Moderate And Radical Liberalism

A new reading of a crucial chapter in the history of social and political thought – the transition from the late Enlightenment to early liberalism.

Ultimate Washington insider Elliot Richardson (a stalwart of the liberal wing of the Republican party) offers a cool and steady examination of the growth of political cynicism and the accumulation of hostility toward our government by its citizens. Published to conicide with the Democratic and Republican national conventions, this is a bracing account of what it means to be a responsible American today.

Not so long ago, it seemed the intellectual positions on globalization were clear, with advocates and opponents making their respective cases in decidedly contrasting terms. Recently, however, the fronts have shifted dramatically. The aim of this publication is to contribute philosophical depth to the debates on globalization conducted within various academic fields – principally by working out its normative dimensions. The interdisciplinary nature of this book’s contributors also serves to scientifically ground the ethical-philosophical discourse on global responsibility. Though by no means exhaustive, the expansive scope of the works herein encompasses such other topics as the altering consciousness of space and time, and the phenomenon of globalization as a discourse, as an ideology and as a symbolic form.

A former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State and currently Acting Senior Vice President for Research at The Heritage Foundation, Kim R. Holmes surveys the state of liberalism in America today and finds that it is becoming its opposite—illiberalism—abandoning the precepts of open-mindedness and respect for individual rights, liberties, and the rule of law upon which the country was founded, and becoming instead an intolerant, rigidly dogmatic ideology that abhors dissent and stifles free speech. Tracing the new illiberalism historically to the radical Enlightenment, a movement that rejected the classic liberal ideas of the moderate Enlightenment that were prominent in the American Founding, Holmes argues that today’s liberalism has forsaken its American roots, incorporating instead the authoritarian, anti-clerical, and anti-capitalist prejudices of the radical and largely European Left. The result is a closing of the American liberal mind. Where once freedom of speech and expression were sacrosanct, today liberalism employs speech codes, trigger warnings, boycotts, and shaming rituals to stifle freedom of thought, expression, and action. It is no longer appropriate to call it liberalism at all, but illiberalism—a set of ideas in politics, government, and popular culture that increasingly reflects authoritarian and even anti-democratic values, and which is devising new strategies of exclusiveness to eliminate certain ideas and people from the political process. Although illiberalism has always been a temptation for American liberals, lurking in the radical fringes of the Left, it is today the dominant ideology of progressive liberal circles. This makes it a new danger not only to the once venerable tradition of liberalism, but to the American nation itself, which needs a viable liberal tradition that pursues social and economic equality while respecting individual liberties.

Michael Freeden explores the concept of liberalism, one of the longest-standing and central political theories and ideologies. Combining a variety of approaches, he distinguishes between liberalism as a political movement, as a system of ideas, and as a series of ethical and philosophical principles.

This work aims to clarify the distinctive character of the French Revolution by tracing the philosophical sources of its rhetoric and comparing it to that of the American Revolution.

This book gives an overview of attitudes toward animals in the long eighteenth century from an interdisciplinary perspective combining intellectual history and art history, and presents a new interpretation of changing attitudes toward animals during this period.

The long revolutionary movements that gave birth to constitutional democracies in the Americas were founded on egalitarian constitutional ideals. They claimed that all men were created equal with similar capacities and also that the community should become self-governing. Following the first constitutional debates that took place in the region, these promising egalitarian claims, which gave legitimacy to the revolutions, soon fell out of favor. Advocates of a conservative order challenged both ideals and favored constitutions that established religion and created an exclusionary political structure. Liberals proposed constitutions that protected individual autonomy and rights but established severe restrictions on the principle of majority rule. Radicals favored an openly majoritarian constitutional organization that, according to many, directly threatened the protection of individual rights. This book examines the influence of these opposite views during the 'founding period' of constitutionalism in countries including the United States, Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela.