Social liberalism

"Social liberals" redirects here. For the Austrian political party, see The Social Liberals.

This article is about the variety of liberalism that supports a regulated market economy and the expansion of civil and political rights. For the branch of liberalism that advocates civil liberties with an emphasis on economic freedom, see Classical liberalism. For the ideology that stresses the freedom of individuals from traditional cultural norms, see Cultural liberalism. For the political philosophy that incorporates liberal principles in socialism, see Liberal socialism. For advocacy of social reform, see Progressivism.

Social liberalism^[a] (German: Sozialliberalismus, Spanish: socioliberalismo, Dutch: Sociaalliberalisme) is a political philosophy and variety of liberalism that endorses social justice, social services, a mixed economy, and the expansion of civil and political rights, as opposed to classical liberalism which supports unregulated laissez faire capitalism with very few government services.

Economically, it is based on the social market economy, and views the common good as harmonious with the individual's freedom.^[9] Social liberals overlap with social democrats in accepting economic intervention more than other liberals;^[10] its importance is considered auxiliary compared to social democrats.^[11] Ideologies that emphasize its economic policy include welfare liberalism,^[12] New Deal liberalism in the United States,^[13] and Keynesian liberalism.^[14] Cultural liberalism is an ideology that highlights its cultural aspects. The world has widely adopted social liberal policies.^[15]

Social liberal ideas and parties tend to be considered centre to centre-left, although there are deviations from these positions to both the political left or right.^{[b][10][16][17]} Addressing economic and social issues, such as poverty, welfare, infrastructure, health care and education using government intervention, while emphasising individual rights and autonomy, are expectations under a social liberal government.^[18][19][20] In modern political discourse, social liberalism is associated with progressivism,^[21][22][23] a left-liberalism contrasted to the right-leaning neoliberalism,^[24] and combines support for a mixed economy with cultural liberalism.^[25]

Social liberalism may also refer to American progressive stances on sociocultural issues,^[26] such as reproductive rights and same-sex marriage, in contrast with American social conservatism. Cultural liberalism is often referred to as social liberalism because it expresses the social dimension of liberalism; however, it is not the same as the broader political ideology known as social liberalism. In American politics, a social liberal may hold either conservative (economic liberal) or liberal (economic progressive) views on fiscal policy.^[27]

Origins

Main article: History of liberalism

United Kingdom

 

Leonard Hobhouse was one of the originators of social liberalism, notably through his book Liberalism, published in 1911.

By the end of the 19th century, downturns in economic growth challenged the principles of classical liberalism, a growing awareness of poverty and unemployment present within modern industrial cities, and the agitation of organised labour. A significant political reaction against the changes introduced by industrialisation and laissez-faire capitalism came from one-nation conservatives concerned about social balance and the introduction of the famous Education Act 1870. However, socialism later became a more important force for change and reform. Some Victorian writers—including Charles Dickens, Thomas Carlyle and Matthew Arnold—became early influential critics of social injustice.^[28]

John Stuart Mill contributed enormously to liberal thought by combining elements of classical liberalism with what eventually became known as the new liberalism. Mill developed this philosophy by liberalising the concept of consequentialism to promote a rights based system.^[29] He also developed his liberal dogma by combining the idea of using a utilitarian foundation to base upon the idea of individual rights.^[30] The new liberals tried to adapt the old language of liberalism to confront these difficult circumstances, which they believed could only be resolved through a broader and more interventionist conception of the state. Ensuring that individuals did not physically interfere with each other or merely by impartially having formulated and applied laws could not establish an equal right to liberty. More positive and proactive measures were required to ensure that every individual would have an equal opportunity for success.^[31]

New Liberals

Not to be confused with The New Liberals in Australia.

 

Thomas Hill Green

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a group of British thinkers known as the New Liberals made a case against laissez-faire classical liberalism. It argued in favour of state intervention in social, economic and cultural life. What they proposed is now called social liberalism.^[1] The New Liberals, including intellectuals Thomas Hill Green, Leonard Hobhouse and John A. Hobson, saw individual liberty achievable only under favourable social and economic circumstances.^[2] In their view, the poverty, squalor, and ignorance in which many people lived made it impossible for freedom and individuality to flourish. New Liberals believed through collective action coordinated by a strong, welfare-oriented and interventionist state could alleviate these conditions.

The Liberal governments of Henry Campbell-Bannerman and H. H. Asquith, mainly thanks to Chancellor of the Exchequer and later Prime Minister David Lloyd George, established the foundations of the welfare state in the United Kingdom before World War I. The comprehensive welfare state built in the United Kingdom after World War II, although primarily accomplished by the Labour Party's Attlee ministry, was significantly designed by two Liberals, namely John Maynard Keynes (who laid the foundations in economics with the Keynesian Revolution) and William Beveridge (whose Beveridge Report was used to design the welfare system).^[2]

Historian Peter Weiler has argued:

Although still partially informed by older Liberal concerns for character, self-reliance, and the capitalist market, this legislation nevertheless marked a significant shift in Liberal approaches to the state and social reform, approaches that later governments would slowly expand and that would grow into the welfare state after the Second World War. What was new in these reforms was the underlying assumption that the state could be a positive force, that the measure of individual freedom ... was not how much the state left people alone, but whether he gave them the capacity to fill themselves as individuals.^[32][33]

Germany

In 1860s Germany, left-liberal politicians like Max Hirsch, Franz Duncker, and Hermann Schulze-Delitzsch established trade unions—modelled on their British counterparts—to help workers improve working and economic conditions through reconciliation of interests and cooperation with their employers rather than class struggle. Schulze-Delitzsch is also the founding father of the German cooperative movement and the organiser of the world's first credit unions. Some liberal economists, such as Lujo Brentano or Gerhart von Schulze-Gävernitz, established the Verein für Socialpolitik (German Economic Association) in 1873 to promote social reform based on the historical school of economics and therefore rejecting classical economics, proposing a third way between Manchester Liberalism and socialist revolution in the 1871-founded German Empire.

However, the German left-liberal movement fragmented into wings and new parties over the 19th century. The main objectives of the left-liberal parties—the German Progress Party and its successors—were free speech, freedom of assembly, representative government, secret and equal but obligation-tied suffrage, and protection of private property. At the same time, they were strongly opposed to creating a welfare state, which they called state socialism. The main differences between the left-liberal parties were:

• The national ambitions.
• The different substate people's goals.
• Free trade against Schutzzollpolitik.
• The building of the national economy.

The term 'social liberalism' (German: Sozialliberalismus) was used first in 1891 by Austria-Hungarian economist and journalist Theodor Hertzka.^[34][c] Subsequently, in 1893, the historian and social reformer Ignaz Jastrow also used this term and joined the German Economic Association. He published the socialist democratic manifesto "Social-liberal: Tasks for Liberalism in Prussia" to create an "action group" for the general people's welfare in the Social Democratic Party of Germany, which they rejected.^[35]

 

Friedrich Naumann

The National-Social Association, founded by the Protestant pastor Friedrich Naumann also maintained contacts with the left liberals.^[36] He tried to draw workers away from Marxism by proposing a mix of nationalism and Protestant-Christian-value-inflected social liberalism to overcome class antagonisms by non-revolutionary means. Naumann called this a "proletarian-bourgeois integral liberalism". Although the party could not win any seats and soon dissolved, he remained influential in theoretical German left-liberalism.

In the Weimar Republic, the German Democratic Party was founded and came into an inheritance of the left-liberal past and had a leftist social wing^[37] and a rightist economic wing but heavily favoured the democratic constitution over a monarchist one. Its ideas of a socially balanced economy with solidarity, duty, and rights among all workers struggled due to the economic sanctions of the Treaty of Versailles, but it influenced local cooperative enterprises.^[38][39]

After 1945, the Free Democrats included most of the social liberals while others joined the Christian Democratic Union of Germany. Until the 1960s, post-war ordoliberalism was the model for Germany. It had a theoretical social liberal influence based on duty and rights.^[40] As the Free Democrats discarded social liberal ideas in a more conservative and economically liberal approach in 1982,^[41] some members left the party and formed the social liberal Liberal Democrats.^[42][43]

France

In France, solidaristic thinkers, including Alfred Fouillée and Émile Durkheim, developed the social-liberal theory in the Third Republic. Sociology inspired them, and they influenced radical politicians like Léon Bourgeois. They explained that a more extensive division of labour caused more opportunity and individualism and inspired more complex interdependence. They argued that the individual had a debt to society, promoting progressive taxation to support public works and welfare schemes. However, they wanted the state to coordinate rather than manage, encouraging cooperative insurance schemes among individuals. Their main objective was to remove barriers to social mobility rather than create a welfare state.^[44]

 

Franklin D. Roosevelt, the 32nd President of the United States, whose New Deal domestic policies defined American liberalism for the middle third of the 20th century

United States

Main article: Modern liberalism in the United States

Social liberalism was a term in the United States to differentiate it from classical liberalism or laissez-faire. It dominated political and economic thought for several years until the word branched off from it around the Great Depression and the New Deal.^[45][46] In the 1870s and the 1880s, the American economists Richard Ely, John Bates Clark, and Henry Carter Adams—influenced both by socialism and the Evangelical Protestant movement—castigated the conditions caused by industrial factories and expressed sympathy toward labour unions. However, none developed a systematic political philosophy, and they later abandoned their flirtations with socialist thinking. In 1883, Lester Frank Ward published the two-volume Dynamic Sociology. He formalized the basic tenets of social liberalism while at the same time attacking the laissez-faire policies advocated by Herbert Spencer and William Graham Sumner. The historian Henry Steele Commager ranked Ward alongside William James, John Dewey, and Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and called him the father of the modern welfare state.^[47] A writer from 1884 until the 1930s, John Dewey—an educator influenced by Hobhouse, Green, and Ward—advocated socialist methods to achieve liberal goals. John Dewey's expanding popularity as an economist also coincided with the greater Georgist movement that rose in the 1910s, pinnacling with the presidency of Woodrow Wilson.^[48] America later incorporated some social liberal ideas into the New Deal,^[49] which developed as a response to the Great Depression when Franklin D. Roosevelt came into office.

