Polls show Americans uneasy about democracy before 250th anniversary

Many Americans are approaching the country’s 250th anniversary with doubts about the health of its democracy. An Elon University poll found that 69% of respondents believe the signers of the Declaration of Independence would feel more disappointment than pride about American democracy today.

Other surveys point to similar unease. Gallup has reported confidence in public institutions at historically low levels, and the latest Harvard Youth Poll found that only a quarter of 18- to 29-year-olds feel hopeful about America’s future.

The Chapman University Survey of American Fears found that, for the 10th year in a row, Americans named corrupt government officials as their top fear, above financial collapse or serious illness affecting a loved one. Pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson wrote in The New York Times that Americans increasingly see domestic political violence, polarization, corruption and cultural dysfunction as part of the threats facing the country.

Why Montesquieu matters to the founders

Robert A. Ballingall, an associate professor of political science at the University of Maine, argues in The Conversation that the French philosopher Montesquieu offers a useful way to understand the country’s current anxiety. Ballingall studies constitutional government and says Montesquieu’s influence on the American founding is often underappreciated.

Montesquieu, an 18th-century philosopher and aristocrat, published “The Spirit of the Laws” in 1748. According to Ballingall, Montesquieu’s work had major standing among the founders; at the Constitutional Convention, only the Bible was quoted more often.

James Madison called Montesquieu “the oracle who is always consulted and cited” on the separation of powers. Ballingall also cites research showing that no author appeared more often in American political writings from 1760 to 1805.

Montesquieu is best known in U.S. constitutional thought for arguing that political power should be divided among branches of government. Ballingall says the deeper point was Montesquieu’s theory of liberty: people are free when they feel secure from arbitrary power, whether from other citizens or from government officials.

Liberty as public confidence

In “The Spirit of the Laws,” Montesquieu described political liberty as the “tranquility of mind” that comes from a person’s belief in their own safety. Ballingall writes that this was not a claim that liberty means doing whatever one wants, because one person’s unchecked actions can threaten others.

Montesquieu’s view, as Ballingall explains it, required laws that protect people from arbitrary decisions by rulers or magistrates. If officials can act outside predictable legal limits, citizens cannot feel secure, even if those actions are aimed at someone else.

Ballingall says Montesquieu also warned that free institutions are not enough on their own. Citizens must believe those institutions serve their freedom; otherwise, constitutional limits can come to feel like obstacles to moral or political goals.

Montesquieu called that danger a tyranny “of opinion,” according to Ballingall. In that situation, a country may have a free constitution on paper while its cultural divisions make people feel that the law blocks what they believe justice or duty demands.

Polarization and constitutional strain

Ballingall writes that recent calls from across the political spectrum for major constitutional change show the pressure on U.S. norms. He points to proposals to expand the Supreme Court, ignore some of its rulings, and abolish the Senate or the Electoral College.

From Montesquieu’s perspective, Ballingall argues, polarization makes that pressure worse because each party’s agenda can feel threatening to the other side’s core values. He says liberty is harder to sustain when citizens want political power used to force contested moral views on opponents.

Ballingall’s conclusion is that the United States needs a civic culture more willing to tolerate moral disagreement and less eager to use government power against political rivals. Without that, he argues, distrust in government and among citizens will keep pulling the country away from the liberty its founders sought to secure.

This story draws on original reporting from Fortune.