Social liberalism: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Social liberalism differs from [[libertarianism]] and its species ([[minarchism]], [[anarcho-capitalism]]) as to the size of government is allowable. |
Social liberalism differs from [[libertarianism]] and its species ([[minarchism]], [[anarcho-capitalism]]) as to the size of government is allowable. |
||
Social liberalism is a somewhat loose concept, whereby the small differences between its proponents cannot meaningfully be grouped into wings or camps. Some social-liberals emphasize financial aid to poorer (e.g as [[unemployment benefit]]s or [[negative income tax] or basic [[stipend]] or [[citizen salary]]). Some social-liberals in existing welfare states (such as Scandinavia) are ready to allow the local government to continue to produce health services and basic education. Most social-liberals tend to think that it is enough that the |
Social liberalism is a somewhat loose concept, whereby the small differences between its proponents cannot meaningfully be grouped into wings or camps. Some social-liberals emphasize financial aid to poorer (e.g as [[unemployment benefit]]s or [[negative income tax]] or basic [[stipend]] or [[citizen salary]]). Some social-liberals in existing welfare states (such as Scandinavia) are ready to allow the local government to continue to produce health services and basic education. Most social-liberals tend to think that it is enough that the government guarantees health services and basic education to everyone, but production of such should be entirely or partially privatized. Most social liberals believe that benefits from the social security shall be financed from taxes, whereas perks must be purchased by private insurances. In order to provide fuller choice for individuals, they may support vouchers in utilization of government-paid benefits (education, senior care). |
||
Intellectual foundation for models of welfare society (which in its extreme may exist as a full welfare state) and public services is the Rawls [[Theory of Justice]] ([[John Rawls]]). |
Intellectual foundation for models of welfare society (which in its extreme may exist as a full welfare state) and public services is the Rawls [[Theory of Justice]] ([[John Rawls]]). |
||
Revision as of 01:52, 1 July 2004
Social Liberalism is situated between social democracy and minarchism, stemming from classical liberalism. According to social-liberalism, the society has no right to moralize its citizens, but the society has tasks to guarantee equal opportunities for each of its citizens.
Social liberalism in political economy argues for some state regulation and partial intervention in a capitalist economy. It may serve as an intellectual foundation for political liberalism, liberal democracy, and social-democracy.
In Europe and the United States, in the end of the 19th century and the early 20th century, governments started to intervene significantly in the economy; this trend gathered momentum after World War I, and became dominant after the Great Depression of the 1930s. People like L.T. Hobhouse theorized why and how a government could intervene in the economy without the country becoming a socialist planned economy. They took the name of new liberals, to signify how they endorsed the evolving tradition of political liberalism, while rejecting the radical element from the classical liberal school of economic thought as well as the then-revolutionary elements from the socialist school.
Social-liberals believe that while individual freedom should be strictly guaranteed, classical free-market liberalism had often failed to protect the basic rights of citizens, and that responsible government is the solution to many social and societal problems. Social-liberals think of their stance as a pragmatic midway between social democracy and classical liberalism.
Social liberals tend to be scandalized by the positions of "neoliberals".
Social liberalism differs from libertarianism and its species (minarchism, anarcho-capitalism) as to the size of government is allowable.
Social liberalism is a somewhat loose concept, whereby the small differences between its proponents cannot meaningfully be grouped into wings or camps. Some social-liberals emphasize financial aid to poorer (e.g as unemployment benefits or negative income tax or basic stipend or citizen salary). Some social-liberals in existing welfare states (such as Scandinavia) are ready to allow the local government to continue to produce health services and basic education. Most social-liberals tend to think that it is enough that the government guarantees health services and basic education to everyone, but production of such should be entirely or partially privatized. Most social liberals believe that benefits from the social security shall be financed from taxes, whereas perks must be purchased by private insurances. In order to provide fuller choice for individuals, they may support vouchers in utilization of government-paid benefits (education, senior care).
Intellectual foundation for models of welfare society (which in its extreme may exist as a full welfare state) and public services is the Rawls Theory of Justice (John Rawls).
In today´s political map:
- In the USA, social liberals may belong to Libertarian Party (its left wing) or to the Democratic Party.
- In Great Britain, social liberals may be situated in the right wing of the Liberal Democrat Party.
- In Finland, the Finnish Social Liberal Association (Suomen Sosiaaliliberaalinen Yhdistys) is ideological organization that improves and promotes social liberalism in Finland. An earlier parliamentary party, Liberaalinen Kansanpuolue, represented social liberalism.
- Flemish in Belgium: Spirit
- The Netherlands: Democraten 66
- Denmark: Det Radikale Venstre
- Sweden: Folkpartiet
- Slovenia: Liberalna demokracija Slovenije
Human of Social Liberalism
The basic difference between social liberalism and social democracy is in picture of human nature and in values. Social democracy stems literally from democracy, from community-based view. Social democrats believe in moral right of majority to regulate everyone and everything. Social liberals see democracy and parliamentarism only as a political system - which must deserve its reliance. Democracy is not the highest value to social liberals. Social liberals set liberty, individuals and private property in highest priority. Social liberals want to trust in human beings: individuals are capable in deciding their own affairs and do not need steering towards happiness. Social democrats believe in control and often they want (or subconsciously do) steer deviating people towards average behavior. Representative democracy serves greatly the execution of social democrat view of society and human beings.