Being a liberal does not mean a person is a member of a liberal group or party; conversely, he or she is supposed to hold certain values. According to Paul Kennedy’s guest Alan Wolfe, a professor of political science and the director of The Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life, liberalism is “the most appropriate philosophy in our time” (Wolfe 2009) in the sense that, as a notion, it embodies the idea of autonomy, which means self-governance. That is to say, people themselves can control their lives, can change by making appropriate decision for themselves. However, they would not be really free to lead an autonomous life unless they are equal. Equality is therefore a fundamental ideal, particularly in the United States. Both autonomy and equality, precisely equality of opportunities, are two beliefs of liberalism: the existence of the one is out of the question without the existence of the other.

In his book The Future of Liberalism, Alan Wolfe evokes a liberal tradition that makes reference to some of the 18th century figures, such as Adam Smith and Immanuel Kant, and others of the 20th century, such as John Stuart Mill and some of his contemporaries. He, therefore, equated two different eras to talk about two contexts: American context and that of the World of Enlightenment, in which liberalism was developed. He did so to persuade his readers “that classical liberalism, which believes in the market and individual freedom, it is fundamentally different from something called modern liberalism” (W. 2009). Furthermore, he declares that the ideals which motivated some of the 18th century figures, such as Adam Smith, are the same as those that are motivating others in the 21st century. Yet, during his interview, Wolfe points to the fact that, in his book, he “tried to show the fundamental underlined assumption that human nature and human progress that[sic] underline all liberalisms” (W.2009), and, if there is any hint to the distinction between