Dr. Michael Dale, Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Hampden-Sydney College
For the ancient Greeks, character development was central to civic virtue. A person could not be a good citizen by simply showing up to vote on an appointed day, or volunteering a certain amount of his time. He also needed to have virtuous character. To cultivate virtuous character, Aristotle emphasized the importance of individual choice. We all have character traits that we can choose to cultivate. Just as we can make the choice to go to the gym and become healthier, we can make the choice to act virtuously in situations that call for virtuous action. And once we make the choice to act virtuously, it will become easier to act virtuously in the future, for our virtuous character traits will be more strongly developed. This perspective seems to have been lost in many contemporary discussions of civic virtue. However, it does seem important for a well-functioning republic. If citizens are virtuous, they are more likely to make conscientious choices about the policies and leaders they are asked to vote on. Such leaders are also likely to be more virtuous, as they will reflect the needs and desires of the citizens. Accordingly, it is crucial to educate younger generations on the importance of virtue, and to show them ways in which they can develop their virtuous character traits.
Dr. John Coombs, Professor of History at Hampden-Sydney College
The concept of civic virtue articulated by a majority of the participants in the political debates of the American Revolutionary era bore only passing resemblance to the assorted ideals they had inherited from the classical republicanism, the civic humanist writers of the Renaissance, Enlightenment political philosophers, and the polemical tracts of early eighteenth-century English “Commonwealthmen.” While many, even most, of the country’s founding generation of leaders were steeped in and influenced by this rich literature, few would have agreed with Virginian Carter Braxton’s contention that “public virtue” meant “a disinterested attachment to the public good, exclusive and independent of all private and selfish interest.” Although public virtue was universally conceived as essential to the viability of republican forms of government, contemporary commentators were under no illusion that human beings could be relied upon to act selflessly and routinely sacrifice their private concerns and desires for the cause of the greater good. As James Madison famously noted in Federalist 51, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” However, far from being perceived as oppositional to “public spiritedness” or “public regardedness,” as it was often termed, an individual’s defense of their liberties and interests was considered a crucial aspect of republican citizenship. Indeed, in a society of equal citizens, the pursuit of self-interest was considered an essential means through which a person contributed to public virtue, as long as that pursuit was undertaken in the knowledge that fellow citizens would do likewise and coupled with a willingness to accept the community’s decisions in adjudicating and balancing among competing or conflicting interests as articulated through government action and the rule of law. The pursuit of self-interest only became destructive and “selfish” when citizens wholly immersed themselves in their own concerns and neglected their responsibility to attend to public affairs. “Self-immersion” of this sort was thought to pose a mortal danger to republics, which required that its members be vigilant in the attention they paid to public life in order to remain sound and secure. In this sense, personal interests need to be sublimated to public needs, since in times of peace the community might call upon individuals to set aside their private pursuits in order to participate in the conduct of public business, or in times of war to sacrifice their property, or even their lives, in defense of the polity.
Dr. Richard Burke, Assistant Professor of Government & Foreign Affairs at Hampden-Sydney College
Civic virtue requires citizens to take actions that are motivated by the common good, which transcends both personal interests, as well as the interests of one’s political party. One major challenge to civic virtue in the United States today is partisan polarization. The divide between the two political parties has grown dramatically over the past half-century. Political partisanship is the strongest predictor of political action among both officeholders and the general public. Research consistently finds that Republicans and Democrats not only disagree on matters of public policy, they also dislike each other as people. In an era of partisan polarization, the call of civic virtue asks something of both political leaders and of ordinary citizens. For political leaders, civic virtue asks them to campaign and govern with the good of the nation in mind. Rhetorically, political leaders should emphasize what unites us and refuse to villainize members of the opposing party. In governance, political leaders need to be open to compromise, even if it displeases their most ardent supporters. For citizens, civic virtue asks them to reevaluate the ways they engage with politics. Americans have come to think of political engagement as plugging into one’s trusted news source and voting in national elections. It is important that we seek out different perspectives. This may involve changing one’s news habits or seeking a constructive conversation with someone who has different political views. It is also important that we consider more active ways of engaging with politics. While voting is a key component of democratic society, it is a passive activity and unlikely to move us beyond our personal and partisan interests. Civic virtue invites us to become active members of our local, state, and national communities.