Implementation

 

David Lloyd George, who became closely associated with this new liberalism and vigorously supported expanding social welfare

The welfare state grew gradually and unevenly from the late 19th century but fully developed following World War II, along with the mixed market economy and general welfare capitalism.^[50] Also called embedded liberalism, social liberal policies gained broad support across the political spectrum because they reduced society's disruptive and polarizing tendencies without challenging the capitalist economic system. Businesses accepted social liberalism in the face of widespread dissatisfaction with the boom and bust cycle of the earlier financial system as it seemed to them to be a lesser evil than more left-wing modes of government. Characteristics of social liberalism were cooperation between big business, government, and labour unions. Governments could assume a vital role because the wartime economy had strengthened their power, but the extent to which this occurred varied considerably among Western democracies.^[51] Social liberalism is also a generally internationalist ideology.^[52] Social liberalism has also historically been an advocate for liberal feminism among other forms social progress.^[53]

Social liberals tend to find a compromise between the perceived extremes of unrestrained capitalism and state socialism to create an economy built on regulated capitalism.^[54] Due to a reliance on what they believe to be a too centralized government to achieve its goals, critics have called this strain of liberalism a more authoritarian ideological position compared to the original schools of liberal thought, especially in the United States, where conservatives have called presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson authoritarians.^{[55][better source needed][56][undue weight? ]}

United Kingdom

 

British leaflet from the Liberal Party expressing support for the National Health Insurance Act of 1911 and the legislation provided benefits to sick and unemployed workers, marking a major milestone in the development of social welfare

The first notable implementation of social liberal policies occurred under the Liberal Party in Britain from 1906 until 1914. These initiatives became known as the Liberal welfare reforms. The main elements included pensions for poor older adults, and health, sickness, and unemployment insurance. These changes were accompanied by progressive taxation, particularly in the People's Budget of 1909. The old system of charity relying on the Poor Laws and supplemented by private charity, public cooperatives, and private insurance companies was in crisis, giving the state added impetus for reform. The Liberal Party caucus elected in 1906 also contained more professionals, including academics and journalists, sympathetic to social liberalism. The large business owners had mostly deserted the Liberals for the Conservatives, the latter becoming the favourite party for commercial interests. Both business interests and trade unions regularly opposed the reforms. Liberals most identified with these reforms were Prime Minister H. H. Asquith, John Maynard Keynes, David Lloyd George (especially as Chancellor of the Exchequer), and Winston Churchill (as President of the Board of Trade), in addition to the civil servant (and later Liberal MP) William Beveridge.^[57]

Most of the social democratic parties in Europe (notably the British Labour Party) have taken on strong influences of social liberal ideology. Despite Britain's two major parties coming from the traditions of socialism and conservatism, the most substantive political and economic debates of recent times were between social liberal and classical liberal concepts.^[58]

Germany

 

Alexander Rüstow

Alexander Rüstow, a German economist, first proposed the German variant of economically social liberalism. In 1932, he dubbed this kind of social liberalism neoliberalism while speaking at the Social Policy Association. However, that term now carries a meaning different from the one proposed by Rüstow. Rüstow wanted an alternative to socialism and the classical liberal economics developed in the German Empire. In 1938, Rüstow met with various economic thinkers—including Ludwig Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and Wilhelm Röpke—to determine how and what could renew liberalism. Rüstow advocated a powerful state to enforce free markets and state intervention to correct market failures. However, Mises argued that monopolies and cartels operated because of state intervention and protectionism and claimed that the only legitimate role for the state was to abolish barriers to market entry. He viewed Rüstow's proposals as negating market freedom and saw them as similar to socialism.^[40]

Following World War II, the West German government adopted Rüstow's neoliberalism, now usually called ordoliberalism or the social market economy, under Ludwig Erhard. He was the Minister of Economics and later became Chancellor. Erhard lifted price controls and introduced free markets. While Germany's post-war economic recovery was due to these policies, the welfare state—which Bismarck had established—became increasingly costly.^[40]

Turkey

Main article: Kemalism

The Kemalist economic model was designed by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in 1930s, founder of the Republic of Turkey, after an unsuccessful attempt to embrace a regulated market economy from İzmir Economic Congress until the 1929 Depression. He put the principle of "etatism" in his Six Arrows and stated that etatism was a unique economic system for Turkey and that it was different from socialism, communism, and collectivism.^[59] Atatürk explained his economic idea as follows:

State can't take the place of individuals, but, it must take into consideration the individuals to make them improve and develop theirselves. Etatism includes the work that individuals won't do because they can't make profit or the work which are necessary for national interests. Just as it is the duty of the state to protect the freedom and independence of the country and to regulate internal affairs, the state must take care of the education and health of its citizens. The state must take care of the roads, railways, telegraphs, telephones, animals of the country, all kinds of vehicles and the general wealth of the nation to protect the peace and security of the country. During the administration and protection of the country, the things we just counted are more important than cannons, rifles and all kinds of weapons. (...) Private interests are generally the opposite of the general interests. Also, private interests are based on rivalries. But, you can't create a stable economy only with this. People who think like that are delusional and they will be a failure. (...) And, work of an individual must stay as the main basis of economic growth. Not preventing an individual's work and not obstructing the individual's freedom and enterprise with the state's own activities is the main basis of the principle of democracy.^[60]

Moreover, Atatürk said this in his opening speech on 1 November 1937: "Unless there is an absolute necessity, the markets can't be intervened; also, no markets can be completely free."^[61] Also it was said by İsmet İnönü that Atatürk's principle of etatism was Keynesian and a Turkish variant of New Deal.^[62]

Rest of Europe

The post-war governments of other countries in Western Europe also followed social liberal policies. These policies were implemented primarily by Christian democrats and social democrats as liberal parties in Europe declined in strength from their peak in the 19th century.^[63]

United States

Main article: Modern liberalism in the United States

American political discourse resisted this social turn in European liberalism. While the economic policies of the New Deal appeared Keynesian, there was no revision of liberal theory in favour of more significant state initiatives. Even though the United States lacked an effective socialist movement, New Deal policies often appeared radical and were attacked by the right. American liberalism would eventually evolve into a more anti-communist ideology as a result.^[64] American exceptionalism was likely the reason for the separate development of modern liberalism in the United States, which kept mainstream American ideology within a narrow range.^[65]

John Rawls' principal work, A Theory of Justice (1971), can be considered a flagship exposition of social liberal thinking, noted for its use of analytic philosophy and advocating the combination of individual freedom and a fairer distribution of resources.^[66] According to Rawls, every individual should be allowed to choose and pursue their conception of what is desirable. At the same time, the greater society must maintain a socially just distribution of goods. Rawls argued that differences in material wealth are tolerable if general economic growth and wealth also benefit the poorest.^[67] A Theory of Justice countered utilitarian thinking in the tradition of Jeremy Bentham, instead following the Kantian concept of a social contract, picturing society as a mutual agreement between rational citizens, producing rights and duties as well as establishing and defining roles and tasks of the state. Rawls put the equal liberty principle in the first place, providing every person with equal access to the same set of fundamental liberties, followed by the fair equality of opportunity and difference, thus allowing social and economic inequalities under the precondition that privileged positions are accessible to everyone, that everyone has equal opportunities and that even the least advantaged members of society benefit from this framework. This framework repeated itself in the equation of Justice as Fairness. Rawls proposed these principles not just to adherents of liberalism but as a basis for all democratic politics, regardless of ideology. The work advanced social liberal ideas immensely within the 1970s political and philosophic academia.^[68] Rawls may therefore be a "patron saint" of social liberalism.^[58]

Decline

Following economic problems in the 1960s and 1970s, liberal thought underwent some transformation. Keynesian financial management faced criticism for interfering with the free market. At the same time, increased welfare spending funded by higher taxes prompted fears of lower investment, lower consumer spending, and the creation of a "dependency culture." Trade unions often caused high wages and industrial disruption, while total employment was considered unsustainable. Writers such as Milton Friedman and Samuel Brittan, whom Friedrich Hayek influenced, advocated a reversal of social liberalism. Their policies—often called neoliberalism—had a significant influence on Western politics, most notably on the governments of United Kingdom Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and the United States President Ronald Reagan. They pursued policies of deregulation of the economy and reduction in spending on social services.^[15]

Part of the reason for the collapse of the social liberal coalition was a challenge in the 1960s and 1970s from financial interests that could operate independently of national governments. A related reason was the comparison of ideas such as socialized medicine, advocated by politicians such as Franklin D. Roosevelt, facing criticisms and being dubbed as socialist by conservatives during the midst of the Red Scare, notably by the previously mentioned Reagan.^[69] Another cause was the decline of organized labour which had formed part of the coalition but was also a support for left-wing ideologies challenging the liberal consensus. Related to this were the downfall of working-class consciousness and the growth of the middle class. The push by the United States and the United Kingdom, which had been least accepting of social liberalism for trade liberalization, further eroded support.^[70]

Contemporary revival of social liberal thought

From the end of the 20th century, at the same time that it was losing political influence, social liberalism experienced an intellectual revival with several substantial authors, including John Rawls (political philosophy), Amartya Sen (philosophy and economy), Ronald Dworkin (philosophy of law), Martha Nussbaum (philosophy), Bruce Ackerman (constitutional law), and others.^[71]

Parties and organisations

In Europe, social liberal parties tend to be small or medium-sized centrist and centre-left parties.^[72] Examples of successful European social liberal parties participating in government coalitions at national or regional levels include the Liberal Democrats in the United Kingdom, the Democrats 66 in the Netherlands, and the Danish Social Liberal Party. In continental European politics, social liberal parties are integrated into the Renew Europe group in the European Parliament, the third biggest group in the parliament, and includes social liberal parties, market liberal parties, and centrist parties. Other groups such as the European People's Party, the Greens–European Free Alliance, and the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats also house some political parties with social-liberal factions.

