[lit-ideas] Re: Ye Olde Dialectic
- From: John McCreery <mccreery@xxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:31:23 +0900
On 2005/09/08, at 7:57, Phil Enns wrote:
If we are using Lincoln's account of government, an account you
introduced and one with which I am quite comfortable, then no such
thing is possible. If government does what the people cannot, then
charities, if they are doing what they claim to be doing, are the
people doing what they can. If the people are doing what they can,
then they are, by definition, not letting the government off the hook.
This strikes me as a bit too facile in accepting at face value
Lincoln's distinction between government and individuals "in their
separate, and individual capacities."
Posed in this black and white way, this distinction leaves out of
account the whole realm of what has come to be called civil society,
where families, clubs, teams, churches, charities, NGOs, NPOs, etc.,
involve collective action that is not being taken, controlled or
directed by government. It also leaves out of account the economy, in
which the principal actors are corporations, again examples of
collection action and not merely the behavior of individuals "in
their separate and individual capacities."
One of the principal arguments for contributing to charities is the
importance of maintaining a robust civil society as a buffer between
individuals and government. Another is the closely related importance
of providing individuals with the opportunity to exercise personal
responsibility collectively (and, thus, more effectively) and
sustaining a barrier against the moral paralysis embodied in the
proposition that "Poor little me, I can do nothing. Please blame the
powers that be."
Changing directions only slightly: Consider, for example, the
familiar metaphor of the nation as the "ship of state." For the sake
of argument, imagine that the ship of state is a passenger liner
named the Titanic. Somewhere on board, someone is comforting a young
man whose lover has just told him to jump over the rail. Somewhere
else, groups of like-minded souls are arranging a deck tennis league
or a bridge tournament. Two or three earnest do-gooders have heard
that a crew member's mother is need of cancer treatment and busy
soliciting donations. Meanwhile the kitchen staff is busy preparing
tiffin. It is, I submit, fair to say (1) that the captain commits no
fault by not being directly involved in any of these activities and
(2) that he is, nonetheless, absolutely responsible when his ship
hits an iceberg and getting the passengers to safety is priority No.
1. He should, if necessary, go down with his ship. His saying, "No
one could have expected an iceberg" is profoundly and abominably wrong.
John L. McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd.
55-13-202 Miyagaya, Nishi-ku
Yokohama, Japan 220-0006
Tel 81-45-314-9324
Email jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
"Making Symbols is Our Business"
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
