Carver
1. Why did Napoleon Bonaparte turn away from his earlier embrace of “ideology” as set
forth by de Tracy, and subsequently deride it as “sinister metaphysics”?
2. Carver suggests that a basic theoretical tension, or perhaps an outright contradiction,
confronts Marx’s successors when they attempt to define Marxism as scientific and
objective. Why is this a potential problem, given Marx’s own definition of “ideology”?
3. As Carver notes, the history of the term “ideology” is deeply conflicted because the
concept has had so many different definitions; nevertheless, he thinks it is a term we
should not abandon, even if we can never arrive at a scientifically objective ideology.
Why does Carver think it is important to understand the meaning of different political
ideologies even if none of them can prove itself to be the “correct” one?
Theban Messenger
1. The Theban Messenger concludes that the masses of common people, or the demos, are
poor judges of political matters. How might a modern defender of democracy —
yourself, perhaps — respond to such a claim?
2. Why does Theseus put so much emphasis on the rule of law in his response to the Theban
Messenger? Why is it so vitally important in a democracy?
3. Theseus argues that tyrants are especially brutal in punishing the youth in a political
society that they come to control. What reasons does he give for this?
Pericles
1. On Pericles’s view, what was so special about collective citizen participation and
deliberation about the most important public matters, including war itself? Why does
Pericles believe that the Athenians’ greater willingness to engage in courageous acts on
behalf of their city-state was related to their commitment to democracy?
2. How does Pericles understand the connection between democracy and empire?
3. In an infamous aside, Pericles briefly discusses the place of women within Athenian
democracy. What does he understand as women’s role within the polis?
Aristotle
1. On pp. 22-23, Aristotle notes that some works of art are not best judged by those who
create them, but by those who utilize them. How does he develop this point into a defense
of democratic judgment?
Machiavelli
1. What does this extract say about Machiavelli’s view of human nature, and why does this
make the rule of law particularly important to his conception of politics?
2. In his conclusion (on p. 29), what does Machiavelli claim is the chief difference between
the excesses of the people and the excesses of the prince that make rule by the former
preferable to rule by the latter?
3. Some scholars have argued that the link between The Prince and The Discourses lies
precisely in the role played by the prince when the republic becomes corrupt and requires
the renewal of its republican origins. Is there any evidence in this extract for that
argument, which stresses the important role that one human being can play in history?
1
Adams
1. Adams lists 6 reasons why single (or unicameral) legislatures are undesirable in a
republic. What are those reasons? Do you find Adams’s arguments compelling? Why or
why not?
2. Adams puts a great deal of emphasis throughout the piece on the importance of annual
elections within republics, arguing that there is no more “infallible maxim” in all of the
sciences than the claim that ‘where annual elections end, there slavery begins’ (p. 31).
Why does Adams think that annual elections are so important for republican self-rule?
3. At the end of the piece, Adams maintains that three additional types of laws are very
important for maintaining republican self-rule. These are: a militia law, laws which make
provision for “the liberal education of youth, especially of the lower class of people,” and
“sumptuary laws” (p. 34). What does Adams mean by these laws, and why does he think
they are so important in a republic?
Bill of Rights
1. The issue of the “right of the people to keep and bear Arms” (Amendment 2) continues to
be one of ongoing controversy in the United States. From a republican perspective, why
is the right of the people to bear arms so crucial?
2. The Tenth Amendment has been regarded as one of the Antifederalists’ great victories.
How might we read it as helping to assuage Patrick Henry’s fear that the Constitution
was insufficiently democratic? How might it be seen as setting the stage for the American
Civil War?
De Tocqueville
1. In the early pages of this piece, Tocqueville describes the various factors at work within
history that he believes have combined to make “equality of conditions,” and thus
democracy, inevitable. What factors does he isolate as central to this process? How does
he say they functioned, and with what specific consequences?
2. Conversely, what does Tocqueville laud about aristocracy? What does he think has been
lost in the replacement of aristocracy by democracy?
Mill
1. Underlying Mill’s argument is a clear commitment to “active” over “passive” sorts of
human character (p. 49). What reasons does he give for preferring the former over the
latter, especially since, as he points out, most moral philosophers prefer people to be
precisely the opposite of what Mill is advocating?
2. What does Mill believe will be the consequences for society of the failure to put in place
means for citizens to participate in the process of democratic self-governance? Looking
around at your own society, do you believe that Mill’s argument has relevance on this
score? Why or why not?
