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.
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.
0 Comments
If you any doubts, Please let me know