Today's liberals are in sharp contrast to the radical thinkers of the past. Their timidity won't save liberalism and markets from the onslaught of left and right.
Philosophical radicals would have pursued market solutions that could reconcile collectivism with individualism and moral economy with a market economy- This is the crux of the book under review. Indeed it is out of box thinking!
But the problem with liberalism is their duplicity & hypocrisy as perceived by the people erstwhile colonies. It is believed that Liberal values they propagate are only for West and not for colonies. To maintain their liberal democracies they colonised and oppressed many nations and people. Even today this is continuing.
When capital and labour are limited imposing limitations on markets, one requires colonies to shore up resources and to expand markets.This may sound like Marxist view. But this is a fact. Obviously in the colonies they can't have liberal institutions for the subjects because the purpose they colonised is different.
So, the problem to be resolved is how to have functioning liberal democracies reconciling the free market philosophy within a country with need capture world markets ( by whatever name you call it, as colonialism&imperialism are words out of fashion). Please realise that at the end of the day, it is markets and free trade that matters and nations go for war only to capture markets and resources.
The prioritisation of the individual over the community lies at the heart of liberalism's failures. In contrast, collectivisation went to the other extreme and failed to give voice and freedom to the individual to pursue his interests relatively untramelled. The right balance between these competing visions lies not in unrestrained capitalism but in restrained individual liberty. A system which privileges the interests of the community over that of any of its members is what we need, but within the framework of liberty. This can only be brought about if we redefine liberty to mean an exercise in self-restraint. Hard coding this into a set of laws is fiendishly difficult. Self-restrained individuals exercising their freedom for the greater common good, aide by law is what we need.
Philosophical radicals would have pursued market solutions that could reconcile collectivism with individualism and moral economy with a market economy- This is the crux of the book under review. Indeed it is out of box thinking!
But the problem with liberalism is their duplicity & hypocrisy as perceived by the people erstwhile colonies. It is believed that Liberal values they propagate are only for West and not for colonies. To maintain their liberal democracies they colonised and oppressed many nations and people. Even today this is continuing.
When capital and labour are limited imposing limitations on markets, one requires colonies to shore up resources and to expand markets.This may sound like Marxist view. But this is a fact. Obviously in the colonies they can't have liberal institutions for the subjects because the purpose they colonised is different.
So, the problem to be resolved is how to have functioning liberal democracies reconciling the free market philosophy within a country with need capture world markets ( by whatever name you call it, as colonialism&imperialism are words out of fashion). Please realise that at the end of the day, it is markets and free trade that matters and nations go for war only to capture markets and resources.
The prioritisation of the individual over the community lies at the heart of liberalism's failures. In contrast, collectivisation went to the other extreme and failed to give voice and freedom to the individual to pursue his interests relatively untramelled. The right balance between these competing visions lies not in unrestrained capitalism but in restrained individual liberty. A system which privileges the interests of the community over that of any of its members is what we need, but within the framework of liberty. This can only be brought about if we redefine liberty to mean an exercise in self-restraint. Hard coding this into a set of laws is fiendishly difficult. Self-restrained individuals exercising their freedom for the greater common good, aide by law is what we need.