Gaetano_filangieri_02

Filangieri and the Founding Fathers

foundingFilangieri, the Founding Fathers and the Culture of Human Rights. Transcript of a lecture before the Library of Congress, Washington DC, by Marcello Pera.

It is a well known fact that Gaetano Filangieri was an admirer of the American Revolution. In his view ― as he wrote in his Science of Legislation of 1780 ― Pennsylvania was “a nation of heroes, the asylum of liberty, and the admiration of the universe.” (The Science of Legislation, Engl. transl., printed for Thomas Ostell by Emery and Adams 1806, I, xi, 150).

Of the several posthumous editions of this great work, one was dedicated to George Washington and another to Thomas Jefferson. He corresponded with Benjamin Franklin to whom he asked to be invited “to participate in the great Constitution being prepared in the United Provinces of America, the laws of which are to determine not only their fate, but also the destiny of the whole of this new emisphere.” (Quoted in A. Pace, Benjamin Franklin and Italy, American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia 1958, p.151).

Although Franklin never made the invitation (sadly but, I must admit, quite reasonably), he sent Filangieri a collection of the Constitutions of the American States in 1783. Filangieri commented on them, and Franklin wrote back to him with fresh observations.

Unfortunately, the comments have never been found, in spite of many efforts by historians. This material would be a valuable source of information for understanding the relationship between the American and the Italian Enlightenment especially on issues such as the regime of division of powers, criminal law, death penalty, the role of the Judiciary, about which Filangieri proved to have far-seeing views.

At present, the only thing we know is that a nephew of Filangieri had a chance to see it, and commented on it by observing “the curious fact developed in it by one of the commentators, that all the leading statesman in America seemed chiefly to be concerned in placing restrictions upon the popular will, while the European philosophers or democrats were equally zealous in abolishing all restriction.” (A. Pace, op. cit., p.153)
I believe this is one of the main reasons for reflecting on Filangieri and Franklin today. Their destinies couldn’t be more different.

Franklin and the Founding Fathers promoted a liberal revolution whose effects are still felt today in the United States and elsewhere; Filangieri and his circle of Neapolitan intellectuals sparked off a Jacobin revolution that terminated in a blood bath. At that time, the two shores of the Atlantic took different paths. Why did this split occur? And is it still underway? If this is the case, who is most in the right, a democratic-oriented Europe or a liberal-leaning America? Or rather, as I fear, are we all in the same boat, running the same risks?

Filangieri’s “absolute goodness” and human rights

The point of departure of Filangieri’s Science of Legislation is easy to formulate: when is a law a good law? Filangieri’s answer to this question is: there are two kinds of goodness, “absolute” and “relative.”
A law is absolutely good if it is in “agreement with the universal principles of morality, common to all nations and all governments, and adapted to all climates.” (I, iv, p.23) A law is relatively good if it agrees with the historical, environmental, cultural, religious, social, et cetera circumstances of the people whom it addresses. In short, a law is relatively good if it reflects “the state of the nation which receives it.” (I, v, p.49) Since Filangieri maintains that the principle of absolute goodness is “the first rule of law” (I, iv, p.24), we can say that absolute goodness is the criterion of legitimacy of laws, while relative goodness is a criterion of their utility. This is why Filangieri maintains that two opposite laws may both be relatively good, because they are useful to two different nations or to the same nation but in different historical periods, but no law in any nation or era is acceptable if it goes against the absolute principles of morality.

Filangieri was not a mere political scientist. Like Machiavelli before him, but without his moral unscrupulousness, Filangieri intended to advance “a philosophy in aid of governments.” And precisely like Franklin, he aimed to tear off the sceptre from tyrants. But if philosophy is to aid governments it has to solve two preliminary questions. What are the principles of absolute goodness rulers should abide by? And how can these principles be known?

Filangieri’s answer to the first question is the same as that of the natural right tradition as passed down by John Locke and the United States Declaration of Independence. In brief, Filangieri makes the two following statements.

