Notes on "A History of Political Theory" -- Episode 24

For episode 23, see here

The Theory of the Nation State

XXIV. Halifax and Locke
 A. The Glorious Revolution indicated monarchy was to stay,
      albeit limited by Parliament. 
 B. Halifax was an empiric skeptic.
       1. Saw so-called "fundamentals" and "general principles"
           as pretense cloaking pursuit of partisan advantage.
       2. Laws based on such are attempts to bind the future.
       3. Government depends on (unspecifiable) inherent power
           of self-development of the people which may or may not
           be expressed through representatives and may be expressed
           through leadership in crucial cases.
       4. Argued for constitutional monarchy. 
 C. Locke was an empiricist, rationalist philosopher.
       1. Tapped medieval tradition (of moral restraints on power,
           responsibility of rulers to community and government 
           under law) through Hooker (Episode 20) and passed it 
           on to the 18th Century. 
       2. Relying on common sense, fails to get to first principles.
       3. His community based theory conflicts with Hobbes analysis
           of community as a result of individual cooperation.
       4. However, Locke used both conceptions:
           i. Accepted first as result of seeing England as a community
             existing through time despite change in government.
           ii. Had to describe society in terms of individual interests.
           iii. Made over natural law into claim of innate, indefeasible
             rights with government existing to preserve these.
       5. Saw state of nature as one of peaceful mutual assistance
           lacking only organization to give effect to these rights.
       6. Saw positive law adding no moral force to pre-exisiting
           moral laws which are broader.
       7. Private property results from mixing labor with land,
           extending ones personality to it.
       8. Right to private property is anterior to society.
       9. Life and liberty are also natural rights.  
 D. Both Locke and Hobbes helped fasten on social theory the
      presumption that individual self-interest is clear and 
      compelling while social interest is thin and unsubstantial.
       1. Locke assumed that common good equaled protection of
           individual rights.
       2. For Hobbes' calculation of security, Locke substituted
           the calculation of pleasure.
 E. Contract
       1. Civil power rests on the individual right to protect 
           himself and his property.
       2. Legislative and executive power of government is only
           what is resigned to it by individuals.
       3. By an original compact do men incorporate into society.
       4. Implicit are two separate compacts, one for society and 
           one for government. 
       5. Individuals must unanimously consent to form body
           politic and are therefore obligated to submit to it.
       6. As decision rule of that body is by majority, government
           depends on what that majority does with the power
           deriving from the original compact. 
 F. Grant of power to government divests people of power
      as long as government is faithful to its duties.
 G. Revolution is justified when the government seriously
      jeopardizes social interests because the moral order is
      permanent and not dependent on force.
 H. Four levels of Locke's theory (often confused)
       1. Basis in the individual and his rights
       2. Men are also members of a community acting as trustee
           of these individual rights.
       3. Government is the trustee for the community.
       4. Executive less authoritative than the legislature. 

Next week: France and The Decadence of Natural Law


 
         

Notes on "A History of Political Theory" -- Episode 23

For episode 22, see here

The Theory of the Nation State

XXIII. The Republicans: Harrington, Milton and Sidney
 A. Republican issues played no major part in the Puritan Revolution.
 B. James Harrington - Utopian The Commonwealth of Oceana 1656
       1. Saw government determined in both structure and practice by
           underlying social and economic forces.
       2. That class that controls property commands government. 
       3. Saw Hobbesian power as resting on social force that presumes
           control of means of subsistence.
       4. Revolution result of control of land shifting to middle class.
       5. Classified governments on basis of typical forms of 
           land tenure.
       6. Not economic materialist because it remains possible to
           radically change the distribution pf property through law.
       7. Politics rests on two principles:
           i. force, depending on distribution of property and;
           ii. "authority," depending on the good of the mind.
           iii. government of "authority could alter property relations
               and relied on statecraft and a commonwealth of law
       8. Commonwealth
           i. agrarian law (political rights based on land)
           ii. rotation in office
           iii. separation of powers
       9. Was republican but not a democrat
 C. John Milton - Areopagitica (1644) defended freedom of speech
       1. Like J.S. Mill after him, stated liberal creed that truth will prevail
           over error when both are freely tested by investigation and
           discussion.
       2. Argued that resistance to a tyrant is natural right.
       3. Called for separation of church and state as they are distinct
           communities. 
 D. Algernon Sidney and Robert Filmer
       1. Filmer's Patriarcha was dusted off 30 years after his death to defend
           royalists.
           i. argument for hereditary king's authority based on natural 
              authority of the father
           ii. pointed out problems of terms such as "the people" and the
               concept of contract
 E. Sidney was a republican
           i. Refuted Filmer
           ii. But backward looking toward aristocratic republicanism 

