Response history

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 1

Modern Ideologies – Classical Liberalism In this lecture we begin our discussion of modern ideologies. The word “ideology” means political philosophy or a set of political ideas. We will examine four modern ideologies:

• Classical Liberalism

• Modern Liberalism

• Communism

• Socialism We examine these ideologies to understand their historical origins and development over time. Their development continues to this day, meaning these ideologies are living traditions. They are not just old ideas from the past, but are ways of thinking which continue to influence how many people interpret society and politics today. By exploring these ideologies historically, you can better understand the origins and development of certain words, phrases, and concepts you might hear in today’s politics. You can think more historically about your own political experiences. We start by examining Classical Liberalism. We already discussed the beginnings of Classical Liberalism in the first part of the course, when we examined the Enlightenment. We further develop that discussion here. We already learned about some foundational writings of Classical Liberalism. These include John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government (1689), Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws (1748), and James Madison’s Federalist #10 (1787). We call these writings “foundational” because they began the Classical Liberal way of thinking. But Classical Liberalism continued well after the Enlightenment of the 1700s. Classical Liberal ideas influenced the authors below from the 1800s, 1900s, and 2000s. Their books highlight that Classical Liberal ideas developed over time and remain with us today as a living intellectual tradition. • William Leggett, A Collection of Political Writings (1840)

• Frédéric Bastiat, Economic Harmonies (1850)

• Thomas Mackay, A Plea for Liberty: An Argument against Socialism (1890)

• Ludwig von Mises, Liberalism: The Classical Tradition (1927)

• Friedrich Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty (1960)

• Tibor Machan, Human Rights and Human Liberties (1975)

• Murray Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty (1982)

• David Schmidtz and Jason Brennan, A Brief History of Liberty (2010) The list gives us a glimpse of Classical Liberalism’s intellectual development. Now let’s explore Classical Liberal ideas.

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 2

Natural Rights Classical Liberalism begins with individual natural rights. The meaning of “natural rights” might seem obvious, but it is not. The word “rights” has different meanings. Consider the phrase “human rights.” Two people can have a heated debate about politics even as both defend human rights. They use the same phrase – human rights – but they clearly disagree. That’s because the phrase human rights can have different meanings. For one, human rights might mean “natural rights.” For the other it might mean something different like “social rights.” Below we will explore these different understanding of rights. We will mostly focus on Classical Liberal natural rights, but will introduce social rights as a point of comparison. The American Founders emphasized natural rights in the Declaration of Independence (1776). They said that natural rights come from the way God made human nature. Humans “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,” the Declaration states. This means that the origin of natural rights is human nature. Natural rights do not come from society or government. Classical liberalism thus views the individual, first and foremost, as an individual whose rights are grounded in human nature. This might seem abstract, but let’s use an example – the example of free speech. Classical Liberals argue free speech is a natural right because the right is grounded in human nature. The Classical Liberal logic is this:

• Human beings are born with the natural capacity for language. The human brain naturally learns language and the ability to speak over time simply by hearing others speak.

• Since humans are born with a natural capacity for language, humans have a natural right to use language – a natural right of free speech.

Here’s a key point: Natural rights protect the individual from powers outside of him/herself – powers in society like social norms, political majorities, public opinion, or the authority of government. All of these powers exist outside the individual. Natural rights do not encourage the individual to conform to these external powers – do not require the individual to conform to social norms or the dominant public opinion. Rather, natural rights protect the individual from these powers in society; natural rights limit the control these external powers have over the individual. Let’s think through what this means. We’ll again use the example of free speech. Someone who does not think free speech is a natural right might reason like this:

• Many people think it is wrong to mock or ridicule the beliefs of others. They think such mocking is offensive. They may be the majority in society or they may simply have influence in media, education, or government. Either way, they establish a social norm – “public opinion” – that it is wrong to mock or ridicule the beliefs of others.

• They thus argue that free speech does not include the right to mock and ridicule. Free speech does not include the right to violate the social norm. It does not include the right to go against the dominant public opinion. Offensive speech, therefore, is not free speech.

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 3

• They may still say they believe in the right of free speech, but they view speech as a social right, not a natural right. A social right comes from society, not human nature. It is based on social norms and public opinion. Because such a right is based on social norms, the right encourages individuals to adapt to those norms – like the norm against mocking the beliefs of others – rather than protecting the individual from the power of those norms. As one defender of social rights explained, “my only rights are those which membership in a group [society] gives me.”

Now let’s return to the Classical Liberal argument about free speech as a natural right.

• We said above that natural rights protect the individual from the power of social norms, dominant opinions, and government – the powers external to the individual.

• The social norm against offensive speech is a power external to the individual.

• The natural right of free speech thus protects the individual from this social norm, protects the individual from having to conform to public opinion against offensive speech. Offensive speech may not be wise, but it is free speech.

• In fact, the purpose of the natural right of free speech is to protect, not to silence, unpopular forms of expression. The natural right is grounded in human nature. It does not come from society, social norms, public opinion, or government. It does not have to conform to those norms because natural rights protect the individual from those kinds of external powers.

An example of how natural rights protect the individual is the U.S. Bill of Rights (1791), which is the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution (1787). Click here to view the Bill of Rights.

• The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law” interfering with five individual rights – freedom of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly, and petition.

• Notice the words – “Congress shall make no law….”

• Congress is the legislative branch of government, the branch that makes laws. The First Amendment protects the individual from government by saying “NO” to Congress. It states what Congress – the political majority – cannot do. It cannot make laws interfering with the five listed rights. Those rights belong to the individual, not to society, the majority, or government.

To summarize this section: Classical Liberal natural rights protect individual freedoms from powers in society like social norms, public opinion, and government. Let’s now continue our discussion by exploring the Classical Liberal view of the right to private property.

Private Property & Taxes Along with free speech, Classical Liberalism also views the individual’s right to private property as a natural right.

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 4

• Consider this quote from John Locke, Second Treatise of Government (1689): The purpose of individuals “uniting into Commonwealths, and putting themselves under Government, is the Preservation of their Property.”

• Or this quote from the Pennsylvania Declaration of Rights (1776): Individuals “have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property.”

Let’s think through why Classical Liberals view private property as a natural right. We said that natural rights are grounded in human nature, in the natural capacities of the human mind. The Classical Liberal says that the human mind has natural capacities to reason, to will, and to feel. To reason is to think. To will is to desire and to act. To feel is to experience love and affection, frustration and anger, and all the emotions in between. These capacities or mental powers are called “faculties.” Classical Liberals argue like this:

• Faculties are private property – each of us owns our own mind and its mental powers.

• The faculties of the mind are creative. Humans use their faculties in creative ways. One creative way is to produce goods and services – food, energy, medicine, technology, housing, education, transportation, etc.

• When we use our faculties to produce goods and services – when we create – we add value to those goods and services. For example, my faculties add value to this educational service; a chef’s faculties add value to food; a doctor’s faculties add value to a physical exam. Imagine a chef and I each prepare a meal using the same ingredients. The chef’s meal costs $12. My meal costs $10. Whose would you buy? Would you pay the extra $2 for the chef’s meal or save the $2 and eat the meal prepared by a history professor? Many would spend the extra $2 because the chef’s faculties add value to the food – it tastes much better. The same is true of a doctor’s faculties adding value to a physical exam or a biochemists’ faculties adding value to chemical compounds.

• Each of us gets rewarded for using our faculties to add value – we get property (often money).

• So the Classical Liberal logic of private property being an individual natural right is this:

1) our faculties are our private property

2) we use our faculties to add value to the goods and services we create

3) in return we get some of the value we added – other property (usually money). This property is our natural right to possess because it comes from the natural powers of our minds. It comes from the value we added by using our faculties.

Now let’s think through taxes. When government taxes, it takes private property – it takes property an individual has earned (money) in order to fund government. Classical Liberals understand that government has to tax – take some private property – to provide government services. But Classical Liberal also want to protect the individual from external powers like government – that’s what natural rights do, they protect the individual.

