- Krishnamurti, J. The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind. When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious. – Dr Rossiter, L, H, 2005, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." In acute cases, liberalism produces a neurosis leading to psychosis, as reality finally slips away and internal defence mechanisms arise in an attempt to explain facts using subjective beliefs.
Women are capable of intellectual development and moral progress. This meant that women, like men, were rational creatures and so had the right to participate in public life – to contribute to debates about political, social and moral issues – rather than to being confined to the private sphere of the home and the family, represented by the male “head of the household” (Steans and Pettiford, 2001). Therefore, liberal feminism is an attempt to ensure that the tenets of liberalism are applied to
According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Liberalism is the “belief in the value of social and political change in order to achieve progress.”1 Originating in Europe, it arose during a period known as the Enlightenment, when men had the idea that if something could not be proved by logic or reasoning, it was not to be believed, and that the main aspects of human life were to be mathematical measurement and deduction and scientific experimentation.2 Liberalism was arrived at when people began to “seek for the natural laws that govern and direct human societies.”3 It focuses mainly on individualism and equality for all people. According to liberal beliefs, the foundation of human life comes from the possession of rights in freedom.4 They also believed that the collision of “natural” forces caused governments to arise. As a result of Liberalism, men began to think that freedom was the supreme principle of social life and that the laws that rule and manage human societies were to be natural, not divine. However, it was not only liberalism that brought about the American Revolution.
He also highlights common unflattering traits that are common with the liberal masses. The use of these rhetorical appeals and the examination of the aforementioned liberal traits allows Rensin to make a compelling and convincing argument in his essay. Rensin identifies common traits shared by liberals and, to cut down on length, I will put them into three succinct
However, the prominence of classical liberalism started to decline towards the end of the nineteenth century due to the emergence of poverty and socialism as an alternative ideology. Consequently, British liberal thinkers including T.H. Green and L.T Hobhouse set out to propose a revised or new liberalism, commonly known as “social liberalism.” As opposed to classical liberalism, social liberalism would focus on social reforms through expanding the state's role. Thus, social liberalism revolved around the concept of positive freedom (or ‘freedom to’ achieve one’s goals) and its key tenets consisted of introducing state intervention (and its duty to ensure the wellbeing of its inhabitants through the elements of healthcare, shelter and education,) an emphasis on equality, a more regulated economy and redistribution of
In Judith Shklar’s well known 1989 essay, The Liberalism of Fear, Shklar analyzes her view on political liberalism. In other words, Judith believes that liberalism has only one potential purpose/goal. Judith Shklar mentions how the goal for liberalism is to ultimately fix the political conditions which is significant for personal freedom. Using this idea, Judith Shklar further demonstrates her views on liberalism by comparing liberalism of fear and other types of liberalism in her essay ( such as John Locked John Stuart Mill) . Judith Shklar believes that John Locke’s liberalism of natural rights is simply an attempt to fulfill an determined standard order “The liberalism of natural rights envisages a just society composed of politically sturdy citizens, each able and willing to stand up for himself and others” (26-27).
Yet, due to the nature of the liberal takeover and the policies such governments enacted, 19th-century Latin American liberals established a constitutional foundation for future authoritarian governments, sabotaged industry and economic stability by opening trade, and expanded class and racial inequality. Thus, while liberalism enriched and benefited the elite, it failed and harmed the lower classes: the peasants and the poor. Latin American society, due to the nature of colonisation and Spanish ruling practices, long experienced the rule of strongmen, first as the conquistadores, then as caudillos. Liberalists initially fought back against
Sanity is a cozy Lie: From the perspective of R.D. Laing In his book ‘The Divided Self’ , R.D Laing aims to make ‘madness and the process of going mad understandable.’ While doing so, he puts sanity and madness on the same spectrum. He articulates that the degree of sanity or madness is dependent upon the relationship between the two parties. Understanding sanity in such a construct, the concept of sanity itself can be questioned. This paper substantiates that sanity is merely a façade by analyzing Laing’s text, ‘The existential-phenomenological foundations of understanding psychosis.’ R.D Laing wrote extensively on mental illness, and through his writings, his aversion towards psychopathology could be easily sensed.
If the problem were really in the roots, wouldn’t it have shown up before now? The difficulties stem not from anything inherent in liberalism but from the fact that we have neglected the moral order and the vision of human dignity embedded within liberalism itself. As anybody who’s read John Stuart Mill, Walt Whitman, Abraham Lincoln, Vaclav Havel, Michael Novak and Meir Soloveichik knows, liberal democracy contains a rich and soul-filling version of human flourishing and solidarity, which Deneen airbrushes from history. Every time Deneen writes about virtue it tastes like castor oil — self-denial and joylessness. But the liberal democratic moral order stands for the idea that souls are formed in freedom and not in servility, in expansiveness, not in stagnation.
Liberal feminists argue that our society holds the false belief that women are, by nature, less intelligent and physically incapable than men. It tends to discriminate women in the academy, the political forum, and the market place. Liberal feminists believe that women’s subordination is rooted in a set of customary and legal constraints. Such constraints block the women’s progress and success in the public world. Liberal feminist aims to show that as a human being the capacities of man and women are equal and it fights for the political, legal and economic equality for women.