![](\"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MNR-1st-edition250.jpg\")
![](\"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/Ebeling_FNL_TP250.jpg\")
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
[Note<\/strong>: This post is part of a series<\/a> on the History of the Classical Liberal Tradition]<\/p>\n Here are some further thoughts to add to my earlier post<\/a> on \u201cWhat Classical Liberals were For\u201d (13 Aug. 2021). They have been stimulated and enriched by my reading of some essays by Richard Ebeling, Peter Boettke, and Stephen Macedo.<\/p>\n I believe that there is an important connection between the ideas people hold about the ends and goals they want to pursue and the best and appropriate means to achieve these ends on the one hand, and the institutions which provide the necessary framework which makes it possible for people with very different ends to \u201clive together and pursue productive specialization and peaceful social cooperation\u201d (Boettke, \u201cTrue Liberalism\u201d), on the other hand.<\/p>\n My discussion below will thus focus on what CLs have thought about liberal ends (ideas or principles), means (what I earlier called \u201cprocesses\u201d), and the institutions which makes the realisation of these ends possible.<\/p>\n The over-arching goal or end for radical liberals is human flourishing, or as Thomas Jefferson beautifully phrased it in the American Declaration of Independence (1776) as \u201cthe pursuit of happiness\u201d. The \u201cflourishing\u201d intended in these sentiments is both that of the individual (or the Greek notion of \u201ceudaimonia\u201d) as well as the communities in which they live. [See David L. Norton, Personal Destinies<\/em> (Princeton University Press, 1976).] Boettke clearly sees the connection between the two, the individual and the social, how individual flourishing promotes social flourishing (or the \u201cpublic good), in this paragraph:<\/p>\n \nThe common good is defined by a framework of general and universally applicable rules that exhibit neither discrimination nor dominion over individuals before the law. Given, as we said previously, following Norton, that individuals represent a composite of human potentialities, individuals can only flourish and actualize their own unique personhood in a context of voluntary social interaction. The common good of a liberal political order, which is to secure the right to liberty, allows for the possibility of a self-discovery process in consequent sociality with others to emerge. The creative powers of a free society are unleashed when individuals are at liberty to realize their own self-worth and uniqueness through their own effort and active pursuit in sociality with others. Consequent sociality emerges out of human action but not of human design from this self discovery process \u2026 [Liberal Libertarianism, p. 98 .]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This ultimate end of individual and societal \u201cflourishing\u201d is made possible by a set of second or contributory ends, namely:<\/p>\n It should be noted that the end of achieving \u201cliberal justice\u201d which was so strong and \u201chot\u201d among the radical liberals of the 17th, 18th, and early 19th centuries faded as the 19thC progressed as it was replaced by the more luke-warm notion of utilitarianism, or the idea that a liberal government should pursue the goal of \u201cthe greatest good of the greatest number\u201d, a goal which might mean the violation of the rights of a few, and hence an act of injustice, for the \u201cbenefit\u201d of the many (as calculated by the government). The importance of the idea of \u201cliberal justice\u201d is something that is central to Macedo\u2019s conception of a liberal society as stated in his book on Liberal Virtues<\/em> (1990).<\/p>\n If increasing numbers of \u201cmoderate\u201d and late 19thC \u201cnew\u201d or \u201cmodern\u201d liberals were willing to sacrifice liberal justice on the altar of \u201cutility\u201d or \u201cexpediency\u201d, they were flying in the face of the older school of liberals who thought that liberal ends could and should only be reached by \u201cliberal means\u201d. However, logical consistency and ideological coherence was less important to these \u201cliberals\u201d (or rather \u201cLINOs\u201d who were \u201cliberal in name only as time passed) who were forced by the necessity of getting re-elected to office to pander to the demands of an increasingly illiberal electorate and intelligentsia.<\/p>\n A \u201ctrue radical liberal\u201d (Boettke\u2019s term) believes that a \u201cfree society\u201d of \u201cfree individuals\u201d would be achieved by a combination of the following four \u201cmeans\u201d (in order going from the individual to the global):<\/p>\n Another way of thinking about the \u201cmeans\u201d by which true liberals can achieve these higher ends is to divide it into three kinds: the \u201cpersonal means\u201d, the \u201csocial and economic means\u201d, and the \u201cpolitical means\u201d. I have borrowed this way of distinguishing between them from Oppenheimer\u2019s distinction between the \u201cpolitical\u201d and the \u201ceconomic means of acquiring wealth\u201d.<\/p>\n The \u201cpersonal means\u201d to achieve these goals begins with each person attempting to live by certain \u201cliberal virtues\u201d , i.e. by \u201cliving liberally\u201d oneself. As Boettke has expressed it, having a \u201ctrue liberal mind-set\u201d (Reconstruction, p. 261) and being \u201cliberal in thought, in word, and in deed\u201d (Reconstruction, p. 279). These \u201cliberal values\u201d include the following:<\/p>\n The \u201csocial and economic means\u201d to achieve the above liberal ends include putting into practice and living by the following principles or key ideas of CL (see my earlier post<\/a> on \u201cWhat Classical Liberals were For\u201d (13 Aug. 2021) ). These should be considered to be the essential \u201crules of the game\u201d for interacting with others in a society:<\/p>\n In additional to the personal and the social\/economic means, there are also the \u201cpolitical means\u201d by which these liberal ends can be realised.<\/p>\n I have talked earlier about the importance of the \u201cliberal revolutions\u201d and the \u201ccrusades for liberty\u201d in which CLs have been active for over 400 years. The emancipation of individuals and societies was achieved by both liberal revolution (the English, American, and French) and by piece-meal incremental reforms (like some the \u201ccrusades\u201d discussed by Ebeling). [See \u201cClassical Liberalism as a Revolutionary Ideology of Emancipation\u201d (13 Oct. 2021) online<\/a>.]<\/p>\n I would add here that perhaps the first \u201cemancipation\u201d is the one that each individual has to achieve for themselves, a kind of internal or \u201cself-emancipation\u201d whereby an individual frees their own mind from the bonds of dogma, superstition, intolerance, bigotry, hatred, and the desire to dominate others – or as \u201cEn Vogue\u201d said in their 1992 song \u201cFree your mind and the rest will follow\u201d. [See \u201cFree Your Mind (song)\u201d Wikipedia<\/em>.]<\/p>\n Once individual or societal emancipation has been achieved, or at least partially achieved, one needs a variety of \u201cliberal institutions\u201d or \u201corders\u201d (Hayek\u2019s phrase) which arise spontaneously and can maintain these reforms and practices over the longer period and allow for their growth, development, and evolution over time<\/p>\n Institutions make it possible for all of the above mentioned ends and means to work in practice. They have arisen spontaneously (in many cases) over a period of several centuries and provide the historical setting within which productive cooperation can take place and be maximised, and which places limits on the destructive and plundering actions of both private individuals and public officials.<\/p>\n As David Hume, Adam Smith, and other CL theorists have argued, for liberal institutions to function properly we do not have to assume or predicate upon a change in the nature of human beings, as do many socialist theorists who base the proper functioning of a socialist society on the emergence of a \u201cnew socialist man\u201d. Human beings do not have to become \u201cangels\u201d for markets and a free society to \u201cwork\u201d. In fact, especially in the case of political institutions, we should heed Hume advice and assume that all men are \u201cknaves\u201d and will abuse their position of power if given a chance.<\/p>\n As Boettke states in \u201cTrue Liberalism\u201d what we need for a free society to function is \u201ca set of institutions where bad men (and women) could do least harm if they were to assume positions of power\u201d (i.e., to engage in public predation). And I would add to that that we need \u201ca set of institutions which will encourage (incentivise) bad or selfish men and women to do the most good for others\u201d (and thus avoid the temptation to engage in \u201cprivate predation\u201d).<\/p>\n I have divided my discussion of \u201cliberal institutions\u201d into five main groups:<\/p>\n All these institutions require certain \u201crules of the game\u201d (Buchanan) or \u201cthe social rules of engagement\u201d (Boettke) in order to provide some certainty and predicability in \u201chow the game is played\u201d (Hayek). These \u201crules\u201d make it possible to resolve conflicts and enable cooperation among disparate individuals and groups of individuals without having to resort to the costly and destructive (and in my view immoral) use of force. Furthermore, these \u201crules of governance\u201d can emerge in two ways, either endogenously and spontaneously through evolution and voluntary cooperation (or what Hayek called \u201cspontaneous orders\u201d), or exogenously by individual creation (what Hayek terms \u201corganisations\u201d) which can be done non-coercively or coercively depending on the circumstances.<\/p>\n I have discussed the overall \u201cframework\u201d (Nozick) or meta-order which Hayek has called \u201cThe Great Society\u201d, within which other orders and organisations can flourish and operate freely, in another post: \u201cClassical Liberal Visions of the Future III: Liberal Experiments, Frameworks, and Archipelagos\u201d (11 Oct. 2021) online<\/a>.<\/p>\n Concerning the other kinds of institutions I will just briefly list some of their key aspects:<\/p>\n Legal institutions:<\/p>\n Political institutions:<\/p>\n Economic institutions:<\/p>\n Social institutions:<\/p>\n Let me finish with some quotes from the authors listed at the start of this post: two from Macedo\u2019s book on Liberal Virtues<\/em> (1990) and Peter Boettke\u2019s The Struggle For A Better World<\/em> (2021).<\/p>\n Macedo nicely summarizes the CL idea of how \u201cliberal citizens\u201d combine their notion of individual autonomy with a liberal \u201cpublic life\u201d:<\/p>\n \n[*Liberal Virtues*, pp. 273-4]: Much of liberal politics will be informed by public moral principles; liberal citizens often recognize the authority of good reasons publicly given and defended; liberal political life should often have an elevating and educating effect.