The Populist Theory of the State in Early American Political Thought
| Date | 01 March 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1065912917724004 |
| Published date | 01 March 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2017
Article
Political Research Quarterly
2018, Vol. 71(1) 115 –126
The Populist Theory of the State in
© 2017 University of Utah
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Early American Political Thought
https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912917724004
DOI: 10.1177/1065912917724004
journals.sagepub.com/home/prq
Patrick Peel1
Abstract
That the “state” and the “people” are antonyms of American political thought is a widely held assumption. This essay
argues that it is a mistake—Americans early in their thinking about politics distinguished the state from government and
defined the state as the people themselves. Building on a deep reservoir of political thought pioneered by seventeenth-
century theorists, Americans believed that to raise questions about the state was to inquire about the legitimacy of
governmental action. The essay has three parts. It begins by explicating Quentin Skinner’s recent research on the
concept of the state, supplemented by the work of other scholars, to apply that research to the American context.
The essay then turns to a discussion of the concept of “the people” in the American context to orient the final section
of the paper. Finally, the paper explicates James Wilson and St. George Tucker’s influential and rival populist theories
of the American state. The overall aim of the essay is to stretch our political imagination and thus help us begin to
reimagine the concept of the democratic state in more fruitful ways.
Keywords
state, people, populism, constitutionalism, American political development
In recent years, American political development (APD)
people, but was a term for the people themselves, as an
scholars have put into question the received view that
organizational unity. This populist understanding of “the
early American politics was “anti-statist,” by document-
state” built on a deep reservoir of political thought pio-
ing a vast array of governmental powers and authorities
neered by seventeenth-century theorists, who viewed
in early America (Balogh 2015, 9; King and Lieberman
self-government as bound up with problems of account-
2016, 234–35; Novak 2008). But a no less significant
ability and the vexing issue of how “the people” could be
revision is needed to the received view of early American
said to control their agents, such that the people them-
political thought, that the word “state” was absent from
selves might be said to direct their own government. To
its lexicon.1 This was the view, for instance, of J. G. A.
raise questions about the nature of the state, in contrast to
Pocock (1988, 57), who puzzled on “the problem of the
the nature of government, was to inquire about the collec-
word ‘state’” (as in the “United States”), finding that in
tive life of the polity as the origin and backbone of legiti-
the eighteenth century the word “state” was not yet a term
mate or illegitimate governmental action.
for political associations in the concrete or abstract, and
To advance my argument, I shall proceed in three
that not until the nineteenth century did “the state”
steps. First, I will briefly explicate the outlines of Quentin
become an object of political study. “[T]he Founders,”
Skinner’s work on the state, supplemented by the work of
Pocock (1988, 57) concludes, “were not familiar with
other scholars, to situate the claims that follow about the
it.”2 The work of other scholars, such as Daniel Rodgers
populist theory of the state in early America. Second, I
(1987, 146), seemed to confirm this, arguing that when
will briefly discuss the concept of “the people” in the
the concept of the state was finally employed in the nine-
American context to orient the paper’s discussion of two
teenth century as a feature of American political thought,
leading authors on the American state, James Wilson and
it was employed as “the antonym of the People” and was
St. George Tucker. Third, and finally, I will turn to the
thus “a formidable barrier to popular claims to rights.”3
Against this view, I will show that early American
political thinking did make use of the concept of the state.
1University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
However, the term had a very different meaning than it
does today, where it is commonly used as a synonym for
Corresponding Author:
Patrick Peel, Department of Political Science, University of Michigan,
“government.” For early Americans, by contrast, “the
5700 Haven Hall, 505 South State Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
state” was not a governmental power set against the
Email: pmpeel@umich.edu
116
Political Research Quarterly 71(1)
works of these authors, Wilson and Tucker, who provide
the term state began to be used with increasing confidence to
rival accounts of the populist theory of the state.
refer to a specific type of union or civil association, that of a
universitas or community of people living subject to the
sovereign authority of a recognized monarch or ruling group.
Skinner’s Genealogy of the State
(Skinner 2009, 327, emphasis in original)
Skinner’s recent work on the state marks an innovation in
our understanding of the concept. That research presents a
The term most widely used to refer to this form of union
richer and more complex account of the concept of “the
underlying civil government was “body politic.” This
state,” tracing the origins of the concept back to the six-
image of the body politic, then, gave rise to two contrast-
teenth century rather than relying on nineteenth-century
ing visions of the universitas. The first Skinner desig-
interpretations, as has previous scholarship. Moreover, it
nates as the absolutist theory of the state and the second
renders problematic the Weberian neutral theory of the
as the populist theory of the state.
state on which APD students so commonly rely, highlight-
The absolutist theory of the state was the view that
ing its descriptive and normative inadequacy for under-
came to predominate under the influence of Jean Bodin in
standing American political thought and development.
his The Six Bookes of a Commonweale (translated from
Indeed, as Skinner’s analysis underscores, the neutral
the French in 1606), according to which a monarchy was
definition of the state as an agency that wields a monopoly
a type of public authority in which “‘all the people in gen-
of legitimate force over some territory falls short of illu-
erall, and (as it were) in one bodie’ swear ‘faithfull alle-
minating the concept, because to understand “the state”
ageance to one soveraigne monarch’ as head of state”
requires a clear sense of whose actions rightly count as
(Skinner 2009, 329). As phrased by King James I, “our
actions of that specified agency. The latter enmeshes us in
sovereignty declar[es] that we as your sovereign are your
deeply normative discussions about the meaning of the
head and thus head of the whole body of the state”
concept of the state, disputes which cannot be set aside if
(Skinner 2007). The clear implications of this view are
we wish to explore the concept of agency at the heart of
that, first, bodies politic as states are incapable of action
the neutral definition itself. “To investigate the genealogy
in the absence of a sovereign head to direct them, and
of the state,” Skinner (2009, 326) thus argues,
that, second, a “body politick” cannot have been “the
original possessor of sovereignty, for it amounts to noth-
is to discover that there has never been any agreed concept
ing more than ‘a heedless and headless multitude’ with-
to which the word state has answered . . . As the genealogy
out direction or government” (Skinner 2009, 331). Under
of the state unfolds, what it reveals is the contingent and
this view, then, “princes and other governors,” as Skinner
contestable character of the concept, the impossibility of
(2009, 329) notes, have “an obligation not to inconve-
showing that it has any essence or natural boundaries.
nience but to protect both ‘the subjects in particular’ and
‘the whole bodie of the state.’”
Neutral definitions of the state flatten the contesting
Once specified, this absolutist theory drew two par-
visions that animate the concept, impairing our ability to
ticularly forceful lines of attack, both of which challenged
“re-imagine the concept in different and perhaps more
the premise that the union of the people could not itself
fruitful ways” (Skinner 2009, 326).
possess the supreme power because said people were no
The full dimensions of Skinner’s genealogy need not
more than a passive and obedient community living under
be laid out here. Still, several features should be kept in
a sovereign head. These contesting arguments claimed
mind if we are to excavate populist theories of the state in
the term state as referring to a civic union, a body or soci-
early American political thought. Furthermore, while
ety of people united under government, in which “the
Skinner is quite effective in opening up theoretical
body of the people” was seen to possess sovereignty
debates about the early American conception of the state,
itself, identifying the people as active agents in their own
for the purposes of this essay his genealogy proves thin in
government.4
significant places and thus needs to be fleshed out by
First, a group of writers interested in the taxonomy of
incorporating the work of other...
To continue reading
Request your trial