Advertisement

Abstract

Nowadays, the term liberalism can mean one thing or its opposite; therefore it is necessary to take time to introduce “classical liberalism.” It may perhaps appear odd to start a book on IR theory with a description of “domestic” classical liberalism. However, this is both logical and necessary. Classical liberalism is a “bottom-up” theory, which regards international relations as an outgrowth of politics in the domestic or national political arena. Only by looking at the classical liberal idea “behind the border,” are we able to move closer to comprehending its meaning “beyond the border.”1

Keywords

Human Nature Economic Freedom Individual Liberty Spontaneous Order Classical Liberal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    Smith, Craig. Adam Smith’s Political Philosophy: The Invisible Hand and Spontaneous Order. London and New York: Routledge. 2006. p. 5.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    See, for example, Powell, Jim. The Triumph of liberty. New York: Free Press. 2000;Google Scholar
  3. Gray, John. Liberalism. Buckingham: Open University Press. 1995. pp. 3–41;Google Scholar
  4. Bramsted, E.K., and K.J. Melhuish, eds. Western liberalism: A History in Documents from locke to Groce. London and New York: Longman. 1978;Google Scholar
  5. Machlup, F. “Liberalism and the Choice of Freedoms.” In Roads to Freedom: Essays in Honour of Friedrich A. von Hayek. Edited by E. Streissler. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1969. pp. 117–146;Google Scholar
  6. Zuckert, Michael P. Launching liberalism: On Lockean Political Philosophy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. 2002;Google Scholar
  7. Raico, Ralph. Classical liberalism in the Twentieth Century. Fairfaix: Institute for Humane Studies. 1989;Google Scholar
  8. Arblaster, Anthony. The Rise and Decline of Western liberalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1984.Google Scholar
  9. 4.
    Willgerodt, H, and A. Peacock. “German Liberalism and Economic Revival.” In Germany’s SocialMarket Economy: Origins andEvolution. Edited by H. Willgerodt and A. Peacock. London: Macmillan for the Trade Policy Research Centre. 1989. pp.1–14;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Zmirak, J. Wilhelm Röpke: Swiss localist, Global Economist. Wilmington: ISI Books. 2001;Google Scholar
  11. Peacock, A, and H. Willgerodt. “Overall View of the German Liberal Movement.” In German Neo-Liberals and the Social Market Economy. Edited by A. Peacock and H. Willgerodt. London: Macmillan for the Trade Policy Research Centre. 1989. pp. 1–15;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nicholls, A.J. Freedom with Responsibility: The Social Market Economy in Germany, 1918–1963. Oxford: Clarendon. 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 5.
    Vincent, Andrew. “Classical Liberalism and Its Crisis of Identity.” History of Political Thought XI(1):143–161. 1990.Google Scholar
  14. 6.
    Roche, George. “The Relevance of Friedrich A. Hayek.” In Essays on Hayek. Edited by F. Machlup. New York: New York University Press. 1976. p. 8.Google Scholar
  15. 7.
    See Conway, David. In Defence of the Realm: The Place of Nations in Classical Liberalism. Aldershot: Ashgate. 2004. pp. 10–75.Google Scholar
  16. 8.
    Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2002. pp. 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 9.
    De Jasay, Anthony. Liberalism, Loose or Strict. Brussels: Centre for the New Europe. 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 10.
    West, Edwin G. Adam Smith into the Twenty-First Century. Edited by C.K. Rowley. Cheltenham and Brookfield: Edward Elgar. 1996. pp. 38–39;Google Scholar
  19. Harvey, David. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2005.Google Scholar
  20. 11.
    Gissurarson, Hannes H. Hayek’s Conservative Liberalism. New York and London: Garland. 1987.Google Scholar
  21. 12.
    Cliteur, Paul B. Natuurrecht, Cultuurrecht, Conservatisme. Grondslag van de Democratische Rechtsstaat. Leeuwarden: Universitaire Pers Fryslân. 2005. pp. 249–286.Google Scholar
  22. 13.
