The policy of liberalism in economics. Report “Basic principles of liberalism. Social liberalism.” Modern Russian liberalism

In 2012, through the efforts of the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM), a survey was conducted in which Russians were asked to explain who a liberal is. More than half of the participants in this test (more precisely, 56%) found it difficult to disclose this term. It is unlikely that this situation has changed radically in a few years, and therefore let’s look at what principles liberalism professes and what this socio-political and philosophical movement actually consists of.

Who is a liberal?

In very general terms, we can say that a person who is an adherent of this movement welcomes and approves of the idea of ​​​​limited intervention government agencies c The basis of this system is based on a private enterprise economy, which, in turn, is organized on market principles.

Answering the question of who a liberal is, many experts argue that he is someone who considers political, personal and economic freedom to be the highest priority in the life of the state and society. For supporters of this ideology, the freedoms and rights of each person are a kind of legal basis on which, in their opinion, the economic and social order should be built. Now let's look at who a liberal democrat is. This is a person who, while defending freedom, is an opponent of authoritarianism. according to Western political scientists, this is an ideal that many developed countries strive for. However, this term can be discussed not only from a political point of view. In its original meaning, this word called all freethinkers and freethinkers. Sometimes these included those who in society were prone to excessive indulgence.

Modern liberals

As an independent worldview, the ideological movement in question arose at the end of the 17th century. The basis for its development was the works of such famous authors as J. Locke, A. Smith and J. Mill. At that time it was believed that freedom of enterprise and non-interference of the state in privacy will inevitably lead to prosperity and improved well-being of society. However, as it turned out later, the classical model of liberalism did not justify itself. Free competition, uncontrolled by the state, led to the emergence of monopolies that inflated prices. Interested lobby groups have emerged in politics. All this made legal equality impossible and significantly narrowed the opportunities for everyone who wanted to start a business. In the 80-90s. In the 19th century, the ideas of liberalism began to experience a serious crisis. As a result of long-term theoretical searches, at the beginning of the 20th century, a new concept was developed, called neoliberalism or social liberalism. Its supporters advocate protecting the individual from the negative consequences and abuses of the market system. In classical liberalism, the state was something of a “night watchman.” Modern liberals recognized that this was a mistake and included in their program ideas such as:

Russian liberals

In polytypic discussions of the modern Russian Federation, this trend causes a lot of controversy. For some, liberals are conformists playing along with the West, while for others they are a panacea that can save the country from the undivided power of the state. This discrepancy is to a large extent due to the fact that several varieties of this ideology are operating simultaneously on Russian territory. The most notable of them are liberal fundamentalism (represented by Alexey Venediktov, editor-in-chief of the Echo Moscow station), neoliberalism (represented by social liberalism (Yabloko party) and legal liberalism (Republican Party and PARNAS party).

from lat. liberalis - free) is the name of a “family” of ideological and political movements that historically developed from rationalistic and educational criticism, which in the 17th and 18th centuries. Western European class-corporate society, political “absolutism” and the dictates of the church in secular life were subjected. The philosophical foundations of the “members of the liberal family” have always been different to the point of incompatibility. Historically, the most important among them are: 1) the doctrine of “natural rights” of man and the “social contract” as the foundation of a legitimate political structure(J. Locke et al., Social Contract); 2) the “Kantian paradigm” of the moral autonomy of the noumental “I” and the concepts of the “rule of law” that follow from it; 3) the ideas of the “Scottish Enlightenment” (D. Hume, A. Smith, A. Ferguson, etc.) about spontaneous evolution social institutions, driven by the irreducible scarcity of resources combined with the selfishness and ingenuity of people, bound, however, by “moral feelings”; utilitarianism (I. Betpam, D. Ricardo, J. S. Mill, etc.) with its program of “the greatest happiness for the largest number people" viewed as calculating maximizers of their own benefit; 5) “historical liberalism”, one way or another connected with Hegelian philosophy, affirming human freedom, but not as something inherent in him “from birth,” but as, in the words of R. Collingwood, “acquired gradually insofar as a person enters into the self-conscious possession of one's own personality through... moral progress." In modified and often eclectic versions, these various philosophical foundations are reproduced in modern discussions within the “liberal family.” The main axes of such discussions, around which new groupings of liberal theories are emerging, relegating the importance of differences in philosophical foundations to the background, are the following. Firstly, should liberalism as its main goal strive to “limit the coercive power of any government” (F. Hayek) or is this a secondary issue, decided depending on how liberalism copes with its most important task - “maintaining conditions without which the free practical realization of one’s abilities by a person is impossible” (T. X. Green). The essence of these discussions is the relationship between the state and society, the role, functions and permissible scale of activity of the former for the sake of ensuring the freedom of development of the individual and the free community of people. Secondly, should liberalism be “value neutral”, a kind of “pure” technique for protecting individual freedom, regardless of what values ​​it is expressed in (J. Rawls, B. Ackerman), or does it embody certain values ​​(humanity, tolerance and solidarity, justice, etc.), departure from which and boundless moral relativism are fraught with the most disastrous consequences for him, including directly political ones (W. Galston, M. Walzer). The essence of this type is the normative content of liberalism and the dependence on it of the practical functioning of liberal institutions. Thirdly, the dispute between “economic” and “ethical” (or political) liberalism. The first is characterized by the formula of L. von Mises: “If we condense the entire program of liberalism into one word, then it will be private property... All other requirements of liberalism follow from this fundamental requirement.” “Ethical” liberalism argues that the relationship between freedom and private property is ambiguous and variable across historical contexts. According to B. Krone, freedom “must have the courage to accept the means of social progress that... .. are diverse and contradictory,” considering the principle of laissez faire only as “one of the possible types of economic order.”

