Classical Liberalisms, State, Capitalism, and Libertarian Philosophies essay
|← Learning Theories||The Barber Paradox →|
Classical Liberalisms, State, Capitalism, and Libertarian Philosophies. Custom Classical Liberalisms, State, Capitalism, and Libertarian Philosophies Essay Writing Service || Classical Liberalisms, State, Capitalism, and Libertarian Philosophies Essay samples, help
Noam Chomsky has been working in linguistics for a long time. Noam is widely known for strong critique views on the American government and the leadership styles employed. He has also been in the front line on the liberation process of the objectives based on socialism. Noam has also been giving views on anarchism as well as Marxism. This research paper will focus more on his work the progress made because of his critiques in the leadership and management of the American resources.
Chomsky got interested in anarchism back in his teenage life. In this case, anarchism refers to an extremely strong belief that the community should not form governments, police, laws, as well as any form of authority, instead there should be only free member association. The point is that a good government and strong governance should be achieved through a strong formation of individual ethical values. This was triggered by the fact that Noam thought of the world from different point of view. It was far beyond the pretty range and there had never been any chance available to a revision on the early altitudes. According to Noam, these views are sensible once the structures, identity, and a matter of authority are clearly identified. Dominance in every aspect of life to challenge the altitudes can be strongly based on justice, legitimacy, as well as dismantling of them in order to have an increased scope in the human freedom.
These directives are possible if political power, management, as well as ownership and relationships between the gender sensitivity, children, the fate of future generation among others, is strongly dealt with as it is expected in the society. This is one of the challenges facing momentous institutions on the control of the domestic international economy. Noam in his understanding of anarchism with the conviction of proof burden needs to be placed an authoritative, and, if this burden is not effectively met, thie situation should be dismantled. For example, when a person is capable of walking in the streets with his or her children, and this act is based on force, but not coercion. Again, such actions should be challenged and possibly stopped. On the other hand, authority or physical coercion should be used to stop such actions. Noam believes that life is full of complexity, whereby the human beings hardly understand anything about it. As a result, grand pronouncements are a source of harm apart from benefits.
In an intellectual aspect, Chomsky found a lot of interest and stimulation from politics in the Russian linguistics. He called on two facts that are fundamental in language. He has done a lot to the formation of language, although his altitudes have been traced from anarchism. This was a part of his early activism activities. Although the focus was mostly based on political literature, he had an interest in radical politics. When the United States began a war with the Vietnam, Chomsky became rather active in anti war movement. It is clear that Chomsky started being ahead to ensure that there was good governance and respect for human beings life.
This was a dominant philosophy in the United States politics. This philosophy gave freedom to independence act, as well as all other documents presented by people who formed America’s system of government. This is a liberty belief. As in the case today, many people strongly believe that rights come from the government. It is clear that people have rights apart from the state, they are a part of the nature; and it is easy to form and dissolve governments. The legitimacy about the government is on protecting the civilian rights (Sally, 2002). This philosophy aimed to act as an enrichment in the political system of the US. Its emphasis is the individual autonomy, it is concerned with the self-state responsibility. Under such context, freedom acts as the key to the rights endowed to the human beings. This freedom falls under the following aspects: speech, religion, association among others. It is also abundantly clear once these attributes under classical liberalism make a great contribution into the social progress.
According to Chomsky, classical liberation extends from the range of Marxism along anarchism. The natural extensions are found in classical liberalism: in the era of advancement in the industrialized society. In his views, what seemed to be an ideology in a socialism government turned out to be bolshevism and the capitalism state, as well as the modern government welfare.
In a social life classical liberalism is taken as the key idea, and it has a lot of restrictions and minimized forms of government intervention in a social or personal life perspective. In his view, man is made an instrument by the state on overlooking his individual purpose through arbitrary service (Sally, 2002). The existence of these features is extremely incompatible with the potential human development in a harmonious way. Therefore, it is clear that the modern world seems to consider man as a descendant of the classical liberalism.
The other critique on classical liberalism is that thinkers of the ancient age, when these philosophies were being formed, were a group of liberals in the US. They possessed radical views, which were now in line with the aristocracy of that era, today’s plutocracy. The radical facts about liberals are based only on the sense of anarchism and the rebellion that existed between these liberals and that time ruling elites.
