Lesson 1 Liberty : Negative and Positive Important Notes

 

Lesson 1 Liberty : Negative and Positive

The term liberty means freedom. Freedom can be understood in different ways i.e. freedom of speech, freedom to move, freedom to practice profession of one choice, freedom to practice and propagate religion of one’s choice.

In order to understand freedom in a better way we can take some other examples like desire of bird in a cage to fly in the open air, desire of the prisoner to set himself free from the prison and lead a free life, desire of patient to go home who is admitted long time in a hospital for treatment.

 

Scope of Liberty

One of the major issue in liberty is adjustment of claims between individuals and society (community). Here State is plays an important role because it is the instrument or agency for regulating their relations. If the claim of the individual is stretched to an extreme in utter disregard of the interest of society, liberty would be reduced to ‘licence’. On the other, if liberty of the individual is increasingly restricted in the supposed interest of society, the result would be an unconditional submission to authority, hence the loss of liberty, it is therefore, essential to draw a distinction between liberty and licence on the one hand, and to fix the proper frontier between liberty and authority, on the other.

 

Liberty and Licence

When liberty is interpreted as the absence or removal of all restraints on the action of individual in utter disregard of the interest of other individuals, liberty degenerates into licence.

A thief’s liberty to take away anybody’s property would become a threat to everybody’s security. A driver’s freedom to drive at any speed in any direction at his own whim would endanger the life and liberty of all users of the road. Such a situation is obviously self-contradictory. It cannot be permitted in a civil society, otherwise it would defeat the very purpose of social organization.

If freedom is not to become a prerogative of a single individual, or for that matter a group of individuals, it must be regulated in such a way that none shall use his freedom so as to destroy the freedom of others.

The liberty of the owner of capital to determine the conditions of work in a the factory which he owns is a relative liberty which must be adjusted to the liberty of the worker to do his work under such conditions as leave him still a free agent and give him also a share in the determination of the conditions of work. Because the liberty of each is, thus relative to that of others, and has to be adjusted to that of others, it must always be regulated; and indeed it would not exist unless it was regulated.

 

Liberty and Authority

Liberty of the individuals has to be restricted by a measure of equal liberty to be enjoyed by others. In other words, one man’s liberty should not become an obstruction in the enjoyment of liberty of others.

Liberty within the State is thus a relative and regulated liberty: it is the common measure of liberty which is possible for all, as determined and defined (i) by the need of each to enjoy similar and equal liberty with others; (ii) by the need of all to enjoy the specific liberty of realizing specific capacities.

This view of relative and regulated liberty does not dismiss or dilute the essence of liberty. On the contrary it provides for a more substantive foundation thereof. As Barker has elucidated: A relative and regulated liberty, actually operative and enjoyed, is liberty greater in amount than absolute liberty could ever be – if indeed such liberty could ever exist, or ever amount to anything more than nothing at all.

Regulation of liberty implies the recognition of authority of the state over the individual. If the liberty of the individual cannot be permitted to be absolute, can we allow the authority of the state to become absolute? Thus, the conflict between liberty and authority is no less grave than the conflict between liberty and license.

Whatever be the situation, limitations on the authority of the State have to be laid down to make authority more meaningful with reference to its social purpose. A State may possess unlimited legal powers. For instance, the British Parliament is regarded as legally omnipotent. But in the real world, no State can afford to exercise unlimited powers.

As State makes, law; it has the power to enforce that law by coercion. In other words, the law is backed by sanctions; the state is free to use the methods of compulsion.

Legitimacy denotes the support extended by the people to the state and its law out of their moral beliefs and values.

Legitimacy comes from the people. A State is legitimate if people believe that it is necessary for them and that its action is lawful and valuable to society. As long as its legitimacy is unquestioned, the State will rarely need to use force. But if its legitimacy is widely questioned, the State is in dangerous situation. A regime is in serious trouble if the people believe that its military is illegitimate, its police brutal, and its courts unfair. It may have power- the ability to get its orders obeyed despite widespread opposition-but it does not have authority of State or law would prove most effective only when most people accepted it on moral grounds.

 

Various Notions of Liberty

Positive Liberty: During the latter half of the 19th century, a positive concept of liberty developed. We can find it in the writings of Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, T.H. Green, Bosanquet, Barker and Laski. Kant said that there are higher and lower selves in an individual.

