Classical Liberalism: A Guide on Its Definition and How It Came to Be

Classical Liberalism

What is classical liberalism?

And what does it mean to be a classically liberal?

Classical liberalism refers to the philosophy of individual liberty, property rights, and rule of law that dominated the West from the late 1700s until the mid-1900s.

As history shows, however, words can take new meanings over time. The word liberalism has been in the English lexicon for centuries, but its definition has changed over the course of the 20th century.

In fact, the changes have been so significant that political scientists have to qualify liberalism prior to the twentieth century as classical liberalism. By contrast, they have to refer to its modern variant as liberalism.

Since most people generally understand what liberalism means according to how it is used in America, the classical liberalism definition becomes even more intriguing due to its gradual disuse in everyday speech.

For the sake of preserving classical liberal ideas and the concepts that shape its definition, let’s take a deep dive into the definition of classical liberalism, the philosophy’s history, and how it developed in previous centuries.

What is a Classical Liberal

A classical liberal is someone who advocates for private property, economic freedom, the rule of law, free trade, and a republican style of government that protects free speech and freedom of association.

As the late libertarian historian Ralph Raico noted in a piece for American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia, “Up until around 1900, this ideology was generally known simply as liberalism.” Raico continued by observing why classic liberalism must be qualified:

The qualifying ‘classical’ is now usually necessary, in English-speaking countries at least (but not, for instance, in France), because liberalism has come to be associated with wide-ranging interferences with private property and the market on behalf of egalitarian goals. 

Due to the embrace of a more activist state, the classic liberals of yesterday would be left scratching their heads at how the classical liberal definition has changed. As is the nature of all political evolutions, which generally see terms and political practices transform form over time.

Classical Liberal Economics

Classical liberal economics tends to be laissez-faire. This characterization holds true when comparing old liberalism to contemporary liberalism.

Although classical liberals do not go as far as libertarians do when it comes to free-market adherence, they still maintain a healthy skepticism towards the government managing economic affairs.

The works of Scottish economist Adam Smith are the fundamental pillars of classical liberal economics and have served as inspirations for libertarianism and anti-state conservatism in subsequent generations

Classical Liberalism Principles

Looking at old school liberalism as a package deal is the best way to understand it.

In addition to respecting economic freedom, classical liberals promoted freedom of inquiry, rational thought, and individualism. For classical liberals, individual rights were sacred.

One of the most revolutionary aspects of liberalism is its emphasis on the individual. Whereas most political orders during liberalism’s embryonic stage tended to be more monarchical in outlook, liberals brought a different perspective to governance.

Individual rights such as free speech, property rights, toleration of different religions, and due process soon entered the political discussion after various English philosophers broke the mold by advocating for a system of restrained government.

Etymology of Classical Liberalism

The roots of the word liberalism can be traced back to the Latin word liber, which means “free”. Over time, the word liberal would take on a more positive connotation in regular English. The term would later signify freedom from coercion and other practices that inhibited people’s ability to act in a voluntary manner.

Liberalism’s European Roots

Britain was one of the principal incubators for liberal concepts. The signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 by King John of England marked one of the most pivotal historical moments in laying the groundwork for liberalism. The political charter subjected the English Crown to the laws of men and laid the foundation for civil liberties such as habeas corpus in Anglo-American jurisprudence.

The Dutch Fight for Freedom

Not far away from England, the Dutch engaged in a protracted conflict with the Spanish Empire from 1568 to 1648. In the Eighty Years’ War, the northern provinces of the Low Countries (the Netherlands) were able to break free from the absolutist rule of the Spanish Habsburgs.

This successful revolt was viewed as an early triumph of democratic ideas, with the Dutch transitioning into a republican model of government that defended property rights, promoted religious freedom, upheld free speech, and considerably restrained the power of the central government.

These factors made the Dutch Republic one of the most economically and politically dynamic politics of Europe during the late 1500s up until the late 1600s. The Dutch example became a model that other European countries looked at with envy at the time.

The Bumpy Road for English Freedoms Continues

The English Civil War (1642-1651) witnessed a bloody struggle concerning religious freedoms and the English monarchy’s overreach. Parliamentarians were able to eventually come out on top. The pro-Parliament faction’s victory later established the precedent that English monarchs cannot govern without Parliament’s consent.

