If I were capable of writing a book it would be titled
Untapped: Michael Oakeshott and the American Conservative Movement. You may
have noticed that Oakeshott’s thought appears disturbingly often (is this guy
obsessed?) around here. It’s because his thought clarifies to a degree I haven’t
found anywhere else.
In his magnum opus, On Human Conduct, Oakeshott
distinguished between civil association and enterprise association in regard to
political activity. Conceptually this is far better than left/right (a low
bar), liberal/conservative, or negative/positive liberties.
Civil association rules or laws are neutral and are in
Oakeshott’s words “subscribed to” rather than carried out. They are purposeless
except in the sense that they minimize the clashes that occur as free people
pursue their own choices. The rule that we drive on the right side of the rode
belongs to civil association. It merely specifies that if we decide to drive we
do so on the right side, but it is indifferent as to where we go or whether we
drive at all.
Enterprise association is of a completely different
character. As its name suggests it is government as enterprise. An enterprise
(think of business) is directed to a goal and everything it does is with that
goal in mind. You are hired if you can contribute to the enterprise’s goal and you’ll
be fired if your contribution is inadequate.
Oakeshott argued that neither civil association or
enterprise association was possible in pure form but that civil association was
compatible with free people, a populous who enjoy and value making their own
decisions. He also believed that viewing government as enterprise association
has regrettably become the dominant way of thinking about government (for
Oakeshott, what the government should do was the critical question not its
form).
Now with the above in mind it should surprise no one that
men and women who have spent most of their adult lives in business and are
running for office on the back of their business success will naturally
view government as an enterprise association. Immersed in a world of getting
things done, delivering results, of the constant pursuit of efficiency they
cannot but see the idea of government as a neutral activity, one that values checks
and balances, and one that deliberately sets up impediments to action as an
absurdity.
In short, at least from the conservative perspective, there
is much in the businessman’s outlook that should make him wary. Unless the businessman is that rare
person who views government as a wholly different activity, he or she is likely
to be more of a progressive/rationalist than a conservative.