    See Kelly, Paul. Liberalism. Cambridge: Polity. 2005.Google Scholar
  23. 14.
    See, for example, Gray. Liberalism, pp. 45–77; Barry, Norman. On Classical Liberalism, pp. 1–43; Higgs, Robert, and Carl P. Close. The Challenge of Liberty: Classical Liberalism Today. Oakland: Independent Institute. 2006. pp. xii–xxii; Gissurarson. Hayek’s Conservative Liberalism, pp 10–41;Google Scholar
  24. Conway, David. Classical Liberalism, the Unvanquished Ldeal. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan. 1995. pp. 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 17.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. Liberalism: The Classical Tradition. Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education. 1996. pp. 5–7.Google Scholar
  26. 18.
    Kinneging, A.M.M. Liberalisme. Een Speurtocht naar de Grondslagen. Den Haag: Prof. Mr. B.M. Teldersstichting. 1988. pp. 17–21.Google Scholar
  27. 19.
    Merikoski, Ingrid A. “Introduction.” In Well Temper’d Eloquence. Edited by I.A. Merikoski. Edinburgh: David Hume Institute. 1996. pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
  28. 20.
    Danford, J.D. “Hume’s History and the Parameters of Economic Development.” In Liberty in Hume’s History of England. Edited by N. Capaldi and D.W. Livingston. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1990. pp. 195–196.Google Scholar
  29. 21.
    Biro, John. “Hume’s New Science of the Mind.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hume. Edited by D.F. Norton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993. pp. 33–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 22.
    Haakonssen. Knud. “Introduction.” In David Hume: Political Essays. Edited by K. Haakonssen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1994. pp. xi–xxx.Google Scholar
  31. 23.
    Hume, David. A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2000. p. 266.Google Scholar
  32. 24.
    Beauchamp, Tom L. “Editor’s Introduction.” In David Hume: An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1998. pp. 10–17.Google Scholar
  33. 25.
    Hume, David. Essays: Moral, Political, and Literary. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1987. p. 38.Google Scholar
  34. 26.
    Hume, David. An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1999. p. 154.Google Scholar
  35. 28.
    Haakonssen. Knud. “Introduction: The Coherence of Smith’s Thought.” In The Cambridge Companion to Adam Smith. Edited by K. Haakonssen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
  36. 30.
    Smith, Adam. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1982. p. 41.Google Scholar
  37. 35.
    Infantino, Lorenzo. Individualism in Modern Thought: From Adam Smith to Hayek. London and New York: Routledge. 1998. p. 15.Google Scholar
  38. 36.
    Gordon, David. The Philosophical Origins of Austrian Economics. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute. 1996. p. 25.Google Scholar
  39. 37.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. Omnipotent Government: The Rise of the Total State and Total War. Grove City: Libertarian. 1985. p. 251.Google Scholar
  40. 38.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. Human Action: A Treatise on Economics. San Francisco: Fox & Wilkes. 1996. p. 186.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cubeddu, R. The Philosophy of the Austrian School. London: Routledge. 1993. pp. 77–86.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hayek, Friedrich A. The Constitution of Liberty. London: Routledge. 1993. pp. 205–219.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Caldwell, Bruce. Hayek’s Challenge: An Intellectual Biography of F.A. Hayek. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. 2004. pp. 241–247, 281–287.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hayek, Friedrich A. Individualism and Economic Order. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. 1948. pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Galipeau, Claude J. Isaiah Berlin’s Liberalism. Oxford: Clarendon. 1994. pp. 88–90.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Machan, Tibor R. The Liberty Option. Exeter: Imprint Academic. 2003. p. 13.Google Scholar
  47. 48.
    Berlin, Isaiah. Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1969. pp. 131–134.Google Scholar
  48. 49.
    Whelan, F.G. Hume and Machiavelli: Political Realism and Liberal Thought. Lanham: Lexington Books. 2004. p. 297.Google Scholar
  49. 50.