The English Levellers as the First Liberal Party

During this struggle, the first liberal party in European history emerged in the form of the Levellers. The Levellers, a group of libertarian-leaning English activists, wanted to put an end to state monopolies, called for the separation of church and state, demanded popular representation, pushed for a decentralized militia system, and even wanted to limit parliament’s powers.

Although they were not successful politically, the Levellers’ respect for property rights, adherence to individual liberty, and distrust of centralized power provided inspiration for future libertarian-style movements in English-speaking political jurisdictions.

How John Locke Changed Anglo-American Politics

British philosopher John Locke fundamentally transformed European political thought when he released the Two Treatises of Government in 1689.

In this seminal publication, Locke argued that sovereignty lied with the people not the British Crown. By contrast, absolutist monarchies of his time maintained that they possessed the divine right of kings as their mandate to govern.

The British philosopher firmly believed in the natural rights of life, liberty, and property. These concepts would be championed by the anti-absolute monarchist Whigs in the United Kingdom throughout the eighteenth century. Later on, these ideas eventually made their way across the pond to the 13 colonies, which became the center of the world’s most influential revolution.

Locke vs. Hobbes

Locke was renowned for his optimistic outlook on human nature. This contrasted to his predecessor, Thomas Hobbes.

Hobbes was a political theorist whose political philosophy was rather cynical and based on the idea that humans were naturally corrupt. As a result, a powerful state was needed to reign in human beings’ most depraved behavior.

In his magnum opus, Leviathan, Hobbes made the case that without a state, mankind’s life would be “nasty, brutish, and short.”

Adam Smith Brings Economics to Liberalism

Liberalism wasn’t just about politics, It had an economic component as well.

During the age of absolute monarchies, most European economies were mercantilist in nature. In other words, these economies were characterized by massive tariffs and restrictions on trade.

When Adam Smith entered the scene, the field of economics was forever changed. Smith’s magnum opus, The Wealth of Nations made the case for a restrained government presence in the economy and put free trade on a pedestal.

The Context of Smith’s Thought

The Scottish economist was very much a product of the 18th century Enlightenment and took the political logic of his contemporaries and predecessors and applied it to economics.

Since the publication of Smith’s work, free-market economics would become an integral plank of liberal thought up until the mid-twentieth century.

Liberalism Goes to France

Liberalism wasn’t just confined to the United Kingdom. France saw ideas of liberty spread within its borders thanks to the Enlightenment. Some of the greatest thinkers of that time Voltaire and Baron de Montesquieu helped define classical liberalism by stressing a commitment to limited government and freedom of expression.

The aforementioned concepts were generally alien to French political philosophy at the time. France was one of the principal centers of absolute monarchy in the European continent, which initially made ideas of freedom a hard sell in France.

Ideas of Limited Government Begin to Take Root in France

That said, powerful ideas can penetrate through even the most stubborn of despotic regimes. France was no exception to this rule.

Philosophers like Montequieu were calling for the separation of powers in government, a concept that would have traditionally made the French royal family shudder. By the mid-1700s, it was clear that France was on the cusp of a major political shakeup due to the prominence of many intellectuals who remained committed to spreading the values of a restrained state.

America’s Freedom Experiment

With over a century’s worth of self-government, colonists in America’s 13 colonies enjoyed some of the highest levels of human freedom at that point in history.

They were proud of the freedoms they enjoyed as English subjects and this culture of liberty was at the crux of a new political identity.

Taxation Without Representation Causes a Revolt

After the French and Indian War (1754-1763), the British Crown was desperate to find a revenue source to finance its costly military adventure. It turned to the Stamp Acts and Townshend Acts, which raised taxes on the colonists.

Angered by these taxes that were levied upon them without any form of parliamentary representation, the colonists turned to the slogan of “no taxation, without representation” as a form of protest against these arbitrary acts.

The British Empire did not relent and only became more heavy-handed in its policies towards the colonies in America. The Crown’s refusal to listen to the colonists’ grievances forced the colonists to take bold action.

The American Revolution Puts Freedom at the Center Stage

In the fateful year of 1776, colonial leaders came together to sign the Declaration of Independence.

Authored by Virginia lawyer Thomas Jefferson, the signers of the declaration aired their grievances with the British government. They took the ideas of John Locke — natural rights and consent of the government — and applied it to their own circumstances.

