A pervasive misconception contributes, currently, to murky the waters of political debate: The term ‘Liberal’ has had its meaning gradually and imperceptibly altered to describe a docile, cosmopolite, snobby, well-indoctrinated university-educated person eager to augment the level of State interventionism in order to attain Social Justice.

The European Union and some of our national institutions devotedly fawn to this type of “Liberal” and are predominantly run by them.



To understand how the word ‘Liberal’ has been sequestrated by the enemies of Classical Liberal ideas, one must look at the erosion of the principles which are most conducive to individual liberty.

Take for example the fact that, traditionally, Liberals were those who believed in the inviolable nature of the individual’s rights. The French Declaration of Human Rights of 1789 opens with the following:



“Men are born and remain free and equal in rights.”



Contrastingly, Article 20 of The EU Charter of Human Rights, states – in technocrat parlance – that:



“Everyone is equal before the Law.“



According to the EU charter then, we are all to respect the Law equally and the law applies to all, yet there is a clear attenuation as to whether the Law considers certain characteristics of the individual as unassailable.



(Notice that the Charter no longer will apply to Britain, thanks to you, my fellow Brexiters.)



The “Liberals” of today – perhaps with good but misguided intention – think the Law should be used to make us all equal by usurping individual liberties. They call themselves Liberals but they should instead be called Illiberals.

The Illiberals Don’t Like History



The Illiberals excuse themselves from the triviality of historical precedent and the fact that throughout history – from Timur to Mao Zedong – humanity has constantly battled against tyranny (the illegitimate concentration of power in the hands of one person, or a few).

The reason for this myopia is that Illiberals consider the validity of their ambition universal, their knowledge irrefutable, their intentions magnanimous and their enemies evil.

To them, tyrannical power is not problematic as long as it is they who dispense the laws. Their aim is to make us all equal and to make us all better off.



In complete opposition to this, true Liberals believe the Rule of Law must include limits on what can be ruled upon.



It was here in Britain, after all, that Liberal ideas were first accepted as the most favourable way to promote Liberty. Back in 1215, the Magna Carta set up these four basic principles:



1. The British people no longer would cede all power to one ruler.

2. The inalienable right to private property.

3. No person should be deprived of liberty without due process.

4. Taxes should only be levied with the consent of the People.



Centuries later, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 – as Edmund Burke famously expressed it – “was made to preserve our ancient indisputable laws and liberties, and that ancient constitution of government which is our only security for law and liberty”.



Furthermore, it was John Locke who polished the Aristotelian conception of private property giving it a shine which continues to blaze today, despite terrible misinterpretations by overly-celebrated political philosophers such as Robert Nozick.



Today, with Britain having finally returned to independence, we should restore true Liberal values to the eminent position they have rightfully occupied for centuries and made this country great. Those who wanted power not to be ceded to single-minded mob-rule by the Illiberal blob in Brussels should now move onto the next challenge and take back control of the word ‘Liberal’