Where
economics is concerned, this entails rejecting, on the one hand, a globalism
that dissolves national boundaries and pushes nations into a free trade
dogmatism that is contrary to the interests of their citizens; but also, on the
other hand, a mercantilism that walls nations off into mutually hostile camps
and treats international economic relations as a zero-sum game. From the point
of view of solidarity, neither free trade nor protectionism should be made into
ideologies; free trade policies and protectionist policies are merely tools
whose advisability can vary from case to case and require the judgment of
prudence.
Where war
and diplomacy are concerned, this vision entails rejecting, on the one hand,
the liberal and neoconservative project of pushing all nations to incorporate
themselves into the globalist blob by economic pressure, regime change, or the
like; but also, on the other hand, a Hobbesian realpolitik that sees all other
nations fundamentally as rivals rather than friends, and seeks to bully them
into submission rather than cooperate to achieve what is in each nation’s
mutual interest.
This
solidarity-oriented vision is an alternative to the false choice between what
might be called the “neoliberal” and “neo-Hobbesian” worldviews competing today
– each of which pretends that the other is the only alternative to itself. It
is the vision developed by thinkers in the Thomistic natural law tradition such
as Luigi Taparelli in the nineteenth century and Johannes Messner in the
twentieth, and which has informed modern Catholic social teaching.
The
principle of solidarity is fairly well-known to be central to natural law and
Catholic teaching about the internal
affairs of nations (and famously gave a name to Polish trade union resistance
to Communist oppression). But it ought to be better known as the ideal to
pursue in relations between nations
as well.
(From a post today at X/Twitter)
No comments:
Post a Comment