Political ideology: Personal freedom + economic limits |
Political ideology: Personal freedom + economic limits |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Administrator Posts: 2,648 Joined: Apr 2008 Member No: 639,265 ![]() |
Is there a name (and/or writings) about a form of political ideology that combines the emphasis on personal freedom found in libertarianism with the economic "restraint", if you will, of socialism? Libertarianism's emphasis of the individual and individual freedom is interesting, but the emphasis on laissez-faire capitalism doesn't sit well with me. Social democracy comes close to these ideas, but I don't know if it encompasses them completely.
|
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
![]() ICE CREAM ♥ ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 405 Joined: Nov 2008 Member No: 699,617 ![]() |
As far as I know, very few political philosophers (at least when it comes to early modern political philosophy) talk about States in terms of personal freedom versus economic restraint, specifically. In addition, the terms "personal freedom" and "economic restraint" (esp. "restraint") can mean very many things and encompass a large range of possible topics that political philosophers deal with. Perhaps the more appropriate question would be: what political philosophy allows for a large amount of personal freedom while maintaining a strong governmental check on the freedom these individuals?
The first political philosophy that comes to mind for me is Hobbes. According to Hobbes, human beings have, by nature, a freedom to anything and everything. This leads to a problem, of course, when people begin to fight over the same things, and people can easily default on transactions made without the government in power. The idea goes that when the State is formed, implying the purpose of the State, governments impose harsh punishment on those who default on transactions to deter others from doing so. That's really all the government is meant to do. You can imagine people being allowed to do pretty much whatever they want under a Hobbesian government, but if they step out of line, the hammer comes down on them. There are a few others, but that's my two cents. I'm a political phil study, so feel free ask any questions. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |