Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in 21st-Century America

Gary Hart has made a significant contribution to the national discussion on the nature of our political system and our aspirations as a nation. Very few scholars and commentators have seriously explored the serious erosion of authority and viability of our local communities and economies in the face of urbanization/surbanization, the ascendancy of consumerism, and the continued march of globalization. One writer who has explored the social and economic (especially agricultural) aspects of this problem is Wendell Berry. Berry, however, locates the problem in the larger culture and does not offer any detailed political prescriptions. I am not sure that Berry would agree, but I think that Hart's argument is a natural complement to his, coming at some of the same problems from a political perspective. Hart makes a serious attempt to articulate a vision for maintaining local control despite the centralizing forces in our national and international political and economic systems. Both Berry and Hart ask us if we can truly claim to be a "free" people when we give up all real control of our local communities and economies to distant unnaccountable political and economic elites. Neither author offers ultimate solutions to these problems, but both ask the right questions and point us in the right direction. In the conclusion Hart describes the extreme individualism, alienation, and "atomization" that afflicts contemporary American life. He holds out the vision of a local republic as a response to these trends and their related social ills. (In response to the comments of an earlier reviewer, Hart is on solid analytical ground in pointing out Americans' lack of participation in local community and political affairs. His analysis relies heavily on the solid research of Robert Putnam [Bowling Alone], whom he cites extensively). What I like best about Hart's argument is that it avoids the simplistic left-right divide in current American political discourse. Hart criticizes those on both the left and right who defend a narrow rights-based vision of the American political system, divorced from rights and obligations. Hart's reminder that we can only preserve our rights through civic virtue expressed by our direct participation in the life of our local communities, is a timely one and fully grounded in the thought of Thomas Jefferson and the larger republican tradition.

Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in 21st-Century America written as a doctoral thesis by Gary Hart.The book in a nutshell is about bringing to light a long-neglected aspect of Thomas Jefferson's political philosphy... "the ward republic."Thomas Jefferson proposed that a layer of American government composed of elementary, pure or ward republics should provide the foundation upon which individual State republics and the federated republic would be based. His proposal was heavily influenced both by classic republican theories of civic virtue and citizen participation and by the belief that local public affairs were best managed locally. His views, explicated most thoroughly following his retirement from public office, were not considered during the Constitutional debates and were thus neither explicitly accepted nor rejected during America's founding era. Federalist proponents of the new Constitution, principally Jefferson's ally James Madison, argued for a Constitutional structure based upon a federal republic whose allocation of power among branches of government would check and balance each other, a republic strong enough to unite the various States and sufficiently consolidated as a national government to resist local factions and interests. Whereas Madison saw citizens as fractious, potentially oppressive, and neither enlightened for self-government. Madison saw democracy as a door through which chaos might enter; Jefferson saw it as the only means by which to prevent ownership of government by "interests" and the resulting citizen alienation from government.With this in mind, Hart brings these views to mind as he discusses current economic globalization and the evolving of Nation-States, Republicanism, and Original objections to small republics in the light of the twenty-first-century realities.I found the book to be well-written and the prose foundational at first, then later making cogent sense as he tries to bring Jefferson's ideas into the twenty-first-century. This book does as follows: brings consideration of the revolutionary economic, social, and political changes in the twenty-first century; an examination of whether America in the twenty-first century is an authentic republic; consideration of the objections to small-scale republicanism during the founding-era debate and discussions of the impact of these new realities on early objections to small-scale republicanism; a concluding discussion of the relevance of radical democratic republican ideals to America in the current age.This is a thoughtful and provocative book and makes a persuasive argument for Jeffersonian principles.

