c c

c c c c c c c

c
 ]

c c

c 
 

c
c   
c cc c
c

c
c c
c
c ccc cc
cc
1.cUtilitarianism
2.cReform Act,1832
3.cDemocratic Liberalism
c c
c 
c
1.c Jeffersonian Democracy
2.c Democratic Liberalism
3.c Progressivism
4.c Social Liberalism

c c
c
c

c ]

 
c

c

 

c c c c c c c c c c c
c Liberty is the concept of ideological and political philosophy that identifies the condition
to which an individual has the right to behave according to one's own personal
responsibility and free will. The conception of liberty is impacted by ideals concerning the social
contract as well as arguments that are concerned with the state of nature. The term Liberty is as
modern as its meaning. It is Spanish in origin, from the name of political party; the ³Liberales´
that early in nineteenth century advocated constitutional government for Spain. Later Liberal was
a term taken over in other countries to designate a government, a party, a policy, an opinion that
favored freedom as opposed to authoritarianism. As a philosophy the concept of liberty does not
falls into the category of closed system of thought, with fixed, unchanging dogmas. Rather may
it be characterized as an attitude of mind toward life and life¶s problems that stresses the values
of freedom for individuals, for minorities, and the nations.
Liberty according to L.T.Hobhouse, ¦
  

  

 



  



 
 

   

 




 



  



   



  





  









 1
According to the French political philosopher Montesquieu, the political liberty of the subject is
a tranquility of mind arising from the opinion each person has of his safety. In order to have this
liberty, it is the requisite the government be so constituted as one man need not be afraid of
another2. Liberty is a beautiful word in any language. Its connotations have always been
appealing, noble, and high-minded. It is hard to find philosophers who inveigh against it, and
even harder to find politicians who advocate its suppression- except perhaps as a temporary thing
and for what they claim is a greater good. The adjective µliberal¶ imputes loftiness of view,
concern with things of the spirit a respect of human decency. Its definition ran the gamut from
³one who wants someone else to support him, to think for him««. To protect him from those
who would impose on him responsibilities,´ to one who ³acts as though he believes that man is
made in the image of god and that the nature, the development and the rise of that god-likeness
are his first duty and only wholly worthy employment´3. Liberty represents what I can do for

ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
1
L. T. Hobhouse, „  
 123(New York ,1931).
2
Montesquieu,   
„ 

   !182(New York, 1900).
3
Thomas P Neill, 
 " 
„  
3 (The Bruce Publishing Company, USA, 1953).
myself, free of possibility of legal interference by others. Liberty is the opposite of duty4. The
liberty according to the human person in medieval times was not the same thing as the liberty of
modern times- an absence of exterior restraint. It was rather the positive liberty of fulfillment.
The person was free to choose those means which were themselves morally neither good nor bad
in order to achieve his end in life. Society was thought to have the right and the duty establishing
those conditions which could be conducive to each person¶s attaining his end of salvation, and it
was equipped with sanctions necessary for attaining its purpose of promoting the good life for
everyone. There was a general acceptance in the medieval society that there were objective
norms for the regulation of human conduct, that there were such things as truth and error, right
and wrong, human rights and duties, and these could be established by reason and by revelation.
Liberty implies the obligation by the government to refrain from interference with men¶s
property rights unless specifically requested by their owners to limit them in a certain way for the
prevention of greater evils5.

c  
c cc c
c


c c c c c
c Liberalism was nurtured in the natural rights doctrines of the seventeenth century. The
Dutch scholar Hugo Grotius (1583±1645) is widely held to be the main innovator of the modern
doctrine, and his mode of theorizing, involving the idea of a pre-political state of nature and a
social contract as the ground for political society, was taken up and given major formulations by
Hobbes and Locke in England and Benedictus de Spinoza (1632±1677) and Samuel von
Pufendorf (1632±1694) on the European continent. The reason for holding these theories to be
the ground in which liberalism grew is that they start with a presumption in favor of individual
liberty and limit liberty only to protect the equal rights of others or to provide the public order
considered necessary to secure everyone¶s liberty to the greatest extent.cAll the natural law
theorists recognize that constraints on individual liberty are necessary if people are to enjoy the
maximum of equal liberty in a peaceful society, so it is rational for them to agree to establish a
political society on the basis of their natural interests in liberty. The natural rights theorists
developed the central ideas of a liberal

