gov and politics 45 mark essay help!Watch
First, draw up a list of the two factors on each side and then search on google to find relevant examples as to how Modern Liberalism is becoming more ' modern' or maybe even more ' tough' than its predecessor was.
This document will help you for Classical Liberalism - only dig the key bits out.
Second, define what both of these mean. Get some definitions down.
Thirdly, use this as a starting guide:
All liberals believe that citizens should enjoy the maximum possible liberty consistent with a
like liberty for all. No liberal, therefore, supports the principle of absolute freedom.
The principal disagreement within liberalism over freedom is over its nature. Classical liberals
believe in negative freedom, viewed as the absence of external restrictions on the individual,
allowing freedom of choice. Modern liberals, by contrast, believe in positive freedom. They
understand this to mean self-mastery or self-realisation: the achievement of autonomy and
the development of human capacities.
However, modern liberalism builds on a framework of negative freedom, believing that
positive freedom is only justified in circumstances where citizens do not enjoy the capacity to
make wise moral decisions in their own interests, usually because of social disadvantage. The
desire to ‘help individuals to help themselves’ therefore embraces both negative and positive
conceptions of freedom
This is taken from a markscheme from which you can find here:
Fourthly, to really get into detail: Explore what Liberalism is and how it has broken from classical liberalism, or has it maintained it roots? I'm not sure what the key points would be, but perhaps:
A focus on what liberlaism has become, and how it has progressed in the 21st century
Use relevant examples as to show liberals have broken from the traditional change, e.g Nick Clegg and the Liberals oppose Conservative Reform over a budget cut for example.
Explore what Classical Liberalism is, and how it could also have changed during the century, you might want to put a foregin aspect of Shinzo Abe, ( though being offtopic, this is still to do with the concept of Liberalism) though being a ' Liberal Democrat' and the PM of Japan, he is a member of the Japanese Imperial family, and some of his laws have called out protests on the streets of Tokyo, for they are ' harsh'. You could be asking yourself that some people join the Liberal parties to achieve their goals whereas socalists nor right wing politicans would accept them.
Modern Liberals support Economic and Social Intervention.
Modern Liberals do not want a state intervention into people's lives, and therefore would rather see them removed. The aim is not to control people, but to enable them to become independent and self sufficent. The aim of welfare is not to create a nanny state. While economic intervention certainly provides incentives, too mu ch incentives and too much intervention may cause ruin and reccession - e.g Greece for example.
Classics require law and order in an minimal interventionist state. There should be a large private realm, where there is a free market. The state needs to be there to keep law and order, therefore protecting Liberal values and goals.
Adam Smith, and Milton Friedman - have a look at these two Classic Liberals who support the idea of free markets.
Classics argue that free markets are self regulating, and that it will be guided by an ' invisible hand'. The Government needs to step in cruical events, e.g Brown bailing out Northern Rock during the 2008 crisis, despite being a Socalist Labour Politican.
Modern Liberals tend to support Keynesian policies where interest rates are kept high, therefore they require a mixed economy.
Classics believe the markets will create a self regulating force, it will also generate wealth, attracting business and investors and giving them the freedom of what they want to do. Freedom of choice - provides the buyer a choice of products to buy - therefore not limiting his freedom and companies can produce products at a profit margin. Produces fair and just outcomes - unequal distribution of wealth becomes more level with hard amount of work.
Modern Liberals want barriers of social status removed, so people can have wealth of opportunity or equality.
On welfare, Classics want people to be self sufficient, providing wealth so that there will be more incentive to work.
Or you may wish to focus on the economy, for example Classic Liberals support free market capitalism.
Modern Liberals are opposed to free market capitalism, viewing it as too unruly, disorganized, aggressive, and markets are not self regulating. Prices in markets can go either way and can cause ' recession or unemployment'. There is too much massive inequality.
Your best bet would be to go on these key POINTS:
Indiviuality vs Freedom.
It would be best to compare and contrast Modern and Classical Liberalism, and what their views are.
BUT the question is asking whether Modern Liberalism has MARKED a break from Classical liberalism, or it is it MERELY a continuation of Classical Liberalism?
So in sense you have to explore how Modern Liberalism has evolved from Classical liberalism, and then examine whether it is a merely a continuation of the same policy - only slightly changed as a result of new policies.
The points I raise here are compare and contrast, your job is to provide a fresh perspective, you have to explore new areas, remember you are ARGUING in this essence. The question is asking you: Do you think Modern Liberalism has departed from Classical Liberalism or is ita continuation?
Basically, you would imagine, hmmm...I think it has departed from Classical Liberalism
AND THEN YOU WOULD GO TO EXPLAIN AS TO HOW IT HAS DEPARTED FROM CLASSICAL LIBERALISM.
But if you think it is a continuation then:
ARGUE YOUR POINTS WITH EVIDENCE TO SHOW HOW IT HASN'T DEFERRED FROM CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, AND OFFER YOUR OWN OPINION AS WELL TO SHOW YOU UNDERSTAND THE TOPIC. EXPLAIN THAT FOR EXAMPLE, THIS HAS SHOWN THAT MODERN LIBERALISM IS MERELY A EXTENSION OF THE VALUES AND IDEAS EXPRESSED IN CLASSICAL LIBERALISM.
Sorry for the caps, but I thought it would be good so you could get the idea.
And remember this, you're making key six points here. I've given you four factors:
Indiviuality vs Freedom.
You have to make six points which will be important, the four factors here will help you out. Before starting the essay, do RESEARCH. I cannot stress this enough but before starting any essay, you have got to do research, you need to know inside out. Once you do, the essay should be easy to write. But check for spelling errors, LINKING BACK TO THE QUESTION IS YOUR MOST OBVIOUS ONE. EACH POINT, WHETHER YOU DECIDE TO GO FOR LIBERALISM MARKING A BREAK OR A CONTINUATION, MUST LINK BACK TO THE QUESTION. FOR EXAMPLE, IF MODERN LIBERALISM IS TAKING A BREAK FROM CLASSIC REGARDING THE ECONOMY, YOU WOULD GIVE EXAMPLES AS TO HOW IT IS DOING THIS. ALWAYS LINK BACK TO THE QUESTION.
So on a finishing note, in summary you must:
2) Draw up the definitions of Liberlism, find revelant examples by looking on google, compare and contrast.
3) Understand the question, think of what it is asking you, then whatever key points you decide, put them intot the right section.
4) Make a essay plan like this:
5) Begin writing once you have decided your plan.
6) Check to see if you link back to the question.
7) Focus on P.E.E and focus on quality - not the number of pages.
8) Check a million times, and then when happy, submit it in.
I just had a look around and started looking up some stuff, I hope this helps!