Liberalism

:This article discusses liberalism as a major political ideology as it developed and stands currently, rather than specific ideologies contained to specific countries. For entries about varieties of liberalism and liberal parties around the world, see the entry Liberalism worldwide. Liberalism is an ideology, or current of political thought, which strives to maximize liberty. Liberalism seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on the power of government and religion, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a free market economy that supports private enterprise, and a system of government that is transparent, a liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have by law equal rights and an equal opportunity. Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the divine right of kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property.
The nature and origins of liberalism: an overview

Etymology and historical usage
The word "liberal" derives from the Latin liber ("free"). Livy's History of Rome from Its Foundation describes the struggles for freedom between the plebeian and patrician classes. Largely dormant during the vicissitudes of the Middle Ages, this struggle began again in the Italian Renaissance, in the conflict between the supporters of free city states and the supporters of the Pope. Niccolò Machiavelli, in his Discourses on Livy, laid down the principles of republican government. John Locke in England and the thinkers of the French Enlightenment articulated the struggle for freedom in terms of the Rights of Man. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) indicates that the word liberal has long been in the English language with the meanings of "befitting free men, noble, generous" as in liberal arts; also with the meaning "free from restraint in speech or action", as in liberal with the purse, or liberal tongue, usually as a term of reproach but, beginning 1776–88 imbued with a more favorable sense by Edward Gibbon and others to mean "free from prejudice, tolerant." The first English language use to mean "tending in favor of freedom and democracy", according to the OED, dates from about 1801 and comes from the French libéral, "originally applied in English by its opponents (often in Fr. form and with suggestions of foreign lawlessness)". An early English language citation: "The extinction of every vestige of freedom, and of every liberal idea with which they are associated." The American War of Independence established the first nation to craft a constitution based on the concept of liberal government, especially the idea that governments rule by the consent of the governed. The more moderate bourgeois elements of the French Revolution tried to establish a government based on liberal principles. Economists such as Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations (1776), enunciated the liberal principles of free trade. The editors of the Spanish Constitution of 1812, drafted in Cádiz, may have been the first to use the word liberal in a political sense as a noun. They named themselves the Liberales, to express their opposition to the absolutist power of the Spanish monarchy. Beginning in the late 18th century, liberalism became a major ideology in virtually all developed countries.
Forms of liberalism
Within the above framework, there are deep, often bitter, conflicts and controversies among liberals. Emerging from those controversies, out of classical liberalism, are a number of different forms of liberalism. As in many debates, opposite sides use different words for the same beliefs, and sometimes use identical words for different beliefs. For the purposes of this article, we will use "political liberalism" for the support of (liberal) democracy (either in a republic or a constitutional monarchy), over against absolute monarchy or dictatorship; "economic liberalism" for the support of private property, over against government regulation; "social liberalism" for the support of equality, over against inequalities of opportunity; "cultural liberalism" for the support of individual liberty. By "modern liberalism" we mean the mixture of these forms of liberalism found in most First World countries today, over against any one of the pure forms listed above.
- Political liberalism is the belief that individuals are the basis of law and society, and that society and its institutions exist to further the ends of individuals, without showing favor to those of higher social rank. The Magna Carta is an example of a political document that asserted the rights of individuals even above the prerogatives of monarchs. Political liberalism stresses the social contract, under which citizens make the laws and agree to abide by those laws. It is based on the belief that individuals know best what is best for them. Political liberalism includes the extension of the right to vote to women, non-whites, and those who do not own property. Political liberalism emphasizes the rule of law and supports liberal democracy.
- Economic liberalism, many of whose adherents term it classical liberalism, is an ideology which supports the individual rights of property and freedom of contract. The watchword of this form of liberalism is "free enterprise". It advocates laissez-faire capitalism, meaning the removal of legal barriers to trade and cessation of government-bestowed privilege such as subsidy and monopoly. Economic liberals want little or no government regulation of the market. Some economic liberals would accept government restrictions of monopolies and cartels, others argue that monopolies and cartels are caused by state action. Economic liberalism holds that the value of goods and services should be set by the unfettered choices of individuals, that is, of market forces. Some would also allow market forces to act even in areas conventionally monopolized by governments, such as the provision of security and courts. Economic liberalism accepts the economic inequality that arises from unequal bargaining positions as being the natural result of competition, so long as no coercion is used. This form of liberalism is especially influenced by English liberalism of the mid 19th century. Libertarianism is the closest modern representative of this intellectual tradition. Minarchism and anarcho-capitalism are forms of economic liberalism. (See also Free trade, Neo-liberalism, liberalization )
- Cultural liberalism focuses on the rights of individuals pertaining to conscience and lifestyle, including such issues as sexual freedom, religious freedom, cognitive freedom, and protection from government intrusion into private life. John Stuart Mill aptly expressed cultural liberalism in his essay "On Liberty," when he wrote, "The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." Cultural liberalism generally opposes government regulation of gambling, sex, prostitution, the age of consent, abortion, birth control, terminal illness, alcohol, and marijuana and other controlled substances. Most liberals oppose some or all government intervention in these areas. The Netherlands, in this respect, may be the most liberal country in the world today.
- Social liberalism, also known as reform liberalism, arose in the late 19th century in many developed countries, influenced by the utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Some liberals accepted, in part or in whole, Marxist and socialist exploitation theory and critiques of "the profit motive", and concluded that government should use its power to remedy these perceived problems. According to the tenets of this form of liberalism, as explained by writers such as John Dewey and Mortimer Adler, since individuals are the basis of society, all individuals should have access to basic necessities of fulfillment, such as education, economic opportunity, and protection from harmful macro-events beyond their control. To social liberals, these benefits are considered rights. These positive rights, which must be produced and supplied by other people, are qualitatively different from the classic negative rights, which require only that others refrain from aggression. To the social liberal, ensuring positive rights is a goal that is continuous with the general project of protecting liberties. Schools, libraries, museums, and art galleries were to be supported by taxes. Social liberalism advocates some restrictions on economic competition. It also expects governments to provide a basic level of welfare, supported by taxation, intended to enable the best use of the talents of the population, to prevent revolution, or simply "for the public good." There is a fundamental antagonism between economic and social liberalism. Economic liberals see positive rights as necessarily violating negative rights, and therefore illegitimate. They see a limited role for government. Some economic liberals see no proper function of government (anarchists), while others would limit government to courts, police, and defense against foreign invasion (minarchists.) Social liberals, in contrast, see a major role for government in promoting the general welfare - providing some or all of the following services: food and shelter for those who cannot provide for themselves, medical care, schools, retirement, care for children and for the disabled, including those disabled by old age, help for victims of natural disaster, protection of minorities, prevention of crime, and support for art and for science. This largely abandons the idea of limited government. Both forms of liberalism seek the same end - liberty - but they disagree strongly about the best or most moral means to attain it. Some liberal parties emphasize economic liberalism, while others focus on social liberalism. Conservative parties often favor economic liberalism while opposing cultural liberalism. In all of the forms of liberalism listed above there is a general belief that there should be a balance between government and private responsibilities, and that government should be limited to those tasks which cannot be carried out best by the private sector. All forms of liberalism claim to protect the fundamental dignity and autonomy of the individual under law, all claim that removing restrictions on individual action promotes the best society. Liberalism is so widespread in the modern world that most western nations at least pay lip service to individual liberty as the basis for society.
Comparative influences
Early Enlightenment thinkers contrasted liberalism with the authoritarianism of the Ancien Regime, feudalism mercantilism and the Roman Catholic Church. Later, as more radical philosophers articulated their thoughts in the course of the French Revolution and throughout the nineteenth century, liberalism defined itself in contrast to socialism and communism, although modern European liberal parties have often formed coalitions with social-democratic parties. In the 20th century liberalism defined itself in opposition to totalitarianism and collectivism. Some modern liberals have rejected the classical Just War theory, which emphasizes neutrality and free trade, in favor of multilateral interventionism and collective security. Liberalism favors limited state power. Extreme anti-statist liberalism, as advocated by Gustave de Molinari, Herbert Spencer, and Auberon Herbert, is in a way anarchist in character. Most modern liberals claim that a government is necessary to protect rights. Recently, liberalism has again come into conflict with those who seek a society ordered by religious values: radical Islamism often rejects liberal thought in its entirety.
Development of liberal thought