John Locke and Adam Smith regarded every law as involving a decrease in liberty, whereas Green and Laski desired to reform society through the agency of laws. According to them, liberty does not mean “absence of restraints, it rather signifies “an opportunity” for you to do something which is worth doing. Laski explains, “by liberty I mean the eager maintenance of that atmosphere in which men have the opportunity to be their best selves”

Views of Laski

Laski says: “By liberty I mean the eager maintenance of that atmosphere in which men have the opportunity to be their best selves. Liberty, therefore, is a product of rights…Without rights there cannot be liberty because without rights people are subject to law unrelated to the needs of personality.

Personal liberty cannot be enjoyed in isolation from society. Laski states maintains that liberty should not be left at the mercy of the State because “…in this context can be called to account; and it should always be so called to account when it invades rights”. Laski supports the positive concept of liberty, he is suspicious of governments and does not surrender liberty to the State.

Laski associates liberty with the availability of opportunities for the development of personality. He says, “…the freedoms I must possess to enjoy a liberty are those which, in their sum, will constitute the path through which my best self is capable of attainment…Freedoms are, therefore, opportunities which history has shown to be essential to the development of personality”.

He mentions two conditions that are required for political liberty to be real. These are education and the provision of an honest and straightforward supply of news. “A people without news is, sooner or later, a people without the basis of freedom”.

Laski describes about the nature of three kinds of liberties -Private liberty is mainly a negative thing, whereas political and economic liberties need some socio-economic conditions for their fulfillment, and are positive in nature. Positive and economic liberties are meaningless without the conditions required for their realization. The responsibility of creating these without the conditions required for their realization.

Laski mentions positive conditions required for the realization of liberty. They are as follows:-

i) The absence of Special Privileges: Freedom cannot exist in the presence of special privileges. The special privileges leads to frustration, the habit of creativeness is lost due to this and people lose the ability to realize their own good. Laski says, that “…those who desire the good of all begin by abolition of special privileges…Special privilege is incompatible with freedom because the latter quality belongs to all alike in their character as human beings”.xv Thus liberty is possible only when equality is there.

ii) The Presence of Rights: Liberty can only be enjoyed in the presence of rights. There cannot “…be liberty where the right of some depends upon the pleasure of others”. It is the duty of the state to maintain equal rights.

iii) Responsible Government: The government must be responsible. Only a responsible government can create the socio-economic and political conditions required for the realization of rights and liberty.

 

Views of Macpherson

Macpherson call positive liberty as ‘developmental liberty’. He says, “…the division will be better marked if we change the name of positive liberty to developmental liberty”. Macpherson defines “positive liberty to act as a full human being. A man’s positive liberty is virtually the same as what I have called a man’s power in the developmental sense”.

He says, “…since each individual’s liberty must diminish or destroy another’s the only sensible way to measure individual’s liberty is to measure the aggregate net liberty of all the individuals in the society.”

Important Points of Positive Liberty

i) Liberty is not the absence of restraints, rather it is the presence of those socioeconomic and political conditions without which it cannot be realized.

ii) The object of liberty is the development of man as a social being.

iii) Without proper opportunities and social conditions liberty cannot be realized.

iv) Rights are necessary for liberty and it is related to justice, morality and equality.

v) The liberties of an individual must correspond with social welfare.

vi) The duty of the State is to create positive conditions for the realization of liberty and for this the State can limit the liberties of some individuals. However, the government must be a responsible government. The State is not viewed as an enemy of personal liberty.

vii) Liberty is social requirement of social man and it is not given to an asocial or antisocial beings.

viii) Only in a welfare State can positive liberty exist.

Negative Liberty: Negative liberty means, “absence of external restraints”. The supporters of Negative liberty include John Locke, Adam Smith and Herbert Spencer. They were of the opinion that the sphere of State activity should be restricted to the narrowest possible limits.

J.S. Mill describes that man’s actions are of two kinds, i.e. “self-regarding” and “otherregarding”. The self-regarding actions have an effect only on the doer, whereas other regarding actions have an effect other’s existence.

