Editing Classical republicanism (section)

====The Thirteen British Colonies in North America====
{{Main|Republicanism in the United States}}

In recent years a debate has developed over the role of republicanism in the [[American Revolution]] and in the British radicalism of the 18th century. For many decades the consensus was that [[classical liberalism|liberalism]], especially that of [[John Locke]], was paramount and that republicanism had a distinctly secondary role.<ref>See for example {{cite web |first=Vernon L. |last=Parrington |title=Main Currents in American Thought |year= 1927 |url= http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/Parrington/vol1/bk03_01_ch02.html |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060901090727/http://xroads.virginia.edu/~Hyper/Parrington/vol1/bk03_01_ch02.html |url-status= dead |archive-date= September 1, 2006 |access-date= 2013-12-18}}</ref>

The new interpretations were pioneered by [[J.G.A. Pocock]], who argued in ''[[The Machiavellian Moment]]'' (1975) that, at least in the early 18th century, republican ideas were just as important as liberal ones. Pocock's view is now widely accepted.<ref>Shalhope (1982)</ref> [[Bernard Bailyn]] and [[Gordon S. Wood|Gordon Wood]] pioneered the argument that the American founding fathers were more influenced by republicanism than they were by liberalism. Cornell University professor [[Isaac Kramnick]], on the other hand, argues that Americans have always been highly individualistic and therefore Lockean.<ref>Isaac Kramnick, ''Ideological Background'', in Jack. P. Greene and [[Jack Pole|J. R. Pole]], ''The Blackwell Encyclopedia of the American Revolution'' (1994) ch. 9; Robert E. Shallhope, "Republicanism" ibid ch 70.</ref> [[Joyce Appleby]] has argued similarly for the Lockean influence on America.

In the decades before the American Revolution (1776), the intellectual and political leaders of the colonies studied history intently, looking for models of good government. They especially followed the development of republican ideas in England.<ref>Trevor Colbourn, ''The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual Origins of the American Revolution'' (1965) [http://oll.libertyfund.org/Home3/Book.php?recordID=0009 online version]</ref> Pocock explained the intellectual sources in America:<ref>Pocock, ''The Machiavellian Moment'' p. 507</ref>

<blockquote>The Whig canon and the neo-Harringtonians, [[John Milton]], [[James Harrington (author)|James Harrington]] and [[Algernon Sydney|Sidney]], [[John Trenchard (writer)|Trenchard]], [[Thomas Gordon (writer)|Gordon]] and [[Henry St John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke|Bolingbroke]], together with the Greek, Roman, and Renaissance masters of the tradition as far as [[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu|Montesquieu]], formed the authoritative literature of this culture; and its values and concepts were those with which we have grown familiar: a civic and patriot ideal in which the personality was founded in property, perfected in citizenship but perpetually threatened by corruption; government figuring paradoxically as the principal source of corruption and operating through such means as patronage, faction, standing armies (opposed to the ideal of the militia), established churches (opposed to the Puritan and deist modes of American religion) and the promotion of a monied interest&nbsp;– though the formulation of this last concept was somewhat hindered by the keen desire for readily available paper credit common in colonies of settlement. A neoclassical politics provided both the ethos of the elites and the rhetoric of the upwardly mobile, and accounts for the singular cultural and intellectual homogeneity of the Founding Fathers and their generation.</blockquote>

The commitment of most Americans to these republican values made the [[American Revolution]] inevitable. Britain was increasingly seen as corrupt and hostile to republicanism, and as a threat to the established liberties the Americans enjoyed.<ref>Bailyn, Bernard.''The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution'' (1967) {{ISBN?}}</ref>

[[Leopold von Ranke]] in 1848 claimed that American republicanism played a crucial role in the development of European liberalism:<ref>quoted in Becker 2002, p. 128</ref>

<blockquote>By abandoning English constitutionalism and creating a new republic based on the rights of the individual, the North Americans introduced a new force in the world. Ideas spread most rapidly when they have found adequate concrete expression. Thus republicanism entered our Romanic/Germanic world.... Up to this point, the conviction had prevailed in Europe that monarchy best served the interests of the nation. Now the idea spread that the nation should govern itself. But only after a state had actually been formed on the basis of the theory of representation did the full significance of this idea become clear. All later revolutionary movements have this same goal... This was the complete reversal of a principle. Until then, a king who ruled by the grace of God had been the center around which everything turned. Now the idea emerged that power should come from below.... These two principles are like two opposite poles, and it is the conflict between them that determines the course of the modern world. In Europe the conflict between them had not yet taken on concrete form; with the French Revolution it did.</blockquote>