Catholicism and "libertarianism" (again)

Over at the dotCommonweal blog, political theorist Robert Geroux has a series of posts (go here and here to start reading) (a) arguing against the views of and some recent writings by Fr. Robert Sirico and (b) exploring and criticizing what he calls the "dreamworld of libertarianism."  The posts are worth reading, but they also invite, in my view -- as Catholic critiques of "libertarianism" (at least, the Catholic critiques that are directed against the economic libertarianism of some "conservatives") generally do -- a cautionary, but genuinely-intended--as-friendly amendment, namely:  While it is true that the Catholic account of the person, society, community, authority, flourishing, and politics is more rich than, and in many important respects incompatible with the premises of some forms of "libertarianism", it is not the case either that all (or even most) policies espoused by or associated with "libertarianism" are inconsistent with the Catholic account or are otherwise objectionable.

Too often (though not, I think, in Geroux's posts), it is thought to be a sufficient "Catholic" response to a "libertarian" or "neo-liberal" or "conservative" policy proposal having to do with economic or social-welfare matters to attach to that proposal a word like "Randian" or "libertarian" or "individualistic", as if the attaching settled the matter.  If Catholic thinkers are really going to -- as MOJ readers and others should want them to -- provide genuinely Catholic alternatives to the "libertarianism" of the left and right, or to versions of statism and collectivism that are also inconsistent with the Church's account of the person, etc., then they (all of them, of whatever stripe) need to acknowledge that some claims and arguments sometimes associated with "libertarianism" are sound and important.  For example, the "moral hazard problem" is real and persons do respond to incentives.  (Authentic) human freedom is a good thing, and constraints by government on that freedom need to be justified.  (They often are justified, but they need to be justified.)  "Society" and "the state" are different.  The rule of law, constitutional limits on public authority, and (reasonable) property rights are good -- they make communities better, and make it more likely that persons will flourish.  We are not merely lone, self-sufficient, solitary, unsituated, non-dependent rights bearers, but we're also not just bricks in the wall, cogs in the machine, etc.

Geroux writes:

[T]here’s nothing new or challenging about the awareness of the claims others make upon us, in the name of individual rights. As Simone Weil pointed out, every articulation of right that comes from another person impinges upon me. As adults, however, we acknowledge these sometimes burdensome obligations as bonds that tie us together and which constitute us collectively. We may differ on the particulars of family, church, and community, but we comprehend these things as part of what make us fully human.

Libertarianism represents a rejection of those bonds; it fetishizes my actions and accomplishments and imagines a world without mutual obligation. Its logic is reminiscent of the dreamworld of a child, or at the very best an adolescent; its narrative order sometimes reads like the script of an action film in which all conflicts are fantastically resolved by hypertrophically masculine heroes. Such stories are fine in their context, but as Freud suggested, the dreams of adults are different. They take place in strange places, reflect complicated nuances of meaning, and are peopled by characters in unpredictable situations. They are full of subtlety and sometimes tragic difficulty. They cannot be easily resolved. They resist facile analysis.

A "libertarianism" that is as Geroux describes is, certainly, to be rejected.  We are situated and embedded in webs of obligation, duty, and oughts that are not (only) the result of our choice that do not depend on our approval or consent.  But . . . there's a childishness (perhaps of a different sort) in the accounts that many of libertarianism's critics would offer (consider the lyrics of John Lennon's "Imagine"), and so maybe a task of Catholic thinkers is to challenge us to leave "dreamworlds" behind and to confront a complicated, fallen world with a combination of appropriate humility and confidence.