Home About us Products Services Contact us Bookmark
:: wikimiki.org ::
Social Liberalism

Social liberalism

Social liberalism is a label used by progressive liberal parties in order to differentiate themselves from market liberal parties, especially when there are two or more liberal parties in a country. Additionally, it also means Social progressivism, usually when contrasted with Social conservatism. Social liberalism (also called new liberalism) is a political philosophy that emphasizes mutual collaboration through liberal institutions, rather than the threat and use of force, to solve political controversies. Social liberalism, as a branch of liberalism, contends that society must protect liberty and opportunity for all citizens. Social liberalism was a development of liberalism in the early 20th century that originated with the writings of liberal thinkers such as Lujo Brentano, Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse, Thomas Hill Green, John Maynard Keynes, Bertil Ohlin and John Dewey. Rejecting both radical capitalism and the revolutionary elements from the socialist school, modern liberalism emphasized positive liberty, seeking to enhance the freedoms of the poor and disadvantaged in society. Social liberalism, also called new liberalism, is very different from the ambiguous term neoliberalism, a name given to various proponents of the free markets and also to some conservative opponents of free markets, such as mercantilistic conservatives, in the late 20th century's global economy. The ambiguous term neoliberalism has been used to describe the policies of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, since it advocates positions contrary to many of those taken by social liberals. The use of the term social or "new liberal" has fallen out of favor in recent years. For more context, see Liberalism. category:Liberalismcategory:Political theories

Progressive

Progressive can be a political word referring to:
- Progressivism, a political philosophy
- Progressive Party, a political party
- The Progressive, a left-wing monthly magazine
- Progressive tax Progressive may also refer to:
- Progressive music
  - Progressive rock
  - Progressive metal
  - Progressive electronica
- Progressive Era in the United States (1890-1913)
- Progressive (insurance company), a company providing auto insurance in the US
- Progressive tense in grammar
- Progressive lenses, used to correct presbyopia
- Progressive function, in mathematics
- Progressive JPEG, image format which displays scans from lower quality to higher quality during transmission
- Progressive scan is a form of video transmission which is frame-based instead of field-based

Liberal parties

: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 LI, CALD) is a left of center liberal party. The Taiwan Solidarity Union is a progressive centrist party characterised primarily by its Taiwanese nationalism and derives is membership from both the Chinese Nationalist Party's former moderate and Taiwan-oriented fringe and DPP supporters disgruntled by the party's moderation on the question of Taiwanese sovereignty. Its liberal character is questionable, although it its part of the DPP's left-of-centre and Taiwan-oriented Pan-Green alliance (in contrast with the conservative and China-oriented Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) and People First Party. (Main article: Liberalism in Taiwan).
- In Thailand, the Democratic Party (Pak Prachatipat, member CALD) is a more or less liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Thailand).

