Classical Liberalism
The closed bag of coins represents Classical Liberalism. The money itself represents the emphasis on the property that characterizes Classical Liberalism. The property, for example, is one of the three elements of life that Locke felt was critical and central to be safeguarded. The bag as a collector and protector of money represents the outcome of the application of the principles of Classical Liberalism. Under the principles of Classical Liberalism, the accumulation of wealth as possible, and even dramatically successful.
The fact that there is a bag and not a hand represents the fact that under Classical Liberalism, there is a tendency for the wealth to become more concentrated into the possession of a few people. It does not scatter into the possession of a large number of people. Note, as well, that there is only one bag – the coins are not distributed to anyone else involved in the work (whatever it was) that generated this profit.
This is also a bag that anyone could obtain – a simple bag that is readily available, just as the principles of Classical Liberalism suggest that all have an equal right to sell their labor, whether this is actually true in practical terms or not. This represents that anyone with the right resources, to begin with, could, at least in theory, manage to generate such a pile of coins. This may not have been universally true, because a laborer might not have the freedom ever to break loose from the hold of their employer.
Even if they could and did, where could they go? What better situation could a laborer find? Without a ‘character’ from a previous employer, how could a laborer find other employment? With no savings, how could a laborer acquire the means of either supporting themselves by agriculture or by some industry or craft of their own? Under welfare capitalism, some employers even arranged matters such that laborers were forever in debt to the company store.
The bag of coins is also visible, which represents that the fortunes accrued under the principles of Classical Liberalism are meant to be seen. In fact, the fortunes of the industrialist are intended to be admired and envied by everyone else. This is accomplished by building beautiful homes, driving beautiful carriages, and dressing and entertaining exquisitely.
The empty bowls represent the laborers that have actually generated the products that were sold to make all that money in the bag. Their bowls are empty because they are not paid enough to save or invest for themselves. They barely have enough to keep their bowl on the table. They cannot change employment readily without loss, so they are stuck with an empty bowl.
Everything about this symbol is meant to show the emphasis on PRIVATE PROPERTY as interpreted by entrepreneurs under the ideas and guidance of Classical Liberalism.
Modern Liberalism
The bowls with coins in them represent a more egalitarian distribution of wealth and benefits. This is, in very general terms, the goal of Modern Liberalism. Rather than keeping the profits from work in the hands of only a few, the aim of Modern Liberalism is to ensure that everyone gets something. The coins are divided among many bowls (or as many as can be fitted into the photo) to represent that the profit accrued from the labor of many people is to be shared by the many people who generated this profit.
Under Modern Liberalism, it may well be that no one person accrues as much money as under Classical Liberalism. However, each person does get a portion of the wealth created by his or her labor. If there is a cooperation between labor and employers, there is the opportunity for greater efficiency, the more moderate shades of Modern Liberalism assert. If there is efficiency in the production of goods, food, and everything else, then there will be more to sell.
This will mean that everyone will be better off in the long run because there will be more income from trade and sales. Of course, under Modern Liberalism, there is a recognition that the wealthiest capitalists may lose some advantage associated with their former absolute control over the labor input to production. If labor has a say and protection from whimsical or hard-nosed decisions regarding employment, pay, benefits, or working conditions, then perhaps the industrialist will lose some portion of their dramatic profits. To the industrialist, it may seem as though they will be losing out. However, even under profit-sharing and cooperation with labor, Modern Liberalism contends that everyone will be able to survive.
In the most extreme flavors of Communism, the idea is that there are no profits anymore, and no commerce at all. The products of labor are shared with everyone. Thus, the mill-owner’s bag has just a few coins in it. There are not even any markets anymore. According to Marx and his disciples, one way to achieve this end is by the worker class accumulating enough awareness, will, and other tools for activism, such that they can stage a revolution – possibly a violent one.
They acknowledged that this ideal situation might need to be achieved by violence, with the laborers rising up and overthrowing the owners of mills, factories, and other enterprises by force. When the revolution comes, under this model, everyone will work for his or her fellow citizens and not for personal gain. Thus, the symbol shows that every bowl has just about the same amount of coins in it, and the bag has a couple as well, but no more than any worker’s bowl.
In fact, in the case of a revolution, the bag representing the mill owner might be, literally, eliminated. The individual and their whole social class would be wiped out whether by getting rid of them or by appropriating their private property for the use of society as a whole. This situation has arisen in a number of places, not always with complete success in the long run.
Thus, every aspect of this visual symbol is meant to represent the shared, communal aspects of Modern Liberalism. Rather than promoting the interests of the individual who risks their own fortunes to invest or innovate, Modern Liberalism promotes distribution of the production of society to all, such that they all have a bit of the benefit. Whether by revolution or by a gradual increase in the power and role of a central government, this ideology, in all its forms, has affected many nations and continues to do so to this day. It is certainly evident in the way that Canada has chosen to manage the problem of scarce resources.