) into precarious positions of insecurity. The article then illustrates how Paddington exemplifies the tensions caused by the presence of the foreigner in societies perceived to be liberal. Adapted from the source document.

"Debates about whether the Wahhabist practice of face-veiling for women should be banned in modern liberal states tend to generate more heat than light. This book brings clarity to what can be a confusing subject by disentangling the different strands of the problem and breaking through the accusations of misogyny and Islamophobia. Explaining and expounding the ideas of giants of the liberal tradition including Locke, Mill, and Rawls as well as contemporary thinkers like Nussbaum, Kymlicka and Oshana, the book considers a variety of conceptions of liberalism and how they affect the response to the question. Directly addressing issues facing many of today's societies, it unpicks whether paternalism on grounds of welfare can be justified within liberalism, the value of personal autonomy and the problem of whether a socially influenced choice counts as a genuine preference. Covering the role of multiculturalism, gender issues and feminism, this comprehensive philosophical study of a major political question gets to the heart of whether a ban could be justified in principle, and also questions whether any such ban could prove efficacious in achieving its end."--

The proliferation of pornography and hate speech in contemporary democratic cultures threatens the liberal ideal of a marketplace of ideas, unhampered by state regulation of speech. Pornographic and hate speech, because it threatens to silence the competing speech of women and minorities, calls into question the liberal orthodoxies of state neutrality about the content of speech, as well as the traditional primacy of the value of liberty over the value of equality. By drawing on a broad range of philosophical traditions - from classical and contemporary liberalism, to Continental philosophy, speech act theory, critical race theory, feminism, and philosophy of law. The Cost of Free Speech argues that how courts resolve freedom of expression cases involving pornography or hate speech reveals more about the power of state speech to potentially oppress women and minorities than it does about the power of pornography and hate speech themselves. Once the liberal state becomes aware of the power of its own speech, the values of neutrality and liberty recede and the value of equality emerges as the true goal of liberalism.

"All that belong to the Liberal Party in the Cauca are people of the pueblo bajo (as they are generally called) and blacks," observes an 1859 letter written by Juan Aparicio, a local political operative who had undertaken the unenviable task of recruiting these same "lower classes" to support the powerful caudillo Tomás Mosquera's new National Party. Aparicio tried to explain his failure in this assignment, arguing that "this class of people will not listen to anyone that is not of their party."1 How had the local Liberal Party—controlled at the national level by wealthy white men—become associated with blacks and the poor in the Cauca region of southwestern Colombia? Or, more to the point, how did Afro-Colombians and other lower-class people transform elite political organizations into "their party"?

Introduction -- Part I - The Dual Argument (1920 - 1947): The Socialist Calculation Debates -- The Lippmann Colloquium -- The Economic Consequences -- Part II - The First Meeting (1947): An Army of Fighters for Freedom -- Using the State -- A New Europe -- The Second Week -- Conclusions: What Is Neoliberalism?.

A dramatic shift in British and French ideas about empire unfolded in the sixty years straddling the turn of the nineteenth century. As Jennifer Pitts shows in A Turn to Empire, Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, and Jeremy Bentham were among many at the start of this period to criticize European empires as unjust as well as politically and economically disastrous for the conquering nations. By the mid-nineteenth century, however, the most prominent British and French liberal thinkers, including John Stuart Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville, vigorously supported the conquest of non-European peop