In order to create a full-orbed political theory, libertarians must broaden their understanding of man’s role. Politics is the practice of human cooperation. This definition strays from other definitions. These tend to emphasize politics’ role in granting certain groups rights to coercion in society. Libertarianism, if understood as the non-aggression principle based upon a theory property rights, is particularly seeking to understand the principles that define coercion in human society. Libertarianism seeks to improve man’s freedom from unnecessary coercion. This is certainly part of the study of politics, but not exclusively so. The study of the role of coercion in society is part of a larger body of political theory. Libertarians must recognize that truth.
The Free Actor
Libertarianism tends to view man as a free actor. This is legitimate, but he also has other roles. When libertarians recognize this, it gives their theory a greater breadth than it otherwise would have. Though still a theory of coercion, libertarianism is set within larger cultural, religious and political realities. Without suddenly limiting man to only two roles, I want to argue a full-orbed political theory will treat man as both actor and as recipient.
Without suddenly limiting man to only two roles, I want to argue that a full-orbed political theory will treat man as both actor and as recipient.
However, we must continue to emphasize the role of man as a free actor. Christians may believe that man is spiritually bound, but politically we should all want free human action in our society. When God creates the world, he gives man freedom to develop the garden and the wilderness however he wants. He has freedom to eat of any tree of the garden, except for the one that God puts off limits. Even after the fall, man is free to choose where to live, to farm, and to have children. This means that, as much as possible, mankind should be free from coercion by other men. All libertarians, whether thick or thin, paleo or left, Christian or atheist, agree on this, at least on the surface. After all, libertarianism is a theory of coercion, not a full-orbed political theory.
All libertarians, whether thick or thin, paleo or left, Christian or atheist, agree on this, at least on the surface. After all, libertarianism is a theory of coercion, not a full-orbed political theory.
The Recipient
But a full-orbed political theory will account for man’s being as well. Man’s being is something received. In a large part, this underlines the whole point of this blog. In my posts, I want to underline the importance of our response to our gifts. Man receives a being, a culture, and a history. His response to these gifts will determine his political life. Man has gratitude in the fabric of his nature (because that nature is a gift).
When we understand man as a recipient, as well as, as an actor, there is a role for thanksgiving. When we fail to show our gratitude, we do violence to the past. We have a society that lives in ingratitude.
This gratitude includes gratitude toward God our parents, and our leaders. God has given us our bodies, which contain his own image. Gratitude for that gift will result in using our bodies in a way which pleases God. Our parents, as secondary causes, have also given us our bodies, besides raising us (imperfect though that raising may be). Gratitude for that gift will result in honor. Our civil leaders (imperfectly) have given us a degree of peace and justice. Gratitude for that gift will result in a certain degree of honor as well. Of course, two of these (parents and civil leaders) three always give imperfect gifts. Sometimes it may be said that they gave no gift at all. Instead, they oppressed and consumed their charges. Yet some degree of gratitude is generally necessary. Toward God, gratitude is always necessary.
Without an understanding of gratitude, libertarianism will be unsuccessful. A libertarian’s implicit or explicit understanding of gratitude will not damage his status as a libertarian. However, his understanding of gratitude will destroy his chances of living peacefully when he is able to live in a libertarian society. He will commit violence: not the type that is immediately punishable by law, but the type that is ultimately destructive to whatever relationships he has.