    Hume, David. The History of England: From the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution in 1688. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1983. Volume IV. pp. 176–177.Google Scholar
  50. 53.
    Smith, Adam. Lectures on Jurisprudence. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1982. LJA. p. 8.Google Scholar
  51. 55.
    Ross, Ian Simpson. The Life of Adam Smith. Oxford: Clarendon. 1995. p. 54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 56.
    Smith, Adam. An Inquiry into the Nature and the Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1981. pp. 687–688.Google Scholar
  53. 57.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. Planning for Freedom and Sixteen Other Essays and Addresses. Grove City: Libertarian. 1980. pp. 16, 35–38.Google Scholar
  54. 58.
    Butler, Eamonn. Ludwig von Mises: Fountain head of the Modern Microeconomics Revolution. Aldershot and Brookfield: Gower. 1988. pp. 109–111.Google Scholar
  55. 61.
    Machan. Liberty Option, pp. 11–26; Van Dun, F. “Natural Law, Liberalism and Christianity.” Journal of Libertarian Studies XV(3):1–36. 2001. p. 1.Google Scholar
  56. 62.
    Knowles, D. Political Philosophy. London: Routledge. 2001. pp. 135–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 63.
    Barry, Norman P. An Introduction to Modern Political Theory. New York: St. Martin’s. 2000. pp. 31–32.Google Scholar
  58. 64.
    Rasmussen, Douglas B., and Douglas J. Den Uyl. Liberalism Defended: The Challenge of Post-Modernity. Edited by C.K. Rowley. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar. 1997. pp. 37–59.Google Scholar
  59. 65.
    Van Dun, F. “Natural law. A Logical Analysis.” Etica & Politica V (2):1–4. 2003.Google Scholar
  60. 66.
    Van Dun, F. “Human Dignity: Reason or Desire?” Journal of Libertarian Studies XV (4):1–28. 2001.Google Scholar
  61. 69.
    Haakonssen, Knud. “The Structure of Hume’s Political Theory.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hume. Edited by D.F. Norton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993. pp. 200–201;Google Scholar
  62. Van Dun, F. “Hayek and Natural Law: The Humean Connection.” In Hayek, Co-ordination and Evolution: His Legacy in Philosophy, Politics, Economics and the History of Ideas. Edited by J. Birner and R. Van Zijp. London and New York: Routledge. 1994. pp. 269–286.Google Scholar
  63. 71.
    Ayer, A.J. Hume. Rotterdam: Lemniscaat. 1999. p. 118; Whelan, F.G. Order and Artifice in Hume’s Political Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1985. pp. 212–213.Google Scholar
  64. 72.
    Miller, D. Philosophy and Ideology in Hume’s Political Thought. Oxford: Clarendon. 1981. p. 190.Google Scholar
  65. 75.
    Macfie, A.L. The Individual in Society: Papers on Adam Smith. London: George Allen & Unwin. 1967. p. 158.Google Scholar
  66. 76.
    Haakonssen, Knud, and Donald Winch. “The Legacy of Adam Smith.” In The Cambridge Companion to Adam Smith. Edited by K. Haakonssen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. pp. 380–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 77.
    Campbell, T.D., and Ian Simpson Ross. “The Utilitarianism of Adam Smith’s Policy Advice.” Journal of the History of Ideas 42(1):73–92. 1981. p. 73; Shaver, Robert. “Virtues, Utility, and Rules.” In The Cambridge Companion to Adam Smith. Edited by K. Haakonssen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. pp. 189–213.Google Scholar
  68. 78.
    Haakonssen, Knud. The Science of a Legislator: The Natural Jurisprudence of David Hume and Adam Smith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1981. p. 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 79.
    Hülsmann, Jörg Guido. Mises: The Last Knight of Liberalism. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute. 2007. p. 410.Google Scholar
  70. 80.
    Greaves, Percy L. Mises Made Easier: A Glossary for Ludwig von Mises’ Human Action. Irvington: Free Market Books. 1990. p. 96.Google Scholar
  71. 81.