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 5

Thus Classical Liberals seek to limit the government’s power to tax. Classical Liberals argue that government can tax – take private property – only to provide a “public good.” A “public good” is not anything good for the public. Rather, something is a “public good” – a legitimate reason for government to tax – only if it fits both of the following 2 criteria:

1. My use of part of the “good” does not leave you with less of the good to use.

o Food is not a public good because my use of part of the food (I eat part) leaves you with less of the food to use (eat). So Classical Liberals argue government should not tax to provide food because food is not a “public good.”

o But national defense is a public good. Government taxes – takes some private property – to spend on a military to protect the nation. My use of the good, the protection of me, does not lessen the protection of you.

2. A “good” is distributed in a way that cannot exclude some people based on payment.

o A streaming service is not a public good because the way it is distributed excludes people based on payment. If you do not pay for the service, you are excluded from getting it. Thus government should not tax to provide streaming services because such services are not a public good.

o Law enforcement is a public good. Government taxes – takes some private property – to spend on police to enforce the law. I am not excluded from law enforcement if I do not pay my taxes – i.e., police do not enforce the law in a way that excludes based on payment.

A Classical Liberal says government can tax – take some private property – in order to provide for “public goods” such as national defense and law enforcement. They also include courts of law and judges, as well as infrastructure like roads, bridges, tunnels, etc. These would fit both of the 2 criteria above and are thus “public goods.” But Classical Liberals argue that other things like food and clothing are not “public goods.” Neither food nor clothing fits both criteria #1 and #2 above. The Classical Liberal says individuals and society can make, distribute, and sell clothes and food themselves. Thus individuals should not pay taxes to government to provide these goods. To summarize this section: Classical Liberals view private property as a natural right. The property comes from individuals using their own faculties to add value to the goods and services they create. Classical Liberals thus want to protect the individual’s private property.

• Classical Liberals understand that government needs to tax – take some private property – to provide certain services.

• But Classical Liberals want to limit government’s power to tax – limit the amount of private property government can take.

• Classical Liberals thus say government can tax only to provide “public goods” – things that fit both criteria #1 and #2 above. Public goods include national defense, law enforcement,

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 6

and courts of law, but do not include many goods and services which members of society can produce and sell on their own.

A Free Market – Capitalism Because Classical Liberals want to protect private property and limit government, they are associated with a “free market” economy, which is usually called capitalism. Capitalism means private ownership of the economy – businesses, companies, corporations, etc. are private property. Let’s explore further to make sure we understand. Think of all the goods and services you consume. By reading this lecture, you consume a service – education. When you go to the doctor, you consume health care services. By drinking coffee or eating lunch, you consume goods – food and drink. In a free market economy, decisions about the production, prices, and consumption of goods and services are private and voluntary decisions. The more a society has a free market, the more privately owned companies and consumers – not government – decide what to produce, what prices to pay, and how much to consume. In a free market, in other words,

• Government does not decide how much education, health care, or food is produced, how much these goods and services cost, or how they are consumed.

• These goods and services are not “public goods” – they don’t fit both criteria #1 and #2 above.

• Instead, decisions about the production, prices, and consumption of most goods and services would be voluntary decisions made by companies and consumers.

• Notice what this means: because a free market is based on voluntary decisions, it is not led or directed by anyone in particular. It is based on millions of individuals making millions of independent decisions on what to produce and what to consume. These decisions are decentralized – spread throughout society. They are not the result of planning or organization by a State.

• Classical Liberals view a free market like a language. Think of the language you speak. It is a complex system of communication. Now think of how it developed over time. The language’s development was not led or directed by anyone in particular. It was not the result of planning or organization by a State. Rather, the language developed based on millions of individuals making decisions across time on how to communicate with one another. Classical liberals view a free market like a language – a decentralized process of millions of individuals making independent decisions about how to use their faculties to add value in producing goods and services, and then deciding what value-added goods and services to consume.

We’ll end this section by noting the following: Classical Liberals do not want government, especially a national government, trying to organize and plan the economy. They do not want a

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 7

national government developing economic plans like a food production plan or running economic systems like a health care system. This does not prevent government – especially local government – from working with private organizations to provide help to those in need to get privately produced health care or food. Consider health care. A Classical Liberal does not think society benefits by government running a large economic system like a national health care system. They think it is best to focus on those in need and provide them with assistance so they can access privately produced health care services. Assistance might include a voucher to buy a doctor’s services. In this way, the production, distribution, and consumption of most goods and services remains private and voluntary.