If various types liberalism, classical and modern, it is impossible to find a common philosophical denominator and their approaches to key practical problems differ so significantly, then what allows us to say that they belong to the same “family”? Prominent Western researchers reject the very possibility of giving liberalism a single definition: its history reveals only a picture of “discontinuities, accidents, diversity... thinkers, indifferently mixed together under the guise of “liberalism” (D. Gray). The commonality of types of liberalism that are different in all other respects is revealed if they are considered not from their philosophical or political-programmatic content, but as an ideology, the defining function of which is not to describe reality, but to act in reality, mobilizing and directing the energy of people towards specific goals. In different historical situations, the successful implementation of this function requires appealing to different philosophical ideas and putting forward different programmatic guidelines in relation to the same market, “minimization” or expansion of the state, etc. In other words, the only general definition of liberalism can only be that it is a function of the implementation of certain values-goals, manifested in a specific way in each specific situation. The dignity and measure of “perfection” of liberalism are determined not by the philosophical depth of its doctrines or fidelity to one or another “sacred” formulations about the “naturalness” of human rights or the “inviolability” of private property, but by its practical (ideological) ability to bring society closer to its goals and prevent he will “break” into a state that is radically alien to them. History has repeatedly demonstrated that philosophically poor liberal teachings turned out to be much more effective from this point of view than their philosophically refined and sophisticated “brothers” (let us compare at least the political “fates” of the views of the “Founding Fathers” of the USA, as they are set out in “The Federalist”, etc. documents, on the one hand, and German Kantianism, on the other). What are the stable goals-values ​​of liberalism, which received various philosophical justifications in its history and were embodied in various practical programs of action?

1. Individualism - in the sense of the “primacy” of the moral dignity of a person over any encroachments on him by any group, no matter what considerations of expediency such encroachments are supported. Understood thus. individualism does not a priori exclude a person’s self-sacrifice if he recognizes the demands of the collective as “fair.” Individualism is not connected in a logically necessary way with those ideas about an “atomized” society, within the framework and on the basis of which it was initially affirmed in the history of liberalism.

2. Egalitarianism - in the sense of recognizing all people as having equal moral value and denying the importance for the Organization of the most important legal and political institutions of society of any “empirical” differences between them (in terms of origin, property, profession, gender, etc.). Such egalitarianism is not necessarily justified according to the formula “everyone is born equal.” For liberalism, it is important to introduce the problem of equality into the logic of ought ~ “everyone must be recognized as morally and politically equal,” regardless of whether such an introduction follows from the doctrine of “natural rights,” the Hegelian dialectic of “slave and master,” or the utilitarian calculation of one’s own strategic benefits.