    Tucker, Jeffrey A., and Llewellyn H. Rockwell. “The Cultural Thought of Ludwig von Mises.” In The Meaning of Ludwig von Mises: Contributions in Economics, Epistemology, Sociology, and Political Philosophy. Edited by J.M. Herbener. Norwell and Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers & Praxeology Press of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. 1993. p. 318.Google Scholar
  72. 82.
    Gonce, R.A. “Natural Law and Ludwig von Mises’ Praxeology and Economic Science.” Southern Economic Journal 39 (4):490–507. 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 83.
    Rothbard, Murray N. “Ludwig von Mises and Natural Law: A Comment on Professor Gonce.” Journal of Libertarian Studies IV (3):289–297. 1980.Google Scholar
  74. 84.
    Yeager, Leland B. “The Moral Element in Mises’ Human Action.” In Human Action: A 50-Year Tribute. Edited by R.M. Ebeling. Hillsdale: Hillsdale College Press. 2000. pp. 235–249.Google Scholar
  75. 86.
    Hülsmann. Mises, pp. 307, 410–413, 523–537; Von Mises, Ludwig. Theory and History: An Interpretation of Social and Economic Evolution. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 2005. pp. 44–45.Google Scholar
  76. 87.
    Cliteur, Paul B. “Spontaneous Order, Natural Law, and Legal Positivism in the Work of F.A. Hayek.” In Hayek Revisited. Edited by B. Bouckaert and A. Godart-van der Kroon. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar. 2000. pp. 14–31.Google Scholar
  77. 88.
    Walker, Graham. The Ethics of F.A. Hayek. Lanham and London: University Press of America. 1986. p. 35.Google Scholar
  78. 90.
    Dietze, Gottfried. “Hayek and the Rule of Law.” In Essays on Hayek. Edited by F. Machlup. Hillsdale: Hillsdale College Press. 1976. pp. 107–115.Google Scholar
  79. 91.
    Hayek, Friedrich A. Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. New York: Simon and Schuster. 1967. pp. 96–101.Google Scholar
  80. 92.
    De Jasay, Anthony. Choice, Contract, Consent: A Restatement of Liberalism. London: Institute of Economic Affairs. 1991. pp. 80–91.Google Scholar
  81. 94.
    Gray, John. Hayek on Liberty. London and New York: Routledge. 1998. pp. 27–55.Google Scholar
  82. 95.
    Hayek, Friedrich A. Law, Legislation and Liberty: A New Statement of the Liberal Principles of Justice and Political Economy. London: Routledge. 1998. Parts I & III.Google Scholar
  83. 98.
    Rothschild, Emma. Economic Sentiments: Adam Smith, Condorcet and the Enlightenment. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press. 2001. p. 223.Google Scholar
  84. 99.
    Rotwein, Eugene, ed. David Hume: Writings on Economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. 1970. pp. xvi and further.Google Scholar
  85. 100.
    Skinner, Andrew S. “David Hume: Principles of Political Economy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hume. Edited by D.F. Norton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993. pp. 222, 230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 101.
    Hardin, Russell. David Hume: Moral and Political Theorist. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2007. p. 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 102.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. Critique of Lnterventionism. Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education. 1996. p. 76.Google Scholar
  88. 103.
    Younkins, Edward W. “Misesian Praxeology as the Path to Progress.” In Philosophers of Capitalism: Menger, Mises, Rand and Beyond. Edited by E.W Younkins. Lanham and Oxford: Lexington Books. 2005. p. 49.Google Scholar
  89. 104.
    Steele, David Ramsay. From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. La Salle: Open Court. 1992. pp. 229–237.Google Scholar
  90. 105.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality. Grove City: Libertarian. 1994;Google Scholar
  91. Von Mises, Ludwig. Bureaucracy. Grove City: Libertarian. 1996. p. 23.Google Scholar
  92. 107.
