Book Review: The New Liberalism: An Ideology of Social Reform
| Author | Henry S. Kariel |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/106591297903200214 |
| Published date | 01 June 1979 |
| Date | 01 June 1979 |
| Subject Matter | Book Review |
226
Westerti Political Qtiarterly
The one redeeming value of his work might be found in the chapter devoted
to legalism or what he terms forensic philosophy. This area has been neglected by
most Mamists
or
quickly dismissed
as
a
mere extension of the state. Skillen’s focus
upon it
as
an important mediation and his efforts to cover the most significant ideas,
initially lead the reader to great expectations. Unfortunately, his analysis is ex-
tremely onesided and incomplete. His lack of subtlety can in part be attributed to
the bad habit of Mamist scholars in general to conclude that once they have dis-
covered what they believe to be the interest served by
a
structure, idea,
or
action,
they have exhausted its meaning. Few are the Marxist works which do not com-
pletely ignore “intentionality” or assume that it is the same
as
objective interest.
Perhaps most disturbing is his unsubtle use of the dialectic.
He
is unable to see the
positive elements in each historical situation and seems to prefer blanket condem-
nations. Thus unlike Horkheimcr, who points out that the achievement of formal
legal freedoms
is
an important step in the liberation of man, one which must now
be supplemented with substantive freedoms, Skillen scorns the rule of law
as
little
more than
a
mediation hindering the revolution; he refuses to recognize the positive
content of its formal protection of individual freedom. Finally, the promise of this
chapter ends in disappointment because the author seeks to do too much in too
little space. Thus, he does not deal with opposing ideas in their complexity and
generally ends up dismissing them prematurely. Indeed, this criticism could easily
be extended to the entire book, which, if it were to achieve what Skillen apparently
desired, would have had to comprise at least 500 rather than
200
pages.
Finally, for all the unmerciful criticism of every school on the positivist land-
scape,
as
well
as
a
general denunciation of the U.S.S.R., Skillen furnishes
us
with
few viable alternatives with which to tickle
our
fancy.
He
simply calls for de-
specialization, dehierarchicalization, and full participation without telling
us
how.
His
faith, in some sort of Marxian-Freudian analysis operating within the frame-
work of
a
type of Gestalt T-Group
as
a
means of resolving the contradictions of
the human condition, ultimately leaves the reader gasping
for
breath. One can-
not help but wonder why the disease
was
so extensively dealt with when the cure
received only passing mention.
DAVID
EARLE BOUN
Brighanz
Young University
The
New Liberalism:
An
Ideology
of
Social Reform.
By MICHAEL
FREEDEN.
(Ox-
ford: Clarendon Press,
1978.
Pp.
259. $24.00.)
This meticulously executed study can serve to remind
us
that at the end of
late Victorian times, those who ruled England and those who gave
a
measure of
ideological respectability to the ruling classes were disquieted by “the social prob-
lem”
-
the restlessness
of
an underprivileged stratum in society.
As
Michael
Freeden makes clear, they believed the social problem would be solved if legislation
were to improve the lot of the workingman (his wife and children not excluded)
without however disturbing the sanctity of
the
individual, basic property relations,
the rule
of law
as
understood by sensible men, the awesome obligations
of
empire,
the belief in the ultimate rationality of man, and an educational system designed
to make thcse notions attractive for
all
members of society.
In his scholarly exercise, Freeden gives
a
disciplined account
of
this move-
ment toward the welfare state, treating it
as
an unqualified success
stoiy.
He sees
it
as
the successful, “viable” effort of
a
network of like-minded thinkers to adjust
the classical formula
of
liberalism to the supposed imperatives of new times. With
the exception of Hobhouse, they were-not commanding figures in the history of
political thought. They offered
no
original ideas and probed few ideas in depth.
Yet no matter. These energetic, articulate men (and not
a
few women) managed
to talk and write and publish. They worked through “the ‘Nation’ lunches, the
Rainbow Circle, the Ethical Society, and small groups operating on the periphery
of the Liberal party.
.
.
.”
II they did not see very deeply, if they ignored those pains
and pleasure brought to the surface by Ibsen, Dostoevsky, Strindberg, Nietzsche,
To continue reading
Request your trial