Liberalism, or what we might now refer to as "classical liberalism" to distinguish

it from today's usage of the term, emerged as a reaction to Europe's decaying

feudal order in the 17th and 18th centuries. The rising urban business class,
sometimes called the bourgeoisie, sought increased political influence to match
their growing economic and social power. Momentum for change accelerated as
political philosophers, developing ideas of natural rights and the social
contract, began to articulate an ideology that rejected hereditary privilege and
fit the political aspirations of these growing political actors. These ideas were
profoundly influenced by two major movements in Western civilization. The first
movement was the Protestant Reformation and its notion that a person has an
individual relationship with the divine. The second movement was the
Enlightenment with the assumption that the world has a natural order that
individual reason can discover and understand independently of faith, a
rationalist philosophy.

Individualism

Classical liberalism holds that there are certain

natural rights of which no government, elected or otherwise, may deprive its
citizens. This is an important distinction. Governments do not give rights to
their citizens. Rights belong to citizens because they are inherent in the natural
order or granted by God Almighty (take your pick). John Locke, a political
theorist of the 18th century identified three such basic rights, "life, liberty, and
property." Thomas Jefferson memorably plagiarized Locke's idea in the
Declaration of Independence when he wrote that all men share
certain inalienable rights, among them "life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness."

Given the political and economic interests of its beneficiaries, classical liberalism
places a very strong emphasis on the individual's right to property. This
ideology is thus a natural favorite for proponents of a capitalist economic
system. A capitalist economy allocates economic decision-making to individuals
meeting in free markets. In such a system individuals, rather than the state,
are the predominant owners of property. This highlights another key aspect of
classical liberalism: its clear suspicion of centralized political power and its
earnest advocacy of limited government. You may recall another famous phrase
credited to that prolific phrase-turner, Thomas Jefferson: "That government is
best which governs least."

Limited Government

This emphasis on limited government is

notable in three particulars. First, classical liberalism is hostile to government
interference in the marketplace. It was a reaction against the repressive
medieval guild system of trades and the heavy-handed state policy of
mercantilism, typified under France's economic minister, Colbert. Adam Smith,
a Scottish political economist, invoked the metaphor of an invisible hand to
describe how individual selfishness in an unregulated economy actually
promotes the public good. More bluntly, big government is bad for business and
prosperity. Second, the classical liberal tradition emphasizes separation of
church and state (though not always the wall of separation endorsed by some
modern constitutional scholars). The emerging business elites who embraced
classical liberalism were often Protestants and victims of persecution or
discrimination by Catholic, Anglican or other state churches. State control of
religious practice was bad for business and, more fundamentally, a matter best
left to individual conscience. They saw proof for these points in the apocalyptic
bloodshed of Europe's Thirty Years War, a war waged in the name of religion.
 Third, while the classical liberal
tradition celebrates civil society (associations of individuals and institutions
outside of government control) and charitable giving to the poor, it rejects the
proposition that the state is responsible for the welfare of society's less
fortunate, whether the poor or ill. This is a notable difference between classical
liberalism and socialism. It is inclined to see an individual's fate as the outcome
of his or her individual decisions, good or bad. It is relatively optimistic about an
individual's capacity for self-transformation and accents individual responsibility.
It is skeptical of theories emphasizing environmental determinism (the idea that
individuals are severely limited by the social conditions into which they are
born). The cliché maxim that someone should "pull himself up by his own
bootstraps" is a reflection of the liberal ideal. Thus concerning the cardinal value
of equality, it embraces equality of opportunity but rejects equality of results.
Classical liberalism is adverse to the welfare state.

In conclusion, classical liberalism is a political ideology grounded in the notion of

individualism and limited government, with a large helping of property rights on
the side. It demands formal political and legal equality, but does not require or
even expect social and economic equality.
The Rise, Decline, and Reemergence of Classical Liberalism
by Amy H. Sturgis

Introduction: The Definition of Classical Liberalism

Contemporary Liberalism consists of separate and often contradictory streams of thought springing
from a common ancestry; the intellectual parent of these variants has not only endured intact, it has
outlived some of its offspring and shown more intellectual stamina than others. The tenets of this
parent, known as classical liberalism, have answered the needs and the challenges of over three
centuries in the West. By observing its past and discovering how it responded to the dramatic
historical dynamics of economic, technological, political, and social changes we may understand
how classical liberalism provides a strong foundation for the future.

