nav-icons nav-icons
Progress in Political Economy (PPE) Progress in Political Economy (PPE)
LOGIN REGISTER
LOGIN
REGISTER
linklink
  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
Longlist for the 2022 Australian International Political Economy Network (AIPEN) Journal Article Prize
Previous
Valuation is political
Next

Liberalism is Misunderstood

by Neil Harrison on October 4, 2022

Liberalism is Misunderstood

Neil Harrison and John Mikler | October 4, 2022

Tags: capitalism liberalism
capitalism, liberalism
| 0 293

We recently published a book about capitalism in which we approve of the free market. This evidently makes us “neoliberals”. Yet, in the same book we advocate strong measures to reduce inequality including a wealth tax and universal basic income (UBI) – a government payment to all citizens regardless of their need or circumstance. We also advocate government leadership for technological innovation to mitigate climate change and withdrawal of support for anything that may be profitable in market terms. Therefore, we are perhaps anti-market, or worse, Marxists. Then again, we also argue that economic policy should be designed to increase personal liberty. This makes us libertarians.

We reached these policy conclusions, and many others, by clearly defining liberalism. Yet, because of the cavalier use of political labels, liberalism is equivalent to socialism in America, hardline heartless right-wingers in Australia, and produces confusion in the UK where voting for the Liberal Democrats may unintentionally lead to support for a government on either end of the political spectrum. No wonder that even some self-identifying liberals in these countries do not understand liberalism! So here, we want to clarify why we are liberals, and what it should mean for economic policy be to be one.

Liberalism

Liberalism is widely misunderstood, even in the United States where it was first used as a foundation for government. The principal purpose of liberal philosophy and of what we might call “true liberalism” is to optimize personal liberty or freedom (we consider these terms identical). Freedom is greater when there are no constraints on what you are able to do or to be. It results from removing obstacles to your free choice, and preventing anyone, including government, telling you how to use your freedom.

The US Constitution does not directly increase personal freedom. Instead, it prevents government from limiting it. For example, it does not guarantee the freedom of speech that is a central requirement of liberalism. It only states that “Congress shall make no law . . .  abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” In other words, the government is proscribed from limiting freedom of speech, but private corporations like Facebook and Twitter are not constitutionally prohibited from doing so.

In addition to political restriction on personal freedom, in most capitalist societies there also are economic constraints. High economic inequality not only incites the natural human demand for “fairness,” but also limits the choices—and therefore the freedom—of many while grossly expanding that of a few. Unemployment or under-employment and attendant poverty limit choice and therefore reduce freedom. Meanwhile, employers dictate how a large portion of our lives are spent.

The philosopher John Rawls wrote that fairness demands equal opportunity for all to better themselves. However, recognising that some people begin with more ability to choose their lives—from natural ability or inherited wealth—Rawls argued that the least advantaged should receive more opportunities to improve their lot. Although everyone should have a right, secured by government, to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” economic inequality grants much greater opportunity to pursue happiness to the rich than the poor. For example, free public education is one way to provide equal opportunity for all. However, wealth can always buy a better education that brings greater freedom to choose and greater economic opportunity. If the state does not provide greater opportunity to the least advantaged, inequality and low social mobility become entrenched.

It is a curious anomaly that in the US liberalism is misunderstood on both the left and right of the political spectrum. The right is incorrect that liberalism is comparable to socialism or communism as practiced in Venezuela, Cuba, or the Soviet Union. Nor can it be an excuse for the state to regulate social interactions, to demolish capitalism, or significantly reduce economic competition. However, self-styled liberals persist in attempting to use government to instruct the people on what is best for them. Too often they demand an equality of outcomes—rather than of opportunities—that could easily be mistaken for socialism. On the other hand, liberalism doesn’t mean that the state should be shrunk until it can be drowned in a bathtub. The state always has a role to play in a liberal society, not least through economic policy.