Europe

In general, liberalism in Europe is a political movement that supports a broad tradition of individual liberties and constitutionally-limited and democratically accountable government. This usually encompasses the belief that government should act to alleviate poverty and other social problems, but not through radical changes to the structure of society. European liberals are divided on the degree of government intervention in economy, but generally they favor limited intervention. In Northern European countries, it refers to somebody who emphasizes individual liberty in economical, social, cultural and ethical topics and a free market policy with some degree of government intervention. It generally does not have the particular connotations of radicalism that the word carries in the United States, though it does not exclude them either. In France and in Southern Europe, the word is used either to refer to the traditional liberal anti-clericalism or to economic liberalism. However, in recent years in France, the word is being increasingly used by proponents of laissez-faire capitalism and minarchists to describe themselves; in reaction, ultra-libéral is a pejorative term aimed by a large section of the French left-wing against those whom they regard as having extreme capitalist views. The more moderate form of political liberalism in France was long associated more with the Radical Party, leading to the use of the term radicals to refer to political liberals. The French Radicals tend to be more statist than most European liberals, but share the liberal values on other issues. In France and in Southern Europe, the word "liberal" does not include always the suggestion of general support for individual rights that it carries in Northern Europe. In European countries, liberals tend to label themselves either as liberals, or as radicals, centrists or democrats (though some would dispute the liberal character of the Northern European centrist parties).
- In Albania, liberalism is weak. Two parties could be considered to embrace liberal values: the Democratic Alliance Party (Partia Aleanca Demokratike, member LI, ELDR) and the Unity for Human Rights Party (Partia Bashkimi për të Drejtat e Njeriut), which is the party of the ethnic minorities. (Main article: Liberalism in Albania.)
- In Andorra, the Liberal Party of Andorra (Partit Liberal d'Andorra, member LI, ELDR) is a right of center liberal party and became the dominant political party.
- In Armenia, traditional liberalism doesn't play a role any more, but the Republican Party of Armenia (Hayastani Hanrapetakan Kusaktsutyun) joined the ELDR group in the Council of Europe. (Main article: Liberalism in Armenia.)
- In Austria, liberalism almost disappeared, when the Liberal Forum (Liberales Forum, member LI, ELDR) became a micro-party. Sometimes the name of the main right-wing populist party, the Freedom Party of Austria is wrongly translated as Liberal party of Austria. (Main article: Liberalism in Austria.)
- In Belarus, liberalism is under threat. One of the main opposition parties is the liberal United Civic Party of Belarus (Abjadnanaja Hramadzianskaja Partyja Biełarusi).
- The Belgian party system is divided by language. In Flanders the liberal Flemish Liberals and Democrats (Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten, member LI, ELDR), comprising both market and left of center liberals, is one of the dominant parties. Smaller liberal parties are Spirit, allied with the social democrats, and Vivant, allied to the VLD. In the French speaking part of the country the nowadays center liberal Reformist Movement (Mouvement Réformateur, member LI, ELDR) is one of the mayor parties. Affiliated with this party is the German speaking Party for Freedom and Progress (Partei für Freiheit und Fortschritt). (Main article: Liberalism in Belgium.)
- In Bosnia-Herzegovina, liberalism is weak, because of the domination by ethnic parties. A small and rather unsuccessful liberal party is the Liberal Democratic Party (Liberalno demokratska stranka, member ELDR). The Party for Bosnia and Hercegovina (Stranka za Bosnu i Hercegovinu) can be considered a more or less liberal party.
- In Bulgaria, organized liberalism was initially quite unsuccessful. Liberalism is now represented by the mainly Turkish minority party Movement for Rights and Freedoms (Dviženie za prava i svobodi, observer LI, member ELDR) and the National Movement for Simeon II (Nacionalno Dviženie Simeon Vtori, member LI, ELDR), both taking a more or less liberal position. (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Bulgaria.)
- In Croatia, liberalism is very divided. One could distinguish three parties: the center Croatian People's Party - Liberal Democrats (Croatian Hrvatska narodna stranka - Liberalni Demokrati, member ELDR), the left of center Liberal Party (Liberalna stranka, member ELDR, observer LI) and the right of center Croatian Social Liberal Party (Hrvatska socijalno liberalna stranka, member LI, ELDR). (Main article: Liberalism in Croatia).
- In Cyprus, the United Democrats (Enomeni Dimokrates, member ELDR) are a left of center liberal party. In North Cyprus the left of center Peace and Democracy Movement (Bariş ve Demokrasi Hareketi), might be considered a liberal party, but it exact profile is not available. See also Liberalism in Cyprus.
- In Czech Republic, liberalism is clearly unsuccessful. . Four parliamentary liberal parties work together, theCivic Democratic Alliance (Obcanska demokraticka aliance, member ELDR), the Freedom Union-Democratic Union (Unie Svobody - Demokratická unie) and the Liberal Reform Party (Liberální Reformní Strana) and the Path of Change (Cesta zmeny, member of EDP). They were unsuccessful at the last European elections, obtained only 1,69%. At these elections the European Democrats (Evropští demokraté) proved to be a liberal alternative, but it joined the EPP. (Main article: Liberalism in the Czech lands).
- In Denmark, liberalism is divided in two parties, the left of center social liberal Radical Left (Det Radikale Venstre, member LI, ELDR) and the right-wing market liberal Left, (Venstre Danmarks liberale parti, member LI, ELDR). (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Denmark).
- In Estonia, the Estonian Reform Party (Eesti Reformierakond, member LI), ELDR is a free market liberal party. The liberal character of the centrist (centre-left) Estonian Centre Party (Eesti Keskerakond, member LI), ELDR) can be disputed. (Main article: Liberalism in Estonia).
- In Faroe Islands, the Union Party (Sambandsflokkurin) and the Self-Government Party (Sjálvstýrisflokkurin) were or are aligned with the Danish liberal parties.