Next week: Halifax and Locke

Notes on "A History of Political Theory" -- Episode 21

For episode 20, see here

The Theory of the Nation State

XXI. Thomas Hobbes
 A. Hobbes' political writings occasioned by civil war and were intended to
      support the King. 
 B. Sought to account on scientific grounds for all facts of nature including
      society and individuals (an approach now defined as materialism).
       1. Derived complex appearances from underlying simple motions.
       2. Used a geometry and physics to account for individual physiology
           and psychology and those to build a philosophy of the most complex
           "artificial" bodies, society and the state.
 C. That which was natural for Hobbes was not an end (e.g. natural law) but a
      cause (the psychological mechanism of the human animal).
       1. Resulting in societies made up of mutual actions and reactions of
           individuals upon each other.
       2. Not moral ideals but causes that will evoke generally cooperative
           behavior are conditions of a stable union.
 D. All emotions and desires derive from primitive attractions or retractions
      from stimulus.
 E. Rule behind all behavior is that a living body is set instinctively to preserve
      or heighten its vitality.
       1. Leads to restless pursuit of means to continue existence.
       2. Means that security is always precarious with result that there is no
           limit on the desire for security and power ("the present means of
           obtaining apparent future goods").
       3. This plus a rough equality in capabilities leads to a war of all against
           all -- with no "right" or "wrong" -- and thus making civilization
           impossible. 
 F. Reason is second principle of human nature.
       1. Makes pursuit of security more effective.
       2. Ruthless pursuit of individual advantage cannot be basis of society.
       3. Calculating selfishness brings man into society.
 G. Laws of nature state what ideally rational beings would do to achieve
      security. 
       1. This forms postulates upon which rational construction of society
           takes place.
       2. Laws amount to this:
           i. peace and economy have greater utility for self-preservation than
              violence and general competition
           ii. peace requires mutual confidence in the surrender of the "right to
               everything"
 H. Society is simply the means to an end.
       1. Based on utilitarianism and individualism.
       2. Such a notion of individualism was a clean break with customary 
           ideas about economic and social institutions.
       3. The defense of monarchy superficial next to this.
 I. To safeguard covenant by which all surrendered rights, a coercive
     power, i.e. government, was required. 
       1. Men do what they dislike on pain of suffering what they dislike even
           more.
       2. Cooperation is formed by union of individuals -- not consent from
           "citizens" -- which acts as, and through, one sovereign individual. 
 J. Law and morals are the same, simply the will of the sovereign.
 K. All necessary powers belong to the sovereign and are individual and 
      unalienable. 
       1. There is no justification for resistance.
       2. Yet if resistance is successful and the sovereign unable to govern
           (provide security), he is sovereign no longer.
       3. Monarchy not essential to the theory.
       4. Church is the only other corporation existing as an act of sovereign will.
 L. Advantages  of government are tangible and must accrue to individuals.
 M. Rests on no general or public good or will, only self-interested individuals. 

Next week: Radicals and Communists

Notes on "A History of Political Theory" -- Episode 7

For episode 6 see here.