It is clear that Chomsky was in the first line in analyzing the foreign policies of the US government through the media support, which promoted certain agendas (Barry, 1987). Chomsky, also referred to as an archaist, was always in the front line of criticizing the work done by the government. They tend to bring the aspect of citizens self-interest. It is clear that they have no ready solution to the problems that they bring or place on the table. This anarchist brought in the argument that libertarianism acted as the natural offspring of classical liberalism. It is not a particularly clear fact as a virtue of policy issued there was the presence of opposition. The key idea in classical liberalism acted as if it was in opposition to the power endowed to a certain government, which is the advanced theme in the libertarian movement. Therefore, anarchist in one way seems as ironically being in pleasure in the expense of the state power.
This refers to the groups formed by political philosophies that aim at aspiring to come with a society that has no economic, political, or even social hierarchies. This refers to a society that is free from violence or coercive institutions. People in such environments are also free and have an equal access to the information tools and production.
This philosophy is in the sermon of adherents, which is a believe that common good management or socialism is valuable and should be input into operation in a manner that individual liberty is preserved, and there is avoidance of power concentration or authority (Bak, 1991). According to some of these socialists, individual and community harmony, as well as liberty, are indispensably antagonistic. On the other hand, they still state that anarchism must have a stable balance of the two. There are also those who have a feeling that these two aspects are symbiotic, where the liberty acts as an individual guarantee to the society’s harmony.
Libertarianism refers to a belief in certain rules, the way the rights are endowed to the property. It is clear that there cannot be the imposition of socialism in a consistent libertarian where there is force in the way individuals cooperate in plans or rather violate the property rights. It is clear that in libertarianism people have the right to enter the contractual agreements. For example, people may decide to form a community where socialism will be adopted. In such a community the practice of certain behaviors will bw forbidden (Collective, 1970). They should also come up with the regulation mechanism to the violators of these set rules. Unlike in a democracy, it is not possible to force people to be a part of the subject of set rules. It is notable that libertarians are in support of National Socialism and misinformed attributes.
In another context, socialism is mostly concerned with freedom. This freedom from domination, repression issue, and alimentation freely bars a flow of the human creativity. Socialism cannot be equated to planning, government control, or any industrial nationalization. However, in a socialist community, all economic factors are collectively owned and managed. It is not clear whether socialism equates or accommodates equality, but it may be identified that socialism is not equality, as it may exist in a community where every person is oppressed. The governments that are freedom constrained may fail to be compatible with socialism where elite may have power on behalf of other people in that society. Politics in libertarian is concerned with individual’s liberation.
Socialism libertarian is a form of anti authoritarian in communal systems. The core principles to these political philosophies fall under the liberty, workers rights, freedom, among others. Libertarian socialist places humankind under several different social classes. These classes include working class, which comprises people who have no power on their destinies and are given orders, whereby they do not benefit fully from the work they do. The rich minority who enjoys the benefits of production following this, they are also decision makers, and they are at the top powerful levels over the majority.
This philosophy has a number of critiques. Chomsky, and other libertarian socialists have a conventional view that implies that libertarian socialism inherently is flawed as a form of communal system. The common arguments linked into this philosophy fall under the market capitalism. This is true as suppression on population arises when capital markets are formed. Under this philosophy, socialist would do anything to get rid of capitalism and state government systems. They work hard to be sure that there are changes made to these free capitalism markets and there are significant changes in the workplaces. These socialists advocate for workers direct democracy, solidarity, and self-management in the workplaces. Therefore, Chomsky seeks to see key changes to the government structures, eventually lowering the capacity and authority of the government structure over some time.
According to capitalist, libertarians believe that freedom, as well as equity, is in individual conflicts. They urge that equality promotion needs many restrictions on liberty forcing the community to select each other as principal value. It is clear that once equality is valued so much in the expense of freedom, tyranny and despotism may arise. There are situations where the government protects freedoms, but fails to apply those freedoms. The libertarian socialists highly disagree these contradictions on equality and freedom. According to Chomsky, human talents have considerable variations based on a certain framework.