Origins of liberal thought
The focus on "liberty" as an essential right of people within the polity has been repeatedly asserted throughout history. Mentioned above are the conflicts between the plebeians and patricians in ancient Rome and the struggles of Italian city states against the Papal States. The republics of Florence and Venice had forms of elections, the rule of law, and pursuit of free enterprise through much of the 1400s until domination by outside powers in the 16th century. The Dutch resistance against (Spanish) Catholic oppression is often—despite its refusal to give freedom to Catholics—considered a predecessor of liberal values. As an ideology, liberalism can trace its roots back to the humanism that began to challenge the authority of the established church during the Renaissance, and the Whigs of the Glorious Revolution in Great Britain, whose assertion of their right to choose their king can be seen as a precursor to claims of popular sovereignty. However, movements generally labelled as truly "liberal" date from the Enlightenment, particularly the Whig party in Britain, the philosophes in France, and the movement towards self-government in colonial America. These movements opposed absolute monarchy, mercantilism, and various kinds of religious orthodoxy and clericalism. They were also the first to formulate the concepts of individual rights under the rule of law, as well as the importance of self-government through elected representatives. clericalism The definitive break with the past was the conception that free individuals could form the foundation for a stable society. This idea is generally dated from the work of John Locke (1632-1704), whose Two Treatises on Government established two fundamental liberal ideas: economic liberty, meaning the right to have and use property, and intellectual liberty, including freedom of conscience, which he expounded in A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689). However, he did not extend his views on religious freedom to Catholics . Locke developed further the earlier idea of natural rights, which he saw as "life, liberty and property". His "natural rights theory" was the distant forerunner of the modern conception of human rights. However, to Locke, property was more important than the right to participate in government and public decision-making: he did not endorse democracy, because he feared that giving power to the people would erode the sanctity of private property. Nevertheless, the idea of natural rights played a key role in providing the ideological justification for the American revolution and the French revolution. French revolution On the European continent, the doctrine of laws restraining even monarchs was expounded by Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu, whose The Spirit of the Laws argues that "Better is it to say, that the government most conformable to nature is that which best agrees with the humour and disposition of the people in whose favour it is established," rather than accept as natural the mere rule of force. Following in his footsteps, political economist Jean-Baptiste Say and Destutt de Tracy were ardent exponents of the "harmonies" of the market, and in all probability it was they who coined the term laissez-faire. This evolved into the physiocrats, and to the political economy of Rousseau. The late French enlightenment saw two figures who would have tremendous influence on later liberal thought: Voltaire who argued that the French should adopt constitutional monarchy, and disestablish the Second Estate, and Rousseau who argued for a natural freedom for mankind. Both argued, in different forms, for changes in political and social arrangements based around the idea that society can restrain a natural human liberty, but not obliterate its nature. For Voltaire the concept was more intellectual, for Rousseau, it was related to intrinsic natural rights, perhaps related to the ideas of Diderot. Rousseau also argued the importance of a concept that appears repeatedly in the history of liberal thought, namely, the social contract. He rooted this in the nature of the individual and asserted that each person knows their own interest best. His assertion that man is born free, but that education was sufficient to restrain him within society, rocked the monarchical society of his age. His assertion of an organic will of a nation argued for self-determination of peoples, again in contravention of established political practice. His ideas were a key element in the declaration of the National Assembly in the French Revolution, and in the thinking of Americans such as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. In his view the unity of a state came from the concerted action of consent, or the "national will". This unity of action would allow states to exist without being chained to pre-existing social orders, such as aristocracy. A main contributing group of thinkers whose work would become considered part of liberalism are those associated with the "Scottish Enlightenment", including the writers David Hume, Adam Smith and Immanuel Kant. David Hume's contributions were many and varied, but most important was his assertion that fundamental rules of human behavior would overwhelm attempts to restrict or regulate them, in A Treatise on Human Nature, 1939-1940. One example of this is in his disparging of mercantilism, and the accumulation of gold and silver. He argued that prices were related to the quantity of money, and that hoarding gold and issuing paper money would only lead to inflation. mercantilism] Although Adam Smith is the most famous of the economic liberal thinkers, he was not without antecedents. The physiocrats in France had proposed studying systematically political economy and the self organizing nature of markets. Benjamin Franklin wrote in favor of the freedom of American industry in 1750. In Sweden-Finland the period of liberty and parliamentary government from 1718 to 1772 produced a Finnish parliamentarian, Anders Chydenius, who was one of the first to propose free trade and unregulated industry, in The National Gain, 1765. His impact has proven to be lasting particularly in the Nordic area, but it also had a powerful effect in the later development elsewhere. 1765] The Scotsman Adam Smith (1723–1790) expounded the theory that individuals could structure both moral and economic life without direction from the state, and that nations would be strongest when their citizens were free to follow their own initiative. He advocated an end to feudal and mercantile regulations, to state granted monopolies and patents, and he promulgated "laissez-faire" government. In The Theory of Moral Sentiments, 1759, he developed a theory of motivation that tried to reconcile human self-interest and an unregulated social order. In The Wealth of Nations, 1776, he argued that the market, under certain conditions, would naturally regulate itself and would produce more than the heavily restricted markets that were the norm at the time. He assigned to government the role of taking on tasks which could not be entrusted to the profit motive, such as preventing individuals from using force or fraud to disrupt competition, trade, or production. His theory of taxation was that governments should levy taxes only in ways which did not harm the economy, and that "The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state." He agreed with Hume that capital, not gold, is the wealth of a nations. 1776] Immanuel Kant was strongly influenced by Hume's empiricism and rationalism. His most important contributions to liberal thinking are in the realm of ethics, particularly his assertion of the categorical imperative. Kant argued that received systems of reason and morals were subordinate to natural law, and that, therefore, attempts to stifle this basic law would meet with failure. His idealism would become increasingly influential, since it asserted that there were fundamental truths upon which systems of knowledge could be based. This meshed with the ideas of the English Enlightenment about natural rights.
Revolutionary liberalism
These thinkers, however, worked within the political framework of monarchies and in societies in which the class system and an established church were the norm. The idea that ordinary human beings could structure their own affairs remained theoretical until the American and French Revolutions. (The Glorious Revolution of 1688 is often cited as a precedent, but it replaced one monarch with another monarch.) These two late 18th century revolutions became the examples which later revolutionary liberals followed. Both used as their philosophical justification the Rights of Man or the rights given, in the words of Henry St. John, by "Nature and Nature's God". They rejected both tradition and established power. Henry St. John] Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams would be instrumental in persuading their fellow Americans to revolt in the name of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, echoing Locke, but with one important change (opposed by Alexander Hamilton). Jefferson replaced Locke's word "property" by "the pursuit of happiness". The "American Experiment" would be in favor of democratic government and individual liberty. James Madison was prominent among the next generation of political theorists in America, arguing that in a republic self-government depended on setting "interest against interest", thus providing protection for the rights of minorities, particularly economic minorites. The American constitution instituted a system of checks and balances: federal government balanced against states' rights; executive, legislative, and judicial branches; and a bicameral legislature. The goal was to insure liberty by preventing the concentration of power in the hands of any one man. Standing armies were held in suspicion, and the belief was that the militia would be enough for defense, along with a navy maintained by the government for the purpose of trade. navy The French Revolution overthrew monarch, aristocratic social order, and an established Roman Catholic Church. These revolutionaries were more vehement and less compromising than those in America. A key moment in the French Revolution was the declaration by the representatives of the Third Estate that they were the "National Assembly" and had the right to speak for the French people. During the first few years the revolution was guided by liberal ideas, but the transition from revolt to stability was to prove more difficult than the similar American transition. In addition to native Enlightenment traditions, some leaders of the early phase of the revolution, such as Lafayette, had fought in the U.S. War of Independence against Britain, and brought home Anglo-American liberal ideas. Later, under the leadership of Maximilien Robespierre, a Jacobin faction greatly centralized power and dispensed with most aspects of due process, resulting in the Reign of Terror. Instead of an ultimately republican constitution, Napoleon Bonaparte rose from Director, to Consul, to Emperor. On his death bed he confessed "They wanted another Washington", meaning a man who could militarily establish a new state, without desiring a dynasty. Nevertheless, the French Revolution would go farther than the American Revolution in establishing liberal ideals with such policies as universal male suffrage, national citizenship, and a far reaching "Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen", paralleling the American Bill of Rights. One of the side-effects of Napoleon's military campaigns was to carry these ideas throughout Europe. Bill of Rights] The examples of United States and France were followed in many other countries. The usurpation of the Spanish monarchy by Napoleon's forces in 1808 led to autonomist and independence movements across Latin America, which often turned to liberal ideas as alternatives to the monarchical-clerical corporatism of the colonial era. Movements such as that led by Simon Bolivar in the Andean countries aspired to constitutional government, individual rights, and free trade. The struggle between liberals and corporatist conservatives continued for the rest of the century in Latin America, with anti-clerical liberals like Benito Juarez of Mexico attacking the traditional role of the Roman Catholic Church. The transition to liberal society in Europe sometimes came through revolutionary or secessionist violence, and there were repeated explicitly liberal revolutions and revolts throughout Europe in the first half of the 19th century. However, in Britain and many other nations, the process was driven more by politics than revolution, even if the process was not entirely tranquil. The anti-clerical violence during the French Revolution was seen by opponents at the time, and for most of the 19th century, as explicitly liberal in origin. At the same time many French liberals were victim too of the Jacobin terror. With the coming of romanticism, liberal notions moved from being proposals for reform of existing governments, to demands for change. The American Revolution and the French Revolution would add "democracy" to the list of values which liberal thought promoted. The idea, that the people were sovereign, and capable of making all necessary laws and enforcing them, went beyond the conceptions of the Enlightenment. Instead of merely asserting the rights of individuals within the state, all of the state's powers were derived from the nature of man (natural law), given by God (supernatural law), or by contract ("the just consent of the governed".) This made compromise with previously autocratic orders far less likely, and the resulting violence was justified, in the minds of monarchists, to restore order. The contractual nature of liberal thought to this point must be stressed. One of the basic ideas of the first wave of thinkers in the liberal tradition was that individuals made agreements and owned property. This may not seem a radical notion today, but at the time most property laws defined property as belonging to a family or to a particular figure within it, such as the "head of the family". Obligations were based on feudal ties of loyalty and personal fealty, rather than an exchange of goods and services. Gradually, the liberal tradition introduced the idea that voluntary consent and voluntary agreement were the basis for legitimate government and law. This view was further advanced by Rousseau with his notion of a social contract. Between 1774 and 1848, there were several waves of revolutions, each revolution demanding greater and greater primacy for individual rights. The revolutions placed increasing value on self-governance. This could lead to secession - a particularly important concept in the revolutions which ended Spanish control over much of her colonial empire in the Americas, and in the American Revolution. In countries where feudal property arrangements still held sway, liberals generally supported unification as the path to liberty. The strongest examples of this are Germany and Italy. As part of this revolutionary program, the importance of education, a value repeatedly stressed from Erasmus onward, became more and more central to the idea of liberty. Liberal parties in many European monarchies agitated for parliamentary government, increased representation, expansion of the franchise where present, and the creation of a counterweight to monarchical power. This political liberalism was often driven by economic liberalism, namely, the desire to end feudal privileges, guild or royal monopolies, restrictions on ownership, and laws which did not permit the full range of corporate and economic arrangements being developed in other countries. To one degree or another, these forces were seen even in autocracies such as Turkey, Russia and Japan. As the Russian Empire crumbled under the weight of economic failure and military defeat, it was the liberal parties who took control of the Duma, and in 1905 and 1917 began revolutions against the goverment. Later Piero Gobetti would formulate a theory of "Liberal Revolution" to explain what he felt was the radical element in liberal ideology. Another example of this form of liberal revolution is from Ecuador where Eloy Alfaro in 1895 lead a "radical liberal" revolution that secularized the state, opened marriage laws, engaged in the development of infrastructure and the economy.
Disputes within liberalism

Economic liberalism versus social liberalism
The Industrial Revolution greatly increased material wealth, but also created social problems, such as pollution, child labor, and overcrowding in the cities. Material and scientific progress led to greater longevity and a reduced mortality rate. The population increased dramatically. The downside of this was an oversupply of labor, which led to declining wages. Economic liberals, such as John Locke, Adam Smith, and Wilhelm von Humboldt felt that the problems of an industrial society would correct themselves without government intervention. In the 19th century, the voting franchise in most liberal democracies was extended, and these newly enfranchised citizens often voted in favor of government solutions to the problems they faced in their everyday lives. A rapid increase in literacy and the spread of knowledge led to social activism in a variety of forms. Social liberals demanded laws against child labor and laws requiring minimum standards of worker safety and a minimum wage. The laissez faire economic liberals countered that such laws were an unjust imposition on life, liberty, and property, not to mention a hindrance to economic development. Thus began the struggle. On the one hand, economic liberals, who stress economic freedom and desire small governments. On the other hand, social liberals, who stress equality of opportunity, and desire a government large enough to protect citizens from the consequences of economic or natural difficulties that they consider too serious to be overcome without government aid. This 19th century social liberalism was the first significant split from classical liberalism. By the end of the 19th century, a growing body of liberal thought asserted that, in order to be free, individuals needed access to the requirements of fulfillment, including protection from exploitation and education. In 1911, L.T. Hobhouse published Liberalism, which summarized the new liberalism, including qualified acceptance of government intervention in the economy, and the collective right to equality in dealings, what he called "just consent." Meanwhile, the anti-statist strain of liberalism was still alive, and had become even more radical, arguably a form of anarchism. Gustave de Molinari in France and Herbert Spencer in England were prominent.
Natural rights vs. utilitarianism
anarchism anarchism The German Wilhelm von Humboldt developed the modern concepts of liberalism in his book The Limits of State Action. John Stuart Mill (J.S. Mill, 1806-1873) popularized and expanded these ideas in On Liberty (1859) and other works. He opposed collectivist tendencies while still placing emphasis on quality of life for the individual. He also had sympathy for female suffrage and (later in life) for labor co-operatives. One of Mill's most important contributions was his utilitarian justification of liberalism. Mill grounded liberal ideas in the instrumental and pragmatic, allowing the unification of subjective ideas of liberty gained from the French thinkers in the tradition of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the more rights-based philosophies of John Locke in the British tradition. Ironically, while Mill might be historically the last classical liberal, his utilitarianism was a major factor in classical liberalism's popular decline. The utilitarian notion of the public good began to overshadow the rights of the individual. Mill wrote in favor of providing the material, educational, and moral conditions for freedom to bloom.
War vs. peace
Another dispute in liberalism which began in the late 19th century was the attitude about war and peace. Classical liberalism was stridently anti-imperialist - what today we would call anti-interventionist. The Just War theory of Grotius was standard liberal fare, and English liberals denounced British empire-building. In America, Thomas Jefferson encapsulated non-interventionism: "free trade with all; entangling alliances with none". After World War I, President Woodrow Wilson, jettisoned Just War notions of neutrality and harm-reduction. Wilson advocated collective security - the idea that an alliance of states should put down aggressor states. The League of Nations, Wilson's brainchild, failed after the U.S. Congress refused to allow the United States to join, but the idea was resurrected later in the form of the United Nations. Most liberals today oppose unilateral war of one state on another state, except in self defense. Many accept multilateral war, carried out within a structure such as the United Nations, for such purposes as preventing genocide. Some accept wars for such purposes even without multilateral agreement or within the structure of NATO.
Liberalism and the great depression
NATO The Great Depression of the 1930s shook public faith in laissez-faire capitalism and "the profit motive," leading many to conclude that the unregulated markets could not produce prosperity and prevent poverty. Many liberals were troubled by the political instability and restrictions on liberty that they believed were caused by the growing relative inequality of wealth. Key liberals of this persuasion, such as John Dewey, John Maynard Keynes, and Franklin D. Roosevelt, argued for the creation of a more elaborate state apparatus to serve as the bulwark of individual liberty, permitting the continuation of capitalism while protecting the citizens against its percieved excesses. Some liberals, including Hayek, whose work The Road to Serfdom remains influential, argued against these institutions, believing the Great Depression and Second World War to be individual events, that, once passed, did not justify a permanent change in the role of government. Hayek Key liberal thinkers, such as Lujo Brentano, Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse, Thomas Hill Green, John Maynard Keynes, Bertil Ohlin and John Dewey, described how a government should intervene in the economy to protect liberty while avoiding socialism. These liberals developed the theory of modern liberalism (also "new liberalism," not to be confused with present-day neoliberalism). Modern liberals rejected both radical capitalism and the revolutionary elements of the socialist school. John Maynard Keynes, in particular, had a significant impact on liberal thought throughout the world. The Liberal Party in Britain, particularly since Lloyd George's People's Budget, was heavily influenced by Keynes, as was the Liberal International, the Oxford Liberal Manifesto of 1947 of the world organization of liberal parties. In the United States, the influence of Keynesianism on Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal has led modern liberalism to be identified with American liberalism and Canadian Liberalism. Other liberals, including Friedrich August von Hayek, Milton Friedman, and Ludwig von Mises, argued that the great depression was not a result of "laissez-faire" capitalism but a result of too much government intervention and regulation upon the market. In Friedman's work, "Capitalism and Freedom" he elucidated government regulation that occurred before the great depression including heavy regulations upon banks that prevented them, he argued, from reacting to the markets' demand for money. Furthermore, the U.S. Federal government had created a fixed currency pegged to the value of gold. This pegged value created a massive surplus of gold, but later the pegged value was too low which created a massive migration of gold from the U.S. Friedman and Hayek both believed that this inability to react to currency demand created a run on the banks that the banks were no longer able to handle, and that and the fixed exchange rates between the dollar and gold both worked to cause the great depression. He further argued in this thesis, that the government caused more pain upon the American public by first raising taxes, then by printing money to pay debts (thus causing inflation), the combination of which helped to wipe out the savings of the middle class.
Liberalism against totalitarianism
In the mid-20th century, liberalism began to define itself in opposition to totalitarianism. The term was first used by Giovanni Gentile to describe the socio-political system set up by Mussolini. Stalin would apply it to German Nazi-ism, and after the war it became a descriptive term for the common characteristics of fascist and Marxist-Leninist regimes. Totalitarian regimes sought and tried to implement absolute centralized control over all aspects of society, in order to achieve prosperity and stability. Such governments often justified such absolutism by arguing that the survival of their civilization was at risk. Opposition to totalitarian regimes acquired great importance in liberal and democratic thinking, and totalitarian regimes were often portrayed as trying to destroy liberal democracy. In Italy and Germany, nationalist governments linked corporate capitalism to the state, and promoted the idea that their nations were culturally and racially superior, and that conquest would give them their rightful "place in the sun". The propaganda machines of these totalitarian states argued that democracy was weak and incapable of decisive action, and that only a strong leader could impose necessary discipline. regimes The rise of totalitarianism became a lens for liberal thought. Many liberals began to analyze their own beliefs and principles, and came to the conclusion that totalitarianism arose because people in a degraded condition turn to dictatorships for solutions. From this, it was argued that the state had the duty to protect the economic well being of its citizens. As Isaiah Berlin said, "Freedom for the wolves means death for the sheep." This growing body of liberal thought argued that reason requires a government to act as a balancing force in economics. Isaiah Berlin Other liberal interpretations on the rise of totalitarianism were quite contrary to the growing body of thought on government regulation in supporting the market and capitalism. This included Friedrich Hayeks work, The Road to Serfdom. He argued that the rise of totalitarian dictatorships was the result of too much government intervention and regulation upon the market which caused loss of political and civil freedoms. Hayek also saw these economic controls being instituted in the United Kingdom and the United States and warned against these "Keynesian" institutions, believing that they can and will lead to the same totalitarian governments "Keynesians liberals" were attempting to avoid. Hayek saw authoritarian regimes such as the fascist, Nazis, and communists, as the same totalitarian branch; all of which sought the elimination or reduction of economic freedom. To him the elimination of economic freedom brought about the elimination of political freedom. Thus Hayek believes the differences between Nazis and communists are only rhetorical. Friedrich von Hayek and Milton Friedman stated that economic freedom is a necessary condition for the creation and sustainability of civil and political freedoms. Hayek believed the same totalitarian outcomes could occur in Britain (or anywhere else) if the state sought to control the economic freedom of the individual with the policy prescriptions outlined by people like Dewey, Keynes, or Roosevelt. Classical liberal studies by the Canadian "conservative" free market oriented Fraser Institute, the American "conservative" free market oriented Heritage Foundation, and the Wall Street Journal state that there is a relationship between economic freedom and political and civil freedoms to the extent claimed by Friedrich von Hayek. They agree with Hayek that those countries which restrict economic freedom ultimately restrict civil and political freedoms.
Liberalism after World War II
In much of the West, expressly liberal parties were caught between "conservative" parties on one hand, and "labor" or social democratic parties on the other hand. For example, the UK Liberal Party became a minor party. The same process occurred in a number of other countries, as the social democratic parties took the leading role in the Left, while pro-business conservative parties took the leading role in the Right. The post-war period saw the dominance of modern liberalism. Linking modernism and progressivism to the notion that a populace in possession of rights and sufficient economic and educational means would be the best defense against totalitarian threats, the liberalism of this period took the stance that by enlightened use of liberal institutions, individual liberties could be maximized, and self-actualization could be reached by the broad use of technology. Liberal writers in this period include economist John Kenneth Galbraith, philosopher John Rawls and sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf. A dissenting strain of liberalism developed that viewed any government involvement in the economy as a betrayal of liberal principles. Calling itself classical liberalism or libertarianism, this movement was centered around such schools of thought as Austrian Economics. The debate between personal liberty and social optimality occupies much of the theory of liberalism since the Second World War, particularly centering around the questions of social choice and market mechanisms required to produce a "liberal" society. One of the central parts of this argument concerns Kenneth Arrow's General Possibility Theorem. This thesis states that there is no consistent social choice function which satisifies unbounded decision making, independence of choices, Pareto optimality, and non-dictatorship. In short, according to the thesis, it is not possible to have unlimited liberty, a maximum amount of utility, and an unlimited range of choices at the same time. Another important argument within liberalism is the importance of rationality in decision making - whether the liberal state is best based on rigorous procedural rights or whether it should be rooted in substantial equality. One important liberal debate concerns whether people have positive rights as members of communities in addition to being protected from wrongs done by others. For many liberals, the answer is "yes": individuals have positive rights based on being members of a national, political, or local unit, and can expect protection and benefits from these associations. Members of a community have a right to expect that their community will to a certain degree regulate the economy since rising and falling economic circumstances cannot be controlled by the individual. If individuals have a right to participate in a public capacity, then they have a right to expect education and social protections against discrimination from other members of that public. Other liberals would answer "no": individuals have no such rights as members of communities, for such rights conflict with the more fundamental "negative" rights of other members of the community. After the 1970s, the liberal pendulum had swung away from increasing the role of government, and towards a greater use of the free market and laissez-faire principles. In essence, many of the old pre-World War I ideas were making a comeback. In part this was a reaction to the triumphalism of the dominant forms of liberalism of the time, but as well it was rooted in a foundation of liberal philosophy, particularly suspicion of the state, whether as an economic or philosophical actor. Even liberal institutions could be misused to restrict rather than promote liberty. Increasing emphasis on the free market emerged with Milton Friedman in the United States, and with members of the Austrian School in Europe. Their argument was that regulation and government involvement in the economy was a slippery slope, that any would lead to more, and that more was difficult to remove.
The impact of liberalism in the modern world
The impact of liberalism on the modern world is profound. The ideas of individual liberties, personal dignity, free expression, religious tolerance, private property, universal human rights, transparency of government, limitations on government power, popular sovereignty, national self-determination, privacy, enlightened and rational policy, the rule of law, fundamental equality, a free market economy, and free trade were all radical notions some 250 years ago. Liberal democracy, in its typical form of multiparty political pluralism, has spread to much of the world. Today all are accepted as the goals of policy in most nations, even if there is a wide gap between statements and reality. They are not only the goals of liberals, but also of social democrats, conservatives, and Christian Democrats. There is, of course, opposition. See the headlines of critique.
Liberalism in this age

