Political labels sometimes tend to create more confusion
instead of clarifying things on philosophy and ideology. One reason for this is
that certain advocates and campaigners of particular philosophies are
themselves confused of what they are talking about, and yet they project to be
the leaders and articulators of those political philosophies.
Take liberalism.
There are perhaps a dozen varieties of this philosophy,
from the classical to social liberal to American liberal and so on. To help us
differentiate and redefine some variants of liberalism and its anti-thesis, the
table below will help show different values and definitions.
Classical liberalism was articulated and developed some
2-3 centuries ago, based from the writings of John Locke (“social contract”
theory), Adam Smith (“invisible hand of the market”), David Ricardo (theory of
comparative advantage), among others.
Neoliberalism was articulated around 1930s and
revitalized in the 1980s, with former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and
former US President Ronald Reagan as key personalities of that period. Their
movement though was considered as rebirth of Conservatism, not liberalism.
A number of the general advocacies of classical
liberalism are carried out by neoliberalism. Anti-liberalism has various shades
too, like socialism, communism, and fascism (see table).
In the Philippines and other parts of Asia, the people
are treated to a “taste” of classical and European liberalism through the
Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom (FNF), a German political foundation
affiliated with the Free Democratic Party (FDP) in Germany.
The foundation conducts national and international
political education related to its philosophy of freedom. I have attended some
of FNF-Philippines’ public fora and seminars related to free trade, investments
liberalization, and human rights protection. I have also attended the
International Academy for Leadership (IAF) in Gummersbach, Germany in late
2008, on “Local Government and Civil Society.”
The German liberals’ definition of decentralization and
subsidiarity is indeed radical: Things and functions that can be done by the
local government need not be done or provided by the central or national
government. And functions that can be done by civil society and various
voluntary organizations and associations need not be done or provided by the
local governments.
And that shows the ideological superiority of liberalism
over other philosophies in the planet, especially over socialism and (classical)
conservatism: The primacy given to individual freedom and personal/parental
responsibility. The freedom to be hardworking and efficient and the freedom to
be lazy and complacent.
FNF Philippines’ Country Director from 2010-2016, Jules
Maaten, a former member of the EU Parliament, is leaving his post to become an
FNF Regional Director in South Africa. Within those six years, Jules has
befriended many Filipino politicians and media people, civil society leaders,
think tank officials and academics.
Asked about his most memorable moments and events in the
Philippines, Jules said it’s the Filipino people themselves. Warm, friendly,
jolly, always singing, etc. He also remembers the Filipinos’ reception to the
philosophy of freedom, including the huge participation in the annual “Freedom
Run” led by the mascot “Fredo.” And things that he did not like somehow is the
lack of real competition in Philippine politics and the economy and the lack of
ideology-based political competition which, as it stands, is replaced by
personality-based politics.
Jules’ predecessor, Siegfried Herzog, became a Regional
Director for East and Southeast Asia, while Jules’ successor will be Wolfgang
Heinze, a young, tall, and cool German liberal.
Meanwhile, the entry of the new administration in the
Philippines for six years under incoming President Rodrigo Duterte seem to be
more of a continuation of the liberal economic policies of the outgoing
administration of President Benigno S. C. Aquino III. In some cases, the new
administration promises to be more liberal, more investment-friendly than the
current one because of the plan to remove the restrictions on foreign
investments and allow 100% foreign equity ownership on more sectors of the
economy except land ownership.
Anti-liberal policies on the other hand, like the
nationalist and socialist measures in Venezuela has created more
underdevelopment, more poverty among its people. Restricting if not killing
innovation and price segmentation is a perfect formula to court economic disasters
and social misery.
More economic freedom, individual liberty, diversity and
spontaneity, innovation and market competition, less government intervention
and taxation, will usher in more creativity among entrepreneurs and workers.
Government function should be focused on enforcing the
rule of law and protection of the citizens’ three freedoms -- freedom from
aggression, freedom to own private property, and freedom of self-expression.
Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the head of Minimal
Government Thinkers, a SEANET Fellow and member of the Economic Freedom Network
(EFN) Asia. minimalgovernment@gmail.com
------------
See also:
BWorld 57, Eric Hoffer, Machiavelli and Duterte, May 06, 2016
BWorld 57, Eric Hoffer, Machiavelli and Duterte, May 06, 2016
BWorld 58, INDCs and PH energy realities, May 14, 2016
BWorld 59, Free trade and Norwegian salmon, May 28, 2016
Pol. Ideology 51: Liberalism is Not Welfarism, September 17, 2013
Pol. Ideology 55: Jules Maaten's Lecture on Liberalism, May 11, 2014
EFN Asia 40: Liberalism, Growth and Reducing Inequality, August 19, 2014
My Second Book: Liberalism, Rule of Law and Civil Society, September 02, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment