Statism, Subsidiarity, and Sphere Sovereignty
Abdul Majeed
PLCY 802
Professor: Dr. Bolek Kabala
July 5, 2021
Daniel,
You did a great job explaining your thoughts in your post. I was particularly interested in
your explanation of what statists’ effort in our societies are, which is to build a society of equity.
The discussion of equality is one that we may never arrive at a single acceptable medium to
attain it, but it should not be for the lack of trying. Even among egalitarian followers, there seems
to be a lack of consensus regarding what equality represents in many significant subjects
including immigration. Some believe that liberal democracies should have restrictive
immigration policies because they can aid in protecting the welfare states while others believe
that a more relaxed immigration policy allows for ethnic diversity which “drives down social
cohesion including trust and solidarity” thus creating the basis for supporting the welfare state
(Holtug 2020, 119). Hence, from the egalitarian perspective, the quest for equality becomes a
matter of scope, should equality be limited to a society or nation, or should it be available
globally for all who seek it? When a section of the society is ignored or disregarded in the quest
for equality or justice, it may lead to an anti-social theme where what “consistently gets ignored
or dismissed are precisely the costs to society” (Sowell 1999, 10). Equality I believe should
transcend borders, ultimately, it is humanity that suffers when others struggle to survive because
their leaders or nations lack the resources to provide them with the means to pursue happiness.
References
Holtug, Nils. 2020. "Global Equality and Open Borders." In Oxford Studies in Political
Philosophy Volume 6, 118-150Oxford University Press.
Sowell, Thomas. 1999. The quest for cosmic justice (1st). Simon and Schuster.
self-governance and its role in making rational policy decisions for the society. To add to
your point, I believe that self-governance is significantly motivated in many instances by our
personal interests. As explained by Andersson et. al. (2020), the actions of individuals who tend
to lead their fellow citizens may be motivated by the “leaders’ expectations for social
recognition, reputation gains, or simply a sincere concern for their fellow community members’
well-being” (Andersson et. al. 2020, 27293). It is important to note that individual actions in the
discussion of self-governance is not solely motivated by self-interest and greed. There remain
many citizens who represent their fellow citizens for the purpose of fulfilling the greater good.
Similarly, as explained by Tatalovich et. al. (2014), groups that are created to aid in
making policy decisions such as distributive and redistributive policies seem not to be focused on
“contentious social regulations” because most of them are created to “defend the economic
interest of their memberships, and not to champion moral crusades” (xxxiv). I concur with
Fischer on the biblical worldview allowing rational policy decisions based on logic. Today,
policy makers appear to ignore logic in writing policies and are motivated by their undisclosed
desires. It is therefore important to encourage Christians to seek for political positions hence
push for policies that are guided by the teachings of the Christian faith and logic.
References
Andersson, Krister P., Kimberlee Chang, and Adriana Molina-Garzón. 2020. "Voluntary
leadership and the emergence of institutions for self-governance." Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 117, no. 44: 27292-27299.
Tatalovich, Raymond, Byron W. Daynes, and Theodore J. Lowi. 2014. Moral controversies in
American politicsRoutledge.
The quest for justice begins with the understanding of the rule of law by which we are
governed by, and our ability to note when our rights are violated. All political ideologies claim to
have the answers in protecting the inalienable rights of all citizens thus ensuring social justice is
attained. Unfortunately, as explained by Reisch (2002), the concept of social justice is now
viewed “as a rationale for maintaining the status quo, promoting far-reaching social reforms, and
justifying revolutionary action” (343). Speaking in terms of the revolutionary aspect of the quest
for justice, Sowell (1999) compares the American revolution to this theory and asserts that the
American revolution gave the common man a “voice, a veto, elbow room, and a refuge from the
rampaging presumptions of his betters” hence upgrading its effects from a national event to a
global one which served as a “landmark in the general struggle for human freedom” (146).
Furthermore, the American revolution presented a different meaning to the term “revolution”
because it showcased less violence and terror, and less claims of change when compared to other
revolutions. (145). Ultimately, the attainment of public justice requires the recognition of the
plural structure and the confessional pluralism in society (Skillen 1997, 7).
Barry Friedman in his review of Gregory Leavitt’s book Class Conflict: The Pursuit and
History of American Justice explained that many Americans wrongfully viewed the 1787
Constitutional Convention as an event ordained by God to save Americans from Britain’s reign.
