Classical Liberalism in the Age of Post-Communism,

by Norman Barry (1996)

Classical Liberalism in the Age of Post-Communism reconstructs the theory of classical liberalism as a unified doctrine that encompasses political economy, jurisprudence and social philosophy.

Norman Barry's essay provides explanations of the market economy, entrepreneurship, property rights theory and constitutionalism from a classical liberal perspective. The main elements of this doctrine are defended by Professor Barry against the criticisms of egalitarians, communitarians and the new reconstructed socialists. Despite some intellectual and practical successes the classical liberal doctrine has failed to capture the imagination of the establishment in the social sciences or the support of the electorate at large. Professor Barry shows how classical liberal public choice theory can counteract the apparent decline of the doctrine and enable us to explore the meanings of liberty, social justice and law in the context of contemporary social theory.

Tyler Cowen, George Mason University, Public Choice Vol. 93, Nos. 1-2, 208-210 (1997)

"Norman Barry presents a very clear and useful introduction to the principles of classical liberalism...."

Bruce Yandle, Clemson University, Constitutional Political Economy Vol. 8, No. 1, 93-95 (1997)

"Rowley's post-communism challenge is confronted head on by Norman Barry in the book's second major paper. He points out that market principles, having been embraced by the state, have been abused from a classical liberal perspective. Barry tells how demand for individual freedom has become a mandate for state-provided equal liberties. The option to make choices and the potential for engaging in voluntary exchange has been replaced with entitlements and income guarantees that tie the individual to the state.

Calling for constitutional constraints, or their equivalent, Barry questions the ability of evolutionary forces in a state of nature to deliver a liberal order based on property rights. In other words, he is more a friend of Locke than of Hayek. At the same time, Barry explores the claim that markets are simply social artifacts that cannot be generalized to all societies. He concludes that markets and the virtues of the minimal state are generalizable concepts, but that we should expect different outcomes for different cultures.

Why the loss of capital among classical liberals? Barry suggests two things: a shift in public opinion generated by popular spokesmen and the power of interest groups in obtaining political favors. And what is the solution? Barry leaves the reader with useful but somewhat pessimistic thoughts regarding global competition and capital flight."

John Rogers, Agenda Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 508-510 (1997)

"... Similarly, reliance on the common law to constrain government would appear naive, especially as pro-government, centralist, judicial activists have become established in constitutional courts around the world. Norman Barry, in his essay 'Classical Liberalism in the Age of Post-Communism'. shows how 'in the 20th century deliberate judicial intervention in common law process has been, if anything, disruptive of its coordinating processes; it has not been aimed at correcting inadequacies in the legal servicing of a free order, as suggested by Hayek, but rather it has steered the legal order away from this' (p. 30).

A third option for constraining government is the use of a federal structure to induce competition between states. However, Barry believes that 'the federal idea itself has been badly damaged in the 20th century with the rise of uniform standards' (p. 41). We are left with the hope that there will be an 'imitative effect' of successful capitalist orders that will spread liberal ideas. Unfortunately, this too is in danger of being undermined, in this case by the rush for governments to 'cooperate' through international forums.

The failure of the traditional methods for constraining government highlights the need for liberals to make the moral case for constraining government. But they have not done so. Barry refers to a 'moral lacuna' whereby the market is justified with respect only to outcomes and not to its moral underpinnings. ..."