Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
And what is the expression of the national question? This definition does not describe the problem, what specific task should liberalism solve in the framework of this question?
Within the framework of the liberal idea, there is no special national question, there are only social groups of citizens united on the basis of “nationality” and they have equal rights and duties with all other citizens united in other social groups. Including the right to exercise their interests as a social group, if these interests do not violate the rights and freedoms of other citizens.
Anyone who asks such a question has no idea what liberalism is in general. A liberal is a person who believes that any person born in the world initially has rights and freedoms. These rights and freedoms were most clearly formulated by the UN in 1948. Human rights prevail over any other right, including State laws.
With this approach, the individual and his individual interests are always higher than those of the State.
Russian scammers and crooks in power have such a statement of the question as a sickle in the balls. Because they are used to deciding the fate of people on behalf of “the people” and “the interests of the state”. Which directly contradicts your rights…
And the national question, like any other issue of interpersonal relations, does not stand between people and has never stood, unless unscrupulous politicians start artificially provoking discord. Therefore, the national question is solved simply: find the politicians-provocateurs, instigators-provocateurs of this discord and eliminate them. And you will solve all the issues related to any discord in society.
But Russia is a parasite on the discord of the population, so this weeding of provocateurs will never take place in Russia. Russia itself produces and generates provocateurs. She is their parent, she is their Mother country.
Initially, liberalism did not have the task of solving the national question. Moreover, at a time when liberalism was making its way into political trends, there was no national question. The nation as a phenomenon was created by capitalism, including liberal capitalism. Within the framework of capitalism, there is no solution for the national question, but there are ways to mitigate the problem. Such phenomena as multiculturalism and the like were created and developed just for this purpose.
Therefore, we should not expect the national question to be resolved by liberalism, since it does not have the goal of resolving this issue.
In connection with the correct remark in Evgeny Kuzmishin's commentary: we are talking about liberalism in the Locke-Mises tradition, about the original in Modern Times, classical liberalism, which describes a market economy and a democratic structure of power with a minimal role of the state.
Raiseflagg Surrender's response attributed to liberals something they never said or supported – neither the nation-state nor the”social contract.” Liberals see the goal of the state in guaranteeing the protection of life, health, freedom and private property from violence and assassination. Liberals consider the “social contract” to be a flawed concept that opens the way for authoritarianism.�
As a young lawyer, Locke was commissioned, rather than initiated, to draft a constitution for the state of Carolina, and also held shares in the Royal African Company, which was engaged in the slave trade. But it was Locke who wrote 20 years later: “Slavery is so abominable and abject a condition of man, and so repugnant to the generous disposition and courage of our people, with which it is simply incompatible, that it is almost impossible to imagine an Englishman, much less a gentleman, speaking in its defence.” Locke did not justify or defend slavery, but made an exceptionally great contribution to the formulation of the ideas of freedom and resistance to government that led to the abolition of slavery.
What is the “national question”? There is no innate feeling of antipathy between nations, and interethnic conflicts are of a political nature, when the authorities try to consolidate the majority nation by force, coercion and pressure. This was clearly seen in the example of Hitler's Germany, which created the “German world” at the expense of small nations.
Liberalism does not distinguish between nations – it sees only a person and describes the conditions, economic and political, that lead to the growth of a person's material well-being and the protection of his life, freedom, health and property. Liberalism protects the individual through his rights and freedoms, but recognizes the need for social cooperation and peace and the belonging of a person, in particular, to his national group.
The coexistence of different nations and language groups on the same territory is a real political problem for many countries. This problem cannot be ignored, it is a cause of conflict, but it has no other solution than through public cooperation
Liberals oppose aggressive nationalism, which seeks to assert the position of its own nation at the expense of other nations. Aggressive nationalism is based on the principle of unlimited sovereignty in conditions of state interference in the economy and social affairs. State interventionism is always associated with economic nationalism, an attempt to succeed and protect one's interests at the expense of other nations, but this is the path of conflict.�
No nation, in the face of a deepening division of labor, is able to meet its needs for goods and services solely at the expense of its own production. Expanding free trade that transcends borders will eventually solve the question of the coexistence of nations – small and large.
Historically, classical liberalism insisted on the principle of the nation-state, that is, the autonomy and sovereignty of the social contract of the nation and the state that ensures its rights. Other nationalities are not included in the agreement and should be content with less. Therefore, it is precisely the same liberal theorist, J. R. R. Tolkien. Locke drew up laws for the slave states of the United States. With the development of liberalism and its transition to neoliberal views, the national question began to be perceived through the prism of “minority politics”and ” multiculturalism”. In modern liberal theory, people belonging to minorities should be given rights that specifically protect them from discrimination and prejudice of the majority.