Topic: Classical republicanism

Is it easier to reconcile Republicans with Classical Liberals than today’s Neo Liberals?

When liberalism is understood more expansively, republicanism becomes indistinguishable from liberalism (Larmore 2001; Dagger, 1997).
Liberals used to be about social and economic freedom?
Boomer Wisdom:
Interesting you should quote Goldwater. He’s Republican in my way of thinking (and I’m not alone) in contrast to what we refer to as NeoCon. Here’s a warning (about NeoCons) from Goldwater in a 1994 interview with the Washington Post.
"When you say "radical right" today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican party and make a religious organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye."
Were he around today, I’m certain he would be even more incensed over the direction the Neo Liberals have taken.

Classical Liberals accord liberty primacy as a political value, in the strain of John Locke. Locke believed, as did his comtemporaries Hobbes and Rousseau, that the state of nature is such that humans are free and equal.
In Locke’s own words "Liberals have typically maintained that humans are naturally in ‘a State of perfect Freedom’ to order their Actions, as they think fit, without asking leave, or depending on the Will of any other Man"
There is certainly nothing about the Democratic Party of today that even remotely resembles that statement, but the core of the Republican Party embraces it. If we are going to restore America to its glory, the Republicans are going to have to galvanize around the core ideas that made this country great, the core ideas we have owned since Abraham Lincoln: Freedom and equality.
Libertarians are going to have to pick a side if they want to be relative:
Freedom and equality
or
Submission and control
Oops:
Libertarians are going to have to pick a side if they want to be ***relevant.

I am very late answering this question but feel I must!

First let me address Rocket34: I fear that 90% of thoseusing the term "Neocon" have no concept of the meaning. NeoCon has little to do with "Conservatism" and certainly is not the far right. They would better be called "Neolibs" since they are Liberals that moved to the right and still embrace the left; Here is a short passage from one of my sources below:

"Neoconservatism is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States. Its key distinction is in international affairs, where it espouses an interventionist approach that seeks to defend what neo-conservatives deem as national interests. In addition, unlike traditional conservatives, neoconservatives are comfortable with a minimally-bureaucratic welfare state; and, while generally supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes."

Another:

"New" conservatives initially approached this view from the political left. The forerunners of neoconservatism were often liberals or socialists who strongly supported the Allied cause in World War II, and who were influenced by the Great Depression-era ideas of the New Deal, trade unionism, and Trotskyism, particularly those who followed the political ideas of Max Shachtman.[citation needed] A number of future neoconservatives, such as Jeane Kirkpatrick,[citation needed] were Shachtmanites in their youth; some were later involved with Social Democrats USA."

Now to your question: Yes I agree with your assesment! My Father, who would be 120 years old this month, was a staunch Democrat but his view of being a Democrat was so far removed from today’s Democrat that he would not recognize his party! He was Democrat because it stood for protecting the "hard working little guy" Those that were oppressed by management of large closely held companies. Those that oppressed thier workers. He was not about welfare and Government handouts, just some protection. He would be appalled at those lined up for handouts and welfare. Welfare is OK for those willing to help themselves but not for those unwilling to work for whatever reason other than severe health reasons. He would see today’s Democrats/Liberals as not helping people but rather using it as a platform to totaly erode morals and personal responsibility.

Yes, Today’s Republicans are much closer to the old liberalism than today’s Democrats. Obama could probably be more accurately described as a Neocon than Bush. I think Obamaism is more like "Trotskyism" who was a close associate of Lennin!

I am a Religious person but today’s Republicans need to move back to the "Goldwater" roots and stop being hijacked by religious fanatics (Huckabee) who in the end would want to move towards a "Theocracy"!

Candidates like McCain and Romney would lead us back to our roots of fiscal responsibility not only at a government level but a personal level. Welfare for the "Needy" not the "Lazy" Rethinking of personal and political morals but not in a "Theocratic" way but in a personal responsibility way!

In my Fathers day, Large Corporations were usually closley held by families that did in fact oppress workers! Taday’s Corporations are more like Coops owned by tens of thousands of shareholders usually even by th workers themselves. The Corporations have been hjacked by a few executives that use them as thier piggy bank. Government does not need in interceede but he Stockholders and Boards of Directors should. Existing laws can be used to force Boards to do thier duty to the Staockholders not the Executives. They are the ones who should have thier feet held to the fire. The Governmen, however, should stay far away from private enterprise. Let contract law run its course and do not reward bad behavior nor bad decisions at the corporate level or the personal level. If you bought home you could not afford because you were greedy and blinded by materialism to the point you failed to read the contract, well shame on you but don’t expect me or the Government to bail you out.