2
Hobbes
1. On pp. 57-58, Hobbes outlines three principal reasons why he thinks conflict in the state
of nature is inevitable. These are "competition," "diffidence," and "glory." What does
Hobbes mean by these terms, and why does he think they will inevitably culminate in
"war," as he understands that term?
2. Hobbes has often been accused of having too negative a view of human nature in the state
of nature and, consequently, of rushing too quickly to the notion that people would accept
an absolute ruler so long as it provided for their safety. On p. 58, he offers what he hopes
will be an empirical proof of his theory of human nature, by describing the behavior of
people who actually live in political society, which he imagines to be much safer than the
state of nature. What examples does he give to "prove" his theory? Do you find them
convincing? By way of updating this argument, we might think of the debate over
security versus individual rights in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001. Do you think most people would opt for greater security, even if it meant a
diminution of individual rights? Should they?
Locke
1. In A Letter Concerning Toleration, Locke gives a number of reasons why state power (or
the "civil magistrate"), should not be understood as having any say in what religion
people should follow. What reasons does he give for this? Similarly, Locke adduces a
number of arguments in favor of the notion that a church should best be understood as a
voluntary association. What are they? How far should they be understood as limiting any
church's power? What legitimate or justifiable powers does any church still maintain over
its members, according to Locke?
2. What is the importance of the development of money for Locke's argument about the
extent of property accumulation in the state of nature? What are the consequences of his
argument from the standpoint of economic equality? Does Locke think this will be a
problem? Why or why not?
Paine
1. According to The Rights of Man, what is the rationale behind Paine's claim that only the
present generation has any claim on the politics of today? Do you find this argument
convincing? Why or why not?
Declaration of Independence
1. What are the specific grievances listed by the colonists in The Declaration of
Independence? How might one read these grievances from the perspective of liberalism?
How might one read them from the perspective of republicanism?
2. If you were part of a group whose members had been systematically denied the rights that
Jefferson sets forth in the Declaration, how might you go about arguing for inclusion?
3
3. What does the Declaration suggest is the appropriate response to government if such
rights are continually violated over a long period of time?
Declaration of the Rights of Man
1. In the final, seldom-remembered list of complaints about the behavior of King George
III, the Declaration discusses Native Americans. What does it say about them, and what
does this say about the history of liberalism?
2. Which article of the Declaration most clearly attacks the notion of ascribed status and
aristocratic privilege? Why?
3. Which articles of the Declaration most clearly attack political absolutism? Why?
Smith
1. Smith argues that, in addition to the natural propensity to truck, barter, and exchange,
there is another feature of human life that separates us from animals. Do you think there
is sometimes a tension between these two elements of human existence? Why or why
not?
2. In a fascinating argument that is all too often overlooked, Smith maintains that, "The
difference of talents in different men is, in reality, much less than we are aware of." He
goes on to add that while it may offend the "vanity of the philosopher," the fact is that:
"By nature a philosopher is not in genius and disposition half so different from a street
porter as a mastiff is from a greyhound" (p. 90). On Smith's account, then what accounts
for the "very different genius which appears to distinguish men of different professions"
(p. 90)?
Kant
1. Kant gives two broad sets of reasons why individuals have not heretofore thrown off their
immaturity. What are they?
2. To what extent does Kant believe any generation can legitimately limit the willingness of
future generations to dare to know? Which institution does Kant use as an example of one
that might well attempt to engage in such behavior, and what does he think of it?
Mill
1. Mill famously declares that: "If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only
one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing
that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind" (p.
97). Mill gives three basic reasons for this claim. What are they? Do you find them
convincing? Why or why not?
2. On pp. 98-100, Mill insists on the fundamental importance of individual eccentricity for
democracy, especially among those whom he calls "geniuses." This argument seems
strange. Why are eccentrics so important in a democracy, according to Mill?
3. Unlike many of his contemporaries, Mill was far more consistent in the application of his
liberal democratic principles. For example, he advocated extending the suffrage not only
4
to the working class, but also to women, and was a committed opponent of slavery.
However, it also must be noted that Mill was an employee of the British East India
Company, the central tool of British imperialism on the subcontinent, and consistently
maintained that neither liberty nor democracy were applicable in less "civilized" parts of
the globe (like Asia). In such places, he claimed: "Despotism is a legitimate mode of
government in dealing with barbarians, provided that the end be their improvement, and
the means justified by actually effecting that end" (p. 95). What reasons does he give for
this position in the piece we read?
