RealClearPolicy Newsletters: Original Articles
In Praise of Mixed Government
Dear Reader —
An unexpected merit of the Trump era has been the re-politicization of America. From the reengagement of a middle class that felt abandoned by both parties to a renewed emphasis on localism and the Left’s resistance movement — whatever one thinks of these developments in themselves — there is a shared sense that broad political participation is urgently needed. Could our era of polarization, incivility, and fracture inadvertently reinvigorate civic engagement? Consider this the upside of populism.
But there are dangers as well. There is, first of all, the danger that re-politicization leads to the politicization of everything — further eroding the civil institutions that mediate between individuals and the state. There is also the danger of tribalism, whereby rival groups place the interests of factions above the common good. Finally, there is the danger that populism produces Caesarism.
Classical philosophers were especially attuned to the ways in which democracy can be perverted into demagogy. They saw a volatile cycle between democracy, oligarchy, and tyranny — an evolution of political regimes known as “anacyclosis.” Cicero, for instance, praised the Roman Republic for its “mixed” constitution, which blended democracy (the people) with aristocracy (the senate) and monarchy (the consuls) so as to maintain a stable balance between them. Such stability proved temporary, of course. Only a few years later, the popular Julius Caesar defied the Senate and marched on Rome, eventually naming himself Dictator perpetuo.
The idea of a mixed government, which goes back to Aristotle, was popularized by the Greek historian Polybius, who influenced not only Cicero but also Montesquieu and thereby the Framers of our Constitution. Whereas classical authors tended to look to the aristocracy to temper the excesses of democracy, the Framers saw political authority as residing in the people, with the Constitution setting limits on centralized power. Though essentially democratic, ours is nevertheless a mixed government, which allows for competing interests to be balanced through a representative and deliberative process that separates legislative, executive, and judicial powers.
The downside of populism? It can enflame a desire to circumvent these structures for the sake of effectiveness or tribal retribution. On the Left, for instance, an ends-justifies-the-means logic has emerged, which renders constitutional mechanisms mere options for “resisting” Trump. These mechanisms thus appear as either helpful tools — as with the principle of judicial review — or obstacles to effective resistance — as with the principle of the unitary executive — depending on circumstances. Some on the Right, meanwhile, have grown impatient with appeals to constitutional restraint and deliberative processes, decrying them as impotent in the fight against progressivism. Federal power thus comes to be seen as a weapon by which to exact political retribution.
Are the dynamics of anacyclosis reemerging within our mixed government?
These are some of the many issues taken up at RealClearPolicy over the past week. Below you will find just a few highlights.
— M. Anthony Mills, editor | RealClearPolicy
***
#Resistance and the Crisis of Political Authority. In Law & Liberty, James Wallner considers the political and constitutional implications of the CFPB debacle.
Time to Depoliticize Financial Reform. In our own pages, Kyle Burgess suggests a way out of the CFPB leadership controversy.
Republicans Broke Congress. Now What? Washington Monthly’s Nancy LeTourneau argues that Congress is broken “because our politics is broken.”
A Second Special Counsel Would Boost the DOJ’s Credibility. Also in our own pages, Rep. Doug Collins counters critics who say the move would damage the Justice Department’s independence.
The Republic Will Survive the Tax Bill. The New York Times’ David Leonhardt contends that progressive critics go too far.
The GOP Tax Plan Is Pro-Growth. In RealClearPolicy, James C. Capretta contends that the Joint Committee on Taxation’s recent assessment of the plan should be good news for Republicans.
Democrats Need to Get a Grip About the Budget Deficit. According to Vox’s Matthew Yglesias, liberal worries about what the GOP tax bill will due to the federal budget are misplaced.
Net Neutrality Is the Free Speech Fight of Our Generation. In Talk Poverty, Rebecca Vallas interviews Katrina vanden Heuvel.
No, Net Neutrality Isn’t a Women’s Issue. In our pages, Andrea Castillo O’Sullivan and Jennifer Huddleston Skees counter a critique of the FCC's decision.
Reagan’s 1986 Tax Reform vs. Trump’s 2017 Tax Reform. Also in RealClearPolicy, the bipartisan organization No Labels spotlights key differences between the two.
