Liberalism
Part of a series on |
Liberalism |
---|
Part of the Politics series |
Party politics |
---|
Politics portal |
Liberalism is a
: 11Liberalism became a distinct
Leaders in the British
Liberals sought and established a constitutional order that prized important
Etymology and definition
Part of a series on |
Libertarianism |
---|
In the 16th-century
Over time, the meaning of liberalism began to diverge in different parts of the world. According to the
Philosophy
Liberalism—both as a political current and an intellectual tradition—is mostly a modern phenomenon that started in the 17th century, although some liberal philosophical ideas had precursors in
Major themes
Part of a series on |
Individualism |
---|
Although all liberal doctrines possess a common heritage, scholars frequently assume that those doctrines contain "separate and often contradictory streams of thought". Despite these variations, liberal thought does exhibit a few definite and fundamental conceptions.
Political philosopher
The liberal philosophical tradition has searched for validation and justification through several intellectual projects. The moral and political suppositions of liberalism have been based on traditions such as natural rights and utilitarian theory, although sometimes liberals even request support from scientific and religious circles.[47] Through all these strands and traditions, scholars have identified the following major common facets of liberal thought:
- believing in equality and individual liberty
- supporting private property and individual rights
- supporting the idea of limited constitutional government
- recognising the importance of related values such as pluralism, toleration, autonomy, bodily integrity, and consent[49]
Classical and modern
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes
Enlightenment philosophers are given credit for shaping liberal ideas. These ideas were first drawn together and systematized as a distinct ideology by the English philosopher John Locke, generally regarded as the father of modern liberalism.[50][51] Thomas Hobbes attempted to determine the purpose and the justification of governing authority in post-civil war England. Employing the idea of a state of nature — a hypothetical war-like scenario prior to the state — he constructed the idea of a social contract that individuals enter into to guarantee their security and, in so doing, form the State, concluding that only an absolute sovereign would be fully able to sustain such security. Hobbes had developed the concept of the social contract, according to which individuals in the anarchic and brutal state of nature came together and voluntarily ceded some of their rights to an established state authority, which would create laws to regulate social interactions to mitigate or mediate conflicts and enforce justice. Whereas Hobbes advocated a strong monarchical commonwealth (the Leviathan), Locke developed the then-radical notion that government acquires consent from the governed, which has to be constantly present for the government to remain legitimate.[52] While adopting Hobbes's idea of a state of nature and social contract, Locke nevertheless argued that when the monarch becomes a tyrant, it violates the social contract, which protects life, liberty and property as a natural right. He concluded that the people have a right to overthrow a tyrant. By placing the security of life, liberty and property as the supreme value of law and authority, Locke formulated the basis of liberalism based on social contract theory. To these early enlightenment thinkers, securing the essential amenities of life—liberty and private property—required forming a "sovereign" authority with universal jurisdiction.[53]
His influential Two Treatises (1690), the foundational text of liberal ideology, outlined his major ideas. Once humans moved out of their natural state and formed societies, Locke argued, "that which begins and actually constitutes any political society is nothing but the consent of any number of freemen capable of a majority to unite and incorporate into such a society. And this is that, and that only, which did or could give beginning to any lawful government in the world".[54]: 170 The stringent insistence that lawful government did not have a supernatural basis was a sharp break with the dominant theories of governance, which advocated the divine right of kings[55] and echoed the earlier thought of Aristotle. Dr John Zvesper described this new thinking: "In the liberal understanding, there are no citizens within the regime who can claim to rule by natural or supernatural right, without the consent of the governed".[56]
Locke had other intellectual opponents besides Hobbes. In the First Treatise, Locke aimed his arguments first and foremost at one of the doyens of 17th-century English conservative philosophy: Robert Filmer. Filmer's Patriarcha (1680) argued for the divine right of kings by appealing to biblical teaching, claiming that the authority granted to Adam by God gave successors of Adam in the male line of descent a right of dominion over all other humans and creatures in the world.[57] However, Locke disagreed so thoroughly and obsessively with Filmer that the First Treatise is almost a sentence-by-sentence refutation of Patriarcha. Reinforcing his respect for consensus, Locke argued that "conjugal society is made up by a voluntary compact between men and women".[58] Locke maintained that the grant of dominion in Genesis was not to men over women, as Filmer believed, but to humans over animals.[58] Locke was not a feminist by modern standards, but the first major liberal thinker in history accomplished an equally major task on the road to making the world more pluralistic: integrating women into social theory.[58]
Locke also originated the concept of the
- Earthly judges, the state in particular, and human beings generally, cannot dependably evaluate the truth claims of competing religious standpoints;
- Even if they could, enforcing a single "true religion" would not have the desired effect because belief cannot be compelled by violence;
- Coercing religious uniformity would lead to more social disorder than allowing diversity.[61]
Locke was also influenced by the liberal ideas of Presbyterian politician and poet
In a natural state of affairs, liberals argued, humans were driven by the instincts of survival and self-preservation, and the only way to escape from such a dangerous existence was to form a common and supreme power capable of arbitrating between competing human desires.[65] This power could be formed in the framework of a civil society that allows individuals to make a voluntary social contract with the sovereign authority, transferring their natural rights to that authority in return for the protection of life, liberty and property.[65] These early liberals often disagreed about the most appropriate form of government, but all believed that liberty was natural and its restriction needed strong justification.[65] Liberals generally believed in limited government, although several liberal philosophers decried government outright, with Thomas Paine writing, "government even in its best state is a necessary evil".[66]
James Madison and Montesquieu
As part of the project to limit the powers of government, liberal theorists such as
Beyond identifying a clear role for government in modern society, liberals have also argued over the meaning and nature of the most important principle in liberal philosophy: liberty. From the 17th century until the 19th century, liberals (from Adam Smith to John Stuart Mill) conceptualised liberty as the absence of interference from government and other individuals, claiming that all people should have the freedom to develop their unique abilities and capacities without being sabotaged by others.[70] Mill's On Liberty (1859), one of the classic texts in liberal philosophy, proclaimed, "the only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way".[70] Support for laissez-faire capitalism is often associated with this principle, with Friedrich Hayek arguing in The Road to Serfdom (1944) that reliance on free markets would preclude totalitarian control by the state.[71]
Coppet Group and Benjamin Constant
The development into maturity of modern classical in contrast to ancient liberalism took place before and soon after the French Revolution. One of the historic centres of this development was at
Among them was also one of the first thinkers to go by the name of "liberal", the
