Traditional Catholic Political Philosophy v. Libertarianism
Had to type this up fast, but let’s play a quick game of “draw your own conclusions”:
________________________
Traditional Catholic political philosophy holds that government exists for the sake of the common good.
Libertarians hold that government does not and/or cannot exist for the sake of the common good.
________________________
Traditional Catholic political philosophy holds that men are naturally social, and thus government is natural and good.
Libertarians hold that government is, at best, a necessary evil.
________________________
Traditional Catholic political philosophy holds that the end of the political community are goods that can only be attained in common by the members of said society—goods that, ultimately, all the members of society ought to desire.
Libertarians hold that the end of the political community is to bestow freedom on individuals so that they can attain what is good in their own eyes—goods that are primarily material and/or vary from individual to individual.
________________________
You get the point.
and much like me dropped off in a foriegn city, neither traditional Catholic etc etc nor libertarians have any clue how to get where they ought to go.
beitiathustra
June 23, 2006 at 5:53 pm
Although each and every one of your points is valid, it seems that the American Catholic is bound to be sympathetic towards libertarianism. The American Catholic is not part of a society which is and can be ordered to a Catholic end. In the developement of Catholic political philosophy, the societies concerned were by and large comprised of individuals who were Catholic. That being said, Catholic political philosophy is not wholly applicable to the American Catholic. In many ways, our government cannot be ordered to a desirable common good; our government, since it is in the interest of people opposed to Catholicism as well as Catholics, is in many ways a necessary evil; because our society is so multi-ethical/religious/cultural how can Catholics succeed in being part of that common good, wouldn’t it be better for Catholics to live in a more libertarian America and pursue the common good on a community level?
Don’t get me wrong, I think libertarianism is principally flawed but I do think that Jefferson was on to something (at least in refference to America) when he said that the government that governs least governs best.
Trujillo
June 24, 2006 at 1:42 am
My mistake in the post was to say “traditional Catholic philosophy,” I think. Those propositions are simply true, and I should have phrased those sentences to reflect that.
Starting with the last point. Jefferson was not a libertarian; Jefferson helped found a republic. It is not inconsistent to say that in certain repects the government that governs least governs best and to NOT be a libertarian. All the founders thought that the Constitution ought to limit government. Our government is still one of the most limited in the world. Most governments have been tyrannies. We live in a very successful Republic, for all our whining.
Catholics, whether they like it or not, have a DUTY to the common good of their nation. You are confusing the fact that there is disagreement over what the common good is (there always will be, even among Catholics–which is obvious from the way they vote) with what government truly ought to be aiming at.
You assume that our government cannot be ordered to a “Catholic” end. Why? Unless you hold up a confessional state as a model, I don’t think this is the case. First off, the ends of government are in one sense largely non-sectarian: security, peace, etc. Secondly, you might have mistaken a prevailing elite view of a secular American government for the nuanced view of the founders. Governments exist for the sake of the pursuit of happiness–but they never thought happiness meant “do whatever one wants.” They wanted and encouraged the Christian religion, which they all (Christian or not) saw as NECESSARY to good government. They realized that any republic DEPENDS on the virtue of the people.
If religion in America can’t hold its own; if a majority of Catholics can’t vote in line with the Church or convince anyone else of the truth of their religion, even when more of them have more wealth, power, and free time–nevermind political say and a political DUTY–than likely at any other time and place in history, are we to blame the American regime for this?
This is one of my big “themes.” We all fall into blaming the form of regime for our problems, when the regime we live in is a great plus in many ways. The problem is a NEW idea of American government, which arose largely from modern philosphy, the rise of graduate schools, the decay of education, and other circumstance in about the 1880s and has since come to dominate our view of our country.
Libertarianism is only helpful in that those guys, to paraphrase Jonah Goldberg at National Review, are good to have in the room everytime the government is figuring out how to spend money. They can sometimes be a good check on “big government.” But this is good because given human nature, human government must always be limited–unless, like Aristotle says, someone with the virtue of a God comes to earth.
Most especially, I disagree with the notion that Catholics ought to “check out” of politics. I know the temptation, and what you are saying–I’ve been there before–but I think these thoughts are actually dangerous.
The irony is that this line of thinking sets up a vision of the common good etc.–and accepts it–and then says libertarianism is good because our particular regime is bad. Precisely because of what I say above, this is NOT the case, and this position contradicts itself. But I’ve rambled enough for now. You’ll have to come over soon and we’ll chat.
kodiak
June 24, 2006 at 10:54 am
I think I may have not been clear enough when I wrote my comment. (I think it may have had something to do with lack of sleep and the fact that my bowels were rebelling against me). First, I have too much respect for Mr. Jefferson to ever accuse him of being a libertarian, rather libertarians take the sentiment of Mr. Jefferson and run wild with it. Ultimately, I was espousing a pre-libertarian Jeffersonian paleo-conservative outlook (let’s see if I can find any more -isms).
I still think that Catholics have a dilemma when approaching government, which should lend sympathy (not wholehearted agreement or even distant approval) to the libertarians. To the extent that all men, Catholic or not, seek after the same things in government the Catholic should be in whole hearted support of his government. But the common good for the Catholic extends beyond what all men seek (at least what they think they are seeking). It is the confusion over the ultimate end of man and the necessities for that end that make me want to be sympathetic towards the Libertarians.
But that being said, the common goods that all men seek (or should seek) extend far beyond the libertarian goods of wealth and security. Therefore, we do, as Catholics, have an obligation towards our government to support it and seek it success insofar as it lays the foundations for greater ease in the attainment of beatitude.
This is some what of a ramble and convoluded comment but I think I should have solidified my non-libertarian (yet still sympathetic) view point.
I think that libertarians stand to conservative politics what psycho-traditionalism (SSPX, et al.) stands to real traditional Catholicism. That is that they are the worst enemy of their seemingly closest ally.
Trujillo
June 24, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Ah. I’m liable to leap into paragraphs unwarranted on this issue, because it pushes me buttons. I think I understand where you are coming from now.
kodiak
June 26, 2006 at 1:25 pm