Republicanism was revived during the [[Renaissance]], especially by political thinkers who promoted [[Civic Humanism]] in Florence such as [[Niccolò Machiavelli]].
Was Machiavelli a Machiavellian? In ''The Prince'' he showed how an absolute monarch can use tyranny and deceit to get his way. But in other books he took an opposite view, emphasizing that when a state does not have a prince (a powerful king), the people rule in a "republic" and they must have civic virtue for the republic to survive. Through his book on Roman history ''Discourses on Livy'' Machiavelli has been a major positive influence of modern conservative thought. He took the lead in defining what civic virtue means for a citizen of a republic--a republic—a state where the people are sovereign and not some king. For example , a citizen has the duty to oppose corruption and when called upon fight for his country. His ideas on [[republicanism]] strongly influenced British, French and American thought on the duties of the good citizen, and can be traced through American history from the days of [[Benjamin Franklin]] and [[James Madison]] down to the 21st century.<ref>See Paul A. Rahe, ed. ''Machiavelli's Liberal Republican Legacy'' (2005).</ref>
===Britain===
The British overthrew and executed King [[Charles I]] in 1649, and established a republican government under [[Oliver Cromwell]]. After Cromwell died in 1658 the republic collapsed, the monarchy was restored, and republican ideas were driven out of the mainstream of British political thought. They did not disappear, but were promulgated by the Whigs Country Party, whose pamphlets were eagerly read by the American colonists. Thus English political journalists [[John Trenchard]] and [[Thomas Gordon]] published anonymously ''Cato's Letters'' (1720-231720–23). These were 138 letters or short essays that expounded on liberty and republicanism and which greatly influenced the American Founding Fathers and [[libertarian]] thought into the 21st century.<ref> See Ronald Hamowy, "Cato's Letters" in Hamowy, ed. ''Encyclopedia of Libertarianism'' (2008) p. 54-55 [http://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC&pg=PA54&dq=republicanism+%22cato+the+younger%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=2005&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2009&num=30&as_brr=0#v=onepage&q=republicanism%20%22cato%20the%20younger%22&f=false online]</ref>
==United States==
Republicanism is the political value system that has dominated American political thought since the [[American Revolution]]. It stresses ''liberty'' and ''rights'' as central values, makes the people as a whole sovereign, rejects aristocracy and inherited political power, expects citizens to be independent and calls on them to perform civic duties, and is strongly opposed to corruption. The American version of republicanism was formed by the [[Founding Fathers]] in the 18th century and was based on English models as well as Roman and European ideas. It formed the basis for the fighting the British in 1775, the [[Declaration of Independence|declaring independence]] (1776) and creating a powerful written Constitution (1787); it appears in highly influential statements from [[Abraham Lincoln]] and others.
Republicanism is not the same as democracy, for republicanism asserts that people have inalienable rights that cannot be voted away by a majority of voters. In a true democracy, the voters have no limits. Republicanism and democracy are two political philosophies (along with classical liberalism) that have dominated all American politics. Indeed , the terms are enshrined in the names of the two major parties, but both parties in practice combine both republicanism and democracy.
The republican ideal of civic duty was succinctly expressed in 1961 by the Democrat [[John F. Kennedy]]: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
==The American Revolution==
===Republican opposition to corruption === The intellectual and political leaders in the 1760s-1770s closely read history to compare governments and their effectiveness of rule.<ref>Colbourn, ''The Lamp of Experience'' (1965)</ref> They were especially concerned with the history of liberty in England, and were primarily influenced by the "country" party in British politics, which roundly denounced the corruption surrounding the "court" party in London. This approach produced a political ideology called "[[republicanism]]", which was widespread in America by 1775. "Republicanism was the distinctive political consciousness of the entire Revolutionary generation."<ref>Robert Kelley, "Ideology and Political Culture from Jefferson toNixon," ''American Historical Review,'' 82 (June 1977), 536</ref> Pocock explained the intellectual sources in America:<ref> Pocock, ''The Machiavellian Moment'' p 507 </ref>
:"The Whig canon and the neo-Harringtonians, [[John Milton]], [[James Harrington]] and [[Algernon Sydney|Sidney]], [[John Trenchard (writer)|Trenchard]], [[Thomas Gordon (writer)|Gordon]] and [[Henry St John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke|Bolingbroke]], together with the Greek, Roman, and Renaissance masters of the tradition as far as [[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu|Montesquieu]], formed the authoritative literature of this culture; and its values and concepts were those with which we have grown familiar: a civic and patriot ideal in which the personality was founded in property, perfected in citizenship but perpetually threatened by corruption; government figuring paradoxically as the principal source of corruption and operating through such means as patronage, faction, standing armies (opposed to the ideal of the militia), established churches (opposed to the Puritan and deist modes of American religion) and the promotion of a monied interest—though the formulation of this last concept was somewhat hindered by the keen desire for readily available paper credit common in colonies of settlement. A neoclassical politics provided both the ethos of the elites and the rhetoric of the upwardly mobile, and accounts for the singular cultural and intellectual homogeneity of the Founding Fathers and their generation."