    Manning, D.J. Liberalism. London: J.M. Dent. 1976. p. 15.Google Scholar
  93. 108.
    Vile, M.J.C. Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1998.Google Scholar
  94. 109.
    Hume, David. An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1998. p. 87.Google Scholar
  95. 112.
    Otteson, James R. Adam Smith’s Marketplace of Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002. p. 259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 113.
    Evensky, Jerry. “The Role of Law in Adam Smith’s Moral Philosophy.” In Adam Smith and the Philosophy of Law and Economics. Edited by R.P. Malloy and J. Evensky. Dordrecht, Boston, and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1995. pp. 206–213.Google Scholar
  97. 116.
    Dunleavy, Patrick, and Brendan O’Leary. Theories of the State: The Politics of Liberal Democracy. Houndmills, Basingstoke and London: Macmillan. 1987. pp. 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 117.
    Gellner, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell. 1983. p. 7.Google Scholar
  99. 118.
    Guibernau, Montserat. Nationalisms: The Nation-State and Nationalism in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Polity. 1996. pp. 47–48.Google Scholar
  100. 120.
    Minogue, Kenneth. The Liberal Mind. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1963. pp. 159–161.Google Scholar
  101. 125.
    Fleischacker, Samuel. A Third Concept of Liberty: Judgment and Freedom in Kant and Adam Smith. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1999. p. 182.Google Scholar
  102. 126.
    Griswold, Charles L. Adam Smith and the Virtues of Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1999. p. 301.Google Scholar
  103. 129.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. Two Essays by Ludwig von Mises: Liberty and Property and Middle-of the-Road Policy Leads to Socialism. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute. 1991. p. 32.Google Scholar
  104. 133.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. Selected Writings, volume 2: Between the Two World Wars: Monetary Disorder, Interventionism, Socialism and the Great Depression. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 2002. pp. 96–99; Z. pp. 111–118.Google Scholar
  105. 134.
    Hayek, Friedrich A. New Studies in Philosophy, Politics, Economics and the History of Ideas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1978. pp. 111–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 136.
    Roos, N.H.M. “Hayek’s Kantian Heritage and Natural Law.” In Hayek, Co-ordination and Evolution: His Legacy in Philosophy, Politics, Economics and the History of Ideas. Edited by J. Birner and R. Van Zijp. London and New York: Routledge. 1994. p. 290.Google Scholar
  107. 137.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. The Historical Setting of the Austrian School of Economics. Auburn: The Ludwig von Mises Institute of Auburn University. 1984. p. 20;Google Scholar
  108. Von Mises, Ludwig. Epistemological Problems of Economics. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute. 2003. pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
  109. 139.
    Von Mises, Ludwig. The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science: An Essay on Method. Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education. 2002. p. 183.Google Scholar
  110. 141.
    Kukathas, Chandran. “Hayek and Liberalism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hayek. Edited by E. Feser. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. p. 192.Google Scholar
  111. 142.
    Hayek. New Studies, pp. 249–266; Hayek, Friedrich A. Hayek on Hayek: An Autobiographical Dialogue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1994. p. 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 143.
    Ebenstein, Alan. Hayek’s Journey: The Mind of Friedrich Hayek. New York and Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 2003. p. 100;Google Scholar
  113. Hayek, Friedrich A. The Counter-Revolution of Science: Studies on the Abuse of Reason. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1979. p. 1; Studies, pp. 106–121; New Studies. pp. 267–269; Smith, Graig. Adam Smith, pp. 97–135.Google Scholar
  114. 145.
    Rapaczynski, Andrzej. Nature and Politics: Liberalism in the Philosophies of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. 1987. pp. 61–65.Google Scholar
  115. 146.
    Berns, Laurence. “Thomas Hobbes.” In History of Political Philosophy. Edited by L. Strauss and J. Crospey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1987. pp. 396–401.Google Scholar
  116. 147.
    Ryan, Alan. “Hobbes’s Political Philosophy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes. Edited by T. Sorell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1996. pp. 225–237.Google Scholar
  117. 150.