<\/p>\n We should also remember that liberal citizens will not learn justice only, or even mainly, from political participation as it is usually conceived of (voting, discussing candidates and politi\u00adcal issues, campaigning, and so forth). From early on and throughout their lives, liberal citizens learn and apply public norms in their interaction with others, children learn respect for rules and fair play from their parents and from childhood games. They criticize, discuss, listen to others, and take votes, they follow, debate, change, and help enforce rules, at home, in school, at work, in games, and with their friends. They gradually learn to restrain their impulses, to respect others as equals, and to direct and apply their energies with diligence. They learn to make judgments for themselves and hopefully acquire a measure of individuality and autonomy. They learn something about due process, and fairness, and respect for those who are different; they develop judicial, legislative, and executive virtues. All of this takes place without political control, though it is all importantly influenced by our political practices. It would be wrong, therefore, to view participation in campaigns and elections as the sole or even primary font of public virtue: private life goes a long way in helping to prepare us for our public duties.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And:<\/p>\n \n[*Liberal Virtues*, p. 274}: If liberal autonomy and the practice of liberal politics emphasize activity, initiative, and moral duty, we can expect further effects on the character of liberal citizens. Like the democratic citizens Tocqueville observed, liberals will be willing to take initiatives on their own. And since nothing in the emphasis on individuality and choice would justify the supposition that liberal citizens will pursue self-gratification as a primary end, we should expect liberal citizens to be prepared to combine in voluntary associations for common ends both altruistic and otherwise. Autonomous liberal subjects will prize not isolated activity but the liberty to choose how to be associated, with whom, in what manner, and for what purposes. The public life of liberal subjects will not be con\u00adfined to their political relationships, as critics of liberalism sometimes wrongly assume, but will include participation in the host of clubs and associations that do exist and flourish in liberal societies: the ubiquitous Kiwanis and Rotary, Cham\u00adbers of Commerce, churches, environmental lobbies, retire\u00adment clubs, Masons, Elks, and Lions.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n While, Peter Boettke reminds us that the ultimate end to is to have a society in which individuals and the communities in which they live can flourish and prosper and for all people to enjoy the benefits of \u201cliberal justice\u201d:<\/p>\n \n[Boettke, Intro to *Struggle*]: However imperfect that (liberal emancipation) project has been pursued in our problematic past\u2014 and it has indeed been imperfectly pursued\u2014the struggle remains to understand and pursue a coherent and consistent vision of a society of free and responsible individuals, who can prosper through the voluntary participation in a market society, and live and be actively engaged in caring communities with their family and friends. Humane liberalism, cosmopolitan liberalism, true radical liberalism\u2014 this should be the promise of the liberal society to everyone regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. People are people, and liberalism is liberal. We are, after all, one another\u2019s dignified equals. Open and tolerant, peaceful and prosperous, and dynamic and evolving\u2014these are the hallmarks of a humane liberal economic, political, and social arrangement of human affairs.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" [Note: This post is part of a series on the History of the Classical Liberal Tradition] Liberal Ends require Liberal Means to build Liberal Institutions Introduction Here are some further thoughts to add to my earlier post on \u201cWhat Classical Liberals were For\u201d (13 Aug. 2021). They have been stimulated and enriched by my reading … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_import_markdown_pro_load_document_selector":0,"_import_markdown_pro_submit_text_textarea":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[77],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1212","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-tradition"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1212","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1212"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1212\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":203982,"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1212\/revisions\/203982"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1212"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1212"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/davidmhart.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1212"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Liberal Ends require Liberal Means to build Liberal Institutions<\/h2>\n
Introduction<\/h2>\n
\n
Liberal Ends<\/h2>\n
\n
Some Liberal Means to achieve Liberal Ends<\/h2>\n
\n
The Personal Means of Achieving a Liberal Society<\/h3>\n
\n
The Social and Economic Means<\/h3>\n
\n
Political Means<\/h3>\n
Liberal Institutions to achieve Liberal Ends<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n