In contrast, the Liberty of the Moderns was based on the possession of civil liberties, the rule of law, and freedom from excessive state interference. Direct participation would be limited: a necessary consequence of the size of modern states and the inevitable result of creating a mercantile society where there were no slaves, but almost everybody had to earn a living through work. Instead, the voters would elect representatives who would deliberate in Parliament on the people's behalf and would save citizens from daily political involvement.[80] The importance of Constant's writings on the liberty of the ancients and that of the "moderns" has informed the understanding of liberalism, as has his critique of the French Revolution.[82] The British philosopher and historian of ideas, Sir Isaiah Berlin, has pointed to the debt owed to Constant.[83]
British liberalism
Liberalism in Britain was based on core concepts such as classical economics, free trade, laissez-faire government with minimal intervention and taxation and a balanced budget. Classical liberals were committed to individualism, liberty and equal rights. Writers such as John Bright and Richard Cobden opposed aristocratic privilege and property, which they saw as an impediment to developing a class of yeoman farmers.[84]
Beginning in the late 19th century, a new conception of liberty entered the liberal intellectual arena. This new kind of liberty became known as positive liberty to distinguish it from the prior negative version, and it was first developed by British philosopher T. H. Green. Green rejected the idea that humans were driven solely by self-interest, emphasising instead the complex circumstances involved in the evolution of our moral character.[85]: 54–55 In a very profound step for the future of modern liberalism, he also tasked society and political institutions with the enhancement of individual freedom and identity and the development of moral character, will and reason and the state to create the conditions that allow for the above, allowing genuine choice.[85]: 54–55 Foreshadowing the new liberty as the freedom to act rather than to avoid suffering from the acts of others, Green wrote the following:
If it were ever reasonable to wish that the usage of words had been other than it has been ... one might be inclined to wish that the term 'freedom' had been confined to the ... power to do what one wills.[86]
Rather than previous liberal conceptions viewing society as populated by selfish individuals, Green viewed society as an organic whole in which all individuals have a
Besides liberty, liberals have developed several other principles important to the construction of their philosophical structure, such as equality, pluralism and tolerance. Highlighting the confusion over the first principle, Voltaire commented, "equality is at once the most natural and at times the most chimeral of things".[88] All forms of liberalism assume in some basic sense that individuals are equal.[89] In maintaining that people are naturally equal, liberals assume they all possess the same right to liberty.[90] In other words, no one is inherently entitled to enjoy the benefits of liberal society more than anyone else, and all people are equal subjects before the law.[91] Beyond this basic conception, liberal theorists diverge in their understanding of equality. American philosopher John Rawls emphasised the need to ensure equality under the law and the equal distribution of material resources that individuals required to develop their aspirations in life.[91] Libertarian thinker Robert Nozick disagreed with Rawls, championing the former version of Lockean equality.[91]
To contribute to the development of liberty, liberals also have promoted concepts like pluralism and tolerance. By pluralism, liberals refer to the proliferation of opinions and beliefs that characterise a stable
Liberal economic theory
Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, followed by the French liberal economist Jean-Baptiste Say's treatise on Political Economy published in 1803 and expanded in 1830 with practical applications, were to provide most of the ideas of economics until the publication of John Stuart Mill's Principles in 1848.[95]: 63, 68 Smith addressed the motivation for economic activity, the causes of prices and wealth distribution, and the policies the state should follow to maximise wealth.[95]: 64
Smith wrote that as long as supply, demand, prices and competition were left free of government regulation, the pursuit of material self-interest, rather than altruism, maximises society's wealth[96] through profit-driven production of goods and services. An "invisible hand" directed individuals and firms to work toward the nation's good as an unintended consequence of efforts to maximise their gain. This provided a moral justification for accumulating wealth, which some had previously viewed as sinful.[95]: 64
Smith assumed that workers could be
In his Treatise (Traité d'économie politique), Say states that any production process requires effort, knowledge and the "application" of the entrepreneur. He sees entrepreneurs as intermediaries in the production process who combine productive factors such as land, capital and labour to meet the consumers' demands. As a result, they play a central role in the economy through their coordinating function. He also highlights qualities essential for successful entrepreneurship and focuses on judgement, in that they have continued to assess market needs and the means to meet them. This requires an "unerring market sense". Say views entrepreneurial income primarily as the high revenue paid in compensation for their skills and expert knowledge. He does so by contrasting the enterprise and supply-of-capital functions, distinguishing the entrepreneur's earnings on the one hand and the remuneration of capital on the other. This differentiates his theory from that of Joseph Schumpeter, who describes entrepreneurial rent as short-term profits which compensate for high risk (Schumpeterian rent). Say himself also refers to risk and uncertainty along with innovation without analysing them in detail.
Say is also credited with Say's law, or the law of markets which may be summarised as "Aggregate supply creates its own aggregate demand", and "Supply creates its own demand", or "Supply constitutes its own demand" and "Inherent in supply is the need for its own consumption". The related phrase "supply creates its own demand" was coined by John Maynard Keynes, who criticized Say's separate formulations as amounting to the same thing. Some advocates of Say's law who disagree with Keynes have claimed that Say's law can be summarized more accurately as "production precedes consumption" and that what Say is stating is that for consumption to happen, one must produce something of value so that it can be traded for money or barter for consumption later.[98][99] Say argues, "products are paid for with products" (1803, p. 153) or "a glut occurs only when too much resource is applied to making one product and not enough to another" (1803, pp. 178–179).[100]
Related reasoning appears in the work of John Stuart Mill and earlier in that of his Scottish classical economist father, James Mill (1808). Mill senior restates Say's law in 1808: "production of commodities creates, and is the one and universal cause which creates a market for the commodities produced".[101]
In addition to Smith's and Say's legacies,
Several liberals, including Adam Smith and Richard Cobden, argued that the free exchange of goods between nations would lead to world peace.[102] Smith argued that as societies progressed, the spoils of war would rise, but the costs of war would rise further, making war difficult and costly for industrialised nations.[103] Cobden believed that military expenditures worsened the state's welfare and benefited a small but concentrated elite minority, combining his Little Englander beliefs with opposition to the economic restrictions of mercantilist policies. To Cobden and many classical liberals, those who advocated peace must also advocate free markets.[104]
Keynesian economics
During the
Keynes's
Liberal feminist theory
