This diploma thesis deals with a political program of Strana svobodných občanů. Firstly, the methodology used in this thesis is explored in the first chapter. Then, in the second chapter are defined and described relevant theoretical concepts. These are the concepts of Euroscepticism, anarchocapitalism and libertarianism. In the case of Euroscepticism, a typology by a French political scientist Cécile Leconte is used as well because Euroscepticism is a very complex term. In the next chapter there are described relevant aspects of political philosophy of Strana svobodných občanů. The fourth chapter, with help of content analysis of the Strana svobodných občanů program, answers to all of the research questions: To what extent is Euroscepticism present in the political philosophy of Strana svobodných občanů? How the presence of Euroscepticism in the political philosophy of Strana svobodných občanů evolved since the founding of the party to the present? To what extent is anarchocapitalism present in the political philosophy of Strana svobodných občanů? How the presence of anarchocapitalism in the political philosophy of Strana svobodných občanů evolved since the founding of the party to the present? To what extent is libertarianism present in the political philosophy of Strana svobodných občanů? How...

Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka om det går att rättfärdiga militära interventioner med stöd i klassisk liberal politisk teori. För ändamålet har de klassiskt liberala filosoferna John Locke och John Stuart Mill analyserats. Undersökningen är utförd medelst en text- och idéanalys av några av filosofernas portalverk. Resultatet av studien visar ett tydligt stöd för vissa sorters militära interventioner och att det faktumet är djupt rotat i flera etiska och moraliska överväganden som Locke respektive Mill gör. Slutsatsen i uppsatsen är därav att det finns klassiskt liberala argument för att genomföra militära interventioner.

L’inflation a diminué de façon importante dans les pays riches depuis le début des années 80. Cette baisse de l’inflation n’est pas un hasard et peut, en partie, être liée à la mise en place de nouvelles institutions et politiques monétaires. Ce mémoire examine la relation qui existe entre deux de ces institutions, l’indépendance politique et le conservatisme d’une banque centrale, et l’idéal d’égalité économique. Peut-on, demandons-nous, être égalitariste et défendre, à la fois, l’indépendance politique d’une banque centrale et la volonté «conservatrice» de faire de l’inflation une priorité relativement au chômage? Le mémoire se divise en trois grandes parties. Une version crédible de l’égalitarisme économique est d’abord présentée. La relation qui existe entre le phénomène d’inflation et l’égalitarisme est, ensuite, examinée. Une réflexion critique sur les fondements théoriques de l’indépendance politique et du conservatisme est, enfin, développée. Nous concluons que la théorie égalitariste ne permet pas, à elle seule, de déterminer si un modèle particulier de banque centrale est moralement désirable. Pour se porter à la défense d’une banque centrale indépendante et conservatrice, un égalitariste doit adhérer à des prémisses économiques contestées. / Inflation has been decreasing in rich countries since the beggining of the 80’s. The creation of new monetary institutions in the western world is, partly at least, responsible for this fall. This Master’s thesis examines the relation beetween the ideal of economic equality and two important monetary institutions: Central bank conservatism and political independance. Can egalitarians support, I ask, the conservatism and the political independance of a central bank? This work is divided in three parts. We, first, present a credible definition of what egalitarism is. We examine the relation that exists beetween inflation and egalitarianism. Finally, we analyse and criticize the theoretical foundation of political independance and monetary conservatism. We conclude that egalitarianism cannot determinate, by itself, the moral quality of monetary institutions. Egalitarians can defend central bank political independance and conservatism, but to do so they have to accept controversial economic premisses.

