Why Liberalism Still Matters
As extremists call liberalism outdated, Fukuyama argues it’s still the best system for peace and dignity amid deep political divides.
Movements on both halves of the political horseshoe have attacked liberalism as an outdated system of government.
Some extremists believe liberalism is rotten to its core, incapable of bringing positive change to people outside the halls of power. Others believe that the weight of the government should be mobilized against not only their political enemies, but also against people who choose to exercise the autonomy liberalism grants to each citizen.
Francis Fukuyama’s 2022 book Liberalism and its Discontents is a much-needed defense of liberalism as a governing philosophy. It’s the best chance we have at elevating others and preventing violent conflict with our fellow Americans. Fukuyama describes liberalism concisely at the beginning of his short book:
“Liberal societies confer rights on individuals, the most fundamental of which I the right to autonomy, that is, the ability to make choices with regard to speech, association, belief, and ultimately political life.”
Liberalism is the foundation of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, both of which (originally) limited the power of the president so he couldn’t invade the homes of ordinary people and disrupt their lives over ideological disagreements.
The competing ideologies solve none of the problems of classical liberalism. In fact, they introduce new ones.
Taking Good Ideas Too Far
One of Fukuyama’s most important thoughts in the book comes early:
“Most doctrines or ideologies begin with a core insight that is true or even revelatory, but they go wrong when that insight is carried to extremes—when the doctrine becomes, so to speak, doctrinaire.”
It’s so easy for so many to become infatuated with one good idea and use it as their only one. One prominent example is neoliberalism, which Fukuyama describes as an over-infatuation with the power of markets to solve problems for ordinary people.
While globalization did lead to lower-priced consumer goods, it was little comfort to the manufacturing workers who couldn’t compete in a global market. Aggregate well-being went up, but the victims brewed the backlash that led to both of Trump’s presidencies.
But there are market fundamentalists who still believe that human beings will make rational decisions as measured by economic efficiency. Fukuyama disabuses them of that mistake:
“Moreover, human beings crave respect not just for themselves, but also for external things like religious beliefs, social rules, and traditions, even when such craving leads them to behavior that is individually costly. This means that human beings cannot ‘maximize’ in the manner suggested by the basic economic model, which assumes that people have stable preferences. They must trade off incompatible desires in ways that are hard to predict in advance.”
Fukuyama also cites an experiment about ultimatums. One person decided how to split the pot of money, and the second could choose whether to accept it. The second player would often refuse the offer if the split favored the first player too heavily. Pride and dignity are enough to break the “maximizing self-interest” behaviors some economists—and pundits—assure us that we follow.
Liberalism allows each of us to pursue what is most important to us as long as we share the project of living peacefully alongside people different from us with our communities.
Shortcomings of Liberal Community
One admitted shortcoming of liberalism is that, on its own, it produces weak community ties. For example, religious communities are tightly bound by a common cosmology, culture, and beliefs. It’s a powerful bond that liberalism doesn’t recreate. Fukuyama argues that it’s purposeful:
“Classical liberalism deliberately lowered the sights of politics, to aim not at a good life as defined by a particular religion, moral doctrine, or cultural tradition, but at the preservation of life itself in conditions where populations could not agree on what the good life was. This leaves liberal orders with a spiritual vacuum: they allow individual stop go their own way, and create only thin sense of community.”
Before liberalism became a popular governing philosophy, religious sects could persecute each other with impunity. Being the wrong kind of Christian was not only heresy, but sedition. The Thirty Years’ War saw parts of Germany lose over half the population due to fighting between Catholics and Protestants.
Instead of trying to impose a worldview, liberalism prevents this kind of bloodshed by removing questions about the correct way for everyone to live from politics. Each person must answer those questions for themselves.
Fukuyama’s book is a clarifying look at why certain popular ideas haven’t dethroned liberalism as a viable governing alternative. It’s worth a read as American democracy is once again stress-tested.