|A Pre-revolutionary Situation||The Ghosts of Liberal Pieties|
by Christopher Chantrill
June 19, 2012 at 6:00 pm
IN HIS LEARNED excursus on American history in Cleveland last week, President Obama made a big deal about the things we Americans have done together: railroads and highways, the Hoover Dam and the Golden Gate Bridge.
We got where we are today not by telling everybody to fend for themselves, but by coming together as one American family, all of us pitching in, all of us pulling our own weight, said the president. The president used the word together ten times in his speech.
Its a pity that almost everything the president has done in the last three years has divided Americans and replaced together with big government and special interests. Maybe its time we thought about what together really means.
It just so happens that the life work of Americas only woman Nobel economist, Elinor Ostrom, who died last week, had something important to say about this together. Ostrom, who was not an economist, did groundbreaking research into the ways that humans manage common resources, a.k.a. the tragedy of the commons. In other words, she worked on the science of together. She asked the question: How do humans manage things that they own together?
Ordinary humans, it turns out, have succeeded in managing common resources like common grazing land and common fisheries despite the tragedy of the commons. They have done it with systems of shaming and rewards. Good people, who do the right thing, get praised and honored in their communities; bad people, who sneak off to fish or graze more than their share, get named and shamed. I suspect that a critical part of this system is frequent community meetings, where members of the community know that they have to face their neighbors in a public forum.
You can see why we moderns talk about the tragedy of the commons. We look down on guilds and village councils that together used to reduce the freedom of their community members. Instead of naming and shaming we prefer the impersonal hand of the regulator and the bureaucrat. But politicians and bureaucrats arent very good at managing common resources from Washington DC. Under their management common resources suffer waste, abuse and neglect.
Elinor Ostrom represents a generation of scientists that has been doing yeomans work in exposing the noble lies and oversimplifications of the last two centuries, the sort that politicians like President Obama use to justify increased government power. You could run human society purely on the basis of utility, said the utilitarians: happiness of the greatest number. You could run society as a communal village writ large, said the socialists. You could run society with rational educated experts, said the Progressives and the Fabians. You could even run society as an evolutionary survival of the fittest, said the entrepreneurs, but everyone agreed that was social Darwinism.
But just as we know now that the design and operation of the human body is complex and sophisticated far beyond our imaginings, we are coming to understand that our life as social animals has a depth of complexity and sophistication beyond the naive simplifications of the philosophers and political activists. For instance Alan Page Fiske in the early 1990s developed a four-dimensional relational model of human society, humans doing things together as social animals. There is Communal Sharing, which was Elinor Ostroms area of specialization. Then there is Authority Ranking, President Obamas favorite approach to together. Then there is Equality Matching: thats the idea of taking turns, of returning favors, of tit-for-tat. Finally there is Market Pricing; we know all about that.
The reality of humans as social animals is much more complicated than a four-dimensional model: of course it is. At least the model shines a light on the horribly cramped and bigoted philosophy of President Obama, whose together means liberals inventing bureaucratic programs and calling it community as they force everyone onto a one-size-fits-all idea that just happens to create easy, lifetime-employment, supervisory roles for educated liberals.
Let us celebrate President Obamas use of family togetherness, for he is paying tribute to the conservative vision, that there is something more than politics and programs. As Catholics believe in subsidiarity, conservatives believe in civil society, the empowerment of the little platoons in society in which everyone can make his or her responsible contribution to society.
Its a shame that the president and his political party really dont really believe in together outside of presidential framing speeches. A stimulus program filled with moneys for the presidents supporters isnt together. A top-down bureaucratic monster health care program isnt together. A green energy program doling out favors to the presidents contributors and issuing draconian regulations to shut down coal production isnt together.
Maybe the president and his top aides should spend a bit of time reading up on the science of human sociality. Then they might learn how very far the program of President Obama and his political party is from together.
Buy his Road to the Middle Class.
But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie
that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison
Civil Societya complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churchesbuilds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust
Tear down theory, poetic systems... No more rules, no more models... Genius conjures up
rather than learns... Victor Hugo
César Graña, Bohemian versus Bourgeois
We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.
E. G. West, Education and the State
When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of agesthey seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings, and that a refusal to use the means appointed was a damning sin.
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990
When we received Christ, Phil added, all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh
A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is merely relative, is asking you not to believe him. So dont.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy
As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable...
[1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006
At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing
But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family.
Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says we should....
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity
Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism