Liberty, dignity, and responsibility: the moral triad of a good society:

AuthorKlein, Daniel B.

In The Constitution of Liberty, Friedrich Hayek wrote, "the belief in individual responsibility...has always been strong when people firmly believed in individual freedom" (1960, 71; see also 1967, 232). He also observed that during his time the belief in individual responsibility "has markedly declined, together with the esteem for freedom." In surveying the twentieth century, noting the ascent of the philosophy of entitlement, the doctrines of command and control, and their institutional embodiments--the welfare state and the regulatory state--one can only respond, "indeed." Lately, perhaps, a reversal has begun.

We might advance the reversal if we better understood responsibility and its connection to liberty. We speak often of responsibility, but vaguely, even more so than when we talk of liberty. When Hayek refers to "the belief in individual responsibility," does he mean the striving by the individual to be admirably responsive in his behavior, to be reliable, dependable, or trustworthy? Or does he mean the belief that individuals ought to be held to account, to be answerable or liable for their actions? A drunken watchman can be held accountable for trouble that occurs during his shift; he is then both irresponsible and responsible. Indeed, the two kinds of responsibility tend to occur together, but they are conceptually distinct. As moral philosophers, we usually have the reliability notion in mind; as political philosophers, the accountability notion. To make the terminological distinction clear, I shall call the personal trait of being admirably responsive personal responsibility, and the social-relations trait of holding the individual to account individual responsibility.

Individual responsibility fosters personal responsibility. Policy affects morals. And personal responsibility enhances the appeal of individual responsibility and of liberty. Morals affect policy. Putting policy and morals together, we get feedback loops and multiplier effects.

I shall attempt to clarify the moral dimension of our statist ways. But moral philosophy here is handmaiden to political philosophy. I do not aim to persuade the individual to find or affirm certain moral outlooks or personal habits. I aim to persuade members of the polity to change government policy. One of the most important, if subterranean, arguments for changing government policy, however, is that doing so affects individuals' moral outlooks and personal habits, which in turn affects....

Clarifying Liberty and Individual Responsibility

My usage of liberty has a common recognition and acceptance. By liberty, I refer to private property rights, consent, and contract. By private property rights, consent, and contract, I mean what traditional common-law conventions have meant. Of course, there are gray areas here--what is the precise scope of private property rights? what of implicit terms in agreements?--and one must consider the senile, children, and other hard cases. But as a famous jurist once said, that there is a dusk does not mean there is no night and no day. Some things are gray, but most are either black or white. Despite its areas of ambiguity, the principle of liberty is cogent and well established. In the United States it is most consistently and most completely advocated by the libertarian movement. National and state policies that clearly encroach on the principle of liberty include drug prohibition, drug prescription requirements, drug approval requirements, restrictions on sexual services, licensing restrictions, wage and price controls, health and safety regulations of private-sector affairs, antitrust policies, import restrictions, laws against discrimination in private-sector affairs, and gun control. On the truly local level, such policies might be viewed as acceptable because we might grant town government the status of contract, as for a proprietary community. The point here is not that liberty is everywhere good and desirable, only that it is reasonably cogent.

Let us think of liberty as conceptually distinct from individual responsibility. Libertarians often speak in terms of the liberty dimension, disregarding the responsibility dimension. The point is familiar with respect to the welfare issue. The taxes, which libertarians deem an encroachment on liberty, are only part of the complaint. Suppose that instead of our current national and state welfare systems, we had the following: governments at the national and state levels continued to collect the same taxes but instead of providing welfare payments, they gathered all the tax dollars into a huge paper mountain, doused it with gasoline, and set it on fire. This hypothetical arrangement encroaches on liberty just as much as the existing system does. Libertarians may instinctually prefer the bonfire, but they cannot explain this preference with reference to the liberty dimension. The government distribution of welfare payments is itself objectionable, and for reasons aside from government ineptitude. The difference between the welfare system and the bonfire lies in the dimension of responsibility.

We can analyze government policy better by distinguishing liberty from individual responsibility. The dole is one thing: that the dole is financed by confiscatory taxation is another. Historically and practically, however, liberty and individual responsibility are intertwined. They are, especially, morally intertwined.

"Individual responsibility" means accountability; more specifically, it means government-administered systems of accountability for citizens. Both liberty and individual responsibility, then, pertain to the citizens' relationships with government. Hence, in my usage, one citizen's crime against another is not an encroachment on liberty, and the practices of a philanthropic organization, even if arbitrary, are not departures from individual responsibility. I shall sometimes abbreviate "individual responsibility" as just "responsibility."

Think of liberty and responsibility as one-dimensional continuous variables. For the sake of setting the benchmark, we can describe the absolute liberty and absolute responsibility that constitute the Libertarian Utopia. Absolute liberty would be the freedom of private property rights, consent, and contract among private parties. Government would maintain and enforce the legal order and not burden citizens with tax levies beyond those necessary to pay for these protective services. This arrangement is the classical Nightwatchman State, the utopia of Wilhelm von Humboldt, Frederic Bastiat, Herbert Spencer, William Graham Sumner, Albert Jay Nock, and other classical liberals. Here the government holds people accountable for their transgressions of private property rights, consent, and contract--punishing criminals, enforcing restitution where possible, and adjudicating a thick-skinned tort doctrine--but it provides no other benefits to citizens. (Again I hedge on the question of local government because local government services beyond the Nightwatchman functions may occupy a gray area between ordinary contract and state power.) In the Libertarian Utopia, summarized in the middle column of figure 1, the variables "liberty" and "individual responsibility" both have their extreme values.

[Figure 1 ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Departure from responsibility--indulgence--takes various forms, as summarized in the first column of the figure. In interactions between citizens and government, government acts with indulgence when it gives benefits to citizens--welfare payments, medical care, housing, schooling, freeways, and so on. In its policing of interaction among private parties, government engages in indulgence in making inadequate punishment of criminals (meaning burglars, not pot dealers). In its adjudication of civil disputes, government engages in indulgence by failing to make tort judgments against truly malfeasant defendants or by making tort awards to frivolous plaintiffs for example, in liability, discrimination, or sexual harassment suits beyond the bounds of a thick-skinned tort doctrine.

Encroachment of liberty--coercion--takes the forms of confiscatory taxation (in excess of funding the Nightwatchman), conscription, any kind of restriction on consensual private activity, excessive punishment of criminals or detainment of suspected criminals, making frivolous judgments against defendants in civil disputes, and failing to make tort awards to truly aggrieved plaintiffs in civil disputes. (Again, these delineations apply in the context of state and national government; at the level of truly local government, the contours of liberty and individual responsibility are much fuzzier.)

Having clarified the concepts of liberty and responsibility, let us now consider their interdependence.

Interaction between Liberty and Individual Responsibility

Government must be small and circumspect if society is to enjoy a high degree of liberty and a high degree of individual responsibility. To explain the magnitudes of these two variables in terms of the people's general attitude toward government--by whether or not they view it as wise and efficacious--we might say that liberty and responsibility vary together because they depend alike on the popular attitude toward government. Where people distrust government, they choose politically to have much liberty and much responsibility. A serious shortcoming of this approach, however, is that most people lack cogent views in political philosophy. Rather, their views on public issues are, if existent at all, superficial, inconsistent, piecemeal, and highly fickle.

Taking a more marginalist approach to the interaction of liberty and responsibility (economists might call it "comparative statics"), one asks: How do marginal encroachments on liberty affect responsibility? And how do departures from responsibility affect liberty? I shall briefly mention the more obvious connections only, then take up some...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT