Forum

The future of liberalism depends on several factors, with population growth being both an opportunity and a threat. Liberals can be divided into two main camps: classical conservative market liberals and progressive global citizen social liberals. In the 1980s, neoliberalism gained dominance in the global economy—a theory advocating maximum market freedom with minimal public regulation and intervention. A key part of this doctrine is the concept of economies of scale. Two seemingly inevitable trends began to influence the development of societies: urban-centric concentration and globalization. In the name of economic efficiency, urban concentration leads to regional polarization and societal divisions between the privileged and the underprivileged, even in terms of living conditions. Neoliberal thinking has, in recent decades, weakened the welfare state and increased economic inequality. This has led to a decline in social security, growing income inequality, and the dismantling of public services. Neoliberalism has also eroded public trust in political institutions. Politics in Finland is changing too, with municipal and social reforms altering the roots of belonging and community, sources of identity. Boys and girls in villages now become just parts of administrative structures. The member of the community becomes a mere cog in the management of a continental economic corporation. Another threat comes from illiberal global actors like China and Russia. These diminish the image of democracies’ ability to solve problems, shifting economic and political power away from democratic countries. Moreover, external crises, such as pandemics and the climate crisis, can shake trust in liberal democracy. Glocalization refers to the simultaneous emergence of universal and specialized trends in social, political, and economic systems. It can offer new opportunities for local action and community. Leveraging glocalization could be a way to strengthen liberal democracy and resist the destructive greed of neoliberal globalization. Ultimately, the future of the welfare state depends on our collective ability to recognize and resist the ideological assumptions that threaten and distort its foundations. It requires the courage to rethink, in these apocalyptic times, what we value in our society and how we can build a more just and secure future for all citizens. One key challenge to the future of liberalism is opposing neoliberalism and bringing the core principles of the welfare state back to the center of political discourse. This requires political will to recognize the problems caused by neoliberal thinking and actively work to correct them. The future of the welfare state hinges on people’s ability to identify and resist neoliberal ideological assumptions. A new anti-militarist model is needed, focusing on equality, social security, and ecological safety instead of economic efficiency. The Rise of Social Liberalism? The future of the welfare state depends on people’s ability to identify and resist neoliberal ideological assumptions. A new model is needed, focusing on equality, social security, and ecological safety rather than economic efficiency. The demands of the times highlight the importance of social liberalism as a counterforce to neoliberalism. Social liberalism supports a free market economy but also emphasizes the role of the state in promoting welfare and equality. It seeks to balance individual freedoms with social justice . For the future of social liberalism, it is essential to find ways to respond to the challenges posed by neoliberalism and build a fairer and safer future for all citizens. Social liberals also emphasize the importance of the ecological principle as part of liberal thought. For the future of liberalism, it is crucial to address environmental issues and strive for sustainable development. The future of liberalism depends on strengthening social liberalism and considering the ecological principle. It is important to find new models that focus on equality, social security, and ecological safety instead of just economic efficiency. Social liberalism is not just an economic policy direction but also an ethical conviction based on values of individual freedom, social justice, and ecological sustainability. Social liberals see the state’s role as crucial in promoting these values, striving to balance individual freedom with the common good. This perspective highlights the value-driven nature of social liberalism, which distinguishes it from market-oriented neoliberalism.

Liberalism first emerged as an ideal during the Age of Enlightenment and later came to life during the French Revolution through the pursuit of liberty, fraternity, and equality, and entered European vocabulary in the 1810s. It was a political ideology and an idealistic value system, inspired by the dismantling of the estate society and the mercantilist economic system. Since the fall of Marxism, liberalism has attracted attention, as the right no longer had to be helmeted and rigid priests. As a foundation for political parties, liberalism is a complex ideological structure due to its non-dogmatic nature. In this world, liberalism doesn't operate within an outdated party structure but rather through ethical and ideological frameworks. However, as a way of thinking, liberalism has found a place among progressive factions within various parties, from liberal conservatives to the new green-left, and even to agrarian parties within the EU. According to Bertrand Russell, liberalism, along with fraternity and equality, is "the other side of the coin of democratic socialism and liberal democracy"—thus, it is also a brother to the social democrat, but what sets it apart is liberal-mindedness. AUF DEUTSCH: Der Liberalismus erschien zuerst als Ideal in der Zeit der Aufklärung und lebte dann in der Französischen Revolution im Streben nach Freiheit, Brüderlichkeit und Gleichheit auf – und fand in den 1810er Jahren Eingang in den europäischen Sprachgebrauch. Es war eine politische Ideologie und ein idealistisches Wertesystem, dessen Vater die Auflösung der Ständegesellschaft und des merkantilistischen Wirtschaftssystems war. Unter der Flagge des Liberalismus herrschte seit dem Fall des Marxismus großer Andrang, da die Rechte nicht mehr als gepanzerter und starrer Priester auftreten musste. Als Ausgangspunkt für politische Parteien ist der Liberalismus aufgrund seines nicht-dogmatischen Charakters eine schwer fassbare ideologische Konstruktion. In dieser Welt funktioniert der Liberalismus nicht mit veralteten Parteistrukturen, sondern mit ethischen und ideologischen Strukturen, aber als Denkweise war Liberalismus in progressiven Fraktionen innerhalb verschiedener Parteien möglich – von liberalen Konservativen bis hin zur neuen Grün-Linken und sogar in Agrarparteien in der EU. Laut Bertrand Russell ist der Liberalismus „die andere Seite der Medaille des demokratischen Sozialismus und der liberalen Demokratie“ – somit auch ein Bruder des Sozialdemokraten, wobei ihn jedoch der Freiheitsgeist unterscheidet.

Mentorointi- ja FORUM mallit uuden yhteistoiminnan malleina? Ihmisen uusi elämä pitää hahmottaa tapahtuvien tosiasioiden eikä eilispäivän asenteiden, vaan kokemuksen ja koetun perusteella, muutoksella parempaan pyrkien. Mentorointi on paljon intiimimpi yhdessä tekemisen muoto kuin valta-asemasta johtaminen. ”Oppilas” on tässäkin tietysti viimeksi itse vastuussa oppimisestaan. Tietoa ei voida suoraan ”siirtää”, eikä toista voida pakottaa oppimaan havainnoista jos havainnointi ei kiinnosta, jos hän ei halua omaksua ”vanhoja ajatuksia”. Siksi  mentorilla ei ole ainoaa  tietoa ja totuutta. Vuoropuhelun  toinen osapuoli täytyy kohdata suoraan joko digitaalisen kohtaamisen tai läsnäolon avulla saada vakuuttuneeksi, että hän tarvitsee sitä osaamista,jota mentori tarjoaa. Kaikki perustuu luottamuksen voittamiseen ja siksi mentorin on luotava hyvä suhde oppilaaseensa jotta hän oppisi. Tässä olisi merkittävä mahdollisuus yhdistettynä lähityön uuteen radikaaliin teknologiaan. (Siinä olisi myös tervetullut kotouttamistoimien pohjaidea ja vientimalli maahanmuuttajien integraatioon, pyrkimys veljeyteen ja  tasa-arvoon; älyaikaan vanhasta traditiosta.) Se olisi osallistujille mieluinen palvelus – jo sukupolvien saatossa hyväksi havaittu toiminta- ja tietämyksen siirtämisen malli – kertaelämän kokemuksien siirtämistä sukupolvien ketjuun. Olemme sen velkaa esi-isillemme ja esiäideillemme. MITÄS SANOTTE?