The Challenge Of Maintaining Freedom In A Liberal Society
Cultural diversity is the eternal reality of social life. There are cultural differences in the country, and the country shares various cultures of the earth. Even in the most homogeneous countries, people recognize common races, speak the same language and believe mainly in beliefs, but subcultures still include scorpions, occupations, wealth and geographical conditions. In many countries, different ethnic, linguistic and religious communities interact to maintain group identity. In human history, it is difficult to find social systems that are more tolerant of diversity than liberal societies. Religions and minorities live under the protection of a liberal system, and even groups that are very opposed to freedom thrive in liberal democracy while adhering to national law. However, not all cultures are compatible with liberalism in the classical sense of the word, and if this fact is not controlled, liberal society can be damaged. The challenge for a liberal society is to maintain a freedom that is compatible with its existence.
After World War II, especially during the Cold War, human rights became increasingly important in defining international relations and order. At the same time, as human rights became an important issue in the international system, international relations began to focus on human rights instead of war, trade agreements and national agreements. The importance of human rights has led to the development of important national and international policies worldwide. We can also explain human rights activities to prevent human rights crimes. Because there are conflicts and violations of human rights in the world, the United Nations and its agencies that oppose human rights violations have specific policies to prevent these violations.
Thus, classical liberals explain the application and violation of human rights. Countries, individuals and international organizations that defend liberal ideologies have played an important role in international relations. Countries have developed specific human rights policies and codes that link these policies and standards with common values and standards. International organizations and various stakeholders have the power to manage these policies and influence their decisions. This has increased the role of human rights in international relations. Even if people face unfair treatment, they now have the power of the law and can claim their rights in national or international courts. Liberalism focuses on respecting individual rights and values in the public domain. In addition, liberalism plays an important role in promoting human rights by ensuring useful policy failures, but it cannot overcome inequality, racism, exploitation and other factors. Damage human rights on the international stage. For example, when examining human rights violations by economic companies, large-scale cooperation, large-scale finance and multinational companies, they affect people and become important actors in international relations. This is considered a violation of human rights. These companies usually set up factories in Asia and Africa to create a cheap workforce, protect their interests and exploit poor workers.
However, the Liberal Party is different from the Conservative Party. The Conservative Party is more discriminatory with the Liberal Party, and the Liberal Party is more discriminatory with the Conservative Party. Conservative discrimination is due to their best traditions and the obvious violations of their values by liberals. Free discrimination is due to a clear violation of values by their vulgar traditions and conservative groups. More complicated is the fact that conservatives attach great importance to autonomy. This weakens discrimination against free groups. This is autonomy, it is freedom of belief or what they want to do. Liberals consider themselves universal and undermine discrimination against conservative groups, perhaps because universality prefers universal acceptance. In addition, liberals discriminate on the basis of race, gender, religion and other reasons. Neoliberals are often characterized by inter-ethnic marriage, but liberals claim that discrimination is justified and that inter-ethnic marriage causes hybridity and puts pressure on the public.
The rule-and-exemption approach can be applied as a multicultural medium. For example, some schools have uniforms, but Muslim girls can wear scarves to break the rules. Another example is of Sikhs who wear a turban, and who feel in many countries relieved of the obligation to wear motorcycle helmets or hard hats in the construction work site. The application of rules and exemptions should be considered in context, but taking into account all considerations, it is generally recommended to apply the rules to all or relax each rule. However, the legal status (or a copy thereof) is usually sufficient to exclude an exemption, or the issuance of an exemption may be sufficient to prove that there is no law. An example is the French ordinance; it is possible to bury people without coverings traditional coffins. This change in the law comes from the Muslim desire to bury the dead in coffins. Instead of allowing legal exemptions, it was recommend to change the law itself. With regard to French slaughtered animals, no changes have been made to the law and no exemptions apply. However, the government continues to act multiculturalism. Local governments are encouraged to build a temporary slaughterhouse with an approved hangar that slaughter animals in a humane and environmentally friendly way, with respect for Muslims mores.
Autonomy refers to the ability of an independent person or to lead their lives following their causes, preferences, motivations or desires; this requires that external forces that interfere with their choices do not affect them. Autonomy is often considered the main characteristic of liberalism. Liberalism seems to derive from this notion of personal status, the nature of social relations, political commitment and the legitimacy of political power. It is difficult to know how this 'continuous strategy' evolves from the first interlocutor to the political community without interruption. Theorists who study independence are aware of this ambiguity and the related concept of a broadly defined concept. There are many differences with respect to the nature, elements and situations, and the conceptual importance (or lack of conceptual importance) of the social and political context in which people live.
According to Margalit and Raz (1990), moral rights exist when the element of human happiness (interest) is sufficient to allow it to continue fulfilling its obligations. They affirm that people have rights when collective goals are not enough to take away what they want, explain the basic characteristics of personality rights, emphasize the seriousness of what cannot be provided. Therefore, the transition from multicultural policy to liberal multiculturalism means acceptance of the last concept that the fact that a free state does not protect the interests of minority ethnic cultures can cause unacceptable harm. This notion suggests that liberal theorists do not consider the danger of cultural identity that minorities are ignored in countries that do not implement a multicultural integration model. Therefore, they must adapt their methods, give cognitive value to the few interests of their own culture and avoid damaging the neglected cultural features that are the main concerns of liberalism.
In conclusion, a liberal society that prioritizes freedom of choice must accept a diversity that is compatible with freedom. Accepting diversity gives others the freedom to choose their lives. As our choice is limited by the rights of others, freedom of choice is not restricted. Freedom can be strengthened by applying the fundamental laws of life, liberty and property to all options. Therefore, a liberal society does not tolerate all forms of culture, but only those that respect the basic laws. In a liberal society, the basic laws apply to all individuals, especially the state. The repression of a particular culture by the state constitutes a rejection of the election and constitutes a direct violation of the basic law. The state's promotion of certain cultures will require redistribution that contradicts these laws and must therefore be condemned equally. A complete liberal society does not exist and never exists. But for those who want to defend and expand freedom in an imperfect liberal society where they live, this remains the source of inspiration and principles.