  Their politics, however, was in many cases far
from being liberal. Despite the grounding of political society in a social contract and thus
apparently basing it on the consent of all, Grotius, Hobbes, and Pufendorf defended absolute
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
4
G.W.Paton, ©#

$
%
  255 (Oxford University Press, London, 1964).
5

 note 3 at p50.
monarchy, while Locke and Spinoza restricted political rights to property owners. These
theorists' aim, therefore, was to construct a minimal social ethics that all could agree on while
leaving as much room as possible for each to decide for him-or herself what to believe and how
to live. Of course, it is always possible to say that the liberal view of just interaction still involves
a conception of the good life, namely one of maximum equal liberty. But this is a very thin
conception of the good that leaves people as free as possible to make their own choices.c
Rights-based liberalism has two apparent weaknesses: It is not clear where the natural
rights come from, and no principled account of conflicts involving rights is given or seems to be
possible. Utilitarian-based liberalism offers a single solution to both. The principle of utility,
which tells moral agents to do those acts that will produce the greatest amount of utility, is
interpreted by the great liberal utilitarians to mean that one should act to bring about a society in
which individuals enjoy the standard liberal rights enumerated earlier in this entry. The principle
of utility, which tells moral agents to do those acts that will produce the greatest amount of
utility, is interpreted by the great liberal utilitarians to mean that one should act to bring about a
society in which individuals enjoy the standard liberal rights enumerated earlier in this entry.
Mill introduced significant modifications to the liberal theory he inherited from Bentham. One of
these is his extension of the liberty principle, which requires persons to be allowed to pursue
their own good in their own way so long as they do not harm others, to cover the coercive
pressure of public opinion mentioned earlier. Furthermore, the area of conduct falling within this
principle includes what Mill calls experiments in living. People should be encouraged to
experiment (so long as they do not harm others) in order to promote the long-term utility of the
human race.
Kant, the deeply anti-utilitarian and still very influential German philosopher, identifies
human beings' capacity for autonomy as the grounds for claiming the existence of a natural right
to an equal liberty. Autonomy is the capacity to govern oneself by freely imposing rational laws
on the operation of one's natural inclinations. In following one's inclinations even through
rational calculation, one is bound by causal laws operating independently of one's will. One is
free and self-determining only insofar as one's end is rational and self-imposed. One achieves
this in willing principles that are universal and apply to everyone. Kant's significance lies not so
much in his working out the implications of the principle of equal liberty but in his invention of a
new rational ground in autonomy for it. Contemporary liberals who still seek to provide
justifications for preferring liberalism to other social and political schemes are largely either
Kantians or utilitarians, with Kantians for the moment predominating. Post-Kantian idealism,
most elaborately developed by Hegel in Germany but also influential in Britain in the second
half of the nineteenth century through the writings of Thomas Hill Green, Francis Herbert
Bradley, and Bernard Bosanquet, historicizes and socializes the Kantian scheme. The general
idea is that historical forms of society and the reflective philosophies that arise in them are the
result of the struggle of human beings to grasp and actualize the free will inherent in their nature
as rational beings. This struggle culminates in the development of a liberal civil society and a
partially liberal state. A liberal self-organizing civil society in which all persons are responsible
for their own life economically and socially is necessary to develop in all the idea and partial
actualization of their autonomy.