Liberal feminism, the dominant tradition in feminist history, is an individualistic form of feminist theory that focuses on women's ability to maintain their equality through their actions and choices. Liberal feminists hope to eradicate all barriers to gender equality, claiming that the continued existence of such barriers eviscerates the individual rights and freedoms ostensibly guaranteed by a liberal social order.[112] They argue that society believes women are naturally less intellectually and physically capable than men; thus, it tends to discriminate against women in the academy, the forum and the marketplace. Liberal feminists believe that "female subordination is rooted in a set of customary and legal constraints that blocks women's entrance to and success in the so-called public world". They strive for sexual equality via political and legal reform.[113]
British philosopher Mary Wollstonecraft (1759–1797) is widely regarded as the pioneer of liberal feminism, with A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) expanding the boundaries of liberalism to include women in the political structure of liberal society.[114] In her writings, such as A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Wollstonecraft commented on society's view of women and encouraged women to use their voices in making decisions separate from those previously made for them. Wollstonecraft "denied that women are, by nature, more pleasure seeking and pleasure giving than men. She reasoned that if they were confined to the same cages that trap women, men would develop the same flawed characters. What Wollstonecraft most wanted for women was personhood".[113]
John Stuart Mill was also an early proponent of feminism. In his article The Subjection of Women (1861, published 1869), Mill attempted to prove that the legal subjugation of women is wrong and that it should give way to perfect equality.[115][116] He believed that both sexes should have equal rights under the law and that "until conditions of equality exist, no one can possibly assess the natural differences between women and men, distorted as they have been. What is natural to the two sexes can only be found out by allowing both to develop and use their faculties freely".[117] Mill frequently spoke of this imbalance and wondered if women were able to feel the same "genuine unselfishness" that men did in providing for their families. This unselfishness Mill advocated is the one "that motivates people to take into account the good of society as well as the good of the individual person or small family unit".[113] Like Mary Wollstonecraft, Mill compared sexual inequality to slavery, arguing that their husbands are often just as abusive as masters and that a human being controls nearly every aspect of life for another human being. In his book The Subjection of Women, Mill argues that three major parts of women's lives are hindering them: society and gender construction, education and marriage.[118]
Social liberal theory
New liberals began to adapt the old language of liberalism to confront these difficult circumstances, which they believed could only be resolved through a broader and more interventionist conception of the state. An equal right to liberty could not be established merely by ensuring that individuals did not physically interfere with each other or by having impartially formulated and applied laws. More positive and proactive measures were required to ensure that every individual would have an equal opportunity for success.[127]
His definition of liberty, influenced by Joseph Priestley and Josiah Warren, was that the individual ought to be free to do as he wishes unless he harms others.[130] However, although Mill's initial economic philosophy supported free markets and argued that progressive taxation penalised those who worked harder,[131] he later altered his views toward a more socialist bent, adding chapters to his Principles of Political Economy in defence of a socialist outlook and defending some socialist causes,[132] including the radical proposal that the whole wage system be abolished in favour of a co-operative wage system.
Another early liberal convert to greater government intervention was T. H. Green. Seeing the effects of alcohol, he believed that the state should foster and protect the social, political and economic environments in which individuals will have the best chance of acting according to their consciences. The state should intervene only where there is a clear, proven and strong tendency of liberty to enslave the individual.[133] Green regarded the national state as legitimate only to the extent that it upholds a system of rights and obligations most likely to foster individual self-realisation.
The New Liberalism or social liberalism movement emerged in about 1900 in Britain.
Principles that can be described as social liberal have been based upon or developed by philosophers such as John Stuart Mill, Eduard Bernstein, John Dewey, Carlo Rosselli, Norberto Bobbio and Chantal Mouffe.[138] Other important social liberal figures include Guido Calogero, Piero Gobetti, Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse and R. H. Tawney.[139] Liberal socialism has been particularly prominent in British and Italian politics.[139]
Anarcho-capitalist theory
In a theoretical
History
This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: Needs better presentation and content summarization. (May 2017) |
Isolated strands of liberal thought had existed in
The two key events that marked the triumph of liberalism in France were the
The development into maturity of classical liberalism took place before and after the French Revolution in Britain.
In
In the 19th century, English liberal political philosophers were the most influential in the global tradition of liberalism.[159]
During the 19th and early 20th century, in the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East, liberalism influenced periods of reform, such as the
Abolitionist and suffrage movements spread, along with representative and democratic ideals. France established an enduring republic in the 1870s. However, nationalism also spread rapidly after 1815. A mixture of liberal and nationalist sentiments in Italy and Germany brought about the unification of the two countries in the late 19th century. A liberal regime came to power in Italy and ended the secular power of the Popes. However, the Vatican launched a counter-crusade against liberalism. Pope Pius IX issued the Syllabus of Errors in 1864, condemning liberalism in all its forms. In many countries, liberal forces responded by expelling the Jesuit order. By the end of the nineteenth century, the principles of classical liberalism were being increasingly challenged, and the ideal of the self-made individual seemed increasingly implausible. Victorian writers like Charles Dickens, Thomas Carlyle and Matthew Arnold were early influential critics of social injustice.[105]: 36–37
Liberalism gained momentum at the beginning of the 20th century. The bastion of
In the Middle East, liberalism led to constitutional periods, like the Ottoman
In the United States,
In Iran, liberalism enjoyed wide popularity. In April 1951, the National Front became the governing coalition when democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh, a liberal nationalist, took office as the Prime Minister. However, his way of governing conflicted with Western interests, and he was removed from power in a coup on 19 August 1953. The coup ended the dominance of liberalism in the country's politics.[173][174][175][176][177]
Among the various regional and national movements, the
The Cold War featured extensive ideological competition and several
At the beginning of World War II, the number of democracies worldwide was about the same as it had been forty years before.[182] After 1945, liberal democracies spread very quickly but then retreated. In The Spirit of Democracy, Larry Diamond argues that by 1974 "dictatorship, not democracy, was the way of the world" and that "barely a quarter of independent states chose their governments through competitive, free, and fair elections". Diamond says that democracy bounced back, and by 1995 the world was "predominantly democratic".[183][184] However, liberalism still faces challenges, especially with the phenomenal growth of China as a model combination of authoritarian government and economic liberalism.[185]
Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of the modern era.[11][12]: 11
Criticism and support
Liberalism has drawn criticism and support from various ideological groups throughout its history. Despite these complex relationships, some scholars have argued that liberalism actually "rejects ideological thinking" altogether, largely because such thinking could lead to unrealistic expectations for human society.[186]
