Changing Systems Position Paper

Mica Pettibone

“I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis--- broad Executive

power to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we

were invaded by a foreign foe” This quote preceded Franklin Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal‘ which was the

beginning of the evolution of Classical Liberalism to Modern Liberalism. The New Deal was meant to

address the recession in the dirty thirties, because while the principles of Ricardo may be true, in that

the poor will grow in number, wages will drop and people will die there is a problem that prevents the

simple loss of population leading to higher wages. The problem comes when the masses of dying poor

revolt against the system, causing it to fail. Classical Liberalism’s major flaw is that it does not meet the

needs of the majority of its people, and in doing this it will never be accepted as a viable form of

government. People might object to government invention in the economy because it does limit the

growth of the economy during upwards trends, but while it does this it also prevents the downfall of the

system. Modern Liberalism is a practical system because it meets the needs of the people and when a

system works to the needs of its people it will survive.

Government intervention in the economy prevents it from growing to the heights that it would

otherwise achieve, thus keeping people from ‘getting rich quick’. This is considered a bad thing by some,

but can only be seen under a negative light if you completely ignore the entire purpose ofthe result of

this limitation. The limitations placed on the economy by the government follow Keynes’ Economic

ideals which take the surplus from the economy when it is at its highest in order to provide funding for

when it falls, thus evening out the upwards and downwards trends of the economy and preventing

recession to the extent that we saw in the 1930’s in America. By doing this the government prevents the

accumulation of a large desperate population that would cause for the ‘collapse’ of the system, either

by violent revolution or another means. In any society the accumulation of a desperate population is the

clearest warning sign of a failing system. We have seen thorough history the results of a failed system,

every dictator that has been in place came to power through the weakened remains of a system that

was failing to meet the needs of its people. If the conditions that lead to a desperate population can be

avoided the system will remain stable, and a stable system doesn’t result in large-scale

violence,therefore government intervention in the economy prevents the suffering of the general

population.

Modern Liberalism, as it is, is a very stable system, it keeps the people within it happy and their

needs met and by doing this it doesn’t have the problems of other systems. Canada is a leading example

of how well Modern Liberalism works, there are not riots being held in the street, the poor population is

not starving to death by the day, and the working conditions and needs of the people are being met.

Canada’s economy has not dropped drastically the entire time that we have had an established modern

liberal form of government proving that Keynes economic plan works. While Canada’s government may

have its critics their basis is trivial in matter, the faults are inconsequential in comparison to countries

whose entire population has lost trust in their government due to a lack of proper freedoms, or rampant

poverty. The stability of Modern Liberalism is derived from its ability to please all of the people within

the system while being able to adapt as necessary. This is what makes it an effective system for the

countries that have implemented it into their governing bodies.

The failing of any political system rarely occurs without loss of life or unnecessary damage. This

is why it is so important to try and change a system in tandem with the changing needs of the

population. If the governing system ignores the needs of its people it will lead to poverty and with that

comes desperation, the key component in radical change. Radical change is not necessarily a bad

change, but desperate people are more prone to make decisions based less on what they know, and

more on what they believe. This in turn allows room for rash decisions, desperate people are easy to

rally and manipulate, especially when they have a common enemy. Desperation leads people to choose

systems simply because they promise change, they do not question if the change is viable, if it will

actually work, they simply jump on the bandwagon. Desperation breeds more volatile individuals, ones

that are easy to rally and more apt to protest more and more vocally until someone decides that a

display of force will make them quiet, and so more life is wasted. When a system fails and sudden

change occurs there is a drastic imbalance in the empty space where one governing body used to be.

Thenext government that the people have fought for steps up only to find themselves ill equipped to

handle the chaos left behind. Modern Liberalism evolved due to the foresight of philosophers like

Keynes. All governing systems evolve from the ideas of the people in them, and most revolve around

making things better. Better wages, better living conditions, better treatment, better standard of living.

Our desire to improve the governing system in order to meet our needs results in the constant evolution

of systems. If a system does not evolve it is forcibly replaced. Modern Liberalism, as an effective

government system prevents the consequences of an ineffective system through its existence.

Modern Liberalism is a system that was developed to meet the needs of the people. We can see

that as a system it is not only effective but well accepted as a ‘better’ form of government. By the simple

fact that Modern Liberalism is working, and is well liked by those who are part of the system in place is

enough to suggest that it is working and should be left as is. If it isn’t broken, you don’t need to fix it. As

long as there is a system in place in any country that meets the needs of its people, it shouldn’t need any

debate. As people’s needs change, the governing system will need to evolve to keep up. As such any

system is not going to stay as is if it intends to last. The world is in a constant state of change and each

situation requires a different way of being approached, the most effective systems in a world like ours,

that is constantly evolving, is one that is open to change.