A general overview of political positions
The word liberalism is today used differently in various countries. (See Liberalism worldwide.) One of the greatest contrasts is between the usage in the United States and usage in Continental Europe. In the US, liberalism is usually contrasted with conservatism, and American liberals support broader tolerance and more readily embrace multiculturalism and
Ideology
An ideology is a collection of ideas. The word ideology was coined by Count Destutt de Tracy in the late 18th century to define a "science of ideas." An ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things (compare Weltanschauung), as in common sense (see Ideology in everyday society) and several philosophical tendencies (see Political ideologies), or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society (for the Marxist definition of ideology - see Ideology as an instrument of social reproduction).
Ideology in everyday society
Every society has an ideology that forms the basis of the "public opinion" or common sense, a basis that usually remains invisible to most people within the society. This dominant ideology appears as "neutral", while all others that differ from the norm are often seen as radical, no matter what the actual vision may be. The philosopher Michel Foucault wrote about this concept of apparent ideological neutrality. Organisations that strive for power influence the ideology of a society to become what they want it to be. Political organisations (governments included) and other groups (e.g. lobbyists) try to influence people by broadcasting their opinions, which is the reason why so often many people in a society seem to "think alike". When most people in a society think alike about certain matters, or even forget that there are alternatives to the current state of affairs, we arrive at the concept of Hegemony, about which the philosopher Antonio Gramsci wrote. The much smaller scale concept of groupthink also owes something to his work. Modern linguists study the mechanism of conceptual metaphor, by which this 'thinking alike' is thought to be transmitted. There are many different kinds of ideology: political, social, epistemological, ethical, and so on. Meta-ideology is the study of the structure, form, and manifestation of ideologies. Meta-ideology posits that ideology is a system of ideas and thoughts bound by an internal logic and a few basic assumptions about reality that have no real factual basis, but are arbitrary choices that serve as the seed around which ideologies grow. According to this train of thought, ideologies are neither right nor wrong, but only a relativistic intellectual strategy for categorizing the world.
Political ideologies
In social studies, a political ideology is a certain ethical, set of ideals, principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class, or large group that explain how society should work, and offer some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power and to what ends it should be used. It can be a construct of political thought, often defining political parties and their policy. Studies of the concept of ideology itself (rather than specific ideologies) have been carried out under the name of systematic ideology. Political ideologies regard policies of many different aspects of a society, the most central of which are: economy, education, criminal law, management of criminals, minors, animals, environment, immigration, eugenics, race, use of the military, forced nationalism, forced religion
List of political ideologies
There are many proposed methods for the classification of political ideologies. See the political spectrum article for a more in-depth discussion of these different methods (each of whom generates a specific political spectrum). The following list attempts to divide ideologies into a number of groups; each group contains ideologies that have a certain theme or idea in common. Note that one ideology can belong to several groups, and there is sometimes considerable overlap between related ideologies.
Ideologies emphasizing ethnicity or nationality

