Liberty enjoyed by the individuator is not liberty without order. If we live in society, and the vast majority of us must, then we must obey the laws of society. With that in mind, we might as well take a hand in crafting, administering and adjusting the laws that govern us, so then our consent as the governed people is substantive and influential.
If we lived by ourselves in the Alaskan wilderness, off the grid, there are still state laws that influence us. The laws of nature (disease, starvation, the need for food and shelter, the competition for food and procreation of our species against prey and predators of competing wilderness species) weigh heavily upon us in the -50 below Alaskan winters.
The laws of nature, set up by God, and administered by the Good Spirits, still rule over our soul, whether we live in a mid-Manhattan condo or in the valleys of Alaska along some river.
What does it mean for the individuator to enjoy ordered liberty in these three domains of existence.? First, one would want them to be in harmony with each other. For the individuator supercitizen in society, life underneath a constitutional republic would maximize his pursuit of personal happiness while allowing others the right to do their thing, minimizing conflict between citizens, smoothing out problems that arise. Under this economic and political, spontaneous order, the common good can be realized, as an afterthought not as the primary emphasis.
With his private property usage and enjoyment, he can live his life of ordered political liberty while doing his own thing, balancing out the competing needs to function within society, and yet being off the grid in nature (say he owes 5 acres or 80 acres) to play and live on. There the laws of nature play out as he used natural resources without polluting or annihilating the natural features of his land.
As a virtuous, pious follower of God, he can enjoy ordered liberty while living in harmony with nature, neighbors, national laws and neighborhood mores.
Where the three laws affecting human action and behavior oppose one another, as a citizen legislator and voter and as an ethical maverizer people can debate the issue that arose deliberate about it and then form a proposal, growing out of honorable and workable compromise, to give to the legislators in Washington or St. Paul.
No comments:
Post a Comment