For example, Classical Liberalism, Social Liberalism and Neoliberalism has several difference with each other. Can they coexist with each other, or are they mutually exclusive (or they can only exist with one)?

Does Classical Liberalism have more things in common with Conservatism and Libertarianism than Social or Neoliberalism?

Is anyone aware of any studies that have looked into what proportion of people on the left are liberals and what leftists?

I am just seeking for a serious relationship

Hi everyone,

Here is a general brain dump regarding my understanding of US education and its relevant policy proposals. I am writing to expand my current knowledge of how education works in a free market by acquiring feedback on my thought process. I appreciate any help you can give me.

Education does not work the same way businesses in a free market work. To compare and contrast, I want to use the market for shoes as an example. Suppose you want a new pair of shoes. In that case, you drive to the mall or a solo shoe store to try on a pair to check the fit, look at how the colors match with your typical outfit you plan on wearing the shoes with, compare and contrast prices between different brands, and engage in a dialogue with the various salespeople in the store to acquire the most amount of information regarding shoes, their prices, and their look and feel. Education works in different ways.

For instance, you and your partner move into a new neighborhood with your child. You and your partner will probably need new jobs that fit with your current location and skillset (unless your skillset mismatches with the job market, then you will need to find something else that is suitable), coordinate errand routines that fit your schedules and living location (if you live in a food/transit desert, some more time may be required to coordinate errand routines because), and most importantly send your child to a school that is near your living location.

If you are unsatisfied with your experience at the shoe store, you can find another shoe store with minimal problems. This interaction would be different with schooling. Your child, the "customer" in this case, might have a different idea of what it means to be a "good school" than the teachers, the administrators, and the parents. Going to recess and going on Cool Math Games was my priority; I am sure some of you can relate. The "customer's" perception of quality in education may be warped because a child could not understand or articulate the proper techniques to communicate the difference between Mitosis and Meiosis or the sequence of events leading up to the Civil War. As consumers of shoes or burgers, we can tell right away what works or doesn't. We're wearing shoes that do not fit well, so we take them off and buy a new pair, or we are eating disgusting burgers, so we spit them out and go to a new restaurant. Parents could also have a warped view of quality as they may not be experts in the subject matter taught to their children, they might have difficulty articulating the proper methods to teach students, and they are also not consuming that knowledge then and there; their child is. Recognizing poor quality in education is not as straightforward as recognizing poor quality in restaurants or shoe stores.

Unless the school is hazardous, which is usually informed by the surrounding neighborhoods and cities, the parents might not know immediately that their child does not like the "educational products" they consume. As I said, some of you might not even want to go to school as children because you like having fun playing outside or going on the computer, so you might immediately say to your parents, "I don't want it," the same way you could speak to a salesperson offering you a car or a pair of shoes.

But let's say you want to switch schools as if you would find another business to go to. This process could be tricky as many other schools might be far from your neighborhood. There may be a school nearby, but they may not supply buses directly to your house, and it would be inconvenient for you to walk there as a student or for your parents to make a long commute to drop you off every day. Your parents may need to move houses completely to make the transfer, which could also be inconvenient because your parents may need to find new jobs, plan out new arrand routines, and see how you adjust to this new school and hope, assuming that their child understands education quality, you find this new institution suitable.

Hopefully, I have demonstrated that education does not work like a market. Shopping for schools is tricky because quality is not transparent, assessing "consumer feedback" (which would just be asking your kid how school went) is tricky because of a misalignment of objectives, and evaluating your options is tricky because of the massive investment it takes on the parents' part. Because of these facts, we cannot treat education in America like in other markets because education is not a market.

Broad-based privatization and school voucher systems concern me for this very reason. How can parents shop for schools using private or tax-payer-funded accounts when doing so is so inconvenient? Why should American taxpayer money go into funding family accounts that will be used for nonsecular private schools that are antithetical to our nation's values? How do parents know they made the right decision for their child and understand those metrics well enough? What about those who need help to afford private schools or shop for them? Do they stick with their nearby school while higher-income families can send their children to private schools and get a higher quality of education?

I get that school voucher systems can promote competition in theory, but according to this article that does not seem to be the case and tends to harm public schools as a result.

Marketization and privatization of schooling aren't viable options. While I prefer less government intervention and market-oriented solutions for most issues, education doesn't play by those rules. Better funding for public schools and incremental initiatives should be the way forward. Incorporating more open-note exams and project-based learning impacts students positively.

That's it for my brain dump. Please let me know if I need to be on the right track or if I need to be corrected. I will read every comment and consider your perspective. Thanks to those who got to the bottom and read everything.

Alexis de Tocqueville on the French conquest of Algeria.

Bonus passage:

"You remember, Monsieur, what I told you before that the whole civil and military government of the Regency was in the hands of the Turks. As soon as we were masters of Algiers, we hastened to gather every last Turk, from the Dey to the last soldier of his militia, and we transported this crowd to the coast of Asia. In order to better remove the vestiges of the enemy's domination, we proceeded to tear up or burn all written documents and administrative registers, authentic or not, which could have perpetuated a trace of what had come before us. The conquest was a new era, and for fear of irrationally mixing the past with the present, we even destroyed a large number of the streets of Algiers, in order to rebuild them according to our methods, and we gave French names to all those whom we allowed to remain...

What was the result of all this? You can easily guess.