Skepticism of Government Power Classical Liberals are clearly skeptical of government power. They think government plays an important role in providing “public goods,” but they grow more skeptical of government the more it accumulates authority to do an increasing number of things, which usually requires increasing taxes. Let’s return to the U.S. Bill of Rights to highlight this Classical Liberal skepticism of government power. We previously saw how the First Amendment limits the power of the legislative branch. Let’s now consider how the Fourth Amendment limits the power of the executive branch. The Fourth Amendment is about searches and seizures – the police searching for and seizing evidence in a criminal investigation.

• The amendment requires in many instances the police (executive branch) to present “probable cause” to a judge (judicial branch) to obtain a warrant in order to search private property for evidence of a crime.

• This process of one branch of government applying to another branch for a warrant slows down the investigation. It slows down the executive branch.

• If the warrant is not granted, then the executive branch is stopped altogether, at least in searching what it wanted to search.

• If the warrant is granted, the warrant restricts the executive branch on what it can search and what evidence it can seize.

No amendment or law can guarantee government will never abuse its power. The point of the Fourth Amendment is to make it less likely government will abuse its power, or harder for it to do so.

Which brings us to this point: Classical Liberals emphasize individual natural rights to limit government because they think government is the thing in society most likely to abuse its power.

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 8

Classical Liberals understand that all kinds of people in all kinds of situations can misuse their authority. They just think government has the most coercive authority to begin with, and therefore its misuse becomes most abusive. To make it harder for government to abuse its power, Classical Liberals seek to separate the powers of government into three branches – the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. This is called the separation of powers. The legislative branch makes law, the executive branch enforces law, and the judicial branch applies law to particular cases. What is key about the separation of powers is the relationship between the three branches.

• Classical Liberals envision the three branches as mostly competing with each other for power.

• We might think that the three branches should mostly cooperate with each other.

• But Classical Liberals want the three branches to compete with each other. Their logic is this: the competition for power between the three branches of government limits the power of each branch.

• And that is the point, to limit the power of government by limiting the power of each branch.

• Limiting government makes it less likely government will abuse its power and violate individual natural rights.

Let’s conclude this lecture with this point: You may have noticed that this lecture mostly used the word “government,” but then used the word “State” near the end of the last section. We said that a free market is “not the result of planning or organization by a State.” But what’s the difference between a government and a State? Classical Liberals argue that a government governs society. Governing society means passing laws to protect the natural rights of individuals, laws which identify certain activities as illegal because they violate natural rights. Governing society also includes an executive branch to enforce these laws and a judicial branch to decide cases in which people are accused of breaking the laws. The key here is thinking about how society develops over time. • For Classical Liberals, a government does not play a significant role in how a society

develops.

• Governing society does not mean leading and directing society. It does not mean defining future goals for society to achieve and then using the power of government to achieve those goals.

• For Classical Liberals, governing society means leaving how society develops in the hands of millions of individuals exercising their natural rights. Society’s development is a decentralized process. Millions of individuals independently exercising their rights of speech, religion, assembly, and private property determine how society develops rather

This content is protected, and may not be shared, uploaded, or distributed. Classical Liberalism - 9

than a centralized authority determining how society develops. Government steps in when those natural rights are violated, but does not to lead or direct society toward other goals.

A “State” does not simply govern society in the Classical Liberal sense. It does not leave how a society develops in the hands of individuals exercising natural rights. Rather, a State leads and directs society. It organizes and manages an economy. A State defines goals for society and then uses its power to move society and its people toward those goals. Consider the example of the environment. We noted in an earlier discussion that CO₂ emissions have decreased in the U.S. since the beginning of the 21st century because of an energy transition to natural gas. In this case, private companies and consumers have played a large role in society’s development – lower CO₂ emissions. In the United States today, our federal government has become more of a State than a government. So we might ask this question: Should the State play a more active role in using its power to move society toward environmental goals other than those achieved by private companies and consumers? Our point here is not to answer the question, but to see how the question helps distinguish between a government which governs society in the Classical Liberal sense and a State which leads and directs society. A State will obviously have more power than a government. A State cannot be based on the idea of individual natural rights. At the beginning of the next lecture, notice how several of the books about Modern Liberalism include the word “State” in their title.