Unit 1.2 – Core Political Ideas
Essay Plans
Liberalism
To what extent do modern and classical liberals agree over the role of the
state? (24)
Introduction
Although it can be argued there are significant areas of agreement when
it comes to liberals and the state. EXAMPLE; LIMITED GOV, MECHANISM,
SOCIAL CONTRACT. The differences between the two are significantly
dominant that they outweigh the comparative argument.
Paragraph 1: How is the state run?
Thesis- Classical and modern liberals disagree to a great extent in
relation to how the state should be run. EVIDENCE; CLASSIC LIBERALS
MINIMAL STATE DUE TO VIEW OF NEGATIVE FREEDOM (ABSENCE OF
EXTERNAL CONSTRAINTS) LINK TO J.S MILL HARM PRINCIPLE. MODERN
LIBERALS ENABLING STATE.
Antithesis- However, some may argue that they agree because they
share the same basis views on the position of the state. EVIDENCE; JOHN
LOCKE LIMITED GOVERNMENT, LIMITED AS IT IS NECESSARY EVIL-
NECESSARY TO GUARENTEE FREEDOM- MILL
Synthesis- On balance however, they should be seen to disagree as in
practice they are very different.
Paragraph 2: The state controlling the economy
Thesis- Additionally, Classical and modern liberals disagree to a great
extent on the role of the state in relation to how the economy is
controlled. EVIDENCE; CLASSICAL LIBERALS AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE
CAPITALISM, MODERN LIBERALS BELIEVE CAPITALISM NEEDS RESTRAINT,
STARTED KEYNESIANISM.
Antithesis- However, some might argue that modern and classical
liberals agree on the role of the state as both parties agree on free
market capitalism working.
Synthesis- On balance, they should be seen to disagree due to their
views on how capitalism as a system should or should not be managed.
Conclusion
In conclusion it is fair to say that whilst there are some areas of
agreement such as those on limited government and the use of
capitalism in the economy, however, classic and modern liberals
, disagree on such a wide basis that it outweighs a general agreement on
the state.
To what extent to liberals believe in equality (24)
Introduction
Equality can be defined as a fair or fairer society without unfair
disadvantages. All liberals generally agree that individuals are born
equal, should be equal in the eyes of the law and should also receive
equality of opportunity. However, it must be acknowledged there are
areas of disagreement between the two.
Paragraph 1: Types of equality
Thesis: The credentials of liberalism are based upon a strong belief in
foundational and formal equality. Liberals believe that people are ‘born’
equal in the sense that they are of equal moral worth. Foundational
equality implies a belief in formal equality, the idea that individuals
should enjoy the same formal status in society, particularly in terms of
the distribution of rights and entitlements.
Antithesis: However, some may argue that liberals are fragmented in
relation to equality of opportunity. For classical liberals, they see
equality of opportunity as a chance for the unfettered individual to sink
or swim. Moreover, modern liberals see equality of opportunity in that
the state must step in to create a meritocracy or level playing field,
thereby linking equality of opportunity to a greater measure of equality
of outcome. RAWLS; SOCIAL INEQUALITY ONLY JUSTIFIED IF TO THE
ADVANTAGE OF THE LEAST WELL OFF.
Paragraph 2: Role of the state in equality
Ideas of classical liberalism suggest tension between liberalism and
equality. EXAMPLE, BELIEF IN INDIVIDUALISM- HUMANS ARE SELF
INTERESTED LINKING TO ATOMISTIC INDIVIDUALISM WHERE
INDIVIDUAL IS SELF CONTAINED- LEADS TO INEQUALITY AS IF SELF
RELIANT THERE IS NO NEED FOR JUSTIFICATION FOR STATE
INTERVENTION. Moreover, modern liberals enjoy developmental
individualism, idea that individuals seek higher goals that accumulation
of wealth. LINKS TO ETHICAL INDIVIDUALISM SUGGESTS STATE SHOULD
PROVIDE THE CONDITIONS CONDUCTIVE TO ALL BEING ABLE TO BE
TRULY FULFILLED HELPING TO EXTEND EQUALITY.
Paragraph 3 : Freedom and equality
Classic liberals and negative freedom- indicates a society w/ no legal or
social restraints on the individual to exercise their liberty. Leads to
freedom of expression. J.S MILL HARM PRINCIPLE. Leads to inequality as
exercise of freedom could cause some may become poorer.
Essay Plans
Liberalism
To what extent do modern and classical liberals agree over the role of the
state? (24)
Introduction
Although it can be argued there are significant areas of agreement when
it comes to liberals and the state. EXAMPLE; LIMITED GOV, MECHANISM,
SOCIAL CONTRACT. The differences between the two are significantly
dominant that they outweigh the comparative argument.
Paragraph 1: How is the state run?
Thesis- Classical and modern liberals disagree to a great extent in
relation to how the state should be run. EVIDENCE; CLASSIC LIBERALS
MINIMAL STATE DUE TO VIEW OF NEGATIVE FREEDOM (ABSENCE OF
EXTERNAL CONSTRAINTS) LINK TO J.S MILL HARM PRINCIPLE. MODERN
LIBERALS ENABLING STATE.
Antithesis- However, some may argue that they agree because they
share the same basis views on the position of the state. EVIDENCE; JOHN
LOCKE LIMITED GOVERNMENT, LIMITED AS IT IS NECESSARY EVIL-
NECESSARY TO GUARENTEE FREEDOM- MILL
Synthesis- On balance however, they should be seen to disagree as in
practice they are very different.
Paragraph 2: The state controlling the economy
Thesis- Additionally, Classical and modern liberals disagree to a great
extent on the role of the state in relation to how the economy is
controlled. EVIDENCE; CLASSICAL LIBERALS AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE
CAPITALISM, MODERN LIBERALS BELIEVE CAPITALISM NEEDS RESTRAINT,
STARTED KEYNESIANISM.
Antithesis- However, some might argue that modern and classical
liberals agree on the role of the state as both parties agree on free
market capitalism working.
Synthesis- On balance, they should be seen to disagree due to their
views on how capitalism as a system should or should not be managed.
Conclusion
In conclusion it is fair to say that whilst there are some areas of
agreement such as those on limited government and the use of
capitalism in the economy, however, classic and modern liberals
, disagree on such a wide basis that it outweighs a general agreement on
the state.
To what extent to liberals believe in equality (24)
Introduction
Equality can be defined as a fair or fairer society without unfair
disadvantages. All liberals generally agree that individuals are born
equal, should be equal in the eyes of the law and should also receive
equality of opportunity. However, it must be acknowledged there are
areas of disagreement between the two.
Paragraph 1: Types of equality
Thesis: The credentials of liberalism are based upon a strong belief in
foundational and formal equality. Liberals believe that people are ‘born’
equal in the sense that they are of equal moral worth. Foundational
equality implies a belief in formal equality, the idea that individuals
should enjoy the same formal status in society, particularly in terms of
the distribution of rights and entitlements.
Antithesis: However, some may argue that liberals are fragmented in
relation to equality of opportunity. For classical liberals, they see
equality of opportunity as a chance for the unfettered individual to sink
or swim. Moreover, modern liberals see equality of opportunity in that
the state must step in to create a meritocracy or level playing field,
thereby linking equality of opportunity to a greater measure of equality
of outcome. RAWLS; SOCIAL INEQUALITY ONLY JUSTIFIED IF TO THE
ADVANTAGE OF THE LEAST WELL OFF.
Paragraph 2: Role of the state in equality
Ideas of classical liberalism suggest tension between liberalism and
equality. EXAMPLE, BELIEF IN INDIVIDUALISM- HUMANS ARE SELF
INTERESTED LINKING TO ATOMISTIC INDIVIDUALISM WHERE
INDIVIDUAL IS SELF CONTAINED- LEADS TO INEQUALITY AS IF SELF
RELIANT THERE IS NO NEED FOR JUSTIFICATION FOR STATE
INTERVENTION. Moreover, modern liberals enjoy developmental
individualism, idea that individuals seek higher goals that accumulation
of wealth. LINKS TO ETHICAL INDIVIDUALISM SUGGESTS STATE SHOULD
PROVIDE THE CONDITIONS CONDUCTIVE TO ALL BEING ABLE TO BE
TRULY FULFILLED HELPING TO EXTEND EQUALITY.
Paragraph 3 : Freedom and equality
Classic liberals and negative freedom- indicates a society w/ no legal or
social restraints on the individual to exercise their liberty. Leads to
freedom of expression. J.S MILL HARM PRINCIPLE. Leads to inequality as
exercise of freedom could cause some may become poorer.