Along with the right-left economical dimension of positioning of political parties and voters, there is also dimension of division along cultural and value items which is described as authoritarianism - libertarianism axis or sometimes conservatism - liberalism. In new democracies the division along clear support for liberal democracy on the one hand and support or toleration of non liberal use of power on the other hand is often very important. We distinguish between authoritarianism as orientation with tendency towards support for restrictive and hierarchical politics, which in some cases lead to non liberal variant of formally democratic order, and cultural conservatism, which has its roots mainly in higher level of religiosity. Authoritarian and conservative tendencies are to certain level associated with each other, nevertheless they do not create an integral complex. There is evidence of a group with authoritarian value orientation and culturally liberal position at the same time; in Slovak conditions it is the case of the electorate of left wing party Smer (Direction). Examining the opinion cleavage among Slovak public along cultural and value questions, we identify the biggest conflict potential of the authoritarian items as the mode of political rule and nationalism. Next significant...

Dans cette thèse, je tente d’établir les fondements normatifs d’une richesse maximale qui comprend deux mesures complémentaires : un revenu maximal qui peut être mis en œuvre au moyen d’un impôt sur le revenu et un capital maximal, au moyen d’un impôt sur les successions, dont le taux marginal est de 100 % dans les deux cas. Je soutiens en effet qu’une telle mesure est juste, puisqu’elle respecte les principes développés au sein de trois théories principales : le libertarisme, le suffisantisme et le prioritarisme. Puis, je soutiens aussi qu’une telle mesure est efficace d’un point de vue économique, puisqu’elle permet de mieux diffuser les incitations financières, ce qui peut avoir des effets positifs sur la production et la répartition de la richesse. D’abord, je soutiens qu’une richesse maximale respecte le principe fondamental défendu par les libertariens, c’est-à-dire la propriété de soi. Pour ce faire, je m’appuie surtout sur deux arguments : le proviso et la théorie des marchés où le gagnant rafle la mise. D’abord, je montre que si l’on associe les ressources naturelles au capital, l’application d’un proviso au principe d’acquisition interdit l’appropriation illimitée des ressources naturelles, ce qui permet de justifier un capital maximal. Ensuite, je montre que si l’on associe les fruits du travail au revenu, les marchés où le gagnant rafle la mise permettent à certains individus de recevoir des revenus qui sont supérieurs aux fruits de leur travail, ce qui viole par excès le principe de la propriété de soi et permet de justifier un revenu maximal. Ensuite, je soutiens qu’une richesse maximale respecte les principes développés au sein de deux théories faisant partie de la tradition égalitariste : le suffisantisme et le prioritarisme. Pour ce faire, je montre que ces deux théories ne sont acceptables que si elles intègrent une autre théorie que l’on appelle le limitarianisme. Selon cette théorie, toute richesse supérieure à celle dont un individu a besoin pour s’épanouir pleinement dans la vie peut être qualifiée d’immorale. Par conséquent, une telle théorie permet de justifier une richesse maximale, puisqu’elle ajoute un seuil de richesse au seuil de pauvreté que défendent déjà les suffisantistes et les prioritaristes.Enfin, je réponds à l’une des principales objections qui peuvent être soulevées contre une richesse maximale et qui porte sur l’efficacité économique du plafonnement des incitations financières. Je montre en effet qu’une richesse maximale, contrairement à ce que l’on pourrait croire, pourrait avoir des effets positifs sur la production et la distribution de la richesse. Pour ce faire, je m’appuie surtout sur trois arguments. D’abord, les incitations ont une importance surestimée en sciences économiques. Ensuite, il existe plusieurs formes d’incitations qui ne se réduisent nullement aux seules incitations financières. Enfin, il est préférable de diffuser largement les incitations financières plutôt que de les concentrer exagérément auprès d’une minorité d’individus. / In this thesis, I try to establish the normative foundations for a maximum limit on wealth that includes two complementary measures: a maximum on income that can be implemented by means of an income tax, and a maximum on capital, which can be attained through a tax on inheritance; the marginal rate being 100% in both cases. Indeed, I argue that such a measure is fair, since it respects the principles developed in three main theories : libertarianism, sufficientarianism, and prioritarianism. Next, I argue that such a measure is economically efficient, since it allows to better spread financial incentives, which can have positive effects on the production and distribution of wealth. First, I maintain that a maximum limit on wealth respects the fundamental principle defended by libertarians, that is, self-ownership. To do this, I rely mainly on two arguments: the proviso and the theory of winner-takes-all markets. First, I show that if we associate natural resources with capital, the application of a proviso to the principle of acquisition prohibits the unlimited appropriation of natural resources, which justifies a maximum on capital. Then, I show that if the fruits of labor are associated with income, winner-takes-all markets allow certain individuals to receive incomes that are superior to the fruits of their labor, which violates the principle of self-ownership, and thus justifies a maximum on income. Secondly, I maintain that a maximum wealth respects the principles developed within two theories within the egalitarian tradition: those of sufficientarianism and prioritarianism. To do this, I show that these two theories are acceptable only if they integrate another theory named limitarianism. According to this theory, any wealth superior to that which an individual needs to live a flourishing life can be qualified as immoral. Consequently, such a theory makes it possible to justify a maximum wealth, since it adds a wealth threshold to the poverty threshold already defended by sufficientarians, and prioritarians. Finally, I respond to one of the main objections that can be raised against maximum wealth and which deals with the economic efficiency of the capping of financial incentives. In fact, I show that maximum wealth, contrary to what one might believe, could have positive effects on the production and distribution of wealth. To do this, I rely mainly on three arguments. First, incentives are overestimated in economics. Second, there are several forms of incentives that are not limited to financial incentives alone. Finally, it is preferable to disseminate financial incentives widely rather than to exaggeratedly concentrate them on a minority of individuals.

<p>The study argues that implicit in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the principle of immigration as human rights is supported by principle of positive freedom, negative freedom, and equal autonomy. The study endorses a liberal egalitarian perspective by claiming that human right to immigrate promotes equal autonomy. The study also investigates why the principle of immigration as a human right has been dismissed by doctrines within Liberalism. It argues that a state lacks a legitimacy to employ a principle of national self-determination against the immigration issue. Instead, a state has a moral obligation to the protection of a human right to immigrate; it also has a duty to provide equal social rights to the immigrants in compared with those of the citizens.</p>

The study argues that implicit in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the principle of immigration as human rights is supported by principle of positive freedom, negative freedom, and equal autonomy. The study endorses a liberal egalitarian perspective by claiming that human right to immigrate promotes equal autonomy. The study also investigates why the principle of immigration as a human right has been dismissed by doctrines within Liberalism. It argues that a state lacks a legitimacy to employ a principle of national self-determination against the immigration issue. Instead, a state has a moral obligation to the protection of a human right to immigrate; it also has a duty to provide equal social rights to the immigrants in compared with those of the citizens.

L’inflation a diminué de façon importante dans les pays riches depuis le début des années 80. Cette baisse de l’inflation n’est pas un hasard et peut, en partie, être liée à la mise en place de nouvelles institutions et politiques monétaires. Ce mémoire examine la relation qui existe entre deux de ces institutions, l’indépendance politique et le conservatisme d’une banque centrale, et l’idéal d’égalité économique. Peut-on, demandons-nous, être égalitariste et défendre, à la fois, l’indépendance politique d’une banque centrale et la volonté «conservatrice» de faire de l’inflation une priorité relativement au chômage? Le mémoire se divise en trois grandes parties. Une version crédible de l’égalitarisme économique est d’abord présentée. La relation qui existe entre le phénomène d’inflation et l’égalitarisme est, ensuite, examinée. Une réflexion critique sur les fondements théoriques de l’indépendance politique et du conservatisme est, enfin, développée. Nous concluons que la théorie égalitariste ne permet pas, à elle seule, de déterminer si un modèle particulier de banque centrale est moralement désirable. Pour se porter à la défense d’une banque centrale indépendante et conservatrice, un égalitariste doit adhérer à des prémisses économiques contestées. / Inflation has been decreasing in rich countries since the beggining of the 80’s. The creation of new monetary institutions in the western world is, partly at least, responsible for this fall. This Master’s thesis examines the relation beetween the ideal of economic equality and two important monetary institutions: Central bank conservatism and political independance. Can egalitarians support, I ask, the conservatism and the political independance of a central bank? This work is divided in three parts. We, first, present a credible definition of what egalitarism is. We examine the relation that exists beetween inflation and egalitarianism. Finally, we analyse and criticize the theoretical foundation of political independance and monetary conservatism. We conclude that egalitarianism cannot determinate, by itself, the moral quality of monetary institutions. Egalitarians can defend central bank political independance and conservatism, but to do so they have to accept controversial economic premisses.

