progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group
progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group
progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
The <strong>Telmarc</strong> <strong>Group</strong><br />
PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC<br />
INTELLECTUAL<br />
Francis continually tries to say that "The Man versus The State" was an aberration of an<br />
old man ra<strong>the</strong>r than a culminating view developed by Spencer. In fact this was one of<br />
Spencer's clearest texts <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> one which has had lasting influence. Moreover it is a text<br />
devoid of <strong>the</strong> Darwin <strong>and</strong> reflects an evolving <strong>and</strong> mature view of <strong>the</strong> individual versus<br />
<strong>the</strong> exp<strong>and</strong>ing nature of <strong>the</strong> State.<br />
Francis <strong>the</strong>n goes into <strong>the</strong> current position we find in Rawls with direct reference to<br />
him 47 . Francis speaks of <strong>the</strong> confusion Rawls has between liberalism <strong>and</strong><br />
communitarianism, but no matter, both are counter <strong>individualism</strong> which is where Spencer<br />
had allegedly evolved to. Francis gets quiet complex <strong>and</strong> confusing as he attempts to<br />
draw toge<strong>the</strong>r what he sees conflicting views of Spencer while at <strong>the</strong> same time<br />
attempting to keep Spencer in what we would see today as a truly "liberal" player <strong>and</strong> not<br />
one dedicated to true <strong>individualism</strong>. He ends <strong>the</strong> discussion with <strong>the</strong> statement:<br />
"For Spencer it was not that <strong>the</strong> individual <strong>and</strong> society operated in different spheres as<br />
<strong>the</strong>y had for …Mill. That distinction would have allowed for a principled discussion of<br />
when interference with <strong>the</strong> former was justified. Spencer's conceptualization of <strong>the</strong><br />
individual <strong>and</strong> society places <strong>the</strong>m on separate planes making it illegitimate to permit<br />
some restrictions on freedom while forbidding o<strong>the</strong>rs."<br />
This sentence makes little sense. On <strong>the</strong> one h<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y are not in different spheres but on<br />
<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r h<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y are on different planes. Now <strong>the</strong> metaphor is not just weak it makes<br />
no sense. This chapter is rant with such non sequiturs!<br />
Now Francis continues his diatribe against "The Man Versus <strong>the</strong> State" 48 . Here is states:<br />
"Spencer's liberalism in particular is not usefully glossed over as a "bourgeois"<br />
individualistic ideology that was forged in opposition to <strong>the</strong> collective."<br />
Indeed it was not. It was carefully thought out <strong>and</strong> predicated on <strong>the</strong> events that allowed<br />
him to detail fact by fact with <strong>the</strong> resulting impacts on individual freedom equally<br />
detailed.<br />
In Chapter 18 Francis discusses Spencer's work on Sociology in political systems. Francis<br />
detailed <strong>the</strong> nexus between <strong>the</strong>se topics <strong>and</strong> evolution. It is seen that Spencer continually<br />
winds <strong>the</strong> evolutionary elements into his work 49 . To Spencer everything was continually<br />
in an ever changing evolutionary milieu. It was for him Lamarckian where <strong>the</strong> Darwinian<br />
step changes were Lamarck's slow changes which were absorbed.<br />
47 Francis pp 250-251.<br />
48 Francis pp 258-259.<br />
49 Francis pp 305-306.<br />
Page 57