An interesting meeting is going on today up the road from me at the University of Oklahoma. Story here.

Excerpts:

NORMAN, Okla. (AP) - University of Oklahoma President David Boren says a conference in Norman today is intended to send a message that Democrats and Republicans should lead a bipartisan government of national unity.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is among more than one dozen political centrists expected to attend the conference one day before the New Hampshire primary.

Other attendees include former Republican senator John Danforth of Missouri and Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.


One part of me is drawn to this idea: a government by statesmen rather than by party. As I've mentioned, in my political thought, I am a great admirer of Revolutionary-Era Republicanism (the system of ideas underlying a republic): the political thought of the Revolutionary generation. A major idea in that ideology is that citizens should be committed to the Common Good, what's best for all. Also, that politics takes place within a universe governed by laws given by the Creator, in other words, political decisions should conform not only to the natural laws governing politics, but also to the Moral Law. George Washington deplored the idea of political parties. In the 1790s neither the Federalists nor Republicans could or would call themselves political parties. "Parties" were thought to equal "Faction" which meant a group out for themselves, not the Common Good.

But, on the other hand, there is another idea in Revolutionary-Era Republicanism at tension with this: human beings are not to be trusted with power. One major root of republicanism is the Puritan/ Presbyterian/ Separatist Protestant tradition in Britain. Central to the doctrine of these groups is the teaching that mankind has "fallen" into a state of sin. Therefore, in politics vigilance is necessary lest someone, or some group, abuse power because of their fallenness. Madison exemplifies this way of thinking in the establishment of checks-and-balances within our Federal Government, and between the Federal Government and the States. Later, Martin Van Buren (a member of the Kinderhook Dutch Reformed Church, a group very committed to the doctrine of Total Depravity), would justify political parties, in part, because of their ability to maintain vigilance. In a sense, political parties are an extension of Madison's system of dividing power and then limiting the expression of power by having competing groups.

Realistically, we need parties in conflict. Mexico, among other nations, demonstrates that corruption follows the extended rule by one party making itself a monopoly. Even a "bipartisan" group will act like a party.

For some more philosophy, see below.

The Revolutionary Generation strongly believed in the power of the rational mind. What we call the Enlightenment outlook. Therefore, they believed that reflective human beings should be able to perceive and to agree on what is the Common Good. As the Enlightment confidence broke down, and the new movement called Romanticism grew, with its emphasis on the Heart rather than the Head, this confidence was lost. During this latter period we see the explicit party system develop. I do not think that today we have an Enlightenment sense of confidence in rationality, therefore we do not believe that rational people necessarily can come to the same conclusion on the Common Good.

Also, the English-Speaking Enlightenment involved what is called Scottish Common-Sense Philosophy. The central idea is that all human beings possess a sense of reality: Common (to all human beings) Sense (of reality). This Sense of Reality includes the objective reality of Natural Law established by the Creator, including those laws for societies. (We hold these truths to be self-evident. . .) Therefore, all humans should be able to perceive the Common Good and agree on it; if not, they are deluding themselves because of their immorality. Our society, especially in its current multi-cultural form, does not have confidence in a Common Sense.

In other words, we do not have a world-view that could make an appeal to bipartisanship seem like the natural thing to do.