Conservatism
The first major proponent of modern conservative thought, Edmund Burke, offered a blistering critique of the French Revolution by assailing the liberal pretensions to the power of rationality and the natural equality of all humans.[187] Conservatives have also attacked what they perceive as the reckless liberal pursuit of progress and material gains, arguing that such preoccupations undermine traditional social values rooted in community and continuity.[188] However, a few variations of conservatism, like liberal conservatism, expound some of the same ideas and principles championed by classical liberalism, including "small government and thriving capitalism".[187]
In the book
Russian President Vladimir Putin believes that "liberalism has become obsolete" and claims that the vast majority of people in the world oppose multiculturalism, immigration, and rights for LGBT people.[191]
Catholicism
One of the most outspoken early critics of liberalism was the
A movement associated with modern democracy,
Anarchism
Anarchists criticize the liberal social contract, arguing that it creates a state that is "oppressive, violent, corrupt, and inimical to liberty."[195]
Marxism
Karl Marx rejected the foundational aspects of liberal theory, hoping to destroy both the state and the liberal distinction between society and the individual while fusing the two into a collective whole designed to overthrow the developing capitalist order of the 19th century.[196]
Vladimir Lenin stated that—in contrast with Marxism—liberal science defends wage slavery.[197][198] However, some proponents of liberalism, such as Thomas Paine, George Henry Evans, and Silvio Gesell, were critics of wage slavery.[199][200]
Deng Xiaoping criticized that liberalization would destroy the political stability of the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party, making it difficult for development to take place, and is inherently capitalistic. He termed it bourgeois liberalization.[201] Thus some socialists accuse the economic doctrines of liberalism, such as individual economic freedom, of giving rise to what they view as a system of exploitation that goes against the democratic principles of liberalism, while some liberals oppose the wage slavery that the economic doctrines of capitalism allow.[202]
Feminism
Some
Social democracy
Social democracy, an ideology advocating modification of capitalism along progressive lines, emerged in the 20th century and was influenced by socialism. Broadly defined as a project that aims to correct through government reform what it regards as the intrinsic defects of capitalism, by reducing inequality,[204] social democracy does not oppose the existence of the state. Several commentators have noted strong similarities between social liberalism and social democracy, with one political scientist calling American liberalism "bootleg social democracy" due to the absence of a significant social democratic tradition in the United States.[205]
Fascism
See also
- The American Prospect, an American political magazine that backs social liberal policies
- Black liberalism
- Constitutional liberalism
- Friedrich Naumann Foundation, a global advocacy organisation that supports liberal ideas and policies
- The Liberal, a former British magazine dedicated to coverage of liberal politics and liberal culture
- Liberalism by country
- Muscular liberalism
- Old Liberals
- Orange Book liberalism
- Rule according to higher law
References
Notes
- ISBN 978-0-19-920516-5.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-521-43755-4.
political rationalism, hostility to autocracy, cultural distaste for conservatism and for tradition in general, tolerance, and ... individualism.
- ISBN 978-0-19-971751-4 – via Google Books.
Liberal democracy requires a form of secularism to sustain itself
- .
Three of them – freedom from fear, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion – have long been fundamental to liberalism.
- ^ "The Economist, Volume 341, Issues 7995–7997". The Economist. 1996. Retrieved 31 December 2007 – via Google Books.
For all three share a belief in the liberal society as defined above: a society that provides constitutional government (rule by law, not by men) and freedom of religion, thought, expression and economic interaction; a society in which ... .
- .
The most frequently cited rights included freedom of speech, press, assembly, religion, property, and procedural rights
- .
There is no need to expound the foundations and principles of modern liberalism, which emphasises the values of freedom of conscience and freedom of religion
- ^ Lalor, John Joseph (1883). Cyclopædia of Political Science, Political Economy, and of the Political History of the United States. Nabu Press. p. 760. Retrieved 31 December 2007.
Democracy attaches itself to a form of government: liberalism, to liberty and guarantees of liberty. The two may agree; they are not contradictory, but they are neither identical, nor necessarily connected. In the moral order, liberalism is the liberty to think, recognised and practiced. This is primordial liberalism, as the liberty to think is itself the first and noblest of liberties. Man would not be free in any degree or in any sphere of action, if he were not a thinking being endowed with consciousness. The freedom of worship, the freedom of education, and the freedom of the press are derived the most directly from the freedom to think.
- ^ "Liberalism". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 16 June 2021.
- ISBN 978-0-7394-7809-7.
- ^ a b Wolfe, p. 23.
- ^ ISBN 0-7190-6019-2.
- ^ a b c Gould, p. 3.
- ^ Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government.
All mankind ... being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions
- ^ Kirchner, p. 3.
- ISBN 978-0-300-15605-8. Retrieved 7 February 2013.
- ISBN 978-90-04-16052-1 – via Google Books.
- PMID 29019300.
- ISBN 978-0-429-27957-7 – via Google Books.
- ISBN 978-1-78238-426-7 – via Google Books.
Liberalism, liberal values and liberal institutions formed an integral part of that process of European consolidation. Fifteen years after the end of the Second World War, the liberal and democratic identity of Western Europe had been reinforced on almost all sides by the definition of the West as a place of freedom. Set against the oppression in the Communist East, by the slow development of a greater understanding of the moral horror of Nazism, and by the engagement of intellectuals and others with the new states (and social and political systems) emerging in the non-European world to the South.
- City Journal.
- JSTOR 24027184.
- ISBN 0-12-227246-3
- ^ "Liberalism in America: A Note for Europeans" Archived 12 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. (1956) from: The Politics of Hope (Boston: Riverside Press, 1962). "Liberalism in the U.S. usage has little in common with the word as used in the politics of any other country, save possibly Britain."
- ^ a b c d e f Gross, p. 5.
- ^ Kirchner, pp. 2–3.
- ^ Palmer and Colton, p. 479.
- ISBN 978-0-521-32394-9. "Liberal parties were among the first political parties to form, and their long-serving and influential records, as participants in parliaments and governments, raise important questions ... ."
- ^ "Liberalism". Encyclopædia Britannica.
- For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto. Mises Institute. Archived 18 June 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 18 June 2015 – via LewRockewell.com
- ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 1 September 2022.
- OCLC 60393965.
- SSRN 969272.
- ISBN 9781443852838
- ^ "Content". Parties and Elections in Europe. 2020.
- ^ Puddington, p. 142. "After a dozen years of centre-left Liberal Party rule, the Conservative Party emerged from the 2006 parliamentary elections with a plurality and established a fragile minority government."
- ^ Grigsby, pp. 106–07. [Talking about the Democratic Party] "Its liberalism is, for the most part, the later version of liberalism – modern liberalism."
- ^ Arnold, p. 3. "Modern liberalism occupies the left-of-center in the traditional political spectrum and is represented by the Democratic Party in the United States."
- ISBN 9781000366709 – via Google Books.
- ISBN 9780313391811 – via Google Books.
- ^ .
- ^ .
- ^ Antoninus, p. 3.
- ^ Young 2002, pp. 25–26.
- ^ a b Young 2002, p. 24.
