Attaining Rogers Smith's Civic Ideals

Abstract

Rogers Smith's recent work' represents a new start in the academic liberal community. Rejecting the tendency to begin inquiry by constructing highly abstract principles, scenarios or hypothetical conditions,2 he engages in a historically grounded normative enterprise.3 Perhaps most welcome is his attention to tradition. By recognizing the important role inherited ideas play as sources of certainty, comfort, and identity, Smith provides a sophisticated explanation for our failure to realize liberal values. His arguments for liberal reform therefore pack a welcome empirical punch. But are Smith's recommendations for reform practical? An important part of his remedy for our liberal shortcomings is eliminating mythic descriptions of our national origins and purposes.4 Smith argues that myths glorify our community as a unique and special place. He asserts that discriminatory and inequitable citizenship laws often arise when elites manipulate ascriptive identities related to this glorification.5 He therefore proposes that we reject myths and their associated political identities as the grounds for justifying polices and replace them with a critical understanding of history, a tentative political identity, and justification through reflective equilibrium.6 Can we justify reform and reject all the mythic texts Smith associates with dangerous forms of identity? I argue that if we define myth, as Smith seems to, as a bundle of collectively held texts that celebrate national history, describe a natural order, and invoke heroes,7 his prescription fails to account fully for the situated political behavior he describes. If we constantly struggle to fulfill the promise of liberal ideals within the context of traditions,8 we are compelled to employ social texts describing a natural order and invoking heroes alongside Smith's critical history. Smith is forced to choose between