3. Universalism - in the sense of recognizing that the demands of individual dignity and equality (in this understanding) cannot be rejected by reference to the “immanent” features of certain cultural and historical groups of people. Universalism should not necessarily be linked to ideas about the ahistorical “human nature” and the same understanding of “dignity” and “equality” by everyone. It can also be interpreted in such a way that in every culture - in accordance with the inherent nature of human development - there must be the right to demand respect for dignity and equality, as they are understood in their historical certainty. What is universal is not what exactly people demand in different contexts, but how they demand what they demand, namely, not as slaves seeking favors that their masters can rightfully deny them, but as worthy people who have the right to what they require.

4. Meliorism as an affirmation of the possibility of correcting and improving any social institutions. Meliorism does not necessarily coincide with the idea of ​​progress as a directed and deterministic process, with which it has long been historically associated. Meliorism also allows for different ideas about the relationship between the conscious and spontaneous principles in changing society - ranging from the spontaneous evolution of Hayekado to the rationalist constructivism of Bentham.

With this constellation of values ​​and goals, liberalism declares itself as a modern ideology, different from earlier political teachings. The boundary here can be indicated by the transformation of the central problem. All pre-modern political thought focused in one way or another on the question: “what is the best state and what should its citizens be like?” At the center of liberalism is another question: “how is a state possible if the freedom of people, which can result in destructive self-will, is irremovable?” All liberalism, figuratively speaking, follows from two formulas of G. Hobbes: “There is no absolute good, devoid of any relation to anything or anyone” (i.e., the question of “the best state in general” is meaningless) and “ the nature of good and evil depends on the totality of conditions present in this moment ” (i.e., “correct” and “good” policy can only be defined as a function of a given situation). The change in these central issues determined the general outline of liberal political thinking, outlined by the following lines: 1) in order for any state to take place, it must include everyone who is concerned, and not just those who are virtuous or have some special characteristics that make them suitable for political participation (as was the case, for example, with Aristotle). This is the liberal principle of equality, which was filled with content during the history of liberalism, progressively spreading to all new groups of people excluded from politics at previous stages. It is clear that such a spread occurred through a democratic struggle against previously established institutional forms of liberalism with their inherent mechanisms of discrimination, and not due to the self-deployment of the “immanent principles” of liberalism. But something else is important: the liberal state and ideology were capable of such development, while earlier political forms (the same ancient polis) broke down when trying to expand their original principles and spread them to oppressed groups; 2) if there is no absolute good that is self-evident for all participants in politics, then achieving peace presupposes allowing everyone the freedom to follow their own ideas about the good. This assumption is “technically” realized through the establishment of channels (procedural and institutional) through which people satisfy their aspirations. Initially, freedom comes to the modern world not in the form of a “good gift,” but in the form of a terrible challenge to the very foundations of human coexistence from their violent selfishness. Liberalism had to recognize this brutal and dangerous freedom and socialize it according to that primitive formula of “freedom from” that early liberalism so expressively conveys. Such recognition and what followed from it for political theory and practice are necessary for the realization of the very possibility of people living together in modern conditions. (In the sense of the Hegelian formula - “freedom is necessary”, that is, freedom has become a necessity for modernity, which, of course, has little in common with the “dialectical-materialist” interpretation of this formula by F. Engels - freedom as a recognized necessity). But the need to recognize freedom in its crude form does not mean that liberalism does not go further in the understanding and practice of freedom. If ethical liberalism strived for something, it was precisely for freedom itself to become an end in itself for people. The formula of this new understanding of freedom as “freedom for” can be considered the words of A. de Tocqueville: “He who seeks in freedom something other than itself is created for slavery”; 3) if freedom is recognized (both in the first and second understandings), then the only way to organize a state is the consent of its organizers and participants. The meaning and strategic goal of liberal politics is to achieve consensus as the only real foundation of a modern state. The movement in this direction - with all its failures, contradictions, the use of tools of manipulation and suppression, as well as with moments of historical creativity and the realization of new opportunities for the emancipation of people - is the real history of liberalism, its only meaningfully rich definition.

