“Liberalism Today: Freedom First“

Course orientation for participants and for an international dialogue, benefiting from blended learning

This reveals already that primarily questions of political practice, facing Liberals the world over today, stood at the focus of this event, consisting of two one-monthly online periods as well as two weeks at the Theodor Heuss Academy at Gummersbach, attended by all participants.

A total of over 80 participants coming from 22 countries had been registered for the online seminar, starting in late January 2008. Almost all of them turned out to be active participants. Depending on the quality of their respective contributions, the best participants were invited to come to Gummersbach. This on-site seminar was held between 6 to 18 April with an attendance of 23.

The Foundation has successfully organised international online seminars for four years, based on a platform it calls “e-Academy”. These events are always participant-oriented. Participants are encouraged to exchange views and information, using discussion forums, group tasks and joint work on „Wikis“ allowing for intensive online co-operation.

Participants of this seminar on liberalism first studied basic terms and principles. For this they were given access to contemporary texts of liberal thinkers. These included liberal viewpoints on selected and fundamental considerations such as freedom, the principle of the rule of law, state and government, democracy, freedom of opinion as well as property, as reflected in the writings of Ralf Dahrendorf (PDF, 69 KB), Friedrich A. von Hayek (PDF, 72 KB), Karl Popper (PDF, 53 KB) and Hernando de Soto (PDF, 73 KB).

As a result of their exchanges, participants compiled a joint Wiki file outlining the history and present-day state of affairs of liberalism in their respective regions. Their reports vary as to depth of detail, but altogether they present a very interesting overview of topical and historical perceptions regarding the forces of liberalism in various regions of the world.

The following results are available online:

Central, South East and Eastern Europe (PDF, 106 KB)
Africa (PDF, 87 KB)
Latin America (PDF, 263 KB)
South Asia (PDF, 85 KB)

The topic for the discussion forum, for which translations into English and Spanish were available at all times, was freedom of opinion, already referred to at the outset. Drawing on a number of recent examples, “blasphemy” was the starting point chosen for the debate. How do Liberals cope with “blasphemy”? Do religions deserve special protection, or will Liberals place freedom of opinion higher? Numerous discussion bodies of this forum debated these topics both intensively and controversially. On the one hand, there were participants who argued that for Liberals especially, the values of tolerance and freedom of religion were important precepts deserving protection. There were others who objected that freedom of religion cannot underpin a claim for protection and specific privileges by a specific religion. There should only be a right to unhindered religious practice for the belief in question. Many contributions also pinpointed the specific value of freedom of opinion. Freedom of opinion does not mean for Liberals to approve the views set forth, but those who hold these opinions should be allowed to say what they want, even if individuals or groups feel they have come under attack. At a later point in time, participants also debated the boundaries of freedom of opinion and general principles. But the latter should not result in any sort of special treatment of certain (religious) groups.

This discussion gained its special value as a result of the practical viewpoints introduced by participants. These provided a permanent thread for the whole programme: because these are the questions many Liberals the world over shall have to face when setting forth their views in political discussions. What is at stake is not just recognition of liberal values and principles as such, but, before all, they must be implemented in political practice.

The first part of this online seminar was rounded off by a number of tasks set to every individual participant. A “photo quiz” asked for well-known political leaders from all parts of the world whom the participants had to identify. A knowledge quiz drew on the contents of the texts submitted for study and in a final essay they were encouraged to give free reign to their own political creativity. The topic “The most important reform for my country” asked for liberal reform concepts. A total of 48 essays were received and they covered a great variety of ideas for reform – from educational policies to the struggle against discrimination, a reform of the legal system up to decentralisation and the introduction of federal structures of government.

Those participants who had scored best in the first online phase of the seminar were then invited to Gummersbach to continue their work. To prepare for this on-site event they were first involved in another online scheme. They were first given practical hints for the seminar to follow and used the well-known Wiki editor to compile a glossary of liberal terminology for later use in their seminar.

Also in Gummersbach participants concentrated on working together and on an exchange of views. This type of live co-operation was facilitated by the fact that they had already got to know one another during the online stages, so contacts were rapid and cordial in the real world, in contrast with “traditional” seminars. Seminars could now build on important groundwork that had already been provided in the e-Academy. The discussions continued work on concepts already dealt with online, concentrating on subjects of special importance to liberals, such as the rule of law, property, subsidiarity, development, market economy and secularism. In the course of the trips offered (half a day to Duesseldorf and four days to Weimar, Buchenwald, Dresden and Erfurt) participants met with liberal political leaders there. They learnt more about the glories and the darker sides of the past and of the culture of their host country during their visits to historical sites.

During the first half of the seminar, participants analysed the arguments put forward by the enemies of globalisation and rabble-rousers in the international debate about the climate and worked on liberal counter-positions. The arguments started after three propaganda films were screened, including Al Gore’s tendentious offering “An inconvenient Truth”. Groups working on these topics were asked to check major statements as to their substance-matter and reliability by referring to the Internet. Some participants were brought down to earth when analysing their findings. Items presented as “truths” turned out to be “assumptions”. Cost-benefit-analyses of many prescriptions showed the handwritings of socialists or government-interventionists. The most uncomfortable truth facing the anti-globalisation movement is that those countries which cut themselves off from all others are globalisation’s biggest losers. The solution may therefore not be found in erecting barriers to trade to protect a country’s output.

It also became obvious that Liberals call for another political concept to fight international terrorism. Theirs should be a line prepared to follow different avenues to guarantee security. Curtailing civil rights and in particular, imposing extensive limits on the private sphere, as practiced all too frequently, were quite unacceptable.

During the second half of the Gummersbach-based seminar, participants dealt with and practised communication skills, so as to enable them to more effectively run political discussions. Such competences include plain language, using arguments people can follow, rhetorical talents and a strategy. Enemies of the Liberals quite often try to introduce all-too hackneyed clichés and to discredit liberal approaches. One example was the claim forwarded frequently that the market made the rich richer and the poor poorer. Others refer to examples of privatisation schemes which failed because of a lack of professionalism or because they were not pursued seriously enough. They use these points to argue their case against privatisation and decentralisation. The discussion here concentrated on sources of facts and figures, resulting in a totally different picture after rational analysis. Also, arguments for liberal solutions were practised to be more effective in discussions as one part of everyday political activities.


Additional interesting documents and working results of the Gummersbach seminar to download (in English):

A survey of value systems of political trends by Dr. Stefan Melnik (PDF, 124 KB)

Capitalism by Renu Pokharna, India (PDF, 9 KB)


Two short presentations on liberal market concepts:

1) Petar Mirchevski, Macedonia (PDF, 1,09 MB)
2) Renu Pokharna, India (PDF, 1,96 MB)


‘Communicating Liberalism‘ (PDF, 83 KB): some hints for discussion practice


Liberal approaches – by way of ten specific proposals for topical issues:

fighting poverty (PDF, 164 KB)

protection of property rights (PDF, 103 KB)

secularism (PDF, 592 KB)



By Dr Stefan Melnik and Wulf Pabst



The term “Wiki“ was derived from Wikipedia, the Internet-based encyclopedia. The software employed allows various users to work on a joint document, to insert or amend texts, images and graphics. As this Wiki editing software is freely available, it was possible to integrate this instrument into the e-Academy. It can be used there mainly for group work as it represents some sort of electronic flipchart.