The supporters of Negative Liberty believe that:-

(i) More the laws, less is the liberty available to the individuals;

(ii) Freedoms of thought, speech, religion and property should never be restricted;

(iii) ‘Franchise’ should be universal;

(iv) The sphere of State activity should be very limited.

Views of J.S. Mill (1806-73)

Mill supported the concept negative liberty together with the support for the support for the positive view of the State. Mill was writing in the later half of the 19th century when negative liberties was vehemently opposed. He was writing in the age when the “…extending suffrage conferred a measure of power on classes who had something to gain from the legal interference in daily affairs, and…it was accepted that State had a legitimate and positive part to play in promoting welfare”.

The will of the people, moreover, practically means the will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people… precautions are as much needed against this as against any other abuse of power. The limitation, therefore, of the power of government over individuals loses none of its importance when the holders of powers are regularly accountable to the community…and in political speculations the tyranny of the majority is now generally included among the evils against which society is required to itself be a tyranny of the be on its guard”.

He maintained that even social collectivity or society may itself be a tyrant and may tyrannise over the separate individuals who compose it. Here lies the value and worth of Mill’s individualism, and he is afraid of the restraints of both the democratic State and society, so far as the individual’s liberty is concerned.

 

Views of Isaiah Berlin

According to Berlin: “Political liberty in this sense (negative) is simply the area within which a man can act unobstructed by others”.i The absence of coercion is the basis of liberty. He says: “You lack political liberty or freedom only if you are prevented from attaining a goal by human beings.

He says: “ If my poverty were a kind of disease, which prevented me from buying bread or paying for the journey, or getting my case heard, as lameness prevents me from running, this inability would not naturally be described as a lack of freedom, least of all political freedom”.

Berlin further explains that there is no logical relationship between liberty and democracy as a man/woman may be left by a dictator than by a democratic government. He says: “Freedom in this sense (negative) is not, at any rate logically, connected with democracy or self-government may provide a better guarantee of the preservation of civil liberty…But there is no necessary connection between individual liberty and democratic rule”.

Berlin is of the view that liberty is something different, and the socio-economic conditions necessary for the fulfillment of liberty are altogether different. He refuses to accept the relationship between liberty and the conditions required for the realization of liberty.

f there is poverty in the society and no coercion at all, there may be injustice or inequality in the society, but liberty is very much present there. So the absence of the necessary socio-economic conditions for the realization of liberty does not mean the absence of liberty itself. In brief we can say Berlin maintains liberty is the absence of any restraints or interference in the personal affairs of an individual.

 

Views of Milton Friedman

Friedman, a neo-liberal (libertarian), supports negative liberty and finds connection between liberty and capitalism. He is of the opinion that without capitalism there cannot be freedom in a society. According to him, political freedom means, “…the absence of coercion of a man by his fellowmen”.

He favors negative State and the regulations of the economy by it are improper. In the earlier stage political freedom was demanded for the development of capitalism, but today Friedman is demanding free capitalism for the maintenance of the political freedom. He supports that competitive capitalism is necessary, though not sufficient, condition of political freedom and “…history suggests…that capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom”.

He attacks the positive State and the positive view of liberty because state interference in economic matters is harmful to the economic liberty of individuals and economic development of society. By economic liberty he means availability of free capitalist market economy. He does not associate liberty with human values like justice and equality.

Important Points of Negative Liberty

i) Liberty is a negative thing- the absence of restraints.

ii) An individual is rational and only he/she knows what is his/her interest. For the development of his/her personality he/she needs certain liberties. They has a personal sphere of their own, distinct from that of the society.

iii) Each individual should be given personal liberty with regard to their personal affairs and the society or the State must not interfere with it. Among these personal liberties, the liberties of thought and discussion, of association and assembly are the most important.

iv) There is no conflict between the personal interest and social interest and by serving his own interests an individual also serves the social interest. Personal liberty is a precondition of social progress.

v) Leaving a man free in his personal affairs will lead to personal and social development. Personal development is in harmony with social development.

vi) Those actions of individual which influence the society can be controlled by the State through the laws. But this interference of the State should be minimal.

vii) The laws of the State cannot take away personal liberty, but can only regulate it for overall social welfare.

viii) Democratic government is not a sufficient guarantee of personal liberty as it may lead to tyranny of the majority or a collective mediocrity and may crush minorities.

ix) There is a difference between liberty and necessary socio-economic conditions for the realization of liberty. Liberty may be against justice and equality and in a dictatorship of man may have more liberty than in a democracy.