In North America, social liberalism (as Europe would refer to it) tends to be the dominant form of liberalism present, so in common parlance, "liberal" refers to social liberals. In Canada, social liberalism is held by the Liberal Party of Canada, while in the United States, social liberalism is a significant force within the Democratic Party.

Giving an exhaustive list of social liberal parties worldwide is difficult, mainly because political organisations are not always ideologically pure, and party ideologies often change over time. However, peers such as the Africa Liberal Network, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party, the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats, the European Liberal Forum, the Liberal International, and the Liberal Network for Latin America or scholars usually accept them as parties who are following social liberalism as a core ideology.

Social liberal parties or parties with social liberal factions

Social liberal political parties that are more left-biased than general centre-left parties are not described here. (See list of progressive parties)

• Åland: Liberals for Åland^[73]
• Argentina: Radical Civic Union^[74]
• Australia: Liberal Party of Australia (factions),^[75][76] Australian Labor Party (factions)^{[77][78][79][80]}
• Bahamas: Progressive Liberal Party^[81]
• Belgium: DéFI,^[82] Party for Freedom and Progress, Vivant^[83]
• Bosnia and Herzegovina: Our Party^[84]
• Brazil : Cidadania, Brazilian Social Democracy Party
• Canada: Liberal Party of Canada^{[85][86][87][88]}
• Chile: Radical Party of Chile, Liberal Party of Chile
• Croatia: Croatian People's Party – Liberal Democrats,^[89] Centre,^[90][91] Civic Liberal Alliance,^[89] Istrian Democratic Assembly^[89][92]
• Czech Republic: Czech Pirate Party^[93]
• Denmark: Danish Social Liberal Party^{[94][95][96][97]}
• Egypt: Constitution Party^[98]
• Estonia: Estonian Centre Party,^[99][100] Estonian Greens,^[101] Estonia 200^[102][103]
• Faroe Islands: Self-Government Party^[104]
• Finland: Centre Party,^[105] Green League,^[105] National Coalition Party,^[106] Swedish People's Party of Finland^[107]
• France: Renaissance,^[108] Radical Party of the Left,^[109] Territories of Progress, The New Democrats^[110]
• Germany: Alliance 90/The Greens,^[111] Liberal Democrats,^[112][113] Social Democratic Party of Germany (factions)^[114][d].
• Greenland: Democrats^[115]
• Hungary: Democratic Coalition^[116]
• Iceland: Bright Future^[117]
• India: Indian National Congress^[118][119]
• Indonesia: Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle
• Israel: Israel Resilience Party,^[120] Yesh Atid^[121]
• Italy: Democratic Party (factions),^[122] Italia Viva,^[123] Italian Republican Party,^[124][125] Action
• Japan: Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan^[126]
• Kosovo: Democratic Party of Kosovo^[127]
• Latvia: Development/For!^[100]
• Lesotho: Revolution for Prosperity^[128]
• Luxembourg: Democratic Party^{[129][130][131]}
• Malaysia: Democratic Action Party,^[132] People's Justice Party^[133]
• Montenegro: Positive Montenegro,^[134] United Reform Action^[135]
• Morocco: Citizens' Forces^[136][137]
• Myanmar: National League for Democracy,^[138] National Democratic Force^[139]
• Netherlands: Democrats 66^{[94][95][140]}
• New Zealand: New Zealand Labour Party (factions)^[141]
• Norway: Liberal Party^[142][143]
• Philippines: Liberal Party^[144]
• Poland: Polish Initiative, Your Movement, Union of European Democrats^[145]
• Portugal: Together for the People^[146]
• Romania: PRO Romania^[147]
• Russia: Yabloko^[148][149]
• Serbia: Democratic Party^[150]
• Slovakia: Progressive Slovakia^[151][152]
• Slovenia: List of Marjan Šarec,^[153] Party of Alenka Bratušek^[153]
• South Africa: Democratic Alliance
• South Korea: Democratic Party of Korea,^[154] Justice Party^[155][156]
• Sweden: Liberals (factions),^{[157][158][159]} Centre Party^{[160][158][159]}
• Taiwan: Democratic Progressive Party^[161]
• Trinidad and Tobago: People's National Movement^[162]
• Turkey: Good Party^[163] Democracy and Progress Party^[164]
• United Kingdom: Liberal Democrats,^{[94][95][165]} Liberal Party^[166]
• United States: Democratic Party^[167][168]

Historical social liberal parties or parties with social liberal factions

• Andorra: Democratic Renewal^[169]
• Australia: Australian Democrats^{[170][171][172]}
• Belgium: Spirit^[173]
• France: Radical Movement^[174]
• Germany: Free-minded People's Party,^{[175][176][177]} German Democratic Party,^[178][179] German People's Party,^{[180][181][182]} Progressive People's Party^[183]
• Greece: The River^[184]
• Hungary: Alliance of Free Democrats^[185]
• Iceland: Liberal Party,^[186] Union of Liberals and Leftists^[187]
• Israel: Independent Liberals,^[188] Kulanu,^[189] Progressive Party^[188]
• Italy: Action Party,^[190] Radical Party, Italian Liberal Party, Democratic Alliance,^[191] Democratic Union, The Democrats
• Japan: Japan Socialist Party (factions),^{[192][193][194]} Democratic Party of Japan^[195]
• Latvia: Society for Political Change^[196]
• Lithuania: New Union (Social Liberals)^[197]
• Luxembourg: Radical Socialist Party^[198]
• Malta: Democratic Party
• Moldova: Our Moldova Alliance^[199]
• Netherlands: Free-thinking Democratic League^[200]
• Poland: Democratic Party – demokraci.pl,^[201][202] Spring,^[203][204]
• Russian: Constitutional Democratic Party^[205]
• Slovenia: Liberal Democracy of Slovenia,^{[17][97][206]} Zares^[207][208]
• South Korea: Progressive Party (1956), Uri Party, Grand Unified Democratic New Party
• Spain: Union, Progress and Democracy^[209][210]
• Switzerland: Ring of Independents^[211]
• United Kingdom: Liberal Party,^[212] Social Democratic Party^[213][214]

Notable thinkers

Some notable scholars and politicians ordered by date of birth who are generally considered as having made significant contributions to the evolution of social liberalism as a political ideology include:

• Jeremy Bentham^[2] (1748–1832)
• John Stuart Mill^{[2][46][215][216]}
  (1806–1873)
• Thomas Hill Green^{[2][46][217][218][219]} (1836–1882)
• Lester Frank Ward (1841–1913)
• Lujo Brentano^[46] (1844–1931)
• Bernard Bosanquet^[218] (1848–1923)
• Woodrow Wilson^[220] (1856–1924)
• Émile Durkheim^{[221][222][223]}
  (1858–1917)
• John Atkinson Hobson^{[2][217][218][219]} (1858–1940)
• John Dewey^[2][220] (1859–1952)
• Friedrich Naumann^{[224][225][226]}
  (1860–1919)
• Gerhart von Schulze-Gävernitz^[46]
  (1864–1943)
• Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse^{[2][46][217][218][219]}
  (1864–1929)
• Tokuzō Fukuda^[227] (1874–1930)
• William Beveridge^[2][217] (1879–1963)
• Hans Kelsen^[220] (1881–1973)
• Mohammad Mossadegh^[228] (1882–1967)
• John Maynard Keynes^{[2][220][217]}
  (1883–1946)
• Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945)
• Lester B. Pearson (1897–1972)
• Pierre Elliot Trudeau (1919–2000)
• Bertil Ohlin^[229][230] (1899–1979)
• Piero Gobetti^[216] (1901–1926)
• Karl Popper (1902–1994)
• Guido Calogero [it]^[216] (1904–1986)
• Isaiah Berlin^[220] (1909–1997)
• Norberto Bobbio^[220][216] (1909–2004)
• Masao Maruyama^[231] (1914–1996)
• John Rawls^{[2][215][232][233]} (1921–2002)
• Don Chipp^[234] (1925–2006)
• Karl-Hermann Flach^[235] (1929–1973)
• Vlado Gotovac^[236] (1930–2000)
• Richard Rorty^[237] (1931–2007)
• Ronald Dworkin^{[215][216][233]}
  (1931–2013)
• Amartya Sen^{[215][238][239]} (born 1933)
• José G. Merquior^[220][240] (1941–1991)
• Bruce Ackerman^[215][233] (born 1943)
• Roh Moo-hyun^[241] (1946–2009)
• Martha Nussbaum^[238] (born 1947)
• Grigory Yavlinsky^[242] (born 1952)
• Paul Krugman^[243] (born 1953)
• Dirk Verhofstadt^[238] (born 1955)
• Justin Trudeau^[244] (born 1971)
• Robert Biedroń^[245] (born 1976)

