I have to do a social essay on this and i’m not sure what to say.

Pretty much, classic liberalism is based on the middle-classes economic and political needs. It believes in utilitarianism (what makes something right/wrong is based on the usefulness of it for a majority of people, not based on morals or nature) and man’s ability to govern oneself. Classic liberalists wanted represented government, freedom of press/assembly to criticize the government and transparency in government actions. They did not want universal suffrage, because they believed only people who had education or property had the right to vote. They supported laissez-faire (the fact that the government should not get involved in economic planning, only businesses should) and advocated education because education equals power. Lastly they believed every problem could be negotiated without physical conflict.
Laborers began to get angry with the ideas of the liberalists. They did not like that they weren’t allowed to vote in liberalist societies and they hated that the government could not get involved in economic planning. They wanted everyone to be equal, and did not think anyone was above anyone else (like the liberalists believed they were above all). They wanted the government to own all the land, businesses and property and split it equally between all. This idea was started by Count Saint-de-Simone.A total socialist society, as mirrored in Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward, was what the Marxists were looking for- pure social, economic and political equality.

it is because it created new opportunities.

I have to do an essay on this and you have to weigh the options of both sides and then pick the side that you think is best. But i don’t know what the two different sides of this would be. Thanks

Classical liberalism is not intended to meet the needs of society. It helps the needs of the individual that in turn benefits society as a whole with a level off efficiency that no managed system can approach. Classical liberalism is a decentralized and cooperative system that responds automatically to needs of society because there is personal incentive to help address the needs of others.

Modern liberalism is about redistribution of rights and property so that it may be directed at a target. It creates an overwhelming force, but tends to miss the target and is slow to aim. I causes collateral damage on both sides of the force. The only true beneficiaries are the people that are paid to promote the system. The system ultimately fails over time just like the Soviet Union had.

Your teacher has biased the question by attempting to put the needs of society above your own. Modern liberals claims to put the needs of society first but always fails from the missed opportunities that are impossible to see in a vacuum.

what can we do to get them back in touch with the liberalism of the forefathers?

Societies "draw lines in the sand". Liberals deem it their job to cross the "lines". Unfortunately the reality of the situation is; once the lines are crossed there is no turning back.

Simply look at the language used on TV today….20 years ago that profanity would have never been allowed. I’m talking about network TV not cable programming.

Paper for political science.. please only submi serious answers. Do not be rude

Contemporary liberalism is trending towards socialism in my opinion. More emphasis on social safety nets and government run services. Pure, classical liberalism is more libertarian.

I’m not trying to be rude if you think I might be.

I’ve been having trouble understanding the topic issue in my online social class for social 30-2. I’ve been trying to contact my teachers but havent received any feed back in three weeks. Any help would be awesome.

don’t bite the invisible hand that feeds you. in a nutshell, "freedom works" the fewer laws and regulations there are to strangle the peoples’ ingenuity and industry, the individual is better off, and in turn, the common good is enhanced.

And is neoliberalism really an updated form of classical liberalism, or not?

Neoliberalism is modern conservatism, you don’t have to take my word for it, see the wiki link below. They believe strongly in the power of money and the market.

Classical liberalism is less about money, more about limiting the power of the government and using it to ensure that individual freedoms, rights, equality and national liberties and justices are protected from the government itself, other individuals and other powerful entities like corporations, the market and business people. For example liberalism was the driving force that got child labor abolished.

Don’t you believe it, a lot of conservatives are calling themselves ‘libertarian,’ which essentially another word for liberal, these days when they’re just cold-hearted super-capitalists who tend to defend anything a corporation does, no matter how crooked it may be, because they hope to have that kind of power themselves at some point. That’s not libertarian and they’re defiling it by using it as a political ploy like that.

An essential part of it is the support for free-market capitalism, so does that just make it "right wing" regardless of it’s other components?

classic liberalism, or libertarianism, is in favor of small government

this would place them well onto the right side of the spectrum

curious =)

it is a rebellion of low-income people against the liberal idea that income should be proportional to skill and effort at work.

Classical liberalism is closer to what we would call libertarianism or conservatism today. Modern liberalism embraces the philosophy that it is a function of the government and society to be involved in individuals’ lives to provide their basic needs, even if that means curtailing some personal liberties. Today’s liberals also prefer a mixed economy over capitalism in many cases. Whereas, a classical liberal places emphasis on individual responsibility, self-reliance, personal liberty and a free market.