Originally Posted by BBII
You're failing to connect the dots here.
Equality is not Liberty. At times they align. But at times they conflict. This can't be denied.
If you choose equality over liberty, you are not a liberal in the classical sense at all. And for that reason you can draw no line from today's liberals back to those.
The resemblance boils down to name alone. And only because common definitions tend to change over time.
Do me a favor, read the article or don't comment. Just bypass the thread.
Liberalism is egalitarian in the sense
that it seeks to achieve a more equal distribution of income and
well-being than would otherwise be generated in the marketplace.
But it is not committed to achieving a perfect equality in the distribution
of goods. Equity requires that those who work harder,
take greater risks, or develop their talents to a higher degree be
able to recoup a return from their efforts. This incentive is critical
to innovation and prosperity, which redound to wider benefit.
Liberalism regards the well-being of the least well-off as a central
criterion for a just society, and it seeks to provide individuals with
some degree of protection against risks beyond their control; but
it accepts inequalities insofar as they are to everyone’s long-run
advantage, and therefore aims for sustainable growth with widely
And just to clarify, unequal economics can certainly determine a person's sense of their own liberty, and not only just their sense of it, but the reality. What is liberty to a starving man?