Liberal assumptions Version 0.06 9 Nov 2003
What distinguishes an Indian liberal from other Indians and liberals?
The need for a liberal alternative in India is premised on there being a distinction between a
liberal and others. These “liberal” assumptions need to be stated at the outset and discussed at
length to distill the core elements on which there is broad agreement. An assumption is a basic
understanding that can drive further analysis. It should be possible to derive policy prescriptions
from these assumptions. To the extent that the policy prescribed is incompatible with the
assumptions, either the assumptions needs to be revised or the policy prescription.
1. Nationalism: Despite globalisation, nations continue to exist independently as different
competing corporates. The opprobrium of being an “Indian” sticks to all Indians
everywhere. They are treated as second-class citizens, coming from the ‘Third World’.
Their efforts or ability are discounted, often for, but not merely, racial reasons. America,
Europe, Japan, Australia and other developed nations spend lavish care on their alleged
poor while the hopeless poor of India are neglected. All nations operate a foreign policy
exclusively in their national interest and no one will ever come to India's help unless it
suits them in a self- interested way. Therefore nationalism is even more important
today than it was a hundred years ago. The Indian liberal is an Indian first and liberal
second. India's national self-interest is the primary concern of the Indian liberal, and his
or her focus is to achieve a status where self- respect is easier to obtain than it is today in
this world. However, each of us cares for India and Indians for reasons that maybe
different, and in our own unique way, and to that extent nationalism represents a
deliberate choice to the liberal.
2. Freedom to choose: A grown-up person is capable and therefore free to make choices
either for good or evil. A grown-up person should be able to assess alternative choices
and be fully responsible for the decisions taken. In a democracy, if we can trust of voter
to take important decisions relating to governance, and the person is able to run a
household and perform other significant duties, it is then an insult to that person’s
independence for someone else to dictate and curtail his or her choice. Attempts to
curtail choice usually end up curtailing initiative, creativity, and progress. The freedom to
choose is therefore the most fundamental freedom of all, to be restrained only under the
most special circumstances.
3. The family as the centre of freedom: In matters that relate to one's own family, relatively
complete freedom is crucial. Everyone should be able to control their own family size, but
no one else’s, for instance. Further, a government has no role in the creation or design of
family. A government cannot regulate a specific kind of marriage by enacting, for
instance, a Hindu Marriage Act. A government may of course, provide a marriage
registration facility for those who wish to do so. Since freedom does not mean anarchy, a
society may require prohibitions to certain extreme barbaric behaviour, for instance, a
prohibition on sati, child marriage or bigamy, in the interest of setting a minimum standard
of civilised behaviour. A society may also require certain minimum reasonable standards
to be met in terms of succession, to ensure that the rights of women and children are
appropriately looked after.
Implication: all Hindu Acts need to be repealed and replaced by a general Prohibitions Act that covers all
citizens. There already exist Acts that allow for registration of marriages if people so choose, and set the
benchmark for succession. These can be reviewed and updated.
4. Other freedoms: Freedom to express one's opinion, and to be able to hold on to what is
one’s own (a right to property), are among other vital ingredients of freedom.
5. Minimal but significant role for government: “Little else is required to carry a state to the
highest degree of affluence form the lowest barbarism but peace, easy access, and a
tolerable administration of justice; all the rest being brought about by the natural course
1
Liberal assumptions Version 0.06 9 Nov 2003
of things. All governments which thwart the natural course are unnatural, and, to support
themselves, are obliged to be oppressive and tyrannical”.
6. Openness to constant change: Being open to inquiry and continuous questioning of
existing assumptions is a core principle of a liberal.
7. Prosperity is preferable to poverty: This is a trite but important assumption that perhaps
no alternative ideology including socialism would radically differ from. This assumption of
a liberal, however, distinguishes a liberal from someone who may promote poverty as a
virtue, or poverty as the only option for a country like India.
8. As much wealth as can be created should be allowed to be created: It is in the method of
wealth creation, in terms of the organisation of the society and individual incentives that a
liberal fundamentally differs from alternative ways of thinking.
a. Economic system: Free and unfettered exchange of goods and services by
private individuals, in the context of fair rules of exchange set and monitored or if
absolutely necessary, enforced by a government, provides incentives that ensure
the creation of the largest amount of wealth that can be created by a people
given the state of knowledge.
b. State of knowledge and education: Technology helps produces wealth: its
foundation is science. Given that science is a part of the openness to new
evidence that a liberal believes in, the liberal generally assumes that technology
and science are useful tools. But strong support for these does not mean that
the government directly needs to undertake such activity.
6. Large population can be good: It so happens that as a share of total wealth created, it is
human endeavour rather than natural resource that is overwhelmingly predominant. As
such, the human being is the ultimate resource. It follows that a population that is working
to its highest ability in the environment of maximum opportunity will provide India as a
whole with its best possible quality of life.
7. Open society: An open society is one that provides or allows the widest choice and
opportunity. It encourages or at least tolerates dissent.
a. Religious choice and tolerance: This is just one of the many kinds of choices, and
therefore, an open society would allow the widest religious choice. In a country
like India where religion remains and may remain a crucial part of life for many
people for a long time to come, and leads to enormous differences in perception
among its citizens, is can at times appear extremely difficult to reconcile religious
choice and social cohesion. It is important that across the entire range of views,
ranging from those who would have nothing to do with religion to its firmest
believers, there has to be one single determining principle for ensuring social
cohesion: tolerance.
b. Political choice: It is an article of faith with liberalism that a well-run democracy is
the best way to provide political choice to people. There can be alternative ways
of providing this democratic choice. Whichever kind of democracy is chosen, it
must not be prohibitively expensive for people who wish to offer the society the
choice of certain non-violent solutions to the problems of society, to participate
actively in this process.
c.
Cultural choice and preservation: In India, as a result of our diverse history,
there are some relatively weak cultures that are easy for established ones to
dominate. A laissez faire policy on such a matter may unfortunately mean that
2
Liberal assumptions Version 0.06 9 Nov 2003
elements that are inimical to modernisation may step in to fill the void. The most
desired situation would be for civil society to provide adequate information to
enable such cultures to make their own decisions with full awareness of the
consequences. If such social institutions do not step in, there may be a role for
government.
d. Economic opportunity: Ownership of a reasonable set of economic resources is a
crucial ingredient for participation in an open society. In consideration of various
limitations that disadvantage some members of the society, the social system
must allow the weakest citizen to own certain resources to participate in the open
society.
An alternative set
1. LIFE
2. LIBERTY