Americans above all feared the corruption generated by a royal court, with its favoritism, grasping ambition, bribery, patronage, lavish luxury and disregard of civic virtue. They watched anxiously so that these evils could be scotched immediately should they appear in America--a America—a watchfulness that persists into the 21st century.
===Cause of Revolution===
In a larger sense the tax issue was part of the representation question, which was increasingly defined by Americans as an issue of republicanism. The commitment of most Americans to republican values caused the [[American Revolution]], for Britain was increasingly seen as corrupt and hostile to republicanism, and a threat to the established liberties that Americans enjoyed.<ref>Bernard Bailyn, '' The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution'' (1967)</ref> The greatest threat to liberty was increasingly seen as "corruption"--not —not just in London but at home as well. The colonists associated it with luxury, Royal appointees not answerable to the people, a standing army, unconstitutional taxes, and, ultimately, an system of rule by an inherited aristocracy.
Thomas Jefferson defined a republic as:
:"a government by its citizens in mass, acting directly and personally, according to rules established by the majority; and that every other government is more or less republican, in proportion as it has in its composition more or less of this ingredient of the direct action of the citizens.... Governments are more or less republican as they have more or less of the element of popular election and control in their composition; and believing, as I do, that the mass of the citizens is the safest depository of their own rights, and especially, that the evils flowing from the duperies of the people, are less injurious than those from the egoism of their agents, I am a friend to that composition of government which has in it the most of this ingredient."<ref>Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, May 28, 1816[http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mtj:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28tj110172%29%29 online]</ref>
The Founders discoursed endlessly on the meaning of "republicanism." John Adams in 1787 defined it as "a government, in which all men, rich and poor, magistrates and subjects, officers and people, masters and servants, the first citizen and the last, are equally subject to the laws."<ref>[http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch4I.html Republican Government].</ref>
For a century historians have debated how important republicanism was to the Founding Fathers. The interpretation before 1960, following [[Progressive Era]] historians such as [[Charles Beard]], [[Vernon L. Parrington]] and [[Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr.]], downplayed rhetoric as superficial and looked for economic motivations. [[Louis Hartz]] refined the position in the 1950s, arguing [[John Locke]] was the most important source because his property-oriented [[liberalism]] supported the materialistic goals of Americans.
In the 1960s and 1970s two new schools emerged that emphasized the primacy of ideas as motivating forces in history (rather than material self -interest). The "Cambridge School" led by [[Bernard Bailyn]] and [[Gordon Wood]] and the "St. Louis School" led by [[J.G.A. Pocock]] emphasized slightly different approaches to republicanism.<ref>Rodgers (1992)</ref> However, some scholars, especially [[Isaac Kramnick]] continue to emphasize Locke, arguing that Americans are fundamentally individualistic and not devoted to civic virtue. The relative importance of republicanism and liberalism remains a topic of debate among historians.