Sumner
1. At the beginning of this piece, Sumner argues that "every man and woman in society has
one big duty." What is that duty, according to Sumner, and why would it be a
fundamental mistake to try to go beyond it?
2. The key figure in Sumner's analysis is the one he calls "the Forgotten Man." Who is this
individual? How and why is he forgotten? Why does Sumner believe that the case of the
Forgotten Man illustrates the problem of enabling government to do more than protect
the persons and property of its citizens?
Green
1. Green makes a radical break with many classical liberals, like Locke, who argued that the
right to property was a natural or pre-political right. That is, for Green property rights are
not sacrosanct emanations from natural or God-given law that government must never
infringe upon. How does Green go about defending this claim, and do you find it
convincing? Why or why not?
2. Why does the welfare liberal Green reject voluntary slave contracts? Why might some
neoclassical liberals or libertarians like Nozick defend them? Should people have the
right to voluntarily enslave themselves in a free society? Why or why not?
3. At the conclusion of this piece, Green maintains that "we shall probably all agree that a
society in which the public health was duly protected, and necessary education duly
provided for, by the spontaneous action of individuals, was in a higher condition than one
in which the compulsion of law was needed to secure those ends" (pp. 107-108).
Nevertheless, Green does not believe this will happen; therefore state intervention is
absolutely necessary to achieve these ends. What reasons does he give for this failure?
Are his reasons historically convincing? Why or why not?
Roosevelt
1. Roosevelt argues that, in various ways, the opponents of the New Deal have been
"deceitful." What examples does he give to justify this assertion?
2. What sorts of programs does Roosevelt single out as essential ones for the continuation of
the New Deal in his second term? How are these programs illustrative of the welfare
liberal conception of "positive freedom"?
5
Allen
1. Throughout this essay, Allen compares current debates about censoring and making
illegal certain types of speech and behavior to the Prohibition movement. On Allen's
account, what lessons should we learn from the failures of Prohibition that are applicable
today?
2. What is the fundamental difference between Allen's understanding of the importance of
individual liberty for democracy, and that set forth by J.S. Mill? Put differently, why
isn't Mill a modern libertarian like Allen? Or is he?
Rothbard
1. Despite the fact that libertarians take some positions generally associated with the
political left wing, and some positions associated with the political right wing, Rothbard
does not believe that they are confused. Indeed, he argues that libertarianism is the only
truly consistent variant of liberalism as an ideology. Why?
2. Why, precisely, is the regulation or restriction of free speech, or the outlying of
pornography and drugs by the state, a form of "aggression" on individuals? Is preventing
people from doing something the same as attacking them? Why or why not?
3. At the conclusion of his essay, Rothbard argues that land and animals should be
understood originally as unowned "resources" that can legitimately become the private
property of individuals. How does this process unfold, according to Rothbard? How does
it hearken back to Locke's arguments? Is his argument about what makes "resources" into
private property a convincing one? Why or why not?
Ball
1. Why does Ball think "Marketopia" is unfair? Do you find his argument convincing? Why
or why not?
2. There does not seem to be anything inherently unfair about treating your professors as
"service providers," and seeing yourselves as "costumers" partaking of their services.
Nevertheless, Ball still seems to think there is something wrong with this model. Why?
Do you agree with his argument? Why or why not?
Burke
1. Given Burke's basic assumptions, why does he reject arguments based on absolute,
universal human rights?
2. How does Burke understand the idea of the "social contract"? How does his traditionalist
conservative idea of the social contract differ from a liberal one, like Locke's?
3. What does Burke think are the necessary prerequisites for becoming a member of the
"natural aristocracy"?
6
DeMaistre
1. De Maistre rejects the constitution of 1795, drawn up by the French Revolutionaries, as a
ridiculous and absurd document. What reason(s) does he give for this?
2. Who does de Maistre think are the true founders of nations, and how is this related to his
concepts of a constitution (rightly understood) and the "national soul"?
Oakeshott
1. What is Oakeshott's conception of "human nature"? What are its characteristics? Why
does he think that "friendship" is conservative?
2. On pp. 152-153, Oakeshott argues that "moderation" is essential to conservative politics.
What does he mean by this, and why does he think that it is important?
