Freedom's Progress?: A History of Political Thought,
by Gerard Casey
“For
Augustine,” writes Thomas Cahill, “is the first human being to say ‘I’ – and to
mean what we mean today.”
So
now we know that it was Augustine’s Confessions that Equality 7-2521
(aka “Prometheus”) was reading when he
discovered the word “I.”
Augustine,
born in North Africa in the middle of the fourth century, was – perhaps only
after Paul – the most influential writer in Western Christian thought.
Having travelled through Manichaeism and having become a Neo-Platonist, these
influences did not leave him when he later became a Christian and was baptized.
Some
definitions:
Manichaeism
taught an elaborate dualistic cosmology describing the struggle between a good,
spiritual world of light, and an evil, material world of darkness. Through an
ongoing process that takes place in history, light is gradually removed from
the world of matter and returned to the world of light, whence it came. Its
beliefs were based on local Mesopotamian religious movements and Gnosticism.
Even
though Neoplatonism primarily circumscribes the
thinkers who are now labeled Neoplatonists and not their ideas, there are some
ideas that are common to Neoplatonic systems, for example, the monistic idea
that all of reality can be derived from a single principle, "the
One".
There
are those who view the earliest period of the Middle Ages, due to Augustine’s
influence, as the highpoint of the appearance of the individual. While
Casey understands why such a claim can be made, he disagrees. Casey sees
this idea as advancing over the next eight-hundred years.
While
Augustine wrote some 117 books, there is no single book devoted to political
philosophy or political thought. Instead, one gathers from several of his
works Augustine’s views on such topics. To properly understand Augustine,
it must be realized that his view of man and history is defined by two points –
and through these two points: man’s original bliss in Eden, and man’s future
bliss in heaven (or damnation in hell). As he has this “truth” in his
grasp before he begins, it guides his views throughout his work.
In The
City of God, Augustine depicts not two distinct cities, but two views of
man – separated by the object of their love. The one loves God, the other
himself; the one lives by the standards of the spirit, the other of the flesh;
the one desires to serve, the other desires dominion. Ultimately the two
point to two different visions of sovereignty.
Given
that we live in this world – the one populated by many who wish dominion – for
Augustine, government is not specifically a necessary evil, but necessary due
to evil; government is required due to the concept of Original Sin.
Citing Luskin, for Augustine, government…
…“was
the consequence of sin and it arose from the lust for power and
domination. But in so far as coercive authority restrained further abuse
of free will, it was a necessary and legitimate remedy of sin.”
The
state does not exist to make men virtuous; the state does not exist to provide
universal law. The purpose of the state is to underpin order – while a
thief-taker, it is a necessary thief-taker. Such coercion is both
necessary and inevitable, given man’s nature.
As
such, Augustine finds no issue even with slavery, beyond noting that slavery –
like government – is nothing more than a natural outcome of man’s original sin:
slavery is for the benefit of the enslaved, just as government is for the
benefit of the governed.
His
realpolitik may be ground in more than his pessimism of man’s nature or
his call for passive obedience; given his view of history – marked by the two
points of Eden and heaven (or hell) – nothing in between really matters.
We may have Augustine to thank for the unfortunate interpretation of Romans 13; Augustine – 1200 years before – anticipates
Hobbes: a strong power is necessary to restrain man.
Augustine
describes the ideal ruler as one who is not inflated with pride; who puts his
power at the service of God’s majesty; who fears, loves and worships God more
than his earthly kingdom. But whether or not a ruler has such
characteristics, he is to be obeyed: he puts forward a theory of passive
obedience to the state – whatever he moral character of its leaders.
While
he sees government as required, he is by no means blind to its evils – a gang
of criminals on a large scale. His endorsement is nothing more than realpolitik:
given man’s sinful nature, the state is necessary. Whether a good prince
or a bad prince, a prince is necessary to maintain peace and justice.
Good or bad, the prince is an instrument of Providence.
Conclusion
While
Augustine – like Machiavelli – focused on the dark side of man’s nature as the
reason for a strong state, unlike Machiavelli, Augustine never lost his moral
bearing: unlike Machiavelli, Augustine didn’t lose site of the reality that
state power was an evil. Understanding Augustine, one could describe him
as the first Calvinist. Now there is something to consider.
Augustine’s
life and death coincided with the fall of Rome. This was to usher in the
birthing of a society through which libertarian law bloomed. But this is
a story for another day.
