Abstract

In recent years, scholars have paid considerable attention to moderation in Montesquieu’s De l’esprit des lois. Still, little scholarship has considered how Montesquieu develops moderation as a concept and practice. In this article, I argue Montesquieu’s complementary defense of moderation and critique of despotism rely on immoderate argumentative practices of omission that enable him to reshape extant laudatory narratives of China and Japan. Through an analysis of Montesquieu’s primary texts on climate and commerce, I demonstrate that, absent these practices, Montesquieu’s “Asian despotism” collapses, revealing the moderate natures of both countries. This conclusion is paradoxical insofar as we take seriously Montesquieu’s claim that De l’esprit des lois upholds the spirit of moderation as of paramount importance. Moreover, I argue that this analysis of Montesquieu’s paradoxical spirit brings to light under-examined dimensions of Montesquieu’s work and alerts political theorists to how different reading practices can recast his “moderate” reputation.