First, there are universal moral principles: “natural right contains the immutable principles of eternal justice in every case.” (I, iv, p.23)

Second, these principles have a divine origin: as he remarks, “they are neither the result of the ambiguous maxims of the moralist, nor the useless and unproductive meditations of the philosopher. They are the dictates of universal reason, and of that moral code, which the Author of Nature has imprinted on the heart of every individual of the human race.” (ibid.)
Filangieri’s answer to the second question is also indebted to the same tradition stemming from Locke. He makes two farther statements.

Fourth, the universal moral principles of absolute goodness are understandable by everyone according to his own reason. “The savage of Nova Zembla ― he writes ― is aware, as well as Locke, that he has no right to the beast killed at a distance in the chase by one of his tribe.” (I, iv, p.24)

Fifth, the universal moral principles are knowable by revelation. Besides reason ― Filangieri writes ― “the next object of absolute goodness is revelation …The laws should neither endeavour to oppose its progress nor weaken its effect. An attempt at either would be an attempt to shake the foundations of an edifice raised by the Great Being, who has the first rights to our obedience.” (I, iv, pp.36-37)

Two consequences worthy of great attention may be drawn from the latter statement.

The first one is historical: if the universal moral principles of absolute goodness are directly or indirectly bound to revelation, i.e. to the Christian Revelation, it can be safely affirmed that, without Christianity, there would be no Europe. Like Franklin, Filangieri was more of a Mason than of a Christian; nonetheless, he wrote:

“If indeed any brilliant instances of benevolence appear amidst the errors and obscurity of the European codes of law, they owe their lustre to a religion, which in the recommendation from the altar of the offices of mutual affection and the tenets of equality, hath strengthened the liberties of man by the prohibition of domestic slavery… The triumph of reason and humanity is certainly our due, and neither the legislative code of Egypt, Greece, nor Rome, can stand a comparison with that of the present times.” (I, iv, pp.37-38)

The second consequence concerns religion’s civil, juridical and political function. If, according to Filangieri, religion is an “expansion and modification of the universal principles of morality,” (I, iv, p.37) it can be said that, without religion, in particular without Christianity, human rights have no moral grounding.

Filangieri writes:

“Revelation should be the legislator’s guide. The Decalogue alone contains within a few precepts everything to be collected from an hundred volumes of morality … The private peace of individuals and families, conjugal virtue, and public tranquillity, are the necessary consequences. Of what inestimable advantage to legislators is not such a perfect model!” (I, iv, p.37)

This is not to say that for Filangieri the State must be confessional. There is a clear distinction between the public and the private sphere. The State attends to the former: personal thoughts, intentions, and what we now call lifestyles, must not be the legislator’s concern. On the other hand, the State can not reach its goal of ensuring the serenity and security of its citizens, if their private lives are not inspired by virtue. Filangieri writes:
“The citizen’s public order and security require that … authority stop before his doorstep, that it respect the citizen’s peace and liberty … that it allow due course to his desires. At the same time, they require a further restraint, another tribunal, judge, code of conduct regulating the citizen’s hidden actions, curbing his secret abandons, encouraging his undisclosed virtues, binding him to justice honesty and virtue … Here is religion’s true action.” (Piano ragionato, not printed in the English translation, pp. 57-58 of the original Italian edition)

And here is another point of contact between Filangieri and the Founding Fathers of America. More or less in the same years, in his Notes on the State of Virginia (1784), Jefferson raised the following question:
“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?” (Query XVIII)

Franklin and all the Founding Fathers were of the same opinion. For example, John Adams famously wrote:

“Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of republicanism and of all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all combinations of human society”.

This is my concern. My question is the following. Today a growing number of intellectuals, as well as politicians (and judges), believe that religion is an obstacle to the peaceful coexistence of people of different nations, that it ought to be kept separate from political life, and that it can not belong to the public sphere. While the Founders thought that our free institutions need a moral and religious basis, philosophers like John Rawls and many others claim instead today that liberalism is “free-standing”, i.e. that it is simply and exclusively political. Franklin and Filangieri would have rejected this idea, and I personally fear its consequences. Let me briefly pay homage to both men by explaining why I do harbour such feelings.

