Hostname: page-component-76dd75c94c-28gj6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T09:55:50.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Left Reverberations in the Academy: The Antipluralist Critique of Constitutionalism*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Herman Belz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Every state has a constitution—a body of principles, institutions, laws, and customs that forms the framework of government—but not every state is a constitutional state. The latter is distinguished by a commitment to constitutionalism, which in essence is the idea that political life ought to be carried on according to procedures and rules that paradoxically are in some degree placed beyond politics: procedures in other words that are fundamental. Nothing so positive as a written constitution, but rather the belief that the law as the embodiment of a society's most important values is powerful, characterizes government under the rule of law.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , April 1974 , pp. 265 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Bachrach, Peter, ed., Political Elites in a Democracy (New York, 1971), pp. 4–11Google Scholar; Parenti, Michael, “Power and Pluralism: A View from the Bottom,” Journal of Politics, XXII (08, 1970), pp. 501–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “The Possibilities for Political Change,” Politics and Society, I (11, 1970), pp. 79–90Google Scholar; Benello, C. George and Roussopoulos, Dimitrios, eds., The Case for Participatory Democracy: Some Prospects for a Radical Society (New York, 1971), pp. 4–5Google Scholar: Bay, Christian, “Hayek's Liberalism: The Constitution of Perpetual Privileg,” The Political Science Reviewer, I (Fall, 1971), pp. 93–124Google Scholar; Lockard, Duane, The Perverted Priorities of American Politics (New York, 1971), 18, pp. 314–15.Google Scholar

2 Ricci, David M., Community Power and Democratic Theory: The Logic of Political Analysis (New York, 1971), pp. 62–63Google Scholar; Connolly, William E., ed., The Bias of Pluralism (New York, 1969), pp. 13–17Google Scholar; Bachrach, Peter and Baratz, Morton, “Decisions and Non-Decisions: An Analytic Framework,” American Political Science Review, LVII (12, 1963), pp. 632–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Marcuse, Herbert, “Repressive Tolerance,”Google Scholar in Bachrach, , ed., Political Elites in a Democracy, 138–69Google Scholar; Barber, Benjamin R., Superman and Common Men: Freedom, Anarchy, and the Revolution (New York, 1971), pp. 94–96, 101–02.Google Scholar

4 Thompson, Kirk, “Constitutional Theory and Political Action,” Journal of Politics, XXXI (08, 1969), pp. 655–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wolin, Sheldon S., Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought (Boston, 1960), pp. 388–92, 433–34Google Scholar; Baskin, Darryl, American Pluralist Democracy: A Critique (New York, 1971), pp. 59–73, 96–98, 175–76.Google Scholar

5 Thompson, , “Constitutional Theory and Political Action, pp. 657–61;”Google ScholarArendt, Hannah, The Human Condition (Chicago, 1958), pp. 175–247Google Scholar; Pranger, Robert J., Action, Symbolism, and Order: The Existential Dimensions of Politics in Modern Citizenship (Nashville, 1968), 10, pp. 100–02.Google Scholar

6 Duncan, Graeme and Lukes, Steven, “The New Democracy,” Political Studies, XI (06, 1963), pp. 156–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Davis, Lane, “The Cost of Realism: Contemporary Statements of Democracy,” Western Political Quarterly, XVII (03, 1964), pp. 37–46Google Scholar; Walker, Jack L., “A Critique of the Elitist Theory of Democracy,” American Political Science Review, LX (06, 1966), pp. 285–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ricci, David M., “Democracy Attenuated: Schumpeter, the Process Theory, and American Democratic Thought,” Journal of Politics, XXXII (05, 1970), pp. 239–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Schaar, John H., book review, American Political Science Review, LXIV (12, 1970), p. 1259Google Scholar; Wolin, Sheldon S. and Schaar, John H., “Is a New Politics Possible?” New York Review of Books, XV (09 3, 1970), p. 3Google Scholar; McWilliams, Wilson Carey, “On Violence and Legitimacy,” Yale Law Journal, LXXIX (03, 1970), p. 645.Google Scholar

8 Bay, Christian, “Politics and Pseudopolitics: A Critical Evaluation of Some Behavioral Literature,” American Political Science Review, LIX (03, 1965), pp. 39–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “Foundations of the Liberal Make-Believe: Some Im plications of Contract Theory Versus Freedom Theory,” Inquiry, XIV (Autumn, 1971), pp. 213–37.Google Scholar

9 Power, Paul F., “On Civil Disobedience in Recent American Democratic Thought,” American Political Science Review, LXIV (03, 1970), pp. 35–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “Civil Disobedience as Functional Opposition.” Journal of Politics, XXXIV (02, 1972), pp. 37–55Google Scholar; McWilliams, Wilson Carey, “Civil Disobedience and Contemporary Constitutionalism: The American Case,” Comparative Politics, I (01, 1969), pp. 211–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Arendt, Hannah, “Reflections: Civil Disobedience,” New Yorker (09 12, 1970), pp. 78–105.Google Scholar

10 Power, , “On Civil Disobedience in Recent American Democratic Thought,” p. 47.Google Scholar

11 McWilliams, , “Civil Disobedience and Contemporary Constitutionalism,” p. 222.Google Scholar

12 Bachrach, Peter, The Theory of Democratic Elitism: A Critique (Boston, 1967), pp. 72–104Google Scholar; Pateman, Carole, Participation and Democratic Theory (Cambridge, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, passim; Megill, Kenneth A., The New Democratic Theory (New York, 1970), pp. 89–120.Google Scholar Robert A. Dahl, not otherwise an antipluralist, has endorsed this approach in “Power to the Workers?” New York Review of Books, XV (11 19, 1970), pp. 20–24.Google Scholar See also “The New Corporatism,” the entire issue of the January 1974 Review of Politics, to be published with some additions as a book in the spring of 1974 by the University of Notre Dame Press.

13 Wolin, Sheldon S., “Political Theory as a Vocation,” APSR, LXIII (12, 1969), pp. 1062–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Reid, Herbert, “Contemporary American Political Science,” Midwest Journal of Political Science, XVI (08, 1972), p. 365Google Scholar; Ricci, , Community Power and Democratic Theory, pp. 62–63, 211Google Scholar; Bay, , “Politics and Pseudopolitics”; McCoy, Charles A. and Playford, John, eds., Apolitical Parties: A Critique of Behavioralism (New York, 1967).Google Scholar

14 Wolin, , “Political Theory as a Vocation,” pp. 1070–71.Google Scholar

15 Kariel, Henry S., Open Systems: Arenas for Political Action (Itasca, Ill., 1969), p. 7Google Scholar; Kariel, , “Expanding the Political Present,” APSR, LXIII (09, 1569). pp. 774–75.Google Scholar“Terminal Cases,” The Political Science Reviewer, I (Fall, 1971), pp. 84–85Google Scholar; Wolin, , “Political Theory as a Vocation,” p. 1081.Google Scholar

16 Kariel, , Open Systems, p. 73Google Scholar, and “Terminal Cases.” pp. 85–91Google Scholar; Pranger, . Action, Symbolism, and Order, pp. 6, 29Google Scholar. and The Eclipse of Citizenship: Power and Participation in Contemporary Politics (New York, 1968), pp. 68–72.Google Scholar

17 Barber, , Superman and Common Men, p. 109Google Scholar; Pranger, , Action, Symbolism, and Order, p. 6Google Scholar, and Eclipse of Citizenship, p. 97.Google Scholar

18 Ibid., p. 89; Pranger, , Action, Symbolism, and Order, p. 107Google Scholar; Baskin, Darryl, “American Pluralism: Theory, Practice, and Ideology,” Journal of Politics, XXXII (Fall, 1970), pp. 71–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and American Pluralist Democracy, pp. 173–74Google Scholar; Kettler, David, “The Politics of Social Change: The Relevance of Democratic Approaches,”Google Scholar in Connolly, , ed., The Bias of Pluralism, pp. 213–49Google Scholar; Connolly, , “Liberalism under Pressure,” Polity, II (Spring, 1970), pp. 365–66Google Scholar; Wolin, and Schaar, , “Is a New Politics Possible?” p. 4.Google Scholar

19 Ibid., p. 10; Barber, , Superman and Common Men, pp. 96, 122Google Scholar; Kariel, , “Expanding the Political Present,” p. 773Google Scholar; Reid, , “Contemporary American Political Science,” p. 365.Google Scholar

20 Pranger, , Eclipse of Citizenship, p. 71Google Scholar; Kariel, , “Expanding the Political Present,” p. 774.Google Scholar

21 Pranger, , Eclipse of Citizenship, p. 92Google Scholar; Kariel, , “Expanding the Political Present,” p. 774Google Scholar; James, Dorothy Buckton, “The Limits of Liberal Reform,” Politics and Society, II (Spring, 1972), pp. 309–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 Kariel, , “Expanding the Political Present,” p. 771Google Scholar; Wolin, and Schaar, , “Where We Are Now,” New York Review of Books, XIV (05 7, 1970), p. 3.Google Scholar

23 Wolin, and Schaar, , “Is a New Politics Possible?” 4Google Scholar; McWilliams, , “On Violence and Legitimacy,” pp. 645–46.Google Scholar

24 Wolin, , “Political Theory as a Vocation,” p. 1070Google Scholar; Pranger, , Action, Symbolism, and Order, p. 105Google Scholar; Kariel, , “Expanding the Political Present,” p. 77–4Google Scholar; Zolberg, Aristide R., “Moments of Madness,” Politics and Society, II (Winter, 1972), pp. 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 Diamond, Stanley, “The Rule of Law versus the Order of Custom,” Social Research, XXXVIII (Spring, 1971), pp. 42–72.Google Scholar

26 Thompson, , “Constitutional Theory and Political Action”Google Scholar; Prangpr, , Eclipse of Citizenship, pp. 68–72Google Scholar; Moore, Barrington Jr., Reflections on the Causes of Human Misery and Upon Certain Proposals to Eliminate Them (Boston, 1972), pp. 112–14Google Scholar; Kettler, , “The Politics of Social Change”Google Scholar; Wolin, and Schaar, , “Is a New Politics Possible?” p. 4.Google Scholar

27 Palmer, R. R., The Age of the Democratic Revolution: A Political History of Europe and America 1760–1800 (2 vols., Princeton, 1959–1964) I. pp. 213–35.Google Scholar

28 Belz, Herman, “Changing Conceptions of Constitutionalism in the Era of World War Two and the Cold War,” Journal of American History, LIX (12, 1972), pp. 640–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Lockard, , Perverted Priorities of American Politics, p. 18Google Scholar; Connolly, , ed., The Bias of Pluralism, p. 23Google Scholar; Duncan, and Lukes, , “The New Democracy,” pp. 174–77.Google Scholar The intellectual discrediting of the idea of totalitarianism is described in Burrowes, Robert, “Totalitarianism: The Revised Standard Version,” World Politics, XXI (01, 1969), pp. 272–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Spiro, Herbert J. and Barber, Benjamin R., “Counter-Ideological Uses of ‘Totalitarianism,’” Politics and Society, I (11, 1970), pp. 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 Barber, , Superman and Common Men, p. 122.Google Scholar

31 Lowi, Theodore J., The End of Liberalism: Ideology, Policy, and the Crisis of Public Authority (New York, 1969), pp. 287–314Google Scholar; Friedrich, Carl J., “Bureaucracy Faces Anarchy,” Canadian Public Administration, XIII (Fall, 1970), pp. 219–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tugwell, Rexford G., “Constitution for a United Republics of America,” The Center Magazine, III (09/10, 1970), pp. 24–45Google Scholar; Fluno, Robert Y., “The Floundering Leviathan: Pluralism in an Age of Ungovernability,” Western Political Quarterly, XXIV (09, 1971), pp. 563.Google Scholar

32 How literally unacademic the challenge is can be seen in a sympathetic critic's observation that to achieve true community advocates of the new political theory will not undertake empirical research, but rather will become actively involved in social movements, teach “skills of criticism to large numbers of people,” and engage in “philosophical investigations into the structure of openness, integrity, and self-knowledge.” Weinstein, Michael A., “The Inclusive Polity: New Directions in Political Theory,” Polity, V (Spring, 1973), p. 372.Google Scholar