Ten Principles of Classical Liberalism
Uploader Comments (GStolyarovII)
Top Comments
-
@monkeyfeet122 Classical liberalism has *absolutely no* necessary connection to God. And some of the most famous classical liberals -- Locke, Voltaire, and Jefferson -- were some of the greatest champions of individual rights and individual expression, especially for their time.
-
@sdfkjllshadflhadfshl Classical liberalism is not modern "liberalism". The term "liberalism" was hijacked in the 1920s-1930s by such socialists as John Dewey to refer to the antithesis of genuine 19th-century liberalism.
The root of "liberalism" is the same as the root of "liberty". That should suggest what the term originally stood for. It is time to take it back from the socialists.
All Comments (106)
-
I agree with all points, but I wish the creator had backed up the principles with historical examples to show why the are in line with classical liberalism. Viewers need to be shown and not just told that these are the principles of the American Revolution.
-
@monkeyfeet122 ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT LIBERALS EVER, ADAM SMITH, WAS AN ATHEIST! where are you getting your ideas from
-
@GStolyarovII Classical liberalism adopted utilitarian ethics from Benthem and Mill. In the UK was Liberal governments of Campbell-Bannerman, Asquith, and Lloyd George that applied this as the foundations of the welfare state.
Socialism was never an antithesis of liberalism, except in the imaginations of some US libertarians - who, true to their knowledge of history - are painfully unaware of how that word (libertarian) has its origins with the anarcho-communists. Oh well.
-
@BboyDpark I find myself very much in favour of most libertarian ideas, but when they start going on how their right to own a third house, a fifth car and a laptop built into a swimming pool are more important
that the the provision of the necessities of life for others then they're being dicks.
Maybe a new movement is needed. Libertarianism Without Dickery.
-
@levlafayette Just because someone has an excessive wealth doesn't mean that others have the right to take away that wealth even if that person's neighbors are starving to death, thus the principle stays true.
However at the same time, just because you don't have the right to take away the wealth of others doesn't prevent the starving neighbors to take away the wealth, so the neighbors WILL take away the wealth in order to survive, disregarding the principle 1 & the right of the owner of wealth
This doesn't sound much like the modern day liberals
rsn00b4life 3 months ago
@rsn00b4life Classical liberalism is not modern "liberalism". Indeed, the two are diametrically opposed in many respects.
GStolyarovII 3 months ago
@GStolyarovII yes, i am aware of that statement you just pointed out. I was just saying that liberals should be more like classic liberals(in my opinion). but i was saying it in a blunt, satire way. so yeah......well kinda satire-ish.
rsn00b4life 3 months ago
@rsn00b4life Understood.
GStolyarovII 3 months ago