Kirk
1. Why does Kirk believe that conservatism is not an ideology?
2. What are Kirk's ten conservative principles?
3. Are there certain political ideologies that all traditional American conservatives would be
opposed to, given the principles Kirk outlines? Why?
Bork
1. At the beginning of the essay, Bork relies on the work of thinkers who have developed
the concepts of "defining deviancy up" and "defining deviancy down." What do these
concepts mean, and why does Bork think they are so important?
2. Why does Bork think that a commitment to "radical egalitarianism"---or much greater
equality in society---will culminate in "tyranny"? Indeed, what does he mean by tyranny?
3. What does Bork mean when he calls "hedonism" the true danger of radical
individualism? How does he think modern technology makes this danger worse?
Kristol
1. What reasons does Kristol give for why neoconservatives are so keen to cut taxes, and so
unafraid of large budgetary deficits?
2. What examples does Kristol give to illustrate "the decline of our democratic culture"?
3. Kristol presents the reader with a number of "theses" that underpin the neoconservative
approach to foreign policy. What are they?
Dobson
1. In order to drive home his point about the necessity of religious people entering the
political arena, Dobson gives examples of the debates over slavery, the civil rights civil
rights movement, and the holocaust in World War II. What is his point in invoking these
examples?
7
2. Dobson asks: "What is behind this targeting of kids?" (p. 176). He answers this question
by drawing an analogy between children and "stem cells." What does he mean by this
analogy? Why, on Dobson's account, does understanding children in this way make the
issue of childhood education such a vital one?
3. The relationship between the Religious Right and the Republican Party is sometimes
tense and uneasy. In this essay Dobson attacks and condemns the behavior of President
Bush's first Secretary of State, Colin Powell. What did Powell do that so offended
Dobson?
Antle
1. Antle notes that Frank Meyer made the case for conservative "fusionism." What did
Meyer see as the principles uniting neo-liberal libertarians and traditionalist
conservatives, beyond economics, according to Antle?
2. At the end of the essay, Antle notes that all hope might not be lost for "fusionism," and
that the "conservative crack-up" might be avoided. What does he think prevented an
earlier crack-up?
More
1. On p. 194 declares that when he looks about at the flourishing commonwealths of his
own time, he sees a "conspiracy." What kind of conspiracy is he is talking about?
2. On p. 193, More argues that when there is no private property, people are concerned with
achieving the common good, not their own self-interest. Why does he think that this is
the case?
3. What use do the Utopians make of gold and jewels? What reasons do they give for their
behavior? What have they done with money, and why?
Owen
1. What are the "first principles," or set of assumptions, that Owen makes about human
beings? How do these contrast with the first principles that he sees at the heart of
capitalist society?
2. Owen argues that the principles of cooperative socialism can and should only be
introduced gradually into the capitalist world. Why?
3. Owen believes that his arguments about human nature and character are universally
applicable. Why, then, does he think that so many people disagree with him about those
principles? What does he predict the future will look like if his assumptions about human
nature are wrong?
Marx and Engels
1. On p. 208, Marx declares that the "theory of the Communists may be summed up in the
single sentence: Abolition of private property." In the following two pages, however, he
explains precisely what he does---and does not---mean by that term. What does Marx
8
mean by "private property"? Why does he think that in his own time "private property is
already done away with for nine-tenth of the population" (p. 209)?
2. Perhaps one of the most frequent criticisms of Marx is that communism would never
work because without competition and the profit motive, everyone would become lazy.
On p. 209, Marx explicitly addresses this criticism, and why he thinks it is wrong. What
does he say? Is his assertion plausible? Why or why not?
3. On pp. 209-210, Marx develops his own definition of "ideology" and uses it to criticize
the enemies of communism. What does he mean by this term? How is "ideology" in
Marx's sense related to the ruling class?
Marx
1. Marx says that all human beings enter into "relations of production" that are both
"indispensable and independent of their will." What does he mean by this?
2. Marx claims that "It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on
the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness." Simplified
somewhat, Marx is describing a relationship between the ideas human beings hold in
their heads, and the things they do in the world. What, according to Marx, is that
relationship? Is his view a valid or plausible one? Why or why not?
3. Marx contends that "No social order ever perishes before all the productive forces for
which there is room in it have developed; and new, higher relations of production never
appear before the material conditions of their existence have matured in the womb of the
old society itself." Given Marx's theory of history, what does this mean? Might this give
current-day Marxists some hope for a revival or the Marxian revolutionary project? Why
or why not?
9