- ^ Young 2002, p. 25.
- ^ a b Gray, p. xii.
- ^ Wolfe, pp. 33–36.
- ^ Young 2002, p. 45.
- ^ a b Taverne, p. 18.
- ^ a b Godwin et al., p. 12.
- ISBN 0-385-47042-8pp. 39–41.
- ^ Young 2002, pp. 30–31
- ^ Locke, John (1947). Two Treatises of Government. New York: Hafner Publishing Company.
- ^ Forster, p. 219.
- ISBN 9780415089234.
- ISBN 0-385-47042-8, p. 33.
- ^ JSTOR 2712349.
- ^ Feldman, Noah (2005). Divided by God. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, p. 29 ("It took John Locke to translate the demand for liberty of conscience into a systematic argument for distinguishing the realm of government from the realm of religion.")
- ^ Feldman, Noah (2005). Divided by God. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, p. 29
- ^ McGrath, Alister. 1998. Historical Theology, An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. pp. 214–15.
- ^ Bornkamm, Heinrich (1962), "Toleranz. In der Geschichte des Christentums", Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart (in German), 3. Auflage, Band VI, col. 942
- ISBN 0-8387-1841-8.
- ^ Wertenbruch, W (1960), "Menschenrechte", Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart (in German), Tübingen, DE
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link), 3. Auflage, Band IV, col. 869 - ^ a b c Young 2002, p. 30.
- ^ a b Young 2002, p. 31.
- ^ Young 2002, p. 32.
- ^ Young 2002, pp. 32–33.
- ^ a b Gould, p. 4.
- ^ a b Young 2002, p. 33.
- ^ Wolfe, p. 74.
- ^ Tenenbaum, Susan (1980). "The Coppet Circle. Literary Criticism as Political Discourse". History of Political Thought. 1 (2): 453–473.
- ^ Lefevere, Andre (2016). Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. Taylor & Francis. p. 109.
- ^ Fairweather, Maria (2013). Madame de Stael. Little, Brown Book Group.
- ^ Hofmann, Etienne; Rosset, François (2005). Le Groupe de Coppet. Une constellation d'intellectuels européens. Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes.
- ^ Jaume, Lucien (2000). Coppet, creuset de l'esprit libéral: Les idées politiques et constitutionnelles du Groupe de Madame de Staël. Presses Universitaires d'Aix-Marseille. p. 10.
- ^ Delon, Michel (1996). "Le Groupe de Coppet". In Francillon, Roger (ed.). Histoire de la littérature en Suisse romande t.1. Payot.
- ^ "The Home of French Liberalism". The Coppet Institute. Retrieved 20 February 2020.
- ISBN 978-0-300-17482-3.
- ^ a b c d "Constant, Benjamin, 1988, 'The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with that of the Moderns' (1819), in The Political Writings of Benjamin Constant, ed. Biancamaria Fontana, Cambridge, pp. 309–28". Uark.edu. Archived from the original on 5 August 2012. Retrieved 17 September 2013.
- ^ Bertholet, Auguste (2021). "Constant, Sismondi et la Pologne". Annales Benjamin Constant. 46: 65–76.
- ISBN 0-7294-0280-0.
- ^ Rosen, Frederick (2005). Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill. Routledge. p. 251. According to Berlin, the most eloquent of all defenders of freedom and privacy [was] Benjamin Constant, who had not forgotten the Jacobin dictatorship.
- ^ ISBN 0-631-16451-0.
- ^ ISBN 0-7190-5055-3.
- ^ Wempe, p. 123.
- ^ a b Young 2002, p. 36.
- ^ Wolfe, p. 63.
- ^ Young 2002, p. 39.
- ^ Young 2002, pp. 39–40.
- ^ a b c Young 2002, p. 40.
- ^ Young 2002, pp. 42–43.
- ^ Young 2002, p. 43.
- ^ a b c Young 2002, p. 44.
- ^ ISBN 0-333-97130-2.
- ^ The Wealth of Nations Archived 6 December 2022 at the Wayback Machine, Strahan and Cadell, 1778
- ^ See, e.g., Donald Markwell, John Maynard Keynes and International Relations: Economic Paths to War and Peace, Oxford University Press, 2006, chapter 1.
- ^ (Clower 2004, p. 92)
- ^ Bylund, Per. "Say's Law (the Law of Markets)" Archived 8 March 2021 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ "Information on Jean-Baptiste Say".Archived 26 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Mill, James (1808). "VI: Consumption". Commerce Defended. p. 81. Archived from the original on 24 February 2021.
- ^ Erik Gartzke, "Economic Freedom and Peace", in Economic Freedom of the World: 2005 Annual Report (Vancouver: Fraser Institute, 2005). Archived 27 December 2018 at the Wayback Machine.
- ISBN 0-393-96947-9).
- ISBN 978-0-7546-5572-5 – via Google Books.
- ^ ISBN 155587939X.
- ^ See studies of Keynes by, e.g., Roy Harrod, Robert Skidelsky, Donald Moggridge, and Donald Markwell.
- ISBN 978-0-415-13481-1.
- ^ a b Cassidy, John (10 October 2011). "The Demand Doctor". The New Yorker.
- ISBN 978-0-330-48867-9.
- ^ Tribe, Keith (1997). Economic careers: economics and economists in Britain, 1930–1970. p. 61.
- ^ Palmer and Colton, p. 808.
- ^ Jensen, p. 2.
- ^ a b c Tong, Rosemarie. 1989. Feminist Thought: A Comprehensive Introduction. Oxon, United Kingdom: Unwin Human Ltd. Chapter 1
- ^ Falco, pp. 47–48.
- ^ John Stuart Mill: critical assessments, Volume 4, By John Cunningham Wood
- ^ Mill, J.S. (1869) The Subjection of Women Archived 29 April 2015 at the Wayback Machine, Chapter 1
- ^ Mill, John Stuart (1869). The Subjection of Women (1869 first ed.). London: Longmans, Green, Reader & Dyer. Retrieved 10 December 2012.
- ^ Brink, David (9 October 2007). "Mill's Moral and Political Philosophy". Stanford University. Retrieved 1 October 2016.
- ISBN 9780801422614 – via Google Books.
- ISBN 978-0-8014-9595-3 – via Google Books.
Equity-feminism differs from equality-feminism
- ^ "Liberal Feminism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 18 October 2007. Retrieved 24 February 2016. (revised 30 September 2013)
- ISBN 0-670-03151-8.
- ^ Kuhle, Barry X. (2011). "Evolutionary psychology is compatible with equity feminism". Evolutionary Psychology. Archived from the original on 16 January 2012.
