PublicationArticle (with peer review)

Sociology and Classical Liberalism

Abstract

We advocate the development of a classical-liberal character in sociology. Even social democrats should recognize classical liberalism as a venerable tradition. They should recognize that its antistatist sensibilities remain a vibrant and valuable part of the general political culture. To say that classical liberalism is underrepresented in sociology would be a vast understatement. Forbidden might be more fitting. The lack of classical liberalism, in our view, has worked to the detriment of sociology and the public purposes that sociology presumably should be fulfilling. First, we relate recent controversies within the sociology profession to show that some sociologists are very critical of the profession’s ideological character. Second, we summarize the results of our survey of ASA members, providing hard data that shows the almost complete absence of classical liberals in the organization. Third, we sketch a few substantive ideas to indicate the promise
of classical-liberal sociology.

Related content: Working Paper No. 81

Klein, D.B. & Stern, C. (2006). ”Sociology and Classical Liberalism.”The Independent Review, 11(1): 37-52.

Details

Author: Klein, D.B. & Stern, C.
Publication year: 2006
Published in: The Independent Review

Related

Similar content

Sociology and Classical Liberalism in Dialogue. Freedom is Something We Do Together

Rojas, F. & Stern, C.

Publication year

2024

Published in

Lexington Books.

Abstract

The motivation for Sociology and Classical Liberalism in Dialogue: Freedom is Something We Do Together is based on two observations: first, sociology as a field is populated with scholars on the left and second, (few but still) classical liberals and libertarian scholars are found in neighboring social science fields, such as economics, political science, and political philosophy. Can scholarship benefit if sociology and classical liberal ideas are in dialogue? To answer the question, the book gathers sociologists, criminologists, demographers, and political scientists that care about classical liberal ideas, or are willing to engage their sociological thinking with classical liberal ideas. Not all authors would identify themselves as classical liberals. These contributors discuss sociological topics through the lens of classical liberalism, asking how issues such as class, gender, or race relations can be viewed with a different perspective. Chapters also delve into the intersection of sociology and classical liberalism, exploring where viewpoints conflict and where they align.

Article (with peer review)

Managers on balancing employment protection and what’s good for the company: Intended and unintended consequences of a semi-coercive institution

Stern, C., & Weidenstedt, L.

Publication year

2022

Published in

Economic and Industrial Democracy.

Abstract

Sweden’s institutionalized employment protection legislation, ‘LAS’, is interesting theoretically because parts of it are semi-coercive. The semi-coerciveness makes it possible for firms and unions under collective agreements to negotiate departures from the law. Thus, the law is more flexible than the legal text suggests. The present study explores intended and unintended consequences of LAS as experienced by managers of smaller manufacturing companies. The results suggest that managers support the idea of employment protection in principle but face a difficult balancing act in dealing with LAS. From their point of view, the legislation’s institutional legitimacy is low, producing local cultures of hypocrisy and pretense. The article gives insights into how institutions aimed at specific, intended behavior sometimes end up producing unintended consequences fostering the opposite.

The article in total can be read here.

Article (with peer review)

Sex differences and occupational choice. Theorizing for policy informed by behavioral science.

Stern, C., & Madison, G.

Publication year

2022

Published in

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 202, 694-702.

Abstract

Occupations are segregated with respect to sex, even in modern, egalitarian societies. There are strong pressures to eliminate segregation and therefore strong reasons to correctly theorize why segregation persists. The dominant view underpinning most public policies is essentially that environmental factors nudge women and men into different occupational paths. Nudging, however, ignores research suggesting that psychological traits that influence occupational choice differs between women and men, on average.

Some of the most well-documented and persistent average sex differences between men and women suggest that the taken-for-granted assumption that an egalitarian society would exhibit a more or less equal distribution of men and women across the occupational landscape may be mistaken. Rather, models of occupational choice informed by individual differences in preferences, broadly understood, would help us better explain how men and women behave in the labor market. Differences in occupational preferences will affect choices. Therefore, differences in proportions of women and men across professions may be in line with an egalitarian society and the well-being and best interest of both men and women in society.

The article can be read here.