After successfully breaking free from British rule, the statesmen of the newly formed United States of America were able to craft the Articles of Confederation, followed by the more durable United States Constitution.

By ratifying the constitution, America’s founding generation made it clear from the start that the rule of law, not the rule of men, is what a stable political order should be founded on.

Liberalism’s Peak in the 1800s

Towards the latter half of the 19th century, America became the paragon of human freedom that nations around the world sought to emulate.

Following the destructive Civil War (1861-1865), politics in America stabilized and the country soon began to turn to individual freedom as the main principle that brought the nation together following previous decades of political tension.

Cities such as New York embodied the ethos of the liberal tradition. A thriving market economy, a respect for individual liberty and property, and a tireless entrepreneurial spirit made New York City the Mecca of freedom and commerce.

The Gilded Age represented the pinnacle of freedom in America, which motivated many Europeans to pack up their bags and start a new life in America.

The Gilded Age/Belle Époque

Across the pond, individual freedoms were greatly respected. For Europeans, the Gilded Age was the Belle Époque, where government intervention in the economy was minimal and citizens could do what they pleased so long as they did not violate the rights of others.

In the United Kingdom, intellectuals like Herbert Spencer were leading the way in promoting the idea of spontaneous order and making the case for a society where the state had a minimal presence.

It’s no coincidence that the Industrial Revolution took place during the Gilded Age/Belle Époque, a time in history when individual rights were held in high esteem by all corners of society,

The Importance of Ideas

None of these developments occurred in an ideological vacuum. The robust economic and social development of the Gilded Age was the product of liberal principles that developed over the course of centuries.

They originally started in Northern Europe, then made their way to North America. By the end of the 1800s, most of the West adopted these principles in some shape or form.

The rise of Progressivism

Some notable liberals such as the British philosopher John Stuart Mill became gradually more partial to the idea of a welfare state.

Mill was a liberal that was nominally in favor of a political economy centered around the market. However, his focus was not exclusively centered on the individual’s relationship with the state. He also believed that society was also capable of coercion.

To correct this, Mill called for a more robust state to fix some of the social deficiencies that he believed still afflicted society. Mill still conceded that the best economic policy would be market-based.

The Gradual Shift Towards Welfarism

However, Mill’s gradual move towards statism became one of the first steps that liberals in the 1800s made in rejecting the classical liberal tradition of anti-statism. Mill and some of his more radical successors became more fixated with equal rights and egalitarianism, as opposed to natural rights that were prescribed in accordance with natural law.

For Mill and his ilk, freedom should still be respected, but it could be optimized through state action. This is when the classic liberal definition of freedom began to take a new meaning among progressives

America’s Changing Political Landscape

The economic transformation the Industrial Revolution brought to America was accompanied by a notable political transformation.

The progressive movement of the late 19th century challenged the previous laissez-faire order and promised to bring a “third way”, if you will, of scientific planning when it came to governing a country.

The market would still be in place, but the state would be used to rectify the supposed flaws of human behavior.

The two World Wars and the New Deal in the interwar period witnessed America’s federal government grow at exponential rates.

What once was a sleek, constitutional form of government, soon became an administrative behemoth that the Founding Fathers would likely never recognize.

Classical Liberalism Examples in Modern Times

The consolidation of the progressive state during the first half of the 20th century was not absent of criticism.

The Austrian economic thinkers Ludwig von Mises and F.A. Hayek stepped in to resuscitate the classic liberal ideals of the previous century in a time when social democracy, national socialism, and communism became the predominant ideological currents throughout the West.

They insisted that the decentralized spirit of 19th-century liberalism was what made the West great and that the interventionism of their day was a radical departure from those principles.

Novelist Ayn Rand also played a major role in bringing back liberal ideas of rational thinking, free markets, religious toleration, and individualism during a twentieth-century that largely took these concepts for granted.

The resurgence of liberalism assisted other movements such as conservatism in serving as alternatives to the dominant progressive narrative of the century’s first half.

Libertarianism Enters the Picture

The emergence of libertarianism towards the latter half of the 20th century gave the classical liberal definition a new twist.

The historian Murray Rothbard became the face of this new political current, an ideology that was explicitly anti-state in nature. Rothbard and his companions made it clear that the vast majority of government agencies established during the Progressive Era and New Deal should be abolished.

