Was Montesquieu a Liberal Republican?

Dijn, Annelien de

doi:10.1017/s0034670513000879

Cited by 29 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But on the specific matter of the origins, age, and robustness of English liberty, all three disagreed. For present purposes we may sidestep the vexed question of where England fits in Montesquieu's typology of republics versus monarchies (Pangle 1973;Rahe 2009;Spector 2012;Douglass 2012;De Dijn 2014) and hence the extent to which he was an outright admirer of the English system of government and the degree to which he thought it could or should be emulated in other historical and geographical locales (De Dijn 2011Tomaselli 2006). Instead we can focus specifically on the question of liberty-of why and to what extent Montesquieu thought the English possessed it.…”

Section: Old But Fragile: Montesquieu On the Liberty Of The Englishmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Liberty of the English: Adam Smith’s Reply to Montesquieu and Hume

Sagar

2021

Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay has two purposes—first, to identify Adam Smith as intervening in the debate between Montesquieu and Hume regarding the nature, age, and robustness of English liberty. Whereas Montesquieu took English liberty to be old and fragile, Hume took it to be new and robust. Smith disagreed with both: it was older than Hume supposed, but not fragile in the way Montesquieu claimed. The reason for this was the importance of the common law in England’s legal history. Seeing this enables the essay’s second purpose: achieving a more thorough and nuanced understanding of Smith’s account of liberty. This requires us to go beyond repeating Smith’s famous claim that modern liberty was the result of the feudal barons trading away their wealth and power for inane status goods. As I demonstrate, this is only one part of a much wider story: of liberty requiring, and also being constituted by, the rise of the regular administration of justice, and ultimately the rule of law. Although Smith’s history of the English courts and common law has been almost entirely neglected by scholars, it is indispensable to understanding both his reply to Montesquieu and Hume and his wider political theory of modern freedom.

show abstract

Section: Old But Fragile: Montesquieu On the Liberty Of The Englishmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Liberty of the English: Adam Smith’s Reply to Montesquieu and Hume

Sagar

2021

Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other analysts have retorted that Rahe's arguments are flawed in the sense that Montesquieu certainly did not praise everything he saw in England and was actually more enamored by his own French system provided the power of the Monarch was checked by other public actors. One such example is local 'parlements' acting as legal magistrates endorsing royal edicts (or not) and another is aristocrats operating as a countervailing power against arbitrary interventions against their primus inter pares, the King himself [14,15]. Since it is hard to look into the mind of an 18th century author and find out what he truly intended to write, it cannot be 'objectively' established who is right and wrong in this debate.…”

Section: Montesquieu's Central Ideas and Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing the People’s Republic of China through the Eyes of Montesquieu: Why Sino-European Collaboration on Eco City Development Suffers from European Misinterpretations of “Good Governance”

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China faces a number of impressive challenges in dealing with climate change: rising energy use, growing emission levels of greenhouse gases, dangerous levels of air pollution over cities and low resilience against flood and drought. Sustainable urbanization has been adopted as a keyword in handling these challenges. The Chinese central government has undertaken a variety of measures, including the launch of large Sino-European programs to learn from 'developed nations'. In the wake of these partnerships, a great variety of cross-national and cross-city agreements were signed. Sino-European cooperation does not often run as smoothly as initially hoped because of diverging interests, cultural misunderstandings and practical limitations. In the background, a mismatch in normative conceptions Chinese and European participants have of 'good governance' plays a role. In this contribution, insights taken from Montesquieu's 'The Spirit of Laws' regarding checks and balances and trias politica (updated to 'sextas politica' for the 21st century) are used to comprehend how the exertion of power is distributed and expected to be distributed differently in Chinese than in European administrative traditions. The article will end with conclusions on how European misconceptions of Chinese governance complicate Sino-European collaboration in sustainable urbanization policies.

show abstract

“… 56 To get an idea of these debates, see, e.g., Rahe (2009) and Douglass (2012), who criticizes Rahe for interpreting Montesquieu as a “modern republican.” From more recent work, see also Spector (2003) on Montesquieu as a critic of republicanism, and Dijn (2014), arguing that our author is not a “liberal republican” but a “liberal monarchist.” For an argument against Montesquieu the liberal, stressing the value of “moderation,” see Spector (2012). She rightly points out (p. 68): “Not only should his admiration for the greatness of the ancients not be underestimated, but his ambivalence with regard to the effects of commercial society should also not be overlooked.” Cf.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

In the Shadow of Lacedaemon: Luxury, Wealth and Early-Modern Republican Thought

Regent¹

2019

J Hist Econ Thought

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article examines Sparta’s influence on the treatment of luxury and wealth in early-modern republican thought, analyzing three key thinkers: Francesco Guicciardini, Montesquieu and Abbé de Mably. In this view, unnecessary wealth and, particularly, consumption over a certain limited level, is a pernicious extravagance that harms virtue and leads to corruption of the commonwealth that allows it. Both the direct influence of the Spartan example and the correlative Platonic ideal, inspired by the Lacedaemonians, are analyzed; the influence of Plutarch is emphasized. Special attention is given to the distinction between the Platonic account, with the twin dangers of both wealth and poverty, and a simpler, binary opposition of virtuous poverty vs. corrupting wealth. Guicciardini’s and Mably’s views are closely examined; for Montesquieu, the article traces the decisive role Plato plays in Montesquieu’s account of luxury, and analyzes his almost unknown work,Dialogue de Xantippe, showing the importance of Sparta for Montesquieu’s idea of republic.

show abstract

Was Montesquieu a Liberal Republican?

Cited by 29 publications

References 13 publications

On the Liberty of the English: Adam Smith’s Reply to Montesquieu and Hume

On the Liberty of the English: Adam Smith’s Reply to Montesquieu and Hume

Seeing the People’s Republic of China through the Eyes of Montesquieu: Why Sino-European Collaboration on Eco City Development Suffers from European Misinterpretations of “Good Governance”

In the Shadow of Lacedaemon: Luxury, Wealth and Early-Modern Republican Thought

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About