- In Finland, the dominant LI and ELDR member party is the original agrarian Finnish Center (Suomen Keskusta), however the liberal character of this party is disputed. The Swedish minority party Swedish People's Party (Svenska Folkpartiet i Finland, member LI, ELDR) has a more clear liberal profile. The original liberal current is now organized in the Liberals (Liberaalit), a very small extra-parliamentary party. At the autonomous island of Åland the Liberals for Åland (Liberalerna på Åland, observer LI) are a dominant force. (Main article: Liberalism and centrism in Finland).
- In France, the original liberal current disappeared and market liberalism is now represented in the conservative Union for a Popular Movement. The originally left of center radical liberal party split up in the right of center liberal Radical Party (Parti Radical) and the left of center social liberal Left Radical Party (Parti Radical de Gauche). (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in France).
- In Georgia, the National Movement - Democrats (Natshhionakhuri Modraoba - Demokrathebi) has to develop a clear profile, but there are signs it will develop into a liberal party.
- In Germany, the Free Democratic Party (Freie Demokratische Partei, member LI, ELDR) is a center and market liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Germany).
- In Gibraltar, the Liberal Party of Gibraltar (member LI) is a liberal party.
- In Greece, the formerly strong liberal current disappeared. (Main article: Liberalism in Greece).
- In Hungary, the Alliance of Free Democrats (Szabad Demokratak Szövetsege, member LI), ELDR) is a center market liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Hungary).
- In Iceland, the Progressive Party (Framsóknarflokkurinn, member LI) is an agrarian liberal party. The newly found Liberal Party (Frjáslyndi Flokkurin) seems to be a liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism and centrism in Iceland).
- In Ireland, the Progressive Democrats (member ELDR) are a liberal party on social and economic issues.
- In Italy, liberalism got strongly divided after the shake up of the political system. Liberals are now divided over the center liberal Italy of Values-List Di Pietro (Italia dei Valori - Lista Di Pietro, member LI), ELDR, the left of center Daisy (La Margherita, a merger of liberal and Christian-democratic forces, so it includes both liberals and Christian democrats), the left of center European Republican Movement (Movimento Repubblicani Europei, member ELDR), the old - nowadays right of center - Italian Republican Party (Partito Repubblicano Italiano, member ELDR) and the alternative liberal Italian Radicals or Lista Bonino (Radicali Italiani, member ELDR). Moreover, the newest Federation of Liberaldemocrats (Federazione dei Liberaldemocratici), the only north-based party, inspired to the real liberal and democratic values, has enjoyed the latest elections in the past two years, and will challenge other parties in the next future. (Main article: Liberalism and radicalism in Italy).
- In Latvia, the Latvian Way (Latvian Way, member LI, ELDR) is a right of center market liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Latvia).
- In Lithuania, the Liberal and Centre Union (Liberalų ir centro sąjunga, member LI), ELDR) is a center liberal party and the New Union Social Liberals (Naujoji Sąjunga (socialliberalai), observer LI), member ELDR) is a left of center liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Lithuania).
- In Luxembourg, the Democratic Party (Demokratesch Partei//Parti Démocratique, member LI, ELDR) is the traditional liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Luxembourg).
- In Macedonia, the liberals are divided over the Liberal Democratic Party (Liberalna Demokraticka Partija, member LI), part of the left of center government coalition and the Liberal Party of Macedonia (Liberalna Partija na Makedonija, member ELDR), part of the right of center opposition coalition. (Main article: Liberalism in Macedonia).
- In Moldova, liberalism is divided over the social liberal Party Alliance Our Moldova (Partidul Alianţa «Moldova Noastră»), a merger of liberal and social democrat forces and the market liberal Social Liberal Party (Partidul Social-Liberal). (Main article: Liberalism in Moldova).
- In Netherlands, liberalism is divided over two parties in the Netherlands, the left of center liberal Democrats 66 (Democraten 66, member LI, ELDR) and the right of center market liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie, member LI, ELDR). Furthermore, in 2004, the Green Left started profiling itself as a 'leftist liberal' party, thus possibly breaking with its socialist roots. (Main article: Liberalism in the Netherlands).
- In Norway, Venstre (litt. Left, member LI) is a centrist liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Norway).
- In Poland, the Democratic Party (Partia Demokratyczna, member ELDR) is a centre-liberal party. It didn't succeed in entering parliament in the 2005 election. The Platforma Obywatelska is economically liberal. (Main article: Liberalism in Poland).
- In Portugal, liberalism was a strong force in history. Nowadays liberalism is not represented anymore. (Main article: Liberalism in Portugal).
- In Romania, the National Liberal Party (Partidul Naţional Libera, member LI), ELDR) is a center liberal party. (Main article: Liberalism in Romania).
- In Russia, Yabloko (Yabloko, Russian Democratic Party, Jabloko - Rossijskaja Demokratičeskaja Partija, member LI) is a left of center liberal party, the Union of Right Forces (Sojuz Pravych Sil, member IDU) is a right of center liberal party. This last party can also be seen as a democratic conservative market party. The so-called Liberal Democratic Party of Russia is not at all liberal; it is a nationalist, right-wing populist party. (Main article Liberalism in Russia.
- In the small country of San Marino, the Popular Alliance of Sammarinese Democrats for the Republic (Alleanza Popolare dei Democratici Sammarinesi per la Repubblica) is a center liberal party.
- In Serbia, liberalism is divided. The small centrist Civic Alliance of Serbia (Graðanski Savez Srbije) has a clear liberal profile. The right of center Democratic Party (Demokratska Stranka) officially aligned itself with the European social democrats and the G17 Plus is somewhere between liberalism and conservatism. The liberal character of the Liberals of Serbia (Liberali Srbije, observer LI, member ELDR) is disputed due to their campaign for the last elections, in whi

