Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in 21st-Century America - BY GARY HART !!

Barnes & Noble Booksellers ^ | September 17th (appropriately!) | misc book reviews

[Xthe17th]

FELLOW FREEPERS, PLEASE FIRST READ MY COMMENTS BELOW AS A PREFACE

Rarely does scholarship anticipate the most dramatic events of the moment. In this timely work Gary Hart does just that, arguing for the restoration of republican virtues and for homeland security as an important first step. The American democratic republic has from its founding been a paradoxical success. Simultaneously attached to state and national power, citizens' rights and citizens' duties, American democracy has uniquely turned its reliance on consent from the governed into a powerful governing of the consenting.

In a remarkable political feat, America's founders combined mixed government, the language of popular sovereignty and a self-conscious emphasis on checks and balances to forge a republic that has weathered the test of time. The complex realities of the twenty-first century, however, have fundamentally challenged the underpinnings of this enduring American experiment, repeatedly exposing the tensions at the heart of America's mixed system of government.

What then is the nature of an American republic in an age of democracy? How can the democratic values of social justice and equality be balanced with republican values of civic duty and popular sovereignty?

Bringing to light a long-neglected aspect of Thomas Jefferson's political philosophy -- the "ward republic" -- Gary Hart here offers a wholly original blueprint for republican restoration in which every citizen can participate democratically in the governing of his or her own life. Of crucial relevance for contemporary society, including its startlingly prescient plan for homeland security, Restoration of the Republic provides original insights into issues of national urgency as well as the timeless questions that bedevil the American democratic experiment.

and from Kirkus Reviews:

Scholarly dissertation meets populist manifesto in politico Hart's case for increased citizen involvement in government. Disgraced when caught dallying with Donna Rice on the good ship Monkey Business, former US senator and presidential candidate Hart has spent the last decade or so restoring his image as a student and practitioner of statecraft. This phase of that attempt began its life as a doctoral thesis in politics at Oxford University.

Hart's thoughtful critique of the centralized state under which Americans live today is, in the main, free of the me-first libertarianism of so many antifederal treatises. "America in the twenty-first century," he writes, "is a procedural republic deficient in the qualities of civic virtue, duty, citizen participation, popular sovereignty, and resistance to corruption." What is more, he adds, the state actively hinders citizens from exercising the "republican virtues" that informed the Founding Fathers ideas of citizenship, with the result that the citizenry and the state have become remote from each other.

Hart revisits arguments first offered in The Patriot (1996) and The Minuteman (1998) for increasing the involvement of the National Guard (the militia of the Constitution) in matters of national security, an argument given new timeliness in the aftermath of September 11. He also offers a consideration of Thomas Jefferson's idea that the growing union should develop "ward republics" by which power could be devolved and local decision-making encouraged.

Arguing that the nation-state is increasingly ineffectual in the age of transnational economies and roving bands of terrorists, a time "characterized by the erosion of national authority and theweakening of national sovereignty," Hart makes a strong case for the republican virtue of allowing local people to make some if not all of the day-by-day decisions that affect their lives and for the ability of the populace to undertake that hard work. Despite some pie-in-the-sky elements, the argument merits discussion, and the prescriptions are delivered coherently and effectively.

[Xthe17th]

Republican government, sovereignty, the founders, Madison, Jefferson, The Federalist letters, citizen militias, citizenship, states rights...

OK, I realize most of you already have a preconceived opinion of former senator Gary Hart (D-CO). But, consider that all of the above and more is from his recent book, Restoration of the Republic. Trust me. I bought the book and find it very enlightening. IMHO, It looks like Gary really gets it now. Apparently he's been studying our republic and doing doctoral work since his problematic year of 1988. Yeah, I know he's affiliated with the Democrat party. But PLEASE have a little heart (pun intended) and give the guy some credit and buy the book. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT!

[Anti-Bubba182]

I don't feel like contributing today. ~~~ Wait until you see "Unable to locate server"

I don't have money. ~~~Help with the fundraiser. Bump the threads, ping your FRiends.

There's plenty of time to donate. ~~~Bill collectors don't see it that way.

I don't know where to contribute. Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com I've got too many other things to do first. ~~~Don't we all? I can't contribute much, what's five dollars? ~~~If everyone contributed one dollar a month, we'd never have a fundraiser again.

The dog ate my credit card. ~~~Shoot the dog. Just let me finish freeping. ~~~BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Don't wait until it's too late. Do it today. Do it now! Free Republic is funded solely by us. It's up to us to keep it running. Do your part, contribute if you can. Bump the fundraising threads. Help keep this place alive! STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[Xthe17th]

Restoration of the Republic PINGS )))))))

[SamAdams76]

Gary Hart is one of the few Democrats that have half a clue. But his sleazy affair with Donna Rice was incredibly stupid for such an intelligent man. Of course, Bill Clinton makes him look like a monk by comparison.

[Fiddlstix]

Thanks for the Ping
(Btw, welcome to FR)
(I like your screen name)

[RLK]

The logic here eludes me. Hart's logic always did. Hartpence has continually tried to make himself relevant with various ploys. I think I'm being conned.