Lit.: Leonpyovich V.V. History of liberalism in Russia. 1762-1914. M., 1995; DunnJ. Liberalism.- Idem., Western Political Theory in the Face of the Future. Cambr.. 1993; Galston W.A. Liberalism and Public Morality.- Liberals on Liberalism, ed. by A. Damico. Totowa (N.J.), 1986; Gray). Liberalism. Milton Keynes, 1986; HayekF.A. The Constitution f Liberty. L., 1990; Holmes S. The Permanent Structure of Anti-Liberal Thought.- Liberalism and the Moral Life, ed. by N. Rosenblum, Cambr. (Mass), 1991; Mills W. C. Liberal Values ​​in the Modem Vbrld.- Idem. Power, Politics and People, ed. by I. Horowitz. N.Y., 1963; RawlsJ. Political Liberalism. N. Y, 1993; Ruggiero G. de. The History of Liberalism. L., 1927; Wallerstein 1. After Liberalism. N.Y., 1995, pans 2, 3.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Several years ago, the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion conducted a survey of the population, the main question of which was: “What is liberalism, and who is a liberal?” Most of the participants were confused by this question. 56% could not give a comprehensive answer. The survey was conducted in 2012; most likely, today the situation is unlikely to have changed for the better. Therefore, now in this article we will briefly consider the concept of liberalism and all its main aspects for the education of the Russian audience.

In contact with

About the concept

There are several definitions that describe the concept of this ideology. Liberalism is:

• political movement or ideology that unites fans of democracy and parliamentarism;
• a worldview that is characteristic of industrialists who defend their rights of a political nature, as well as entrepreneurial freedom;
• a theory incorporating philosophical and political ideas that appeared in Western Europe in the 18th century;
• the first meaning of the concept was freethinking;
• tolerance and tolerance of unacceptable behavior.

All these definitions can be safely attributed to liberalism, but the main thing is that this term denotes an ideology that affects the structure and states. WITH In Latin, liberalism is translated as freedom. Are all the functions and aspects of this movement really built on freedom?

Freedom or restriction

The liberal movement includes key concepts how about public good, individual freedom and equality of people within the framework of policy and . What liberal values ​​does this ideology promote?

1. The common good. If the state protects the rights and freedom of the individual, and also protects the people from various threats and monitors compliance with the laws, then such a structure of society can be called reasonable.
2. Equality. Many people shout that all people are equal, although it is obvious that this is absolutely not the case. We differ from each other in various aspects: intelligence, social status, physical characteristics, nationality, and so on. But liberals mean equality of human opportunity. If a person wants to achieve something in life, no one has the right to interfere with this on the basis of race, social status or other factors . The principle is that if you put in the effort, you will achieve more.
3. Natural rights. British thinkers Locke and Hobbes came up with the idea that a person has three rights from birth: to life, to property and to happiness. It will not be difficult for many to interpret this: no one has the right to take a person’s life (only the state for certain offenses), property is considered as a personal right to own something, and the right to happiness is that same freedom of choice.

Important! What is liberalization? There is also a concept that means the expansion of civil liberties and rights within the framework of economic, political, cultural and social life, and this is also a process when the economy gets rid of the influence of the state.

Principles of liberal ideology:

• there is nothing more valuable than human life;
• all people in this world are equal;
• everyone has their inalienable rights;
• the individual and his needs are more valuable than society as a whole;
• the state arises by common consent;
• people form laws and state values ​​independently;
• the state is responsible to the individual, and the individual, in turn, is responsible to the state;
• power must be divided, the principle of organizing life in the state on the basis of the constitution;
• only in fair elections can a government be elected;
• humanistic ideals.

These principles of liberalism formulated in the 18th century English philosophers and thinkers. Many of them never came to fruition. Most of them are similar to the utopia that humanity so passionately strives for, but cannot achieve.

Important! Liberal ideology could be a lifeline for many countries, but there will always be some pitfalls that hinder development.

Founders of the ideology

What is liberalism? At that time, each thinker understood it in his own way. This ideology absorbed completely different ideas and opinions of thinkers of that time.

It is clear that some of the concepts may contradict each other, but the essence remains the same.

The founders of liberalism English scientists J. Locke and T. Hobbes (18th century) can be considered, along with the French writer of the Enlightenment era Charles Montesquieu, who was the first to think and express his opinion about human freedom in all spheres of his activity.

Locke gave birth to legal liberalism and stated that only in a society in which all citizens are free can there be stability.

The original theory of liberalism

The followers of classical liberalism gave greater preference and paid more attention to " individual freedom» person. The concept of this concept is expressed in the fact that the individual should not submit to either society or social orders. Independence and equality- these are the main stages on which the entire liberal ideology stood. The word “freedom” then meant the absence of various prohibitions, limits or vetoes on the implementation of actions by an individual, taking into account the generally accepted rules and laws of the state. That is, that freedom that would not go against established dogmas.

