Ordinary Virtues: Foundations of Self-Rule in England and America, 1647-1776

Abstract

Can ordinary people rule themselves? The question of self-rule is often considered only as an aspect of a particular model of rule, such as republicanism, democracy or constitutionalism. Yet, a theory of self-rule per se would be a useful contribution to political thought. Notwithstanding the deference given to the principle of popular rule, it remains an unresolved question whether people are actually capable of ruling themselves. Even in the United States today, self-rule remains a contested idea. This essay is an attempt to understand what self-rule is and how the idea developed in the period between the first English Revolution and the American Revolution. I begin by offering a theory of self-rule that focuses on the distinction between the rule of one’s own self, personal self-rule, and the rule of our combined selves, collective self-rule. Contradictions and conflicts inevitably arise between the two. These are only overcome, I claim, when people come to share an image of the common good, an idea regarding the proper pursuit of shared interest that becomes synonymous with public virtue. In the second part of the essay, I rely on this theory to examine how revolutionary era Americans came to believe in the community of virtue. Such assurance is indeed remarkable, especially in light of the failure of English radicalism in the seventeenth century, a disillusioning experience that only compounded the doubts and objections expressed by philosophers, religious leaders, and rulers alike. How did this conviction, so contrary to traditional notions of deference and obedience, come about? It came, I argue, with the transformation of the concept of virtue into an instrument of political action. American revolutionaries claimed the right of independence only after concluding that they already possessed all the virtues required for self-rule. This provided the moral justification for rebellion and the legal foundation for their new governments. Such a claim is always revolutionary and always problematic. In truth, we do not yet know if self-rule is plausible, nor are we in agreement about whether it is desirable.