Thank you for writing this article. It seems to me that many people consider liberalism to have run its course and that we must wrestle with the concept of what comes next. I’m a pretty traditional Catholic, but i recoil at the idea of implementing a theocracy, so I appreciate the flaws of such an approach being pointed out. However, I do think it useful for people to weigh in on what should come next via essays (which will hopefully prevent-or at least delay-someone from ushering in what comes next via the sword).
That said, I do think there is a certain merit to the argument that Lockesean liberalism has within it the seeds of its own destruction. If I am reading your argument correctly, you think it is technocratic progressivism that has gotten us into this predicament we find ourselves in, not classical liberalism. I’d love to see you explore this point more deeply, as I’m sympathetic to that argument. I’ve argued for years now that the managerial state alllows us to outsource virtue and charity to the government, weakening us a humans. Progressivism, in my opinion, is a form of heresy, and when implemented acts as a parasite on Christianity.
It’s also important to remember that our founders understood self government in its classical liberal form to require a citizenry capable of self government as a prerequisite to constitutional government, not to be a product of said government. It’s worth asking if we are, collectively, a people capable of such a thing right now. And if not, what tools are available to us to help our society get back to that place. I’d be interested to see an essay from you on that topic.
One final point that I like to always make when being involved in conversations about what the just role of government should be: consent of the governed. We hold this as some sort of Lockesean Ideal or goal (and as such, it is an idea that is deeply exploited-stealing elections, for example). Our citizenry, and especially our “elected officials” would do well to remember that consent of the governed isn’t an ideal to pursue, it’s an observation about the nature of life to be heeded. When people cease to consent to the government, said government ceases to govern. What a people are willing to consent to is a separate question, but a wise leader would be well advised to avoid approaching anything close to that particular boundary.
I wish I had more time today to respond to this incredibly thoughtful comment. Let me say, for now, that there are a lot of Christians out there who, like you, understand that there need be no contradiction between being fundamentally Catholic and liberal. This is the healthy both/and thinking that we need to maintain. I am, by the way, not really a Lockean per se. I just used Locke because Feser used him and he is often considered a liberal exemplar whose work informed the thinking of the American Founders. Most liberals know that we need to clean up liberalism and upgrade it. Most Catholics know they need to clean up Catholicism and upgrade it. I suspect that a new generation of thoughtful people can do both of these things together.
The Church certainly has a lot that needs to be cleaned up, for sure. I see signs that this is taking place, but large ships can’t turn on a dime, so to speak. As governing systems go, classical liberalism seems to me to be the best we have come up with, though it seems more suited to a mercantile/agrarian economy rather than an industrial/global economy. Industrialization was the back door through which progressivism snuck in under the guise of liberalism, I would argue. We are where we are now, though, and the path forward needs to be carefully considered, and people such as yourself are performing a critical role in contributing to that conversation.
I certainly don’t expect a full response to the comment-we all have lives off of Substack, after all-but I wanted to commend you for such a great piece, and I hope that my comment can inform or inspire future essays. In the meantime, I’ll continue to follow you, and when time permits I’ll look back through your archives.
Also, when financial circumstances permit, I’ll subscribe, or at least throw a little something in the tip jar. I’ve recently picked up a second job, so hopefully that day will be coming soon.
Thank you for writing this article. It seems to me that many people consider liberalism to have run its course and that we must wrestle with the concept of what comes next. I’m a pretty traditional Catholic, but i recoil at the idea of implementing a theocracy, so I appreciate the flaws of such an approach being pointed out. However, I do think it useful for people to weigh in on what should come next via essays (which will hopefully prevent-or at least delay-someone from ushering in what comes next via the sword).
That said, I do think there is a certain merit to the argument that Lockesean liberalism has within it the seeds of its own destruction. If I am reading your argument correctly, you think it is technocratic progressivism that has gotten us into this predicament we find ourselves in, not classical liberalism. I’d love to see you explore this point more deeply, as I’m sympathetic to that argument. I’ve argued for years now that the managerial state alllows us to outsource virtue and charity to the government, weakening us a humans. Progressivism, in my opinion, is a form of heresy, and when implemented acts as a parasite on Christianity.
It’s also important to remember that our founders understood self government in its classical liberal form to require a citizenry capable of self government as a prerequisite to constitutional government, not to be a product of said government. It’s worth asking if we are, collectively, a people capable of such a thing right now. And if not, what tools are available to us to help our society get back to that place. I’d be interested to see an essay from you on that topic.
One final point that I like to always make when being involved in conversations about what the just role of government should be: consent of the governed. We hold this as some sort of Lockesean Ideal or goal (and as such, it is an idea that is deeply exploited-stealing elections, for example). Our citizenry, and especially our “elected officials” would do well to remember that consent of the governed isn’t an ideal to pursue, it’s an observation about the nature of life to be heeded. When people cease to consent to the government, said government ceases to govern. What a people are willing to consent to is a separate question, but a wise leader would be well advised to avoid approaching anything close to that particular boundary.
I wish I had more time today to respond to this incredibly thoughtful comment. Let me say, for now, that there are a lot of Christians out there who, like you, understand that there need be no contradiction between being fundamentally Catholic and liberal. This is the healthy both/and thinking that we need to maintain. I am, by the way, not really a Lockean per se. I just used Locke because Feser used him and he is often considered a liberal exemplar whose work informed the thinking of the American Founders. Most liberals know that we need to clean up liberalism and upgrade it. Most Catholics know they need to clean up Catholicism and upgrade it. I suspect that a new generation of thoughtful people can do both of these things together.
The Church certainly has a lot that needs to be cleaned up, for sure. I see signs that this is taking place, but large ships can’t turn on a dime, so to speak. As governing systems go, classical liberalism seems to me to be the best we have come up with, though it seems more suited to a mercantile/agrarian economy rather than an industrial/global economy. Industrialization was the back door through which progressivism snuck in under the guise of liberalism, I would argue. We are where we are now, though, and the path forward needs to be carefully considered, and people such as yourself are performing a critical role in contributing to that conversation.
I certainly don’t expect a full response to the comment-we all have lives off of Substack, after all-but I wanted to commend you for such a great piece, and I hope that my comment can inform or inspire future essays. In the meantime, I’ll continue to follow you, and when time permits I’ll look back through your archives.
Also, when financial circumstances permit, I’ll subscribe, or at least throw a little something in the tip jar. I’ve recently picked up a second job, so hopefully that day will be coming soon.