“Detachment” and the crisis of human rights

Human rights, according to Filangieri, are “innate,” (I, 298) “universal,” (I, 76) “sacred,” (I, 84) mprescriptible.” (I, 82. As such, they come before the State and are independent from it: people enjoy these rights qua persons, not qua citizens. As Locke argued, they exist even in the state of nature. The question is then: if people are “endowed” with human rights and if they, in virtue of these rights, are free to pursue their own lifestyles, and if consequently the State is not allowed to interfere with these styles, how can such a State, a quintessential, liberal State in Locke’s sense, preserve a sufficient cohesion among its citizens, retain their loyalty to the institutions, and avoid its own disgregation?

The answer of Filangieri and of the Founding Fathers, as we saw, is: by education to virtue, including the virtue of law abidance, and by religion, the best guide to such an education.

This naturally implies that the State is not entirely neutral with respect to the different life visions, nor entirely independent in regard to the different religions. More precisely, this means that the liberal State is indebted to the morality and religion that engenders and nurtures the culture of human rights. More exactly still, this means that the liberal State is indebted to Christianity and to every “comprehensive doctrine” (to borrow another expression by Rawls) that takes inspiration from Christianity.

But Filangeri’s solution raises a paradox. On one side, the liberal State is a secular State: it requires the separation between Church and State and between politics and religion; on the other side, the liberal State, precisely because it is based on human rights, requires a religious grounding. Is there a way out of this conundrum?

I do not intend here to enter such a complex philosophical question. But I can say how it has been solved de facto. Since the Enlightenment, modern political culture has operated what may be termed a process of “detachment” or “emancipation.” It has detached the liberal State and human rights from religion, and has emancipated political reason from all religious morality.

The goal may seem reasonable, because the detachment of free institutions from moral codes and religious tradition promises to bring more tolerance and more hospitality. Nevertheless, the result is not satisfactory, nor can it be. Not only has tolerance not increased in our countries and the issue of citizenship very often become controversial, the quantity and quality of claims considered as human rights has also exploded, especially in the social and ethical or bioethical fields. Once insurmountable limits to the action of the State, human rights are now becoming the State concessions.

On such a dramatic turning point we ought particularly to reflect upon. We have certainly become more secular, we have probably become more democratic, and our societies are probably becoming more and more open; but if human rights effectively depend on the State, can we claim we are becoming more free? Our forefathers fought to be free from the tyranny of absolutist and theocratic regimes. Are we not plunging into another absolute regime and another theocracy, a “democratic absolutism” and a “secular theocracy,” if we may call them so?

I leave my audience the burden of comforting me. I conclude by mentioning another phenomenon that worries me in addition to that of detachment. Nowadays the explosion of human rights claims increasingly depends on courts of justice and supreme courts rather than on parliaments. The Judiciary, once a passive body, as in Filangieri’s conception, is now turning creative. And this gives rise to a serious problem, because the highest virtue of the judicial system, i.e. its independence, is in danger of becoming its greatest weakness, that is to say, its assimilation to a political body.

We expected for a long time the question “who controls the controllers?”, but are so little prepared for the question “who controls the judges?” that we can not even imagine it being raised.

To conclude, human rights require free institutions and these require deep moral virtues and strong religious commitment. I am afraid that if we do not take the latter both seriously, as seems to be the case today, Franklin and Filangieri’s efforts to build a regime of liberty might be destined to fail. It was then their obligation to speak, it is now ours to listen.

Enhanced by Zemanta

722 thoughts on “Filangieri and the Founding Fathers”

  1. Pingback: longchamp pas cher
  2. Pingback: jordans for sale
  3. Pingback: Oakley Sunglasses
  4. Pingback: Oakley Sunglasses
  5. Pingback: Longchamp Outlet
  6. Pingback: New Balance Outlet
  7. Pingback: Cheap Adidas
  8. Pingback: wow gold
  9. Pingback: GHD Outlet
  10. Pingback: Burke's Outlet
  11. Pingback: coach 10339
  12. Pingback: Coach Outlet
  13. Pingback: Cheap Beats by dre
  14. Pingback: wow gold
  15. Pingback: Trackback
  16. Pingback: nike free shoes
  17. Pingback: potencja
  18. Pingback: Cheap Lebron 11
  19. Pingback: Trackback
  20. Pingback: wowgold
  21. Pingback: Oakley Sunglasses
  22. Pingback: Michael Kors Sac
  23. Pingback: wow gold
  24. Pingback: babyliss miracurl
  25. Pingback: Jordan Retro 1
  26. Pingback: foams concord
  27. Pingback: wow gold
  28. Pingback: fertility pills
  29. Pingback: Trackback
  30. Pingback: coach outlet
  31. Pingback: nike free run 7.0
  32. Pingback: nike free run 4
  33. Pingback: nike free run 6.0
  34. Pingback: louis vuitton bags
  35. Pingback: more info
  36. Pingback: Sac Louis Vuitton
  37. Pingback: coach factory
  38. Pingback: my explanation
  39. Pingback: michael kors
  40. Pingback: krzesło biurowe
  41. Pingback: Trackback
  42. Pingback: loui vuitton
  43. Pingback: UK power cord
  44. Pingback: Trackback
  45. Pingback: Cheap Dior
  46. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses
  47. Pingback: Cheap Foamposites
  48. Pingback: Jordan Retro 11
  49. Pingback: Sac Michael Kors
  50. Pingback: webpage
  51. Pingback: Concord foamposite
  52. Pingback: canape lit design
  53. Pingback: Trackback
  54. Pingback: jordans for sale
  55. Pingback: this
  56. Pingback: jordan 6
  57. Pingback: gucci baseball cap
  58. Pingback: Kate Spade Sale
  59. Pingback: Nike KD VII DMV
  60. Pingback: oakley pas cher
  61. Pingback: nike pas cher
  62. Pingback: nike free 2
  63. Pingback: nike tn
  64. Pingback: water ionizers
  65. Pingback: Coach Outlet
  66. Pingback: michael kors bags
  67. Pingback: Info
  68. Pingback: Jordan Gamma Blue
  69. Pingback: Nike KD VII
  70. Pingback: smartbabyinc
  71. Pingback: nouveau sac fendi
  72. Pingback: polo shirt
  73. Pingback: Jordan 1 Barons
  74. Pingback: air max shoes
  75. Pingback: cheap michael kors
  76. Pingback: cheap jordans
  77. Pingback: air max one
  78. Pingback: Trackback
  79. Pingback: water ionizer
  80. Pingback: ipcgame.me
  81. Pingback: coach outlet
  82. Pingback: saloneuforia.com
  83. Pingback: polo ralph lauren
  84. Pingback: rollerderbyworkout
  85. Pingback: polo
  86. Pingback: sport blue 3s
  87. Pingback: hornbrookblog.com
  88. Pingback: polo
  89. Pingback: Chrome Hearts Ring
  90. Pingback: ralph lauren polo
  91. Pingback: Company
  92. Pingback: Ideas
  93. Pingback: michael kors uk
  94. Pingback: ralph lauren polo
  95. Pingback: News
  96. Pingback: foamposites yeezys
  97. Pingback: www.nor-sta.pl
  98. Pingback: Louboutin Pas Cher
  99. Pingback: Tech
  100. Pingback: cheap jordan shoes
  101. Pingback: cheap michael kors
  102. Pingback: turbo green 6s
  103. Pingback: maillot paris
  104. Pingback: lebron 11 shoes
  105. Pingback: maillot foot
  106. Pingback: polo ralph lauren
  107. Pingback: michael kors
  108. Pingback: louboutin pas cher
  109. Pingback: jordan pas cher
  110. Pingback: oakley femme
  111. Pingback: nike pas cher
  112. Pingback: gamma 11s
  113. Pingback: jordan retro 6
  114. Pingback: jordan 13 for sale
  115. Pingback: jordan retro 11
  116. Pingback: nike free run 5.0
  117. Pingback: jordan 13
