INVENTORY OF LIBERAL POLITICAL VALUES
Liberalism, like any ideology, is essentially composed of
two levels of political thought. At the core level are the
fundamental assumptions of the ideology concerning
human nature, social life and social relationships, and the
purposes and scope of governmental authority. There
appears to be widespread consensus among Americans
concerning these fundamental assumptions. In the
Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson asserted
that these were “self-evident truths.” Few Americans
question the basic assertions of the Declaration of
Independence.
At the superficial level of ideological thought are
order
specific values that flow from and are logically
consistent with the fundamental assumptions concerning liberty
human nature, society, and government. It is here that
we see debate in American politics, though the debate is
not over whether these are or should be held as values in
the political culture. Rather it is over how to prioritize
them when they come into conflict with one another and
over how to pursue them as a matter of public policy.
What follows is an inventory of the American political
culture. This is by no means an exhaustive list of
American political values; rather it is intended to
indicate some of the most important values associated
with liberal political thought.
Fundamental
Assumptions
Concerning Human
Nature, Society, and
Government
democracy
republicanism
equality
justice
rule of
law
order
civil order – refers to government’s authority to maintain the public peace, prevent lawlessness, and
protect life and property (police power)  Americans associate this meaning of order closely with
the rule of law (law & order).
political order – refers to the established patterns of political power and influence in society (who has
power?)  We frequently attempt to characterize a country’s political order with labels such as
democratic, autocratic, pluralistic, or elitist, among others.
economic order -- refers to the established patterns of economic interaction (i.e., commerce) in a
society and may include considerations such as the distribution of wealth  We may use labels
such as capitalist, mercantilist, or socialist to characterize a country’s economic order.
social order – refers to the established patterns of social interaction in a society and may suggest a class
system or a system of privilege  We may use terms such as aristocratic or egalitarian to label a
country’s social order.
liberty – there are two dimensions of liberty as a political value: [1] the freedom to pursue individual
happiness and has both civil liberties and economic liberties (property rights) components (i.e., freedom
to choose one’s vocation, where one wants to live, lifestyle, people to associate with, religious beliefs,
speak one’s mind, own and dispose of property, etc.); [2] the freedom from impediments with the
pursuit of individual happiness. In the classical liberal tradition, government represents the principle
threat to individual liberty, but by the late 19 th and early 20th centuries many liberals (populists and
progressives) began to see additional threats to individuals, such as private centers of economic and
political power (large corporations), poverty, and discriminatory practices. Liberty is a preeminent
value in a liberal political culture (“Give me liberty or give me death!”). Note the common root of the
words liberal and liberty.
equality – in the American political culture, equality clearly implies that individuals should have
substantially equal opportunities (equality of opportunity) to pursue their choices and achieve according
to their talents and abilities rather than the idea that individuals should receive substantially equal shares
of the benefits of social life (equality of outcomes or equality of results)
justice – Americans see justice as a value consisting of two components: [1] a system of laws that is
dedicated to moral or ethical ends; [2] the belief that every one should be treated the same under the law
(equal justice under law). With respect to the second idea, many Americans are convinced that the
reality of justice falls short of the ideal.
rule of law – the idea that law governs our society, not men (“the law rules”), implying that those who
make the laws are not above the laws. Liberalism holds that government’s authority to maintain order
should be structured by and derived from law (constitutionalism). Many of our most serious
constitutional crises, particularly over the last quarter century or so, have ultimately been rule of law
issues (i.e., Watergate, Iran-Contra Scandal)
republicanism – In the broadest sense of the concept, republican government is any form of government
other than monarchy. Under this definition, most of the governments in the world today are republican
systems since relatively few have a king or queen. However, there is a qualitative difference between
the American version of republicanism and the versions employed in many other countries (for
example, China – People’s Republic of China or PRC). The founders of the American republic
understood republicanism to mean representative government based on the principle of popular
sovereignty (ultimate political authority rests with the people, not a hereditary monarch). The 1787
Constitution guarantees republican form of government for the United States. Today, Americans
associate concepts such as consent of the governed, free and open elections, universal voting rights
(universal suffrage), and democratic process with republican government (democratic-republicanism).