==New Nation: The Constitution==
The [[Founding Fathers]] wanted republicanism that would guarantee liberty, and most were afraid that a "democracy" (by which they meant a [[direct democracy]]) would allow a majority of voters at any time to trample rights and liberties; the most formidable of these potential majorities being that of the poor against the rich. That is, they saw democracy as [[mob rule]] that could be shaped on the spot by a demagogue. Therefore , they devised a written Constitution which could only be amended by a supermajority, preserved competing sovereignties in the constituent states,<ref>When [[Alexander Hamilton]] proposed at the Constitutional Convention to drastically reduce the power of the states, he won no support and dropped the idea.</ref> gave the control of the upper house (Senate) to the states, and created an [[Electoral College]] comprising a small number of elites to select the president. They set up a House of Representative to represent the people. In practice the electoral college soon gave way to control by political parties. Not expected by the founders was the emergence of the Supreme Court under [[John Marshall]] as the final arbiter of the Constitution and indeed of all political rules. In 1776 most states required property ownership to vote, but most citizens owned farms in the 90% rural nation, so it was not a severe restriction, and was dropped state by state in the early 19th century.<ref>Alexander Keyssar, ''The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States'' (2001)</ref>
==="Republican" as party name===
In colonial days the Quaker elite established a monopoly on political leadership in Pennsylvania based on what they believed to be their inherent civic virtue grounded in their religious and social class. By 1760, this view had been discredited and replaced with the general consensus that civic virtue was an achieved, not an inherent, attribute and that it should be determined by the display of appropriate manliness and the valor of men who were willing to take up arms for the common defense of the colony. Pennsylvanians came to believe that all white men, not just wealthy property owners, were equally capable of achieving political voice. Martial masculinity, therefore, became the defining characteristic of the ideal citizen and marked a significant transformation in the way individuals understood their republican rights and duties.<ref>John Smolenski, "From Men of Property to Just Men: Deference, Masculinity, and the Evolution of Political Discourse in Early America." ''Early American Studies'' 2005 3(2): 253-285. Issn: 1543-4273 Fulltext: in [[Ebsco]]</ref>
Civic virtue required men to put civic goals ahead of their personal desires, and to volunteer to fight for their country. As [[John Randolph of Roanoke]] put it, "When citizen and soldier shall be synonymous terms, then you will be safe."<ref>Randolph quoted in Banning (1978) p. 262. See Lawrence D. Cress, "Republican Liberty and National Security: American Military Policy as an Ideological Problem, 1783 to 1789." ''William and Mary Quarterly'' (1981) 38(1): 73-96. ISSN 0043-5597 Fulltext at Jstor</ref> Scott (1984) notes that in both the American and French revolutions, distrust of foreign mercenaries led to the concept of a national, citizen army, and the definition of military service was changed from a choice of careers to a civic duty. <ref>Samuel F. Scott, "Foreign Mercenaries, Revolutionary War, and Citizen-soldiers in the Late Eighteenth Century." ''War & Society'' 1984 2(2): 41-58. ISSN 0729-2473 </ref> Herrera (2001) explains that an appreciation of self-governance is essential to any understanding of the American military character before the Civil War. Military service was considered an important demonstration of patriotism and an essential component of citizenship. To soldiers, military service was a voluntary, negotiated, and temporary abeyance of self-governance by which they signaled their responsibility as citizens. In practice self-governance in military affairs came to include personal independence, enlistment negotiations, petitions to superior officials, militia constitutions, and negotiations regarding discipline. Together these impacted on all aspects of military order, discipline, and life.<ref>Ricardo A. Herrera, "Self-governance and the American Citizen as Soldier, 1775-1861." ''Journal of Military History 2001'' 65(1): 21-52. ISSN 0899-3718 Fulltext in SwetsWise and Jstor</ref>
==Civil War and Reconstruction==
==Progressive Era==
[[Jane Addams]] stressed that women--especially women—especially middle class women with leisure and energy -- as energy—as well as rich philanthropists, had a civic duty to become involved in municipal affairs as a matter of "civic housekeeping." Addams thereby enlarged the concept of civic duty as part of republicanism to include roles for women beyond republican motherhood (which involved child rearing).