Market liberal

Classical liberalism (or alternatively Classic liberalism) is a political school of thought that holds that all rights are held by individuals, and that governments are put into place solely in order to defend those rights. Classical liberals promote the use of restrictive constitutions in the formation of governments, to ensure that their role is constrained to the defense of these rights. "Classical liberalism" can refer to early (approximately pre-1850) liberalism, or it can refer to economic liberalism which is similar to and derived from the historical classical liberals.

Introduction

The classic liberal philosophy places a particular emphasis on the role of property rights in ensuring the rights of the individual, and forms the philosophical underpinning of the free market system. The precepts of classic liberalism were probably best described by John Locke and Adam Smith, and illuminated much of the thought at the time of the American revolution. As a result, the United States Constitution and the United States Declaration of Independence are both documents that embody many principles of classic liberalism. Modern liberalism tends to deviate from this definition of the term "liberal" in that it espouses the use of the power of government to achieve a variety of desirable goals, ranging from social justice to economic equality. The libertarian movement is probably the closest modern derivative of classic liberalism, although other political movements and parties sometimes incorporate its ideals, and often borrow from its rhetoric. The CATO Institute briefly discusses these changes and their views on the term Classical Liberalism, stating from their website: :"Classical liberal" is a bit closer to the mark, but the word "classical" connotes a backward-looking philosophy. Finally, "liberal" may well be the perfect word in most of the world--the liberals in societies from China to Iran to South Africa to Argentina are supporters of human rights and free markets--but its meaning has clearly been corrupted by contemporary American liberals." Classical liberals often prefer to call themselves liberals because they see themselves as the only rightful inheritors of Liberalism.

Origins

Classical liberalism is a political and economic philosophy. With roots in ancient Greek and medieval thought, it received an early expression in the 16th century by the School of Salamanca and its classic formulation in the Enlightenment tradition. The Wealth of Nations (1776) by Scottish philosopher Adam Smith is one of the classic works. Another early expression is the tradition of a Nordic school of liberalism set in motion by a Finnish parliamentarian Anders Chydenius. Classical liberalism tries to circumscribe the limits of political power and to define and support individual liberty and private property. The phrase is often used as a means of delineating the older philosophy called liberalism from modern liberalism, in order to avoid semantic confusion. modern liberalism] Classic Liberalism is close to 18th century Liberalism. The Wealth of Nations (1776) by Adam Smith is considered one of the classic foundations of liberalism. While Adam Smith provides an explanation of liberalism and economics, the legal and philosophical understanding originates with scholars like John Locke and evolves through Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Immanuel Kant, in the Perpetual Peace, creates an international liberal framework to foster a sustainable world peace. The term "liberal" derived from this time period (generally the 18th and 19th century) with its origination stemming from the belief in individual freedom, economic freedom (including free markets), and limited representative government. This original understanding of the word "liberal" carries the same meaning in some parts of the world, but in others (such as the United States) the meaning and ideology behind Liberalism is ironically the exact opposite (welfare state, tariffs, heavy intervention and regulation into the economy, wage and price controls)of its original meaning. In many countries liberalism holds a position between classical liberalism and American liberalism. Only a few major parties adhere to classical liberalism, most of the liberal parties accept limited government intervention in economics. Perpetual Peace] Classic Liberals include all original liberals such as John Locke, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Stuart Mill with his work On Liberty, and even more modern liberals such as Von Mises, Hayek, and Milton Friedman. Classical liberal institutions include the Frasier Institute (Canada), The Hoover Institution (Stanford University), and The Cato Institute to name a few. In Hayek's book The Constitution of Liberty, in the chapter, "Why I am not a Conservative" Hayek tells us that he was not a conservative because he was in fact a liberal; and had refused to give up that label. In the United States the term liberal had changed meaning, and according to Hayek this was because Franklin D Roosevelt had been labeled a socialist and a leftist because of his New Deal Policies. Fearing the consequences of that label, FDR called himself a Liberal instead. Since that day, Liberal in the United States has had a different meaning from the orginal, 18th and 19th century meaning of the word. People who stayed close to this orginal meaning label themselves often "Classic Liberal", "Classical Liberal" or "Libertarian" to avoid confusion (especially in America ).

