Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:17:48.798Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Friedman, Liberalism and the Meaning of Negative Freedom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2009

Vardaman R. Smith
Affiliation:
James Madison University

Extract

In the ‘Introduction’ to Capitalism and Freedom, Friedman's stated intentions are to: (i) establish the role of competitive capitalism as a system of economic freedom and a necessary condition for political freedom; (ii) indicate the proper role of government in a free society; and (iii) return the term ‘liberal’ ‘… to its original sense – as the doctrines pertaining to a free man’ (1962, p. 6). In fact, Friedman accomplishes none of these things. This essay has three distinct, though related, objectives: first, to compare Friedman's position with the liberal alternative; second, to show why Friedman's position is more properly regarded as libertarian than liberal; and third, to assess the quality of Friedman's argument in its own right. My purpose is to demonstrate that Friedman overlooks the important liberal insight that the unrestricted accumulation of private propety may limit rather than promote individual freedom. This omission is crucial. Not only does it divorce Friedman's conception from liberalism, it also vitiates his case for economic freedom as a necessary condition for political freedom.

Type
Essays
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Berlin, Isaiah. 1958. ‘Two Concepts of Liberty.’ In Freedom: Its Hislory, Nature and Varieties, pp. 8493. Dewey, R. E. and Gould, J. A. (eds.). Collier-MacMillan Canada, Ltd. 1970Google Scholar
Freeman, John R. 1989. Democracy and Markets: The Politics of Mixed Economies. Cornell University PressGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Alan. 1981. Forms of Explanation: Rethinking the Questions in Social Theory. Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
Graham, Frank D. 1942. Social Goals and Economic Institutions. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Hausman, Daniel M. and McPherson, Michael S.. 1996. Economic Analysis and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Hayek, Freidrich A. 1948. Individualism and Economic Order. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Hayek, Freidrich A. 1944. The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Hayek, Freidrich A. 1960. The Constitution of Liberty. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Lindblom, Charles A. 1977. Politics and Markets. Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Locke, John. 1967. Two Treatises on Government. Laslett, P., (ed.). Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Alfred. 1936. Principles of Economics. 8th ed.Macmillan and CompanyGoogle Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1929. On Liberty. London: Watts and Co.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1976. Principles of Political Economy. Auguste M. Kelley, PublishersGoogle Scholar
Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Simons, Henry C. 1948. Economic Policy for a Free Society. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1937. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Random House, Modern Library EditionGoogle Scholar
Viner, Jacob. ‘Adam Smith and laissez faire.’ The Journal of Political Economy, XXXV:198232Google Scholar