In his new book, Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in the 21st Century (Oxford University Press, 2002) former U.S. Senator Gary Hart examines Thomas Jefferson's vision of free society. The result is the most timely and relevant treatment of that vision ever published. For Jefferson, free society is about more than just citizen rights. It is about the responsibilities that accompany those rights - the responsibility of informed participation.As America debates the troubling aftermath of 9/11, Hart succeeds in identifying what has been called "the revolutionary tradition and its lost treasure" - the town meeting system of self-government - and the failure to incorporate this system into our constitutional framework. This failure was a direct result of Shays Rebellion in 1786, an event which caused fears of anarchy and violence. In response to those fears, the United States adopted an elaborate check and balance scheme based on representation. Hart's book focuses on this tragic oversight in our political development and re-establishes Jefferson as the primary exponent for a public space where the voice of the whole people can be, as Jefferson said, "fairly, fully, and peacefully expressed, discussed, and decided by the common reason of society." Jefferson believed that violence could be avoided by creating, along with public education, a place for a redress of grievances. A place, he thought, where citizens could be "participator[s] in the government of affairs, not merely at an election one day in the year, but every day."Jefferson's vision of republican government has profound implications for the 21st century. Hart deserves high praise for identifying and bringing focus to the central legacy of Thomas Jefferson.Sydney N. Stokes, Jr.Chairman

Gary Hart's "Restoration of the Republic" is a fantastic call for the modern American Empire to return to it's democratic republican roots. By examining Thomas Jefferson's ward republicsand their classical republican ideal we see how they could work for modern America. Jefferson's wards would be the focus of government for the everyday citizen. Care of the poor, militia duty, jury selection, and public education would be just a few of the duties of these "little republics". Hart shows how Jefferson's wards could help restore civic participation by allowing the average citizen to be intimately involved with the basic duties of government that effect his or her life. This books is a clarion call to arms for a revival of the classical republican spirit where not only our rights but our duties are cherished. Overall a great read and a must buy.

The author, The Honorable Gary Hart, Former Senator and Presidential Candidate continues to contribute to the public debate on American policies, principles and institutions in this new book. Choosing Jefferson, as the subject to foster new debates for a new direction of America in this new century is both wise and insightful and a trademark of Senator Hart's visions.The book outlines some interesting ideas of how America can improve the lot of its citizens and protect them without giving up individual freedoms that make life worthwhile for all. It is calling upon the consolidation of local government, which is badly needed at least in states with elderly populations. The fact is taxes which Jefferson opposed is really hurting our elderly on fixed income, remove businesses to global tax havens and in the end burden more than help like any Ponzi scheme. Yet, due to communities and school districts refusing to merge we are forced to have High Schools and Police Forces paid by wasted tax dollars that consolidation would reduce except for community pride.Upon finishing the book, I disagree with Gary Hart's conclusions and proposals in some places. I think Jefferson would be appalled that our Public Schools with such heavy funding cannot educate our students that the Republic is dependent upon to foster good government. I think Jefferson would be especially disappointed in the School Districts dominated by Democrats not just in urban areas but many suburbs as well. Jefferson founded the Democratic Party and would expect it to produce for the common citizens rather benefit an economic elite whether they are unions, teachers or administrators. He would call upon these elites to change policies for all and not stop change.Jefferson was an activist of knowing a Democracy run by emotions of the time causing mob rule needed a Republic run by cooler heads with separations of power to keep all tyranny in check. Yet, the great weight of federal funding is like opium now because states and local communities cannot survive without it. Jefferson would not appreciate this result, in my opinion. I do believe he would have caused local communities to make the hard choices for consolidation instead of opting to raise taxes to fund obsolete government because someone wants their son to play football from the school they graduated.Furthermore, we are going to a global economy of 24-hour service. Yet, our schools have but one school day instead of 3 shifts that could accommodate more students with more teachers without increase funding for building and maintenance. Teacher Unions prefer the current system devised on an agricultural based economy because they get 3 months off every year. I say, still give them 3 months off, but consolidation and adding 2 to 3 shifts dividing students will lower class size, increase money towards teachers and remove heavy debt of non-educational expenses. Additionally, America is funding huge Airlines and Airports that in the end actual