3. PROPERTY

4. GROUNDS
AND
PROCESSES

5. POLITICAL
LIBERTY






6. ECONOMIC
LIBERTY
7.
COEXISTENCE
WITH OTHER
STATES








the dignity of the individual, individual autonomy, sanctity of life
individual liberty, a private sphere protected from outside interference (Humboldt and
Mill)
private property, self-propriety or self-ownership, exchange of property titles or
contracts
natural law and natural rights, Tom Paine's "imprescriptible rights" - Rights of Man
(1791), rights anterior to govt, often exercised against state power
utility, "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" (Bentham)
idea of spontaneous order, evolved voluntary orders (Hayek)
freedom of the press, freedom of speech, free expression
limited representative government, power limited by means of a constitution and/or
bill of rights
rule of law, law applies equally to all (including agents of the state)
religious toleration, extended to toleration of all unorthodox thought and (non
injurious) behaviour
the right of "exit", right of rebellion against unjust state, resistance to tyranny
domestic free markets and international free trade
complete freedom of movement of people and goods (laissez-faire, laissez-passer)
private ownership of economic assets
minimal taxes, balanced government budgets
non-interference in the affairs of other nations
international arbitration to solve disputes
international free trade
READINGS
1. Individuality and Privacy
 Wilhelm von Humboldt, The Limits of State Action, ed. J.W. Burrow (Cambridge University Press,
1969).
 John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1984).
 David L. Norton, Personal Destinies: A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism (Princeton Universtiy
Press, 1976).
 Steven Lukes, Individualism (New York: Harper and Row, 1973).
2. Tolerance and Moral Autonomy
 Herbert Spencer, Social Statics (New York: Robert Schalkenbach, 1970).
 Lysander Spooner, Vices are not Crimes: A Vindication of Moral Liberty (Cupertino: California:
Tanstaafl, 1977).
3
Liberal assumptions Version 0.06 9 Nov 2003


Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia (New York: Basic Books, 1974).
Albert Jay Nock, "On Doing the Right Thing," in Our Enemy, the State, ed. Walter E. Grinder (New
York: Free Life Editions, 1973).
 Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of a Metaphysic of Morals, ed. H.J. Paton (New York: Harper and
Row, 1964).
3. Social Harmony, Free Trade and Peace
 Frédéric Bastiat, Economic Harmonies (Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand, 1964).
 Richard Cobden, "Free Trade and Reduction of Armaments," Free Trade and Other Doctrines of
the Manchester School, ed. Francis W. Hirst (New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1968).
 Edmund Silberner, The Problem of war in Nineteenth Century Economic Thought, trans. Alexander
H. Karppe (Princeton University Press, 1946).
 William Grahamn Sumner, "War" and "The Conquest of the United States by Spain," in War and
Other Essays, ed. Albert G. Keller (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911).
 Ludwig von Mises, The Free and Prosperous Commonwealth, trans. Ralph Raico (Princeton, New
Jersey: Van Nostrand, 1962).
4