  118. Pingback: jordan 11 shoes
  119. Pingback: lebron 9 Galaxy
  120. Pingback: cheap air max
  121. Pingback: michael kors
  122. Pingback: jordan retro 3
  123. Pingback: Nike KD 7
  124. Pingback: Gamma Blue 11
  125. Pingback: new jordans 2014
  126. Pingback: Health
  127. Pingback: toms shoes sale
  128. Pingback: tiffany and co
  129. Pingback: toms on sale
  130. Pingback: Finance
  131. Pingback: Nike KD VII DMV
  132. Pingback: Louboutin Pas Cher
  133. Pingback: Liberty
  134. Pingback: Buy Sport Blue 6s
  135. Pingback: retro 3 jordans
  136. Pingback: ionized water
  137. Pingback: air jordan
  138. Pingback: alkaline water
  139. Pingback: Trading
  140. Pingback: abercrombie soldes
  141. Pingback: Real F50 Adizero
  142. Pingback: sport blue 14
  143. Pingback: nike air max one
  144. Pingback: Louboutin Femme
  145. Pingback: Cheap Carmine 6s
  146. Pingback: louis vuitton bags
  147. Pingback: beats by dr dre
  148. Pingback: Business
  149. Pingback: nike pas cher
  150. Pingback: nike free pas cher
  151. Pingback: louboutin soldes
  152. Pingback: ray ban homme
  153. Pingback: Nike KD VII DMV
  154. Pingback: leeds roofers
  155. Pingback: jordan retro 4
  156. Pingback: Louis Vuitton Bags
  157. Pingback: aastra.tv
  158. Pingback: kobe bryant shoes
  159. Pingback: free run 3.0
  160. Pingback: borse prada
  161. Pingback: toms Norge
  162. Pingback: Camp
  163. Pingback: location de nappes
  164. Pingback: karen millen sale
  165. Pingback: Technology
  166. Pingback: Nike KD 7 DMV
  167. Pingback: jordan 3lab5s
  168. Pingback: Nike KD 7 DMV
  169. Pingback: michael kors bags
  170. Pingback: Ray Ban Wayfarer
  171. Pingback: Code
  172. Pingback: louboutin pas cher
  173. Pingback: nike free pas cher
  174. Pingback: School
  175. Pingback: chaussure nike
  176. Pingback: Jordan 3Lab5
  177. Pingback: nike foams
  178. Pingback: Nike Air Max sale
  179. Pingback: Jordan Gamma Blue
  180. Pingback: casque beats
  181. Pingback: toms Norge
  182. Pingback: toms Norge
  183. Pingback: toms Norge
  184. Pingback: toms Norge
  185. Pingback: michael kors bag
  186. Pingback: coach sale
  187. Pingback: Clothing
  188. Pingback: Jordan 14 thunder
  189. Pingback: chanel sito
  190. Pingback: retro jordans
  191. Pingback: toms sko
  192. Pingback: celine balitran
  193. Pingback: Benz Scanner C3&C4
  194. Pingback: toms Norge
  195. Pingback: Louboutin pas cher
  196. Pingback: ray ban wayfarer
  197. Pingback: cheap foamposites
  198. Pingback: nike air jordan
  199. Pingback: asics mining
  200. Pingback: kate spade outlet
  201. Pingback: asics gel saga
  202. Pingback: asics shoes women
  203. Pingback: Gucci Top Handles
  204. Pingback: polo ralph lauren
  205. Pingback: asics 2170
  206. Pingback: bitcoin asic
  207. Pingback: abercrombie femme
  208. Pingback: jordan 3lab5s
  209. Pingback: asic
  210. Pingback: asics trainer
  211. Pingback: toms Norge
  212. Pingback: mbt shop online
  213. Pingback: asics gel pulse 3
  214. Pingback: Financial
  215. Pingback: cheap jordans
  216. Pingback: sac balenciaga
  217. Pingback: asics gel scram
  218. Pingback: nike air max 90
  219. Pingback: asics ultimate
  220. Pingback: e cigarette review
  221. Pingback: toms Norge
  222. Pingback: michael kors bags
  223. Pingback: retro jordans
  224. Pingback: toms Norge
  225. Pingback: Nike KD VII DMV
  226. Pingback: jordan 6 2014
  227. Pingback: sac longchamp
  228. Pingback: Green Glow 4s
  229. Pingback: toms Norge
  230. Pingback: nike pas cher
