STEP UP TO VALUES

During my time in Paris attending various classes at Paris Université 1, I attended a lecture concerning the philosophies of values and rights. I had arrived early and chose a seat at the end of a middle row on the aisle, one for comfort and to allow for students, actually taking degrees to have the better seats. As I sat waiting and reading bits of Adam Smith, the classroom began to fill. In fact, an astonishing number of people began to crowd into the room with people sitting in the aisles and pushing the already tight seating even tighter, and making my comfortable aisle seat like being on the Northern Line at rush hour. Clearly the numbers of young people wishing to hear and discuss the question of values at 8 o’clock in the morning was remarkable. I cannot now recall the name of the lecturer, but the tenor of the first session initially revolved around economic value which of course rapidly expanded to other value systems, attitudes and concerns. Is it monetary, importance, standards, ethics, maths, music, language and any other areas to which one can ascribe value? In terms of attendance, it was certainly the most valued class I sat in on; however, due to the constraints, and the fact that degree students had greater priority I switched to lectures on the philosophy of violence, the concept of Saint Augustine Just War ‘jus bellum justum’. Not as crowded, but certainly interesting.

Dr Mark Carney

But to return to Adam Smith and the Scottish Enlightenment, I was reminded of the above as I was listening to this morning’s Reith Lecture on Radio 4 given by Dr Mark Carney, former Governor of the Bank of England. He began his talk with reference to the Scottish Enlightenment and in particular to Adam Smith, not only for his work The Wealth of Nations but also for his Theory of Moral Sentiments. Again, the concern begins with comparisons in terms of monetary value, e.g.: why is the salary of an experienced healthcare worker working for 40 hours in a week around £510 ($679), whereas the price of an ounce of gold is £1297.81 ($1728.38) in today’s market?

The Theory of Moral Sentiments, was published in 1759, which marks the birth of Robert Burns, Mary Wollstonecraft, William Pitt the Younger, Georges Danton and Friedrich Schiller, as well as the Seven Year War.  The Wealth of Nations was published seventeen years later on the 9^th of March, 1776, which also marks the American Revolutionary War, Thomas Paine publishing Common Sense in January and the Continental Congress producing the Declaration of Independence in July. A great deal of value was considered and cogitated during those 17 years.

Value takes off in a multiplicity of directions towards importance, evaluations, appreciations, costs and principles. What we hold in high esteem not only as individuals but as a group informs our codes of conduct and ethics. The value of a single human life is constantly being expounded by just about everyone, and in particular politicians, as evidence of a claim to having high moral standards.

Indeed, most citizens of every nation have political values, which are informed by their ancestors, their family, their peer groups, their education, their work, their representatives and their experiences. Which is why the matter of values is at such a crossroads at the beginnings of this 21^st century. In the UK, the closeness of the split between those who voted to leave the European Union and those who wished to stay is still very evident. In the United States, although the difference in numbers who voted for a president seems large, six million, we cannot hide the fact that over 74 million voted one way and nearly 80 million another. It was only a matter of 4.4%. The 2016 referendum in the UK as to whether to stay in the Union or not, the difference was some 1.2 million votes, which was only a matter of 3.78% on the day. That still left over 16 million people disheartened.

What matters in the end is that people give value to their institutions, the idea of the rule of law and the democratic system that holds them together. There were demonstrations in the UK, and some bad words were exchanged, and no doubt a few thumps might have been traded by some, but on the whole democracy was in action. That does not prevent people from holding on to certain different values, but at the core democratic values prevail. Nor does the difference prevent continued comment. The value of being able to have opinion and comment is equally revered.

As an instance in point, the British Parliament passed a bill allowing a degree of devolution empowering Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to create their own Legislature to deal with its sphere of influence, to manage its own domestic agenda. Following on from that, there came about a referendum in 2014 as to whether Scotland would separate entirely from the UK and be its own sovereign Nation. The difference on Scottish Independence was 10.6% in favour of staying in the union. Then came 2016 and 62% of voting Scots chose to remain in the European Union. Two thirds of the population sought to keep its ties with Europe. Is it any surprise therefore that Scotland seeks once again to separate itself from the United Kingdom? The values that made them choose Union over isolation is what moves them again. Not so much as to change its view, but to break off in order to re-join a larger international community. Those that sought to break away from Europe now seek to prevent Scotland from holding another vote on independence, in defiance of the clear wishes of the people. The UK Government, having made a treaty with Europe, is now perfectly prepared to break international law to enforce their views. Where are the values in that? If the rule of law is to be valued, then it should be respected. The hypocrisy in the current UK Government  is glaringly unprincipled.

“Yet they are all honourable men” you may say. Think again.

Returning to American values at present in question in the United States. On the whole America does like a winner. It usually commiserates with the losing party and will give up a well done for the effort. Traditionally it holds no value for the sore loser, the cry baby. 

It has in the past been particular about accepting its electoral process, and is disparaging of countries lacking in fair and honest electoral systems, where fraud and intimidation is overt and apparent. That is what American claim to value. Yet now, in 2020, the whole of American values is seriously in question. The sore loser is now seen as the victim. Those who speak out against are traitors to be taken out and shot. The rule of law is to be replaced by the mob. It is left to Gabriel Sterling to come out like Atticus Finch and Judge Billy Priest to reclaim American values.

The whole of America must step up.

We must all step up.