 

Marxist Concept of Liberty

Marxist concept of freedom is different from the liberal-individualistic view. According to the Marxist thinkers, welfare policies might lessen the misery of the masses, but they do not change the exploitative character of Capitalism. Freedom is not possible only when means of production and distribution-land, factories, mines, banks, railways etc.-are all owned by society as a whole, i.e. State.

Marxism analyses socio-economic and political problems and concepts on the basis of dialectical materialism. Personal freedom is not something abstract and asocial. During 18th and 19th centuries the liberal supporters of liberty based their concept of liberty on the alienated individual, and personal, political and religious liberty were demanded liberal writers were supporting the capitalist system, and on the other way were giving the slogans of liberty, equality and fraternity.

The Marxist concept of freedom is associated with concepts like self-realization, self-development, self-development, self-fulfilment, and self-creativeness. Any fruitful discussion on Marxist concept of freedom has to consider Marxian view of man in its multi-dimensional aspects and his relationship with self, nature and society. Marxist concept of freedom has been divided into the following parts: -

i) Critique of man and his freedom in bourgeoise societies: Marx presented a sound and scientific criticism of the position of man and woman and his freedom in bourgeois societies. He explains that bourgeois revolution has politically emancipated people and their freedom can be achieved only by abolishing private property and establishing social ownership of the means of production. Marx borrowed the concept alienation from Hegel and Feuerbach gave an altogether humanity in the capitalist system. Marx concludes that private property is the enemy of humanity, and freedom- a human quality- is not possible along with it.

ii) Views on human essence, purpose and value: The understanding of philosophical concept of man/woman is the first requirement for understanding any problem of man/woman. Marx scientifically analysed the then prevailing different views of people anthropological, spiritual, idealist, individualist, mechanical and materialist pointed out the weaknesses of these and then gave his own view. “The-Marxist social thought relied theoretically on the concept of man in the abstract, man in general.

Human beings are social animal and cannot be studied under isolation. Mere existence is not their existence in social nature. The purpose and values of man are closely associated with human existence. NonMarxist ideologies have insisted that the purpose of man is abstract truth and virtue (idealism), personal happiness (individualism), achievement of salvation or spiritualism (religion), etc.

iii) The meaning of freedom: Freedom and necessity: Marxism does not regard absence of restraint as freedom, nor does not it accept that the personal and political freedoms are the highest ideals and other freedoms are based on these. It defines freedom by associating it with essence and purpose of man.

Similarly, Petrosyan says: “Marx’s understanding of freedom implies activity aimed at creating real conditions for the free all-round development and flowering of man’s individuality.

iv) Freedom and praxis (purposive social activity): Praxis means social activity of man. Marxism regards knowledge of objective law as the necessary condition for freedom, but this alone is not sufficient. Freedom can be achieved by revolutionary social activity (Praxis), based on the knowledge of objective laws of nature and society. Knowledge makes possible the mastery of man over nature and society, but without man’s revolutionary social activity this knowledge is useless.

v) Freedom as a class concept: Marx describes that in a class divided society freedom will mean different things to different classes. For the owners of the property it will mean freedom of private property, of profits, of free contracts, of employing someone or removing them from their exploitation and bad working conditions.

Similarly Claudwell writes, “…bourgeosis social relations alike give rise to these two extremes, the freedom of the idle bourgeois and the unfreedom of the proletarian worker…The bourgeois could not enjoy his idleness without the labour of the worker…thus the liberty of the few is in bourgeois social relations built on the unfreedom of the many”.

vi) Freedom, where and How?: According to Marx freedom can be available in the free atmosphere of a free society. Free society will be a classless society in which everyone will be free from exploitation from his fellow beings. The wall of private property will not remain between man in the society and man can live in the society with his true essence, purpose and values. Freedom means multidimensional development of social man and a free socialist society provide ample opportunities for this.

Evaluation and Main Points of Marxian Freedom

· The issue personal liberty is associated with Marxian humanism.

