A Review of “The Kingdom and the Glory: For a Theological Genealogy of Economy and Government,” and “Adam Smith as Theologian”

Abstract

Philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre has asserted in several writings that present-day democratic governing institutions fail to incorporate beliefs about the common good and deliberation. However, objections can be raised against MacIntyre's characterization based on research from a new field in political science, Deliberative Democracy. Empirical research in that field shows that the common good and deliberation still do have a place in the United States Congress. It also shows that what James Madison argued at the founding of the country still holds, that representative deliberative bodies aid in transforming arguments for private goods into arguments for the common good; they refine and enlarge the public views.     

Disco and Democracy: Thoughts on Stillman's Film and Book

Abstract

Statesmanship can be exercised in a variety of situations, not all of which involve sitting in the Executive Office. This response examines three of the most impressive American efforts at statesmanship—that of Madison in his capacity as Founder (on how best to secure rights), Franklin as author of a new American Way of life (based on virtues freed from religious seriousness), and Lincoln as theorist of a political morality. All three examples, I argue, provide evidence that a statesman is more than just a politician who has been dead for some time.     

Was James Madison Ever for the Bill of Rights?

Abstract

This article revisits the question whether James Madison believed the Bill of Rights improved the Constitution. In particular, it asks whether the evidence supports the argument that Madison was persuaded that bills of rights serve an important educative function in constitutional government. It concludes that the evidence does not support this argument and suggests that Madison did not believe that the Bill of Rights improved the Constitution.     

Feature Reviews

Abstract

Thomas Jefferson, in his Notes on the State of Virginia, first published and distributed to the American public in 1787, presented his mature thoughts on politics, amid a vast array of themes reflective of his own encyclopedic studies. The diverse contents and unusual form of the work have often led modern readers to neglect its overarching political purpose. We argue that when read as a unified whole shaped by an explicit literary structure and rational method, Jefferson's Notes lays the foundation for a new science of republican politics. By engaging and revising key aspects of both the Bible and Enlightenment science, whenever either asserts authoritative claims beyond rational scrutiny that obscure or distort nature, Jefferson overturns false idols that impede our inquiry into natural laws and natural right, and the proper grounds of republican government.     

安纳波利斯会议在美国制宪史上的地位

安纳波利斯会议原是邦联国会为协调北部各邦之间贸易冲突而开,会议报告却发出了召开修改《邦联条例》以应对邦联危机的费城会议的决定;汉密尔顿和麦迪逊是这次会议的主角,协调贸易冲突的失败,更坚定了他们这些“国家主义者”建立强大中央政府的信念,并开始思考建立新国家的若干原则,从而为费城会议上的大辩论奠定了理论基础。因此,安纳波利斯会议在美国制宪史上占有重要的地位,是美国宪政体制由邦联向联邦制转变的一次探索性的会议。