Classical liberal Philosophy

Classical Liberals subscribe to a very basic and universal understanding of the world and the rights of all humans. Classical Liberals believe in private property, free markets, economic competition, freedom from coercion, limited government (all economic freedom), the rule of law, and individual rights (Natural rights is also used). These are inherent to all people, of all faiths, cultures, societies, ethnicities, and histories and that all peoples are capable of achieving liberal government and liberal societies not just western cultures. (Classical) Liberals prefer a Laissez-faire style of government with a microeconomic focus and understanding of economic operations. Classical Liberals do not believe in wealth transfers, tariffs, or other trade barriers such as quotas, regulated markets (also known as a Mixed economy ), capital controls, wage and price controls. As a general rule these macroeconomic policies (favored by groups varying from Communists, Fascists, Nazis, socialists, social democrats, and liberal Keynesians) reduce the general welfare of society and according to Hayek and Friedman will ultimately reduce and eliminate the political and civil freedoms enjoyed by the people. Conversely, Hayek and Friedman believed that this economic freedom would help build and protect political and civil freedoms. Milton Friedman's Free to Choose and Capitalism and Freedom are examples of this philosophy updated for modern man and woman to understand (classical) liberalism.

Classical Liberalism during the Great Depression and the Rise of Dictatorships

Some liberals, including Friedrich August von Hayek, Milton Friedman, and 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 but also that such intervention can and will lead to international conflict (World War I and World War II) but the rise of totalitarian regimes and the loss of political and civil freedoms. Hayek, in his book The Road to Serfdom, believed that the rise of totalitarian regimes, whether they be communist, fascist, or Nazi, were the result of the restriction of economic freedom. Economic freedom was, thus, restricted by government intervention and regulation of the economy. Hayek states: : "…economic planning, conducted independently on a national scale, are bound in the aggregate effect to be harmful even from a purely economic point of view and, in addition to produce serious international friction. That there is little hope of international order or lasting peace so long as every country is free to employ whatever measures it desires in its own immediate interest, however damaging they may be to others…" Hayek, F.A., The Road to Serfdom, The University of Chicago Press, 1944. p. 240. Here Hayek is demonstrating the rationale behind why economic policies like those subscribed to by Keynesian economists can not and could not be compatible to freedom and peace much in the same way Nazis, Fascists, and Communists failed to retain or create free and peaceful states The more economic freedom that was lost, he said, the more civil and political freedom would be lost as well. Hayek's work The Road to Serfdom remains influential, argued against these "Keynesian" institutions, believing that they can and will lead to the same totalitarian governments Keynesians were attempting to avoid. Hayek saw authoritarian regimes such as the fascist, Nazis, and communists, as the same totalitarian branch that sought the elimination of economic freedom. To him the elimination of economic freedom brought about the elimination of political freedom. Thus the differences between Nazis and communists are only rhetorical. The same 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. Nobel Prize winning economists such as Hayek and Milton Friedman have argued for years that economic freedom leads to greater political and civil rights and those governments who control the economy tend to limit economic rights and eventually will limit political, civil rights of their people. Friedman states, :"economic freedom is simply a requisite for political freedom. By enabling people to cooperate with one another without coercion or central direction it reduces the area over which political power is exercised." Friedman, Milton and Rose Friedman, Free to Choose: A Personal Statement, Harcort Brace Janovich, 1980, p. 2-3 Free to Choose]

Classical liberalism, Economic Freedom, and their relationship with Civil and Political Freedoms

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 Fraser Institute, the American conservative Heritage Foundation, and the Wall Street Journal argue that there is in fact a relationship between economic freedom and political and civil freedoms as Friedrich von Hayek had once said. They agree with Hayeks statement that those countries which restrict economic freedom ultimately restrict civil and political freedoms. On the other hand, economic freedom does not necesarily imply civil and political freedom. FA Hayek and Milton Friedman have both observed that economic freedom is a necessary condition for the creation and sustainability of civil and political freedoms. This has been observed through history over the last century; easily seen by the atrocities committed by the least economically free countries in the world which include Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Communist China, Khmer Rouge Cambodia... 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. The facts of history in the post-war era affirmed in his vision the accuracy of his thesis. Clement Atley's Labour Party, after winning a land slide election in post was England, encouraged private buisness owners to hand over their property, nationalized many industries, instituted wage and price controls, and even attempted to place restrictions on their citizens ability to seek employment at will, by requiring citizens to seek permission from the central government. Another example, in the 1960s the Labour Government of Harold Wilson placed a limit of £30 on money people could take abroad to avoid the consequences of an inflatonary policy pursued to create full-employment. Nevertheless, British democratic institutions survived and in 1979 a radical Conservative government led by Margaret Thatcher was elected, which, sometimes painfully, re-liberalised the economy. Recent empirical studies by the Frasier Institute, Heritage Foundation, and the Wall Street Journal argued that there is in fact a relationship between economic freedom and political and civil freedoms as Friedrich von Hayek had once observed. As he stated, those countries which restrict economic freedom ultimately restrict civil and political freedoms.
- http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=pb&id=789
- http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/

