 |  |
|
Michael Sandel
Professor of Government at Harvard, Michael Sandel
has penned Liberalism and the limits of Justice, an answer to John Rawl's famous social contract, and, more recently,
Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy. Without hyperbole, I believe the latter was the best
book I read in college. In fact, I liked it so much I read it again and again and eventually wrote my senior thesis on it.
In Democracy's Discontent, Sandel discusses the two prevailing political philosophies in American history: liberalism (a theory of rights) and republicanism (a theory of citizenship). More specifically, Sandel discusses the ebb and flow of "civic republicanism," a concern for establishing the prerequisites of citizenship, and "New Deal liberalism," which espouses a neutral government and the proliferation of rights.
Sandel traces the height of civic republicanism, during the Progressive era, and, coupled with the emphasis shift from production to consumption, its fall at the hands of New Deal liberalism in the 30's and 40's. (For an even more detailed account of this transition, see Alan Brinkley's The End of Reform.) Fleshing his tale out through the Great Society and Morning in America, Sandel acutely diagnoses our current political dilemma - while communities dissolve and government is seen as increasingly unresponsive, both contemporary liberals and contemporary conservatives rely on an uninspiring political ideology that in its evocation of an independent self leaves us all feeling ever more disempowered. Sandel argues that the forgotten political strand of civic republicanism, a theory that recognizes the interdependence of citizens in the framework of society and the necessity of civic association a la de Tocqueville, would go a long way in revitalizing both our communities and our faith in government.
I should note that I don't agree with Sandel on every point. Being a communitarian, he is much more concerned with the deleterious effects of Wal-Mart and its ilk on communities. I believe that, while multinational corporations are indeed a threat to local community rule, the benefit of chain stores' economies of scale outweigh the cost of losing some friendly mom-and-pop stores.
Moreover, there is always a danger when one discusses civic strands of democratic thought that implementation will lead to coercion (witness Rousseau:those who disagree with the General Will will "be forced to be free.") I think the answer to this civic dilemma resides in the philosophy of John Stuart Mill and the perfectionism of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Civic education, as articulated by Benjamin Barber, is also a necessity in promoting a more civically attuned democracy that embraces individuality while rejecting the excesses of laissez-faire, devil-take-the-hindmost individualism.