In addition, Rothbard called for the U.S. to scale back its foreign policy adventurism and return to a gold standard after abolishing the Federal Reserve.

Former Texas Congressman Ron Paul’s presidential runs in 2008 and 2012 were largely inspired by Rothbardrian principles.

How is Liberalism Faring These Days?

Although liberalism has seen better days, its classical liberal principles still live on.

Certain political figures such as Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, and Michigan Congressman Justin Amash have worked diligently to make mainstream conservatism classically liberal on certain issues such as government spending and never-ending wars.

While liberalism may not be as prominent as it was in previous eras, the ideas of Jefferson and Locke will not go away so easily.

Liberty Will Not Go Away

Even during the Trump era, when populist ideas swept across the United States and many foreign countries, old school liberalism had a clever way of creeping back into political discussions.

The Trump approach to the Wuhan virus lockdowns was very federalist in nature and in line with how classical liberals viewed the state’s role in otherwise state or local-level affairs.

This goes to show that extinguishing the classical tradition will be a tall task for proponents of statism. It’s very much ingrained in America’s political psyche. U.S. culture still values individualism which allows dissident figures such as Ludwig von Mises to resurrect and spread ideas that people otherwise viewed as defunct.

Classical liberalism is definitely not at its peak, but its ability to come back and re-invent itself cannot be underestimated.

Classical Liberalism: A Guide on Its Definition and How It Came to originally appeared in Libertas Bella.

Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise

Author: Libertas Bella

Libertas Bella. It’s Latin for “beautiful liberty." We chose the name for a few reasons, one of them being that we cherish liberty whether it’s our own or anyone else’s. Libertas Bella has been featured on FEE.org, LewRockwell.com, Activist Post, PJ Media, and ZeroHedge.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
39 Comments
Anonymous
Anonymous
April 18, 2022 2:33 pm

Thanks.

2 of 5
2 of 5
April 18, 2022 3:09 pm

So-oooo when do we get back to interpreting the Constitution & bill of rights by the definitions of the words used when it was written?? My great grandchildren will most likely not know what a Democratic Republic was or is based on the level of education coming out of the schools at all levels.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  2 of 5
April 18, 2022 3:42 pm

great grandchildren?

Your grandchildren won’t know unless you, personally, explain it to them. And better double check on your children. Perhaps an intergenerational family pop quiz is in order.

Ken31
Ken31
  2 of 5
April 18, 2022 7:45 pm

I am just going to put it out there that the weaknesses of the US Constitution were deliberate by an Elite that did not respect Christianity (AKA Deists and Masons).

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Ken31
April 18, 2022 8:24 pm

The major weakness of the Constitution was it failure to prohibit chattel slavery.
It was deliberate only on the part of the Southern Slavers, an aristocratic elite who thought of themselves as the American aristocracy, landed Barons and such, and controlled the Southern State Governments.
It was felt to be a necessary concession to them, in order to get them to join the Union of States. It was generally believed that the new United States of America would not survive unless they did unite.

Perhaps you see it differently?

Finally, Deists and Masons all believe in a God that is the Supreme Being. As such, they respect all other believers for their Belief.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  2 of 5
April 18, 2022 8:17 pm

Good government requires constant vigilance and can only be instituted against the will of royalists and other sorts of tyrants.

It is not a matter of the definitions of words, it is a matter of understanding, and to reach understanding, you must consider many things… but pretty much all of those things were well covered by the author and Friend of Liberty that posted for you, so that hopefully you could learn.

If you are unhappy with the schools and have school aged children, by all means find a way to take them out of the school you are unhappy with. Try to teach your children real history, encourage them to read it. It is entertaining and fascinating and informative. Hope that they will teach their children the value of individual rights and individual liberty.

Remember, most of the people who created America never went to any school at all.

m
m
April 18, 2022 4:31 pm

Should have been named:
“Classical Liberalism: A Guide on How To Destroy the Foundations of Society Without Anybody Noticing”

Anonymous
Anonymous
  m
April 18, 2022 5:29 pm

Liberalism is individualism, and Individualism is poison.

https://redice.tv/news/the-problem-with-individualism

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Anonymous
April 18, 2022 8:27 pm

You maintain that collectivism is the solution? What exactly do you think that I, as an individual going about my own life, trying to respect the rights of others, am likely to poison?
Individualism is only dangerous to tyrants.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Anonymous
April 19, 2022 2:09 am

It’s dangerous to you. The tyrants promote it, and that is why.

http://www.amerika.org/texts/cult-of-the-individual/

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Anonymous
April 19, 2022 5:37 pm

If your link is to arguments meant to show that tyrants love it when everyone acts in their individual self interest, often forming free associations to do so, then its simply wrong and not worth reading.

m
m
  Anonymous
April 19, 2022 4:00 am

False dichotomy FAIL!
Must.keep.believing.

