Liberalism doesn't have a specific expression on race, liberalism more or less states that inequality and social stratification should only exist when it is beneficial to society as a whole, and only when any person, regardless of race/gender/etc are in positions to go into stations on either side of the spectrum.
Rawls is the greatest voice of philosophical liberalism. Time to get out philosophy of law notes.
Rawls A Theory of Justice -- A Thought Experiment
Fundamental question: What are the principles of justice on which political and legal systems should be founded? What legal and political principles would be rational?
Assumption: Human beings are mostly equal, with some variation. (mostly anybody here can agree with this).
How do we overcome our own biases when trying to do this philosophy? The Hypothetical Original Position.
We must answer under a Veil of Ignorance, meaning that we don't know what we will be born as...black, gay, women, insane, etc....we only know that we will be human.
Three characteristics of those of us in the original position: we are all equal, rational, and self-interested...
What wouldn't we choose? A slave-holding society would not be picked because nobody wants to be a slave. Laissez-faire system would be crossed off the list because it is an irrational way to distribute goods to a society, and also because of the rejection of slavery in the previous statement. And lastly, utilitarian principles would ultimately be rejected due to individuals not wanting to be sacrificed for the profit of the majority.
What would we choose? Most of us anyway, under the veil of ignorance.... Rawls says we would choose:
1. Each person would have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others (libertarianism completely fails here).
2. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both 1. Reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage and 2. Attached to positions and offices open to all. (advancement or failure based on merit not privilege).
3. All social values, whether liberty, opportunity, income, are to distributed equally except insofar as the unequal distribution is to everyone's advantage (a doctor makes more than a janitor, for obvious reasons, and it is to everyone's benefit).
Furthermore, the bad kind of inequality is only caused by acts people commit that are disadvantageous to society.
Rawls states this as a logic conclusion, much like 2+2=4.
This is the philosophical underpinnings of modern liberalism, unless one wants to dig up Kant, in whose work these principles originate.
Any attacks or criticisms of liberalism are just hot air unless this argument is addressed.
This post was edited by Skinned on Sep 9 2014 10:27am