Liberty Equality And Justice Essay
1d. Democratic Values — Liberty, Equality, Justice
Liberty and equality.
These words represent basic values of democratic political systems, including that of the United States. Rule by absolute monarchs and emperors has often brought peace and order, but at the cost of personal freedoms. Democratic values support the belief that an orderly society can exist in which freedom is preserved. But order and freedom must be balanced.
In the early days of the French revolution, the members of the third estate agreed to stick together in the face of opposition from the king and nobles. The "Tennis Court Oath" became the first step towards representative democracy in France.
The Influence of the Enlightenment
The American government has its roots in the seventeenth and eighteenth century Enlightenment in Europe, a movement that questioned the traditional authority of the monarch to rule. What gives one person the right to rule another? Enlightenment philosophes answered the question by acknowledging the importance of establishing order. They were influenced by the chaos of medieval times, when a lack of centralized government brought widespread death and destruction. Havens from invaders and attackers were necessary for survival, so weaker people allied themselves with stronger ones, and kings came to rule who provided protection in return for work and allegiance from their subjects.
John Locke was the English philosopher who theorized that government was the manifestation of a general will of "the governed" that allowed the governed to change their governors at will. His book, Treatises on Civil Government, was very influential in the American revolution.
As order was established and new economic patterns emerged, people began to question the king's right to rule. For example, John Locke, an eighteenth century English philosopher, theorized that the right to rule came from the "consent of the governed." Montesquieu wrote with admiration about three "branches" of government that checked one another's power. Rousseau believed that communities were most justly governed by the "general will" or majority rule of their citizens. Though the philosophes believed that rulers were important for maintaining order, they questioned the sacrifice of individual freedom that they saw under European monarchs.
Two Kinds of Balance
Imagine a society in which everyone was perfectly free to do as he or she pleased. How long would it take for chaos to set in? Order implies a necessary loss of freedom if people are to survive. However, how far can order go? Democratic countries cherish individual freedom and generally believe that laws should not be repressive; a little order can be sacrificed in the name of liberty. So one kind of balance is between order and liberty.
Democratic societies also expect another kind of balance: a compromise between liberty and equality. Complete liberty logically leads to inequality. A strong or ambitious person might acquire more goods and property than another, and someone is bound to dominate. But the line has to be drawn before an individual seizes power that greatly restricts the liberties of others.
The ideals of the first French revolution also inspired the 1830 revolution in Paris. The ideas of "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity" were immortalized in the three colors of the French flag. In Delacroix's painting, Liberty is seen leading the people toward these ideals.
Shouldn't governments help preserve some degree of equality for their citizens? But if they overemphasize equality, won't they restrict their citizens' liberty? For example, governments can bring about more equality by taxing rich citizens more than the poor, but if they carry their policies too far, won't they restrict the individual's freedom to strive for economic success? The balance between liberty and equality is an important cornerstone of democratic government.
In the late 18th century the Founders created the blueprints for the United States government in an effort to achieve these delicate balances — between liberty and order, and between liberty and equality. Their success is reflected in the continuing efforts to refine them. The formula has changed with time, but the framework provided by the Constitution and the values expressed by the Declaration of Independence remain the same.
The European Enlightenment spawned democratic ideas that are valued today. This Washington State University site takes a good look at those ideas and the men and times that shaped democracy as we know it. Straight-up text, but accessible.
Report broken link
The U.S. Constitution was based on many ideas that John Locke originated, such as the "social contract" made between man and state. This Oregon State University page summarizes Locke's major ideas, and has pictures of Locke, a timeline, and links to other sites about Locke as well.
Report broken link
Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu was a researcher into French history and law, and in his book The Spirit of the Laws he presented his ideas on government. It is from Montesquieu that the founders of the United States received the idea of the separation of powers into branches of government. Read excerpts from Spirit of the Laws published by the Internet Modern History Sourcebook.
Report broken link
Jean-Jacques Rousseau came to believe that states were justly governed only if they were governed by the general will. He originated the idea of the "social contract," a bond of agreement between citizens and their government, that was very important in the development of democracy. This Lucidcafe site has a bio of Rousseau including summaries of his ideas, and links to online versions of his books.
Report broken link
Voltaire was another of the French philosophes who fomented the ideas that lay behind the American and French revolutions. This page by an independent Voltaire scholar has a biography of Voltaire, several articles on the thinker, and also electronic versions of two of his major works: the Philosophical Dictionary and Candide.