A central theme of the Progressive era was fear of corruption, one of the core ideas of republicanism since the 1770s. The Progressives restructured the political system to defeat corrupt bosses (for example, by the direct election of Senators), to remove corrupt influence like saloons (through prohibition) and bringing in new, purer voters (woman suffrage).).<ref>Richard Jensen, "Democracy, Republicanism and Efficiency: The Values of American Politics, 1885-1930," in Byron Shafer and Anthony Badger, eds, ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (U of Kansas Press, 2001) pp 149-180.[http://www.uic.edu/~rjensen/rj0025.htm online version]</ref> Debate erupted in 1917 over [[Woodrow Wilson]]'s proposal to draft men for the U.S. Army. Many said it violated the republican notion of freely given civic duty to force people to serve. The solution was to set it up so that each draftee voluntarily "stepped forward" to perform his civic duty.<ref>John Whiteclay II Chambers,''To Raise An Army: The Draft Comes to Modern America'' (1987)</ref>
Another form of corruption was the trust--the trust—the giant business enterprise that crushed its competition. Some reformers adopted the "Iowa idea" that linked the cause of the trusts to high tariffs. Others denounced "robber barons," artfully combining crime and aristocracy. [[John D. Rockefeller]] and his [[Standard Oil Company]] were favorite targets.<ref> Roger M. Olien and Olien, Diana Davids. ''Oil and Ideology: The Cultural Creation of the American Petroleum Industry.'' (2000) p. 103</ref>
==New Deal Era to 2007== "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country!" cried out President [[John F. Kennedy]] in a dramatic call for the American people to honor the core republican value of civic duty.<ref>Gary Hart, ''Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in 21st-Century America'' (2002) p. 7; Michael Tomasky, "Party in Search of a Notion," ''The American Prospect'' (May 2006) online at [http://www.prospect.org/web/view-web.ww?id=11424] . James Patterson, "Modern Era" in Byron Shafer and Anthony Badger, eds, ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (U of Kansas Press, 2001) </ref>
In the [[United States presidential election, 2004|presidential election of 2004]], one of the chief topics of discussion was whether the candidates [[John Kerry]] and [[George W. Bush]] had properly fulfilled their civic duty of fighting for their country, part of the republican duties. Opponents charged that Bush had shirked his National Guard duties, or conversely that Kerry did not earn the medals he was awarded in Vietnam.<ref>D. Michael Shafer, ''The Vietnam-Era Draft'' in Shafer, ed. ''The Legacy: The Vietnam War in the American Imagination'' (1990), 57-79; Jeremy Michael Teigen, "The Role of Previous Military Service in American Electoral Politics" (PhD dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, 2005). Order No. DA3204197.</ref> A similar debate over performance of civic duty took place in the [[United States presidential election, 1884|presidential election of 1884]], when Republicans emphasized that Democrat [[Grover Cleveland]] had purchased a substitute to fight for him in the Civil War, while his opponent [[Benjamin Harrison]] was in combat.
==Further reading==
* Appleby, Joyce. “Republicanism in Old and New Contexts,” in ''William & Mary Quarterly'', 43 (January, 1986), pp 3-34 3–34 in [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-5597(198601)3%3A43%3A1%3C20%3ARIOANC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23 JSTOR]
* Appleby, Joyce. ed., "Republicanism in the History and Historiography of the United States," special issue of ''American Quarterly'', Vol. 37, No. 4, (1985) [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0678%28198523%2937%3A4%3C%3E1.0.CO%3B2-E online at JSTOR] with articles:
** Appleby, Joyce. "Republicanism and Ideology," pp. 461-473 461–473 ** Linda K. Kerber, "The Republican Ideology of the Revolutionary Generation," pp. 474-495 474–495 ** Cathy Matson and Peter Onuf, "Toward a Republican Empire: Interest and Ideology in Revolutionary America," pp. 496-531 496–531 ** Jean Baker, "From Belief into Culture: Republicanism in the Antebellum North," pp. 532-550 532–550 **James Oakes. "From Republicanism to Liberalism: Ideological Change and the Crisis of the Old South," pp. 551-571 551–571 ** John Patrick Diggins, "Republicanism and Progressivism," pp. 572-598 572–598
* Banning, Lance. ''The Jeffersonian Persuasion: Evolution of a Party Ideology'' (1978) [http://www.amazon.com/Jeffersonian-Persuasion-Evolution-Party-Ideology/dp/0801492009/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195534565&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Banning, Lance. "Jeffersonian Ideology Revisited: Liberal and Classical Ideas in the New American Republic," ''The William and Mary Quarterly,'' 3rd Ser., Vol. 43, No. 1 (Jan., 1986), pp. 3-19 3–19 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-5597(198601)3%3A43%3A1%3C3%3AJIRLAC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2 in JSTOR]
*Becker, Peter, JÜrgen Heideking and James A. Henretta, eds. ''Republicanism and Liberalism in America and the German States, 1750-1850.'' Cambridge University Press. 2002. [http://www.amazon.com/Republicanism-Liberalism-1750-1850-Publications-Historical/dp/0521800668/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197947142&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Brown, David. "Jeffersonian Ideology And The Second Party System" ''Historian'', Fall, 1999 v62#1 pp 17-44 17–44 [http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=Gn0D52dvDqQyYrS2Gbm3L3YJr9LCBchTFCyV5SptNjLsGp2TxYLR!1507793099?docId=5001842234 online edition]* Brown; Stuart Gerry. ''The First Republicans: Political Philosophy and Public Policy in the Party of Jefferson and Madison'' Syracuse University Press. 1954[http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=11814508 online edition].