See also

• Classical liberalism
• Classical radicalism
• Constitutional liberalism
• Left-libertarianism
• Liberalism by country
• Modern liberalism in the United States
• Neo-libertarianism
• Progressivism
• Social democracy
• Social-liberal coalition
• Social market economy

Notes

1. Also known as new liberalism in the United Kingdom,^[1][2] modern liberalism in the United States (where it is also simply known as liberalism),^[3][4] left-liberalism (German: Linksliberalismus) in Germany,^[5][6][7] and progressive liberalism (Spanish: liberalismo progresista) in Spanish-speaking countries^[8]
2. Such as Belgium's centre to centre-right DéFI, France's centre to centre-right social liberal MoDem, Greenland's centre to centre-right Democrats, Turkey's centre-right Good Party, Poland's centre-left to left-wing liberal Polish Initiative, Taiwan's left-wing liberal Taiwan Statebuilding Party, South Korea's left-wing liberal Progressive Party and Japan's liberal left-wing populist politician Tarō Yamamoto.
3. Hertzka was from Pest, part of Budapest, now the capital of Hungary. At the time of his birth, Hungary was the territory of the Austrian Empire.
4. majority of the SPD politicians with social liberal ideology are members of Seeheimer Kreis wing

References

1. Freeden, Michael (1978). The New Liberalism: An Ideology of Social Reform. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Adams, Ian (2001). Political Ideology Today (Politics Today). Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN 0719060206.
3. Pease, Donald E.; Wiegman, Robyn (eds.) (2002). The Futures of American Studies. Duke University Press. p. 518.
4. Courtland, Shane D.; Gaus, Gerald; Schmidtz, David (2022), "Liberalism", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2022 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, from the original on 22 March 2022, retrieved 16 September 2022
5. Hoensbroech, Paul Kajus Graf (1912). Der Linksliberalismus. Leipzig.
6. Felix Rachfahl (1912). Eugen Richter und der Linksliberalismus im Neuen Reiche. Berlin.
7. Ulrich Zeller (1912). Die Linksliberalen. Munich.
8. José Luis Comellas Del antiguo al nuevo régimen: hasta la muerte de Fernando VII^{[permanent dead link]}, pp. 421. (Spanish)
9. De Ruggiero, Guido (1959). The History of European Liberalism. pp. 155–157.
10. Slomp, Hans (2000). European Politics Into the Twenty-First Century: Integration and Division. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 35. ISBN 0275968146.
11. Margalit, Avishai (2013). "Liberal or Social Democrat?". Dissent. No. Spring 2013. from the original on 20 September 2022. Retrieved 19 September 2022.
12. "Main Ideas of General-welfare Liberalism". www1.udel.edu. from the original on 26 January 2022. Retrieved 19 September 2022.
13. "How Classical Liberalism Morphed Into New Deal Liberalism". Center for American Progress. 26 April 2012. from the original on 20 September 2022. Retrieved 19 September 2022.
14. kanopiadmin (7 April 2010). "Was Keynes a Liberal?". Mises Institute. from the original on 20 September 2022. Retrieved 19 September 2022.
15. Faulks, Keith (10 December 1999). Political Sociology: A Critical Introduction. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 9780748613564. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 10 December 2018 – via Google Books.
16. Hombach, Bodo (2000). The politics of the new centre. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 9780745624600. from the original on 3 August 2009. Retrieved 6 April 2009.
17. Matland, Richard E.; Montgomery, Kathleen A. (2003). Women's access to political power in post-communist Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-924685-4.
18. Rohr, Donald G. (September 1964). "The Origins of Social Liberalism in Germany". The Journal of Economic History. 24 (3). from the original on 8 January 2016. Retrieved 21 May 2013.
19. Gaus, Gerald & Courtland, Shane D. (Spring 2011). "The 'New Liberalism'". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. from the original on 8 September 2018. Retrieved 21 May 2013.
20. Derbyshire, John (12 July 2010). "The origins of social liberalism". New Statesman. from the original on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 21 May 2013.
21. Klaus P. Fischer, ed. (2007). America in White, Black, and Gray: A History of the Stormy 1960s. Bloomsbury Publishing USA. p. 39.
22. Great Courses, ed. (2014). The Modern Political Tradition: Episode 17: Progressivism and New Liberalism. Great Courses.^{[ISBN missing]}
23. Helen Hardacre; Timothy S. George; Keigo Komamura; Franziska Seraphim, eds. (2021). Japanese Constitutional Revisionism and Civic Activism. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 136, 162.^{[ISBN missing]}
24. Muzammil Quraishi, ed. (2020). Towards a Malaysian Criminology: Conflict, Censure and Compromise. Springer Nature. p. 83. ISBN 9781137491015. The urgent need for a meaningful theoretical perspective and research agenda is driven by an observation that both left liberalism (progressivism) and right liberalism (neoliberalism) have neutralised traditional conservative socialist discourses.
25. Joseph M. Hoeffel, ed. (2014). Fighting for the Progressive Center in the Age of Trump. ABC-CLIO. p. 56. Modern American progressive thought combines social liberalism, including its government spending programs and mix of private enterprise and government regulation, with liberal cultural causes including voting rights for minorities, ...^{[ISBN missing]}
26. "They retain meaning across populations and through time. That's the whole point ... | Hacker News". from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
27. Chideya, Farai (2004). "The Red and the Blue: A Divided America". Trust: Reaching the 100 Million Missing Voters and Other Selected Essays. Soft Skull Press. pp. 33–46. ISBN 9781932360264.
28. Richardson, pp. 36–37.
29. "Utilitarianism and the New Liberalism | History of ideas and intellectual history". Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 29 September 2022.
30. Brink, David O. (18 April 2013). "Liberalism, utilitarianism, and rights". Mill's Progressive Principles. pp. 214–233. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199672141.003.0009. ISBN 978-0-19-967214-1. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 30 September 2022.
31. Eatwell, Roger; Wright, Anthony (1999). Contemporary Political Ideologies. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 9780826451736.
32. Weiler, Peter (2016). "New Liberalism". In Leventhal, Fred M., ed. (1995). Twentieth-century Britain: An Encyclopedia. Garland. pp. 564–565.
33. Weiler, Peter (2016). The New Liberalism: Liberal Social Theory in Great Britain, 1889–1914 (2016). Excerpt 19 October 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
34. Theodor Hertzka: Socialdemokratie und Socialliberalismus (German). Dresden/Leipzig: Pierson. 1891.
35. Na, Inho (200). Sozialreform oder Revolution: Gesellschaftspolitische Zukunftsvorstellungen im Naumann-Kreis 1890–1903/04. Tectum Verlag. p. 27.
36. Derman, Joshua (2012), Max Weber in Politics and Social Thought: From Charisma to Canonization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 25
37. Van De Grift, Liesbeth (2012). Securing the Communist State: The Reconstruction of Coercive Institutions in the Soviet Zone of Germany and Romania, 1944-48. Lexington Books. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-7391-7178-3.
38. Mommsen, Hans (1996). The Rise and Fall of Weimar Democracy. University of North Carolina Press. p. 58. ISBN 0-8078-2249-3.
39. Kurlander, Eric (2006). The Price of Exclusion: Ethnicity, National Identity, and the Decline of German Liberalism, 1898–1933. Berghahn Books. p. 197. ISBN 1-8454-5069-8.
40. Hartwich, Oliver Marc (2009). "Neoliberalism: The Genesis of a Political Swearword". 25 October 2009 at the Wayback Machine
41. "Trennung nach 13 gemeinsamen Jahren". Deutschlandfunk (in German). 17 September 2007. from the original on 15 September 2021. Retrieved 15 September 2021.
42. "Bundestagswahl 2021: alle teilnehmenden Parteien". bundestagswahl-2021.de (in German). 14 December 2020. from the original on 14 September 2021. Retrieved 15 September 2021.
43. "Geschichte". Liberale Demokraten - Die Sozialliberalen (in German). from the original on 25 November 2021. Retrieved 15 September 2021.
44. Eatwell, Roger; Wright, Anthony (1999). Contemporary Political Ideologies (1999). pp. 35–36.
45. Marks, Gary & Wilson, Carole (July 2000). (PDF). British Journal of Political Science. 30 (3): 433–459. doi:10.1017/S0007123400000181. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 June 2008.
46. Richardson, James L. (2001). Contending Liberalisms in World Politics: Ideology and Power. Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers. ISBN 155587939X.
47. Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (1967). Lester Ward and the Welfare State. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
48. England, Christopher William (2015). Land and Liberty: Henry George, The Single Tax Movement, and the Origins of 20th Century Liberalism (thesis thesis). Georgetown University. from the original on 30 September 2022. Retrieved 30 September 2022.
49. Richardson, pp. 38–41.
50. "Chapter 2: The 1920s and the Start of the Depression 1921-1933 | U.S. Department of Labor". www.dol.gov. from the original on 22 September 2022. Retrieved 22 September 2022.
51. Richardson, pp. 137–138.
52. Beitz, Charles R. (1999). "Social and Cosmopolitan Liberalism". International Affairs. 75 (3): 515–529. doi:10.1111/1468-2346.00091. ISSN 0020-5850. JSTOR 2623634. from the original on 22 September 2022. Retrieved 22 September 2022.
53. Baehr, Amy R. (2021), "Liberal Feminism", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2021 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, from the original on 23 April 2021, retrieved 30 September 2022
54. Whiteside, Heather (3 November 2020). Canadian Political Economy. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-1-4875-3091-4. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 23 October 2022.
55. Hornberger, Jacob G. (23 November 2016). "Don't Forget FDR's Authoritarianism". The Future of Freedom Foundation. from the original on 21 September 2022. Retrieved 20 September 2022.
56. Carlin, David. "Democratic, Authoritarian, Laissez-Faire: What Type Of Leader Are You?". Forbes. from the original on 21 September 2022. Retrieved 20 September 2022.
57. Feuchtwanger, pp. 273–317.
58. Vincent, Andrew (2010). Modern Political Ideologies (Third ed.). John Wiley & Sons. p. 54.
59. Medeni Bilgiler (Örgün Yayınları). Afet İnan. 1930s. p. 212.
60. Medeni Bilgiler ve M.Kemal Atatürk'ün El Yazıları. Afet İnan. 1930s. pp. 46–47.
61. . Turkish Grand National Assembly. 1 November 1937. Archived from the original on 13 January 2006. Retrieved 22 June 2022.
62. Yunus Emre, CHP, Sosyal Demokrasi ve Sol (in Turkish). İletişim Yayınları. p. 87.
63. Adams, p. 32.
64. Aldridge, Daniel W. (December 2003). "A Militant Liberalism: Anti-Communism and the African American Intelligentsia, 1939-1955". Hartford Web Publishing. from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 29 September 2022.
65. Contending liberalisms in world politics: ideology and power (2001), James L. Richardson, pp. 38–41 31 January 2013 at the Wayback Machine
66. A Theory of Justice — John Rawls. Belknap Press. 30 September 1999. ISBN 9780674000780. from the original on 29 September 2022. Retrieved 29 September 2022. {{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
67. Browing, Gary (2000). Contemporary liberalism. SAGE Publications. pp. 154–155. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
68. Harr, Edwin van de (2015). Degrees of Freedom: Liberal Political Philosophy and Ideology. Transaction.