- ethnic supremacy
- fascism, neo-Fascism
- clerical fascism
- Multiculturalism
- Nazism, neo-Nazism
- racism, racialism
- Pan-Arabism
- Pan-Africanism
- Pan-Iranism
- Pan-Slavism
- sultanism
- black nationalism
- white nationalism
Ideologies emphasizing class struggle

- Marxism, Leninism
- 'Marxism-Leninism'
- Stalinism
- Maoism
- Trotskyism
- left communism
- council communism
- eurocommunism
- neo-Marxism
- anarchism
- anarcho-syndicalism
- anarcho-socialism
- anarcho-communism
Ideologies emphasizing the individual

- Christian anarchism
- individualist anarchism
- libertarian socialism
- liberalism
- social liberalism
- ordoliberalism
- classical liberalism
- liberal conservatism
- market liberalism
- economic liberalism
- new liberalism
- neoliberalism
- American liberalism
- libertarianism
- anarcho-capitalism
- neolibertarianism
- minarchism
- paleolibertianism
- geolibertarianism
- georgism
- autonomism
- existentialism
- capitalism
- unregulated capitalism
- regulated capitalism
Ideologies and social-systems emphasizing the collectivity

- communitarianism
- communism, collectivism, egalitarianism
- Marxism
- socialism
- African socialism
- religious socialism
- Christian socialism
- democratic socialism
- infosocialism
- international socialism
- libertarian socialism
- Popular Socialism
- utopian socialism
- Peronism
Ideologies emphasizing territory

- nationalism
- regionalism
- Pan-Africanism
- Pan-Arabism
- Pan-Iranism
- Nazism
Ideologies based on religion

- Christian based ideologies
- Christian anarchism
- Christian communism
- Christian democracy
- Christian socialism
- clerical fascism
- Hindu-based ideologies
- Hindu nationalism
- Islamic-based ideologies
- Islamism, Muslim fundamentalism
- Jewish-based ideologies
- religious Zionism
- theocracy
- neo-theocracy
- communalism (South Asia)
- religious communism
- religious socialism
Conservatism

- conservatism
- liberal conservatism
- paleoconservatism
- neoconservatism
- compassionate conservatism
- social conservatism
Other ideologies

- centrism
- federalism
- feminism
- green politics
- animal welfarism
- internationalism, cosmopolitanism
- pacifism
- republicanism
- syndicalism
- pragmatism
- majoritarianism
- utilitarianism
- law
Epistemological ideologies
Even when the challenging of existing beliefs is encouraged, as in science, the dominant paradigm or mindset can prevent certain challenges, theories or experiments from being advanced. The philosophy of science mostly concerns itself with reducing the impact of these prior ideologies so that science can proceed with its primary task, which is (according to science) to create knowledge. There are critics who view science as an ideology in itself, or being an effective ideology, called scientism. Some scientists respond that, while the scientific method is itself an ideology, as it is a collection of ideas, there is nothing particularly wrong or bad about it. Other critics point out that while science itself is not a misleading ideology, there are some fields of study within science that are misleading. Two examples discussed here are in the fields of ecology and economics. A special case of science adopted as ideology is that of ecology, which studies the relationships between living things on Earth. Perceptual psychologist J. J. Gibson believed that human perception of ecological relationships was the basis of self-awareness and cognition itself. Linguist George Lakoff has proposed a cognitive science of mathematics wherein even the most fundamental ideas of arithmetic would be seen as consequences or products of human perception - which is itself necessarily evolved within an ecology. Deep ecology and the modern ecology movement (and, to a lesser degree, Green parties) appear to have adopted ecological sciences as a positive ideology. Some accuse ecological economics of likewise turning scientific theory into political economy, although theses in that science can often be tested. The modern practice of green economics fuses both approaches and seems to be part science, part ideology. This is far from the only theory of economics to be raised to ideology status - some notable economically-based ideologies include mercantilism, social darwinism, communism, laissez-faire economics, and "free trade". There are also current theories of safe trade and fair trade which can be seen as ideologies.
History of the concept of ideology
Perhaps the most accessible source for the original meaning of "ideology" is Hippolyte Taine's work on the Ancien Regime (first volume of "Origins of Contemporary France"). He describes ideology as rather like teaching philosophy by the Socratic method, but without extending the vocabulary beyond what the general reader already possessed, and without the examples from observation which practical science would require. Taine identifies it not just with Destutt de Tracy, but with his milieu, and includes Condillac as one of its precursors. The word "ideology" was coined long before the Russians coined "intelligentsia", or before the adjective "intellectual" referred to a sort of person (a substantive). Thus these words were not around when the hard-headed, driven Napoleon Bonaparte took the word "ideologues" to ridicule his intellectual opponents.
Ideology as an instrument of social reproduction
Karl Marx proposed a base/superstructure model of society. The base refers to the means of production of society. The superstructure is formed on top of the base, and comprises that society's ideology, as well as its legal system, political system, and religions. For Marx, the base determines the superstructure. Because the ruling class controls the society's means of production, the superstructure of society, including its ideology, will be determined according to what is in the ruling class's best interests. Critics of the Marxist approach feel that it attributes too much importance to economic factors in influencing society. The ideologies of the dominant class of a society are proposed to all members of that society in order to make the ruling class' interests appear to be the interests of all. György Lukács describes this as a projection of the class consciousness of the ruling class, while Antonio Gramsci advances the theory of cultural hegemony to explain why people in the working-class can have a false conception of their own interests. Louis Althusser proposed that ideology makes use of a special type of discourse: the lacunar discourse. A number of propositions, which are never untrue, suggest a number of other propositions, which are. In this way, the essence of the lacunar discourse is what is not told (but is suggested). For example, the statement 'All are equal before the law', which is a theory behind current legal systems, suggests that all people may be of equal worth or have equal 'opportunities'. This is not true, because the concept of private property over the means of production results in some people being able to own more (much more) than others, and their property brings power and influence (the rich can afford better lawyers, among other things, and this puts in question the principle of equality before the law). The dominant forms of ideology in capitalism are (in chronological order): #classical liberalism #social democracy #neo-liberalism and they correspond to the stages of development of capitalism: #extensive stage #intensive stage #contemporary capitalism (or late capitalism, or current crisis) Other dominant forms of capitalist ideology such as social darwinism cannot be related to a specific phase. The Marxist view of ideology as an instrument of social reproduction has been an important touchstone for the sociology of knowledge and theorists such as Karl Mannheim, Daniel Bell and Jürgen Habermas amongst many others.
Feminism as critique of ideology
Naturalizing socially constructed patterns of behavior has always been an important mechanism in the production and reproduction of ideologies. Feminist theorists have paid close attention to these mechanisms. Adrienne Rich e.g. has shown how to understand motherhood as a social institution. ko:이데올로기
External Links

- [http://www.tamilnation.org/ideology/ The Strength of an Idea]

