The Spirit/Form Tradition inPolitical Thought.

In the history of political thought, there is a discernible tradition that has long made a distinction between the form and spirit of government. This decisively European (particularly French) tradition is best represented by Montesquieu, but also includes the likes of Hegel, Rousseau and Tocqueville. The central claim of this tradition is that types of governments have both a universal and a particular form. The constitutional (institutional and procedural forms) should be particular to contexts, but should still embody the universal principles that define the form, as that designates the type of government—e.g. a democracy as opposed to a monarchy. Yet, they suggest that for the constitutional form or type to be meaningful and descriptive of the society/country, it is necessary that the principles that underlie this type of government be evident in the mores, manners, and behavior (the spirit) of its people. In other words, the forms are a) only as meaningful and accurate as a description and, more importantly, b) only likely to be successful to the extent that they become embodied in the spirit of the people. In this paper, I will first fully develop the core arguments of this tradition in political thought. As I reconstruct the core content of this tradition, I will trace it through each of theorists cited above. Then, I will argue that this tradition has its orgins in Aristotle, who argued that the legislator should model the educative process after the fact that the sociological evolution of the individual is based first on nature, then on habit, and finally on reason. After having reconstructed this tradition and demonstrated its connection to Aristotelian thought, I will then suggest that the spirit/form tradition is a valuable theoretical tool. I argue that the spirit/form tradition establishes criteria by which a political scientist can: a) Evaluate the stability of a regime type within a country b) Evaluate the legitimacy of a government within a country and c) Suggest what alternative types of government might be better suited for a country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]