Liberalisme klasik: Perbezaan antara semakan

1,915 bait ditambah ,  15 tahun lalu
 
Dari sudut ekonomi, sesetengah liberal klasikal mendokong ekonomi pasaran sebagai sistem yang paling cekap untuk memuaskan kehendak manusia serta mengalirkan sumber-sumber ke arah penggunaan yang paling membina: ''they "are more suspicious than [[Conservatism|conservative]]s of all but the most minimal government.''"<ref>Quinton, Anthony. "Conservativism", ''A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy'', editors Goodin, Robert E. and Pettit, Philip. Blackwell Publishing, 1995, p. 246.</ref> Penekanan terhadap pasaran bebas lahir dari "''tanggapan yang manusia berfikiran waras, berkepentingan sendiri dan logikal terhadap sasarannya.''" <ref>"''assumption about individuals being rational, self-interested and methodical in the pursuit of their goals.''" Drilane, Robert and Parkinson, Gary. [http://bitbucket.icaap.org/dict.pl?term=CLASSICAL%20LIBERALISM ''Online Dictionary of the Social Sciences''].</ref> Adam Smith bagaimanapun tidak memperjuangkan [[kapitalisme]] tulen dan menerima bahawa pasaran bebas mempunyai kelemahannya sendiri.<ref>Block, Walter. fr: "Adam Smith and the Left." Jeet Heer. ''National Post'' (December 3, 2001)</ref>
 
Falsafah ini juga memegang dengan teguh bahawa hak-hak peribadi tidak memerlukan kerajaan untuk wujud. Thomas Jefferson menamakan hak-hak ini sebagai hak-hak sedia lahir (''inalienable rights''): "... kebebasan adalah tingkah laku yang tidak terhalang di dalam ruang yang sempadannya terwujud dengan adanya hak-hak orang lain yang sama. Saya tidak berkata "di dalam ruangan undang-undang' kerana undang-undang selalunya adalah kehendak pemerintah yang zalim, terutamanya apabila undang-undang melanggar hak-hak peribadi. <ref>"...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." Jefferson, Thomas. Letter to Isaac H. Tiffany, 1819</ref> <!----For classical liberalism, rights are of a ''[[Negative and positive rights|negative]]'' nature &mdash; rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas [[social liberalism]] (also called ''modern liberalism'') holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others.{{cn}} Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are "hostile to the [[welfare state]]."<ref name="Ryan"/> They do not have an interest in material equality but only in "equality before the law."<ref>Kukathas, Chandran in the book ''The Many and the One: Pluralism in the Modern World'', editors Richard Madsen and Tracy B. Strong, 2003, p. 61</ref> Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism and takes offense at group rights being pursued at the expense of individual rights.<ref>Duncan-Aimone, Katherine and Evans, Mark, ''Edinburgh Companion to Contemporary Liberalism: Evidence and Experience, ISBN 1-57958-339-3, Routledge (UK), 2001, p. 55</ref>--->
 
==Rujukan==
420

suntingan