Classical liberalism and rhetorical liberalism as practiced in the United States

In the United States the Republican Party has paid lip service to classical liberal philosophy since New Deal era. However, Republican president, Richard Nixon proved to be no friend of classical liberal philosophy by instituting price controls on goods during an economic crisis in the 1970s. The Democratic Carter administration oversaw the deregulation of the airline industry while also restricting the money supply (a harsh monetarist policy) to combat stagflation which plagued the United States. Many small liberal gains were achieved under Ronald Reagan in the 1980's as liberalism gained steam world wide, but the country continued to mount a national debt because of an embalanced budget. The Democrats, under Bill Clinton, took things a little further, balancing the U.S. budget, created NAFTA, and influenced the birth of the GATT94 WTO all of which helped usher in a prosperous decade for the United States. Despite these strides toward liberalism the changes have been small. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans consider themselves to be classical liberal parties. The Libertarian Party is a party in the United States that whole heartedly supports classical liberalism. However, it has little influence and only a small chance of putting an official in the White House or Congress. Within the United States, classical liberalism is rhetorically confused with conservatism. The CATO Instutite states from its website :" Only in America do people seem to refer to free-market capitalism--the most progressive, dynamic, and ever-changing system the world has ever known--as conservative. Additionally, many contemporary American conservatives favor state intervention in some areas, most notably in trade and into our private lives." According to most classical liberals, modern liberalism as it is practiced, is mostly rhetorical lip service to liberalisms highest ideals of freedom, rather than a function of its basic assumptions: the free market. See liberalism for further understanding.

See also


- Austrian School
- Capitalism
- Chicago school
- Deregulation
- Free market
- Globalization
- Privatization
- Liberalization
- Marketization
- Liberalism
- Libertarianism
- Paleoliberalism

External articles


- [http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/oldwhig4ever/ Liberalism] by Friedrich Hayek
- http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=pb&id=789
- http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/ Category:liberalism Category:Political theories

Social Progressivism

Social Progressivism is a political ideology opposite to Social conservatism. It is neither left or right. However, many Centre leftists support it. Social progressivism is, in general, the view that as time progresses, so should societal mores and morality. Social progressives believe that some historical mores/morality are wrong or dogmatic and that present knowledge gained from science and philosophy has disproved many traditional beliefs. In the past, social progressives have advocated abolition of slavery and the right to vote for women. Social progressivism today generally supports same-sex marriage, birth control, and women's right to choose an abortion. The term "social progressivism" is criticised and mocked by the Right as being a meaningless rebranding of social left-wingism. Some people, especially form the United States, refer to Social progressivism as Social liberalism, due to the common view that liberalism is the absolute opposite of conservatism. Movements linked to Social Progressivism include abolitionism and feminism.

Resources for Studying Progressivism


- [http://www.progressiveu.org Progressive U] Category:Progressivism

Social conservatism

Social conservatism is a belief in traditional or natural law-based morality and social mores and the desire to preserve these in present day society, often through civil law or regulation. Social change is generally regarded as suspect, while social values based on tradition are generally regarded as tried, tested and true. Its opponents commonly associate it with conservative religious groups, militarism and nationalism. Opponents of social conservatism argue that tradition is not necessarily a source of wisdom. Many views and values, for instance, which were at one time viewed as "traditional" are now viewed as outdated or unacceptable. Proponents of social conservatism counter that many "modern" values are also vapid and corrupt, often pointing to the deterioration of the traditional nuclear family over the past century as a result of increased social acceptance of divorce, promiscuity, and homosexuality. The meaning of social conservatism may vary between locations, depending on the social, religious and nationalistic traditions of a particular locale. It may be, for instance, socially conservative to promote "traditional" marriage in a Protestant, mainstream Mormon, or Catholic community, but socially conservative to promote polygamy in a devoutly Muslim or fundamentalist Mormon community. What is considered to be socially conservative is therefore very much dependent on what is considered traditional. Though most common in American Conservatism—indeed, international observers often wrongly believe it to be the whole of the US Conservative movement—it does have its counterparts outside the United States—in the UK, it is evinced in the work of writers like Peter Hitchens and Alexander Deane, and in publications like the Salisbury Review.