But he asserts that on the contrary, the event was a “remarkably well-orchestrated conspiracy by
American Whiggery to hijack the accomplishment of independence from Britain and to
institutionalize elite advantage (Friedman 2015, 1). Many aristocratic families in America
created their elite status through “piracy, profiteering, smuggling, slave trading, and other sordid
activities, and they are still treated with deep respect” (Friedman 2015, 1).
Due to the contrasting themes offered by social democracy, many have argued that the
Biblical worldview holds the key to solving all societal problems that we face. The biblical
worldview presents the best foundation for sound policy analysis (Fischer 2021). From a
Catholic perspective of life arises the concept of subsidiarity which relies on the lowest element
in a social hierarchy as the source of recourse to solve societal issues. As explained by Koyzis
(2019), only when the issue proves impossible to the lowest element will the higher elements
such as the state would be called in for assistance. This concept highlights the true being and
nature of human society even though indirectly (Mueller 1943, 144). Dudzinski (2017) explains
that the principle of subsidiarity presents two dynamics which enhances the mutual benefit of the
more fortunate and wealthier helping the poor with their wealth and resources and vice versa the
poor helping the wealthy through their labor and efforts. Dudzinski (2017) states that, “regardless
of their status in society, individuals and associations have their individual and unique roles in
contributing to the common good by sharing their gifts of labor to others” (30). Ultimately,
subsidiarity was viewed as necessary for “maintaining a healthy social order in which all parts
retain their vitality and initiative over against the threat of an omnicompetent state” (Koyzis
2019, 222). The idea of the separation of powers is indirectly reflected in the concept of
subsidiarity as shown in the Tenth amendment of the United States Constitution which states that
“the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people” (Koyzis 2019, 228). The states or
the people will represent the lowest hierarchy in the society in this sense.
On the other hand, a reformed Christian perspective requires us to be self-critical of our
actions under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and use our understanding of the Christian faith in
solving political problems. In addition, redemption demands that we understand creation and our
purpose in God’s creation (Skillen 1997, 7). Essentially, the solution to societal and political
problems lays within correlating creation and humanity and deriving solutions thereof. But the
difference between the reformed perspective and the subsidiarity is centered around the role of
the church. According to Koyzis (2019), under the reformed perspective, a political problem
would be “addressed precisely politically, and its solution would come from within the body
politic, which acknowledged to stand directly and immediately under God’s sovereignty” (230).
Understanding politics and solving political problems requires the understanding that
only Jesus Christ is sovereign, and governments should understand that their power is limited
and delegated to them by God. When people view themselves as sovereign then serving
themselves is the highest goal of their lives, which when not controlled can lead to anarchy,
when people see the state as sovereign then they live for the state and are subjected to the control
of the state which can lead to tyranny, but liberty is achieved when people view God as sovereign
(Fischer 1998, 9). Irrespective of the concept of separation of church and state, the laws of our
land have religious undertones that aid in protecting the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and
property. In addition, Christianity continues to survive secularization as seen in high church
attendance here in United States and “faith permeates politics and society” (Boland & Griffin
2021, 22). As explained by Dr. Fischer, the biblical worldview makes the basis for rational policy
making because it allows for logical reasoning and for morality which maximizes freedom
(Fischer 2021).
References
Boland, Tom and Ray Griffin. 2021. The Reformation of Welfare: The New Faith of the Labour
MarketPolicy Press.
Dudzinski, Paul. 2017. "The principle of subsidiarity in Catholic social
thought." wydawca/publisher: 24.
Friedman, Barry D. 2015. "No title." Class Conflict: The Pursuit and History of American
Justice by Gregory C.Leavitt.
Koyzis, D. T. (2019). Political visions & illusions: A survey & christian critique of
contemporary ideologies. InterVarsity Press.
Mueller, Franz H. 1943. "The principle of subsidiarity in the christian tradition." The American
Catholic Sociological Review 4, no. 3: 144-157.
Reisch, Michael. 2002. "Defining social justice in a socially unjust world." Families in
Society 83, no. 4: 343-354.
Skillen, James W. 1997. "Political Thought in the Reformed Tradition." Transformation 14, no.
4: 7-9.
Sowell, Thomas. 1999. The quest for cosmic justice (1st). Simon and Schuster.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
