Radical Moderation
Radical Moderation
Renaissance theories of diplomacy seek to address the tension between the ambassador’s dual roles as mediator between princes and representative of one prince exclusively. Michel de Montaigne transposes this concern onto the question of how to negotiate the resolution of civil conflict when one is a partisan within the conflict. In his view, moderation is the capacity that this activity demands. This is a deeply paradoxical virtue: if one is to be moderate and not overly hostile toward all signs of partisanship, one must retain some contact with partisan extremes. Montaigne argues that one should handle this paradox by acknowledging the customary, habitual aspects of one’s partisan attachments, so that one may affirm them without incapacitating oneself politically. The chapter then compares Montaigne’s conception of moderation with William Connolly’s conception of “bicameral citizenship,” which also seeks to enable non-incapacitating partisanship.
Keywords: Michel de Montaigne, moderation, negotiation, William Connolly, partisanship, citizenship
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