· Man’s essence is the totality of social relations. In a class-divided society based on private property, man is alienated and his existence contradicts his essence. In such situation the question of freedom does not arise.

· Human freedom should be considered in the totality of social relations and with due reference to man’s essence, purpose and values.

· Freedom means availability of conditions for self realization and self-realization and self-fulfillment. It mean’s multi-dimensional development as a social being.

· There is nothing like will of man as there are certain objective laws of nature and society (necessity) which exist independently of human will and the free will of an individual is restricted by these laws.

· Man can realize freedom having scientific understanding of these objective laws. Thus, scientific knowledge is the necessary requirement of freedom.

· On the basis of scientific understanding, there should be revolutionary social activity (praxis) because without changing society and nature, freedom is not possible.

· In a class divided society the freedom of owners of property is built upon the unfreedom of the property less. So freedom in such a society has a class future.

· Freedom to all can only be available in a free society man gets free socioeconomic conditions for free development of his personality.

· Communist society can be established by a socialist revolution and the struggle for socialist revolution is a struggle for freedom.

Various Dimensions of Liberty

i) Civil Liberty: It includes Protection of life, liberty and property; Domestic liberty (Right to privacy); Freedom of Speech and Assembly; Religious liberty; Freedom to form Union and Associations; Freedom of Movement etc.

ii) Political Liberty: It includes right to participate in decision making and right to choose one’s own representative. Right to vote; Right to get elected to the Legislature and other Public bodies; The Right to organize Political parties, Right to criticize the government.

iii) Economic Liberty: It includes Right to Work and the Right to Rest and Leisure, Freedom to acquire, hold and dispose of property; Racial and National Liberty.

Safeguards to Liberty

i) Democratic Form of Government: Dictatorship is characterized by ‘Command’ and ‘Coercion’. Democracy, on the other hand bestows upon each citizen the right to participate in decision-making processes, through their elected representatives.

ii) Safeguards afforded by a written constitution: One of the objectives of the Constitution is to safeguard the rights of the citizens. Several rights have been guaranteed to citizens by the American and Indian Constitutions. Some Constitutions not only lay down the rights, but also provide the means to enforce them.

iii) Decentralization of powers: The powers of the government have to be subjected to limitations. One method to preserve the liberty of people is to divide the legislative, executive and judicial powers among separate bodies or organs of the government. This is known as ‘Separation of Powers’.

iv) Free and Impartial Judiciary: Free and impartial judiciary is essential if we want to protect rights and liberties of our people. Moreover, judicial procedures need to be speedy and inexpensive. Indian Constitution provides Free Legal Aid under Article 39-A, Article 14 provides Equality before Law.

v) Rule of Law: Rule of Law denotes the absence of arbitrary powers. It means the rule of law and not of men”. Law of the Land is Supreme and nobody is above the law, be it ruler or the subject both are under the law, nobody is above the law.

vi) Autonomy of Groups and Associations: There are various groups and associations operating in the fields of education, business, trade, art, religion and science. The associations keep the government in touch with the trend of public opinion, so that it may shape its policies accordingly.

vii) Role of the Opposition: The opposition keeps the government on its toes. It is as much the duty of the Opposition to criticize as it is of a government to government to govern. No government can totally ignore the opposition’s viewpoint. The parties provide a link between the people and the government.

viii) Independent Mass media: The government should not have absolute control over the mass media, i.e. radio, television and the newspapers. Independence of the mass media strengthens freedoms of the masses.

ix) Egalitarianism: It suggests that “all people are equal and deserve equal rights, opportunities and privileges”. Thus regardless of one’s race, religion, caste, or sex, all should have equal opportunities to develop their talents.

x) Enlightened Public Opinion: An enlightened public opinion is the best guarantee of freedom and growth. There are various agencies which formulate the public opinion. Newspapers, literary works, parties associations, voluntary organizations and the educational institutions are the most prominent among such agencies.

 B.A. Political Science Notes, Sol DU BA Study Notes, BA Study Notes, ignou ba notes

Important Questions

1. What is the meaning of liberty. Explain the various notions of liberty?

2. What is the difference between positive and negative liberty?

3. What is the Marxian concept of freedom.

Post a Comment

0 Comments