The Oxford Handbook of Rhetoric and Political Theory
This chapter explores links between Benjamin Constant’s Romantic portrayal of the modern characte... more This chapter explores links between Benjamin Constant’s Romantic portrayal of the modern character in his fiction and his defense of representative government and liberalism. While Constant thought institutional design could help encourage more productive and less violent forms of political controversy, he understood that the institutions of representative government worked best when citizens had certain dispositions. The detached and self-critical sort of character he depicted in his fiction paralleled the detached and self-critical nature of parliamentary democracy. Constant hoped that the self-alienation endemic to modernity might help make possible the peaceful practice of rhetorical controversy in postrevolutionary liberal politics.
What will become of conservatism in the United States? As long as we have a multiparty democracy,... more What will become of conservatism in the United States? As long as we have a multiparty democracy, one of the parties will be more conservative than the other. What will that party most want to conserve? Not so long ago, conservative rhetoric was full of veneration for the Constitution. When conservatives resisted the growth of the national government, they did so by referring to the threat that centralized authority could pose to self-government in the states. When they resisted the imperial presidency, they referred to the separation of powers and to federalism. Conservatives portrayed themselves as defending "limited government" and read the Constitution as an elaboration of the limits. Progressives, for their part, did not always argue against this understanding of the Constitution. Instead, progressives conceded that the document as originally understood would stand in the way of a more powerful national government; this is why they argued for reading the Constitution as a "living" text rather than remaining attached to its original logic. Both sides shared the assumption that the original Constitution was a conservative document deeply suspicious of a 907560P TXXXX10.
God uses waves to make things happen, and this seems to me to have been one of Hobbes's major the... more God uses waves to make things happen, and this seems to me to have been one of Hobbes's major theological objections to the doctrines of his day. Stauffer wonders whether peace can be a summum bonum. I think that Hobbes's answer is no, but not for the reasons Stauffer posits (e.g., 229). Rather, it is the thing that allows the pursuit of such individual bona as are consistent with order and other people's ability to do the same. Equally importantly, it is consistent with Christianity and other religions. One of Hobbes's great theological insights was to formulate his doctrines as "not-inconsistent" (rather than consistent) with civil doctrine. Another was that whatever else they disagreed on, reasonable believers and nonbelievers could come to agree on the desirability of peace.
Polis: The Journal for Ancient Greek Political Thought, 2013
In his account of how each of us deliberates about what to do, Aristotle remarks that we do not a... more In his account of how each of us deliberates about what to do, Aristotle remarks that we do not always trust ourselves on important matters and so sometimes take counsel from others. Taking counsel from others is, in some ways, merely an expansion of the internal activity of deliberation; the suggestions come from other people rather than from our ownminds, but the judgment about them remains our own. In other ways, however, taking counsel is quite different from deliberating with oneself. These differences are the subject matter of the art of rhetoric, as Aristotle understands it. The paper compares the political relationship at work in deliberative rhetoric with slavery, which collapses the separateness of persons, and with friendship, which preserves it. And suggests that the importance of anger in Aristotle’s treatment of rhetoric can be understood as a reflection on the implications of human separateness.
Are representative governments working well? The answer to that question depends on what we think... more Are representative governments working well? The answer to that question depends on what we think the purpose of representative government is. Most research in political science presumes that the purpose of representative government is to represent the will of the people by translating popular sentiment or public interest into governmental policy. It therefore presumes that a good measure of the performance of representative democracy, at least in its representative capacity, involves comparing policy results with public opinion as it is or as it should be. The classic study of constituency influence in the House of Representatives by Miller and Stokes, for example, focused on “the extent of policy agreement between legislator and district” (Miller and Stokes 1963). More recent work continues to investigate similar relations: Page and Shapiro look for “congruence between changes in policy and changes in opinion” and assume that “normative concepts of democracy” would mandate something close to “direct democracy” (Page and Shapiro 1983). Stimson, Mackuen, and Erikson ask “whether the national system is efficient in turning popular sentiment into policy” (Stimson et al . 1995). These studies, and many more like them, presume a principle close to the one that Bartels articulates clearly: “The appeal of representative democracy hinges on the responsiveness of elected politicians to the preferences and interests of their constituents” (Bartels 1991).
Exclusion from politics should not be derogatory. . . self exclusion, far from being arbitrary d... more Exclusion from politics should not be derogatory. . . self exclusion, far from being arbitrary discrimination, would in fact give substance and reality to one of the most impor tan t negative liberties we have enjoyed since the end of the ancient world, nam ely freedom from politics, which was unknown to Rome or Athens and which is politically perhaps the most relevant part of our Christian heritage. —Arendt, On Revolution
Benjamin Constant’s famous lecture comparing ancient and modern liberty can be better understood ... more Benjamin Constant’s famous lecture comparing ancient and modern liberty can be better understood if it is read alongside a set of unpublished lectures on ancient religion that he delivered one year earlier. Those lectures suggest that Constant’s commitment to modern liberty was based in part on his deep anxieties about religious freedom, and that he valued religious freedom because he thought the “religious sentiment” was an important manifestation of a natural human capacity for self-development. In putting religion and self-development at the heart of his vision, he tried to show that modern liberty could have a positive moral or spiritual purpose beyond merely assuring people freedom from interference in the pursuit of their interests.