  231. Pingback: jordan femme
  232. Pingback: louboutin soldes
  233. Pingback: celine bags online
  234. Pingback: nike schuhe
  235. Pingback: Wolf Grey 3
  236. Pingback: wow gold
  237. Pingback: mbt scarpe italia
  238. Pingback: Louboutin soldes
  239. Pingback: cheap jordan shoes
  240. Pingback: hogan prezzi bassi
  241. Pingback: toms Norge
  242. Pingback: Nike KD VII DMV
  243. Pingback: borse gucci
  244. Pingback: canada goose cheap
  245. Pingback: Nike KD VII
  246. Pingback: louboutin pas cher
  247. Pingback: nike tn pas cher
  248. Pingback: oakley pas cher
  249. Pingback: coach handbags
  250. Pingback: Lebron 11
  251. Pingback: cheap jordans
  252. Pingback: Wolf Grey 3
  253. Pingback: cheap jordans
  254. Pingback: toms Norge
  255. Pingback: jordan outlet
  256. Pingback: mbt shoes
  257. Pingback: toms outlet
  258. Pingback: asics outlet
  259. Pingback: asics kayano 19
  260. Pingback: asics black shoes
  261. Pingback: asics outlet
  262. Pingback: fitflop slippers
  263. Pingback: coach factory
  264. Pingback: Buy Sport Blue 6s
  265. Pingback: asics 1140
  266. Pingback: Foams Black Suede
  267. Pingback: gsdashabi
  268. Pingback: Amddram
  269. Pingback: skin tag removal
  270. Pingback: nike free run 2
  271. Pingback: Nike KD 7
  272. Pingback: Jordan 14 thunder
  273. Pingback: Chanel clearance
  274. Pingback: Louboutin Monaco
  275. Pingback: Bauletto Gucci
  276. Pingback: Gucci Borse Outlet
  277. Pingback: cheap toms shoes
  278. Pingback: Wp Weekend Phoenix
  279. Pingback: teachers
  280. Pingback: Jordan 3
  281. Pingback: 15 pounds
  282. Pingback: asics gel cumulus
  283. Pingback: Louboutins
  284. Pingback: asics gel blur 33
  285. Pingback: suaradotcom
  286. Pingback: News
  287. Pingback: asics gel
  288. Pingback: scarpe di prada
  289. Pingback: loose weight fast
  290. Pingback: air max 2013
  291. Pingback: air max
  292. Pingback: nike air max
  293. Pingback: air max 97
  294. Pingback: air max donna
  295. Pingback: nike air max 97
  296. Pingback: nike air max 2013
  297. Pingback: air max command
  298. Pingback: cheap asics
  299. Pingback: asics shoes online
  300. Pingback: asics gel kayano
  301. Pingback: asics gel blur 33
  302. Pingback: asic bitcoin
  303. Pingback: asics t941n
  304. Pingback: asics gel kayano
  305. Pingback: asics nimbus
  306. Pingback: air max 90
  307. Pingback: asics cheap
  308. Pingback: Soldes Louboutin
  309. Pingback: asics gt 2170 mens
  310. Pingback: asics gel lyte 3
  311. Pingback: asics gel rocket 5
  312. Pingback: cheap asics
  313. Pingback: weight loss hcg
  314. Pingback: call us
  315. Pingback: cheap asics
  316. Pingback: asics kayano 18
  317. Pingback: asics nimbus 14
  318. Pingback: asics gel 1150
  319. Pingback: asics nimbus 14
  320. Pingback: asics nimbus 14
  321. Pingback: cheap asics
  322. Pingback: asics 2170
  323. Pingback: asics nimbus
  324. Pingback: web link
  325. Pingback: try this website
  326. Pingback: try this out
  327. Pingback: asics gel blur
  328. Pingback: cheap asics
  329. Pingback: asics kayano 18
  330. Pingback: dr oz diet pills
  331. Pingback: powdered vitamin c
  332. Pingback: auburn dentist
  333. Pingback: asics nimbus 14
  334. Pingback: saber mas
  335. Pingback: asics shirts
  336. Pingback: asics gel blur 33
  337. Pingback: asics clothes
  338. Pingback: dig this
  339. Pingback: Click Here
  340. Pingback: image source
  341. Pingback: browse this site
  342. Pingback: check over here

Leave a Reply

The Filangeri Family

%d bloggers like this: