February 27, 2006
DOING WHAT COMES NATURALLY
Polity's place in a polite society (Frank Field, The Australian, February 28th, 2006)
There are some common causes for the collapse of civility in Britain and Australia. Far and away the most important is that, not so long ago, the formation of our characters was not left to chance but today, increasingly, it is. In the past, family played a key role in shaping character, and its influence was reinforced by a rich array of civil institutions including churches, Sunday schools, trade unions, friendly societies and mutual aid clubs.Both families and this wider world held clear views on the type of character each of us should develop. The central message was that our own self-respect was inextricably bound with our guarding the self-respect of others. This character formation was carried out so well that governments simply did not have to think about the issue. Now they do.
The key to the collapse in civility is the decline in Christianity. The British character was shaped by the early 19th-century evangelical revival, which centred on the role of the family and duty to neighbours. This religious revival developed into a creed of respectability that became as natural a guide to behaviour as the air that was breathed. Respectability was not imposed by a pushy middle class. It was engendered by the working class, which learned from experience that chaos was the alternative to a life emphasising respect for others as well as for oneself.
As adamant libertarians, yobs, punks and bullies will tell you there is no need to impose artificial standards of behaviour on them because natural selection has left them hard-wired for co-operative morality and instinctively drawn to just the right balance between freedom and civility.
Posted by Peter Burnet at February 27, 2006 6:37 PMI don't think so, you're using words of more than 1 syllable. Most of the above aren't capable of that.
Posted by: Sandy P. at February 27, 2006 7:25 PMSandy:
Sure, but it's pretty much what they mean by "..at's tha' way in'is, inn't it."
Posted by: Peter B at February 27, 2006 8:03 PMA very fine book in this regard:
http://www.spencepublishing.com/books/index.cfm?action=Excerpt&ProductID=89
Posted by: oj at February 27, 2006 8:10 PMMr. Burnet;
I have yet to hear a libertarian argue any of that. In fact, libertarians such as Hayek laud those "artificial standards of behavior" as part of the evolved wisdom of human society. I personally am a strong proponent of social sanction to encourage polite and respectful behavior.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at February 27, 2006 10:40 PMI've lived in Australia most of my life and I've noticed no decline in civility at all. I can't speak for Britan. This article is nonsense.
Posted by: Amos at February 28, 2006 12:24 AMAOG:
Yes, I appreciate that, but you never say what your solution is when the social conventions disappear or fail. The author posits that the problem is the decline of religion and family cohesion. If he is right, where do we go? I can't see too many people agreeing to stick together or heading to church on the basis of appeals to keep the streets politer.
Put another way, are your libertarian freedoms absolute or conditional on the strength of those social conventions you favour?
Posted by: Peter B at February 28, 2006 8:20 AMMr. Burnet;
Conditional on the strength of those social conventions. I seek to maximize liberty and maximum liberty is not achieved in a Hobbesian world of maximum license (something, I will agree, that is often missed by the strident libertarians). I am a big believer in the "Social Contract", in which certain freedoms are sacrificed in order to obtain other freedoms. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at February 28, 2006 9:30 AMPoliteness is society's way of avoiding violence. In the old days, you didn't give anyone the bird unless you wanted a fight. I know stories of my grandfather literally beating up guys who didn't act polite. Politeness implied respect.
Civil battery is now a no no, no matter the reason, and with the decline in violence people can get away with being more offensive. If people truly thought that talking on their cell phone during a filme may result in a beating, you can bet going to the movies would become a much better experience.
Posted by: Chris Durnell at February 28, 2006 11:09 AM