As the founders of the liberal movement believed, the government should guarantee equality between all its citizens, but people had to take care of their financial situation and status on their own. Limiting the scope of government power was what liberalism in turn tried to achieve. According to theory, the only thing the state had to provide for its citizens was security and order protection. That is, the liberals tried to influence the reduction of all its functions to a minimum. The existence of society and power could only be subject to their general subordination to laws within the state.

The fact that classical liberalism would still exist became clear when a terrible economic crisis arose in the United States in 1929. Its consequences were tens of thousands of bankrupt banks, the death of many people from hunger and other horrors of the economic decline of the state.

Economic liberalism

The main concept of this movement was the idea of ​​equality between economic laws and natural ones. Government interference in these laws was prohibited. Adam Smith is the founder of this movement and its basic principles:

• self-interest is needed to spur economic development;
• government regulation and the existence of monopolies harm the economy;
• economic growth must be promoted quietly. That is, the government should not interfere in the process of the emergence of new institutions. Businesses and suppliers operating in the interests of profit and within the market system are quietly guided by the "invisible hand." All this is the key to competently meeting the needs of society.

Neoliberalism

This direction was formed in the 19th century and implies a new trend in, which consists of complete non-interference by the government in trade relations between its subjects.

The main principles of neoliberalism are constitutionalism and equality between all members of society in the country.

Signs of this trend: the government should promote self-regulation of the economy in the market, and the process of financial redistribution should primarily take into account the low-income segments of the population.

Neoliberalism does not oppose government regulation of the economy, while classical liberalism denies this. But the regulatory process should only include the free market and the competitiveness of subjects for collateral economic growth along with social justice. The main idea of ​​neoliberalism – support for foreign trade policy and internal trade to increase the gross income of the state, that is, protectionism.

All political concepts and philosophical movements have their own characteristics, and neoliberalism is no exception:

• the need for government intervention in the economy. The market must be protected from possible appearance monopolies, and a competitive environment and freedom are ensured;
• protection of principles and justice. All citizens must be involved in political processes to maintain the necessary democratic “weather”;
• government should maintain existence various economic programs, associated with financial support for social groups with low incomes.

Briefly about liberalism

Why is the concept of liberalism distorted in Russia?

Conclusion

Now the question is: “What is liberalism?” will no longer cause dissonance among respondents. After all, the understanding of freedom and equality is simply presented under other terms that have their own principles and concepts affecting different areas state structure, but remaining unchanged in one thing - only then will the state prosper when it ceases to limit its citizens in many ways.

Historically, the first formulated political ideology was that of liberalism, which emerged in the 18th century. By this time, a class of free owners who did not belong to the nobility and clergy, the so-called third estate or bourgeoisie, had matured in European cities. This was an active part of society, not satisfied with their own good financial situation and saw their path in political influence.

The British are considered the founders of the theoretical foundation of liberalism. The Englishman John Locke (1632-1704) first put forward the idea of ​​separation of powers and interpreted the role of the state as a contractual obligation to protect the natural and inalienable human rights to life, liberty and property. The Scotsman Adam Smith (1723-1790), “the father of economics,” showed, in particular, that the exchange of goods occurs if and only if it is beneficial to both parties. “In order to raise a state from the lowest level of barbarism to the highest level of prosperity, all that is needed is peace, light taxes and tolerance in government; the rest will be done by the natural course of things. All governments that forcibly direct events in a different way or try to stop the development of society are unnatural "To stay in power, they are forced to carry out oppression and tyranny."

The basic value of liberalism, as the name of this ideology suggests, is individual freedom. Spiritual freedom is the right to choose in religious matters, freedom of speech. Material freedom is the right to property, the right to buy and sell for one's own benefit. Political freedom is freedom in the literal sense of the word, subject to the observance of laws, freedom in the expression of political will. Individual rights and freedoms take precedence over the interests of society and the state.

Basic principles of liberalism

Liberalism (fr. libеralisme) is an ideology based on the fact that the rights and freedoms of the individual are the legal basis of the social and economic order. Liberal parties call for the introduction and protection of civil liberties. In liberalism, the fundamental right is considered to be the right to freely dispose of oneself and one’s property.