Visions of Politics, Quentin Skinner's impressive three-volume collection of essays, does not... more Visions of Politics, Quentin Skinner's impressive three-volume collection of essays, does not offer a systematic defense of any particular theory of politics. Skinner's vision is what I refer to as a "rhetorical" vision of politics. In this essay I do not want to criticize this fundamental vision of politics; instead I would like to spend time thinking about its political implications. I hope to suggest that we can acknowledge and even endorse the centrality of rhetorical contestation in political life without accepting the view that liberalism is an unhealthy Hobbesian or neo-Kantian project to "halt the flux of politics." In fact an important strand of liberalism was motivated by a desire to save republicanism from those who would use its language against its essence—those who would use republican rhetoric to stifle the sort of contestation important to republican politics.
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2011
Lucas Swaine attempts to persuade theocrats of the value of liberty of conscience. But his promot... more Lucas Swaine attempts to persuade theocrats of the value of liberty of conscience. But his promotion of principles of conscience for theocratic communities reveals a divided spirit in contemporary liberalism, which is torn between wanting to respect religion as it is and wanting to reform or liberalize it.
ABSTRACT Jeffrey Tulis’s The Rhetorical Presidency should not be read as a tale of decline. It is... more ABSTRACT Jeffrey Tulis’s The Rhetorical Presidency should not be read as a tale of decline. It is not a call for an “un‐rhetorical” presidency so much as an exploration of the fundamentally uneasy place that popular rhetoric occupies in constitutional governments. Popular rhetoric is one way that executives exercise their prerogative power, and the dilemmas about rhetoric that Tulis exposes arise from a fundamental fact about prerogative power that all presidents must confront: Strong constitutional governments seem almost necessarily to grant their chief executives more discretionary authority than is consistent with the idea of constitutional government. Whatever rhetorical style or strategy a president adopts, he must respond in one way or another to this fact.
The Oxford Handbook of Rhetoric and Political Theory
This chapter explores links between Benjamin Constant’s Romantic portrayal of the modern characte... more This chapter explores links between Benjamin Constant’s Romantic portrayal of the modern character in his fiction and his defense of representative government and liberalism. While Constant thought institutional design could help encourage more productive and less violent forms of political controversy, he understood that the institutions of representative government worked best when citizens had certain dispositions. The detached and self-critical sort of character he depicted in his fiction paralleled the detached and self-critical nature of parliamentary democracy. Constant hoped that the self-alienation endemic to modernity might help make possible the peaceful practice of rhetorical controversy in postrevolutionary liberal politics.
What will become of conservatism in the United States? As long as we have a multiparty democracy,... more What will become of conservatism in the United States? As long as we have a multiparty democracy, one of the parties will be more conservative than the other. What will that party most want to conserve? Not so long ago, conservative rhetoric was full of veneration for the Constitution. When conservatives resisted the growth of the national government, they did so by referring to the threat that centralized authority could pose to self-government in the states. When they resisted the imperial presidency, they referred to the separation of powers and to federalism. Conservatives portrayed themselves as defending "limited government" and read the Constitution as an elaboration of the limits. Progressives, for their part, did not always argue against this understanding of the Constitution. Instead, progressives conceded that the document as originally understood would stand in the way of a more powerful national government; this is why they argued for reading the Constitution as a "living" text rather than remaining attached to its original logic. Both sides shared the assumption that the original Constitution was a conservative document deeply suspicious of a 907560P TXXXX10.
God uses waves to make things happen, and this seems to me to have been one of Hobbes's major the... more God uses waves to make things happen, and this seems to me to have been one of Hobbes's major theological objections to the doctrines of his day. Stauffer wonders whether peace can be a summum bonum. I think that Hobbes's answer is no, but not for the reasons Stauffer posits (e.g., 229). Rather, it is the thing that allows the pursuit of such individual bona as are consistent with order and other people's ability to do the same. Equally importantly, it is consistent with Christianity and other religions. One of Hobbes's great theological insights was to formulate his doctrines as "not-inconsistent" (rather than consistent) with civil doctrine. Another was that whatever else they disagreed on, reasonable believers and nonbelievers could come to agree on the desirability of peace.
