A Critical Assessment of the Political Doctrines of Michael Oakeshott

David Richard Hexter Thesis Title: A Critical Assessment of the Political Doctrines of Michael Oakeshott. Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 1 Statement of Originality I, David Richard Hexter, confirm that the research included within this thesis is my own work or that where it has been carried out in collaboration with, or supported by others, that this is duly acknowledged and my contribution indicated. I attest that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge break any UK law, infringe any third party’s copyright or other Intellectual Property Right, or contain any confidential material. I accept that the college has the right to use plagiarism detection software to check the electronic version of the thesis. I confirm that this thesis has not been previously submitted for the award of a degree by this or any other university. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. David R Hexter 12/01/2016 2 Abstract Author: David Hexter, PhD candidate Title of thesis: A Critical Assessment of the Political Doctrines of Michael Oakeshott Description The thesis consists of an Introduction, four Chapters and a Conclusion. In the Introduction some of the interpretations that have been offered of Oakeshott’s political writings are discussed. The key issue of interpretation is whether Oakeshott is best considered as a disinterested philosopher, as he claimed, or as promoting an ideology or doctrine, albeit elliptically. It is argued that when his works are considered in their entirety they can best be thought of as advancing two doctrines, based on his accounts of the historical conceptions of the state in modern European history and the nature of political activity. The first doctrine is that the state conceived as a civil association is best suited to promote individual liberty. The second doctrine is a conservative, anti- rationalist, anti-ideological, thesis that political activity cannot and ought not be conceived as anything other than the pursuit of intimations within a political tradition. The purpose of the thesis is to assess these doctrines. The method used is to draw out and assess the assumptions that underlie Oakeshott’s claims. In Chapter One it is argued that the best point of entry to understand Oakeshott’s preference for the state conceived as a civil association is to make explicit the postulates that underpin his account of human conduct and his personal values, or dispositions. In Chapter 2 the political implications of his formal theory of morality are highlighted. In Chapter 3 Oakeshott’s answer to the question of “what should government’s do?”, and the implications of his response to his understanding of law and justice are evaluated. In Chapter 4 the sufficiency of Oakeshott’s account of politics and the political is considered. The conclusion is that the arguments in support of both doctrines are problematic. 3 Table of Contents Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 1 Oakeshott as a Moralist .................................................................... 49 Chapter 2 Morality and its Presuppositions ..................................................... 85 Chapter 3 Teleocracy, Nomocracy and the Rule of Law ................................ 107 Chapter 4 On Politics and the Political ........................................................... 161 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 227 4 Abbreviations EM- Experience and its Modes LSE- London School of Economics MPME- Morality and Politics in Modern Europe OHC – On Human Conduct PFPS – The Politics of Faith and the Politics of Scepticism RIP – Rationalism in Politics RPML- Religion, Politics and the Moral Life RW- Religion and the World SPDCE- The Social and Political Doctrines of Contemporary Europe VCEM- The Voice of Conversation in the Education of Mankind VPCM- The Voice of Poetry in the Conversation of Mankind WP- Work and Play 5 Introduction Michael Oakeshott (1901-1990) is considered by many historians to be one of the most eminent political theorists of the twentieth century. In ‘Political Philosophy in the Twentieth Century’, for example, Catherine Zuckert bracketed Oakeshott with John Dewey (1859-1952), Hannah Arendt (1906- 1975), Leo Strauss (1899-1973), Eric Voegelin (1901-1985), Yves R. Simon (1903-1961), Isaiah Berlin (1909-1997) and John Rawls (1921-2002) (Zuckert 2009, pp. 1-6). Zuckert’s assessment is relatively commonplace. George Feaver concluded: ‘Oakeshott has reasonable claims to be regarded as the pre- eminent political philosopher in the British political tradition of the past century’ (Feaver 2004). To be placed alongside such luminaries is, perhaps, surprising given Oakeshott’s modest academic output. Gertrude Himmelfarb remarked in 1975 that he had achieved prominence ‘with a minimum intellectual exertion on his part’, and that one of the apparent anomalies surrounding him was that he was an intellectual who was ‘a reluctant a producer of intellectual goods’ (Himmelfarb 1975, p. 407). He published just two full-length monographs during his lifetime: Experience and its Modes (1933), and On Human Conduct (1975a). Only the latter can be described as a work of substantial political theory. In addition to these are the essays that brought him to the attention of a wider public, and led him to be branded by many as a conservative. These essays were collected together as Rationalism in Politics (1991). 1 His works on Hobbes, history and education were subsequently published in book form during his lifetime. 2 Thanks, moreover, to committed 1 Many of the essays were published in the Cambridge Journal, which Oakeshott helped found in 1947. He was the editor from its inception to its closure seven years later. 2 Hobbes on Civil Association (1975b); On History (1983); The Voice of Liberal Learning (1989). 6 Oakeshottians, notably Timothy Fuller and Luke O’Sullivan, several further collections of his essays, lectures and book reviews have been published since his death in 1990. The Notebooks (1923-1986), edited by Luke O’Sullivan, are the latest, penultimate addition to this series. Almost all of Oakeshott’s papers have now been published in readily accessible form. According to O’Sullivan, Imprint Academic plans two further volumes to complete the publication of his works: a volume of correspondence and one of miscellaneous items (2014, p. vii). Neil McInnes described the first decade following his death in 1990 as ‘a long, quiet limbo: marked only by the publication of two small books he left in his desk drawers and not by the rise of any Oakeshottian school that might have developed or applied his teachings’ (2000). 3 In the past fifteen years, however, there has been an outpouring of secondary literature. Two thousand and twelve, for example, oversaw the publication of two prestigious Companion volumes - the Cambridge Companion edited by Efraim Podoksik; and A Companion to Michael Oakeshott, edited by Paul Franco and Leslie Marsh. These publications signify the heightened attention given to Oakeshott by the academic community. The turn in his fortunes coincided with the foundation of the Michael Oakeshott Association in 1999 by some of his friends and former colleagues. Initially, this was an informal forum devoted to encouraging critical discussion of Oakeshott, but it has since developed into a mature non-profit organisation (www.michael-oakeshott-association.com/about-us/). Conferences are held every other year, in the USA and Europe. 4 The Association website maintains a comprehensive bibliography as well as a wealth of other materials. It is likely that the increased attention of recent years is sustainable in the medium term in spite of the death of most of the original founders of the Association. 5 3 An exception is Paul Franco’s The Political Philosophy of Michael Oakeshott (1990). 4 The most recent conference was held at the University of Hull in September 2015. 5 Of the eight founder members, only two are still alive: Timothy Fuller and Oakeshott’s son, Simon. 7 A Question of Interpretation: Philosopher, Covert Ideologue or Both? Oakeshott is one of the most controversial political theorists. He is regarded as a Tory apologist by his critics and a philosopher without a practical agenda by many of his admirers. Both descriptions are problematic. The former interpretation was typical of the newspaper obituaries following his death. The New York Times described him as a ‘right-wing guru’ and ‘a High-Tory Oracle mainly concerned with interpreting current events, usually in a negative style’ (20 December 1990). According to the London Times, though a philosopher who did not engage directly in politics, he was nonetheless the thinker who articulated ‘the real philosophical foundations of Margaret Thatcher’s policies’ (22 December 1991). The claim that he influenced Thatcher was, moreover, not confined to the press. The dust jacket description of Steven Gerencser’s The Skeptic’s Oakeshott claimed that Margaret Thatcher based much of her political thinking on Oakeshott’s theories, but ‘Gerencser shows

Load more