Philosophy 306: Political Philosophy [under construction]

Contents

Introduction

Preface: The difference between Political Philosophy and Ethics

Section 1: Political valuers
Section 2: Political values and disvalues
Section 3: In-theory origins of the state
Section 4: The spectrum of theoretically prescribed forms of states
Section 5: Sorts of political authority
Section 6: The scope of party politics
Section 7: Rivals of the state

Appendix A: Plato's just state
Appendix B: The Three groups in this topic

Introduction

Preface: The difference between Political Philosophy and Ethics

The difference between the subject matters covered by these two areas of philosophy is far from sharp, but the following is one way of seeing it.

Ethics is concerned with relations between (i) individual and individual, (ii) individual and group, (iii) individual and totality (both the human totality and otherwise).

Political Philosophy is concerned with relations between (i) individuals and groups, (ii) groups and groups, (iiia) individuals and the totality, (iiib) groups and the totality.

A second sort of difference is in how the normative conclusions of the two fields are held to be made actual rather than just theoretical.

The normative conclusions of Ethics are held to be made actual by things like (i)individual conscience, (ii) virtues, or (iii) emotions.

The normative conclusions of Political Philosophy are held to be made actual by (i) legislation and its enforcement, (ii) the constitutions of states, and (iii) the values and morality of the people(s).

Note that Ethics is held to be logically prior to Political Philosophy. In other words, when conflict occurs in our politics (and thus in questions of law and constitution) the premises of the arguments are ultimately moral premises - propositions about what is and is not morally required.

Even though some political theorists (notably Machiavelli) have asserted an ultimately amoral basis for matters of political power and control, such theories are evaluated by contrast with morally based theories.

Section 1: Political valuers

G1: Individuals.

Each individual, as an individual, holds certain politcal values (and disvalues). These are likely to be Group 1 values (see below), but not necessarily. The individual might identify so closely with a social group, or political party, or religion, or ideology, or the state, that values pertaining to individuals are no longer held by him/her.

G2: Social groups.

Groups holding political values can include families, any sort of special-interest group, commercial companies, social 'classes', political parties, religiously ordered communities, ideologically ordered communities, etc. The individual's political values (and disvalues), according to his/her group memberships, will be likely to be Group 2 values, but not necessarily. For example, there is apparently no contradiction involved in being a member of a group that was formed to assert the value of and/or values for individuals.

G3: The State.

To the extent that an individual is involved in governing the state he/she is likely to hold political values that facilitate government, but not necessarily. Such values are in competiton with values appropriate to social groups and values appropriate to the individual.

Section 2: Political values and disvalues

Political values and disvalues can be sorted according to (i) whether they are values or disvalues for individuals, social groups, or the state, and (ii) whether they are internally or externally oriented.

(A) Political values

G1a (internal): Liberty
G1b (external): Equality

G2a (internal): Harmony within social groups
G2b (external): Harmony between social groups

G3a (internal): state control over citizens
G3b (external): state control over other states

(B) Political disvalues

G1a (internal): Oppression
G1b (external): Injustice

G2a (internal): Conflict within social groups
G2b (external): Conflict between social groups

G3a (internal): Threat to state control over citizens
G3b (external): Threat to state control over other states

Section 3. In-theory origins of the state

G1: Tacit consent, by acceptance of citzenship in a state structured for the protection of negative rights (Locke).

G2: Rational consent to the state structured on principles arrived at behind a 'veil of ignorance' (Rawls).

G3: Pragmatic consent to a state structured to provide suppression of the natural 'war of all against all' (Hobbes).

Section 4. The spectrum of theoretically prescribed structures of states

G1a: Anarchism

G1b: Libertarianism

G1c: Liberalism

G2a: Socialism

G2b: Cummunitarianism

G2c: Communism

G3a: Authoritarianism

G3b: Unilateral Totalitarianism (internally oppressive)

G3c: Bilateral Totalitarianism (internally oppressive and externally aggressive)

Section 5: The scope of party politics

G1a: Anarchism. Anarchism prescribes against parties. Or, each individual is a party.

G1b: Libertarianism. In a libertarian state, parties would exist only to lobby the government on matters of internal justice and external defence.

G1c. Liberalism. Multi-party democracy is a principle of liberalism.

G2a. Socialism. Multi-party democracy is, in theory, compatible with socialism. However, in fact, the strong tendancy of socialist parties to fragment into factions means more 'multi' and less effective democracy.

G2b. Communitarianism.

G2c. Communism. In theory, the authority of a communist 'democracy' is in the hands of 'the people' as represented by elected leaders of communes or 'soviets'. In fact, authority tends to pyramid with the hierarchy of the 'party' that established the state.

G3a. Authoritarianism. Under such regimes there is usually a cynical and temporary show of going through democratic motions, with no actual political authority outside the upper levels of the party hierarchy.

G3b. Unilateral totalitarianism. Here the party is effectively merged with the state. There is no effective difference between them.

G3c. Bilateral totalitarianism. Here the scope of the party expands, geographically, as the state expands.

Section 6: Sorts of political authority

G1: 'Primitive' democracy. Authority belongs to each individual citizen.

G2: Representative 'democracy'. Authority belongs to a few party members who weild it in the name of their constituents, who are thus, in effect, party affiliates.

G3: Authoritarianism. Authority belongs permanently to one party, and thus often to one party leader, and is weilded in the name of all citizens.

Section 7. Rivals of the state

G1: Individual's religion or ideology

G2: Religious or ideological community

G3: Commerce

Appendix A: Plato's just state

A: Justice in the individual: the three faculties of the psyche

G1: The will

G2: The reason

G3: The appetites

B: Justice in the individual: the three virtues comprising the virtue 'justice'

G1: Courage

G2: Wisdom

G3: Self-control

C: Justice in the state: the three classes of citizens

G1: The guardians

G2: The philosopher-kings

G3: The governed