Thomas Jefferson, who died in 1826,
looms ever larger as a figure of special significance. Americans, of course, are
familiar with Jefferson as an early statesman, author of the Declaration of
Independence, and a high-ranking presidential Founding Father. But there is
another Jefferson less well known. This is the Jefferson who, as the outstanding
American philosopher of democracy, has an increasing appeal to the world’s newly
emerging peoples.
There is no other man in history who
formulated the ideas of democracy with such fullness, persuasiveness, and logic.
Those interested in democracy as a poetical philosophy and system -- even those
who do not accept his postulates or are critical of his solutions -- must reckon
with his thought.
What, then, is his thought, and how much of it
is still relevant under modern conditions
Of all the ideas and
beliefs that make up the political philosophy known as Jefferson democracy,
perhaps three are paramount. These are the idea of equality, the idea of
freedom, and the idea of the people’s control over government. Underlying the
whole, and serving as a major premise, is confidence in man.
To
Jefferson, it was virtually axiomatic that the human being was essentially good,
that he was capable of constant improvement through education and reason. He
believed that "no definite limit could be assigned" to man’s continued progress
from ignorance and superstition to enlightenment and happiness. Unless this kept
in mind, Jefferson cannot be understood properly.
What did he
mean by the concept of equality, which he stated as a "serf-evident" truth
Obviously, he was not foolish enough to believe that all men are equal in size
or intelligence or talents or moral development. He never said that men are
equal, but only that they come into the world with "equal rights". He believed
that equality was a political rather than a biological or psychological or
economic conception. It was a gift that man acquired automatically by coming
into the world as a member of the human community.
Intertwined
with equality was the concept of freedom, also viewed by Jefferson as a "natural
fight." In the Declaration of Independence he stated it as "self-evident" that
liberty was one of the "inherent" and "unalienable rights" with which the
Creator endowed man. "Freedom", he summed up at one lime, "is the gift of
Nature."
What did Jefferson mean by freedom and why was it
necessary for him to claim it as an "inherent" or "natural" right In Jefferson
thought there are two main elements in the idea of freedom. There is, first,
man’s liberty to organize his own political institutions and to select
periodically the individuals to run them. The other freedom is personal.
Foremost in the area of individual liberty, Jefferson believed, was the
untrammeled right to say, think, write, and believe whatever the citizen wishes
-- provided, of course, he does not directly injure his neighbors.
It is because political and personal freedom are potentially in conflict
that Jefferson, in order to make both secure, felt the need to found them on
"natural right". If each liberty derives from an "inherent" right, then neither
could justly undermine the other. Experience of the past, when governments, were
neither too strong for the ruled or too weak to rule them, convinced Jefferson
of the desirability of establishing a delicate natural balance between political
power and personal rights.
This brings us to the third basic
element in the Jeffersonian idea: the people’s control over government. It is
paradoxical that Jefferson, who spent most of his adult years in politics, had
an ingrained distrust of government as such. For the then-existing governments
of Europe, virtually all of them hereditary mortar chies, he had antipathy mixed
with contempt. His mistrust of strong and unchecked government was inveterate.
"I am not," he said, "a friend to a very energetic government. It is always
oppressive."
Government being a necessity for civilized
existence; the question was how it could be prevented from following its
tendency to swallow the rights of the people. Jefferson’s answer to this ancient
dilemma was at variance with much traditional thinking. He began with the
postulate that government existed for the people, and not vice versa; that it
had no independent being except as an instrument of the people; and that it had
no legitimate justifications for existence except to serve the people.
From this it followed, in Jefferson’s view that only the people, and not
their rulers or the privileged classes, could and should be relied upon as the
"safe depositories" of political liberty. This key idea in the Jeffersonian
political universe rested on the monumental assumption that the people at large
had the wisdom, the capability, and the knowledge exclusively to carry the
burden of political power and responsibility. The assumption was, of course,
widely challenged and vigorously denied in Jefferson’s day, but he always
asserted his confidence in it.
Confidence in the people,
however, was not enough, by itself, to serve as a safeguard against the
potential dangers inherent in political power. The people might become corrupted
or demoralized or indifferent. Jefferson believed that the best practice for the
avoidance of tyranny and the preservation of freedom was to follow two main
policies. One was designed to limit power, and the other to control
power.
In order to put limits on power, Jefferson felt, it was
best to divide it by scattering its functions among as many entities as possible
-- among states, countries, and municipalities. In order to keep it in check, it
was to be impartially balanced among legislative, executive, and judicial
branches. Thus, no group, agency, or entity would be able legitimately to
acquire power for abuse. This is, of course, the theory that is embedded in the
Constitution and that underlies the American federal system with its "check and
balance".
For the control of power or, more specifically, the
governmental apparatus itself, other devices had to be brought into play. Of
these, two are of special importance: suffrage and elections.
Unlike many contemporaries, Jefferson believed in virtually universal
suffrage. His opinion was that the universal fight to vote was the only
"rational and peaceable instrument" of free government.
Next to
the right to vote, the system of free elections was the foremost instrument for
control over government. This involved, first, the election by the people of
practically all high government officials, and, secondly, fixed and regular
periods of polling, established by law.
To make doubly sure that
this mechanism would work as an effective control over power, Jefferson
advocated frequent elections and short terms of office, so that the citizens
would be enabled to express their "approbation or rejection" as soon as
possible.
This, in substance, is the Jeffersonian philosophy --
faith in the idea of equality, of freedom, and in the right to and need for
popular control over government.
What, in all this, is relevant
to peoples without a democratic tradition, especially those who have recently
emerged in Asia and Africa The rejection of democratic procedures by some of
these peoples has been disheartening to believers in freedom and democracy. But
it is noteworthy that democratic and parliamentary government has been displaced
in areas where the people had no background in freedom or self-rule, and where
illiteracy is generally high. Even there it is significant that the new
dictatorships are usually proclaimed in the name of the people.
The Jeffersonian assumption that men crave equality and freedom has not
been denied by events. Special conditions and traditions may explain
non-democratic political methods for the achievement of certain purposes, but
these remain unstable wherever the notion of liberty has begun to gain ground.
"The disease of liberty", Jefferson said, "is catching."
The
proof of this is to be found even in such societies as the Spanish and the
Islamic, with their ancient traditions of chieftainships where popular eruptions
against dictatorial rule have had an almost tidal constancy.
But
it is a slow process, as Jefferson well knew, "The ground of liberty", he said,
"is to be gained by inches; we must be contented to secure what we can get, from
time to time, and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time
to persuade men to do even what is for their own good."
Does
Jefferson survive Indeed he does. |
