Political moderation is the touchstone of democracy, which could not function without compromise and bargaining, yet it is one of the most understudied concepts in political theory. How can we explain this striking paradox? Why do we often underestimate the virtue of moderation? Seeking to answer these questions, A Virtue for Courageous Minds examines moderation in modern French political thought and sheds light on the French Revolution and its legacy. Aurelian Craiutu begins with classical thinkers who extolled the virtues of (...) a moderate approach to politics, such as Aristotle and Cicero. He then shows how Montesquieu inaugurated the modern rebirth of this tradition by laying the intellectual foundations for moderate government. Craiutu looks at important figures such as Jacques Necker, Madame de Staël, and Benjamin Constant, not only in the context of revolutionary France but throughout Europe. He traces how moderation evolves from an individual moral virtue into a set of institutional arrangements calculated to protect individual liberty, and he explores the deep affinity between political moderation and constitutional complexity. Craiutu demonstrates how moderation navigates between political extremes, and he challenges the common notion that moderation is an essentially conservative virtue, stressing instead its eclectic nature. Drawing on a broad range of writings in political theory, the history of political thought, philosophy, and law, A Virtue for Courageous Minds reveals how the virtue of political moderation can address the profound complexities of the world today. (shrink)

Aristotle listed moderation as one of the moral virtues. He also defined virtue as the mean between extremes, implying that moderation plays a vital role in all forms of moral excellence. But moderation's protean character—its vague and ill-defined omnipresence in judgment and action—makes it exceedingly difficult to grasp theoretically. At the same time, moderation seems to be the foundation of many contemporary democratic political regimes, because the competition between parties cannot properly function without compromise and bargaining. The success of representative (...) government and its institutions depends to a great extent on the virtue of moderation, yet the latter persists in being absent from both the conceptual discourse of many political philosophers and the campaign speeches of politicians fearful of losing elections if they are perceived as moderates. Aurelian Craiutu aims to resolve this paradox. Examining the writings of prominent twentieth-century thinkers such as Raymond Aron, Isaiah Berlin, Norberto Bobbio, Michael Oakeshott, and Adam Michnik, he addresses the following questions: What does it mean to be a moderate voice in political and public life? What are the virtues and limits of moderation? Can moderation be the foundation for a successful platform or party? Though critics maintain that moderation is merely a matter of background and personal temperament, Craiutu finds several basic norms that have consistently appeared in different national and political contexts. The authors studied in this book defended pluralism, of ideas, interests, and social forces, and sought to achieve a sound balance between them through political trimming. They shared a preoccupation with political evil and human dignity, but refused to see the world in Manichaean terms that divide it neatly into the forces of light and those of darkness. Faces of Moderation argues that moderation remains crucial for today's encounters with new forms of extremism and fundamentalism across the world. (shrink)

In nineteenth‐century Europe, democracy was not embraced with the same enthusiasm it now enjoys. Conservative critics questioned central democratic normative principles, while liberals tried to correct the limitations of actual democratic practice. While accepting the inevitability of democracy, nineteenth‐century liberals often resisted the idea that universal suffrage guaranteed the wisdom of the people's choices. Nothing better illustrates this difficult apprenticeship of democracy than the writings of François Guizot, whose political thought focuses on the relationship between liberalism and democracy.

This article argues that moderation is a difficult, complex, and elusive concept that challenges our political imagination. It has several faces—epistemological, moral, constitutional, political and religious—and forms a rich intellectual tradition that has yet to be explored in all its complexity. Moderation is “the silken string that runs through the pearl-chain of all virtues” (Joseph Hall). As such, it ought to be examined not only as a virtue but also as a social practice, an intellectual sensibility, a way of life, (...) a particular ethos, and a set of concrete institutions. Finally, moderation is best understood in relation with its synonyms (prudence, civility, compromise) and antonyms (extremism, fanaticism, zealotry). (shrink)

In the United States, the debate on civil associations has coincided with the revival of interest in the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville, particularly Democracy in America (1835; 1840) in which he praised the Americans' propensity to form civil and political associations. Tocqueville regarded these associations as laboratories of democracy that teach citizens the art of being free and give them the opportunity to pursue their own interests in concert with others. Tocqueville's views on political and civil associations cannot be (...) properly understood unless we also take into account the larger intellectual and political background of his native France. The main sections of this essay examine Tocqueville's analysis of civil and political associations in America. Special attention is paid to the strong relationship between democracy and civil and political associations and the effects that they have on promoting democratic citizenship, civility, and self-government. (shrink)

The volume draws attention to the unknown and unexplored areas, trends and ways of thinking under the communist regime. It demonstrates how various bodies of knowledge were produced, disseminated and used for a wide variety of purposes: from openly justifying dominant political views to framing oppositional and non-official discourses and practices.

The main focus of this special issue is on marginality, a multifaceted concept that requires a cross-disciplinary approach. The papers selected here deal with marginality in the formation of the epistemic canon (?the mainstream?) and the production of knowledge in the humanities and social sciences. By employing the vocabulary of marginality (?marginal,? ?margins,? ?luminal,? ?threshold,? as well as dichotomies such as ?minor-major,? ?center-periphery?), we propose a shift from a discussion of the canon in terms of just one category of ?marginals? (...) (a certain race, class, gender etc.) to considering this complex concept in terms of a plurality of players and factors related to marginality broadly defined, some of which have little or nothing to do with power structures and dichotomies. Marginality is thus conceived of as an epistemic category and not as a power status. (shrink)

(2013). A Tale of Two Moderates. History of European Ideas: Vol. 39, The Impact of Positivism on Post-War European Political Thought, pp. 141-150. doi: 10.1080/01916599.2012.679079.

