Suchergebnisse

IN RECENT YEARS THERE HAS BEEN MUCH DISCUSSION, BUT LITTLE SUSTAINED ANALYSIS, OF THE POLITICS OF THE 'NEW LIBERALISM', 'LIBERTARIANISM' OR THE 'RADICAL RIGHT'. THE WRITERS IN THIS GENERAL TRADITION, HOWEVER, ARE OFTEN TREATED AS IF THEY CONSTITUTED ONE MONOOLITHIC 'SCHOOL' WHEN, IN FACT, AN ANALYSIS OF THEIR WORK REVEALS IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES. BROADLY SPEAKING, LIBERTARIANS MAY BE DIVIDED INTO TWO GROUPS; 'CONSEQUENTIALISTS' AND 'RIGHTS' THEORISTS. CONSEQUENTIALISTS NORMALLY COME FROM THE WERTFREI SOCIAL SCIENCES AND WISH TO CONSTRUCT A THEORY OF A FREE SOCIETY WITH LITTLE REFERENCE TO THE NORMAL VALUE OF LIBERTY; IN THEIR DOCTRINES, LIBERTY HAS A CRUCIALLY IMPORTANT INSTRUMENTAL VALUE IN PROMOTING THE HAPPINESS OF A COMMUNITY. THE 'RIGHTS' THEORISTS TEND TO COME FROM THE PHILOSOPHICAL AND HUMANE STUDIES AND STESS THE VALUE THAT LIBERTY HAS FOR INDIVIDUAL SELFFULFILMENT, SO THAT COERCIVE ACTION BY THE STATE WHICH ABRIDGES THIS LIBERTY IS IMMORAL, IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY ECONOMIC CONSEQUENTIALIST CONSIDERATIONS. IN THIS DOCTRINE, LAW AND MORALITY PRECEDE ORGANIZED SOCIETY, SO THAT ANY COERCIVE POWER EXERCISED BY POLITICAL AUTHORITIES MUST NOT EXCEED THAT WHICH AN OBJECTIVE MORALITY ENTITLES INDIVIDUALS TO USE.