When virtue is banished, ambition invades the hearts of those who are disposed to receive it, and avarice possesses the whole community.
[Lorsque cette vertu cesse, l’ambition entre dans les cœurs qui peuvent la recevoir, & l’avarice entre dans tous.]
Charles-Lewis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755) French political philosopher
Spirit of Laws [The Spirit of the Laws; De l’esprit des lois], Book 3, ch. 3 (3.3) (1748) [tr. Nugent (1750)]
(Source)
Speaking of republics. See notes here on Montesquieu's meaning of "virtue": political virtue of love of country and of equality.
(Source (French)). Other translations:When that virtue ceases, ambition enters those hearts that can admit it, and avarice enters them all.
[tr. Cohler/Miller/Stone (1989)]When that virtue ceases, ambition enters the hearts that can receive it, and avarice enters them all.
[tr. Stewart (2018)]
Quotations about:
civic virtue
Note not all quotations have been tagged, so Search may find additional quotes on this topic.
There need not be much integrity for a monarchical or despotic government to maintain or sustain itself. The force of the laws in the one, and the prince’s ever-raised arm in the other, can rule or contain the whole. But in a popular state there must be an additional spring, which is virtue.
[Il ne faut pas beaucoup de probité, pour qu’un gouvernement monarchique, ou un gouvernement despotique, se maintiennent ou se soutiennent. La force des loix dans l’un, le bras du prince toujours levé dans l’autre, reglent ou contiennent tout. Mais, dans un état populaire, il faut un ressort de plus, qui est la VERTU.]
Charles-Lewis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755) French political philosopher
Spirit of Laws [The Spirit of the Laws; De l’esprit des lois], Book 3, ch. 3 (3.3) (1748) [tr. Cohler/Miller/Stone (1989)]
(Source)
In his Preface, Montesquieu clarifies:For the understanding of the first four books of this work, it must be noted that what I call virtue in the republic is love of the homeland, in other words love of equality. It is not a moral virtue, nor a Christian virtue, it is political virtue; and this virtue is what drives republican government, as honor is what drives monarchy. I have therefore called political virtue love of the homeland and of equality.
(Source (French)). Other translations:There is no great share of probity necessary to support a monarchical or despotic government: the force of laws, in one, and the prince’s arm, in the other, are sufficient to direct and maintain the whole. But, in a popular state, one spring more is necessary, namely, virtue.
[tr. Nugent (1750)]It does not take much probity for a monarchical or despotic government to maintain or sustain itself. The force of the laws in the first, and the ever-threatening arm of the prince in the second, determine or contain everything. But a popular state needs to be driven by something more, which is VIRTUE.
[tr. Stewart (2018)]
The Spirit of Commerce, Madam, which even insinuates itself into Families, and influences holy Matrimony, and thereby corrupts the Morals of Families as well as destroys their Happiness, it is much to be feared is incompatible with that purity of Heart, and Greatness of soul which is necessary for an happy Republic.
John Adams (1735–1826) American lawyer, Founding Father, statesman, US President (1797–1801)
Letter (1776-04-16) to Mercy Otis Warren
(Source)
For of course it is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen.
[οὐ γὰρ ἴσως ταὐτὸν ἀνδρί τ᾽ ἀγαθῷ εἶναι καὶ πολίτῃ παντί.]
Aristotle (384-322 BC) Greek philosopher
Nicomachean Ethics [Ἠθικὰ Νικομάχεια], Book 5, ch. 2 (5.2.11) / 1130b.29 (c. 325 BC) [tr. Thomson (1953)]
(Source)
Aristotle suggests the distinction comes when a regime is corrupt or unjust, at which point carrying out the duties of a good citizen (supporting the regime) may not align with an individual's virtues.
See also Aristotle, Politics.
(Source (Greek)). Alternate translations:For perhaps it is not the same thing to be a good man, and a good citizen.
[tr. Taylor (1818), 5.2]It may be it is not the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen in every case.
[tr. Chase (1847), 5.4]The perfection of the man is not perhaps in all cases identical with the perfection of the citizens.
[tr. Williams (1869), 5.2]It is possibly not the same thing in all cases to be a good man and to be a good citizen.
