Harvey Mansfield, The Right of Revolution Today (from March 2, 2021)

The host, an absent-minded professor, neglected to begin the recording until about fifteen minutes into the conversation with Prof. Mansfield about “The Right of Revolution.”  With attention to his chapter by that title in The Spirit of Liberalism (Harvard, 1978), Mansfield was asked for starters, what is the right of revolution?  He answered by sketching two different arguments behind the right: (1) the argument from consent, developed by John Locke, which begins with equality in the state of nature, out of which by consent men constitute society and then, by further consent, form government, which they are entitled to dissolve and replace if it fails in its purpose, the protection of property; and (2) the argument from wisdom, attributed to Aristotle, who wrote in Politics V that men of prudence or virtue would be most justified in making a revolution but were least likely to do so, as they would probably be few, the sort of claim raised, for example, said Mansfield, by someone who comes upon a motorist whose car has broken down along a highway and, knowing how to get broken-down cars running, takes charge of the situation.  Then the host, James Stoner, asked the following question:

In your essay, “The Right of Revolution,” you discuss the relationship between the people and their leaders, suggesting, I think, that the Revolution was fought in the name of the people but was possible (and maybe only justifiable) because it was led by a few honorable men. What is the relation of the many and the few in a revolution?

Now listen to how Professor Mansfield proceeds, with questions and answers to follow:

Video:https://lsu.zoom.us/rec/share/o_qDncaXNol6jTezJsCrRS2LUdLgVxtkjwjuUZiiCmFaKigksonaJe-_XMoymIa8.r-YM-b3DWNKSh8me