Along those same lines, The modern labor union has drifted far from the old days but is now just a money grab. The Labor bosses are far worse than the old corporations. They exploit there members by stron arm tactics and price American workers and good they produce out of the competition in a Global economy. The Labor bosses don’t care, they still have thier perks just like the corporate Executives.

Freedom does not exist unless there is also freedom to fail as well as excel! Freedom cannot be force fed but carefully nurtured day after day! When we take our eye off the ball we will lose it. If we take freedom for granted, we will lose it. The Obmaites wil gladly steal it from you. America Beware!

Proud Vet

What are the major differences between classical republicanism and natural rights philosophy?

How might those differences affect thinking about the purposes of goals and of government?

What might the consequences be for individuals and society of placing too great an emphasis on the common good over the rights of individuals? of emphasizing the rights of individuals over the common good?

This is a question for history and philosophy Majors. I would very much like to hear your opinions.
Someone said that this question is based off a Competition and accused me of cheating. I apologize, I was not aware that this question was part of that competition. I was asked to do a speech in class and was asked to gather information and opinions from the public concerning this very topic. I apologize again for any misunderstandings.

there are no major differences.

hey, need help major! what is the difference between natural rights and classical republicanism?

civic competition

ive already answered this question by you before. 4 times…

hey, need help major! what is the difference between natural rights and classical republicanism?

civic competition

ive already answered this question.

hey, need help major! what is the difference between natural rights and classical republicanism?

civic competition

ive already answered this question.

hey, need help major! what is the difference between natural rights and classical republicanism?

for a civic competition

natural rights is for rights and classical republicansim is for the common good.

hey, need help major! what is the difference between natural rights and classical republicanism?

i need help majorly

natural rights involves rights, second one is for the common good.

hey, need help major! what is the difference between natural rights and classical republicanism?

anyone?

natural rights focuses on the rights of people while classical republicanism goes for the common good of civic virtue.

political science question?

1. Which of the following is not a component of the state? a) land b) culture c) territory d) people, 2. Power is actually based on a) authority b) influence c) legitimacy d) money, 3. Equality can be defined as a) access b) morality c) equality d) inclusion, 4. The 9th and 10th amendments limits the power of a) president b) government c) supreme courts d) United Nations, 5. The Initiative allows citizens to bypass a) congress b) state & local legislatures c) security council d) none of the above, 6. The Rule of Law applies to a) all b) rich c) government d) politicians 7. Conservatives believe in a) traditional values b) strong military c) A & B d) pre-emption, 8. Seperation of Powers suggests a) seperate and independent branches of government b) seperation of church & state c) independent judiciary d) none of the above, 9. Anarchism is a) total government control b) no government c) military rule d) autoritarianism, 10. Oligarch is government by a few a) aristocracy b) people c) cabal d) electoral college, 11. Totalitarians embrace a) freedom b) libertarianism c) conservatism d) none of the above, 12. The recall allows the removal from the office of a) president b) governor c) federal judges d) solicitor general, 13. The ideas of classical liberalism embrace all of the following except a) liberty b) equality c) private property d) social welfare, 14. The great compromise resolved issues in a) World War II b) Civil War c) Constitutional Convention d) War of 1812, 15. The Federalist Papers were written during a) adoption of the constitution b) Watergate c) Civil War d) Clinton’s impeachment, 16. The Bill of Rights a) gives us rights b) protects our rights c) provide natural rights d) none of the above, 17. Confederation came about to a) promote prosperity b) better prosecute war c) seek alliance with Britain d) capture Daniel Shay, 18. Constitutional amendments must be ratified by a) 3/5 of the states b) 1/2 the states c) national conventions d) 3/4 of the states, 19. Symbols of US political culture include except a) Liberty Bell b) Statue of Liberty c) Independence Day d) Washington DC Library, 20. The 3/5 principle allowed for a) increased representation for smaller states b) greater inequality among states c) reduced representation for big states d) none of the above, 21. Among the informal changes to the constitution are all of the following except a) judicial decisions b) statutes c) ordinances d) executive agreements, 22. Brian Harper is the leader of which country a)Afghanistan b) Mexico c) Barbados d) Canada, 23. Contemporary economic conditions have produced much/many a) unemployment b) foreclosures c) suicides d) broken homes, 24. Present at the Constitutional Convention were all of the following except a) land owners b) wealthy c) businessmen d) poor, 25. Marbury vs. Madison resulted in the following except a) placed the judiciary on par with the executive and legislature b) changed the way public policy is made c) the judiciary now determine the legality of legislation d) made of Marbury wealthy, 1. True or False : The government is ot the only entity of society allowed to use force. 2. True or False: The Kurds consider themselves a nation but not a state. 3. True or False: Federalism provides for one level of government. 4. True of False: The US is an example of an oligarchy. 5. True or False: Republicanism is central to the ideaology of the Republican Party. 6. True or False: Libertarianism is a variant of liberalism. 7. Affirmative action was designed to promote equality. 8. True or False: Checks and balances mandate cooperation between the legislative and executive branches of government. 9. True or False: Constitutional democracy equals limited government. 10. True or False: Judicial review came about because of Marbury vs. Madison. 11. True or False: Tom Paine was a propagandist who supported the Brirish in the Revolutionary War. 12. True or False: Benjamin Franklin represented the US at the Treaty of Paris. 13. True or False: Regulatory agencies have no impact on our governmental system. 14. True or False: The Bureaucracy is of no significance in the everyday functionong of government. 15. True or False: The Continental Congress spoke glowingly of the British and their king. 16. True or False: Shay’s rebellion was easily put down by the confederation. 17. True or False: Modern Technology is responsible for all US Constitutional changes. 18. True or False: Easton’s definition of politics does not include values. 19. True or False: Ballot proposals and initiatives are not the same thing. 20. True or False: In promoting justice the government promotes exclusiveness. 21. True or False: Due process is an extension of the rule of law. 22. True or False: George Bush invented security as a function of government. 23. True or False: Providing public goods is one function of government around which all political idealogies revolve. 24. True or False: The Electoral College was designed to provide eq