Liberalism worldwide

:This article discusses liberalism as a major political current in specific regions and countries. For the main entry on liberalism, see Liberalism. This article gives information on Liberalism worldwide in diverse countries around the world. It is an overview of parties that adhere more or less (explicitly) to the ideas of political liberalism and is therefore a list of liberal parties around the world.
Introduction
One can argue what a liberal party is. In the list below, a liberal party is defined as a political party that adheres to the basic principles of (political) liberalism. This is a broad political current, that includes both right of center (or free market) liberals and left of center liberals. All liberal parties emphasize individual rights, but they differ in their opinion on an active role for the state. After liberals have gained power and realized their first reforms, one often sees a divergence within their ranks:
- Some are satisfied and rest apart with these reforms, developing into liberal conservatives or simply becoming conservatives, mostly still adhering to free market policies. An example is the Liberal Democratic Party (Japan). These parties are not included in the overview.
- The mainstream of liberalism continues on the path of gradual reforms, embraces electoral democracy as a basic liberal position and organizes itself in the form of the traditional liberal parties. These parties are included in the overview .
- Part of this mainstream emphasizes classical liberal issues and concentrates on economic liberalism. This is, for example, the origin of libertarianism. Many people consider this a separate political theory/current. Others argue that these parties are still liberal parties. Therefore they are included in the overview.
- Another part of the mainstream is more left-wing. It embraces and emphasizes democratic reforms and often strives for social reforms. These parties sometimes prefer to name themselves radical or progressive liberal and are generally quite positive about the role of the state in the economy, by advocating Keynesianism for example, while continuing to support a market economy. United States liberalism developed out of this tradition. Progressive liberals tend to use labels such as Radical, Progressive, Free-minded or simply Democratic instead of Liberal. These parties are included in the overview.
- For some liberals this doesn’t go far enough: they joined social democratic parties. They are not included in the list.
- Next to these development one sees the rise of new centrist or pragmatic parties that share liberal values and develop into liberal or similar parties. These parties are included in the overview too.
- Finally one sees liberals joining parties with a broader political range. This happens especially in countries where the electoral system favors a two-party system. :Note: In some cases the liberal current has steered into a populist direction (e.g. the Freedom Party (Austria)), while in other cases populist parties have adopted the word "liberal" in their names (e.g. the Liberal Democratic Party (Russia) and the Liberal Democratic Party (Lithuania). These parties have only a tenuous connection - if any - to liberalism. Many liberal or similar parties are members of the Liberal International and/or of its regional partners, like the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party and the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats. Generally, membership in these international organizations is an indication that a party is indeed liberal. Therefore, all members are listed. However, some of them are quite centrist parties whose liberal character is disputed by some.
International organizations of parties

