Muddling through with democratic capitalism

I started to write about democratic capitalism in the 1970s in an effort to explain to my overseas friends (and to myself) just what the American new order is (i.e., What is this Novus Ordo Seclorum?). One could not learn this simply by reading the political philosophers and political scientists, who didn’t write much about economics or culture. Nor could it be learned by reading only the economists, who for the most part wrote not nearly enough about the polity, the presence (or absence) of the rule of law, natural rights, and a culture of creativity. Nor did the literary figures and humanists seem to explore the new model of society in which it was their privilege to dwell (a society with heretofore “no model on the face of the globe,” as Madison put it in Federalist 14 ). Therefore, it seemed, a lot of work remained to be done to put into words the nature of our tripartite system: a culture, a polity, an economy—all three in a distinctive framework of checks and balances, and obligated to respect the natural rights of every man and woman and the common good. Blessedly, our founders stressed three terms with not quite identical meanings: the public interest, public good, or general welfare. They also recognized, with originality among political actors, the debilitating daily consequences of human sin (o en overlooked by utopians), desperately in need of constant, vigilant correction.

The underlying anthropology of the Novus Ordo held that there is enough sin in humans to make the survival of liberty problematic, but also enough virtue to give a regime of liberty a chance, albeit a precarious chance. It might even be necessary to merely muddle through. — from The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism: Thirty Years Later (free download here)