The political ideas of Auberon Herbert are usually associated with the late Victorian Individualist thinkers primarily influenced by the philosopher Herbert Spencer. Although Herbert derived his political philosophy of Voluntaryism from Spencer’s thinking it also owed much to J. S. Mill. Voluntaryism was based on a Lockean-Spencerian conception of individual natural rights that asserted self-ownership and the moral obligation for individuals to respect the rights of other people. Rights protection against force and fraud constituted the primary purpose of government. Herbert, aptly describing Voluntaryism as the system of liberty, peace and friendliness, applied these principles to a range of situations from street maintenance, to collective property purchase, and, finally, to the voluntary support of the state. Voluntary taxation was the most controversial component of Herbert’s theory, emphasising its distinctiveness. Although Herbert resisted socialist and new liberal attempts to expand the role of the state, his reasons for doing so shared little in common with conservative critics of this direction. Herbert, a republican and democrat, repeatedly attacked privilege, seeking widespread change including land reform and universal suffrage. His position represented that of a radical reformer seeking to promote Voluntaryism as the basis for friendly co-operation among free individuals at home and abroad. An internationalist, Herbert opposed aggressive imperialism, but also supported national self-determination, including Irish Home Rule. The notion of the voluntary state has led to claims of Herbert’s anarchism, but research indicates a greater complexity to his political ideas. Overall, Herbert was an extreme libertarian who never completely lost sight of the state, although he greatly limited its role. While Herbert’s political theory was idealistic, it avoided the social prescription usually associated with utopianism. Herbert’s commitment to an ethos of radical progressivism was one he shared with other contemporary socialist and anarchist thinkers who, like Herbert, attempted to live the politics they espoused. For his political philosophy and activism, Herbert warrants acknowledgement as one of the most prominent English libertarians of the nineteenth century.

The political ideas of Auberon Herbert are usually associated with the late Victorian Individualist thinkers primarily influenced by the philosopher Herbert Spencer. Although Herbert derived his political philosophy of Voluntaryism from Spencer’s thinking it also owed much to J. S. Mill. Voluntaryism was based on a Lockean-Spencerian conception of individual natural rights that asserted self-ownership and the moral obligation for individuals to respect the rights of other people. Rights protection against force and fraud constituted the primary purpose of government. Herbert, aptly describing Voluntaryism as the system of liberty, peace and friendliness, applied these principles to a range of situations from street maintenance, to collective property purchase, and, finally, to the voluntary support of the state. Voluntary taxation was the most controversial component of Herbert’s theory, emphasising its distinctiveness. Although Herbert resisted socialist and new liberal attempts to expand the role of the state, his reasons for doing so shared little in common with conservative critics of this direction. Herbert, a republican and democrat, repeatedly attacked privilege, seeking widespread change including land reform and universal suffrage. His position represented that of a radical reformer seeking to promote Voluntaryism as the basis for friendly co-operation among free individuals at home and abroad. An internationalist, Herbert opposed aggressive imperialism, but also supported national self-determination, including Irish Home Rule. The notion of the voluntary state has led to claims of Herbert’s anarchism, but research indicates a greater complexity to his political ideas. Overall, Herbert was an extreme libertarian who never completely lost sight of the state, although he greatly limited its role. While Herbert’s political theory was idealistic, it avoided the social prescription usually associated with utopianism. Herbert’s commitment to an ethos of radical progressivism was one he shared with other contemporary socialist and anarchist thinkers who, like Herbert, attempted to live the politics they espoused. For his political philosophy and activism, Herbert warrants acknowledgement as one of the most prominent English libertarians of the nineteenth century.