See also


- Conservatism
- Social conservatism (Canada) Category:Conservatism Category:Social philosophy

Collaboration

Collaboration, literally, consists of working together with one or more other people. Although the word collaboration is widely used in many varying contexts such as education, science, art and business, very little research has been carried out to determine the properties of this process. With the relatively recent advent of computer mediated communication (CMC), the nature of collaboration is coming under more intensive scrutiny. As software designers, facilitators and theorists from many diverse fields strive to create more useful and effective collaborative environments and methods, more light is shown on this ubiquitous and taken for granted practice. However, what light is being cast is still fairly refracted into the diverse fields in which the research is being carried out. Perhaps more collaboration into the nature of collaboration will be required to answer such questions as:
- How does collaboration differ from cooperation? (dictionary definitions are generally more or less equivalent)
- What qualifies as a collaboration? (is Wikipedia a collaboration in the same way that a work of art is when two artist collaborate face-to-face? and for that matter, does a family, city, nation or species qualify?)
- What are the defining principals or elements of this process? (understanding these might help to draw conclusions on the previous questions) Currently there exists no unifying general theory of collaboration.

Etymology

Dating from 1871, collaboration is a back-formation from collaborator (1802), from the French collaborateur, ultimately from the Latin collaboratus, past participle of collaborare ("work with"), itself derived from com- ("with") and labore ("to work").

Nuances

"Collaborate" implies "to work together on a project". When individuals work together as in an academic setting, "collaborate" includes the [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nuance nuance] "to be jointly accredited" for the work completed. When individuals and organizations work together, or organizations with other organizations, nuances include "usually but not necessarily willingly" and "with another organization with which one is not normally connected".

Barriers To Collaboration

One opinion is that whilst collaboration is natural in some societies, and is generally natural in pre-existing teams, collaboration is unnatural in new groups and western society. Some of the perceived barriers to collaboration are:
- "stranger danger"; which can be expressed as a reluctance to share with others unknown to you
- "needle in a haystack"; people believe that others may have already solved your problem but how do you find them
- "hoarding"; where people do not want to share knowledge because they see hoarding as a source of power
- "not invented here"; self explanatory Whilst much of the discussion around the topic of collaboration refers to the use of IT, perhaps more research is required on how to provide an effective social process that will help overcome the barriers.

Wartime collaboration

As a pejorative term, the word "collaboration' can describe the treason of cooperating with enemy forces occupying one's country. As such it implies criminal deeds in the service of the occupying power, including complicity with the occupying power in murder, persecutions, pillage, and economic exploitation as well as participation in a puppet government. The use of "collaboration" to mean "traitorous cooperation with the enemy," dates from 1940, originally in reference to the Vichy Regime in France, and other French people who helped Nazi Germany. Since then, the words collaboration and collaborateur possibly have this very pejorative meaning in French (the shortened form collabo only has this pejorative meaning). During World War II, those accused of collaboration with Axis Powers included:
- Wang Jingwei and his government (China)
- Vidkun Quisling (Norway)
- The Ustaše (Croatia)
- The government of Vichy France
- Léopold III of Belgium (found innocent)
- Anton Mussert (Netherlands)
- Milan Nedić (Serbia)
- Jozef Tiso (Slovakia)
- Pierre Laval (France)
- Andrei Vlasov (USSR)
- P. G. Wodehouse (only informally accused)
- SS units recruited in occupied countries
- companies like Philips and Van Doorne's Automobiel Fabriek (DAF) in the Netherlands continued their business with the Germans as usual, though the Phillips company for one tried to be as unproductive as they could get away with!

Commercial /Scientific Collaboration

Even if the term collaboration has a lot of negative meaning and especially in France is not very usual (see Crozier, M. The Bureaucratic Phenomenon, Chicago 1964) there is a neutral to positive root for the term. There are various variants of multi client and/or multi contractor work. Open collaboration with market near products needs tight non disclosure aggreements excluding background or previously known information from the protected intellectual property rights.(see also an example [http://hdf.ncsa.uiuc.edu/doc_resource/SZIP/HDF_szip_CRA.pdf Collaborative Research and Development Agreement]).
- The first step for collaboration is that the partners get known to each other- this might be facilitated by research directories like [http://www.intransnet.org Network for European medium and large transport research facilities].
- The second step is the compatibility of the aims of the organisations at least in the segment the project is located.
- The personal preconditions comprise the ability to communicate (also with regards to the technical terms) and the willingness to share ideas and develop them further together in a possibly previously unknown direction. The term collaboration is also used for electronic work benches for example referred to as collaboratory by Mathcad (see also [http://udell.roninhouse.com/GroupwareReport.html Internet Groupware for Scientific Collaboration]

