Here is your essay on the characteristics of the Liberal – Marxist traditions.
The Liberal-Marxist tradition is distinctly a part of the modern civilization and consequently, shares a common ground with some of its central premises. This tradition sometimes attempts, methodologically or substantively, to coopt perspectives and elements from the pre-modern civilizations. Sometimes, an attempt may be made to construct a pre-history of this tradition by digging into the past.
In the West, some of the scholars have traced Liberal and Marxist ideas and elements of ways of life among the Greeks and in early Christianity. Similarly in India, scholars have found strong traces of this tradition in Buddhism. Nevertheless, it does not make this tradition pre-modern, but retrieves akin elements from the past into its fold while remaining essentially modern.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The Liberal-Marxist tradition is grounded on collective human experience, reason and argumentation much more than pre-modern political resting on custom, usage, authority or revelation. The medieval Christian tradition for instance, saw revelation as a uniquely privileged site providing access to truth. The Marxist – Liberal tradition may think that revelation cannot be a source of truth as far as constituting the common good is concerned and may such contending conceptions of it.
Being reflective about their own understanding, the Liberal and Marxist traditions could not prevent investigation into their own premises, formulations and recommendations and in the process, led to reformulation of their own positions and that too drastically, at times. The freedoms to which these traditions were committed to such as speech, expression, access to knowledge and information inevitably opened the door wide to pluralism of beliefs and values, which were in tune with free inquiry.
Both reflective understanding and personal liberty, therefore, led to pluralism of beliefs and practices.
Liberals and Marxists agreed on a large number of issues as significant. In many respects, they shared a common conception of human beings and the centrality of man on earth. Both considered their explorations as reasonable and warded off prejudices and localisms of all sorts. Both of them believed that freedom and a political community conductive to freedom are values to be greatly cherished. They upheld the essential equality among human beings and the singular role that man is called upon to play in nature.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Both of them believed that political participation opens up prospects for greatly enriching life. Ultimately, human beings have to take charge of their collective life and destiny and cannot let this charge be handed over to an all merciful God or to the bounty of public institutions. However, they profoundly disagreed on the understanding and implications of issues. They disagreed on the prioritization of concerns and mapped their consequences differently. Sometimes, one of them ignored an issue, which the other thought as significant.
The Liberal-Marxist tradition as a whole saw the role of the masses positively. They were committed to draw the masses actively into the political domain and determine its course. They, however, differed on how to conceptualize the masses and how they could assert their say. Sometimes, their positions varied overtime.
Liberals who were initially enthusiastic about drawing the masses into the political arena against autocracy and political fragmentation started dragging their feet on the question once they were in power and resorted to the language of the rule of law and constitutionalism.
Similarly, Marxists renounced the language of self rule and resorted to that of responsibility once the Marxist parties were in power.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The Liberal-Marxist tradition is directed at understanding and stipulating the basis, the extent and limits of public authority rather than merely attuning to it. Attunement to the political system as a whole and the role one was expected to play in it were the hallmark of the pre-liberal-Marxist traditions.
The basis, the extent and limits of public authority rather than merely attuning to it.
Attunement to the political system as a whole and the role one was expected to play in it were the hallmark of the pre-liberal-Marxist traditions.
The pre-modern political traditions were confined in space and time. On the contrary, the Liberal-Marxist traditions, proposed, procedurally and substantially, universal designs of organising and re-organising world.