“It is bitterly ironical that an Englishman of all people should need to argue the point at all to his countrymen; seeing that historically we have made the cause of nations rightly struggling to be free our own cause.” - J. Enoch Powell.
Throughout the ages, empires have risen and fallen, conquered vast lands in the pursuit of the nation-state’s self-interest. One of the most renowned empire is the British Empire, which at its summit was the largest empire in history. Many historians have argued whether empires, particularly the British and French empires, were beneficial or not. Niall Ferguson not only declares that the British Empire had a positive effect on the globe, but also that liberalism was Britain’s greatest legacy. This paper will seek to examine, and discuss whether or not, according to Niall Ferguson, liberalism was the British Empire’s greatest achievement before the demise of Britain’s rule. This dissertation will define the concept of liberalism, look at Britain’s role within slavery, Britain and capitalism, and Britain compared to other Empires.
First of all, before this paper proceeds, it is of the upmost importance that the concept of liberalism is defined. In recent times Americans with conservative views tend to pigeonhole the concept of liberalism as individuals with an interest in social progression. It seems to be quite apparent that because of America’s immense influential contributions to western culture, that that term is beginning to be generally held in other Anglophone nations. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary states that the term liberalism can either be: (a) A theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom, and usually based around Laissez-faire principles. (b) A political philosophy based on the belief in progress, in the righteousness of the human race, autonomy of the individual, and safe-guarding civil liberties(Merriam-Webster). This will be the definition that will be used, in both of its terminologies for the remainder of this piece.
Ferguson states that liberalism was Britain’s greatest legacy, while it can be contested what was the greatest contribution Britain gave to the world, one must endeavour whether or not liberal philosophy was founded, or adopted within the British realms. The origins of liberalism begins around the seventeenth century, from the ideas and principles of a British philosopher named John Locke, whom is considered to be the architect of liberalism. (Godwin, 2002, p. 68) The ideas of John Locke later gained prominence within the United States and France. Adam Smith, a Scottish economist later expanded liberalism into an economic thinking with his book ‘The Wealth of Nations’. It is clearly unanimous that British thinkers were the progenitors of the liberal philosophy that now emanates within western societies.
Despite the fact that British thinkers were responsible for the ideation of liberalism, many critics of the British Empire contend that Ferguson is irrefutably wrong. The main aspect to why the British Empire did not cause the emergence of liberalism is mainly because of the role in which the British Empire took part in regards to slave trade. While it is true that Britain played a key role in slave trade, it is also true that Britain was the first nation to abolish slave trade in 1807(Drescher, 2011 p. 131). Drescher analyses Britain’s motives towards the abolition of slavery, and discusses whether or not the British Empire decided to permanently ban slave trade on the merit of virtue, or if it was in fact an economic decision. He states the following:
“The history of slavery flowed directly from the ebb and flow of capitalism, the principal economic system of modern times. In phase one (mercantilism) the profits from the expanding slave trade, and slavery provided the wealth that financed the British industrial revolution. In a second phase, beginning with the American Revolution and the shift to free trade capitalism, irreversible, continuous decline of the British slave system made it an encumbrance to the emergent British economy.” (Drescher, 2001 p. 133)
Drescher is asserting the fact that the motivation of Britain abolishing slave trade is perhaps the fact that it eventually became a hindrance to the natural progression of the British economy, and British prosperity. Drescher continues stating that not only was Britain the world’s leading industrial power in the nineteenth century but it was also the hub of anti-slavery(Drescher, 2011 p. 133). When one considers it, a global economic power would have the interests in preventing other nations from rising, and having the same influential power as the British Empire did. This is seen during the Congress of Vienna, in which Britain made a secret coalition with France and Austria, to prevent Russia, and Prussia from gaining more regional influence(Dupont, 2003).
Economic liberalism is another concept in the general term of liberalism. Britain’s most defining aspect in comparison to other empires is perhaps the fact that the emergence of capitalism primarily began in Britain. According to Ferguson, the British Empire took the stock exchange market from the Dutch, and applied it to their empire, making them an empire of capital(Ferguson, 2003).
During the life and times of Adam Smith, Britain was very much an imperialistic empire that practiced mercantilism. Adam Smith refuted the idea that mercantilism was beneficial for Britain. According to Sullivan, Adam Smith believed that because of Britain’s relationship with her colonies, that it was imbalanced, and inefficient. The monopoly ensured that Britain invested an excessive amount of capital to colonial trade, which robbed Britain of capital to invest and expand in the British market(Sullivan, 1983). Sullivan continued stating the following.
“Smith argued that if England operated on the basis of free trade, her capital would naturally flow into the most efficient and productive channels, and be distributed in a balanced way between home and foreign markets. Smith believed that there was great opportunity for profitable investment within England itself, and that the nation would benefit if some of the capital withdrawn from colonial trade were invested at home.” (Sullivan, 1983 p. 600)
Sullivan reiterates the thoughts of the founding father of economics, Adam Smith. I very much concur with the above quote. While Britain was innovative with the advent of the stock exchange, and being an ‘empire of capital’(Ferguson, 2003). It is also clear that Britain had the potential to become a more liberal nation sooner, though her mercantilist, and imperialist agenda’s seems to have prevented the progress of liberalism within the British Empire.
While it is easy to assert that modern western values are transcendent, it is also important that one recognises that Britain at the time in comparison to other empires was more socially liberal. Russia, a rival empire at the peak of the British Empire, was very much an autocratic state. The closest resemblance in Russian history to a liberal society is perhaps in the 11th and 12th century in what was at the time Kievan Rus. The city-state Novgorod saw the development of a remarkably cultured and by the standards of the day, a liberal society(Sixsmith, 2011, p. 19). However Sixsmith states that when the Mongol yoke invaded, Russia became according to Sixsmith:
“Isolated from Europe, Russia missed out on the renaissance, her national progress interrupted for more than 200 years. In some respects she would never fully catch up with Western Europe’s cultural and social values.” (Sixsmith, 2011, p. 29)
Throughout Martin Sixsmith’s book Russia: A 1,000 Year Chronicle of The Wild East portrays the Russian Empire being an autocratic state as a recurrent theme throughout the book(Sixsmith, 2011). France before Napoleon Bonaparte was no different to Russia, which like Russia and Spain was an Absolute monarch(Ferguson, 2003).
To conclude, at first glance it may be the case and it can be easily argued that the British Empire’s most defining legacy is not liberalism. The matter of being responsible and having been an essential role within slave trade routes, would make any human question Britain being synonymous with the word liberalism. Though that is dependent on how one defines what is the definition of liberalism. In regards to Niall Ferguson whom is an economic historian, it could very well be the case that Ferguson is thinking more in the terms of economic liberalism, than social liberalism. I agree with Ferguson if such a premise is true. Sullivan outlines the the issue with the British Empire in regards to economic liberalism. while it was the case that Britain emerged as a global influential empire of capital, it had the intellectuals that could have made Britain unlike any other Empire in history. However it is important to realise that the ideology of liberalism not only originated in Britain, but Britain was in comparison to other empires far more liberal.