Your mistake is you’re looking for opposites. But the real way out is to transcend your individualism.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  m
April 19, 2022 5:38 pm

I assume you’ve done that?

bucknp
bucknp
  Anonymous
April 19, 2022 3:50 pm

It would be interesting to know the thoughts of others as to the relationship between BLM and collectivism and unions , being of a collective nature , sponsoring BLM.

How Unions have Supported Black Lives Matter
From the link, “Why UnionTrack? Our power lies in our collective voice”.

Is Individualism vs. Collectivism the New Left vs. Right?

Anonymous
Anonymous
  bucknp
April 19, 2022 5:44 pm

There is nothing wrong with unions as long as they are free associations with no special privileges.

Of course that’s not what we have since the NLRA and the RLA became the “law of the land”.
From the beginning of the signing of those laws and the creation of bureaucracies to sustain them, the intent of unions in the U.S. has been “socialist”. What they have become was inevitable given the laws passed to favor them.

The very worst of it, as FDR noted, was and is unions of government employees, protected by laws and bureaucrats, “negotiating” with people who will pay their increases in pay and benefits with other people’s money, and exerting hugely disproportionate political power.

Wotan Clan
Wotan Clan
  Anonymous
April 19, 2022 5:27 pm

Here you go:

The Sovereignty of the Individual

https://dissident-mag.com/2020/06/25/the-social-collapse-of-complex-societies/

bucknp
bucknp
  m
April 18, 2022 7:26 pm

I’d be interested in reading your talking points.

flash
flash
  bucknp
April 19, 2022 7:35 am

Free trade is a cancer upon the soul of the nation.
Classic liberalism was instrumental in the destruction of church authority which led directly to muh capitalism which gave the debt slavers the power to steal, in the name of capital (might makes right) , private property via government induced taxations, regulation and subsidization.

There is no freedom outside of nation and you can never own what you can’t defend.
Tribe up or die lolbertz.

Under the freedom of trade the whole severity of the laws of political economy will be applied to the working classes. Is that to say that we are against Free Trade? No, we are for Free Trade, because by Free Trade all economical laws, with their most astounding contradictions, will act upon a larger scale, upon a greater extent of territory, upon the territory of the whole earth; and because from the uniting of all these contradictions into a single group, where they stand face to face, will result the struggle which will itself eventuate in the emancipation of the proletarians.

Engels, To Free Trade Congress at Brussels (1847)

comment image

flash
flash
  flash
April 19, 2022 7:36 am

“ World War II ended the “depression.” The same Bankers who in the early 30’s had no loans for peacetime houses,food and clothing, suddenly had unlimited billions to lend for Army barracks, K-rations and uniforms! A nation that in 1934 couldn’t produce food for sale, suddenly could produce bombs to send free to Germany and Japan!… Germany issued debt-free and interest-free money from 1935 and on, accounting for its startling rise from the depression to a world power in 5 years. Germany financed its entire government and war operation from 1935 to 1945 without gold and without debt, and it took the whole Capitalist and Communist world to destroy the
German power over Europe and bring Europe back under the heel of the Bankers. Such history of money does not even appear in the textbooks of public (government) schools today. ”

Sheldon Emry
Billions For Bankers, Debts for the People
https://archive.org/details/Billions20for20the20bankers

“I do not believe that this primal difference between gentile and Jew is reconcilable. There will be irritation between us as long as we are in intimate contact. For nature and constitution and vision divide us from all of you forever . . . I have no doubt that when Germany and England and America will long have lost their present identity or name or purpose, we shall still be strong in ours . . . We have joined your capitalistic world in deliberate emulation and rivalry: yet Jewish socialism and Jewish socialists are the banner bearers of the world’s “armies of liberation.” . . . But you feel our disruptive difference most keenly, most resentfully, in our deliberate efforts to change your social system. Seen in the dazzling lights of your desires and needs our ideal is repellently morose . . . Because your chief institution is the social structure itself, it is in this that we are most manifestly destroyers. We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers for ever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands.”