In order to assign consistent terms in this study, I must first define classical liberalism. Scholars have
offered different interpretations of this term. For example, E. K. Bramsted, co-editor of the
monumental anthology Western Liberalism: A History in Documents from Locke to Croce (1978),
asserts that the classical liberal champions the rights of individuals (with careful attention to the more
endangered rights of minorities), the right of property in particular, the government's obligation to
protect property, limited constitutional government, and a belief in social progress (36). John Gray
broadens this description in Liberalism (1986) to include philosophies demonstrating individualism,
egalitarianism, and universalism (x). In Liberalism Old and New (1991), J. G. Merquior argues that
the theories of human rights, constitutionalism, and classical economics define classical liberal
thought.

These scholars and others actually agree far more than they differ concerning the philosophy's
components. For the purpose of this chronology and analysis, I shall apply a broad set of criteria to
determine if an idea or individual fits within this intellectual tradition. In this context, classical
liberalism includes the following:

 an ethical emphasis on the individual as a rights-bearer prior to the existence of any state,
community, or society,
 the support of the right of property carried to its economic conclusion, a free-market system,
 the desire for a limited constitutional government to protect individuals' rights from others and
from its own expansion, and
 the universal (global and ahistorical) applicability of these above convictions.
These characteristics do exclude certain thinkers commonly linked with classical liberalism, although
they embrace far more individuals than they dismiss. Failure to exhibit them, however, does point to
a very fundamental difference with the minds that compose the tradition. Two diverse cases of
thinkers associated with yet not belonging to this ideology may serve as examples. First, Jeremy
Bentham and the utilitarians accepted limited rights and market economics as long as they provided
the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Classical liberal ends thus served as convenient
means to them, but the eventual ends they sought betrayed an intellectual collectivism incompatible
with the above criteria. From a different angle, Jean Jacques Rousseau's vision of the social
contract, while also noteworthy, included an almost mystic notion of a general will. Such a concept
created an unaccountable power elite to interpret and impose this will, by force if necessary. Again,
vital components of classical liberal thought are offended. Neither Bentham nor Rousseau therefore
are members of this legacy.

Any single attempt to chronicle the history of classical liberalism cannot do justice to the immense
richness and diversity of the individuals or movements within it. In this story three distinct flavors
coexist and often blend: the realistic English tradition of law, the rationalistic French tradition of
humanism, and the organic German tradition of individualism. Gray characterizes these three as
competing yet complementary definitions of liberty, with Britain representing independence, France
self-rule, and Germany self-realization (13). Beyond these national differences, two parallel concepts
survive throughout the history of classical liberalism irrespective of geographical boundaries. One is
predicated upon a negative view of human nature, accepting that people are equally fallen and
incapable of perfection. It follows from this perspective that power must be limited because it would
allow some corrupt individuals to do more harm than others. The other view maintains that all people
are inherently good and perfectible, so power must be limited to allow humanity to evolve toward a
more perfect order of self-government.

This chronology admittedly cannot discuss every contributor or school of thought in such a multi-
dimensional and lasting tradition. For example, the contributions of Lysander Spooner and the 19th
century American anarchists or Albert Jay Nock and the American Old Right could easily have been
included. I have made an effort to note leaders that symbolize the ideology's historical stages. The
absence of names or works does not necessarily signify any defensible judgment of importance.
This treatment is meant to provide a general introduction to the rise, decline, and reemergence of
classical liberalism and therefore is limited by space and purpose. As the decision to include and
omit facts was difficult and, to a degree, arbitrary, I beg the indulgence of the reader as I begin this
historical overview.
Classical Liberalism: John Locke and Adam Smith
It is within the newly liberated England of the Glorious Revolution that we meet
John Locke, the father of classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is the original
name for the political philosophy we now call libertarianism. The main reason for
the name change is that the words "liberalism" and "liberals" invoke an entirely
different meaning in modern politics. Libertarianism is a good substitute, since it
holds the pursuit and protection of liberty above all else.

John Locke published his "Second Treatise of Government" in 1690. In it, he

argues that the only role of government is to protect our natural rights, namely
the rights to "Lives, Liberties and Estates" [source: Boaz]. Like other early
libertarian thinkers, he argued that these natural rights superseded manmade
rights, and that no ruler or government could seek to remove these "inalienable
rights"