[tr. Welldon (1892), 5.5]It is possible that to be a good man is not the same as to be a good citizen of any state whatever.
[tr. Peters (1893), 5.2]Perhaps it is not the same to be a good man and a good citizen of any state taken at random.
[tr. Ross (1908), 5.2]It would seem that to be a good man is not in every case the same thing as to be a good citizen.
[tr. Rackham (1934), 5.2.11]For being a good man is presumably not in every case the same as being a good citizen.
[tr. Reeve (1948)]For perhaps to be a good man is not the same as to be a good citizen in every case.
[tr. Apostle (1975)]Presumably it is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen.
[tr. Thomson/Tredennick (1976)]For, presumably, being a good man is not the same as being every sort of good citizen.
[tr. Irwin/Fine (1995)]For, presumably, being a good person is not in every case the same as being a good citizen.
[tr. Crisp (2000)]For perhaps it is not the same thing in every case to be a good man and to be a good citizen.
[tr. Bartlett/Collins (2011)]
Others again who say that regard should be had for the rights of fellow-citizens, but not of foreigners, would destroy the universal brotherhood of mankind; and, when this is annihilated, kindness, generosity, goodness, and justice must utterly perish; and those who work all this destruction must be considered as wickedly rebelling against the immortal gods. For they uproot the fellowship which the gods have established between human beings.
[Qui autem civium rationem dicunt habendam, externorum negant, ii dirimunt communem humani generis societatem; qua sublata beneficentia, liberalitas, bonitas, iustitia funditus tollitur; quae qui tollunt, etiam adversus deos immortales impii iudicandi sunt. Ab iis enim constitutam inter homines societatem evertunt.]
Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC) Roman orator, statesman, philosopher
De Officiis [On Duties; On Moral Duty; The Offices], Book 3, ch. 6 (3.6) / sec. 28 (44 BC) [tr. Miller (1913)]
(Source)
(Source (Latin)). Alternate translation:Others there are, who are ready to confess that they ought to bear such a regard to fellow-citizens, but by no means allow of it in relation to strangers: now these men destroy that universal society of all mankind, which, if once taken away, kindness, liberality, justice, and humanity must utterly perish; which excellent virtues whoever makes void, is chargeable with impiety towards the immortal gods; for he breaks that society which they have established and settled amongst men.
[tr. Cockman (1699)]They, too, who hold that a regard ought to be paid to our fellow-citizens, but deny it to foreigners, break asunder the common society of mankind, by which beneficence, liberality, goodness, justice, are entirely abolished. They who destroy these virtues, are to be charged with impiety towards the immortal gods. For, by such principles, they subvert established intercourse among men.
[tr. McCartney (1798)]They, again, who say that a regard ought to be had with fellow citizens, but deny that it ought to foreigners, break up the common society of the human race, which being withdrawn, beneficence, liberality, goodness, justice are utterly abolished. But they who tear up these things should be judged impious, even towards the immortal gods; for they overturn the society established by them among men.
[tr. Edmonds (1865)]Those, too, who say that account is to be taken of citizens, but not of foreigners, destroy the common sodality of the human race, which abrogated, beneficence, liberality, kindness, justice, are removed from their very foundations. And those who remove them are to be regarded as impious toward the immortal gods; for they overturn the fellowship established among men by the gods.
[tr. Peabody (1883)]Others again who deny the rights of aliens while respecting those of their countrymen, destroy the universal brotherhood of mankind which involves in its ruin beneficence, liberality, goodness and justice. To destroy these virtues is to sin against the immortal gods. It is to subvert that society which the gods established among men.
[tr. Gardiner (1899)]In the same way, those who say that one standard should be applied to fellow citizens but another to foreigners, destroy the common society of the human race. When that disappears, good deeds, generosity, kindness, and justice are also removed root and branch. We must draw the conclusion that people who do away with these qualities are disrespectful even against the immortal gods. They destroy the cooperation among men which the gods instituted.
[tr. Edinger (1974)]
I don’t think.
I don’t know.
I don’t care.
I am too busy.
I leave well enough alone.
I have no time to read and find out.