You Gentiles
By Samuel, Maurice, 1895-1972
https://archive.org/details/YouGentiles

comment image

“The Nazis came to power in Germany on 1933, at time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began. “

Henry C K Liu
World Order, Failed States and Terrorism
PART 10: Nazism and the German economic miracle
http://henryckliu.com/page105.html

comment image

“The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control. … Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.”
~ Larry P. McDonald
U.S. Congressman, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets
in “Introduction” to The Rockefeller File, by Gary Allen (1975)
https://archive.org/details/TheRockefellerFile

comment image

flash
flash
  flash
April 19, 2022 7:37 am

Capitalism has failed to preserve the fruit of liberty the same way, Protestantism has failed to preserve Christendom. They are both connected in that usury is their birth mother.

Philip II: (1527-1598)
William Thomas Walsh
http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=1889B28539B7506D637C3D5605BFD2A0

“This kingdom of Mammon had been held in subjection to a great extent by the
Catholic Church during the magnificent thousand years of her free expansion and
dominance, from the time of Constantine in the fourth century to the
Black Death in the fourteenth. And if, even during that period, the
Church did not succeed in abolishing usury, which she proclaimed
everywhere to be one of the vilest of sins, it was because monarchs,
less faithful to principle than to expediency, protected the moneylenders,
who depended on them for their very lives.

It did not occur to the kings that if the money-lenders ever got
power enough, if they ever got from under the public-spirited
repression of the Church, they would destroy their own masters.
Kings were not generally as far-sighted as money-changers, and
much less so than priests. This is not to deny that clerics sometimes
condoned usury and profited by it, or that some kings repressed it.
Human affairs are never so simple as that. But there was a line of
cleavage: the Church on one side hostile to usury, the kings
compelled to make use of it on the other. ”

The fruit of Mammon is evil…always has been.

comment image

comment image

comment image

Anonymous
Anonymous
  flash
April 19, 2022 5:57 pm

“Capitalism”, a term coined by Marx, is what people do when they are free and have protected property rights. They work, they save, they invest, they start businesses, including money lending businesses. What about this do you not like?

What Marx was looking at in his time and place was the end result of centuries of autocratic rule and mercantilism. Feel free to question Marx’s motive in coining a new term for an old evil.

Of course, the world is being told that mercantilism/crony capitalism is the wave of the future, the only way forward, the key to progress… A complete lie.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  flash
April 19, 2022 5:50 pm

In fact, the Great Depression did not end until the war ended, the troops were demobilized and sent home, and the onerous controls on the economy, first instituted beginning with Hoover and continuing thru the haplessly ineffective (counterproductive in most cases) policies of the New Deal and the war years were repealed.

Unfortunately, we were left with the wrongly decided cases of the Supreme Court, which somehow instantly became precedent that shouldn’t ever be overturned. Most quite amazing because those cases could only be decided by ignoring all prior precedents going back to the founding.

bucknp
bucknp
  flash
April 19, 2022 3:06 pm

Thanks. I’ll read some of your info. . I was asking m in regards to the comment.

flash
flash
April 19, 2022 7:32 am

Free trade is a cancer upon the soul of the nation.
Classic liberalism was instrumental in the destruction of church authority which led directly to muh capitalism which gave the debt slavers the power to steal, in the name of capital (might makes right) , private property via government induced taxations, regulation and subsidization.

There is no freedom outside of nation and you can never own what you can’t defend.
Tribe up or die lolbertz.

Under the freedom of trade the whole severity of the laws of political economy will be applied to the working classes. Is that to say that we are against Free Trade? No, we are for Free Trade, because by Free Trade all economical laws, with their most astounding contradictions, will act upon a larger scale, upon a greater extent of territory, upon the territory of the whole earth; and because from the uniting of all these contradictions into a single group, where they stand face to face, will result the struggle which will itself eventuate in the emancipation of the proletarians.