This refers to the economic systems where the government owns almost all means of production; where low degree of free enterprise is allowed in the country. The working class is one that benefits most under this philosophy. State socialist claims that rights would be exercised in an individual perspective on matters of inmate and private relations (Lane, 1996). The government has control of all activities in the state. Individuals are taught not to stick so much on the rights, whereby they disappear gradually and the government is the controller. Naturally, control is encompassed with key responsibility.
According to socialism, the community is held responsible for a number of factors in the country. Such factors include health, wisdom, and health. It is evident that the society expresses its views with the help of the majority (Lane, 1982). The citizens insist a lot on the health conditions. Therefore, it is clear that the individual independence is finally destroyed. The economic systems have remarkably little or no socialist characteristics.
There are two ways in the definition of state capitalism. Capitalism is an economic formation where the government performs the role of capitalist employer. In addition, the government exploits the workers for its own self-interest. Some of the examples of capitalism are a rail that is owned by the federal mail (Crouch, 1979). The workplaces in capitalist countries receive management, plans, and governance from the state. It is also clear any appointment of the managers, such as industry directors, belongs to the state. All profits made by industries under this philosophy are considered as a government income. This is also considered as the state capitalism.
The strength of this philosophy depends on the degree of the government interference. Such interference falls under the following issues: laws passed by the state that affect the employment conditions, firing and hiring of workers. It is notable that the government takes full control of the complete economic life.
State capitalism is not a matter of efficient resources allocation and maximizing control over politics, community, and the entire economy. If the government grabs all the productive resources and holds the control of these resources, this is a form of maximized control, irrespective of the fact that there are sacrifices made to the economic efficiency. Capitalism has helped in the consolidation of governments and authority centralization. These are preconditions that lead to the growth of the modern community and economies. The economy control and planning of the political environment becomes a problem because those people heading the government lack optimal social welfare, as well as the allocation of resources.
The problem with state capitalism results to lack of private sectors that are powerful enough to control institutions and to have a counter of the government. Therefore, it is clear that authoritarian regimes and extractive political instructions should be associated to this philosophy. The government generally plays a key task in the present society. The emergence of state capitalism was not provoked by the of lack of other ways of ensuring economic growth in the states that practice this philosophy (Laux, 1988). In general, capitalism emerged to provide incentives in the price and help in the liberalization of the urban cities. Persistence of capitalism will continue to exist as long as these living elites maintain a strong level and benefit from it. This is possible even if there is a stall in the economic growth. Such situation happens once there is sustenance in the economic growth, presupposes innovation, instability, and destruction of these economies. Capitalism strength strongly depends of the government heads. These heads determine the strength and create loyalty among the civilians in these countries.
In the final analysis, the focus will be on the political theory, whereby there is the general part of the theory. The theory focuses on the nature of the state, community, and politics. The theory gives a clear framework that aims at solving some problems, but in one way it overlooks the associated problems and the power of the society relations. There is also a consensus that the majority of people are illiterate, and they have knowledge concerning their interests. It is also essential to deal with the concerns of financial organizations and how they relate to the values of libertarian socialism.
It is abundantly clear that most political theories and theorists have an extraordinarily close view regarding the power of individuals. Most of these theorists and philosophers view people as ignorant, which is not true. The truth is that people are prearranged a likelihood to discover their intrusion. They also fail to achieve their goals once they are faced with a lot of suppression from their government or dictators who paralyze their social structures. However, with the rise of the new technology in the modern society people are able to communicate effectively and work harmoniously. This offers the works with a good opportunity to transform the environment around to a way that best suits them. This will not change the position of these individuals in the society, but the functionality of the community itself. As a result, people will start questioning the history of the state and its task in the community, whereby they will conclude that there is a need for drastic changes.
The other factor is on the issue of anarchism, whereby it plays a critical role in the rational community. Anarchism can be successful when the moral standards of the community are strong. This will ensure that peace among people will be preserved. All the above-discussed philosophies have their advantages and disadvantages. They benefit one part. Alternatively, there are people who suffer. The suppressed people remain illiterate and are unable to fight for their rights because they are made to believe that all the services they live are for their benefits. .
Finally, libertarian socialism and the fundamental teachings of Chomsky show that there now is justice in the acceptance of doctrines brought forward with an aim of legitimizing power, as well as the privilege. All decisions made in the institutions that are subject to the human. Subjects should face the legitimacy, freer and just institutions should replace the other ones.