Report broken link
The most important French revolutionary document about the values of democracy is The Declaration of the Rights of Man. It established the rights of citizens that could not be infringed upon by government, thus insuring liberty. Yale University provides this online version of the Declaration.
Report broken link
Alexis de Tocqueville was a French observer of American democracy. He found in his journeys across the new country that many of the ideas held dear by the democratic philosophers of France were working in America. Tocqueville published his observations in the book Democracy in America. C-SPAN, to celebrate Tocqueville's work and to celebrate democracy, presents this illustrated website that includes excerpts from Tocqueville's writings and interactive exhibits about his travels in America.
Report broken link
If you like our content, please share it on social media!
The accomplishment of total liberty can not be achieved without the complete satisfaction of equality. Sir Isaiah Berlin once said “If you have maximum liberty, then the strong can destroy the weak, and if you have absolute equality, you cannot have absolute liberty, because you have to coerce the powerful… if they are not to devour the poor and meek… Total liberty can be dreadful, total equality can be equally frightful.” The yin and yang of freedom’s political society; a nation conceived in freedom can not have both of two worlds. Each of these subjects differs in many ways yet is similar in many ways, like a magnetic object each has attracting and deflecting energy within them.
The statement quoted by Sir Isaiah Berlin portrays his point of view of liberty, equality, and justice. He stated that a society can not have both absolute equality and liberty working together side by side. Meaning, that both of these are opposite of each other due to the nature of their laws. Achieving maximum liberty can give more power to the strong, wealthy class citizens, to govern over the weak, lower class citizens. The strong have power over others due to their excessive wealth; for example, a wealthy individual would drape themselves with designer clothing, jewelry, and be well groomed, whereas a diminutive citizen would appear in less glamour than the wealthy, due to lack of funds. If either of them were to commit a crime the wealthy would be able to afford a better attorney and have a better chance of being acquitted of the crime, but a poverty-stricken citizen would have to struggle just to receive the same acquaintance as his counter part with a less likely chance of succeeding.
The strong could contend with the law and act as if they could get away with anything, whereas the opposite action would occur to the weak. Berlin’s statement proves that the strong can take advantage of the freedom given to them, and use it for their own luxury. Now if absolute equality would rein society, then we can not have equal liberty, considering that if everyone was equal than each person would receive equal pay, property, power, laws, jobs, and so on, basically, everyone would have to be equal to one another. This would not give them freedom to choose what to do in their life, because each person would be the same as each other, also being similar to communism.
John Rawls argues that the principles of justice determine how the benefits and burdens of society are to be distributed among individuals in an equal manner. Thus for Rawls, justice is fairness. But consider, how can people decide what is fair, when they live in a nation of great inequalities and diverse interpretations of utopian society? Rawls suggests that the principles of equality would have to be agreed upon by the people as what he would call ‘original position.’ Rawls’ idea of ‘original position’ would be hypothetical or imaginary, meaning that the individual would not know his position in life, including race, sex, and economy. Rawls’ would then appoint his two principles towards that individual. He states that basic rights and liberties should be as extensive as possibly could, to each individual. Rawls’ stated, second that any social and economic indifference should be made equal in any position, while providing the greatest benefits to the poverty-stricken.
The beliefs of Berlin and Rawls on liberty and justice are two completely different beliefs with many arguments that contradict each other. Rawls believes everyone in society should be treated with justice and liberty to the fullest extent, but on the other hand Berlin’s thoughts differ from Rawls, because how can one have justice and liberty in the same package if having to much of either one will imbalance them. Rawls’ two principles suggests that social and economic indifferences should be equal and basic rights and liberties should be as extensive to each individual, but how can you achieve both when having extensive basic rights and liberties will handicap their economic status by having each individual endure a political aspect that are similar to each one another.
Meaning, that each person would have the same power as the person right next to them, but to achieve this they would have to settle differences through their imperfect factors, such as, ethnicity, creed, and sex. How can humans eliminate these factors in their society when there is no such thing as a ‘perfect individual?’ Thus making Berlin’s comparison to Rawls’ statement inconsistent, because of how the two societal factors can not balance each other without losing some attributes to them.
With the two philosophers enduring thoughts about liberty and justice, mixed in with the equality of individuals of society, these factors can not be consistent with each other. Berlin’s statement would be a true pick towards how society can not have both of two worlds. These two different attributes would not give part in what utopia is, as Rawls would have thought it could have. Even with the optimistic views of Rawls, some views can not be viewed without seeing the darker perspective to it. Thus, tying in with what Berlin would consider his ‘dark perspective.’