Theory of the City-State

VII. The Twilight of the City-State
 A. Plato and Aristotle had little immediate influence of contemporary political 
      thought 
 B. More influential at the time was protest against the conception of the good
     life as participation in the life of the polis
 C. Individual self-sufficiency became the basis of the good life
 D. Plato and Aristotle both failed to take note of the effects of foreign relations
       on the Greek city-states
        1. City-states constantly balancing between isolation and inter-dependence
          on question of self-sufficiency
       2. Conflict and inability to work together left them open to outsiders
 E. Faced with decline of importance of city-state, two resulting philosophic
          moods:
       1. Withdrawal -- Epicureans and Skeptics
       2. Withdrawal and protest -- Cynics
       3. Represent questions about first principles(as embodied in Plato and
          Aristotle)
 F. Epicureans
       1.  Aimed to lead students towards individual self-sufficiency
       2. The good life seen to consist of enjoyment of pleasure
           i. Avoidance of pain, worry and anxiety
           ii. Congenial friendship, withdrawal from public life
           iii. The good, privately enjoyed
       3. The state formed solely for the sake of obtaining security
           i. Man essentially selfish
           ii. So they make tacit agreement with each other to leave each other be
       4. There are no moral imperatives
       5. Hobbes not unlike Epicureans
 G. Cynics
       1. Reject the lifestyle, virtues and social distinctions of the city-state
       2. Wise man should be completely self-suffcient
       3. Morality was living with nature according to reason and caring for others
       4. Involved a kind of equality of nihilism and anarcho-communism

For further reading on ancient (Greek) philosophy, I can recommend the classics from my grad school days (before the days of political correctness about Western Civilization):

The Discovery of the Mind: The Greek Origins of European Thought by Bruno Snell

History of Ancient Philosophy by W. Windleband

Greek Political Theory: Plato and His Predecessors by Sir Ernest Baker

And for how the Greeks became the Greeks:  The Coming of the Greeks: Indo-European Conquests in the Aegean and the Near East by Robert Drews


Next week: The Theory of the Universal Community: The Law of Nature


Dedicated this week and every to grandson William, who arrived today.

The Killer Species: Us vs Them

The human species has a long record of Us vs Them conflict. Indeed, our species of Homo sapiens is the only surviving one from a long period in which various other kinds of humans shared the evolutionary record. For whatever reason, we emerged the sole survivor. We had various advantages. Deprived of in-built weapons such as claws and saber teeth, we evolved as especially inventive and effective tool-using killers. Our social organization – depending very much on our ability to use symbols and language to reaffirm in-group bonds and work effectively in coordinated activities – plus our advancing toolset made us formidable hunters and gatherers. While some of these advantages may have characterized the other members of the Homo genus, we did them better. Even our closest relative, Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, may not have had our full capacity for the advanced suite. After coexisting with us for some 160,000 years, the Neanderthals joined the long list of the extinct other humans.

Since our arriving on the scene some 200 thousand years ago, we have succeeded in eliminating, replacing and enslaving Them. Recent discoveries have pushed back the known origins of warfare within our own species to 10,000 years ago. The University of Cambridge anthropologist who discovered the evidence suggested that “lethal raids by competing groups were part of life for hunter-gatherer communities at the time.” A recent excavation in France of 6000 year old remains provides signs of violence including against women and children and perhaps ritual dismemberment. But it would be surprising if we were not already – and since the beginning – omni-predators of anything not Us.

We have come up with various reasons and motives for using violence against others. We want their food, water, land, gold, women, men. But these have often been overlaid or supplemented by the simple desire to rid ourselves of Them. We tend, all too frequently, to establish who we are by defining who we are not. Attacking Them reaffirms our identity. In the Hobbesian state of nature, nothing prevents the war of all against all. Within a society, a stable governing order – the Leviathan – can regularize this war. (Regularize, not end. Witness the current political conflict between Red and Blue in America or the current wave of xenophobia sweeping through the EU.) Between societies in conflict, or when internal order breaks down, the simplest way to distinguish the enemy is to focus on Them.

The conflicts of the last 100 years have been mainly of this Us vs Them kind, primarily over identity: ethnic, tribal or religious. They have spun from control when the regimes that ruled over multi-ethnic states have fallen or been seized or overthrown. Once identity conflicts begin, they quickly turn zero-sum. Violence begets violence and the possibility of achieving a political solution recedes beyond the horizon. In the globalized and technologically complex 21st Century, these conflicts tend to produce regional and global insecurity.

It should seem obvious that international relations requires a version of the Leviathan, an internationally acceptable way to manage conflict between and within states and address the tensions that allow conflict to emerge along identity lines. The UN provides a mechanism to do both. Seems that our choice may be to use it better and act more multi-laterally or perhaps see that we have all become the universal Them on the way to our own demise.