The ideal of liberalism is a society with freedom of action for everyone, the free exchange of politically relevant information, limited power of the state and church, the rule of law, private property and freedom of private enterprise. Liberalism rejected many of the principles that had been the basis of previous theories of the state, such as the divine right of the monarch and the role of religion as the only source of knowledge. The fundamental principles of liberalism include individual rights (to life, personal liberty and property); equal rights and universal equality before the law; free market economy; a government elected in fair elections; transparency of government power. The function of state power is reduced to the minimum necessary to ensure these principles. Modern liberalism also favors an open society based on pluralism and democratic governance, while protecting the rights of minorities and individual citizens.

Some modern movements of liberalism are more tolerant of government regulation of free markets in order to ensure equality of opportunity to achieve success, universal education and reducing income disparities. Proponents of these views believe that the political system should contain elements of the welfare state, including government unemployment benefits, homeless shelters and free health care.

In the political sphere, liberalism arose as a reaction to authoritarian regimes. Liberals sought to limit the rights of hereditary power, establish the institutions of parliamentary government, expand the circle of persons entitled to vote, and provide guarantees of civil liberties. These kinds of measures were seen both as the realization of political freedom and as a means of achieving the economic reforms that liberals insisted on. IN economic field liberalism was a reaction to government intervention in resolving economic issues. Liberals advocated free competition within the country and free trade between different countries . From their point of view, private enterprise, operating in the market according to the principle of competition, is a direct expression of fundamental economic freedoms and a source of political freedom. In the view of liberals, free trade between different countries serves as a means of resolving conflicts and preventing possible military clashes. Within a single country, individuals pursuing their own interests in a competitive environment indirectly contribute to the realization of the interests of the entire country as a whole. Likewise, in relations between different countries, individuals pursuing their own interests in free trade indirectly contribute to the realization of the interests of the entire world community as a whole. When everyone has equal opportunities and rights of access to goods, services and resources, free trade helps unite the countries of the world into a single economic community. The word “liberalism” acquired a completely different meaning in the 20th century, especially in the USA. This distinction has little bearing on the specific political forms of social order proposed by old and new liberals: both advocate a system of representative government, near-universal adult voting, and civil liberties. However, in any particular case, when it is necessary to choose between centralization and decentralization of political responsibility, 19th century liberals. would begin to support local self-government as opposed to the authorities in the center. Liberals of the 20th century. usually support decision-making by the central government, justifying this mainly by the fact that in this way much more “good for the people” can be done. Differences between 19th century liberalism. and liberalism of the 20th century. takes on much more drastic forms in the economic sphere. Early liberals advocated private enterprise and a minimal degree of government intervention. Today's liberals have less faith in the market and advocate the broadest government intervention in economic activity. Liberals of the 19th century. believed that in order to achieve “individualistic” goals, “individualistic” means are required; liberals of the 20th century sometimes they propose means to achieve individualistic goals that are completely “collectivist” in nature. In addition, the understanding of “individualistic goals” has changed; now they are mainly reduced to achieving well-being. Political and economic liberalism come from the same philosophy. At the same time, everyone often went their own way. During the 19th century. many countries have taken the path of liberalism. However, borrowing its elements, they continued to support authoritarian political forms of social order. Prime examples include Russia and Japan. In the 20th century countries that introduced most liberal political institutions subsequently began to move towards collectivist economies. Great Britain can be taken as an example: it is obvious that during the first half of the 20th century. the economy of this country was increasingly controlled by the state. Similar trends were observed in Norway and Sweden. As already noted, liberal thinkers of the 19th century. considered political reforms to be largely a means of achieving economic freedom. Traditional political institutions ensured the concentration of political power in the hands of social groups whose interests did not include support for liberal projects, such as free trade.

Social liberalism

Social liberalism is a type of liberalism that advocates (unlike neoliberalism) government intervention in economic processes. Borders on social democracy.

Ideology

In contrast to classical liberalism, which viewed the market as a self-regulating category and had a negative attitude towards the possibility of regulating economic and social relations, social liberals believe that in order to put into practice the main principle of liberalism - ensuring the individual’s right to self-determination and self-realization - it is not always enough only his own efforts. Equalizing starting opportunities is impossible without the participation of the state, and it is the state that must ensure the redistribution of part of the social product in favor of socially weak members of society, providing them with support and thereby contributing to the harmonization of social relations and strengthening social and political stability. However, unlike various varieties of socialist ideology, social liberals are committed to the capitalist type of economy.