c
c
!c ccc cccc c c

c The nineteenth century is the liberal century in western history, the century dominated as
no other before or since by the middle class, whose victory was achieved in the 1830¶s and
whose influence was dominant until the outbreak of world war I. The triumph of liberalism was
not completed without resistance on the part of the established segments of society, especially
the aristocracy and the various established order constitutes the core of history in the earlier half
of the century. In 1815 conditions in England were more nearly perfect than anywhere else in the
world for carrying on the great liberal struggle and for its eventual triumph. We can say that
England is the birth place of liberalism. There it was born; there its growth has been continuous;
and there it has been accepted by virtually the entire nation. English liberalism has had a
distinctive national quality. It may be described as a complex of rights, privileges, and
immunities won by the nation in its long history. From the time of Magna Charta the privileges
of a minority were gradually extended until they become the rights of all Englishmen. Freedom,
broadening down ³from precedent to precedent´ becomes the national tradition.
Economic and social developments in England since 1750 had rendered the old practical
arrangements obsolete. The glorious revolution in 1688 had been directed against the crown; it
was a political revolution putting power in the hands of parliament controlled by the land gentry.
From the revolution of 1688 to the Reform Bill of 1832 English liberalism presents a bare
outline. Parliament, in theory representing the people, was chosen by few voters, chiefly property
owners. The Bill of Rights mainly dealt with the rights of parliament, and little with those of the
individual citizen.
d
c c c c c c c c c c c
c According to utilitarianism the primary forces controlling human action were the desire
for pleasure and the avoidance of pain. Bentham argues, ¦
  


&   
 
 
©
  
 &

  &  

 




       &  



 

 &


  

 Bentham and his followers were convinced that the then-existing institutions and
laws of Britain tended to promote the happiness of the few and the misery of the many. They
advocated the abolition of antiquated institutions and outworn laws and the repudiation of
confining traditions and customs that hampered man in the pursuit of his happiness. Closely
related to the utilitarians were the philosophic radicals, a group of µeggheads¶ in politics. They
advocated radicals,  root reforms in the political and the social order as the only alternative to
revolution. Such reforms could be made peacefully, they contended, provided the control of
parliament passed from the hands of aristocrats to those of the middle class. According to them
middle class constituted the µpublic¶ and its interests, the public welfare.
’ c
c c"#$%cc c c c c c c c c c
c First and foremost, the advance of liberalism was bound up with the reform of
parliament. As the reform movement progressed it enlisted the powerful support of the Whig
party, the custodian of the liberal tradition of the revolution of 1688. Parliament was finally
induced to pas the historic Reform Bill of 1832. As the Reform Bill took shape, it was backed by
all people of property except the landlord whose control of parliament was threatened by any
change6. The aim of the Reform Bill, in the minds of those who pushed it, was to put the middle
class in power, nothing further was intended. Macaulay explained to parliament that the chief
cause of disorder in society was the failure to adjust political power to economic changes. He
said ³The object of this Bill is to correct those monstrous disproportions, and to bring the legal
order of society into something like harmony with the natural order.´7 During the period from
1832-1870, a series of reforms made Britain the very model of nineteenth century liberalism.
Some of those reforms were the work of the liberal party; others of the conservative party. The

ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
6

 note 3 at p3.
7
British Parliamentary Speeches, February 28, 1832, Miscellanies, I, 94
Corporation Act of 1835 established local government on an elective basis. The Factories Laws
of 1842 and 1847 regulated the conditions of labor in mines and factories. The great economic
freedom of the period was the establishment of free trade by the repeal, in 1846, of the Corn
Laws. In the field of colonial reform British liberalism took a great step of progress.


