• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

"At the heart of liberalism is a fear of unchecked power."

Extracts from this document...


"At the heart of liberalism is a fear of unchecked power." "An illiberal tendency of our new government is the move towards government by regulation. Our government is determined to draft legislation which imbues the relevant minister with wide and unchecked powers to make regulations which have the force of law. In practice, this amounts to government by executive decree. We know this odious creature well, as a particular favourite of the old National Party. The ANC are not na�ve to the fact that delegated legislation removes the scrutiny of Parliament and opposition parties from the law-making process." Tony Leon, South African liberal A simple definition of power could be the ability both to demand that people do something, and to say how a thing should be done or organised. Authority, however, is where power is granted by consent; and when an individual or committee is said to have authority, the reason that justifies this authority is known as legitimacy. In general, the government has authority because it has legitimacy through: tradition, as Parliament has existed for hundreds of years; charisma, as many people may follow present PM Tony Blair through the strength and attraction of his personality; and democratically through the people, as they vote in elections for the MP or party they wish to form the government. ...read more.


They saw democracy as applying majority rule and forcing the will of the majority on all individuals if they wanted it or not, liberals believed minority rights and individual liberty would be crushed in the name of the people. Nineteenth century liberals saw democracy as the Ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle did, a system of rule by the masses at the expense of wisdom and property. All of this gives this appearance of a fear of unchecked power being at the heart of classical liberalism, a fear that democracy if given too much free reign could crush the rights of individuals. Other classical liberal arguments including those for social Darwinism and beliefs on social equality support this. Classical liberals believe so firmly in laissez-faire economics and that humans were self-reliant that the state should not attempt to look after the few who were too weak to look after themselves. They believed giving even this much power to the state would be detrimental to their lives, as it would take their money in tax to look after these people who they believed deserved what they had in life as they had earned it. It is easy to conclude that at the heart of classical liberalism certainly lays a fear of unchecked power and that classical liberalism as an ideology is about combating that power and making certain it can not have any influence of individual rights and freedoms. ...read more.


At the heart of modern liberalism would seem to be a belief that the state should help individuals help themselves to become the best they can and give equal opportunity to all rather than help no one for fear of the state becoming all powerful. So is the statement of unchecked individualism being the fear at the very heart of liberal ideals? The classical liberals seem to have a much harsher stance on this, due to the specifics of their ideologies, and the fact that their strict belief in individual success. The Modern liberals have a much more relaxed view on this, as they appreciate that sometimes it is essential to some individuals rising to the level of their full potential. To say that the statement it then only true of one of the two factions of liberalism though would be wrong, as it is still an important factor in the way Modern liberals think. Overall I think it is possible to class both as having differing fears for, and in turn it is possible to conclude that in that case, liberalism does have a degree of fear for unchecked power at its heart, just to varying degrees depending on the different beliefs of liberals. Modern liberals do fear unchecked power but not to the overriding extent that classical liberals do. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Political Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Political Philosophy essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Analyse the similarities and differences between Classical and Modern Liberalism

    4 star(s)

    Modern Liberal's on the other hand argue for some measure of social equality. John Rawls argued in 1970; "economic equality is only justified if it works to the benefit of the poorest in society". Social liberals, who are the equivalent of Modern liberals, conclude that a just society is one

  2. Analyse The Main Features of Classical Liberalism

    Paine is often seen as the father of modern liberalism. Natural rights theories were not the only basis of early liberalism. An alternative and highly influential theory of human was put forward in the early nineteenth century by the utilitarian's, notably Jeremy Bentham and James Mill.

  1. To what extent is Liberalism compatiable with democracy?

    A third argument is that one definition of democracy is rule by the people which is an important belief of liberals who encourage political participation. There is a civic responsibility to educate individuals their rights and obligations. This therefore leads to individual self-development (positive freedom)

  2. Is Liberalism compatible with democracy?

    Rousseau saw democracy as being fundamentally majority rule. In Rousseau's view even if 99% of the people supported one course of action, it would not necessarily be for the common benefit if it were simply the sum of the self-interested motives of the individuals who formed the majority.

  1. Political Power

    However they can actually block a certain kind of issue to be discussed by disregarding it or make an agreement not to raise the issue. It is difficult to quantify the concept of power from this approach nonetheless not impossible.

  2. Explain why the Liberals were electorally so successful so often, 1868-85?

    1880 was a Liberal landslide with 353 seats gained to the Tories 238.18 How much the result was due to the popularity of Liberal policies themselves is arguable, however no one disputes that the state of the economy was probably the prevailing factor that allowed Gladstone to play on the insecurities of the masses.

  1. America Liberalism

    Peter's gates. Unlike the ideas of Catholicism, the Puritans did not believe that just anyone could go to heaven; they did not believe that the more virtuous a life you lead - the better chance you'd have at getting into heaven (The Puritan Millennium).

  2. T difficult for export orientated economics to sustain the land owning elites much longer. ...

    populism of Peron to grow much greater than that of Vargas, both internally and externally. (Wynia 1999). Like Peron, Vargas in 1943 introduced a series of social and welfare reforms such as social security, minimum labour standards, even paid vacations and retirement for urban workers.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work