According to social liberals, the state is obliged to intervene in economic processes in order to combat monopolism and maintain a competitive market environment. Society must have legal grounds, if income does not correspond to a person’s contribution to the common good, to withdraw part of this income through taxes and redistribute it to social needs. Improving the living conditions of the poorest sections of society will contribute to the growth of the domestic market and economic growth.

The use of these approaches, according to social liberals, should soften conflicts in society and gradually transform “capitalism of the era of free competition” into a society with a “social economy” based on private property and regulated market relations.

Social liberalism emerged at the end of the 19th century in many developed countries ah under the influence of utilitarianism. Some liberals adopted, in part or in whole, Marxism and the socialist theory of exploitation and came to the conclusion that the state should use its power to restore social justice. Thinkers such as John Dewey and Mortimer Adler explained that all individuals, as the foundation of society, must have access to basic needs such as education, economic opportunity, and protection from harmful large-scale events beyond their control to realize their abilities. Such positive rights, which are granted by society, are qualitatively different from classical negative rights, the enforcement of which requires non-interference from others. Proponents of social liberalism argue that without a guarantee of positive rights, the fair implementation of negative rights is impossible, since in practice the low-income population sacrifices their rights for the sake of survival, and the courts are more often inclined in favor of the rich. Social liberalism supports the introduction of some restrictions on economic competition. He also expects the government to provide social protection to the population (at the expense of taxes) in order to create conditions for the development of all talented people, to prevent social riots and simply “for the common good.”

There is a fundamental contradiction between economic and social liberalism. Economic liberals believe that positive rights inevitably violate negative ones and are therefore unacceptable. They see the function of the state as limited mainly to issues of law, security and defense. From their point of view, these functions already require a strong centralized state power. On the contrary, social liberals believe that the main task of the state is social protection and ensuring social stability: providing food and housing to those in need, healthcare, school education, pensions, care for children, the disabled and the elderly, assistance to victims of natural disasters, protection of minorities, prevention crime, support for science and art. This approach makes it impossible to impose large-scale restrictions on the government. Despite the unity of the ultimate goal - personal freedom - economic and social liberalism fundamentally diverge in the means to achieve it. Right-wing and conservative movements often tend to favor economic liberalism while opposing cultural liberalism. Leftist movements tend to emphasize cultural and social liberalism.

Some researchers point out that the opposition between “positive” and “negative” rights is in fact imaginary, since ensuring “negative” rights actually also requires public costs (for example, maintaining courts to protect property).

Initially, liberalism was based on the idea that all rights should be in the hands of individuals and legal entities, and the state should exist solely to protect these rights (classical liberalism). Modern liberalism has significantly expanded the scope of the classical interpretation and includes many currents, between which there are deep contradictions and sometimes conflicts arise. These trends are reflected, in particular, in such a key document as the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. Modern liberalism in most developed countries is a mixture of all these forms. In third world countries, “third generation liberalism”—the movement for a healthy environment and against colonialism—often comes to the fore.

According to liberals, government exists for the benefit of the people subject to it, and the political leadership of the country must be carried out on the basis of the consent of the majority.

Liberal politics defends the will of each individual. After all, it is the latter in this case that is considered to have the highest value. Laws are established as a fair basis for economics and order among people. The constitution plays an important role, within the framework of the rules of which the state and church have the right to influence social processes.

Main features and features

Liberal ideology is characterized by:

• equality of all citizens and the chance to influence political processes;
• the opportunity to speak freely in public, decide on religion, vote honestly for a particular candidate in elections;
• inviolable private property, trade and entrepreneurship are unlimited;
• the law is supreme;
• citizens are equal, influence, wealth and position do not matter.

Wide dissemination of ideas

Liberal ideology is very popular these days. IN modern world freedom plays a very important role. Attention is paid to the sense of personal dignity and the universal rights of people. A person's privacy and private property must be inviolable. The market must remain free, religious choice must be tolerated.

When liberal democratic ideology reigns, the state is legal, the government is transparent, the power of the people is higher than the rulers. good ruling force is considered to be the one that expresses the opinions of the people, is regulated and controlled by them. Not only does the head of the country rule over man, but man also rules over his own land.

A state with a liberal ideology has those common features that are now observed in Finland, Estonia, Cyprus, Uruguay, Spain, Slovenia, Canada and Taiwan. Here the values ​​of will and freedom are given the dominant role. It is on their foundation that the country’s new goals are built.