[Xthe17th]

Thanx, but it's just a new name - I've been FReepin' here since Dr. Winston O'Boogie's Y2K birthday.

[Billy_bob_bob]

Here's the deal on Hart. He's quite bright, and he understands that the best way to become a serious candidate is to actually do the hard work and come up with a coherent platform that will appeal to the average voter. He is good at analyzing the current political situation and coming up with a program and a plan to address whatever current deficiencies exist.

That being said, here's the downside to Gary Hart. He is good at turning his intellectual horsepower loose on a perceived deficiency and coming up with a good, reasonable solution to it. The problem is his motivation. He doesn't have a burning desire to actually improve the nation, he has a burning desire to get elected, and he is able to use his abilities towards that end.

I would like to see him in the race, I think he would bring some interesting ideas and arguments to the race. However, I don't think he has the passion or the deeply seated conviction to actually be able to implement any policy he would propose. Hence, in reality, he would be an ineffective president, a modern "Jerry Brown" type of president for the next generation of bobo liberals.

[Huck]

I certainly welcome seeing republicanism touted, but I don't think Jefferson its finest proponent. Most people ascribe to Jefferson his ill-faited agrarian utopianism. When I think of a champion of republicanism, I think of Madison.

[philman_36]

Hart revisits arguments first offered in The Patriot (1996) and The Minuteman (1998) for increasing the involvement of the National Guard (the militia of the Constitution) in matters of national security, an argument given new timeliness in the aftermath of September 11.
The National Guard is not the militia of the Constitution. They are a "select militia"...The Right to Keep and Bear Arms
"The militia" is not to be confused with "a select militia." A select militia is a group which receives pay, training, and tasks above and beyond what is expected of the general population. The National Guard is an example of a select militia.

[RLK]

Hence, in reality, he would be an ineffective president, a modern "Jerry Brown" type of president for the next generation of bobo liberals.

---------------------------

I've never seen him as anything but another Jerry Brown. He impressed me as a man who wanted to be a hippy but was too old for it and still tried to fake it. I regard him as lacking depth and maturity in all things.

[philman_36]

The Constitutional Militia
The Framers feared two things: large standing armies and select militias. A select militia was an armed group formed not from the entire population of a jurisdiction by public notice, but selected by some method that might make them unrepresentative of the community, and a threat to lawful government or to the community.

[BrucefromMtVernon]

Gary Hart is an insider just like all the rest of the presidential aspirants. Didn't he make noises to the effect that freedom and civil liberties can be traded-off for so-called security? Isn't he a Bilderberger or a Trilateralist or both? This professional politician Gary Hart is bought and paid for.

[Mulder]

Gary Hart is an insider just like all the rest of the presidential aspirants. Didn't he make noises to the effect that freedom and civil liberties can be traded-off for so-called security? Isn't he a Bilderberger or a Trilateralist or both? This professional politician Gary Hart is bought and paid for.

Not only that, but the Soviets admired him, and looked to him as one of several politicians (of both parties, although most were dems) to turn public opinion against President Reagan in the 1980s.

I wonder if the KGB had a codename for him like they did with Cyrus Vance?

[ETERNAL WARMING]

It looks like Gary really gets it now

I'll believe it when I see it. He's putting out feelers as a presidential candidate...could it be that he's just trying to attract all the Conservative Independents that NO ONE speaks for? That'd be my guess.

[Illbay]

EVERYONE'S a Bilderburger, Tri-Lateralist, CFR-er, or worse, except for you and me.

[Mulder]

Hart revisits arguments first offered in The Patriot (1996) and The Minuteman (1998) for increasing the involvement of the National Guard (the militia of the Constitution) in matters of national security

The National Guard ain't the militia.

[nicollo]

Thanks for the ring.

I'm with you on Jefferson, with whom I'm otherwise enamored, where you are not. Jefferson offered no solutions for a fractional society, which Madison uniquely defined as the fulcrum of a working democratic republic, whereby balance prevails over dominant forces.

Hart now questions if the people have been robbed of the "republican virtues" which are the basis, I gather, for popular government.

I'm not convinced that "republican virtue" is necessary to Madison's scheme. Contrary to Hart's complaint, virtue in our republic is precisely in its "procedures," for those rules are what guarantee a fair say to the minority as well as to the majority. Ain't no majority that will allow "procedures" to preempt its hegemony. I can't see in American history that any majority was ever able to successfully redefine those procedures to its sole benefit. Lord knows they've tried, and still do. American history is all about the fight over those fundamental rules, and that fight is entirely empowered by them.

I think Hart is blowing wind.

[MattAMiller]

I've liked just about everything I've been hearing from Hart recently. At the very least having him on the Dem ticket could have some welcome effects by getting both parties to talk about this stuff.

[N. Theknow]

Thanks for the "ping" and book recommendation.

Unfortunately I know Gary Hart.

I'll just wait for the movie.