Negative liberty
Negative liberty, an idea that was first expressed as a separate form of liberty by Isaiah Berlin, is the absence of coercion, as opposed to positive liberty, which is the presence of means to ones aims.Negative liberty means that no-one is allowed to use coercion against others unless for the purpose of self defense. That is, everyone has a complete rule over his or her body and property so long as no one else is hurt.
Suppose, for example, that you want to make love with a certain person. In some countries this is forbidden, if the other person is of same sex or if money is transferred. Such laws are violations of negative liberty, according to which no acts whose participants are willing can be hindered so long as those acts do not hurt others. A law that would force that other person to make love with you would certainly also violate negative liberty (namely that of the compelled person) but would add to your positive liberty. Other examples could include a law that would force others to provide you with transportation or room or other means to your ends, violating the negative liberty of those forced (but, again, adding to the positive liberty of the recipient of the forced favors). Thus, a positive liberty of yours means an obligation to others along with meaning a liberty for you. However, one can give also more tricky examples.
Persons considering negative liberty as an absolute rule are called libertarians. However, most liberals only consider negative liberty as the main rule that can be mildly and cautiously violated to provide some important means, positive liberty, particularly to those most in need. On contrast, those keeping positive liberty as their main rule are typically collectivists, left-wingers, even socialists.
Bibliography
External link