cc c c c c c c c c c
c As after 1832 a number of liberal reforms followed, but this time in the interest of the
workers the British liberalism entered the democratic stage. Democracy inspired a new attitude
towards the state. Unlike classical liberalism, which regarded the state as a necessary evil,
democratic liberalism regarded it as a necessary good. Therefore the power of the state was to be
used to promote reforms in the economic order by removing the fear of undeserved misfortune,
the lot of many because of unemployment, sickness, low wages, and old age. That spelled the
doctrine of Laissez Faire. Democratic liberalism manifested itself vigorously in Britain during
the first decade of the twentieth century. On the other hand, the liberal party underwent a great
transformation when it renounced laissez faire, and advocated social legislation. On the other
hand, a new political party appeared, the British Labor party, committed to an even more radical
program of social reform and to socialism as its ultimate goal. Both the parties repudiated the
anti-thesis, stressed by classical liberalism, between the individual and the state and between the
individual and the society. They sought to create a new order in which both state and society, by
giving the individual more security, would also give him more freedom.
After the First World War, additional legislation increased the pace of the forward march
of democratic liberalism in Britain. The suffrage was widely extended by the Reform Bill of
1918, establishing universal, equal suffrage for men and women. A great step was taken to
liberalize the empire when, in 1931, the statute of Westminster made Britain and its Dominions
³equal in status, in no way subordinate to one another´ in any aspect of their domestic and
foreign affairs. As champions of democratic liberalism the labor party irreconcilably opposed to
dictatorship, either by an individual, or by a group, or by a class.
The latest stage of liberalism, the welfare state, was definitely established by the British
after the Second World War. As a result of elections of 1945, the Labor Party came into power
and remained in power until 1951, headed by Clement Attlee, put through social legislation far
more radical than that of the past. It aimed to guarantee the minimum level of subsistence for all,
³from the cradle to the grave.´ As usual in Britain when a liberal advance was made at home, a
like advance was made in the empire. Southern Ireland and Burma were granted independence.
India, Pakistan, and Ceylon were granted Dominion status at these periods. Ghana became the
first Negro colony to attain virtual independence as a Dominion. The admission of non-
Europeans on the basis of equality with whites marked a notable liberalization of the
Commonwealth.

c
c 

c c&

c

c cc'(ccc
c America was born a liberal nation. It came into existence  
) the high noon if the
enlightenment when the libertarian ideas of the period found easy lodgment in the fresh soil of
the New World. All founders of America were liberals; like Jefferson, Paine, Hamilton and John
Adams. All accepted the declaration of independence and the system of the Government
established by the Constitution. The United States was created by a method, novel at the time, of
a constitutional convention. This body adopted a written constitution establishing a new system
of government for the newly-born nation; and the system was the outcome of the debates,
discussions, and compromise by the delegates of the Philadelphia convention. The creation of a
united nation through voluntary action, not through conquest, constituted a liberal innovation.
Another liberal innovation was the comprehensive Bill of Rights built into the constitution itself.
Most of the state constitutions already had Bills of Rights, but fear was expressed that the central
government might prove tyrannical. It became evident that the constitution would not be ratified
by the states unless such a Bill was attached to it. The first ten Amendments, adopted in 1791,
became the American Bill of Rights.
From its very beginning the united states presented the unique opportunity of establishing
in the new world a liberal society, one based on individual initiative and free from the privileges
of an aristocracy, from the power of a military caste, and from the official creed of a national
church. According to Louis Hartz, ³The United Stated emerged a nation built in the liberal image
and yet without the feudalism that liberalism destroyed.´ Because the constitution had
established America as a liberal state no struggle took place, as in Europe, between liberals and
reactionaries. What might b described as bourgeois liberalism was advocated by the Federalist
Party, the great spokesman of which was Alexander Hamilton (1757-1804). According to the
federalists, government should be in the hands of the propertied, educated elements, ³the better
kind of people.´ The federalists, in power until 1800, put the country on a firm basis. Congress
adopted Hamilton¶s recommendations: to secure the credit of the new nation by its assumption of
all the war debts; to create financial stability by establishing a national bank and a monetary
system; and to encourage domestic industry by a protective tariff.
&

c

c c c c c c c c c c
c Opposed to the federalists were the Republicans, later known as the Democrats. The
founder and great spokesman of the Democratic Party was Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), who
was elected President in 1800. Democratic liberalism in America has its primal source in the
ideas of this philosopher-states-man. Jeffersonian democracy comprehended free, public, secular
education; laissez faire on the theory that the best government was the one that governed least;
manhood suffrage, to be realized not by abolishing property qualifications but by giving full
opportunity to acquire it and thus to qualify ; separation of church and state; and especially
freedom of speech and of the press. The Jeffersonian principle of equal rights to all and special
privileges to none became the rallying cry of America. During the contest of opinion through
which we have passed, the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an
aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what
they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the
rules of the constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and
unite in common efforts for the common good8.