Some Liberal Economic Policies

The 1942 Beveridge report recommended “a comprehensive policy of social progress” to provide personal economic security without stifling “incentive, opportunity, [or] responsibility.” Most rich countries have pursued this worthy goal by creating a welfare state designed to protect people against bad luck. If they lose employment through no fault of their own, they receive a basic stipend to prevent penury until they find new work. If they are ill or injured, free health care treats them. This is not socialism as it does not guarantee economic outcomes. It only guarantees that workers again have an opportunity to support themselves through work. We support UBI for a similar reason: it begins to balance the power of employer and employee. Government hand-outs during the COVID pandemic were a natural experiment of UBI that allowed workers to be more selective about their work and to push for higher pay.

We accept that a free market is the most efficient way to connect producers and consumers and set prices. Yet, a free market is not necessarily socially beneficial. Without the guidance of the state, it cannot meet all the needs of society. The challenge of a warming world changing climates is a clear example of such failure. Therefore, we advocate the state steering all its generous support of innovation toward the science and technologies likely to reduce production of the industrial wastes, like CO2, that are changing the climate.

Many reject such proposals as harming the free market. However, nowhere are markets truly free. In a third of all industries giant corporations control more than 40 per cent of sales and as few as five such companies dominate all the world’s major industries. Their economic dominance gives them political power to fashion economic rules in their favour in even the largest economies. As controllers of their markets, they need to be regulated in the public interest not freed to decide what their social responsibilities constitute.

True liberalism can help solve many present problems. Whether it is inequality, national unhappiness, the overweening power of giant corporations, or climate change, liberalism correctly understood as growing personal freedom shows that the state is critical to channel market activity to socially beneficial ends.

Share this post

  • Tweet
  • Share Post:

Author: Neil Harrison

Neil E. Harrison has published eight books and many articles, conference papers, and book chapters. Most recently he has published Governing Complexity in the 21st Century (Routledge, 2022) with Robert Geyer and with John Mikler Capitalism for All (SUNY Press, 2022). He and John Mikler are also co-editors of Climate Innovation (Palgrave Macmillan 2014). Among other books Dr. Harrison has published Sustainable Capitalism and the Pursuit of Well-Being (Routledge 2014) and edited Complexity in World Politics (SUNY Press) in 2006. He holds a PhD from the University of Denver’s Josef Korbel School of International Studies and has been the Executive Director and a principal researcher of The Sustainable Development Institute since 2000. Neil has taught at universities and government training centres in the US, Australia, and Taiwan.

Author: John Mikler

John Mikler is an Associate Professor in the Department of Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney. He researches corporations’ relations with states, civil society and international organisations, as well as the ways in which they are political actors in their own right. His previous publications have contributed to theorising corporate power in respect of globalisation, private authority and state sovereignty, and on issues including climate change, online gambling and technological innovation. He has edited journal special issues for Global Policy and Policy and Society; published over 30 journal articles and book chapters in journals such as New Political Economy, Regulation and Governance and Business and Politics; and four books: Greening the Car Industry: Varieties of Capitalism and Climate Change (Edward Elgar 2009); The Handbook of Global Companies (editor, Wiley-Blackwell 2013); Climate Innovation: Liberal Capitalism and Climate Change (co-edited with Neil Harrison, Palgrave Macmillan 2014); and The Political Power of Global Corporations (Polity 2018).

Related Posts

 

We live in a time of ‘late capitalism’. But what does that mean?

The term “late capitalism” seems to be everywhere as a trending meme – often used as a kind of shorthand to illustrate the absurdities of certain free market economies. On Tw...

 

Jairus Banaji, A Brief History of Commercial Capitalism

In his 1973 essay ‘Marxist History, a History in the Making: Towards a Dialogue with Althusser’, the French historian Pierre Vilar wrote ‘Anybody can call himself a historian...

 

The History of the Market: Opportunity or Imperative?

What has the ‘market’ in capitalist society ever done for us? Is the ‘market’ an enabling force in our everyday lives, that unleashes prosperity, entrepreneurialism, unlimi...

 

Peter Thiel’s Zero to One explains why ‘big tech’ dominates

Peter Thiel is many things. A staunch libertarian, he is the billionaire Founder of PayPal and Palintir, an early investor in Facebook, and confidant to the likes of Elon Musk a...

Comments

Leave a Response Cancel reply


Join our mailing list

© Progress in Political Economy (PPE)

Privacy | Designed by Nucleo | Terms and Conditions

  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
 

Loading Comments...