Search results

Professor Alan Gibson's insightful article contains much that is admirable. He is, in my view, correct in calling scholars' attention—particularly political scientists—to James Madison's often neglected views in his National Gazette essays and the foundational role of public opinion on all governments. In addition, Gibson asserts several claims hoping to establish Madison's credentials as a democratic theorist that should be of interest as well. Specifically, he seeks to accomplish four tasks: (1) "to clarify the enduring debate over the credibility of Madison's democratic credentials"; (2) to "examine Madison's role in justifying, popularizing, and understanding… public opinion"; (3) to "highlight some of Madison's neglected insights into democratic theory, especially his understanding of the problem of collective action, and thereby establish him as a prescient democratic theorist"; and (4) to argue the case that Madison "contributed to a developing tradition of political thought in America upon a broad-based conception of freedom of speech and on the belief that political truths best emerge from the full flow of ideas."While I concur with much of Gibson's position—especially his fourth, indisputable point—I also disagree with him on at least one significant position: James Madison was not a democrat.

Comments on an article by Alan Gibson, "Veneration and Vigilance: James Madison and Public Opinion, 1785-1800." Matthews contends that contrary to Gibson's views, Madison was not a democrat. Madison endorsed a republican form of government, but he looked at the approach of democracy as a political problem whose negative effects needed to be forestalled. Matthews develops his case by highlighting Madison's views on suffrage.