The Turkish government possessed in Algiers a great number of houses and in the plain a multitude of estates; but their titles of ownership have disappeared in the universal wreck of the old order of things. It so happened that the French administration, knowing neither what belonged to it nor what had remained in the rightful possession of the vanquished, lacked everything or believed itself reduced to seizing at random that which it needed, in defiance of law and rights.

The Turkish government was peacefully receiving the proceeds of certain taxes which, through ignorance, we were unable to raise in their stead, and we had to draw the money we needed from France or extort it from our unfortunate subjects in ways far more Turkish than any Turk has ever used.

If our ignorance has thus made the French government irregular and oppressive in Algiers, it has made all government beyond there impossible."

Taken from his second letter on Algeria.

The 18th-century Holy Roman Empire saw the rise of the "enlightened despots," who claimed absolute power but said that they used it for the good of the people. There are a lot of ironies. By that period, the Holy Roman Emperor didn't hold that much power (as Voltaire said, "neither holy nor Roman nor an empire"). The idea obviously doesn't lead to a stable free society, as the rulers are "enlightened" only as long as they choose to be. Joseph II introduced some real reforms but ultimately declared his reign a failure.

What I'm wondering about, though, is what philosophers rulers such as Maria Theresa and Joseph II drew on. Kant was the most prominent German enlightenment philosopher, but his views emphasized freedom over the good of all. The closest fit I know of was Hobbes, who was English. I haven't found any clear information on the "enlightened despots'" philosophical roots. Any clues?

Brief Overview:

• Fundamental Principles: national sovereignty, working-class empowerment, anti-elite/anti-establishment, local governance

• Political Ideologies: Blue collar populism, civic and economic nationalism, constitutionalism

• Key Policy Goals: give nearly all of the power back to the states and local governments; secure the borders; secure energy independence and energy dominance.

• Economic Policy: emphasize balance between free-market principles and government intervention to prioritize the interests of working class and domestic industries. Advocate for fair competition, trustbusting, job creation, and investment in critical infrastructure

• Social Policy: prioritize well-being of all citizens by advocating for policies that promote upward mobility, support for the working class, and ensure equal access to opportunities, liberties, and services; balance traditional values with societal progress and diversity.

• Foreign Policy: focus on protecting national security, national interests, and the American working class;

Economic System

• Focus on limited government intervention, free-market principles
• Prioritize interests of working class, small businesses, and domestic/local industries
• Fair competition and decentralized economic power, wealth, and property; oppose concentration of wealth, property, and power.
• Oppose the elite, big business, and end collusion of the elite and big business with government
• Supports regulation that protects environment, wildlife, small business, the working class, and ensures transparency
• Oppose regulation that unnecessarily stifles the economy and hurts small businesses
• Focus on job creation, fair labor practices, and workforce development
• Implement protectionist measures, tax cuts, and strategic deregulation
• Invest in local communities, infrastructure, and national security/defense

Social Issues and Policies

• Prioritize well-being and interests of the working class and local communities
• Promote national unity and social cohesion
• Advocate for inclusive policies that benefit all citizens (equal access for all to good education, healthcare, employment opportunities, and public services)
• Address economic inequality and support upward mobility (focus on opportunities and removing the obstacles and roadblocks for individuals to attain success)
• Foster a sense of community and belonging, encourage civic engagement and participation.
• Invest in education, healthcare, and social services at local levels
• Emphasize and protect individual rights and freedoms
• Balance traditional values with societal progress
• Strive for local consensus-building and compromise in policy-making

Foreign Policy

• Prioritize protection of national sovereignty, economic independence, energy dominance/independence, territorial integrity, and safety of citizens and their liberties against all threats
• Emphasize fair and reciprocal trade agreements that benefit domestic industries and workers while promoting economic growth and stability
• Exercise restraint in foreign interventions and military engagements; when intervention is necessary, we should act powerfully, swiftly, and strategically
• Invest in modernizing defense capabilities, maintaining military preparedness, and adapting to evolving security threats.

are they considered public good ? and necessary for society ? should public libraries be privatised ?

I am looking for books and/or articles that defend classical liberalism and limited government using arguments from hard sciences or logic/math.

For example, we know that finding market equillibria is an NP-hard problem, which means it probably can't be exactly solved in a human lifetime. Although it is true that that also means the market can't solve it exactly, the market already uses heuristics to solve it approximately whereas we have no idea how to do this for central planning, no proof of concept.

Chaos theory means macro-economic predictions, especially long term, are going to be bullshit. That severely limits the state and central banks' capacities to devise rational macroeconomic policy. Chaos theory also means it is incredibly hard to measure the welfare impact of public policy.

Game theory teaches us that agents will adapt to public policy and that they will be incredibly hard to predict, if not impossible. That makes it nearly impossible, in some cases, to know the effect a social program will have.

Do you know of anything else ? Do you know authors that have explored this question ? Basically I want to apply what we know about the limits of human reason and science to state to make the case that it is very limited. Let me know if you know anything.

Hi, can i have your 2 minutes? So, I am owner of a discord based, US UN Mock Government based in 1996. We have Events, User Interaction with dice rolls, All 50 states opened for elections, all positions opened, media, judiciary, custom parties, pass laws you want and be the politician you want. Would you be interested to try?

Link- https://discord.com/invite/9n4kWDuV

Great article which explains why the popular notion that incomes have stagnated is wrong.