69. "American Rhetoric: Ronald Reagan -- Radio Address on Socialized Medicine". www.americanrhetoric.com. from the original on 20 November 2022. Retrieved 20 September 2022.
70. Richardson, pp. 138–139.
71. Vincent, Andrew (2004). The nature of political theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-929795-5. OCLC 193933532.
72. Kirchner, Emil (2000). Liberal parties in Western Europe. Cambridge University Press. pp. 356–357. ISBN 9780521323949.
73. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2019). "Parties and Elections in Europe". Parties-and-elections.eu. from the original on 30 March 2012. Retrieved 28 October 2018.
74. Godio, Julio; Robles, Alberto José (2008). El tiempo de CFK; entre la movilización y la institucionalidad: El desafío de organizar los mercados (in Spanish). Corregidor. p. 65.
75. Philip Mendes, ed. (2007). Australia's Welfare Wars Revisited: The Players, the Politics and the Ideologies. Springer Nature. p. 123. ISBN 9780868409917.
76. Rodney Smith; Ariadne Vromen; Ian Cook, eds. (2006). Keywords in Australian Politics. Cambridge University Press. p. 103. ISBN 9780521672832. The ideology of the Liberal Party has in fact always been a mixture of conservatism, social liberalism and classical or neo-liberalism ...
77. Judith Brett (1994). "Ideology". In Judith Brett; James A. Gillespie; Murray Goot (eds.). Developments in Australian Politics. Macmillan Education AU. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-7329-2009-8. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 22 April 2018.
78. Gwenda Tavan (2005). The Long, Slow Death of White Australia. Scribe Publications. p. 193.
79. Huo, Jingjing (2009). Third Way Reforms: Social Democracy After the Golden Age. Cambridge University Press. p. 79. ISBN 978-0-521-51843-7. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 22 April 2018.
80. Leigh, Andrew (29 June 2019). "Social liberalism fits Labor". The Saturday Paper. from the original on 11 August 2020. Retrieved 18 August 2020.
81. "Haiti's future is secure! It has lots of children". The Nassau Guardian. 22 December 2017. from the original on 8 October 2016. Retrieved 28 October 2018.
82. "Les couleurs politiques en Belgique". Cultures&Santé. from the original on 21 April 2021. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
83. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2019). "German-speaking Community/Belgium". Parties and Elections in Europe. from the original on 4 October 2021. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
84. Sejfija, Ismet (2013), "Analysis of Interviews with Representatives of Political Parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina" (PDF), Dealing with the Past in the Western Balkans. Initiatives for Peacebuilding and Transitional Justice in Bosnia- Herzegovina, Serbia and Croatia, Berghahn Foundation, p. 92^{[permanent dead link]}
85. Law Commission of Canada (2011). Law and Citizenship. UBC Press. p. 6. ISBN 9780774840798. The party became infused with social liberalism in the 1940s and 1950s.
86. Prentice, Susan (2004). "Manitoba's childcare regime: Social liberalism in flux". Canadian Journal of Sociology. 29 (2): 193–207. doi:10.1353/cjs.2004.0029. S2CID 145708797.
87. Prince, Michael J. (2012). "Canadian disability activism and political ideas: In and between neo-liberalism and social liberalism". Canadian Journal of Disability Studies. 1 (1): 1–34. doi:10.15353/cjds.v1i1.16.
88. Smith, Miriam (2005). "Social movements and judicial empowerment: Courts, public policy, and lesbian and gay organizing in Canada". Politics & Society. 33 (2): 327–353. doi:10.1177/0032329205275193. S2CID 154613468. The Liberal Party of Canada, the party that championed the Charter, is strongly identified with the document and uses the social liberalism of the Charter as a distinctive badge of party identification.
89. Nordsieck, Wolfram. "Parties and Elections in Europe". from the original on 22 July 2020. Retrieved 14 August 2020.
90. "Puljak: Želimo se maknuti od '41., '71. i '91. godine". N1. 29 October 2015. from the original on 17 August 2017. Retrieved 15 March 2022.
91. Damir Petranović (26 March 2017). "'Spavam 3-4 sata, više otkidam od obitelji nego od banke, a nisam ni lijevo ni desno'". tportal.hr. from the original on 23 March 2022. Retrieved 15 March 2022.
92. "Croatia Elections 2015: Overview of the Parties - IDS and HDSSB". 9 October 2015. from the original on 28 October 2018. Retrieved 10 December 2018.
93. Maškarinec, Pavel (2017). "The Czech Pirate Party in the 2010 and 2013 Parliamentary Elections and the 2014 European Parliament Elections: Spatial Analysis of Voter Support" 2 July 2019 at the Wayback Machine. Slovak Journal of Political Sciences. Walter de Gruyter. 17 (1).
94. J. Kirchner, Emil (1988). Liberal parties in Western Europe. Avon: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-32394-0.
95. Marks, Gary & Wilson, Carole (July 2000). (PDF). British Journal of Political Science. 30 (3): 433–459. doi:10.1017/S0007123400000181. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 June 2008.
96. Madsen, Tomas Bech (Autumn 2007). (PDF). Journal of Liberal Democrat History. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 August 2009. Retrieved 16 August 2009.
97. Almeida, Dimitri (9–11 May 2008). (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 June 2015. Retrieved 26 June 2015.
98. Dawoud, Khaled (8 April 2016). "Egyptian Social Democratic Party Elections Highlight a Deep Rift". Atlantic Council. from the original on 28 October 2018. Retrieved 28 October 2018.
99. Bakke, Elisabeth (2010). Central and East European party systems since 1989. Cambridge University Press. p. 79. ISBN 978-1-139-48750-4. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
100. Kjetil Duvold; Sten Berglund; Joakim Ekman (2020). Political Culture in the Baltic States: Between National and European Integration. Springer Nature. p. 62. ISBN 978-3-030-21844-7. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 25 April 2020.
101. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2011). . Parties and Elections in Europe. Archived from the original on 24 December 2014. Retrieved 9 April 2019.
102. "Estonia 200 unveils its full election candidate list". ERR News. Eesti Rahvusringhääling. 17 January 2019. from the original on 9 February 2021. Retrieved 27 January 2021.
103. Sebald, Christoph; Matthews-Ferrero, Daniel; Papalamprou, Ery; Steenland, Robert (14 May 2019). "EU country briefing: Estonia". EURACTIV. from the original on 26 January 2021. Retrieved 27 January 2021.
104. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2019). "Faroe Islands". Parties and Elections in Europe. from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
105. "Finland's largest political parties". European Parliament Information. 2014. from the original on 7 August 2020. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
106. Smolander, Jyrki (2000). Suomalainen oikeisto ja "kansankoti" : Kansallisen kokoomuksen suhtautuminen pohjoismaiseen hyvinvointivaltiomalliin jälleenrakennuskaudelta konsensusajan alkuun [The Finnish Right Wing and "Folkhemmet" – Attitudes of the National Coalition Party towards the Nordic Welfare Model from the Period of Reconstruction to the Beginning of Consensus]. University of Turku. ISBN 978-951-45-9652-0. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
107. Hloušek, Vít; Kopeček, Lubomír (2010). Origin, Ideology and Transformation of Political Parties: East-Central and Western Europe Compared. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 204. ISBN 978-0-7546-7840-3. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
108. Hertner, Isabelle (2018). Centre-left parties and the European Union: Power, accountability and democracy. Manchester University Press. p. 68. ISBN 978-1-5261-2036-6. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 18 April 2018.
109. Kempf, Udo (2007). Das politische System Frankreichs. Springer DE. p. 190. ISBN 978-3-531-32973-4.
110. "France - Europe Elects". from the original on 20 August 2020. Retrieved 29 December 2021.
111. Thomas Bräuninger and Marc Debus (10 February 2021). BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN.
112. Roberts, Geoffrey (1997). Party Politics in the New Germany. A&C Black. p. 20. ISBN 9781855673113. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 28 October 2020.
113. Breyman, Steve (2019). Movement Genesis: Social Movement Theory And The West German Peace Movement. "The Liberal Democrats (Liberale Demokraten or LD) split from the FDP to create their own social-left liberal alternative."
114. Maron, Thomas (28 April 2017). "Das Sozialliberale ist tief in der SPD verwurzelt". Stuttgarter Zeitung. from the original on 18 September 2022. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
115. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2021). "Parties and Elections in Europe". Parties-and-elections.eu. from the original on 5 July 2013. Retrieved 1 February 2022.
116. Ulf Hedetoft (2020). Paradoxes of Populism: Troubles of the West and Nationalism's Second Coming. Anthem Press. p. 133. ISBN 978-1-78527-216-5. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 8 July 2020.
117. "Politics in Iceland: A beginner's guide". Iceland Monitor. from the original on 3 December 2017. Retrieved 28 October 2018.
118. N. S. Gehlot (1991). The Congress Party in India: Policies, Culture, Performance. Deep & Deep Publications. pp. 150–200. ISBN 978-81-7100-306-8. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 4 January 2020.
119. Soper, J. Christopher; Fetzer, Joel S. (2018). Religion and Nationalism in Global Perspective. Cambridge University Press. pp. 200–210. ISBN 978-1-107-18943-0. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 13 March 2022.
120. Lahav Harkov (16 February 2019). "Histadrut chief Avi Nissenkorn joins Gantzs Israel Resilience Party". The Jerusalem Post. from the original on 5 August 2019. Retrieved 23 February 2019.
121. "Yesh Atid unveils detailed policy plan to promote LGBT equality". The Times of Israel. from the original on 19 October 2021. Retrieved 10 December 2021.
122. De Lucia, Dario (2017). Dal PCI al PD. Imprimatur editore. Le culture di riferimento dei politici appartenenti al Partito democratico sono: la socialdemocrazia, il cristianesimo sociale e il liberalismo sociale [The reference cultures of politicians belonging to the Democratic Party are: social democracy, social Christianity and social liberalism].
123. Segond, Valérie (17 September 2019). "Italie: Matteo Renzi fausse compagnie au Parti démocrate". Le Figaro (in French). from the original on 19 February 2020. Retrieved 24 February 2020.
124. Pridham, Geoffrey (1988). "Two roads of Italian liberalism: the Partito Repubblicana Italiano and the Partito Liberale Italiano". In Emil J. Kirchner (ed.). Liberal Parties in Western Europe. Cambridge University Press. pp. 29–61. ISBN 978-0-521-32394-9. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 26 November 2018.
125. Slomp, Hans (2011). Europe, A Political Profile: An American Companion to European Politics: An American Companion to European Politics. ABC-CLIO. p. 403. ISBN 978-0-313-39182-8.
126. Kölling, Martin (22 October 2017). [Abe wins and hides his weakness]. Handelsblatt (in German). Archived from the original on 22 October 2017. Retrieved 7 August 2020.
127. Nordsieck, Wolfram. "Parties and Elections in Europe". Parties-and-elections.eu. from the original on 20 October 2007. Retrieved 28 October 2018.
128. "Lesotho's New Party Expected to Win Polls, Early Results Show". VOA. 10 October 2022. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
129. Hearl, Derek (1988). "The Luxembourg Liberal Party". In Kirchner, Emil Joseph (ed.). Liberal Parties in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 376–395. ISBN 978-0-521-32394-9.
130. Terzis, Georgios (2007). European Media Governance: National and Regional Dimensions. Intellect Books. p. 135. ISBN 978-1-84150-192-5.
131. Magone, José (2010). Contemporary European Politics: A Comparative Introduction. Routledge. p. 436. ISBN 978-0-203-84639-1.
132. Nam-Kook Kim, ed. (2016). Multicultural Challenges and Redefining Identity in East Asia. Routledge. ISBN 9781317093671. from the original on 14 January 2023. Retrieved 14 January 2023. ... The coalition brings together the Islamist Parti SeIslam Malaysia (PAS), the Chineseled left-liberal Democratic Action Party (DAP), originally the Malaysian branch of the Singapore People's Action Party, ...
133. Senkyr, Jan (2013). "Political Awakening in Malaysia" 1 February 2014 at the Wayback Machine. KAS International Reports. Retrieved 24 June 2019.
134. Nordsieck, Wolfram. "Montenegro". Parties-and-elections.eu. from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 28 October 2018.
135. Nordsieck, Wolfram. "Montenegro". Parties-and-elections.eu. from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 15 February 2022.
136. . Archived from the original on 26 September 2011. Retrieved 27 February 2013.
137. "Neues Parlament für Kryptowährungen". arabparliaments.org. from the original on 16 November 2018. Retrieved 10 December 2018.
138. "Aung San Suu Kyi's award rescinded by US Museum". Dynamite News. 8 March 2018. from the original on 14 January 2023. Retrieved 14 January 2023.
139. "Political Parties". Election.irrawaddy.org. 7 April 2010. from the original on 21 July 2015. Retrieved 28 October 2018.
140. Hloušek, Vít; Kopeček, Lubomír (2010). Origin, Ideology and Transformation of Political Parties: East-Central and Western Europe Compared. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 108–109. ISBN 978-0-7546-9661-2. Retrieved 14 July 2013.
141. Vowles, Jack (1997). Political Science. Vol. 49–50. p. 98.
142. Slomp, Hans (2011). Europe, A Political Profile: An American Companion to European Politics: An American Companion to European Politics. ABC-CLIO. p. 425. ISBN 978-0-313-39182-8.
143. Osterud, Oyvind (2013). Norway in Transition: Transforming a Stable Democracy. Routledge. p. 114. ISBN 978-1-317-97037-8. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
144. . Archived from the original on 24 July 2018.
145. Henningsen, Bernd; Etzold, Tobias; Hanne, Krister, eds. (15 September 2017). The Baltic Sea Region: A Comprehensive Guide: History, Politics, Culture and Economy of a European Role Model. Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag. p. 353. ISBN 978-3-8305-1727-6. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
146. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2015). . Parties and Elections in Europe. Archived from the original on 7 May 2018.
147. "Victor Ponta, în partidul Pro România, alături de Daniel Constantin: Nu mi-am propus să rup PSD". Libertatea (in Romanian). 3 September 2017. from the original on 8 August 2020. Retrieved 23 December 2019.
148. Kulik, Anatoly; Pshizova, Susanna (2005). Political Parties in Post-Soviet Space: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, and the Baltics. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 27. ISBN 978-0-275-97344-5. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
149. White, David (2006). The Russian Democratic Party Yabloko: Opposition in a Managed Democracy. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 2. ISBN 978-0-7546-4675-4. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
150. Orlović, Slaviša; Antonić, Slobodan; Vukomanović, Dijana; Stojiljković, Zoran; Vujačić, Ilija; Đurković, Miša; Mihailović, Srećko; Gligorov, Vladimir; Komšić, Jovan; Pajvančić, Marijana; Pantić, Dragomir (2007). [Ideology and Political Parties in Serbia] (PDF) (in Serbian). Belgrade: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Faculty of Political Sciences, Institute for Humanities. ISBN 978-86-83767-23-6. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 November 2013. Retrieved 17 July 2001.
151. Daniel Matthews-Ferrero; Patrik Fritz; Robert Steenland (24 April 2019). "EU country briefing: Slovakia". EURACTIV. from the original on 7 August 2020. Retrieved 13 April 2020. Recent presidential elections were seen as a crossroads: sticking with the old establishment in the form of SMER-supported EC Vice-President for Energy Union, Maroš Šefčovič, or a desire for change embodied in the political novice Zuzana Čaputová from the relatively new social liberal Progressive Slovakia (PS) party.
152. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2020). "Slovakia". Parties and Elections in Europe. from the original on 2 March 2016. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
153. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2018). "Slovenia". Parties and Elections in Europe. from the original on 30 March 2012. Retrieved 20 March 2019.
154. Denney, Steven (31 December 2015). "An Identity Crisis for South Korea's Opposition" 8 March 2021 at the Wayback Machine. The Diplomat. Retrieved 24 June 2019. "South Korea's main opposition social-liberal party is reeling (again) from intraparty factional struggle. Rebranded earlier this week "the Minjoo Party of Korea" (formerly New Politics Alliance for Democracy), the party is searching for a new identity and direction after high profile and popular assemblyperson Ahn Cheol-soo defected on 13 December."
155. "Seoul Mayor's Death Shocks South Korea". The Diplomat. 9 July 2019. from the original on 9 November 2021. Retrieved 9 November 2021. Ryu Ho-jeong of the small liberal opposition Justice Party wrote on Facebook that she won't pay respects to Park, saying she doesn't want the alleged victim to "feel lonely." Her message drew both strong support and opposition online.
156. "This South Korean Pastor 'Blessed' a Queer Festival. He's Now Being Investigated". Vice. 2 October 2020. from the original on 23 March 2022. Retrieved 9 November 2021. The minor liberal Justice Party is now on its seventh attempt to pass the bill in the National Assembly. Previous attempts failed as conservative Christian groups have been lobbying against it since 2007. Lee believes that the bill's passing is long overdue.
157. Annesley, Claire, ed. (2013). A Political and Economic Dictionary of Western Europe. Routledge. p. 228. ISBN 978-0-203-40341-9. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 23 November 2018.
158. "Liberala partier i Sveriges riksdag & deras ideologiska hållning". liberati.se.
159. "Vad är socialliberalism?".
160. Slomp, Hans (26 September 2011). Europe, A Political Profile: An American Companion to European Politics [2 volumes]: An American Companion to European Politics. Abc-Clio. ISBN 9780313391828. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 25 March 2022.
161. Casey, Michael (12 June 2016). "Time to Start Worrying about Taiwan". The National Interest. from the original on 9 February 2018. Retrieved 9 February 2018.
162. "Caribbean Elections - People's National Movement". Caribbeanelections.com. from the original on 13 August 2020. Retrieved 10 December 2018.
163. Emrah Aslan - daktilo1984.com (22 June 2021). "İyi Parti Raporu" (PDF) (in Turkish). (PDF) from the original on 20 December 2022. Retrieved 19 December 2022. Kamu yatırımlarına ve devlet müdahalesine dönük güçlü söylemler, devlet müdahalesi ile serbest piyasa vurgusu ve mali disiplin ile geniş kamu desteklerinin birlikte ifade edilmesi, İyi Parti'nin sosyal liberal olarak ifade edebileceğimiz karma bir ekonomik modele yakın durabileceğini göstermektedir.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
164. "Babacan sosyal koruma ve güvenlik sistemini açıkladı" (in Turkish). Indy Turk.
165. Slomp, Hans (2011). Europe, A Political Profile: An American Companion to European Politics: An American Companion to European Politics. ABC-CLIO. p. 343. ISBN 978-0-313-39182-8. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
166. "Introduction to The Liberal Party Policies". liberal.org.uk. from the original on 24 May 2022. Retrieved 12 July 2022.
167. Grigsby, Ellen (2008). Analyzing Politics: An Introduction to Politics Science. Florence: Cengage Learning. pp. 106–107. ISBN 978-0495501121. Its liberalism is for the most part the later version of liberalism—modern liberalism.
168. Arnold, N. Scott (2009). Imposing values: an essay on liberalism and regulation. Florence: Oxford University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0495501121. Modern liberalism occupies the left-of-center in the traditional political spectrum and is represented by the Democratic Party in the United States.
169. Nordsieck, Wolfram (2009). . Parties and Elections in Europe. Archived from the original on 30 April 2009. Retrieved 9 April 2019.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
170. Walter, James (2010). What Were They Thinking?: The Politics of Ideas in Australia (Large Print 16pt). ReadHowYouWant.com. p. 430. ISBN 978-1-4596-0494-0. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
171. Icon Group International (2009). European: Webster's Timeline History 1973–1977. John Wiley & Sons. p. 207. ISBN 9780546976427. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
172. Mirow, Wilhelm (2016). Strategic Culture, Securitisation and the Use of Force: Post-9/11 Security Practices of Liberal Democracies. Taylor & Francis. p. 189. ISBN 978-1-317-40660-0.
173. Wauters, Bram; Lisi, Marco; Teruel, Juan-Rodríguez (2016). "Democratising Party Leadership Selection in Belgium and Israel". In Sandri, Giulia; Seddone, Antonella; Venturino, Fulvio (eds.). Party Primaries in Comparative Perspective. Routledge. p. 86. ISBN 978-1-317-08356-6. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 27 October 2017.
174. . Dtom.fr (in French). 6 January 2018. Archived from the original on 12 July 2018. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
175. Kurlander, Eric (2007). The Landscapes of Liberalism: Particularism and Progressive Politics in Two Borderland Regions. University of Toronto Press. p. 125. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
176. Sperber, Jonathan (1997). The Kaiser's Voters: Electors and Elections in Imperial Germany. Cambridge University Press. p. 212. ISBN 9780521591386.
177. Zucker, Stanley (1975). Ludwig Bamberger: German Liberal Political and Social Critic, 1823-1899. University of Pittsburgh Press. p. 239. ISBN 9780822932987.
178. Lash, Scott (1987). The End of Organized Capitalism. Univ of Wisconsin Press. p. 27. ISBN 978-0-299-11670-5. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
179. Grift, Liesbeth (2012). Securing the Communist State: The Reconstruction of Coercive Institutions in the Soviet Zone of Germany and Romania, 1944-1948. Lexington Books. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-7391-7178-3. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
180. Stargardt, Nicholas (1994). The German Idea of Militarism: Radical and Socialist Critics 1866-1914. Cambridge University Press. p. 31.
181. Winkler, Jürgen R. (1995). Sozialstruktur, politische Traditionen und Liberalismus. Eine empirische Längsschnittstudie zur Wahlentwicklung in Deutschland, 1871–1933. Springer. p. 66.
182. Sperber, Jonathan (1997). The Kaiser's Voters: Electors and Elections in Imperial Germany. Cambridge University Press. p. 164.
183. Niedermayer, Oskar (2006). "Das Parteiensystem Deutschelands". In Niedermayer, Oskar; Stöss, Richard; Haas, Melanie (eds.). Die Parteiensysteme Westeuropas. Springer-Verlag. p. 109. ISBN 978-3-531-90061-2. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 30 November 2018.
184. Träger, Hendrik (2015). "Die Europawahl 2014 als second-order election". In Kaeding, Michael; Switek, Niko (eds.). Die Europawahl 2014: Spitzenkandidaten, Protestparteien, Nichtwähler. Springer-Verlag. p. 41. ISBN 978-3-658-05738-1.
185. Hloušek, Vít; Kopeček, Lubomír (2010). Origin, Ideology and Transformation of Political Parties: East-Central and Western Europe Compared. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 115. ISBN 978-0-7546-9661-2. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 14 July 2013.
186. . Nsd.uib.no. Archived from the original on 6 December 2018. Retrieved 10 December 2018.
187. Aranson, Agust Thor (2006). "The European Union Seen From the Top – the View of an Inside-Outsider". In Joakim Nergelius (ed.). Nordic And Other European Constitutional Traditions. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. 31. ISBN 90-04-15171-0.
188. Goldstein, Amir (Spring 2011). "'We Have a Rendezvous With Destiny'—The Rise and Fall of the Liberal Alternative". Israel Studies. 16 (1): 27, 32, 47. doi:10.2979/isr.2011.16.1.26. S2CID 143487617. from the original on 11 July 2021. Retrieved 13 April 2020. Thus, the PP continued to represent mostly white collar and government workers, intellectuals, and the labor intelligentsia, all of whom favored the social liberalism, broadly-based universal views, and social and religious pluralism that the party stood for.⁴(27); Kol wrote to Goldmann...: 'But the party must be founded on a clear ideological basis, and no such basis exists between our progressive humanistic liberalism and Herut.'²⁰(32); Kol emphasized that, 'The Herut Movement and social liberalism cannot dwell together in the same house.'(47)
189. Riestra, Laura (17 March 2015). "Las claves de las elecciones en Israel" (in Spanish). ABC Internacional. from the original on 28 March 2019. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
190. Pombeni, Paolo (2015). "Christian Democracy in power, 1946–63". In Jones, Erik; Pasquino, Gianfranco (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Italian Politics. Oxford University Press. p. 258. ISBN 978-0-19-966974-5. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 27 October 2017.
191. Seißelberg, Jörg (1995). "Berlusconis Forza Italia. Wahlerfolg einer Persönlichkeitspartei". In Steffani, Winfried; Thaysen, Uwe (eds.). Demokratie in Europa: Zur Rolle der Parlamente. Springer-Verlag. p. 209. ISBN 978-3-322-93517-5. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
192. Arthur Stockwin, ed. (2022). The Failure of Political Opposition in Japan: Implications for Democracy and a Vision of the Future. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9789811920769. The Murayama government had a number of broadly left-liberal reforms to its credit.
193. Arthur Stockwin; Kweku Ampiah, eds. (2017). Rethinking Japan: The Politics of Contested Nationalism. Lexington Books. p. 196. ISBN 9781498537933. ... of the debate is the left/liberal "peace movement" currently led by Japanese academics, including legal scholars, and more recently by students, but which until the end of the Cold War was spearheaded by the Japan Socialist Party.
194. Tetsuya Kataoka, ed. (1992). Creating Single-party Democracy: Japan's Postwar Political System. Hoover Institution Press. p. 2. ISBN 9780817991111. The constitution was defended by the JSP, the mainstay of kakushin (radical-liberal forces), ...
195. Franičević, Vojimir; Kimura, Hiroshi, eds. (2003) Globalization, Democratization and Development: European and Japanese Views of Change in South East Europe. "Towards the end of the 1990s the social-liberal Minshuto (Democratic Party of Japan, DPJ) consolidated and replaced Shinshinto as a rival of LDP."
196. Caramani, Daniele (2013). The Europeanization of Politics. Cambridge University Press. p. 310. ISBN 978-1-107-11867-6. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
197. Auzias, Dominique; Labourdette, Jean-Paul (2012). Vilnius 2012 (avec cartes et avis des lecteurs). Petit Futé. p. 22. ISBN 978-2-7469-6092-3.
198. Hearl, Derek (1988). "The Luxembourg Liberal Party". In Kirchner, Emil (ed.). Liberal Parties in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 373–395. ISBN 0-521-32394-0.
199. Chodakiewicz, Marek Jan (2012). Intermarium: The Land between the Black and Baltic Seas. Transaction Publishers. p. 331. ISBN 978-1-4128-4786-5.
200. Moldenhauer, Gebhard (2001). Die Niederlande und Deutschland: einander kennen und verstehen. Waxmann Verlag. p. 113. ISBN 978-3-89325-747-8. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
201. Hloušek, Vít; Kopeček, Lubomír (2010). Origin, Ideology and Transformation of Political Parties: East-Central and Western Europe Compared. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 121. ISBN 978-0-7546-7840-3.
202. Guardiancich, Igor (2012). Pension Reforms in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: From Post-Socialist Transition to the Global Financial Crisis. Routledge. p. 144. ISBN 978-1-136-22595-6.
203. "Kann dieser schwule Atheist Polen verändern?" 7 August 2020 at the Wayback Machine. Bild. 5 February 2019.
204. ""Frühling" macht der linken Mitte Hoffnung" 6 July 2019 at the Wayback Machine. Deutschlandfunk. 3 February 2019.
205. Struve, Peter (1932). The Social Liberalism. Internationales Handwtsrterbuch des Gewerkschaftswesens. pp. 412–423.
206. Europa (1999). The European Union Encyclopedia and Directory 1999. Psychology Press. p. 332. ISBN 978-1-85743-056-1.
207. Almeida, Dimitri (2012). The Impact of European Integration on Political Parties: Beyond the Permissive Consensus. Taylor & Francis. p. 102. ISBN 978-1-136-34039-0.
208. Hloušek, Vít; Kopecek, Lubomír (2013). Origin, Ideology and Transformation of Political Parties: East-Central and Western Europe Compared. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 120. ISBN 978-1-4094-9977-0. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
209. Nordsieck, Wolfram. "Spain". Parties and Elections in Europe. from the original on 24 September 2014. Retrieved 12 January 2015. Unión, Progreso y Democracia (UPD): Social liberalism.
210. "UPyD. Ideology: centralism, social liberalism. Political Position: Centre". European Social Survey. 3 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
211. Lachner, Andreas (2006), "Das Parteiensystem der Schweiz", Die Parteiensysteme Westeuropas, VS Verlag, p. 400
212. Clark, Alistair (2012). "The Liberal Democrats". Political Parties in the UK. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 89. ISBN 978-0-230-36868-2.^{[permanent dead link]}
213. Adams, Ian (1998). Ideology and Politics in Britain Today. Manchester University Press. p. 63. ISBN 978-0-7190-5056-5. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 20 July 2013.
214. Driver, Stephen (2011). Understanding British Party Politics. Polity. p. 117. ISBN 978-0-7456-4077-8. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 20 July 2013.
215. Cardoso Rosas, João (2008). . Diario Economico. Archived from the original on 15 January 2009. Retrieved 21 May 2008.
216. Bresser-Pereira, Luiz Carlos (2003). Building the Republican State. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199261185.
217. Meadowcroft, John (Autumn 2000). (PDF). Journal of Liberal Democrat History. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 August 2009.
218. Simhony, Avital; Weinstein, David (2001). The new liberalism: reconciling liberty and community. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521794046. from the original on 12 August 2016. Retrieved 5 April 2009.
219. . Archived from the original on 31 March 2008. Retrieved 19 May 2008.
220. Ortiz, Cansino; Gellner, Ernest; Merquior, José Guilherme; Emil, César Cansino (1996). Liberalism in Modern Times: Essays in Honour of Jose G. Merquior. Budapest: Central European University Press. 185866053X.
221. Merquior, J. G. (1991). Liberalism Old and New. Boston: Twayne Publishers. ISBN 0805786279.
222. Seidman, Steven (2004). Contested knowledge: social theory today. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 9780631226710.
223. W. Russell, James (2006). Double standard: social policy in Europe and the United States. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 9780742546936.
224. Thompson, Alastair (2000). Left Liberals, the State, and Popular Politics in Wilhelmine Germany. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198205432. from the original on 29 June 2011. Retrieved 29 September 2009.
225. F. Biagini, Eugenio (2002). Citizenship and Community: Liberals, Radicals and Collective Identities in the British Isles, 1865–1931. Cambridge: Published by Cambridge University Press. p. 228. ISBN 9780521893602. from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 5 April 2009.
226. Rahden, Till; Brainard, Marcus (2008). Jews and Other Germans: Civil Society, Religious Diversity, and Urban Politics in Breslau, 1860–1925. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 9780299226947.
227. Roger Backhouse; Bradley W. Bateman; Tamotsu Nishizawa, eds. (2017). Liberalism and the Welfare State: Economists and Arguments for the Welfare State. Oxford University Press. p. 76. ISBN 9780190676681. from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 3 December 2022.
228. Haim Bresheeth-Zabner, ed. (2020). TAn Army Like No Other: How the Israel Defense Forces Made a Nation. Verso Books. p. 118.
229. Findlay, Ronald; Jonung, Lars; Lundahl, Mats (2002). . Cambridge: MIT Press. ISBN 9780262062282. Archived from the original on 10 September 2006.
230. Klausen, Jytte (2001). War and Welfare: Europe and the United States, 1945 to the Present. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 9780312238834.
231. Adam Bronson (2016). One Hundred Million Philosophers: Science of Thought and the Culture of Democracy in Postwar Japan. University of Hawaii Press. p. 56. Maruyama Masao, the left-liberal historian of political thought
232. Watson, Graham (Spring 1998). (PDF). Journal of Liberal Democrat History. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 August 2009.
233. Vincent, Andrew (2007). The Nature of Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199297955.
234. Aron, Paul; Miller, Luke (2007). (PDF). Australian Democrats. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 March 2012. Retrieved 5 April 2009.
235. Flach, Karl-Hermann (1984). Noch eine Chance für die Liberalen. Frankfurt: Fischer S. Verlag GmbH. ISBN 978-3100210012.
236. Gotovac, Vlado (1996). In Defence of Freedom: Zagreb 1971–1996. Zagreb: Matica hrvatska; Croatian PEN Centre. p. 11. ISBN 953-150-066-5.
237. Rodriguez, Ángel Rivero (1993). (PDF). Isegoría (8). Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 August 2009. Retrieved 5 April 2009.
238. Verhofstadt, Dirk. . Archived from the original on 12 October 2006. Retrieved 17 August 2008.
239. Fotopoulos, Takis (October 2004). "Why an Inclusive Democracy? The multidimensional crisis, globalisation and inclusive democracy". The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy. 1 (1). from the original on 12 May 2009. Retrieved 21 May 2008.
240. Tosto, Milton (2005). . Lanham: Lexington Books. ISBN 9780739109861. Archived from the original on 24 May 2006. Retrieved 13 December 2017.
241. David T Johnson, Franklin E Zimring, ed. (2009). The Next Frontier: National Development, Political Change, and the Death Penalty in Asia. Oxford University Press. p. 150.
242. "Grigory Yavlinski". from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 20 September 2022.
243. Krugman, Paul (2007). Conscience of A Liberal. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 9780141035772.
244. "Justin Trudeau, Liberal Let-Down | Martin Lukacs". from the original on 20 September 2022. Retrieved 20 September 2022.
245. Jörg Haßler; Melanie Magin; Uta Russmann, eds. (2021). Campaigning on Facebook in the 2019 European Parliament Election: Informing, Interacting with, and Mobilising Voters. Springer Nature.