Engels, To Free Trade Congress at Brussels (1847)

comment image

“ World War II ended the “depression.” The same Bankers who in the early 30’s had no loans for peacetime houses,food and clothing, suddenly had unlimited billions to lend for Army barracks, K-rations and uniforms! A nation that in 1934 couldn’t produce food for sale, suddenly could produce bombs to send free to Germany and Japan!… Germany issued debt-free and interest-free money from 1935 and on, accounting for its startling rise from the depression to a world power in 5 years. Germany financed its entire government and war operation from 1935 to 1945 without gold and without debt, and it took the whole Capitalist and Communist world to destroy the
German power over Europe and bring Europe back under the heel of the Bankers. Such history of money does not even appear in the textbooks of public (government) schools today. ”

Sheldon Emry
Billions For Bankers, Debts for the People
https://archive.org/details/Billions20for20the20bankers

“I do not believe that this primal difference between gentile and Jew is reconcilable. There will be irritation between us as long as we are in intimate contact. For nature and constitution and vision divide us from all of you forever . . . I have no doubt that when Germany and England and America will long have lost their present identity or name or purpose, we shall still be strong in ours . . . We have joined your capitalistic world in deliberate emulation and rivalry: yet Jewish socialism and Jewish socialists are the banner bearers of the world’s “armies of liberation.” . . . But you feel our disruptive difference most keenly, most resentfully, in our deliberate efforts to change your social system. Seen in the dazzling lights of your desires and needs our ideal is repellently morose . . . Because your chief institution is the social structure itself, it is in this that we are most manifestly destroyers. We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers for ever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands.”

You Gentiles
By Samuel, Maurice, 1895-1972
https://archive.org/details/YouGentiles

comment image

“The Nazis came to power in Germany on 1933, at time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began. “

Henry C K Liu
World Order, Failed States and Terrorism
PART 10: Nazism and the German economic miracle
http://henryckliu.com/page105.html

comment image

“The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control. … Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.”
~ Larry P. McDonald
U.S. Congressman, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets
in “Introduction” to The Rockefeller File, by Gary Allen (1975)
https://archive.org/details/TheRockefellerFile

comment image

Capitalism has failed to preserve the fruit of liberty the same way, Protestantism has failed to preserve Christendom. They are both connected in that usury is their birth mother.

Philip II: (1527-1598)
William Thomas Walsh
http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=1889B28539B7506D637C3D5605BFD2A0

“This kingdom of Mammon had been held in subjection to a great extent by the
Catholic Church during the magnificent thousand years of her free expansion and
dominance, from the time of Constantine in the fourth century to the
Black Death in the fourteenth. And if, even during that period, the
Church did not succeed in abolishing usury, which she proclaimed
everywhere to be one of the vilest of sins, it was because monarchs,
less faithful to principle than to expediency, protected the moneylenders,
who depended on them for their very lives.

It did not occur to the kings that if the money-lenders ever got
power enough, if they ever got from under the public-spirited
repression of the Church, they would destroy their own masters.
Kings were not generally as far-sighted as money-changers, and
much less so than priests. This is not to deny that clerics sometimes
condoned usury and profited by it, or that some kings repressed it.
Human affairs are never so simple as that. But there was a line of
cleavage: the Church on one side hostile to usury, the kings
compelled to make use of it on the other. ”

The fruit of Mammon is evil…always has been.

comment image

comment image

comment image

Anonymous
Anonymous
  flash
April 19, 2022 5:58 pm

I hope you aren’t advocating a State Religion.

hardscrabble farmer
hardscrabble farmer
April 19, 2022 7:49 am

I think what’s being overlooked completely is interference-

Having others direct your life, impeding your ability to live out your own destiny, enacting laws, imposing taxes, restricting speech or movement-these are at the root of Liberalism’s failure.

In every instance we come to some sort of default that others- collectives larger than the individual- have their own right. This was never a part of the framework of Classic liberalism.

Collectives are capable of building complex systems and massive works as well as waging wars and imposing tyrannies, but they have never and will never create works of art, invent anything, discover something new. These are entirely within the realm of the individual. The collective requires individuals and individuals can only come to full flower as a product of collectives. This balance should not, however, be at the cost of one or the other.

flash
flash
  hardscrabble farmer
April 19, 2022 8:37 am

“but they have never and will never create works of art, invent anything, discover something new. ”

