Introduction
Liberalism is a doctrine traditionally rejecting authority and coercion. Its origins lie in the rejection of the authoritarian structures of the feudalistic order in Europe and the coercive tendencies and effects of that order through the imposition of moral absolutes.
Main body
To respect human dignity, as liberalism requires, means we have to tolerate all individuals regardless of their status, and we have to be willing to help those who are less fortunate. Liberals propose a unique understanding of freedom and its role in society and political relationships. For a liberal, āfreedom is the absence of coercionā (Callan 5). The main problem with this understanding is that while they call upon the government to intervene in people’s daily lives when it comes to the marketplace, liberals also exhort the government to respect the sanctity of personal privacy when it comes to social issues, regardless of how offensive it may be to the community’s overall moral sensibilities (GutiĆ©rrez 43).
That is, the state is the locus of shared responsibility, not simply an instrument of force and coercion. It is a wide network of shared ethical ideas and beliefs, not simply an instrument for ensuring civil peace. The state is ultimately a meeting of minds because it is contingent on a common cultural history and a sense of civic identity (Barry et al 76).
But at the same time, this freedom is limited by a prototypical social contract — the need for language to hold the fabric of the community together. By viewing the problem within this context, we begin to see how liberalism places the individual in a social context, A government that must continually be accountable and responsive to the public as a means of maintaining the tacit consent necessary to keep the contract alive is a government that must pursue a policy aimed at serving the changing needs of the community. If the government is to serve the individual, it must ensure a framework in which individuals have opportunities to flourish.
To some extent, this would require that certain forms of government largess be defined in terms of the property so the rights of individuals to choose is maintained The problem with state-oriented policies is that they effectively constrain individual freedom, something that neutrality has been instrumental in protecting (Krugman 2). In terms of the liberal understanding of freedom, welfare thus challenges liberalism because it raises questions about the actual freedom people have to make choices. It may well be a critical reminder that the choices people do make are not completely of our own volition but are affected by, and often are the product of, circumstances and forces beyond our control (Callan 5).
In sum, the principal argument against attaching conditions to welfare benefits is that it is coercive. It is coercive in that one who is forced to work due to a condition beyond one’s control is effectively being punished. It is analogous to servitude: it restricts the freedom of the recipient. To force one to do something in exchange for basic subsistence lacks compassion. It is the imposition of authority over these people’s lives. This can be considered nothing less than cruel. To couch, the issue in terms of citizenship strikes a raw nerve. The main problem with the liberal definition of liberalism is that it does not allow state intervention in the economy and life of individuals.
Works Cited
Barry, J., Eisenberg, M., Dobson, A. Sustaining Liberal Democracy: Ecological Challenges and Opportunities. Palgrave Macmillan, 2001.
Callan, E. Creating Citizens: Political Education and Liberal Democracy (Oxford Political Theory), 2004.
GutiƩrrez Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1988.
Krugman, D. The Conscience of a Liberal. W. W. Norton, 2007.