In Britain, a populist Conservative government faces a Labour Party with a new, left-liberal leader, Keir Starmer. In France, Marine Le Pen remains a serious threat to Europe’s leading liberal renewer, Emmanuel Macron. In Hungary, the EU has an increasingly illiberal and undemocratic member state.
JK, MP, DM, and JL prepared the experiment and wrote the article. Participants were informed that there was no time limit for completing the questionnaire. After completion, the participant sealed his/her questionnaire in an envelope, which was opened after the evaluation of all the electrophysiological data (i.e., from all 100 individuals). It championed the idea that the government should intervene to help the poor.
- We used scores from 0 to 10 intentionally, in order to avoid an association between positive and negative values and L/C, especially during the self-assessment.
- In a liberal democracy it won’t do for one party, even if it consists entirely of the most impeccably liberal “big L” Liberals, to remain continuously in charge.
- Anglo-American law and culture in particular have, over time, become oriented to an anthropology of expressive individualism.
- The participant’s task was to respond to the frequent stimulus by pressing the button and to ignore the rarer stimulus .
It views autonomy and self-determination through the cultivation of the inner self as the highest good. Unchosen obligations and bonds of mutual loyalty are erased in favour of self-fulfilment and self-actualisation. On the left, this works through the social sphere, while on the right it applies to the economic sphere. Our results urge for other ERN experiments with sufficient power and controlling for age, socio-cultural context and L/C validation. Last but not least, we need a sea change of ethos—both among the rich and in attitudes towards the rich. In a lecture on “the problem of freedom,” delivered to the international PEN Congress in 1939, Thomas Mann spoke of the need for “a voluntary self-limitation, a social self-discipline of freedom.” Where has that social self-discipline been in recent years?
Recall that John Stuart Mill’s day job was in the East India Company and he thought that colonised peoples in their “nonage” were not ready for his refined liberties. Some of the worst horrors that human beings have inflicted on other human beings—violent conquest, torture, genocide, slavery—were justified by reference to the highest ideals of liberty, civilisation and enlightenment. Countries like Britain—and the English in particular—have done a remarkable job of forgetting this; the rest of the world has not. Much of what I have discussed thus far can be fitted under the broad rubric of “levelling up.” What about levelling down? Theoretically, a liberal might argue that if everyone has enough for an equal opportunity in life then there is no problem with a few people having much more than enough. Levelling up will be expensive and cannot be paid for without taking some more money from the super-rich, who have done exceptionally well out of globalisation, but also from the so-called “comfortably off,” that is, middle-class people like me.
The Challenge Of The Global
Yet even if one were to take the most selfish, narrow view of the agenda for a new liberalism—one that was exclusively about defending freedom inside currently free countries—it would fail if it did not address some very large issues beyond our borders. The two elections of 1910 were triggered by the Lords’ rejection of Lloyd George’s ‘People’s Budget’, which contained increases in income tax and excise duties, new taxes on cars, petrol and land, and a new supertax for those with incomes above £5,000. All these measures were designed to raise revenue for the social spending of the New Liberal programme, and also higher defence expenditure as the arms race with Germany gathered speed. Goaded by Lloyd George’s inflammatory speeches, in November 1909 the Lords voted the Finance Bill down, an eventuality that had not occurred for more than 250 years. The elections of January and December 1910 were therefore fought on the issue of the limitation of the Lords’ veto. Since both saw the Liberals returned to power , the King acceded to Asquith’s request to create, if required, enough new peers to overcome the Lords’ inbuilt Unionist majority.
There is, Mill tells us, “no necessity for a universal synthesis.” Indeed, the pursuit of maximalist, one-size-fits-all solutions was part of the rationalistic hubris of technocratic Liberalism over the last 30 years. It strayed too far from Karl Popper’s “piecemeal engineering.” For liberalism should never be a closed system but rather an open method, a combination of evidence-based realism and moral aspiration, always ready to learn from others’ and our own mistakes. China’s unprecedented Leninist-capitalist version of developmental authoritarianism is now a systemic rival to liberal democracy, just as fascist and communist regimes were for much of the 20th century. It offers developing societies in Asia, Africa and Latin America an alternative path to modernity.
Unreal Liberalism For An Unreal World
The individualism of Hobbes, Locke and their descendants is utilitarian, designed to maximise autonomy and choice through self-interest and security. Anglo-American law and culture in particular have, over time, become oriented to an anthropology of expressive individualism. Expressive individualism, enabled by the ever-expanding state, is the logical outcome of liberalism’s atomised conception of the individual.
The stimuli on the screen were viewed by the participant at a distance of 80 cm, and the Go and NoGo stimuli subtended 2.5°, and the fixation cross subtended 0.6°. The monitor was driven using ViSaGe MKII (Cambridge Research Systems Ltd., Rochester, UK). We used scores from 0 to 10 intentionally, in order to avoid an association between positive and negative values and L/C, especially during the self-assessment. Subsequently, we deducted five points from the reported values in order for the scale to correspond to the Am2007.
Liberal political theory has come under increased criticism in recent years for its supposed inability to sufficiently ‘accommodate’ or ‘recognise’ cultural difference. The thesis examines these claims and argues that liberalism is more resistant to criticism than many non-liberals believe. The thesis argues that liberalism is a necessarily ‘comprehensive’ doctrine, committed to the principle of individual autonomy and that this places constraints upon what groups can and cannot be allowed to do in the name of cultural values.