From the standpoint of our argument, the following items summarize the key points of Emmerich de Vattel's application of a Leibnizian natural law viewpoint, to the issues of the law of nations. Human Nature Is Creative Reason Vattel begins {The Law of Nations} by attacking the prevailing doctrines of natural law, for failing to distinguish human from animal behavior. The Roman emperor Justinian defined natural law as ``|`that which nature teaches to all animals': Thus he defines the natural law in its most extensive sense, not that natural law which is peculiar to man, and which is derived as well from his rational as from his animal nature.'' Vattel then attacks the writings of Grotius, Hobbes, Puffendorf, and Wolff, for being based on the same false axioms of human nature. Grotius cut his teeth writing legal opinions for the Dutch East India Company, which was set up as part of the Venetian takeover of the Netherlands. In {On the Law of War and Peace,} Grotius used Aristotle to defend the oligarchical system: ``Further, as Aristotle said that some men are by nature slaves, that is, are suited to slavery, so there are some peoples so constituted that they understand better how to be ruled than to rule.'' Having adopted Aristotle's axioms that human nature is fixed, as the basis for his natural law hypothesis, Grotius derives a false natural law, writing ``The law of nature, again, is unchangeable--even in the sense that it cannot be changed by God.'' He fails to understand Plato's {Parmenides} dialogue, that the Creator of the universe is the source of change which generates the elements of the universe, and, hence, is more real than those elements within that created universe. Christian Wolff, who is often presented as the successor to Leibniz, based his natural law hypothesis on axioms of human nature, which were completely opposite to Leibniz's. Wolff wrote that, ``the whole nation may best be thought of in the likeness of a man, whose soul is the director of the state, but whose body is the subjects as a whole.'' Wolff was a defender of ``enlightened absolutism,'' where the vast majority of people were reduced to little more than muscle labor. His extensive discussions of perfection and happiness were designed to mimic Leibniz, but stripped of Leibniz's guiding conception that all men possess creative reason. Consequently, Wolff's mercantilistic system was a static conception of economics, and not based on the development of the productive powers of labor. In {The Law of Nations,} Vattel establishes a system of law governing relations between nation-states, based on natural law. In the ``Preliminaries'' section, Vattel first establishes a natural law hypothesis which is coherent with the approach of Leibniz and LaRouche, in direct opposition to the Lockean, positivist approach which dominates law today. He then applies this natural law hypothesis, in Book I, to develop the law governing nations, and in the three other Books, to develop the law governing relations between nations. Vattel shows that the nature of man requires that society be organized to develop 'agape' in its members. In a section which is a remarkable predecessor to the proof developed two hundred years later by Lyndon LaRouche, Vattel demonstrates that man's ability to provide for himself through technology developed by creative reason, defines human nature as fundamentally different from animal nature. Reason, or the capacity to develop new technologies through scientific discovery, allows mankind to survive and perfect himself, while animal nature is based merely on sense impressions. Vattel attacks the absurd notion, that human nature could be defined by looking at an isolated individual. The potential for speech and reason is inherent within each individual, but can only be developed through the education of the young by others. Therefore, man must work for the perfection of creative reason in himself, and in others, for society to flourish. He writes, "Man is so formed by nature, that he cannot supply all his own wants, but necessarily stands in need of the intercourse and assistance of his fellow-creatures, whether for his immediate preservation, or for the sake of perfecting his nature, and enjoying such a life as is suitable to a rational being. This is sufficiently proved by experience. We have instances of persons, who, having grown up to manhood among the bears of the forest, enjoyed not the use of speech or of reason, but were, like the brute beasts, possessed only of sensitive faculties. We see moreover that nature has refused to bestow on men the same strength and natural weapons of defense with which she has furnished other animals--having, in lieu of those advantages, endowed mankind with the faculties of speech and reason, or at least a capability of acquiring them by an intercourse with their fellow-creatures. Speech enables them to communicate with each other, to give each other mutual assistance, to perfect their reason and knowledge; and having thus become intelligent, they find a thousand methods of preserving themselves, and supplying their wants. Each individual, moreover, is intimately conscious that he can neither live happily nor improve his nature without the intercourse and assistance of others. Since, therefore, nature has thus formed mankind, it is a convincing proof of her intention that they should communicate with, and mutually aid and assist each other. "Hence is deduced the establishment of natural society among men. The general law of that society is, that each individual should do for the others everything which their necessities require, and which he can perform without neglecting the duty that he owes to himself: a law which all men must observe in order to live in a manner consonant to their nature, and conformable to the views of their common Creator,-- a law which our own safety, our happiness, our dearest interests, ought to render sacred to every one of us." ({The Law of Nations,} Preliminaries, Sec. 10) Since men can live ``consonant to their nature'' only by the development of their creative potential through collaboration with others, a society which does not develop the emotion of 'agape' in its members, is self-destructive. Vattel leaves no doubt that he is diametrically opposed to the doctrines espoused by the Enlightenment philosophers such as Hobbes, Locke, and Jeremy Bentham. These doctrines, which the British oligarchy promoted, argued that the best society is achieved by each individual merely following his individual greed. Vattel writes, "It is easy to conceive what exalted felicity the world would enjoy, were all men willing to observe the rule that we have just laid down. On the contrary, if each man wholly and immediately directs all his thoughts to his own interest, if he does nothing for the sake of other men, the whole human race together will be immersed in the deepest wretchedness. Let us therefore endeavor to promote the general happiness of mankind: all mankind, in return, will endeavor to promote ours, and thus we shall establish our felicity on the most solid foundations. (Preliminaries, Sec. 10) Vattel elaborates a program for national economic development, which centers on the increase of the productive powers of labor. This makes possible the increase in the population density, which is a necessity for a successful society. However, economic development is only a means to allow the people to labor after their principal duty, and that is their own perfection. The question of private property shows how the different natural law hypotheses of Locke and Vattel, lead to totally different conceptions of how society should be governed. John Locke's absurd formulation is, that the origin of private property can be traced back to antiquity, to a primitive man picking up acorns under a tree. According to Locke, an individual's private property is merely the result of his past labor. Locke concludes from this, that the rights of private property are sacred and cannot be regulated by society. Vattel locates the origin of private property in the increase in the population density, which necessitated the development of agriculture, to supersede a hunting and gathering society. "If each nation had, from the beginning, resolved to appropriate to itself a vast country, that the people might live only by hunting, fishing, and wild fruits, our globe would not be sufficient to maintain a tenth part of its present inhabitants." (Book I, Chap. XVIII, Sec. 209) The advancement of society, to a more advanced mode of production, required that land be cultivated, with private property the best means for doing this. Society has the need and, therefore, the right to regulate private property, to ensure development. Nations which claim uninhabited areas must develop them, for their claims to be valid, and the landed aristocracy is not allowed to hold large tracts of land without cultivating them. In addition, since government must provide direction to society to ensure the development of the productive powers of the nation, if the owners of a corporation act in a fashion that injures society, or which will ruin the corporation, the sovereign has the duty to constrain the prodigal.
Sovereign Nations, Not World Government Vattel locates how the duty to contribute to the general happiness of mankind, is not removed by the formation of nation-states. Instead, when men join in a nation, they must still fulfill their duties towards the rest of mankind. He writes, "That society, considered as a moral person, since possessed of an understanding, volition, and strength peculiar to itself, is therefore obliged to live on the same terms with other societies or states, as individual man was obliged, before those establishments, to live with other men ... the object of the great society established by nature between all nations is also the interchange of mutual assistance for their own improvement, and that of their condition. (Preliminaries, Sec. 11-12) From this, Vattel arrives at the first general law of relations between nations: "The first general law that we discover in the very object of the society of nations, is that each individual nation is bound to contribute every thing in her power to the happiness and perfection of all the others. (Preliminaries, Sec. 13) "The second general law of relations between nations is the sovereignty of all nations: ``Each nation should be left in the peaceable enjoyment of that liberty which she inherits from nature.'' This is derived from natural law, since nations, like individuals, are naturally free and independent of each other, regardless of the size or strength of the nation. ``A dwarf is as much a man as a giant; a small republic is not less a sovereign state than the most powerful kingdom.'' Nothing makes most modern writers on international law more upset, than Vattel's explicit rejection of the idea of a world government, or supranational institutions, governing nation-states. Numerous writers in the early 1900's, raved that Vattel had to be reduced to obscurity, because of his defense of national sovereignty. Vattel rejects the formulation, advanced by Christian Wolff, that a {civitatis maximae,} or great republic, exists above all nation-states: It is the essence of all civil society 'civitatis,' that each member thereof should have given up a part of his rights to the body of the society, and that there should exist a supreme authority capable of commanding all the members, of giving to them laws, and of punishing those who refuse to obey. Nothing like this can be conceived or supposed to exist between nations. Each sovereign State pretends to be, and in fact is, independent of all others. (Preface, p. xiii) "The sovereign nation-state is the best institution, to understand and perform the duties which the state owes to its citizens. As Vattel puts it, ``A nation ought to know itself. Without this knowledge, it cannot make any successful endeavors after its own perfection.'' Furthermore, if nations reserve the right to judge other nations and intervene in their internal affairs, this ``opens the door to all the ravages of enthusiasm and fanaticism, and furnishes ambition with numberless pretexts." Click here, to continue: Law of Nations |