To view videos of the Lipset Lecture from this and past years, please visit. Unlike many postmodern thinkers, Galston continues to advance the Aristotelian point of view that there are fundamental, nonnegotiable features of the human good, and that societies are worse or better depending on their ability to secure these goods. Zilkha Chair in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution and College Park Professor at the University of Maryland. One may speculate that any country even a self-styled nation of immigrants has a finite capacity to absorb new arrivals, and that bumping up against this limit triggers a reaction that detractors condemn as nativist. By the way, if we keep on going, according to a recent report from the Pew Research Center, we will be headed toward 20 percent by 2070 or so.
Conversely, we know all too well the consequences of long-term unemployment: diminished self-respect, increased strife within families, epidemics of substance abuse, blighted neighborhoods, and a corrosive sense of helplessness. Canada doesn't do it, Britain doesn't do it, Australia doesn't do it. Third—I'm going to make myself probably unpopular in this company, but I'm going to say it anyway—we can't deal comprehensively with the causes of populism unless we purge the poison of the immigration issue from our system. It was only the new democracies that got into big trouble, the democracies that had come into being after the First World War. No pluralist can also be a liberal without insisting on limits to permissible diversity. Other ways of life are worthy of respect even if that worthiness is not apparent to us.
What are your comments on that? Let's follow the constitutional road. Galston therefore considers a number of Supreme Court cases that deal with the ability of religious parents to remove their children from classes on evolution, for example, or from public education altogether. The principle of inclusive growth applies across lines of geography as well as class. Throughout the market democracies of the West, remote and less densely populated regions are losing ground to metropolitan centers. Seventy percent favor referendums in which citizens vote directly on major national issues, and 43 percent believe that allowing experts to make decisions about what is best for their countries makes sense. I am not one of the pessimists who believes that liberal democracy is on the ropes or on its last legs. Liberal democrats can adopt diverse views on issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, local traditions, and religion while remaining true to their political creed.
These distinctions also shed light on the populist challenge to liberal democracy. Of our four key concepts, populism accepts the principles of popular sovereignty and democracy, understood in straightforward fashion as the exercise of majoritarian power. What has happened since then? It's an interesting analogy to conjure with. He has been especially influential in studying, advocating, and promoting the engagement of Americans in multiple dimensions of civic life. In reality, it does less work in some of these arguments than Galston supposes. While populists claim the mantle of democracy, a liberal democracy is not, Galston points out, just a democracy, in which the people exercise political power directly.
So populists accept one-half of the liberal democratic package, but they reject the other half. Twenty-five years ago, liberal democracy was on the march. He is thus able to speak with an authority unique amongst political theorists about the implications of advancing certain moral and political values in practice. I'm Joanne Myers, director of Public Affairs programs, and on behalf of the Carnegie Council I would like to thank you for beginning your day with us. His current research focuses on designing a new social contract and the implications of political polarization. For citizens with less formal education, particularly those in rural areas and smaller towns, the dominance of this new elite has led to feelings of marginalization. Formerly the Saul Stern Professor and Dean at the at the , Galston specializes in issues of U.
If you ask why it was designed with multiple power centers, efficiency has nothing to do with it; the fear of tyranny has everything to do with it. Denying the equal dignity and worth of others is self-defeating: Insult does even more than injury to fuel resentment, one of the most dangerous of all political passions. Populism is a threat to liberal democracy because populism is opposed to pluralism, and modern liberal democracy is inherently pluralistic. . Isaiah Berlin first advanced the moral theory of value pluralism in the 1950s and it subsequently was developed by a number of distinguisthed scholars, including Galston.
That history suggests that full employment should be a focus of economic policy. I think it is possible to trace—and I understand that has before me, and to some extent I draw my analysis from his work, but I modify it in various ways. Because very often in these situations facts become a secondary issue and perception is everything. In circumstances of even partial liberty, different social groups will have different interests, values, and origins. Populism draws its strength and the demagoguery draws its strength from the power of the narrative, the power of the story. I should add that although my book is bounded by the United States, the United Kingdom, and Europe west of the Urals, one can make very similar arguments about what is going on in other parts of the world.
The other, competing conception sees liberalism as a legacy of the post-Reformation period. In China, you have a single tribe, essentially the Han tribe. It's hard enough to hold the country together as it is, but fractionalizing into different linguistic communities permanently would be a disaster in my opinion. Because in effect constitutions are the way that peoples bind themselves against future mistakes. Moreover, even in the face of widespread in commensurability, it is still perfectly consistent with pluralism that some political arrangements simply dominate others: they are better with respect to some of these incommensurable values and worse with respect to none. Left unchecked, moves to undermine freedom of the press, weaken constitutional courts, concentrate power in the hands of the executive, and marginalize groups of citizens based on ethnicity, religion, or national origin will undermine liberal democracy from within. Three sources of liberal pluralism; 4.