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link) - S2CID 154967384.
- ^ Spiegel, Henry William (1991). The Growth of Economic Thought. Duke University Press. pp. 302–303.
- ^ Stedman Jones, Gareth (2006). "Saint-Simon and the Liberal origins of the Socialist critique of Political Economy". In Aprile, Sylvie; Bensimon, Fabrice (eds.). La France et l'Angleterre au XIXe siècle. Échanges, représentations, comparaisons. Créaphis. pp. 21–47.
- ISBN 978-0-8264-5173-6.
- ISBN 978-0-14-144147-4.
- ISBN 978-0-14-144147-4.
- ^ John Stuart Mill (1806–1873), "The Contest in America". Harper's New Monthly Magazine. Volume 24. Issue 143. pp. 683–684. Harper & Bros. New York. April 1862. Cornell.edu.
- ^ IREF | Pour la liberte economique et la concurrence fiscale (PDF) Archived 27 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine
- ISBN 978-0-14-043272-5.
- ^ Nicholson, P. P., "T. H. Green and State Action: Liquor Legislation", History of Political Thought, 6 (1985), 517–50. Reprinted in A. Vincent, ed., The Philosophy of T. H. Green (Aldershot: Gower, 1986), pp. 76–103
- ^ Michael Freeden, The New Liberalism: An Ideology of Social Reform (Oxford UP, 1978).
- ^ The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, p. 599
- ISBN 9780674000537.
- ^ Thompson, Noel W. (2006). Political economy and the Labour Party: the economics of democratic socialism, 1884–2005 (2nd ed.). Oxon, England; New York, New York: Routledge. pp. 60–61.
- ^ Nadia Urbinati. J.S. Mill's political thought: a bicentennial reassessment Archived 6 December 2022 at the Wayback Machine. Cambridge, England, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007 p. 101.
- ^ a b Steve Bastow, James Martin. Third way discourse: European ideologies in the twentieth century Archived 27 December 2018 at the Wayback Machine. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: Edinburgh University Press, Ltd, 2003. p. 72.
- ^ Raico, Ralph (2004) Authentic German Liberalism of the 19th century Archived 10 June 2009 at the Wayback Machine Ecole Polytechnique, Centre de Recherce en Epistemologie Appliquee Archived 10 June 2009 at the Wayback Machine, Unité associée au CNRS
- ^ Molinari, Gustave de (1849) The Production of Security Archived 27 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine (trans. J. Huston McCulloch). Retrieved 15 July 2006.
- ISBN 978-0-631-17944-3, p. 290
- OCLC 750831024.
- ^ Edward Stringham, Anarchy and the law: the political economy of choice, p. 51 Archived 6 December 2022 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ "Review of Kosanke's Instead of Politics – Don Stacy" Archived 1 October 2018 at the Wayback Machine Libertarian Papers VOL. 3, ART. NO. 3 (2011)
- ^ Rothbard, Murray. For A New Liberty. 12 The Public Sector, III: Police, Law, and the Courts Archived 13 December 2011 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ a b Rothbard, Murray (2005). Excerpt from "Concepts of the Role of Intellectuals in Social Change Toward Laissez Faire", The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. IX, No. 2 (Fall 1990) at mises.org
- ^ Rothbard, Murray (2005). "The Ancient Chinese Libertarian Tradition", Mises Daily, (5 December 2005) (original source unknown) at mises.org
- ISBN 978-0-300-15605-8. Retrieved 7 February 2013.
- ISBN 0-19-521043-3p. 701.
- ISBN 978-90-04-16052-1 – via Google Books.
- ISBN 978-0-385-38751-4.
- ^ Palmer and Colton, pp. 428–29.
- ^ Lyons, p. 94.
- ^ Lyons, pp. 98–102.
- ^ Turner, p. 86
- JSTOR 2707981. Archived from the originalon 12 February 2015.
- ^ Doyle, Don H. (2014). The Cause of All Nations: An International History of the American Civil War.
- ^ Caldwell, Wallace E.; Merrill, Edward H. (1964). History of the World. Vol. 1. United States: The Greystone Press. p. 428.
- .
- ^ Roderic. H. Davison, Essays in Ottoman and Turkish History, 1774–1923 – The Impact of the West, University of Texas Press, 1990, pp. 115-116.
- ^ .
- ^ "Edustajamatrikkeli" (in Finnish). Eduskunta. Archived from the original on 12 February 2012.
- ^ Mononen, Juha (2 February 2009). "War or Peace for Finland? Neoclassical Realist Case Study of Finnish Foreign Policy in the Context of the Anti-Bolshevik Intervention in Russia 1918–1920". University of Tampere. Archived from the original on 7 June 2015. Retrieved 25 August 2020.
- ISBN 978-0-19-511622-9. Retrieved 25 May 2017.
- ISBN 978-0-226-53333-9.
- ISBN 978-0-521-77933-3.
- ISBN 978-1-4617-3191-7. Retrieved 9 May 2017.
- ISBN 978-1-107-13633-5. Retrieved 10 May 2017.
- ^ Alterman, p. 32.
- ISBN 978-0-415-13481-1.
- ^ Heywood, pp. 218–26.
- ^ James Risen (16 April 2000). "Secrets of History: The C.I.A. in Iran". The New York Times. Retrieved 3 November 2006.
- ^ Clandestine Service History: Overthrow of Premier Mossadeq of Iran (March 1954). p. iii.
- ISBN 978-1-84511-347-6.
- ^ Bryne, Malcolm (18 August 2013). "CIA Admits It Was Behind Iran's Coup". Foreign Policy.
- ^ The CIA's history of the 1953 coup in Iran is made up of the following documents: a historian's note, a summary introduction, a lengthy narrative account written by Donald N. Wilber and as appendices five planning documents he attached. Published on 18 June 2000 under the title "The C.I.A. in Iran" Archived 25 January 2013 at the Wayback Machine by The New York Times.
- ^ Mackenzie and Weisbrot, p. 178.
- ^ Mackenzie and Weisbrot, p. 5.
- ^ Palley, Thomas I (5 May 2004). "From Keynesianism to Neoliberalism: Shifting Paradigms in Economics". Foreign Policy in Focus. Retrieved 25 March 2017.
- ISBN 978-1-4051-5495-6.
- ISBN 0-415-43775-X, p. 62.
- ISBN 978-0-8050-7869-5.
- ^ "Freedom in the World 2016". Freedom House. 27 January 2016.
- ISBN 0-19-920834-4, pp. 7–8.
- ^ Wolfe, p. 116.
- ^ a b Grigsby, p. 108.
- ^ Koerner, p. 14.