We don’t have time to read all this.

Do your own homework like the rest of us had to do.

What are the fundamental values of a republican?

I asked a question here today about being liberal, but before I asked, I looked up liberalism online, and it was easy to find a description of it.

After reading the reactions and answers to that question, it seems that republicans really hate liberals and feel that the description of liberal I found was wrong. If those republicans would do some reading before answering, they would see it is not wrong and liberalism is what it is, with small differences, but fundamentally the same. Republicans seem to confuse a liberal with a socialist…

So I wanted to compare liberalism with republicanism but I can’t seem to find a good description for republicanism…

What I did find was this;

Republicanism is the ideology of governing a nation as a republic, with an emphasis on liberty, rule of law, popular sovereignty and the civic virtue practiced by citizens. Republicanism always stands in opposition to any form of dictatorship or tyranny in the political realm. More broadly, it refers to a political system that protects liberty, especially by incorporating a rule of law that cannot be arbitrarily ignored by the government. As John Adams put it, “They define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men.” Much of the literature deals with the issue of what sort of values and behavior by the citizens is necessary if the republic is to survive and flourish; the emphasis has been on widespread citizen participation, civic virtue, and opposition to corruption."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism

And on the Republican party page I found this as political ideology;

Historical;
Abolitionism
Classical liberalism
Progressivism
Social liberalism

Modern:
Conservatism
Fiscal conservatism
Social conservatism
Neoconservatism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)

(look in the right column)

So what I make of a republican now, is that they don’t really exist, because a republic is not an ideology, but a way to govern a country. A republican doesn’t really have core values like a socialist or liberal has, but at one point in time, republicans were actually liberals themselves…

So that’s why I ask this question;

What are the fundamental values of a republican?

The sick and infirm neo-con Party uses the billions of dollars saved by not providing health care to eliminate and kill people around the world who don’t see things their way. How much more depravity is the Republican Party capable of? The GOP hits a new low when it denies people the medical attention they require. The GOP goes even lower when they fund depleted uranium, phosphorous bombs, cluster bombs, shock and awe, etc., over child inoculations, pre-natal care, dialysis, PTSD, etc. This is the Republican Party that shoves its Lord and Savior, Jesus, down everyone’s throats the way it shoves tubes down hunger strikers in GTMO. Given the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus has a hot place reserved for Republicans. If there was a reason Hell to exist, it would be you. Yes, you who profess Judeo-Christian ethics as you ignore them. You who lock up the hungry for pilfering food as you steal oil. You who protect discarded blastocysts under the guise that "all life is precious" as you drop high altitude bombs on pregnant women and children.

When Dick Cheney needs a new battery for his pacemaker, the national media lets the world know. The media, the propaganda wing of the neo-conservative junta, sets the priorities. The Ministry of Public Opinion (MOPO) tells us when George W. Bush has his colonoscopy. It tells us we should give a damn about Dick Cheney’s ticker. It tells us we should give a damn as it doesn’t give a damn about us or our family members. We are supposed to care about the so-called first family. As for us and ours, well, screw you!