*Colbourn, Trevor. ''The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual Origins of the American Revolution'' (1965) [http://oll.libertyfund.org/Home3/Book.php?recordID=0009 online free version]
* Ellis, Joseph J. ''Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation'' (2002) [http://www.amazon.com/Founding-Brothers-Revolutionary-Joseph-Ellis/dp/0375705244/ref=pd_bbs_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195534477&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
* Foner, Eric. ''Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party before the Civil War'' 1970 Highly influential study; [http://www.questia.com/library/book/free-soil-free-labor-free-men-the-ideology-of-the-republican-party-before-the-civil-war-by-eric-foner.jsp online edition]
* [http://oll.libertyfund.org/Home3/Essay.php?recordID=0789 Foner, Eric. "Radical Individualism in America: Revolution to Civil War," ''Literature of Liberty,'' vol. 1 no. 3, July/September 1978 pp 1-31 online]
* Gould, Philip. "Virtue, Ideology, and the American Revolution: The Legacy of the Republican Synthesis," ''American Literary History,'' Vol. 5, No. 3, Eighteenth-Century American Cultural Studies (Autumn, 1993) , pp. 564-577 564–577 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0896-7148(199323)5%3A3%3C564%3AVIATAR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0 in JSTOR]
*Greene, Jack P. and J. R. Pole, eds. ''The Blackwell Encyclopedia of the American Revolution'' (1991), 845pp; emphasis on political ideas and republicanism; revised edition (2004) titled ''A Companion to the American Revolution''
* Hart, Gary. ''Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in 21St-Century America'' (2002) [http://www.amazon.com/Restoration-Republic-Jeffersonian-21st-Century-America/dp/0195174283/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200447862&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Pocock, J. G. A. "Virtue and Commerce in the Eighteenth Century,” ''Journal of Interdisciplinary History'' 3#1 (1972), 119–34. [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-1953(197222)3%3A1%3C119%3AVACITE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J in JSTOR]
* Rahe, Paul A. ed. ''Machiavelli's Liberal Republican Legacy'' (2005) shows the impact of Machiavelli on republicanism in America [http://www.amazon.com/Machiavellis-Liberal-Republican-Legacy-Paul/dp/0521851874/ref=si3_rdr_bb_product excerpt and text search]
* Rodgers, Daniel T. "Republicanism: the Career of a Concept," ''Journal of American History,'' Vol. 79, No. 1 (Jun., 1992), pp. 11-38 11–38 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-8723(199206)79%3A1%3C11%3ARTCOAC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I online in JSTOR] * Ross, Steven J. "The Transformation of Republican Ideology," ''Journal of the Early Republic,'' Vol. 10, No. 3 (Autumn, 1990), pp. 323-330 323–330 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0275-1275(199023)10%3A3%3C323%3ATTORI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-S in JSTOR]
* Sandoz, Ellis. ''Republicanism, Religion, and the Soul of America.'' (2006) 248 pp. isbn 978-0-8262-1674-8. [http://www.amazon.com/Republicanism-Religion-Institute-Political-Philosophy/dp/0826216749/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197946943&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Shalhope, Robert E. "Toward a Republican Synthesis: The Emergence of an Understanding of Republicanism in American Historiography," ''William and Mary Quarterly'', 29 (Jan. 1972), 49-80; highly influential article that defined the topic; [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-5597(197201)3%3A29%3A1%3C49%3ATARSTE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2 in JSTOR]
* Shalhope, Robert E. "Republicanism and Early American Historiography," ''William and Mary Quarterly'', 39 (Apr. 1982), 334-356 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-5597(198204)3%3A39%3A2%3C334%3ARAEAH%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y in JSTOR]
*Wood, Gordon S. ''The Radicalism of the American Revolution: How a Revolution Transformed a Monarchical Society into a Democratic One Unlike Any That Had Ever Existed''. (1992). ISBN 0-679-40493-7 [http://www.amazon.com/Radicalism-American-Revolution-Gordon-Wood/dp/0679736883/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197947078&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Wood, Gordon S. "Rhetoric and Reality in the American Revolution," ''The William and Mary Quarterly'' 3rd Ser., Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1966), pp. 3-32 3–32 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-5597%28196601%293%3A23%3A1%3C3%3ARARITA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M in JSTOR]
* [[John Adams]]
* [[James Madison]]
* [[Alexander Hamilton]]
* [[John C. Calhoun]]
* [[Abraham Lincoln]]