- Liberal International
- ELDR (ALDE)
- CALD
- Africa Liberal Network
- Liberal Network for Latin America
Parliamentary parties and other parties with substantial support
:This list includes also parties which were represented in the last previous legislature and still exists as well as some banned or exiles parties (Burma, Cuba). Liberals might be active in other parties, but that is no reason to include a party. :See the remarks above about the criteria. Minor parties are listed below
Africa
Liberalism is a relatively new current for Africa. Traditionally it only existed in Egypt, Senegal and South Africa.
- There is no liberal party in Algeria. The main Berber party, the Rally for Culture and Democracy (Rassemblement pour la Culture et la Démocratie) could be considered to embrace some liberal values.
- In Angola, the liberal Liberal Democratic Party (Partido Liberal Democratico, member LI) is a small liberal party.
- In Benin, the Rebirth Party of Benin (Parti de la renaissance du Bénin), might be considered a liberal party, but it exact profile is not available.
- In Burkina Faso, the Alliance for Democracy and Federation (Alliance pour la Démocratie et la Fédération), might be considered a liberal party, but it exact profile is not available.
- In Cape Verde, the Movement for Democracy (Movimento para a Democracia), might be considered a liberal party, but its exact profile is not available.
- In Côte d'Ivoire, the Rally of the Republicans (Rassemblement des Republicains, member LI) is the liberal, main opposition party.
- In Egypt, the Liberal Party (Hizb al-Ahrar) and the New Delegation Party (Hizb al-Wafd-al-Jadid) could be considered liberal parties. The newest liberal party in Egypt is [El-Ghad Party] (Tomorrow's Party) lead by the opposition leader Ayman Nour[http://www.elghad.org]. See for more information: Liberalism in Egypt
- In Equatorial Guinea, the National Democratic Union of Equatorial Guinea (Unión Democratica Nacional de Guinea Ecuatorial, member LI) claims to be a liberal party.
- In Gambia, the United Democratic Party, might be considered a liberal party, but it exact profile is not available.
- In Ghana, the New Patriotic Party is a right of center liberal party that is unclear about its international affiliations.
- In Kenya, the Liberal Democratic Party might be considered a liberal party.
- In Malawi, the liberal character of the United Democratic Front is despite its membership of the LI disputable. The Democratic Progressive Party was formed in 2005 by President Bingu wa Mutharika after a dispute with the UDF. There were allegations that members of the former governing UDF did not adequately tackle corruption. It is unclear if the party will be ideological or personalist in style.
- In Morocco, two center-right parties, the Constitutional Union (Union Constitutionnelle) and the Popular Movement (Mouvement Populaire) are both member of the LI.
- In Mozambique, the Liberal Democratic Party of Mozambique (Partido Liberal e Democrático de Moçambique) and the Social Liberal and Democratic Party (Partido Social-Liberal e Democrático) claim to be liberal parties, but both lost parliamentary representation.
- In Senegal, the Senegalese Democratic Party (Parti Démocratique Sénégalais, member LI) is a liberal party with a strong personalist character. See for more information: Liberalism in Senegal.
- In Seychelles, the Seychelles National Party (observer LI) is a liberal party.
- In South Africa, the Democratic Alliance (member LI) is a liberal party. See for more information: Liberalism in South Africa.
- In Tanzania, the Civic United Front (Chama Cha Wananchi), member LI) and the United Democratic Party, observer LI) are liberal parties.
- In Tunisia, the Social Liberal Party (Parti Social Libéral, observer LI) is a more or less liberal party.
- In Zambia, the main opposition party, the United Party for National Development (observer LI) takes a liberal position in the political spectrum.
- In Zimbabwe], liberalism is not organized, but the left-leaning opposition [[Movement for Democratic Change]] includes liberals and social democrats opposed to the heavy-handed Maoism and social conservatism of dictator [[Robert Mugabe.
America
In many Latin American countries, liberalism and radicalism have been associated with generally left-of-center political movements such as Colombia's Liberal Party, historically concerned mostly with effecting government decentralization and regional autonomy (liberals were influential in the total dissolution of at least two defunct countries, the United Provinces of Central America and Gran Colombia) and separation of church and state. At times, ironically enough, the anti-clerical and secularist stances promoted by Latin American liberals have resulted in limitations on the civil rights of clergy or others associated with the Church (as in Mexico,where law still prohibits priests from public office). Liberalism in North America has a different background.
- In Argentina, the traditional progressive liberal party is the Radical Civic Union (Unión Civica Radical, a party that joined the SI). Nowadays it more or less adheres to a synthesis of liberal and social democratic ideas. The party Recreate for Growth (Recrear para el Crecimiento) seems to be an attempt to form a market liberal party. Some provincial conservative parties use the label liberal. The Union of Democratic Center (Unión del Centro Democrático) considers itself to be a liberal party, others see it as a conservative party. (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Argentina).
- In Aruba, the character of the Aruban Liberal Organization (Organisacion Liberal Arubiano) is not clear. The party lost parliamentary representation in the 2005 election.
- In Bahamas, the dominant party is the left of center liberal Progressive Liberal Party.
- In Bolivia, liberalism was in the oligarchic period dominant. (Main article: Liberalism in Bolivia).
- In Brazil, three parties name themselves liberal, but the Party of the Liberal Front (Partido da Frente Liberal) is a conservative party, member of the IDU. The Liberal party (Partido Liberal) was founded as a socialist liberal party , and the Social Liberal Party (Partido Social Liberal) can be considered a liberal party in the US sense. The populist, centrist Party of the Brazilian Democratic Movement (Partido do Movimento Democrático Brasileiro) takes a US-sense liberal position in the spectrum. (Main article: Liberalism in Brazil).
- In Canada, Liberal refers mainly to the policies and ideas of the Liberal Party of Canada/Parti Libéral du Canada (member LI), the most frequent governing party of Canada for the last century and one of the largest liberal parties in the world. The Liberal Party of Canada has generally supported a welfare state and, in the latter half of the 20th Century was regarded as a party of the center left. During the 1990s, the Liberal Party moved to the neoliberal right on economic issues, although it continues to espouse left-of-center policies on some social issues. The Quebec Liberal Party and British Columbia Liberal Party combine liberalism with more conservative ideas. (Main article: Liberalism in Canada).
- In Chile, originally the Social Democrat Radical Party (Partido Radical Social-Democráta, member SI) was a left of center liberal party, but nowadays it is a social democratic party. (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Chile).
