"Liberty, Equality,
Brotherhood": so goes the motto of France. It’s
nice. Not as nice as their toast, kissing, or onion soup, but it’s
nice. “In God We Trust” is the United States' motto. It’s nicer, but it's bound to go away soon because it’s no
longer true. North Korea’s motto is “Gangseong Daeguk,” which
translates as “Prosperous and Great Country.” That’s really nice –
especially for a maniacal dictatorial fantasy. Austria’s motto is
“Austriae est imperare orbi universo” which is Latin for
“It is Austria’s Destiny to Rule the World.” That’s not very nice.
Back to France: brotherhood is sort
of the Kumbaya wrapper around the other two ideals in the motto - picture Edith Piaf meets Woody Guthrie. Brotherhood is
nice, too. But what strikes me as odd about this motto is the equal
billing of liberty and equality. It’s odd because they’re really
exclusive of one another. The only way to promote equality is
through diminishing liberty. If your goal is to “level the playing
field,” you have to figure out ways to limit someone's perceived advantages (money, race,
sex, education, etc.) in order to bring someone else up to the social standard you have
for them. Never mind that they might or might not have the same
standard for themselves that you do. The point is one person’s
liberty is the price for another’s gaining in equality.
Obviously I’m kind of a liberty nut
myself. I’d like to see everybody free to pursue their own ideals,
which is why I’m drawn again and again to the Tenth Amendment. However,
I should point out that I don’t think there’s really anything wrong with
pursuing equality: you just need to know what you’re trading if that’s your
goal. It’s not my goal, but if you want to go live in a giant kibbutz,
knock yourself out. In your eagerness, please don’t go forcing people to
be part of your collective; just let the quality of life therein stand as the
proof statement that your system is really better, and they'll come.
Because if you don’t let people opt in and your design doesn’t work, then
all you’ve done is trade their liberty for your failed
ambition. That’s kind of a gnarly price to demand of someone else,
eh?
(By the way, Canada’s motto is “Ad
mari usque ad mare,” or “From Sea to Sea." That's nice.)
Distinguishing formally between the
ideals of liberty and equality may help us navigate the current political
divide in our own country. What would help even more is a public
discourse about justice – that seems to me to be the near universal ideal
behind the subordinate values of liberty and equality. One thing I
don’t think is helpful when people try to distinguish between positive and
negative liberty. Positive liberty is just another way of saying
equality, really. And if what you actually desire is equality, why
not just…well, you get the idea.
Since we don’t trust in God anymore,
the U.S. is going to need a new motto. I kind of like the idea of
borrowing from the Pledge of Allegiance for the next U.S. motto: “Liberty and
Justice for All.” While that would be categorically more coherent
than the French motto, it may also be kind of fanciful – like North Korea’s motto –
and not descriptive of how things are in practice. If our new motto's
purpose is to reflect reality, maybe we could go with “Uh, I’m OK with
Whatever.”
Or how about simply “Meh”? That'd be nice.
No comments:
Post a Comment