The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics (152 page)

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

Belief that the Christian Churches have a duty and a commitment to oppose social, economic, and political repression in societies where exploitation and oppression of humanity exist.
Liberation theology emerged in Latin America in the 1960s to challenge the Catholic Church's traditional role as defender of the status quo. Lay organizations and worker priests argued that the church must identify itself with the interests of the poor. They became involved in grass-roots organization around development issues. A strong influence was the educationalist Paulo Freire (
The Pedagogy of the Oppressed
, 1972). Despite the misgivings of the Catholic hierarchy, in 1967 Pope Paul VI published his encyclical
Populorum Progressio
which condemned the differences between rich and poor nations. In 1968, the Latin American Episcopal Conference (CELAM) meeting in Medellín, Colombia espoused liberation theology (the fullest expression of which is Gustavo Gutierrez's
Theology of Liberation
, 1971).
Since the 1970s, the Vatican has attempted to re-assert its authority, warning against the dangers of politicization and attempting to neutralize the influence of the grass-roots organizations. National churches have experienced schisms. Nevertheless, liberation theology has had a profound impact, demonstrated, for example, by the Chilean Church's deep involvement in human rights activities during the Pinochet regime and the Nicaraguan Sandinistas' acknowledgement that it formed an integral part of their political heritage.
GS 

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

Refers primarily to a range of theories and attitudes whose common characteristic is that they seek to reverse the progress of collectivism and authoritarianism and to ‘roll back the frontiers of the state’. Traditionally, ‘libertarian’ denoted a believer in free will, as opposed to determinism; the opposite was, therefore, a necessitarian. A further meaning referred to a kind of principled libertine, a person in favour of breaking down whatever inhibited and constrained natural or instinctive behaviour, whether it was religious belief, family ties, or the enforcement of laws by the state. But these meanings are now antiquated.
Libertarians as now defined can be divided into two main camps. The most precise form of libertarianism rests on a belief in the essential separateness of individual persons who possess, quite irrespective of whether or not they are part of a society or subject to the laws of a state, a set of inalienable rights, which necessarily include rights to acquire and retain property. The denial of these rights by states can never be defensible and people should only consider themselves subject to states in so far as those states enhance their rights or rest on voluntary procedures. The clearest modern statement of this doctrine is in Robert Nozick's
Anarchy, State and Utopia
published in 1974. It has been described as a brilliant drawing of conclusions (such as that taxation is ‘forced labour’) from premisses (the
a priori
existence of rights) which are merely asserted and which we have no good reason to accept.
Libertarianism in this sense is fundamentally opposed to utilitarianism: an individual's rights must never be abrogated in the general interest. Paradoxically, a variety of libertarians in the broader sense base their projects for the retreat of the state on arguments which are quite compatible with utilitarianism and even overtly utilitarian. The ‘Austrian school’ of economists, culminating in the influence of Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von
Hayek
, is more concerned with the ultimate aggregate benefits of free markets and with the need to counter the state's inherent tendencies to expansion and inefficiency. Some writers, like Samuel Brittan, have attempted to reconcile utilitarian and libertarian thought by stating that, although the aggregate benefit of the population is the only ultimate justification of policy, this is best interpreted as a maximization of individual autonomy and a minimization of dependence on the state.
Some libertarians call themselves ‘minarchists’, indicating a belief in the minimal or ‘night-watchman’ state which confines its activities to defence of its boundaries and the enforcement of contracts and a (minimal) body of criminal law. They are thus quite different from anarchists, who wish to abolish the state in its entirety and the institution of property. Libertarians may be accused of taking the state too seriously and the idea of liberty not seriously enough. The dominant contemporary tradition of libertarianism sees only the state as constraining liberty whereas, considered more broadly, freedom is restricted by social norms, religious beliefs, family structures, and market forces. The most convincing libertarian reply to this criticism is that the determined individual can, ultimately, by strength of will, shrug off these constraints, but not the coercive power of the state.
LA 

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

See
freedom
.

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

Under the Life Peerages Act of 1958, membership of the
House of Lords
can be conferred on a man or woman for life. Life peers have exactly the same privileges and voting rights as hereditary peers, the only difference being that the peerage is not passed on to the peer's heir.

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search