Polis: The Journal for Ancient Greek Political Thought, 2013
In his account of how each of us deliberates about what to do, Aristotle remarks that we do not a... more In his account of how each of us deliberates about what to do, Aristotle remarks that we do not always trust ourselves on important matters and so sometimes take counsel from others. Taking counsel from others is, in some ways, merely an expansion of the internal activity of deliberation; the suggestions come from other people rather than from our ownminds, but the judgment about them remains our own. In other ways, however, taking counsel is quite different from deliberating with oneself. These differences are the subject matter of the art of rhetoric, as Aristotle understands it. The paper compares the political relationship at work in deliberative rhetoric with slavery, which collapses the separateness of persons, and with friendship, which preserves it. And suggests that the importance of anger in Aristotle’s treatment of rhetoric can be understood as a reflection on the implications of human separateness.
Are representative governments working well? The answer to that question depends on what we think... more Are representative governments working well? The answer to that question depends on what we think the purpose of representative government is. Most research in political science presumes that the purpose of representative government is to represent the will of the people by translating popular sentiment or public interest into governmental policy. It therefore presumes that a good measure of the performance of representative democracy, at least in its representative capacity, involves comparing policy results with public opinion as it is or as it should be. The classic study of constituency influence in the House of Representatives by Miller and Stokes, for example, focused on “the extent of policy agreement between legislator and district” (Miller and Stokes 1963). More recent work continues to investigate similar relations: Page and Shapiro look for “congruence between changes in policy and changes in opinion” and assume that “normative concepts of democracy” would mandate something close to “direct democracy” (Page and Shapiro 1983). Stimson, Mackuen, and Erikson ask “whether the national system is efficient in turning popular sentiment into policy” (Stimson et al . 1995). These studies, and many more like them, presume a principle close to the one that Bartels articulates clearly: “The appeal of representative democracy hinges on the responsiveness of elected politicians to the preferences and interests of their constituents” (Bartels 1991).
Exclusion from politics should not be derogatory. . . self exclusion, far from being arbitrary d... more Exclusion from politics should not be derogatory. . . self exclusion, far from being arbitrary discrimination, would in fact give substance and reality to one of the most impor tan t negative liberties we have enjoyed since the end of the ancient world, nam ely freedom from politics, which was unknown to Rome or Athens and which is politically perhaps the most relevant part of our Christian heritage. —Arendt, On Revolution
Benjamin Constant’s famous lecture comparing ancient and modern liberty can be better understood ... more Benjamin Constant’s famous lecture comparing ancient and modern liberty can be better understood if it is read alongside a set of unpublished lectures on ancient religion that he delivered one year earlier. Those lectures suggest that Constant’s commitment to modern liberty was based in part on his deep anxieties about religious freedom, and that he valued religious freedom because he thought the “religious sentiment” was an important manifestation of a natural human capacity for self-development. In putting religion and self-development at the heart of his vision, he tried to show that modern liberty could have a positive moral or spiritual purpose beyond merely assuring people freedom from interference in the pursuit of their interests.
Visions of Politics, Quentin Skinner's impressive three-volume collection of essays, does not... more Visions of Politics, Quentin Skinner's impressive three-volume collection of essays, does not offer a systematic defense of any particular theory of politics. Skinner's vision is what I refer to as a "rhetorical" vision of politics. In this essay I do not want to criticize this fundamental vision of politics; instead I would like to spend time thinking about its political implications. I hope to suggest that we can acknowledge and even endorse the centrality of rhetorical contestation in political life without accepting the view that liberalism is an unhealthy Hobbesian or neo-Kantian project to "halt the flux of politics." In fact an important strand of liberalism was motivated by a desire to save republicanism from those who would use its language against its essence—those who would use republican rhetoric to stifle the sort of contestation important to republican politics.
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2011
Lucas Swaine attempts to persuade theocrats of the value of liberty of conscience. But his promot... more Lucas Swaine attempts to persuade theocrats of the value of liberty of conscience. But his promotion of principles of conscience for theocratic communities reveals a divided spirit in contemporary liberalism, which is torn between wanting to respect religion as it is and wanting to reform or liberalize it.
ABSTRACT Jeffrey Tulis’s The Rhetorical Presidency should not be read as a tale of decline. It is... more ABSTRACT Jeffrey Tulis’s The Rhetorical Presidency should not be read as a tale of decline. It is not a call for an “un‐rhetorical” presidency so much as an exploration of the fundamentally uneasy place that popular rhetoric occupies in constitutional governments. Popular rhetoric is one way that executives exercise their prerogative power, and the dilemmas about rhetoric that Tulis exposes arise from a fundamental fact about prerogative power that all presidents must confront: Strong constitutional governments seem almost necessarily to grant their chief executives more discretionary authority than is consistent with the idea of constitutional government. Whatever rhetorical style or strategy a president adopts, he must respond in one way or another to this fact.
Uploads
Papers by Bryan Garsten