- ^ Damon Linker, An ominous prophecy for liberalism, The Week, January 22, 2018.
- ^ a b Burns, Nick (8 April 2020). "The new intellectuals of the American right". New Statesman. Retrieved 10 August 2023.
- ^ Tiounine, Margot; Hannen, Tom, eds. (27 June 2019). "Liberalism 'has outlived its purpose' — President Putin speaks exclusively to the Financial Times". Financial Times. Retrieved 23 August 2019.
- ISBN 978-0-8047-3087-7.
- ^ Riff, pp. 34–36.
- ^ Riff, p. 34.
- ^ Fiala, Andrew (2021), "Anarchism", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 17 June 2023
- ^ Koerner, pp. 9–12.
- ISBN 978-0-7178-0167-1. Retrieved 1 June 2017.
- ISBN 978-1-4344-6352-4. Retrieved 1 June 2017.
- ^ "Social Security Online History Pages". Archived from the original on 15 March 2015. Retrieved 1 June 2017.
- ISBN 978-1-85109-544-5. Retrieved 1 June 2017.
- ^ "《邓小平文选第三卷》《在党的十二届六中全会上的讲话》" (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 27 February 2022. Retrieved 27 February 2022.
大家可以回想一下,粉碎"四人帮"以后,全国人大在一九八○年通过一个议案,取消宪法中的关于"大鸣、大放、大辩论、大字报"这一条。为什么做这件事?因为有一股自由化思潮。搞自由化,就会破坏我们安定团结的政治局面。没有一个安定团结的政治局面,就不可能搞建设。
自由化本身就是资产阶级的,没有什么无产阶级的、社会主义的自由化,自由化本身就是对我们现行政策、现行制度的对抗,或者叫反对,或者叫修改。实际情况是,搞自由化就是要把我们引导到资本主义道路上去,所以我们用反对资产阶级自由化这个提法。管什么这里用过、那里用过,无关重要,现实政治要求我们在决议中写这个。我主张用。 - ^ Beauchamp, Zack (9 September 2019). "The anti-liberal moment". Vox. Retrieved 6 May 2021.
- . Retrieved 13 July 2023.
- ^ Lightfoot, p. 17.
- ^ Susser, p. 110.
- ^ Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. p. 760.
- ^ ISBN 0691044864. Archived from the originalon 6 December 2022.
Bibliography and further reading
- ISBN 0-670-01860-0.
- Ameringer, Charles. Political parties of the Americas, 1980s to 1990s. Westport: ISBN 0-313-27418-5.
- Amin, Samir. The liberal virus: permanent war and the americanization of the world. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2004.
- Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius. The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. New York: ISBN 0-19-954059-4.
- Arnold, N. Scott. Imposing values: an essay on liberalism and regulation. New York: ISBN 0-495-50112-3.
- Auerbach, Alan and Kotlikoff, Laurence. Macroeconomics Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998. ISBN 0-262-01170-0.
- Barzilai, Gad. Communities and Law: Politics and Cultures of Legal Identities ISBN 978-0-472-03079-8.
- Bell, Duncan. "What is Liberalism?" Political Theory, 42/6 (2014).
- Brack, Duncan and Randall, Ed (eds.). Dictionary of Liberal Thought. London: Politico's Publishing, 2007. ISBN 978-1-84275-167-1.
- George Brandis, Tom Harley & Donald Markwell (editors). Liberals Face the Future: Essays on Australian Liberalism, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1984.
- Clarendon Press, 1967.
- Chodos, Robert et al. The unmaking of Canada: the hidden theme in Canadian history since 1945. Halifax: James Lorimer & Company, 1991. ISBN 1-55028-337-5.
- Clower, Robert W. (22 April 2004). "5: Trashing J.B. Say: The Story of a Mare's Nest". In ISBN 978-0-203-35650-0.
- Coker, Christopher. Twilight of the West. Boulder: Westview Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8133-3368-7.
- Taverne, Dick. The march of unreason: science, democracy, and the new fundamentalism. New York: ISBN 0-19-280485-5.
- Diamond, Larry. The Spirit of Democracy. New York: Macmillan, 2008. ISBN 0-8050-7869-X.
- Dobson, John. Bulls, Bears, Boom, and Bust. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2006. ISBN 1-85109-553-5.
- Dorrien, Gary. The making of American liberal theology. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001. ISBN 0-664-22354-0.
- Farr, Thomas. World of Faith and Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press US, 2008. ISBN 0-19-517995-1.
- Fawcett, Edmund. Liberalism: The Life of an Idea. Princeton: ISBN 978-0-691-15689-7.
- Feuer, Lewis. Spinoza and the Rise of Liberalism. New Brunswick: Transaction 1984.
- Flamm, Michael and Steigerwald, David. Debating the 1960s: liberal, conservative, and radical perspectives. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2008. ISBN 0-7425-2212-1.
- Freeden, Michael, Javier Fernández-Sebastián, et al. In Search of European Liberalisms: Concepts, Languages, Ideologies (2019)
- Gallagher, Michael et al. Representative government in modern Europe. New York: McGraw Hill, 2001. ISBN 0-07-232267-5.
- Gifford, Rob. China Road: A Journey into the Future of a Rising Power. Random House, 2008. ISBN 0-8129-7524-3.
- Godwin, Kenneth et al. School choice tradeoffs: liberty, equity, and diversity. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2002. ISBN 0-292-72842-5.
- Gould, Andrew. Origins of liberal dominance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999. ISBN 0-472-11015-2.
- Gray, John. Liberalism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1995. ISBN 0-8166-2801-7.
- Grigsby, Ellen. Analyzing Politics: An Introduction to Political Science. Florence: Cengage Learning, 2008. ISBN 0-495-50112-3.
- Gross, Jonathan. Byron: the erotic liberal. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2001. ISBN 0-7425-1162-6.
- Hafner, Danica and Ramet, Sabrina. Democratic transition in Slovenia: value transformation, education, and media. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2006. ISBN 1-58544-525-8.
- Handelsman, Michael. Culture and Customs of Ecuador. Westport: Greenwood Press, 2000. ISBN 0-313-30244-8.
- ISBN 0-15-651269-6.
- Heywood, Andrew (2003). Political Ideologies: An Introduction. New York: ISBN 978-0-333-96177-3.
- Hodge, Carl. Encyclopedia of the Age of Imperialism, 1800–1944. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2008. ISBN 0-313-33406-4.
- Jensen, Pamela Grande. Finding a new feminism: rethinking the woman question for liberal democracy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1996. ISBN 0-8476-8189-0.
- Johnson, Paul. The Renaissance: A Short History. New York: Modern Library, 2002. ISBN 0-8129-6619-8.
- S2CID 2642312.
- Karatnycky, Adrian. Freedom in the World. Piscataway: Transaction Publishers, 2000. ISBN 0-7658-0760-2.
- Karatnycky, Adrian et al. Nations in transit, 2001. Piscataway: Transaction Publishers, 2001. ISBN 0-7658-0897-8.
- Kelly, Paul. Liberalism. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005. ISBN 0-7456-3291-2.
- Kirchner, Emil. Liberal parties in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. ISBN 0-521-32394-0.
- Knoop, Todd. Recessions and Depressions Westport: Greenwood Press, 2004. ISBN 0-313-38163-1.
- Koerner, Kirk. Liberalism and its critics. Oxford: Taylor & Francis, 1985. ISBN 0-7099-1551-9.
- Lightfoot, Simon. Europeanizing social democracy?: The rise of the Party of European Socialists. New York: Routledge, 2005. ISBN 0-415-34803-X.
- Losurdo, Domenico. Liberalism: a counter-history. London: Verso, 2011.
- Mackenzie, G. Calvin and Weisbrot, Robert. The liberal hour: Washington and the politics of change in the 1960s. New York: Penguin Group, 2008. ISBN 1-59420-170-6.
- Manent, Pierre and Seigel, Jerrold. An Intellectual History of Liberalism. Princeton: ISBN 0-691-02911-3.
- Donald Markwell. John Maynard Keynes and International Relations: Economic Paths to War and Peace, Oxford University Press, 2006.
- Mazower, Mark. Dark Continent. New York: Vintage Books, 1998. ISBN 0-679-75704-X.
- Monsma, Stephen and Soper, J. Christopher. The Challenge of Pluralism: Church and State in Five Democracies. Lanham: ISBN 0-7425-5417-1.
- ISBN 0-07-040826-2.
- Perry, Marvin et al. Western Civilization: Ideas, Politics, and Society. Florence, KY: ISBN 0-547-14742-2.
- Pierson, Paul. The New Politics of the Welfare State. New York: ISBN 0-19-829756-4.
- Puddington, Arch. Freedom in the World: The Annual Survey of Political Rights and Civil Liberties. Lanham: ISBN 0-7425-5897-5.
- Riff, Michael. Dictionary of modern political ideologies. Manchester: ISBN 0-7190-3289-X.
- Rivlin, Alice. Reviving the American Dream Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1992. ISBN 0-8157-7476-1.
- Ros, Agustin. Profits for all?: the cost and benefits of employee ownership. New York: Nova Publishers, 2001. ISBN 1-59033-061-7.
- Routledge, Paul et al. The geopolitics reader. New York: ISBN 0-415-34148-5.
- ISBN 978-0-415-22854-1.
- ISBN 978-1-57392-404-7.
- Ryan, Alan. The Making of Modern Liberalism (Princeton University Press, 2012).
- ISBN 978-0-87140-465-7.
- Shell, Jonathan. The Unconquerable World: Power, Nonviolence, and the Will of the People. New York: Macmillan, 2004. ISBN 0-8050-4457-4.
- Shaw, G. K. Keynesian Economics: The Permanent Revolution. Aldershot, England: Edward Elgar Publishing Company, 1988. ISBN 1-85278-099-1.
- Sinclair, Timothy. Global governance: critical concepts in political science. Oxford: ISBN 0-415-27662-4.
- Smith, Steven B. Spinoza, Liberalism, and the Question of Jewish Identity. New Haven: Yale University Press 1997. ISBN 0300066805
- Song, Robert. Christianity and Liberal Society. Oxford: ISBN 0-19-826933-1.
- Stacy, Lee. Mexico and the United States. New York: Marshall Cavendish Corporation, 2002. ISBN 0-7614-7402-1.
- Steindl, Frank. Understanding Economic Recovery in the 1930s. Ann Arbor: ISBN 0-472-11348-8.
- Susser, Bernard. Political ideology in the modern world. Upper Saddle River: Allyn and Bacon, 1995. ISBN 0-02-418442-X.
- S2CID 19027999..
- Van den Berghe, Pierre. The Liberal dilemma in South Africa. Oxford: ISBN 0-7099-0136-4.
- Van Schie, P. G. C. and Voermann, Gerrit. The dividing line between success and failure: a comparison of Liberalism in the Netherlands and Germany in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Berlin: LIT Verlag Berlin-Hamburg-Münster, 2006. ISBN 3-8258-7668-3.
- Venturelli, Shalini. Liberalizing the European media: politics, regulation, and the public sphere. New York: ISBN 0-19-823379-5.
- Wallerstein, Immanuel. The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism trimphant 1789–1914. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2011.
- Whitfield, Stephen. Companion to twentieth-century America. Hoboken: ISBN 0-631-21100-4.
- ISBN 0-307-38625-2.
- Young, Shaun (2002). Beyond Rawls: An Analysis of the Concept of Political Liberalism. Lanham, MD: ISBN 978-0-7618-2240-0.
- Zvesper, John. Nature and liberty. New York: ISBN 0-415-08923-9.
- Britain
- Adams, Ian. Ideology and politics in Britain today. Manchester: ISBN 0-7190-5056-1.
- Cook, Richard. The Grand Old Man. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing, 2004. ISBN 1-4191-6449-Xon Gladstone.
- Falco, Maria. Feminist interpretations of Mary Wollstonecraft. State College: Penn State Press, 1996. ISBN 0-271-01493-8.
- Forster, Greg. John Locke's politics of moral consensus. Cambridge: ISBN 0-521-84218-2.
- Locke, John. A Letter Concerning Toleration. 1689.
- ISBN 0-02-848500-9.
- Wempe, Ben. T. H. Green's theory of positive freedom: from metaphysics to political theory. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2004. ISBN 0-907845-58-4.
- France
- Frey, Linda and Frey, Marsha. The French Revolution. Westport: ISBN 0-313-32193-0.
- Hanson, Paul. Contesting the French Revolution. Hoboken: ISBN 1-4051-6083-7.
- Leroux, Robert, Political Economy and Liberalism in France: The Contributions of Frédéric Bastiat, London and New York, Routledge, 2011.
- Leroux, Robert, and David Hart (eds), French Liberalism in the 19th century. An Anthology, London and New York, Routledge, 2012.
- Lyons, Martyn. Napoleon Bonaparte and the Legacy of the French Revolution. New York: ISBN 0-312-12123-7.
- Shlapentokh, Dmitry. The French Revolution and the Russian Anti-Democratic Tradition. Edison, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1997. ISBN 1-56000-244-1.