Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Subsidiarity


Subsidiarity is the recognition that when a problem exists at any level, the resolution of that problem ought to be dealt with at that level.  What is it to talk about levels and problems at these levels? 

Subsidiarity is built upon the idea that people interact with each other through various social strata, or layers.  The base of all, the foundational level is that the family.  The first interaction a person has with others is within the family into which they are born.  The father, mother, siblings, grandparents, aunts and uncles, and cousins, all interact with the newly born, they all are responsible for and contribute to the child’s growth and development.  As a result of increased mobility and opportunities, this level of society has been undergoing tremendous change as nuclear families, a set of parents and their children, move away from the grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins.  The concept of the extended family is disappearing and to now speak of family is to mean simply the nuclear family.  The influence of grandparents, along with the diversity brought by aunts, uncles, and cousins, is slowly disappearing.  Yet, even with the diminution of the extended, subsidiarity recognizes the first level of society as the family rather than the individual. 

The next level of society is the neighborhood, the grouping of families living in close proximity to each other.  It is in slightly wider setting or level that both individuals and families interact for support, development, and well-being.  This level, as well, is undergoing change.  There was a time when families communicated with each other much more than is the case today.  Air conditioning has moved people indoors to avoid the heat rather than sitting on the porch of an evening, lost is the contact neighbors once had seeing each other out and about.  Few people know much about their neighbors beyond their name.  It has become increasingly difficult to know whether or not you can trust your neighbors and homes have become secure fortresses with alarm systems.  Children do not play with other kids in the neighborhood, they are taken to playdates with people the parents know better from work or school than the family next door.

The levels continue to ascend: various neighborhoods close to each other form a town, towns form a county, counties are part of a state, states together form a nation, and the community of nations creates the global level.  There can be levels that form within levels, levels that address a specific area of concern.  For example, a school district is a level above a neighborhood yet different that a town.  Fire protection districts would be another example of a level within a level addressing a specific issue.

Subsidiarity deals with the ability to solve problems.  Subsidiarity is the idea that problems should always be solved at lowest social level possible.  Consider security; when families where more open to their neighbors, there was a sense of security in that everyone watched out for everyone else.  However, there were always threats that could not be addressed by neighbors watching over neighbors and towns stepped in to provide police protection.  Towns were able to provide streets among the neighborhoods of their borders, but linking itself to another town by roads was difficult and county road crews were established.  The Civil Rights Act is a good example of subsidiarity properly applied.  After the Civil War, there were (widely scattered and few in number) neighborhoods where racism disappeared, but the problem of discrimination was still widely practiced.  A few, very few, cities tried to make conditions better for blacks, but still the problem persisted.  Some states, but not many, also tried to improve the lives of black men and women yet the problem of discrimination persisted.  The evil of racism, which originates at the level of neighborhoods, could not be removed by actions at the neighborhood level. The problems were not adequately addressed at the community level or at the state level.  Attempts to solve this problem which was a local problem (at nearly all localities) could not be put in place until it reached the national level and even then it took one hundred years before it happened.  The passage of the Civil Rights Act in the Johnson Administration was a higher level of society addressing problems of much lower levels of society; this was a true act of subsidiarity. 

However, a higher level of society can overstep its bounds and violate the spirit of subsidiarity if it attempts to solve problems that could be solved at the lower level.  The current imbroglio over education is sometimes seen as an example of a higher level interfering with something a much lower level could solve.  Has the federal government, a part of the national level of society, overstepped its reach in establishing curriculum standards for local school districts?  St. John Paul, in discussing the development of the welfare state[1], wrote:

By intervening directly ad depriving society of its responsibility, the social assistance state leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.  In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closet to them and who act as neighbors to those in need.  (CA, 48)

Of course this raises the question of whether or not it is really possible to address many welfare needs at a neighborhood level.  Before the Great Depression, much assistance for the poor came from churches and local communities; neighbors helped neighbors.  What happened to end that?  What was the failure that kicked the responsibility up to higher levels of society?  Families began to decrease their participation in communal efforts to aid others. 

Just as the permanent principle of the common good implied the principle of the universal destination of goods and which led to the development of the preferential option for the poor, the permanent principle of subsidiarity strongly implies the duty of participation.  Participation deals with the acts of individuals which contribute to the cultural, economic, political, and social life of the civil community to which they belong.  These acts can be individually performed or in cooperation with others.  Participation is a duty to be fulfilled with responsibility and with a view towards the common good.  Failure to vote, even when one feels their vote would not matter, is a failure to participate.  Failures to participate can lead to the establishment of groups with hidden privileges and creates conditions where some citizens could make deals with institutions to serve their own needs rather than the common good.  In short, failure to participate creates the conditions under which higher levels can overstep their boundaries and violate the principle of subsidiarity.

There are, then, two areas of concern: first, are problems being solved at the lowest possible social level; and second, are people responsibly participating for the common good?  With respect to the first, orthodox economics generally fails to recognize societal levels because everything is modeled upon the interaction of the representative agent, homo oeconomicus, and individual firms.  There are sub-disciplines within economics broadly defined such as Institutional Economics and Public Choice Theory that could recognize and address the ideas of societal levels.  However, the high school economics curriculum and the principles courses most college students take are based upon the models and contain policy ideas which ignore societal levels.  Regarding the second, orthodox economics generally assumes that everyone participates in market activity and that nothing else matters.  The decision to vote or not is a response to a optimization problem rather than a responsibility to participate.  The idea that large segments of people are excluded from participation is not logically possible in economics because discrimination is not considered rational behavior and since homo oeconomicus always acts rationally, discrimination simply cannot occur. 

CA refers to St. John Paul II's encyclical, Centesimus Annus, and the number is the paragraph in which the quote was found. 


[1] In his words, the “social assistance state”

No comments:

Post a Comment