Book: Western Liberalism: The Case for Freedom

The landing page for the bmjphilosophy book, "Western Liberalism: The Case for Freedom".

=Layout=
 * Part I -- An introduction to freedom & the state
 * Part II -- Freedom from bad people
 * Freedom from invasion
 * Freedom from factionalism (independence movements, movements to undermine the function of the state)
 * Freedom from assault (physical, verbal, anti-hate speech laws)
 * Freedom from theft/fraud
 * Freedom from slander
 * Freedom from harassment
 * Freedom from being tricked into harming yourself (e.g. a news-story saying that scientists recommend eating clay)
 * Freedom from non-citizens entering the country -- both immigration and tourism, i.e. to stop the dilution of the welfare pool, clearly some immigrants contribute, also to prevent unwanted cultural effects
 * Part III -- Freedom from bad luck
 * "Freedom" from being unable to pay for healthcare
 * Only a partial freedom -- limit to free healthcare
 * "Freedom" from being unable to pay for education
 * Only a partial freedom -- limit to free education
 * "Freedom" from destitution (welfare -- housing, clothes, food)
 * Only a partial freedom -- limit to repeat dispensation if squandered "too rapidly"
 * "Freedom" from the consequences of being disliked (anti-discrimination laws)
 * Only a partial freedom -- anti-discrimination laws limited to disliked due a "protected characteristic"
 * "Freedom" from the being offended (applying anti-hate speech laws to cases of "mental trauma", censorship, blasphemy laws)
 * I would argue that if the alleged crime is not verbal attack / hate speech / harrassment, then it is difficult to justify blasphemy laws
 * "Freedom" from the consequences of being unsuccessful (wealth/income redistribution)
 * A (very) incomplete freedom -- clear limits to wealth distribution
 * Part IV -- Freedom from bad government
 * Part V -- Curious freedoms
 * Freedom from neglect where a person is a dependent (child abuse / elder abuse)
 * Freedom from coercion where property is shared (spouse abuse etc.)
 * "Freedom" from being unable to pay for legal defense
 * "Freedom" from being able to do yourself harm (bans on gambling, drugs, suicide pills, tanning beds etc.)
 * "Freedom" from pornography -- ? to protect the women involved ? to protect people (e.g. women) from the resulting harmful sex preferences (of e.g. men) ? to protect people from the mental health problems associated with watching pornography ? to protect employers/beneficiaries of the economy from the reduced productivity of workers who watch porn ? to protect other internet users from the reduced bandwidth availability due to porn watching
 * Freedom from fake news
 * Part VI -- Summary
 * State as an institution which provides freedom from bad people (? what is the responsbility)
 * State as an facilitator of a democratic contract whereby the haves pay for the have-nots
 * Principle 1: To prevent economic loss, always if evidence-based, by a vote if speculative (free education included here, therefore)
 * Principle 2: To prevent national indignity d/t frank suffering, by consent (with enforced payment based on a vote to decide threshold and prevent free-riding, with voluntary giving being the best option)
 * Principle 3: To prevent consequences of a relative lack of material possessions -- same policy as above
 * State as an facilitator of a democratic contract whereby certain behaviours are restricted
 * Principle 1: To prevent consequences of a relative lack of material possessions or social opportunities d/t being discriminated against -- the question of national dignity, preventing factional movements, preventing economic loss
 * Principle 2: To prevent mental anguish -- I am opposed to this, but it obviously raises the question about what is a mental illness
 * Principle 2: To prevent mental anguish -- I am opposed to this, but it obviously raises the question about what is a mental illness