Liberalism vs. Antiliberism
Political scientists have long debated the proper course to consider, resolve, and overcome conflict so to maintain order. In particular, the conflicts of the individual vs. society - the rights of the individual vs. the rights he or she must relinquish in order to be a part of society - have generated much controversy. Man has proved to be an insatiable creature, perpetually hungry for that which he does not have. As man's desires grow, so does his want for money and power. The quest for such, which represent societal status, consumes his life. Indeed, man is inherently selfish. He holds an innate disposition against sharing wealth and power with others. However, this conflict must be resolved in order for man to live in society. Through the ages, many have tried to propose an incisive solution to this problem. To fit the political and socioeconomic conditions of the time, those solutions have employed and manipulated the ideas of past thinkers. Two starkly contrasting ideologies emerged: liberalism and antiliberalism. In this paper, I will reference several prominent thinkers of both ideologies. I will highlight their ideas within the historical context they formulated them. This analysis will serve to contrast the
Marx held that laborers were unhappy and unsatisfied in capitalist society. Because the many were ever oppressed by the few, Marx cited the need to form a union. Smith argued for equal rights and placed a great political and economic importance on labor in society. Antiliberals argue that man is not fit to govern himself. The union, fortified by its numbers, was a faction that would place more power in the hands of the laborers. She considered earning a living as slavish, that instead others should be enslaved to perform the labor. Class division was central to political life for Smith. Marx argued that workers should be able to choose to do what made them happy, rather than slave for someone else who reaped the benefits of their toil. Thus, power should be given to the few who, through capitalism, would advance society by forcing the masses to work at the lowest possible wages. Because the means of production were owned by just a few, Marx argued that only those few would assume power. His underlying fear of man's independence made Burke an anti-liberal. The state of nature is a state of existence in which the effects of government and external institutions are absent. Arendt viewed laborers, like slaves, as sub-human. Smith contended that industrialization eliminated these "unnatural" laws. Thus, no government action could or should attempt to curtail poverty.
Common topics in this essay:
Adam Smith,
Locke's Marx's,
,
John Locke,
Parallel Lockian,
Revolution Smith,
Locke Smith,
Hence Locke,
French Revolution,
Wealth Nations,
political power,
marx believed,
ruling class,
arendt believed,
absolute monarchy,
classical greek,
world war,
natural laws,
equal rights,
form government,
world war ii,
representative form government,
political life locke,
life liberty health,
productive power labor,
|
Acceptance Essays