- In Colombia, the liberal current developed into the Colombian Liberal Party (Partido Liberal Colombiano, despite its name an active member of the SI), which is a left of center, somewhat populist party, somewhere between liberalism and social democracy. (Main article: Liberalism in Colombia).
- In Costa Rica, the Libertarian Movement Party (Partido Movimiento Libertario, observer LI) is a classical liberal party.
- In Cuba, non-communist parties are banned. This makes the three liberal parties Liberal Democratic Party (Partido Liberal Democratico, observer LI), Democratic Solidarity Party (Partido Solidaridad Democratica, observer LI) and the Cuban Liberal Movement (Movimiento Liberal Cubano) illegal. In exile the Cuban Liberal Union (Unión Liberal Cubana, member LI) is active.
- In Dominican Republic, the originally left-wing Dominican Liberation Party (Partido de la Liberacíon Dominicana) developed into a center liberal party.
- In Ecuador, the Alfarista Radical Front (Frente Radical Alfarista) and the Ecuadorian Radical Liberal Party (Partido Liberal Radical Ecuatoriana) are two small remainders of the traditional liberal current. (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Ecuador).
- In Greenland, the Feeling of Community Party (Atássut) is a right of center liberal party, as are the Democrats.
- In Grenada, the National Democratic Congress is a center liberal party.
- In Honduras, the Liberal Party of Honduras (Partido Liberal de Honduras, member LI) is the traditional center liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Honduras).
- In Mexico, liberalism was the dominant current in the nineteenth century. Nowadays it is unrepresented. (Main article: Liberalism in Mexico).
- In Nicaragua, the liberal character of the right-wing Constitutional Liberal Party (Partido Liberal Constitucionalista, former member LI) is disputable. (Main article: Liberalism in Nicaragua).
- In Panama, the National Liberal Party (Partido Liberal Nacional), observer LI is a right of center liberal party, as is the Nationalist Republican Liberal Movement (Partido Movimiento Liberal Republicano Nacionalista). (Main article: Liberalism in Panama).
- In Paraguay, the Authentic Radical Liberal Party (Partido Liberal Radical Auténtico, member LI) is a left of center liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Paraguay).
- In Peru, the Popular Action (Acción Popular) and the Union for Peru (Unión por el Perú) are more or less liberal parties. (Main article: Liberalism in Peru).
- In Puerto Rico, the Popular Democratic Party (Partido Popular Democrático) is a left of center liberal party.
- In Suriname, the Democratic Alternative '91 (Democratisch Alternatief '91) is a center liberal party.
- In the United States, the primary use of the term liberal in the United States is at some variance with European and British usage. In the 19th century it was not a common term in American philosophy or politics, partially because the two main parties were a mixture of populist and nationalist elements. The Democratic Party was the party of free trade, low tariffs and laissez-faire entrepreneurialism, while the Republican Party advocated national citizenship, transparency and a stable currency. Liberalism in the United States was primarily defined by the self-proclaimed liberal presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. While the emphasis on mutual collaboration through liberal institutions as an alternative to the threat and use of force remained consistent with international liberalism, United States liberals also claimed that individuals have a right to expect the government to guarantee social justice. This was in part a consequence of the influence of the ideas of British economist John Maynard Keynes on Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. The New Deal had the effect of stealing the thunder of social democratic forces and the necessity to prevent social unrest strengthened this development. As McCarthyism gave the terms socialism and even social democracy a meaning synonymous with treason in the U.S., many to the left of center moderated their views, aligning with the New Deal liberals. Since approximately the Reagan era, the word liberal has been so much used as a derogatory term by U.S. conservatives that it led to an ever increasing number of critics of conservatism to identify with progressivism, a left-wing political philosophy that places less emphasis on democratic consensus, rather than turning to liberalism. The Democratic Party is identified as the liberal party within the broader definition of liberalism thus putting it in contrast with most other parties listed here. The Libertarian Party, the (disputably) third largest political party in the United States, particularly centers itself on free markets and individual liberty. (Main article: Liberalism in the United States)
- In Uruguay, liberalism organized itself in the nineteenth century in the Colorado (or Red) Party, (Partido Colorado) nowadays an heterogonous party, divided in factions ranging from conservatism to social democracy. Its general profile is more or less liberal. (Main article: Liberalism in Uruguay).
- In Venezuela, liberalism was a strong force in the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century. Nowadays it is unrepresented. (Main article: Liberalism in Venezuela).
Asia
Liberalism has or had some tradition in some countries. Nowadays it is a growing current in East Asia, but in many of these countries liberals tend not to use the label liberal. :Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Georgia, Russia, and Turkey are listed under Europe.
- In Burma, the National Council of the Union of Burma, member CALD, is active in exile.
- In Cambodia, the Pak Sam Rainsy (Sam Rainsy Party, member CALD, claims to be a more or less liberal party, though some dispute this and consider it a xenophobic party.
- In Hong Kong, the Democratic Party is a liberal party, strongly emphasizing the need of democratic reforms. The Liberal Party is often considered to be the business party, not open for democratic reforms.
- In India, liberalism never became a strong current and nowadays it is unrepresented. (Main article: Liberalism in India).
- In Israel, Shinui (שינוי, in English Change, member LI) is a strongly anti-clerical, market liberal party.
- In Japan, the word liberal is used in Japan by the main conservative party, the Liberal Democratic Party (Jiyu Minshuto). The Democratic Party (Minshu-to) is a left of center liberal, social democratic party. The liberal character of the Liberal League (Jiyu Rengo) is disputed, it is also considered to be conservative party. (Main article: Liberalism in Japan).
- In Korea, South, the Democratic Party (Min-ju-dang) and the Our Party (Yeollin Uri Dang) are left of center liberal parties. (Main article: Liberalism in South Korea).
- In Lebanon, the National Liberal Party (Hizb al-Ahrar al-Watani) is a liberal pro-independence (from Syria) party.
- In Malaysia, the Malaysian People's Movement Party (Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia, member CALD) seems to be a more or less liberal party.
- In Philippines, the Liberal Party, member LI, CALD) is a center liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in the Philippines).
- In Singapore, due to the electoral system the liberal Singapore Democratic Party (member CALD) is not represented in parliament. The less intransigent liberal Singapore People's Party is represented in parliament.
- In Taiwan, the Democratic Progressive Party (Min-chu Chin-pu Tang, member