Different features in individual territories

North America and Western Europe They differ in that the political currents there are in solidarity with the movement for people's power. The liberal ideology of the “right” representatives is more inclined to classical views about order in the state.

The influence of conservatives, who are inclined towards established models and schemes, is clearly visible here. Social and cultural progress, which can shake established moral norms, is alien to them.

There used to be rivalry between traditionalists and freedom fighters, but when the Second World War ended World War, authoritarianism was discredited. The leading role was given to moderate movements, whose ideas were expressed in the desire for softer regimes of conservatism and Christian democracy.

The second half of the 20th century was marked by the fact that liberal ideology suffered from an ingrained desire to preserve private property and privatization. Old customs had to be adjusted.

In the United States of America, the values ​​of liberal ideology reached the people through socialists, as well as through the “left” currents of this political trend. Western Europe is characterized by differences in the actions of its public organizations. The “left” there pursues social policies in the struggle for the freedoms of the people.

The Liberal Party in Europe promotes non-interference in personal affairs and business. Such actions can only be carried out when the freedoms and property of some citizens must be protected from others.

Support is provided for cultural and economic trends in which liberal ideology moves. Social orientation is not supported. When seeking to implement the rule of law, it is required that the government has sufficient strength. Some people are of the opinion that private and public organizations are sufficient to ensure order. Armed movements are considered the most recent and unacceptable way to solve problems in the event of military aggression.

Differences in directions

When economic interests are respected, the liberal party can isolate itself into separate movements. Economic schemes of work that do not affect politics are considered. The state must ensure maximum freedom for the development of business and trade, without interfering with this process.

Only moderate regulation of the monetary system can be carried out, and the international market is accessible. Obstruction of foreign economic activity is not carried out by the authorities. On the contrary, any initiative is encouraged. The privatization procedure is being carried out. Margaret Thatcher set an example of such management by carrying out a number of reforms in Great Britain.

The effect of putting ideas into practice

Nowadays, liberals can be classified as centrist movements or social democratic ones. In Scandinavia, such management models are very popular. There were economic downturns, which made the issues of protecting society particularly acute. The population suffered from unemployment, inflation and poor pensions.

The Social Democrats increased taxation, and the state sector played a large role in the economy. For a long time"right" and "left" political forces fought for rule.

Thanks to this, effective laws have emerged, the government has become transparent, and now it is engaged in protecting civil rights human and property of business entities.

Nowadays in Scandinavia the state does not regulate pricing policy. Banks are run by private companies. Trading is open to everyone who wishes to participate in fair competition in both local and international markets. A liberal democratic system of politics was implemented. The level of social protection has become extremely high. Other European countries are characterized by similar processes. There, social democracy is mixed with liberal government policies.

Proclamation of rights and freedoms

The main goals of liberal movements are to strengthen democratic views that give freedom to the people. The state must take as its basis the right to ensure an independent judicial system. The transparency of the work of governing structures must be monitored. Civil rights should be protected and there should be room for competition.

It is very important to understand when we're talking about about this or that party, whether it belongs to the social liberals, libertarians or the right sector.

Society also promotes the ideas of equality and freedom in a variety of ways. Some support free choice of sexual life, the right to sell drugs and weapons, and expand the powers of private security organizations, to which some of the powers of the police may be transferred.

In terms of the economy, a stable income tax or its change to a per capita tax is supported. They are trying to privatize educational institutions, the procedure for providing pensioners, health care. They want to make science associated with self-sustaining sponsorship. A number of states are characterized by the fact that the liberal party seeks to abandon the death sentence, disarm troops, reject the development of nuclear weapons, and take care of the environment.

Unity of nations

The debate around multiculturalism is becoming increasingly heated. Ethnic minorities should share those values ​​of the people that are considered fundamental. The majority of the population, having the same roots, must protect the rights of small communities. There is also an opinion that there must be rapid integration between minorities in order to keep the nation intact.

Organizations and associations

Since 1947, the Mont Pelerin Society has been working to unite economic, entrepreneurial, philosophical minds, and journalists to support the ideals preached by the classical struggle for freedom.

In our time, this policy is promoted by the Liberal International, which unites 19 organizations based on the Oxford Manifesto. As of 2015, the formation has 100 members, including the Free Democratic Party of Germany, Yabloko in Russia and so on.