The Liberal 19th Century

The Liberal Epoch: Analyzing the 19th Century Through a Contemporary Lens

Many libertarians and classical liberals regard the 19th century as a pivotal era for liberalism in the West. This period is often highlighted for its significant advancements in individual freedoms and economic liberties. However, it is crucial to recognize the darker aspects of this century, including slavery, the Jim Crow laws, and colonial oppression. Notably, the control of trade derived from these colonies faced critical examination from thinkers like Adam Smith, whose famous work, the Wealth of Nations (1776), criticized such practices.

It’s important to note that the liberal progress of the 19th century was not uniform across all nations. For instance, the trajectory of liberalism began later in some countries, such as France, while its decline occurred prematurely in others, like Germany. In the UK, significant legislative changes—such as the abolition of the Corn Laws—did not occur until mid-century. By the century’s end, British libertarians were expressing a sense of pessimism about the future. This is explored in The Individualists by Matt Zwolinski and John Tomasi, which I recently reviewed in Regulation.

Despite these complexities, the author Anthony de Jasay interprets the 19th century as an era of genuine liberalism, albeit a fleeting one. In his influential book Against Politics (see my review on Econlib), he articulates this sentiment clearly:

It is to history taking its time that we owe thanks for the brilliant but passing nineteenth-century interlude in Western Civilization, with limited government and assured-looking private sovereignty of everybody’s own decisions over crucial domains of economic and social life.

The United Kingdom notably advanced in liberalism during this period. In his work English History 1914–1945 (1965, Oxford University Press), historian A.J.P. Taylor offers a compelling glimpse into life in England prior to World War I. His observations may echo sentiments found in John Maynard Keynes’ The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919). The opening passage of Taylor’s book is striking and merits extended citation, as it reflects the sense of loss for individual liberty:

Until August 1914, a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state beyond the post office and the policeman. He could live where he liked and as he liked. He had no official number or identity card. He could travel abroad or leave his country for ever without a passport or any sort of official permission.

He could exchange his money for any other currency without restriction or limit. He could buy goods from any country in the world on the same terms as he bought goods at home. For that matter, a foreigner could spend his life in this country without permit and without informing the police. Unlike the countries of the European continent, the state did not require its citizens to perform military service. Only those helped the state who wished to do so. The Englishman paid taxes on a modest scale… rather less than 8 per cent. of national income.

Despite this portrait of relative freedom, a more interventionist trend was emerging. Although advancements were made in public education and limited social assistance, certain societal norms constrained liberty, particularly for women and marginalized groups.

The state intervened to prevent the citizen from eating adulterated food or contracting certain infectious diseases. It imposed safety rules in factories, and prevented women, and adult males in some industries, from working excessive hours. The state saw to it that children received education up to the age of 13. Since 1 January 1909, it provided a meager pension for the needy over the age of 70. Since 1911, it helped to ensure certain classes of workers against sickness and unemployment. This tendency towards more state action was increasing. Expenditure on social services had roughly doubled since the Liberals took office in 1905. Still, broadly speaking, the state acted only to help those who could not help themselves. It left the adult citizen alone.

A.J.P. Taylor remains a contentious figure, having experienced shifts in ideology—from a youthful membership in the British Communist Party to socialism throughout his life. His conception of English liberty before WWI prompts reflection on a pivotal question: do socialists misunderstand that individual liberty cannot exist without economic freedom, while conservatives often struggle to comprehend the essence of that economic freedom in relation to individual liberty?

RECENT POSTS