Extremism has been a constant presence and threat to the stability of the world in the last few decades. We know how destructive extremist organizations and ideologies can be, but when pressed to d...

This article examines Victor Jacquemont's reflections on American democracy and society occasioned by his travel in the United States in 1827. A close friend of Stendhal, Jacquemont (1801?32) was one of the most prominent representatives of the new French generation that came of age around 1820. After a presentation of Jacquemont's political and intellectual background, the essay examines his remarks on slavery and the future of the red race, the different forms of religion, domestic manners, associational life, and newspapers in (...) America. Because Jacquemont grasped the impact of equality on individual lives and mores in America, he might be regarded as a forerunner of Tocqueville. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Jeremy Waldron has argued that Berlin ignored the importance of institutions and constitutions and worked with an impoverished conception of social and political design. Political structures, legal and political institutions, constitutional design, mechanisms of representation and the rule of law: all this remained untouched by Berlin, who seemed, in Waldron’s opinion, largely uninterested in the actual political institutions of liberal society. In this essay, I argue that what may be missing in Berlin—close and sustained attention to, and interest in, (...) institutions and social context—can be found in the works of his prominent contemporary, Raymond Aron, who also wrote about liberty during the Cold War. As such, Aron’s An Essay on Liberty can and should be read as a complement to Berlin’s essay “Two Concepts of Liberty.”. (shrink)

A review essay of key works and trends in the political thought of Central and Eastern Europe, before and after 1989. The topics examined include the nature of the 1989 velvet revolutions in the region, debates on civil society, democratization, the relationship between politics, economics, and culture, nationalism, legal reform, feminism, and “illiberal democracy.” The review essay concludes with an assessment of the most recent trends in the region.

SummaryThis review-essay discusses two recent books on the political vision of Joseph de Maistre (1753–1821) and Alexandre Stourdza (1791–1854) who defended two different types of conservatism in Western and Eastern Europe. A former advisor to Tsar Alexander I and later secretary of Jean Capodistrias, Stourdza stood for the principles of Eastern Christianity and emphasized their unique contribution to the development of the European spirit. Special attention is paid to the controversy triggered by the publication of Stourdza's Considéations sur la doctrine (...) et l'esprit de l'Eglise orthodoxe (1816) followed by Maistre's Du Pape (1819). The essay concludes with a few remarks on the importance of comparative political thought and cross-cultural analysis. (shrink)

Although the French Doctrinaires built up one of the most important political theories of the 19th century and had a decisive influence on Tocqueville, Marx, and J. S. Mill, they have remained largely unknown in the English-speaking world. This article examines the Doctrinaires’ theory of political power by concentrating on François Guizot’s Des moyens de gouvernement et d’opposition dans l’état actuel de la France and Prosper de Barante’s Des communes et de l’aristocratie, both published in 1821. Special attention is paid (...) to Guizot’s rejection of laissez-faire and his critique of Rousseau. I then present Guizot’s theory of the ‘new means of government’ that stressed the importance of communication between government and society. Guizot predicted that the growth of liberty would be accompanied by a simultaneous extension of state power and understood that the development of representative government would inevitably lead to a considerable extension of state power over society, made possible by a social demand unseen before. In the final section, I seek to nuance the conventional image of the Doctrinaires as rigid defenders of centralization and critically discuss the virtues and limitations of their elitist liberalism. After commenting on the specificity of French political tradition, I point out a few lessons for contemporary political theorists interested in issues such as political power and the mutual empowerment of state and society. (shrink)

This essay examines the method of the French Doctrinaires by focusing primarily on the historical writings of their most prominent representative, François Guizot . After a brief introductory presentation of the Doctrinaires’ group, the essay discusses the role of historical studies during the Restoration and provides an in-depth analysis of the Doctrinaires’ historical and sociological mode of argument. Special emphasis is put on the Doctrinaires’ distinction between social and political condition. In order to illustrate the Doctrinaires’ method, the essay examines (...) Guizot's nuanced analysis of modern egalitarian society to be found in his book On Death Penalty. (shrink)

This article explores several key aspects of Tocqueville's "new science of politics". By focusing on its cross-disciplinary, comparative, normative, and political components, it highlights Tocqueville's conceptual and methodological sophistication as illustrated by his preparatory notes for Democracy in America and his voyage notes. The essay also defends Tocqueville against those critics who took him to task for working with an imprecise definition of democracy or with an ambiguous conception of equality.

This essay reviews the main themes and ideas of a couple of recent books on liberalism written by two intellectual historians, Alan S. Kahan and Nathaniel Wolloch.Their books shed fresh light on the internal diversity and complexity of the liberal tradition, especially in relation to the Radical and Moderate Enlightenment as well as the French Revolution. Wolloch and Kahan show that many of the ideas and aims of the Radical Enlightenment ended up being implemented by thinkers who belonged to the (...) tradition of moderate liberalism. The essay also argues that two books offer a timely opportunity to revisit the limits and virtues of liberal principles and respond to their recent critics. (shrink)