Reclaiming Ownership of America
What does America stand for? Pausing to reflect on the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, America’s self-conception seems to be in disarray. Americans no longer believe the future will be brighter. Trust is near all-time lows, not only low trust of governing institutions but low trust of the moral character of other Americans.
I have a hypothesis: America is out of our control. Like a giant wind tunnel, the “system” propels us forward with little opportunity for human direction. Law is everywhere, even in ordinary daily interactions. Instead of discussing what’s right, or practical, Americans worry about legal ramifications. Billboards by lawyers promise riches in retribution for any tragedy or disappointment. Instead of upholding law as a shield for freedom, our leaders wield law as a weapon for self-interest. Of course Americans feel fear and distrust. The land of opportunity is a legal minefield.
What’s needed, I think, is to reclaim ownership for how we do things. Pull law back into a framework of outer boundaries, not an arbiter of daily decisions. Law is not supposed to be central planning. Let principals run schools. Let officials make tradeoff judgments needed to modernize infrastructure. Let people in a free society decide for themselves what’s right and wrong, and judge and be judged accordingly. That’s what freedom is supposed to offer.
For a project on making government manageable, I’ve recently revisited some early organizational theorists. One of these, Mary Parker Follett (1868-1933), is known for her insights on giving employees “authority all down the line,” so workers are free to collaborate and to adapt to “the law of the situation.”
Follett was also a prescient critic of modern democracy, which she felt was disempowering people from being able to collaborate and take ownership for local affairs. Follett saw politics as a process of manipulating “a crowd,” with little opportunity for human growth and fulfillment. Follett was a sharp critic of the conception of freedom as individual rights: “You may as well break a branch off the tree and expect it to live.”
People find meaning and growth, Follett argued, in working in groups. That’s how people learn, and develop mutual commitment and pride. Follett’s analysis aligns with the pluralistic traditions of America—where people of similar interests and backgrounds form communities with high social capital. Follett echoes Tocqueville’s description of why Americans take ownership for community activities—it’s in their “self-interest, rightly understood.”
As part of a series in The Free Press on great Americans not featured in history books, I’ve written this brief bio of Follett. I think Follett has something to say to us. The mistake we made was to delegate decisions to systems. No centralized system can make things work fairly or sensibly. No system of atomized rights can achieve fairness. Law can’t govern; law is a framework for people to govern. Law can’t decide what’s sensible and fair in daily dealings. Law can’t make us trust each other. Only people, working with other people, can develop trust and bonds needed for, you name it, good schools, energetic public agencies, moral standards, and hope for the future.
– Philip
Everyday Freedom will be the subject of “On Mondays We Do Philosophy,” hosted by Noah Smith, Alexia Bonatsos, and Maran Nelson. The event is Monday, June 22, in San Francisco.
How to re-empower human judgment was the topic of my discussion with Leighton Grey on his Grey Matter podcast.