The main difference between right and left liberalism concerns private property and business, which should serve all its clients, regardless of their religious beliefs. Left-wing liberals would like not even firms run by believers to refuse to serve homosexuals. Right-wing liberals believe that the choice should be made by the owners of firms themselves, and the state should not influence their decision in any way. When it comes to America, right-wing liberals also tend to respect the constitution more than left-wingers. This includes the constitutional right to carry arms freely.
Classic liberalism
Classical liberalism is a political ideology and industry that protects civil liberties under the rule of law with an emphasis on economic freedom. Closely connected with the economic side of the trend, it developed at the beginning of the 19th century, drawing on the ideas of the last century as a response to urbanization and the industrial revolution in Europe and the United States. Famous personalities whose ideas contributed to classical liberalism include John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Robert Malthus and David Ricardo. It was based on classical economic ideas set forth by Adam Smith, and on faith in natural law, utilitarianism and progress. The term “classical liberalism” was applied retrospectively to distinguish the early course of the 19th century from the new social liberalism. Extreme nationalism to right-wing liberalism, as a rule, is not peculiar. Let us consider in more detail the policy of adherents of the right wing.
Beliefs of Classical (Right) Liberals
The basic beliefs of classical liberals included new ideas that departed from the older conservative idea of society as a family, and from the later sociological concept of society as a complex set of social networks. Classical liberals believe that people are “selfish, prudent, essentially inert and atomistic, ” and that society is nothing more than the sum of its individual members.
Hobbes influence
Classical liberals agreed with Thomas Hobbes that the government was created by individuals to protect themselves from each other and that the goal of the government should be to minimize conflicts between people that inevitably arise in a natural state. These beliefs were complemented by the belief that workers can be best motivated by financial incentives. This led to the adoption of amendments to the Poor Law in 1834, which limited the provision of social assistance based on the idea that markets are the mechanism that most effectively leads to wealth. Adopting Thomas Robert Malthus' theory of populations, they saw that poor urban conditions were inevitable. They believed that population growth would outstrip food production, and considered it quite acceptable, because hunger would help limit population growth. They opposed any redistribution of income or wealth.
Smith influence
Based on the ideas of Adam Smith, classical liberals believed that in the common interests all people can provide their own economic interests. They criticized the idea of universal public welfare as ineffective interference in the free market. Despite Smith's strong recognition of the importance and value of labor and workers, they selectively criticized group labor freedoms exercised at the expense of individual rights, while accepting corporate rights, which led to unequal negotiations.
Population rights
Classical liberals argued that people should be free to get jobs from the highest paid employers, while the profit motive ensures that the products that people want are produced at the prices that they will pay. In the free market, both labor and capitalists will receive the greatest possible benefit if production is organized efficiently to meet consumer demand.
They argued that rights were negative, and required others (and governments) to refrain from interfering in the free market, opposing social liberals who claim that people have positive rights, such as voting rights, the right to education, for medical care and for a living wage. To guarantee their society, taxation is required in excess of the minimum level.
Liberalism without democracy
The basic beliefs of classical liberals do not necessarily include democracy or a majority government, because there is nothing in the pure idea of majority rule that would guarantee that the majority will always respect property rights or uphold the rule of law. For example, James Madison advocated for a constitutional republic with the defense of individual freedom and against pure democracy, arguing that in pure democracy “a common passion or interest will be felt in almost every case by the majority … and there is nothing that could hold back the motivation to sacrifice a weaker side."
At the end of the 19th century, classical liberalism turned into neoclassical, which argued that the government should be as small as possible in order to ensure maximum individual freedom. In its extreme form, neoclassical liberalism advocated social Darwinism. Right libertarianism is a modern form of neoclassical liberalism.
Conservative liberalism
Conservative liberalism is an option combining liberal values and politics with a conservative bias. This is a more positive and less radical version of the classical trend. Conservative liberal parties tend to combine free-market policies with more traditional positions on social and ethical issues. Neoconservatism has also been identified as an ideological relative or twin in relation to conservative liberalism.
In the European context, conservative liberalism should not be confused with liberal conservatism, which is a variant of the latter, combining the views of conservatives with liberal politics regarding economics, social and ethical issues.
The roots of the current discussed in this section can be found at the beginning of the story. Before the two world wars in most European countries, the political class was formed by conservative liberals, from Germany to Italy. An event such as World War I, which ended in 1918, led to the emergence of a less radical version of ideology. Conservative liberal parties, as a rule, developed in those European countries where there was no strong secular conservative party and where the separation of church and state was less problematic. In those countries where parties shared the ideas of Christian democracy, this branch of liberalism developed very successfully.
Neocons
In the United States, neocons can be classified as conservative liberals. According to Peter Lawler: “Today in America, responsible liberals, who are usually called neoconservatives, see that liberalism depends on patriotic and religious people. They praise not only individualistic human inclinations. One of their slogans is "conservative sociology with liberal politics." The neoconservatives acknowledge that the policies of free and rational people depend on a pre-political social world that is far from a free and rational beginning. ”
National liberalism
National liberalism, whose goal was the pursuit of individual and economic freedom, as well as national sovereignty, refers primarily to the ideology and movements of the 19th century, but national liberal parties still exist today. Extreme nationalism, right-wing liberalism, social democratism - all this is equally a product of the 19th century.
Jozef Antall, a historian and Christian democrat who was Hungary's first post-communist prime minister, called national liberalism "an integral part of the emergence of a nation state" in 19th-century Europe. At that time, constitutional democratic parties of right-wing liberals existed throughout Europe.
According to Oscar Mulei, from the point of view of both ideologies and political party traditions, it can be argued that in the countries of Central Europe, a special type of liberalism inherent in this region developed successfully in the nineteenth century. The word "nationalism" was perceived as a partial synonym for the word "liberalism". Also, according to Muley, in Southeastern Europe, “national liberals” played prominent, if not key, roles in politics, but with rather different, region-specific characteristics that significantly distinguished them from their Central European counterparts in ideology. Nowadays, national liberal parties exist throughout Eastern Europe. Right-wing liberalism includes the parties Petro Poroshenko Bloc and the Popular Front in Ukraine, various Popular Fronts in the Baltic states, and the former Saakashvili party in Georgia.
Lind himself defines "national liberalism" as combining "moderate social conservatism with moderate economic liberalism."
Gordon Smith, a leading scientist in the field of comparative European politics, understands this ideology as a political concept that has lost popularity when the success of nationalist movements in creating nation-states no longer required clarification of whether freedom, party or politician had a “national” subtext.
Individualism and collectivism
Leaders of the liberal wing also tend to be more inclined towards individualism than collectivism. Right wing liberals recognize that people are different, and therefore their ability to make money is also different. Their concept of equal opportunity, applicable to the economy, does not deprive a person of the opportunity to pursue their business interests in the free market. Individualism, capitalism, globalization - right-wing liberalism in the modern world can often be described by these three principles. Left-wing liberals, on the contrary, believe in the class struggle and the redistribution of wealth, but also advocate for globalization.
