Abstract
The arguments presented by Fred M. Frohock and David J. Sylvan in ‘Liberty, Economics and Evidence’, Political Studies, 31 (1983), 541–55 need reconsideration. They attribute a theory of economic development to liberalism, but it is held by both liberal and other thinkers only after the late eighteenth century. This theory, that a certain level of economic development is a necessary prerequisite for freedom, is different from the widely-held anti-democratic view that political rights should only be granted to persons holding property. Again, the view that liberty and welfare can be traded-off seems not to be held by many of the ‘liberals' mentioned by the authors. Moreover, the contention that the ‘liberal position’ is empirically incorrect confuses two propositions: (1) that there are economic conditions which are necessary for the existence of freedom; (2) that there are economic conditions necessary and sufficient for freedom. The authors' recommendation of ‘holism’ should not be swallowed whole.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.