progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL In the analysis of this writing in the same work by Henry Cabot Lodge, Lodge writes commenting on the situation in the United States as follows: "In the United States individualism was perhaps stronger than in any other country. The Democratic party at the outset was devoted to the principle of strict construction of the Constitution, of the least government and the most restricted administration possible. The Federalists, the Whigs, and Republicans favored a liberal construction of the Constitution and what seemed to them a reasonable exercise of the powers of government as in their belief essential to prosperity. One hundred years later we find the Democratic party at the other extreme and advocating in every direction the extension of governmental powers, while the Republican party, … is now in an attitude of resistance…" 36 Lodge summarizes the individualism philosophy of Spencer as it was seen at the beginning of the 20th century. Surprisingly the same structure holds today, one hundred years later. In the United States the sense of individualism was an integral part of the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. In fact the Bill of Rights are themselves individual rights, and are not inclusive, in effect unlimited via the 9th Amendment. In one of the last portions of the document, The Man versus The State, Spencer address the issue of social contract. The social contract idea as generated by Rousseau, Hobbes, Locke and others, was being used by the politicians as a basis for expanding governmental powers and justifying the continuing operations of Government into areas in which they had never before had authority. Spencer then states: "I again emphasize the proposition that the members of an incorporated body are bound "severally to submit to the will of the majority in all matters concerning the fulfillment of the objects for which they are incorporated; but in no others." And I content that this holds of an incorporated nation as much as an incorporated company… Evidently it must be admitted that the hypothesis of a social contract, either under the shape assumed by Hobbes or under the shape assumed by Rousseau, is baseless. Nay more, it must be admitted that even had such a contract once been formed, it could not be binding on the posterity of those who formed it." 37 This clearly is a statement of rejection of contractarian government, especially contractarian forms whereby the individual hands over all control to a government. To Spencer, the individual survives and it the sine qua non elements of any governmental body. There is no majority, no minority, there is but the individual. Spencer ends by stating: 36 See TMVTS pp 33-34. 37 See TMVTS pp 189-190. Page 50
The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL "What do these facts mean? They mean that for the healthful activity and due proportioning of those industries, occupations and professions, which maintain and aid the life of a society, there must, in the first place, be few restrictions on men's liberties to make agreements with one another, and there must, in the second place, be enforcements of the agreements which they do make." 38 This means that for the survival of the individual Spencer sees the necessity of two factors. First, non-interference by the government between agreements reached by and between parties. Second, the support of the Government in seeking remedies on behalf of harmed parties in the event of a breach of an agreement. This is an interesting blend. We can enter into an agreement between parties without the Government but we need the Government to assist in the enforcement of the agreement on an ongoing basis. In the comments on this piece by David Hill, one sees the confluence of interests between three players: the individual, the society, and the state. The individual to Spencer was to be that entity who preservation and security was to be preserved and it was the role of the state to insure that. Society was viewed as an ephemeral amalgam of parties, individuals and possible even other sub societal collections, who could represent a majority but could not suppress the rights of the individual. Another way to understand Spencer and his place in the current world of political thought is to see how he is being presented in the present written word. To do so we choose to analyze the recent biography of Spencer entitled "Herbert Spencer and the Invention of Modern Life" by Mark Francis. This biography is a recent addition to the body of works of the 19th century polymath. Spencer was both a philosopher and advocate of Darwin's evolutionary ideas as well as one who opined frequently on matters of political import. In many ways Spencer was a true polymath, one who wrote seminal works on psychology and sociology and wrote extensively on biology and integrated that with the new ideas promulgated by Darwin. Spencer was praised by many of his contemporaries and was also in many ways the typical Victorian, hardened in that period but also having his views shaped by it also. Overall the book addresses Spencer, his life and his views. However, the author, in my opinion, is more interested in detailing how Spencer fits his personal view of Spencer than Spencer truly was as a person and as an influence on his world. Spencer, in his most lasting work, The Man Versus The State, clearly is an individualist and as such in many ways has become a major cornerstone for many libertarians. Yet Francis seems to reject this view and, for the most part, this book is a tirade against that position of individualism which Spencer clearly took. 3.2.2 Spencer's Critics 38 See THVTS p 211. Page 51
Page 1 and 2: +++ The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM
Page 3 and 4: The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 7 and 8: The Telmarc Group Preface PROGRESSI
Page 49: The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 63 and 64: The Telmarc Group 4.1.3 Hobbes and
Page 93 and 94: The Telmarc Group 4.5.2 The New Fre
Page 101 and 102:
The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
The Telmarc Group Hofstadter contin
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223:
The Telmarc Group and the Progressi
show all

progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?