cc c c c c c c c c c
c The next great advance of American Liberalism took place during the Jackson a period.
The industrial revolution in the north and the settlement of the west resulted in the creation of a
social order uniquely American. Property can be acquired by anyone through free enterprise in
business or through the acquisition of free land in the west. Capitalism, a bourgeois institution in
Europe, became a popular one in America where individualism, self-reliance, initiative, and
ambition had a free field. Largely for this reason, laissez faire, a bourgeois policy in Europe,
became in America a popular idea. The immense resources of the country, waiting to be
exploited, and the large, free market created by the union offered endless, opportunities for
business enterprise. Many rose from the ranks to become property owners. As a result of the
loose, ill-defined class structure, liberalism in America advanced to the democratic stage earlier
than in Europe. Manhood suffrage was virtually established in the north and west during the
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
8
T.C. Pease and A.S. Robert, '  
 ©  (

232(New York, 1928).
1830¶s. Government by the people now meant that the voice of the common man was heard in
the land.
Another aspect of democratic liberalism, popular education, made rapid headway. By the
middle of the nineteenth century, free, public, elementary schools were universal in the north and
the west. Steps were also taken to establish free higher education through state universities and
city colleges. The Morrill Act of 1862 recognized the principle of higher as a public
responsibility, and granted lands to the states to be used as an endowment for the support of
education to advance industry and agriculture. Many of the state universities and land-grant
colleges sprang from this Act. Something unique in the history of education was created in
America: an open corridor from the lowest to the highest grades, free, public, and secular.
 ) c c c c c c c c c c c
c As the new liberalism gathered force it became known as the progressive movement. It
influenced both political parties and inspired the organization of the new, and more radical,
parties. Corrupt politics and big business became the special object of its hostility. In the
tradition of American liberty, Progressivism demanded the participation of the individual in
matters political by the elimination of bossism; and in matters economics by demanding the
dissolution., or at least the curbing, of the trusts. It was influential in the enactment of such
measures as the Pure Foods and Drugs Act, 1906, forbidding adulteration of foods and drugs;
and laws favoring the conservation of forest lands. A decision of the Supreme Court in northern
securities case (1904) struck at monopoly by forbidding the consolidations of several large
railroads. Progressivism was marching on; it scored a great triumph in the presidential election of
1912. The democratic candidate Woodrow Wilson was elected on an advanced platform that
became known as the µNew Freedom.¶ Equally significant was the appearance during the
campaign of the progressive party, whose candidate, the ex-republican Theodore Roosevelt,
received a larger vote that did the Republican candidate, William H. Taft. The socialist
candidate, Eugene V debs, rolled up a surprising vote, about nine lakh. The outcome of the
election was a great triumph for those parties that favored the progressivism. During the
presidency of Woodrow Wilson the progressive era of American politics definitely emerged.
Three amendments to the constitution became part of the new liberal patter- The sixteenth(1913),
empowering the congress to pass an income tax, the seventeenth(1913), establishing popular
election of senators, and the nineteenth(1920).

cc c c c c c c c c c c
c During the period between the second world wars liberalism in America, as I Europe,
became markedly social in outlook. Its efforts were directed toward increasing the regulatory
power of government over economic life. Popular discontent resulted in the triumph of the
Democratic Party in 1932, when its candidate, Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected president. His
election was as notable in the history of American liberalism as that of Jefferson in 1800, of
Jackson in 1828, and of Lincoln in 1860. His administration marked the beginning of decisive
advance of American liberalism to the social stage that was to culminate in the welfare state. In a
notable message president Roosevelt formulated what he called an µeconomic bill of rights¶
guaranteeing the rights of the worker to a satisfactory; the right of the farmer to fair prices for his
products; the right of every citizen to medical care; and right of everyone to protection against
the economic hazards of life9. During 1933-38 a series of radical reforms repudiated laissez
faire, and gave a distinctively social orientation to American liberalism. These reforms became
known as the New Deal, the American version of the Welfare State, the essential character of
which was government regulation economic life with object of allocating the national income so
as to provide a minimum of wellbeing for everyone able and willing to work.
The new liberalism of social rights brought a new emphasis on the old liberalism of
individual rights. It focused attention on that element of the population that had benefited least
from America¶s progress, the Negro. After the two world wars America determined to come to
grips with Negro problem. During the decade 1945-55, the status of Negro underwent an
immense improvement. Segregation was abolished in the armed forces. Some of the states
passed laws forbidding discrimination in employment because of race, creed or national origin.
By far the most important step in the movement to restore America¶s µdilemma¶ was the
unanimous decision of the Supreme Court10, delivered on may 17, 1954. It declared
unconstitutional all laws establishing segregation in the public schools on the ground that such
measures deprived Negroes: ³of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the fourteenth
amendment.´ This famous decision was greeted throughout the world as a great vindication of
the liberal principle of equality.
Liberalism has been on the march in America since the day of the Declaration of

ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
9
F.D. Roosevelt,
 
) 396(Boston, 1946).
10
#
 v. #

* 


$ 347 U.S. 483.
Independence. Until the twentieth century, however, its accomplishments were largely confined
to America itself. But the two world wars profoundly changed this situation. History thrust
America forward as the most powerful and most determined champion of the democratic way of
life, first against militarism of imperial Germany, and then against totalitarianism dictatorship of
fascism. Since then the hopes of liberals everywhere rest on America as the leader of the free
world in its ceaseless struggle against the totalitarian dictatorship of communism.

c
c
c

It is against this background of European intellectual development that Indian liberalism
has to be viewed. It was a product of the Western impact on the Indian mind and contributed to
India's constitutional and political development. So profound, indeed, has been this influence that
the history of Indian nationalism and constitutional development, more or less coincides with
that of liberalism until World War I. The Gandhi period of Indian politics which followed cast a
veil over the real achievements of the outstanding liberal leaders of the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries and it is but appropriate that we now seek to lift it11. The four major aspects of the
outlook of the Indian Liberals by S.P.Aiyer are as follows:
Firstly, they perceived the "total" character of the modernization process and the inter-
dependence of economic development and political stability. They saw how closely related were
the processes of social and political development and stressed the need to maintain continuity in
the cultural traditions of the people. Consider, for instance, Roy's interest in India's religious
history, Ranade's theism and his exposition of the relevance of the teachings of the saints of
Maharashtra, Sastri's interest in the Ramayana and Rajagopalachari's love of the Kural.
Liberalism has sometimes been described as conservatism-so it is, in the best sense of the word
for it seeks to conserve everything that is good in the past.
Secondly, Indian liberals have always entertained a certain apprehension of
unenlightened revolt of the masses and sensed the dangers of mass movements. Liberals, at all
times, have cautioned against rousing the people through an exploitation of their emotions:
Shivaji and Ganpati festivals at the time of Tilak, non-cooperation movements under Gandhi and
the populist gimmicks of politicians which have become endemic in Indian public life today. The
liberal apprehensions of the orgies into which uncontrolled movements often degenerate have

ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
11
S.P.Aiyar, +

„  
  
'& 
  (Democratic Research Service, Bombay, 1985).
now been amply supported by studies in crowd psychology. Sir P. S. Sivaswamy Aiyar pointed
out that one of the great difficulties in non-cooperation and non-violence movements is to
maintain their essential non-violent character and this line of thinking can be found also in the
speeches and writings of Gokhale and of Srinivasa Sastri.
Thirdly, they saw the danger of helpless dependence on foreign assistance. They
welcomed the import of Western skills and knowledge but they warned against unimaginative
dependence on foreign aid and foreign experts. What is important is to develop the initiative of
the people and promote the skills necessary for development. Consider Gokhale's warning in this
direction, echoed after many decades, by Rajagopalachari in the pages of Swarajya and
Sivaswamy Aiyar's plea for technical and professional education.
Finally, all the liberals have shared a common concern for the expansion of education and
opening up opportunities for woman-without watering down standards. Theirs point was no
sentimental flirtation with the Goddess of Learning. They examined the educational needs of the
country; they saw the weakness of a purely "Arts" education compelling people to take
government jobs and making them more dependent than ever on the foreign government. This is
one of the reasons why Sivaswamy Aiyar had emphasized the importance of education in
commerce and mechanical engineering. More than any other liberal, with the exception of
Gokhale, it was from regulated private enterprise to State-red economics; it includes utopianism
of many varied Gandhi, Vinoba, Jayaprakash Narain et al.-a romantic sentimentalism12.
c The near "one party system" which has long dominated the Indian political scene has
given rise to a host of social problems and heightened intolerance of criticism. The threats to
individual freedom are ever present making it necessary for freedom loving individuals to
organise for civil liberties and constantly explore new channels for the expression of critical
thought. In the long perspective of Indian history and tradition concern for the individual and his
rights has been conspicuous by its absence. India can progress on the lines indicated in the
Constitution only through a break with the dead past13.

ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
12
S.P.Aiyer, „  
 ,
 - 

  (Twelfth Annual Lecture, Harold Laski Institute, 1966).
13

 note 11.
]

 

At the beginning of the twentieth century the outlook for liberalism appeared bright.
Because of these notable advances it was generally assumed that liberalism was destined to
encompass the entire world. Then came the two world wars, both within one generation, 1914-
1945. So great was the destruction of life and property, and so fearful the methods of warfare
that many feared that the progress of mankind had come to an end. Liberalism has contributed
much to the solution of the problem of power as exercised by the state. It has taken to heart lord
Acton¶s famous dictum, ³All power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.´
No absolute power is given to anyone in the liberal review. Neither is power exercised without
responsibility to the people, who freely grant or withhold power to govern at periodic elections.
Absolute rule was given a death blow by liberalism when it made opposition to the government a
legitimate, even a necessary function. Opposition is expressed not only by minority political
parties but also by numerous and varied organizations that aim to change the policies of the
government by constitutional methods. This contribution of liberalism to the art of government
has brought stability with progress, has promoted national unity, and has assured the continuity
of the constitutional state.
Liberalism devised a rational method for settling differences between opposing interests.
The liberal spirit has, in modern times, found expression in all of man¶s interests. But nowhere
more so than in the field of government, now extended to include so many of man¶s activities.
The liberal state may be considered as the masterpiece of political man, an institution dedicated
to preserving and enlarging human freedom in all ways. Never until now has the destiny of
mankind been weighed on a political scale. And that scale is the liberal state.
  )cc c c c c c

c c *c

c
Xc J. Salywyn Schapiro, „  
. 
,  (

(D. Van Nostrand Company
Inc., New Jersey, 1958).
Xc Montesquieu,   
„ 

   !182(New York, 1900).
Xc Thomas P Neill, 
 " 
„  
3 (The Bruce Publishing Company,
USA, 1953).
Xc G.W.Paton, ©#

$
%
  255 (Oxford University Press, London,
1964).
Xc T.C. Pease and A.S. Robert, '  
 ©  (

232(New York,
1928).
Xc F.D. Roosevelt,
 
) 396(Boston, 1946).
Xc S.P.Aiyar, +

„  
  
'& 
  (Democratic Research
Service, Bombay, 1985).
Xc S.P.Aiyer, „  
 ,
 - 

  (Twelfth Annual Lecture, Harold
Laski Institute, 1966).
Xc British Parliamentary Speeches, February 28, 1832, Miscellanies, I, 94