movement in which the basic insights described here are constantly reapplied and rethought, with new ideas, analyses and proposals being articulated and the hydra’s heads of error being assaulted.
At the IEA we do not explicitly endorse a particular political philosophy, much less the position of a specific political party or movement. Nevertheless, the continuing objective of understanding social problems and effectively addressing them rules out certain approaches while being open to others. Classical liberalism is one of the congenial philosophies and movements that arrives at a way of thinking and understanding of the world that is compatible and consonant with this, although it is not the only one. As such, this book is a welcome addition to the IEA’s list and will make a major contribution to better understanding of one of the formative philosophies of the modern age.
Stephen Davies
Education Director
Institute of Economic Affairs
May 2015
The views expressed in this monograph are, as in all IEA publications, those of the author and not those of the Institute (which has no corporate view), its managing trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff. With some exceptions, such as with the publication of lectures, all IEA monographs are blind peer-reviewed by at least two academics or researchers who are experts in the field.
Introduction
The purpose of this book
This primer aims to provide a straightforward introduction to the principles, personalities and key developments in classical liberalism. It is designed for students and lay readers who may understand the general concepts of social, political and economic freedom, but who would like a systematic presentation of its essential elements.
The book takes classical liberalism to embrace a wide spectrum of views, all of which consider individual freedom and the minimisation of violence as their top priorities, but which may range from something near libertarianism at one end to more conservative views at the other. It sees classical liberals as believing firmly in individual freedom, but believing that at least some administration of government and justice is needed to maintain it. The debate, among classical liberals at different points on the spectrum, is how large and wide that government role should be.
Outline of the book
Chapter 2 outlines the ten core principles that unite classical liberals, whatever the differences between them. Chapter 3 then sets out the historical development of classical liberalism, from its Anglo-Saxon roots, through the Reformation, the Enlightenment and revolutions, to its nineteenth-century decline and its modern revival today.
Chapter 4 considers the arguments for freedom, outlining the different and often conflicting views of classical liberals from different traditions. Chapter 5 then looks at classical liberals’ ideas on morality, and the centrality to them of minimising coercion, either from individuals or the state. Chapter 6 outlines the thorny debate on what the role and limits of that state should be. Chapter 7 explains why classical liberals believe that human societies are largely self-regulating and create public benefit without needing any large central authority to maintain them. Chapter 8 shows that this is also true in economics, thanks to the evolution of natural institutions such as markets and prices.
Chapter 9 outlines the recent revival in classical liberal thinking, and some of the new schools of thought that have come up within the classical liberal tradition.
The book concludes with sketches of the contributions of key classical liberal thinkers, some important quotations on classical liberal issues, a timeline of the development of classical liberalism, and further reading.
What is classical liberalism?
What most defines classical liberals is the priority they give to individual freedom. Human beings also have other values, of course – honesty, loyalty, security, family and more. But when it comes to our social, political and economic life, classical liberals believe that we should aim to maximise the freedom that individuals enjoy.
Classical liberals maintain that people should be allowed to live their lives as they choose, with only the minimum necessary restraint from other individuals or authorities. They accept that freedom can never be absolute, since one person’s freedom may conflict with another’s: we may all have freedom of movement, but we still cannot all move onto the same spot at the same time. And freedom does not mean you are free to rob, threaten, coerce, attack or murder others, which would violate their freedom.
So what are the limits to individual freedom? Classical liberalism has no single answer. It is not a dogmatic set of rules. Classical liberals do not completely agree on where the limits to personal (and government) action should lie. But they do broadly agree that any answer should seek to maximise individual freedom, and that anyone who wants to curb it must have a very good reason.
Ten principles of classical liberalism
To understand better what classical liberalism is, we can list ten principles that classical liberals all agree on.
1. The presumption of freedom
Classical liberals have a presumption in favour of individual freedom or liberty (the words are interchangeable in English). They want to maximise freedom in our political, social and economic life. However, they have different grounds for this conclusion.
To many, freedom is good in itself. They argue from psychology that, given a choice, people invariably prefer being free to being coerced. Others, natural rights advocates, say that freedom is something given to us by God or Nature. Some argue that freedom is based on a social contract that people in a ‘state of nature’ would have to agree if they were to avoid chaos and conflict.
Many suggest that freedom is an essential requirement for progress. Some make a humanist point, that freedom is an essential part of what it means to be human: someone who is controlled by others is not a whole person, but a mere cipher. Lastly, utilitarian classical liberals value freedom as the best way to maximise the welfare of society as a whole.
2. The primacy of the individual
Classical liberals see the individual as more important than the collective. They would not sacrifice an individual’s freedom for some collective benefit – at least, not without some very good justification. They have several different reasons for this.
One view – called methodological individualism – is that a collective has no existence beyond the individuals that comprise it. Certainly, society is more than a collection of individuals, just as a house is more than a collection of bricks. But society has no independent mind of its own; it is individuals who think and value and choose and drive events. There is no collective ‘public interest’ beyond the interests of the individuals who comprise that community.
And, secondly, those individuals disagree. What is in the interest of one person may be against the interest of others. The reality of sacrificing individual freedom to ‘the collective’ is that we would be sacrificing it to some particular set of interests, not to everyone’s interests.
Another reason is simple experience. History explodes with examples of the horrors visited on populations when their freedom is sacrificed to some leader’s misconceived notion of the collective good. Even in recent times, one need only reflect on the atrocities of Hitler, the starvation and purges under Stalin, or the mass murders ordered by Pol Pot.
Fourthly, society is hugely complicated and in constant flux. No single authority could possibly know what is best for everyone in this complex, dynamic world. Individuals are far better placed to make decisions for themselves, and should be left free to do so.
3. Minimising coercion
Classical liberals want to minimise coercion. They want a world in which people get along by peaceful agreement, not one in which anyone uses force or threats to exploit or impose their will on others.
Accordingly, classical liberals give the monopoly on the use of force to the government and judicial authorities. But they want to keep even that to its necessary