    See also Strauss, Leo. Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1950. pp. 192–196.Google Scholar
  118. 151.
    Tuck, Richard. “Introduction.” In Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1996. p. xxxiv;Google Scholar
  119. Skinner, Quentin. Liberty before Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1998. pp. 8–10.Google Scholar
  120. 152.
    Harrison, Ross. Hobbes, Locke, and Confusions Masterpiece: An Examination of Seventeenth-Century Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2003. p. 107;Google Scholar
  121. Goldsmith, M.M. Hobbes’s Science of Politics. New York and London: Columbia University Press. 1966. pp. 200–201.Google Scholar
  122. 155.
    See, for example, Scruton, Roger. Kant. Rotterdam: Lemniscaat. 2000; Guyer, Paul, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992.Google Scholar
  123. 156.
    Franceschet, Antonio. Kant and Liberal Internationalism: Sovereignty, Justice and Global Reform. Houndmills, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 2002. pp. 10–53, 67–68;Google Scholar
  124. Williams, Howard, and Ken Booth. “Kant: Theorist beyond Limits.” In Classical Theories of International Relations. Edited by I. Clark and LB. Neumann. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan. 1996. p. 78.Google Scholar
  125. 157.
    Reiss, Hans. “Introduction.” In Kant: Political Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1991. pp. 1–33.Google Scholar
  126. 158.
    Williams, Howard. Kant’s Political Philosophy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1983. pp. 125–160.Google Scholar
  127. 159.
    Shilliam, Robert. “The ‘Other’ in Classical Political Theory: Re-contextualizing the Cosmopolitan/Communitarian Debate.” In Classical Theory in International Relations. Edited by B.Jahn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. p. 215;Google Scholar
  128. Covell, Charles. Kant and the Law of Peace: A Study in the Philosophy of International Law and International Relations. Houndmills, Basingstoke and London: Macmillan. 1998. pp. 20–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 161.
    Kersting, Wolfgang. “Politics, Freedom, and Order: Kant’s Political Philosophy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Kant. Edited by P. Guyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992. pp. 348–353;Google Scholar
  130. Feser, Edward. Locke. Oxford: Oneworld. 2007.Google Scholar
  131. 164.
    Ryan, Alan. “Introduction.” In John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham: Utilitarianism and Other Essays. London: Penguin Books. 1987. pp. 25–31.Google Scholar
  132. 165.
    Gray. Liberalism, pp. 28–29; Fuller, Timothy. “Jeremy Bentham and James Mill.” In History of Political Philosophy. Edited by L. Strauss and J. Crospey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1987. pp. 710–731.Google Scholar
  133. 166.
    Thomas, William. The Philosophical Radicals: Nine Studies in Theory and Practice1817–1841. Oxford: Clarendon. 1979.Google Scholar
  134. 167.
    Ten, C.L. “Mill’s Defence of Liberty.” In Traditions of Liberalism. Edited by K. Haakonssen. St. Leonard’s: Centre for Independent Studies Limited. 1988. p. 145.Google Scholar
  135. 168.
    Crisp, Roger. Mill on Utilitarianism. London: Routledge. 1997. pp. 195–199.Google Scholar
  136. 169.
    Magid, Henry M. “John Stuart Mill.” In History of Political Philosophy. Edited by L. Strauss and J. Crospey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1987. pp. 784–790.Google Scholar
  137. 171.
    Himmelfarb, Gertrude. On Liberty and Liberalism: The Case of John Stuart Mill. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. 1974.Google Scholar
  138. 173.
    Cowling, Maurice. Mill and Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1990. pp. 104–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 176.
    Hayek, Friedrich A. John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor: Their Friendship and Subsequent Marriage. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1969.Google Scholar
  140. 178.
    Himmelfarb, Gertrude. Lord Acton: A Study in Conscience and Politics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1952. pp. viii–ix.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Edwin van de Haar 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edwin van de Haar

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations