Analyse, evaluate and compare the similarities and differences between classical and modern
liberalism. You should refer to the thinkers you have studied.
Liberalism is a political ideology with the individual and their rights at its core. There are two forms
of liberalism, classical and modern. Classical liberals argue that humans were born free and morally
equal and no one naturally has the right to rule over others. Modern liberals however, question
what is meant by liberty; this question have become particularly powerful due to the rise of
advanced societies. This essay will compare the similarities and differences between classical and
modern liberalism, through the core ideas of liberalism. These core ideas consist of freedom and the
individual, Human nature and society.
Individualism is a key liberal assumption. The individual – rather than classes, races or nation – is the
key basis for thinking about human nature, the state, society and the economy. On the one hand,
the individual is unique with their own talents and abilities, while, on the other hand, everyone is
morally equal on the basis that they are all individuals. Locke argues that all individuals have natural
rights to ‘life, liberty and property’. As everyone is unique and equal, this places freedom as the core
liberal value. Humans flourish and progress when they are given the widest possible freedom to
make rational decisions, own property and establish their own beliefs, lifestyles and values. This is
best summed up by John Stuart Mill ‘Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is
sovereign’. Modern liberals have focused on developmental individualism by building on the ideas
of John Stuart Mill. Unlike Locke, Thomas Hill Green argued that individuals are free when they rise
above narrow self-interest to participate in a shared way of life and contribute to the common good
by improving themselves. In turn classical and modern liberalists have different views on the
individual. Locke believes that for an individual to develop they must have the widest freedom. On
the other hand, Green believed that individuals are free when they contribute to the common good.
Liberalism’s optimistic view of human nature emerged from the Enlightenment and opposed the
religious view that humankind is imperfect and flawed, found in the concept of original sin. Locke
argued that humans are naturally free, equal and independent, and are not naturally under the
authority of any body or person. This means there is no need for a mighty state, like Hobbes’s
Leviathan to protect people from themselves. Locke’s idea that individuals should be given the
widest possible freedom to act according to their will is based on their possession of reason. The
ability of the individual to pursue their own self-interest rationally produces individual happiness as
well as social progress. Over time, liberal thinkers began to view this approach as being too
optimistic and simplistic, highlighting a difference between classical and modern liberalism. It was
felt that the egotistical element of human nature led to inequality, so the state needed to step in to
promote equality of opportunity. Unlike Locke, Both Green and Freidan argued that the state needs
to intervene to tackle inequality in order to allow individuals to really be free and secure their own
happiness. Friedan saw that human nature, left unchecked by the state, had produced gender
inequality, stopping women from achieving individual happiness. Rawls argued that human nature
has the capacity for toleration and mutual respect. There is an obvious difference between classical
liberalism. You should refer to the thinkers you have studied.
Liberalism is a political ideology with the individual and their rights at its core. There are two forms
of liberalism, classical and modern. Classical liberals argue that humans were born free and morally
equal and no one naturally has the right to rule over others. Modern liberals however, question
what is meant by liberty; this question have become particularly powerful due to the rise of
advanced societies. This essay will compare the similarities and differences between classical and
modern liberalism, through the core ideas of liberalism. These core ideas consist of freedom and the
individual, Human nature and society.
Individualism is a key liberal assumption. The individual – rather than classes, races or nation – is the
key basis for thinking about human nature, the state, society and the economy. On the one hand,
the individual is unique with their own talents and abilities, while, on the other hand, everyone is
morally equal on the basis that they are all individuals. Locke argues that all individuals have natural
rights to ‘life, liberty and property’. As everyone is unique and equal, this places freedom as the core
liberal value. Humans flourish and progress when they are given the widest possible freedom to
make rational decisions, own property and establish their own beliefs, lifestyles and values. This is
best summed up by John Stuart Mill ‘Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is
sovereign’. Modern liberals have focused on developmental individualism by building on the ideas
of John Stuart Mill. Unlike Locke, Thomas Hill Green argued that individuals are free when they rise
above narrow self-interest to participate in a shared way of life and contribute to the common good
by improving themselves. In turn classical and modern liberalists have different views on the
individual. Locke believes that for an individual to develop they must have the widest freedom. On
the other hand, Green believed that individuals are free when they contribute to the common good.
Liberalism’s optimistic view of human nature emerged from the Enlightenment and opposed the
religious view that humankind is imperfect and flawed, found in the concept of original sin. Locke
argued that humans are naturally free, equal and independent, and are not naturally under the
authority of any body or person. This means there is no need for a mighty state, like Hobbes’s
Leviathan to protect people from themselves. Locke’s idea that individuals should be given the
widest possible freedom to act according to their will is based on their possession of reason. The
ability of the individual to pursue their own self-interest rationally produces individual happiness as
well as social progress. Over time, liberal thinkers began to view this approach as being too
optimistic and simplistic, highlighting a difference between classical and modern liberalism. It was
felt that the egotistical element of human nature led to inequality, so the state needed to step in to
promote equality of opportunity. Unlike Locke, Both Green and Freidan argued that the state needs
to intervene to tackle inequality in order to allow individuals to really be free and secure their own
happiness. Friedan saw that human nature, left unchecked by the state, had produced gender
inequality, stopping women from achieving individual happiness. Rawls argued that human nature
has the capacity for toleration and mutual respect. There is an obvious difference between classical
