The issue of institutional autonomy
Written by Károly Halmos
2020.10.04.
"One of the most important aspirations of every profession is to achieve autonomy for the association, which, depending on its nature and extent, can be an important means of defending the interests of its members."
The above sentence, with slight modifications, is often found in the literature on professionalisation. However, whether or not autonomy is in fact the protection of interests, or more precisely whether it is only the protection of interests, is questionable. In fact, it is a question of approach.
If we look at it from the point of view of the modern (nation) state, which arises by counting up privileges (i.e. patents associated with obligations, or, in a later turn of phrase, small circles of freedom) in the name of general freedom, then everything is indeed only interest in relation to this freedom as the ultimate value, since everyone is forced into a position of (from above, particularist) interest protection in relation to the general good.
The above sentence, with slight modifications, is often found in the literature on professionalisation. However, whether or not autonomy is in fact the protection of interests, or more precisely whether it is only the protection of interests, is questionable. In fact, it is a question of approach.
If we look at it from the point of view of the modern (nation) state, which arises by counting up privileges (i.e. patents associated with obligations, or, in a later turn of phrase, small circles of freedom) in the name of general freedom, then everything is indeed only interest in relation to this freedom as the ultimate value, since everyone is forced into a position of (from above, particularist) interest protection in relation to the general good.
But if I look at it from the point of view that libertarianism is in principle opposed to taking away more freedom than is absolutely necessary in the name of the common good, then the term "advocacy" is of dubious value. In the days of republicanism and early liberalism (when liberal still meant 'generous to the (Roman) citizen'), it was taken for granted that people had a vocation, that their vocation was a commitment, and as such it entailed worldly obligations, and that the freedom and autonomy of the body was intended to ensure and effectively implement this.
The most complete legal form of corporality is the public corporation. In this view, the state is only the first and largest of them, and above all the one which has absorbed the others. From the point of view of the (nation-)state and its general law, even the churches are public bodies under the state, although it should be noted that it was precisely the ultramontanism controversy of the 19th century that indicated that this was a matter of a common part of bodies rather than of strict containment.
The most complete legal form of corporality is the public corporation. In this view, the state is only the first and largest of them, and above all the one which has absorbed the others. From the point of view of the (nation-)state and its general law, even the churches are public bodies under the state, although it should be noted that it was precisely the ultramontanism controversy of the 19th century that indicated that this was a matter of a common part of bodies rather than of strict containment.
