However the second form is the unchecked power of the state, liberals see the state as a night watchman figure that intervenes in disputes between individuals. They would not like to see it hold too much power. The state is important though as is shown by Hobbes and Locke in the social contract. They argued that rational individuals would enter into a social government with the state to establish a sovereign government, without which stable and orderly life would be impossible.
The main ideas of liberalism would be under threat by unchecked power. How would the individual be sovereign in a society with unchecked power? It would be impossible for an individual to flourish in this situation. How could the individual be at the heart of the moral universe if one was wielding more power than they should? Being able to threaten other individuals. The idea of universalism that everyone is born of equal morale worth would mean nothing in the face of unchecked power. Would everyone’s opinion really matter if some are more important than others? The idea that all humans are rational would also be under threat. The ability to develop rational ideas would not grow under a system where power is abused. Would we retain the ability to remain tolerant in this situation? The idea of justice and equality of opportunity would also suffer. The main theme of this is that all these doctrines of liberal ideology rely on a certain aspect of freedom for the individual that unchecked power would infringe on. These central ideas are designed in a way to empower the individual but they can only do that if these ideas themselves are protected.
Although liberals are convinced of the need for a government, they are also aware of the dangers that it embodies. It poses a significant threat to individual liberty. They threaten tyranny against the individual. “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”, Lord Acton. Liberals have thus favoured there being limits to the power of constitutional governments in the form of written constitutions and the existence of principles such as the rule of law ( AV Dicey) and the separation of powers (Montesquieu).
Liberals saw democracy as threatening and even dangerous. The central concern has been that democracy can be an enemy of liberty. This arises from the fact that the people are not a single entity but rather a collection of individuals and groups, possessing different opinions and opposing interests. The democratic solution to conflict is that the majority should prevail. This could mean tyranny of the majority, this could lead to unchecked power which is what the liberals want to avoid. The best defence against this is a system of checks and balances. Liberals also fear democracy because they believe that political wisdom is not evenly balanced. The educated are able to use their wisdom and experience for the good of others. This means that a representative system where the elected politicians are of an educated background would have been the most favoured. That is why John Stuart Mill suggested that the educated should have more votes than those less so.
The system of checks and balances includes a bi-cameral parliament. Where the House of Lords can moderate the House of Commons, this ties in with JS Mill’s comments about the more educated because the House of Commons represents the majority. Also the idea of pluralism is important to liberal ideology. More pluralism in a liberal democracy can only be a good thing. Pressure groups can add to the pluralism by challenging powerful government and reducing the democratic deficit.
Liberalism as an ideology encapsulates individual freedom and, although it recognizes the need for a certain amount of intervention to protect that freedom, it must be concerned with what unchecked power can do.
