Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

Can liberal values such as: freedom, equality,

individualism, autonomy, self-determination,


pluralism, tolerance and individual rights are
a base of social life?
In recent years, in relation to issues raised by the crisis of
social policies, we have developed a theoretical reflection, with
reference to the main frame assembly rights problems in modern
societies. In order to critically approach this reflection is necessary
to bear in mind two points.
First: the historical horizon of bourgeois society the concept of
the state is connected with the idea of the basic rules. This
connection does the political theory of classical liberalism necessary
for the doing of individuals to grow in freedom and equal rights
institutions, secured against the arbitrary power of the privileged.
Compared directly with institutions of freedom and equality before
the law and the constitution understood individual rights
frameworks strong core guarantee of private property. The inclusion
of the right of private property in the editorial context state, based
on principles of "freedom" and "fairness" was deemed to ensure
simultaneously the essential terms of social reproduction, as the
"acquisition" parted from Forcibly rights, whilst captive labor
transformed into unfettered.
Second: the development of bourgeois society in the 19th
century and the birth of the "social question" put into question the
adequacy of the above in securing social reproduction conditions,
since this takes place through the separation of free labor from the
means of reproduction of. With reference to the development of this
issue is the comprehensive reform of the political system (universal
suffrage) and the legislative vesting of labor rights, starting with the
setting of the size of the working day. The largely schematic this
historical-theoretical overview, through which attempts to
approximate focal issues and redefine frameworks individual and
social rights, is the substrate of a perception in these issues which
are understood in reference to the central problem of the
relationship of individual property and social work in the
development of division of labor in modern societies. As part of this
approach develops a reflection on political criteria depending on the
extent of the support provided for arrangements to ensure social
work, as well as on criteria for evaluating theoretical arguments
depending on the degree of support of social authority.

Now possible to turn to examine current policies and


theoretical arguments, which are developed by focusing on the
confirmation of the "absolute" character of private property, while
accompanied by the description 'frames' are considered to
implement the rehabilitation demands of private property rights
thereby limiting the scope of social authority.
Core known as libertarian (libertarian) argument is the
establishment of the right to private property as absolute. Any
attempt to relativize this right is deemed to constitute insulting
(aggression). As relativize attempt of this right not only considered
the recognition of social rights (social authority) and vary from
context what defines it as a "human right" as a right proper to the
human nature, especially the frame what defines human right of
those corresponding to the publicity principles in general.
This reduction in the absolute rights type of right of private
ownership removes initially the historicity of social separations in
respect of which formed the framework of individual rights and in
the second stage does not understand the connection of these
separations in terms of reproduction of society. Thus, in analogy with
the properties of atoms, it considered that "the land and natural
resources are given to individuals rather than society. The interest in
the theoretical argument is that social indeterminacy of the
individual doing founded the redefinition of political economy
relationship, based on the redefinition of this concept of politics is
constructed as a concept "deregulation" of frames that define the
processes of social reproduction.
It is basically repeating Hobbes argument of the peace, that
in order to be assured selfish doing people needed the acceptance
of these certain minimum binding frameworks, which are
established by reference to data from the localized to a separate
from society violence bullet. O Hobbes believes that the only
possible content of the human will is the general or the person's
fault. So the criterion of the moral act purely considered through a
utilitarian and psychological perspective. To maintain social peace,
Hobbes creates some trick, the Leviathan, the state, either in the
form of absolute monarchy or parliamentary democracy. The
important point is that this state has the monopoly of violence and
absolute power. In return to man the State exercising this absolute
power only for maintaining social peace: Then Rousseau seeks
social conditions and collective achievement of the General Will, and
for him it is universal as for Diderot, and the conclusion of a genuine
social contract.

The solution proposed by Rousseau is that of self-government.


So in place of the automatic Hobbes, puts the concept of man as an
autonomous (source of law).
At the same time, make a "positive" conception of liberty which is
not based on the definition and protection of privacy of others, but
to participation in community collective decisions. As a concept
appears in ethics, politics and philosophy and bioethics refers to the
potential capacity of a logical person to take crucial decisions on
information and without coercion. The term is also used political
sense regarding self-determination of a people.
In fact, liberalism is a philosophy on the concept of humanity
and society. The political philosopher John Gray has identified
common elements in the liberal thought as: the individualistic, the
balancing, progressive and world. The individualistic element
supports the moral superiority of man against the pressures of
social collectivism, the balancing element give equal moral value
and the same status in all subjects, the progressive element asserts
that successive generations can improve their socio-political
settings, and global element confirms the moral unity of mankind
and marginalizes local cultural differences.
The moral and political liberalism of speculations have been
based on traditions such as natural rights and utilitarian theory,
although sometimes the liberals sought support up by scientific and
religious circles. Through all these elements and traditions,
scientists have identified the following important common aspects
of liberal thinking: belief in equality and individual freedom, defense
of private property and individual rights, advocacy of limited
constitutional government, recognition the importance of the
relative values as pluralism, tolerance, autonomy, bodily integrity
and consensus.
Besides the negative screening, positive and eternal freedom,
liberals have tried to understand the exact relationship between
freedom and democracy. While struggling to extend the right to
vote, the Liberals understand more and more that those who lived
outside the democratic decision-making subject to the tyranny of
the majority, a principle that is explained in the book "On Liberty" by
John Stuart Mill and "The Republic in America "by Alexis de
Tocqueville. To respond to this, the liberals began to assert
safeguards to prevent any attempts of majorities violating the rights
of minorities.
Apart from freedom, liberals have contributed to the
development of other principles important to build their
philosophical structure, such as equality, pluralism and tolerance.

Stressing the confusion in the first principle, Voltaire commented


that "equality is simultaneously the most natural state and, at
times, the biggest pipe dream." All forms of liberalism claim that
fundamentally people are equal. Arguing that people are naturally
equal, liberals claim that all possess the same right to freedom. In
other words, no one is inherently entitled to enjoy the privileges of
liberal society more than any other and all people are equal before
the law.
For the liberal philosophy, pluralism easily leads to tolerance.
Where persons hold differing views, argue the liberals, must defend
and respect everyone's right to disagree. From the liberal
perspective, tolerance originally associated with religious tolerance,
with Baruch Spinoza condemning the "nonsense of religious
persecution and the ideological wars." Tolerance also played a
central role in the ideas of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. Both
philosophers believed that society would contain different
perceptions of good, moral life and how they need to allow people to
make their own choices without interference from the state or other
persons.
In philosophical term individualism (or individualism) we refer
to the theory that establishes the social existence of the individual
conscience and will, gives exclusive value to the particular person's
rights and describes the tendency of man to do what most interest
for him. As to individualism, individual rights have priority over
social and purpose of social life is the welfare of the individual,
individualism describes mainly beings survive individually rather
than live together socially and the proposed utilitarian lifestyle leads
to fission, instead of relationship and unity.
From the observation of the American experience, especially
in the New England region, which has been free from the stigma of
slavery, Tocqueville notes that the defense of democracy, avoiding
the tyranny of the majority and public opinion and the survival of
political freedom guaranteed thanks to government communities,
active citizenship, the existence of a free press and the organization
system of justice in the courts of jurors.
Today, we see around us individuality is fully mutated into a
sterile individualism, in the sense of egoism, of cynicism, of petty
and corporatist interests, forming a new system of values and
ideals. We see the concept of citizenship has been demolished by
indifference and passivity of people without identity, confused with
views on rights and obligations. As a result, nearly every form of
collective organization of life (state, syndicalism, movements and

associations) has alienated and has lost its content, now addressing
the reluctance of people.