I’ll see your classic modern liberalism art and raise you…

comment image

comment image

Philip II: (1527-1598)
William Thomas Walsh
http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=1889B28539B7506D637C3D5605BFD2A0
Pérez also informed the Emperor that the consecrated vessels
containing the Host had been stolen. No doubt the Body of Christ
was trampled in the dust by the feet of Lutherans and
Mohammedans. Flames and smoke began rising in all parts of the
stricken city as the troops set fire to houses whose owners had fled
or were unable to pay ransom. Priceless art treasures were
destroyed. Many artists were killed. The Renaissance in art was
summarily ended. Michael Angelo did no work for two years. Ariosto
sadly wrote his
Vedete gli homicidii e le rapine
In ogni parte far Roma dolente.
10
comment image?q=1

Anonymous
Anonymous
  flash
April 19, 2022 6:12 pm

It’s really hard for me to see art created by artists who were supported by rich patrons as collectivist or free market. Especially since the patrons were quite often rich because they were cronies or “royalty”.
I have to admit the art was generally of higher quality when it wasn’t directly commissioned by governments or bureaucrats. Princes and Popes seem to have had better taste than modern government committees, but that’s not enough reason to want them in control again.

flash
flash
  hardscrabble farmer
April 19, 2022 8:50 am

What has muh freedom loving lolberzt gave us other than open borders, drug wars and buttsex?

List of lay Catholic scientists
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

“The Vitruvian Man” by Leonardo da Vinci
Many Catholics have made significant contributions to the development of science and mathematics from the Middle Ages to today. These scientists include Galileo Galilei, René Descartes, Louis Pasteur, Blaise Pascal, André-Marie Ampère, Charles-Augustin de Coulomb, Pierre de Fermat, Antoine Laurent Lavoisier, Alessandro Volta, Augustin-Louis Cauchy, Pierre Duhem, Jean-Baptiste Dumas, Alois Alzheimer, Georgius Agricola and Christian Doppler.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lay_Catholic_scientists

Anonymous
Anonymous
  flash
April 19, 2022 6:19 pm

Open borders is not a position held by many libertarians at all.

The drug wars were created by our establishment politicians from the TwoParties and have been sustained by the TwoParties since the beginning.

If you don’t think sex between consenting adults is a private matter, how do you think forms of sex with which you disagree should be monitored and prevented?

Nelson Muntz
Nelson Muntz
  hardscrabble farmer
April 19, 2022 9:32 am

All the arguments here against the idea of free markets are actually pointing out the nature of the State. Individuals and groups of individuals conducting trade among each other is the foundation of civilization. Without trade there is no division of labor, which is the source of all prosperity.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The nature of the State is that it steals productivity from the masses and distributes favoritism to the highest bidder. Always has, always will, regardless of the form it takes. The problem is not people conducting business toward their own best self interest, the problem is the State.

The only alternative to free trade is central planning. (Or no trade at all).

flash
flash
  Nelson Muntz
April 19, 2022 9:50 am

Real capitalism has never been tried..reeeee

Anonymous
Anonymous
  flash
April 19, 2022 6:24 pm

You know nothing of the early days of the American Republic?

“Real” capitalism is actually just trade and commerce, conducted freely under a structure of equally applied laws that protect everyone’s rights.

flash
flash
  Anonymous
April 19, 2022 7:00 pm

You know nothing of state sanction trading companies monopolizing and murdering the competition have you?

Muh free whiskey trade….

Anonymous
Anonymous
  hardscrabble farmer
April 19, 2022 6:04 pm

Associations of free people do have rights, just as much so as the individuals that compose them.
“Collectives” in the form of private corporations have contributed an unimaginable number of innovations, inventions and products, and the founders most certainly knew about them.
Yes, it is often (but not always) an individual who comes up with a new idea, or invents something, but it is much easier for individuals to be creative if they are supported by an organization of other individuals.

The real problem is with forced collectivism, which is the opposite of free association.

flash
flash
  Anonymous
April 19, 2022 6:55 pm

Corporations = state sanctioned piracy …always has.

bucknp
bucknp
April 19, 2022 11:37 pm

Meat and potatoes article that refreshed much learned from 2008-2012.
The Revolution A Manifesto and Liberty Defined – Ron Paul

Anonymous
Anonymous
April 22, 2022 8:24 am

Liberalism has created our problems. Nationalism is the only solution. If we could reinvent a high-trust nation, local liberalism could prevail again, but it will take top down fascism to get there, unfortunately. Our national enemies have exploited liberalism, and the altruism of European peoples to destroy the culture of the once exceptional nation.