Upon declaring independence from Great Britain in 1776, Americans became the first people in the
modern period to establish a permanent republican form of government. In the 1780s, as a result of the
French Revolution, the First French Republic was established. During the 19 th century, as the former
colonies of Spain in the Americas achieved independence, republican ideals flourished. By the early
20th century, republican government became the dominant form of government in the western world.
However, even European nations that retained their monarchies embraced many of the republican
principles suggested above. Great Britain, for example, retains its Queen, but the real political authority
rests with the people’s elected representatives in the House of Commons. Britain, Sweden, Denmark,
and Japan are examples of constitutional monarchies.
democracy – refers to a system in which “the people” government themselves. Abraham Lincoln
captured the ideal of democracy when he stated in the Gettysburg Address that the founding fathers
established a government “of the people, for the people, and by the people.” As poetic and appealing as
this characterization of democracy may be, it really doesn’t suggest “how the people govern.” Do the
people themselves make governing (public policy) decisions as in a direct democracy? Or do the
people elect representatives to make those decisions as in a representative democracy (republican
system)? Here it is important that democracy and popular sovereignty are not synonymous concepts.
Clearly, in a direct democracy, “the people” are sovereign. In a republican system, “the people” may or
may not be sovereign. A military dictatorship (Pakistan), Islamic theocracy (Iran), communist regime
(North Korea), or other authoritarian system may have a republican form of government (no monarchy),
but ultimate authority rests with those who control the government, not “the people.” In a democraticrepublic (United States), “the people” are sovereign.
Other considerations should be taken into account when attempting to define of describe democracy as
well. In a procedural democracy, an emphasis is placed on the procedures of governing (how decisions
are made). Strict attention is paid to the form of the decision-making process. In a substantive
democracy, a greater emphasis is placed on the results or outcomes of government decision-making. A
high priority may be placed on the quality of life for citizens in a substantive democracy.
How is political influence distributed in a democracy? Are all citizens politically equal (egalitarian
democracy)? If that is an assumption of democracy, what yardstick should we use to measure political
influence (right to vote, access to decision-makers, opportunity to hold office, etc.)? Does political
power rest with the numerical majority (majoritarian democracy)? Can the majority enact whatever
policies it pleases, or are there limits on the power of the majority? Does political influence vary among
competing group interests and government enacts policies that reflect a balance among these competing
group interests (pluralism)? What resources form the basis of group influence? Is the political system
dominated those who have economic resources (elitism)? Do we have a democracy for the few? If so,
how does the elite control government decision-making? Political scientists have long debated these
issues concerning the distribution of influence in the American system. Most accept either the pluralist
theory or the elite theory of American democracy; few subscribe to either the egalitarian or majoritarian
viewpoints.
Does democracy place an emphasis on individual rights and freedoms (liberal democracy) or on
equality of outcomes (social democracy or democratic socialism)? In the United States, the dominance
of liberal political thought means that we closely associate democracy with civil and economic freedom.
In nations where socialist ideas have been more widely accepted (Austria, Sweden, Germany, Denmark,
Finland), a much higher priority is placed on the redistribution of wealth through universal welfare
programs and heavy tax burdens.
localism – suggests that decisions should be made by those people (or their representatives) who are
directly affected by the decisions. The debate over many issues in American politics today (from public
education to welfare policy) is framed in terms of the extent of national involvement versus local
control. The existence of “independent school districts” reflects the desire of Americans to retain local
control educational policy. Welfare reform in the 1990s was largely a movement to give the states
greater latitude over public assistance programs.
property – holds that individuals have the right to acquire, use, and dispose of the property resources that
they own as they see fit, subject to some limitations. One of government’s basic purposes is to protect
property rights. Property rights are also integral to the assumptions of capitalist economic theory.
Capitalism (economic theory) and liberalism (political theory) are very closely related systems of
thought, making similar assumptions about human nature, society, and government.
personal achievement – the belief that individuals should be allowed to accrue the benefits of their
individual talents, abilities, efforts, and initiative. Obviously, the value of personal achievement is
closely related to the liberal emphasis on property rights.
competitive individualism – the idea that individuals are by their nature competitive and are most
productive in a society that values personal achievement to produce incentives. Liberalism contends that
people work hard and take pride in their efforts to demonstrate their talents and abilities. They are
motivated to compete largely to achieve tangible benefits as a reward for their achievements.