Great post this week on the differences between classical liberalism, which could be considered modern conservatism, and socialism, or modern-day liberalism. How do you think that classical liberalism came to evolve into what we associate it with today? In a broad sense, there are many similarities between the two. From what I have found, classical liberalism was a coherent theory up until the 179h century. The fall of classical liberalism came when free thinking, like in the Enlightenment period, came to the mainstream.

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Response- Liberalism v. Socialism"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

As the Dutch revolted and the Scottish contemplated, they (and even the French) came to the conclusion that in order for direct trade and commerce to happen, people would have to let go of governments that would not begin to encompass the variation of human needs and interest. This became the laissez-faire economy, which translates to “let it be” (Ralco, 2010). The primary view was that society and the individuals within it could run itself without the interference of the government. Throughout the next two centuries, countries were insistent on being fiercely dependent, making their own behavior and actions the reason if they were wealthy or poor.

Good post this week. The similarities between classical liberalism and conservatism are quite clear, as I mentioned in my original post. My question for you is which type of government do you think services its people better? I believe that there is a myth perpetuated that hard work will always bring about success, but with the way that governments are established and how it happens with the most vulnerable also being the most disadvantaged, this is not always the case. For example, the cycle of poverty notes that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, so how do we ameliorate this?

Does the government, whose founding is based on controlling wealth and keeping it at the wealthy fix the problem, or do we leave people to fix their own problem. I think that the latter is a better solution. I think that America fails at reducing poverty because of this myth. The national poverty rate in 2011 was 15 percent (Worstall, 2012), yet with all the money spent, why are people still in poverty? I believe it is because spending vast sums and pretending that it helps is the problem. There should be more policy instead of money going towards alleviating poverty.