Sources

• Adams, Ian (2001). Political ideology today. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2001. ISBN 0 7190 6019 2.
• De Ruggiero, Guido (1959). The History of European Liberalism. Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN 978-0844619705
• Faulks, Keith (1999). Political Sociology: A Critical Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 0 7486 1356 0.
• Feuchtwanger, E. J. (1985). Democracy and Empire: Britain 1865-1914. London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd. ISBN 0-7131-6162-0.
• Richardson, James L. (2001). Contending Liberalisms in World Politics. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. ISBN 1-55587-915-2.
• Slomp, Hans (2000). European Politics Into the Twenty-first Century: Integration and Division. Westport: Praeger Publishers. ISBN 0-275-96814-6.

Further reading

• Green, Thomas Hill (2006). Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation. New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange. ISBN 1584776145.
• Hobhouse, L. T. (1994). Liberalism and Other Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521437261.
• Hobson, John Atkinson (2000). The Crisis of Liberalism: New Issues of Democracy. Delaware: Adamant Media Corporation. ISBN 1421227819.
• Martin, Keith D. (2010). A Liberal Mandate: Reflections on Our Founding Vision and Rants on How We Have Failed to Achieve It. MSilver Spring: Wet Press. ISBN 9780578043654.
• Merquior, J. G. (1991). Liberalism Old and New. Cambridge: Twayne Publishers. ISBN 0805786279.
• Mill, John Stuart (1989). 'On Liberty' and Other Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521379172.
• Rawls, John (2005). A Theory of Justice. Harvard: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0674017722.
• Rawls, John (2005). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 0231130899.
• Simhony, Avital; Weinstein, David (2001). The New Liberalism: Reconciling Liberty and Community. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521794048.

External links

 

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Social liberalism.

• "Social Liberal Forum". Retrieved 29 September 2021.
• (in Spanish). Debate21. Archived from the original on 30 September 2021. Retrieved 30 September 2021.