I am not interested.William J. H. Boetcker (1873-1962) German-American religious leader, author, public speaker [William John Henry Boetcker]
“Seven National Crimes”
For politics ought to be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free people and who would preserve what is good and fruitful in our national heritage. Politics must be the concern of every citizen who wants to see our national well-being increased and our international leadership strengthened. In that combined sense, politics is the noblest of professions. In the ranks of that kind of politics, every American should be enrolled.
Dwight David Eisenhower (1890-1969) American general, US President (1953-61)
Speech, Republican Lincoln Day Dinners (28 Jan 1954)
(Source)
Often paraphrased: "Politics ought to be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free men."
The speech was filmed for the Republican National Committee and distributed to state and local committees to be shown at the Lincoln Day dinners.
But freedom isn’t free. It shouldn’t be a bragging point that, “Oh, I don’t get involved in politics,” as if that makes someone cleaner. No, that makes you derelict of duty in a republic. Liars and panderers in government would have a much harder time of it if so many people didn’t insist on their right to remain ignorant and blindly agreeable.
William "Bill" Maher (b. 1956) American comedian, political commentator, critic, television host.
When You Ride Alone You Ride With Bin Laden (2002)
Public Virtue cannot exist in a Nation without private, and public Virtue is the only Foundation of Republics. There must be a possitive Passion for the public good, the public Interest, Honour, Power, and Glory, established in the Minds of the People, or there can be no Republican Government, nor any real Liberty. And this public Passion must be Superiour to all private Passions. Men must be ready, they must pride themselves, and be happy to sacrifice their private Pleasures, Passions, and Interests, nay their private Friendships and dearest Connections, when they Stand in Competition with the Rights of society.
John Adams (1735–1826) American lawyer, Founding Father, statesman, US President (1797–1801)
Letter (1776-04-16) to Mercy Otis Warren
(Source)
Adams went on to express doubt whether an American nation could live up to such ideals.
To me, the democratic system represents man’s best and brightest hope of self-fulfillment, of a life rich in promise and free from fear; the one hope, perhaps, for the complete development of the whole man. But I know, and learn more clearly every day, that we cannot keep our system strong and free by neglect, by taking it for granted, by giving it our second-best attention. We must be prepared, like the suitor in The Merchant of Venice — and, I might point out, the successful suitor — to give and hazard all we have.
Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) First Lady of the US (1933–1945), politician, diplomat, activist
Essay (1961-04), “What Has Happened to the American Dream?” Atlantic Monthly
(Source)
The Stoics could only advise the wise man to hold aloof from politics, keeping the unwritten law in his heart. But when Christ said: “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s,” those words, spoken on His last visit to the Temple, three days before His death, gave to the civil power, under the protection of conscience, a sacredness it had never enjoyed, and bounds it had never acknowledged; and they were the repudiation of absolutism and the inauguration of freedom.
John Dalberg, Lord Acton (1834-1902) British historian, politician, writer
Speech (1877-02-28), “The History of Freedom in Antiquity,” Bridgenorth Institute
It is manifestly possible to be a good citizen without possessing the goodness that constitutes a good man.
[ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἐνδέχεται πολίτην ὄντα σπουδαῖον μὴ κεκτῆσθαι τὴν ἀρετὴν καθ᾽ ἣν σπουδαῖος ἀνήρ, φανερόν.]
Aristotle (384-322 BC) Greek philosopher
Politics [Πολιτικά], Book 3, ch. 4 / 1276b.34 [tr. Rackham (1932)]
(Source)
Note that a similar passage can be found at 1277a12.
(Source (Greek)). Alternate translations:An excellent citizen does not possess that virtue which constitutes a good man.
[tr. Ellis (1776)]It is quite possible that a citizen, though good as such, should not possess the excellence which characterizes a the good man.
[tr. Bolland (1877)]The good citizen need not of necessity possess the virtue which makes a good man.
[tr. Jowett (1885)]That it is possible for a citizen to be excellent yet not possess the virtue in accordance with which he is an excellent man, therefore, is evident.
[tr. Lord (1984)]Evidently, then, it is possible to be a good citizen without having acquired the virtue expressed by a good man.
[tr. Reeve (1998)]