Differentiating coordination, cooperation, collaboration & teamwork

The differences between these terms can be illustrated by considering these criteria:

Preconditions for success ("must-haves")


- Coordination: Shared objectives; Need for more than one person to be involved; Understanding of who needs to do what by when
- Cooperation: Shared objectives; Need for more than one person to be involved; Mutual trust and respect; Acknowledgment of mutual benefit of working together
- Collaboration: Shared objectives; Sense of urgency and commitment; Dynamic process; Sense of belonging; Open communication; Mutual trust and respect; Complementary, diverse skills and knowledge; Intellectual agility

Enablers (additional "nice to haves")


- Coordination: Appropriate tools (see below); Problem resolution mechanism
- Cooperation: Frequent consultation and knowledge-sharing between participants; Clear role definitions; Appropriate tools (see below)
- Collaboration: Right mix of people; Collaboration skills and practice collaborating; Good facilitator(s); Collaborative 'Four Practices' mindset and other appropriate tools (see below)

Purpose of using this approach


- Coordination: Avoid gaps & overlap in individuals' assigned work
- Cooperation: Obtain mutual benefit by sharing or partitioning work
- Collaboration: Achieve collective results that the participants would be incapable of accomplishing working alone

Desired outcome


- Coordination: Efficiently-achieved results meeting objectives
- Cooperation: Same as for Coordination, plus savings in time and cost
- Collaboration: Same as for Cooperation, plus innovative, extraordinary, breakthrough results, and collective 'we did that!' accomplishment

Optimal application


- Coordination: Harmonizing tasks, roles and schedules in simple environments and systems
- Cooperation: Solving problems in complicated environments and systems
- Collaboration: Enabling the emergence of understanding and realization of shared visions in complex environments and systems

Examples


- Coordination: Project to implement off-the-shelf IT application; Traffic flow regulation
- Cooperation: Marriage; Operating a local community-owned utility or grain elevator; Coping with an epidemic or catastrophe
- Collaboration: Brainstorming to discover a dramatically better way to do something; Jazz or theatrical improvisation; Co-creation

Appropriate tools


- Coordination: Project management tools with schedules, roles, critical path (CPM), PERT and GANTT charts; "who will do what by when" action lists
- Cooperation: Systems thinking; Analytical tools (root cause analysis etc.)
- Collaboration: Appreciative inquiry; Open Space meeting protocols; Four Practices; Conversations; Stories

Degree of interdependence in designing the effort's work-products

(and need for physical co-location of participants)
- Coordination: Minimal
- Cooperation: Considerable
- Collaboration: Substantial

Degree of individual latitude in carrying out the agreed-upon design


- Coordination: Minimal
- Cooperation: Considerable
- Collaboration: Substantial Where do teams, partnerships, think-tanks, open-source and joint ventures fit in this schema? The general definition of a team is an interdependent group, which suggests that collaborative groups are teams, coordinated groups are not, and cooperative groups may or may not be. Partnerships and joint ventures are both primarily cooperative undertakings, whose objectives evolve over time. Open-source developments can run the gamut among all three types of undertaking. So theoretically can think-tanks, though in reality much think-tank work is solitary and not really collaborative. Even the work of scientists on major international projects is substantially individual, with a lot more coordination and cooperation than true collaboration.

Flash Collaboration

A gathering of Flash artists lead by the collab "host", the 'flashers' work together and produce 1 finished product, a good example is the [http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/153913 time trials]

See also


- Collaborative software
- Consensus
- Puppet government
- Resistance movements

References


- "collaborate." Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002. http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com (13 Aug. 2005).

External links


- [http://collaboration.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page MetaCollab.net] - help develop the free collaborative encycolopedia on collaboration.
- [http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~os0tmc/occupied/collab.htm State Collaboration] Collaboration of Vichy France with Nazi Germany.
- [http://coral.wcupa.edu Collaborative On-Line Learning and Research]
- [http://www.wikithat.com Wiki That!] A blog about using wiki for collaboration - case studies, scenarios, advice, and resources for the non-technical user. Not affiliated with any specific wiki technology.
- Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Collaboration_of_the_week Collaboration of the week] Category:Collaboration Category:International relations Category:Organizational studies and human resource management

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 emph