John Adams' Thoughts on Political Science and Government

“While all other sciences have advanced, that of a government is at a stand; little better understood; little better practised than 3 or 4 thousand years ago” - John Adams.

John Adams: A Pioneer of Political Thought

As the second president of the United States and a prominent figure in the American Revolution, John Adams left an indelible mark on political thought. Born in Massachusetts and educated at Harvard, Adams began his career as a lawyer, quickly establishing himself as a passionate advocate for liberty and justice. His candid critiques of British authority and taxation resonated with many, earning him a reputation as a courageous patriot. Over his political career, Adams transitioned from a member of the Massachusetts Assembly to the presidency, facing challenges such as the undeclared war with France during his term. Despite his efforts, he lost re-election in 1800. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson in 1813, Adams expressed his concerns about the stagnation of political science, stating, “While all other Sciences have advanced, that of Government is at a Stand; little better understood; little better practised now than 3 or 4 thousand years ago.” This raises a profound question: how much has the concept of government truly evolved since its origins in ancient Greece?

The Stagnation of Political Science

Adams’ assertion that political science lags behind other fields prompts us to explore the progress of governance compared to the rapid advancements in other scientific domains. Modern sciences play a critical role in our survival, providing energy, food, and insights into our existence. This rapid development, particularly since the Renaissance, has transformed our understanding of the world and our place within it. In contrast, political structures seem to have evolved at a glacial pace, often resisting change.

Here is a brief comparison of advancements in various scientific fields versus political governance:

This comparison highlights the stark contrast between the explosive growth of scientific knowledge and the relative stagnation of political structures.

The Evolution of Dictatorship

Throughout history, the concept of dictatorship has undergone significant transformations. Aulus Postumius Albinus is often credited with establishing one of the earliest forms of dictatorship in the Roman Empire, where absolute power was granted to a single leader during times of crisis. Over time, however, the nature of dictatorship has shifted dramatically, with figures like Napoleon Bonaparte, Adolf Hitler, and Joseph Stalin redefining what it means to hold power. Today, we see various forms of dictatorship in countries like Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe and North Korea under Kim Jong-Un, where the populace often has little to no political freedom.

Contrasting these modern dictators with their ancient predecessors reveals how far the concept has strayed from its original intentions. The Romans envisioned a temporary concentration of power during emergencies, while modern dictatorships often result in prolonged and oppressive rule.

Democracy: A Timeless Concept

In stark contrast to the evolution of dictatorship, democracy has maintained its core principles since its inception over 8,000 years ago. Cleisthenes, an Athenian statesman, is credited with laying the groundwork for democracy by advocating for equal political rights among citizens, regardless of their social class. Today’s democracies, while varied in implementation, retain this foundational principle of citizen participation in governance.

However, the practice of democracy has also evolved. Countries like England and the Netherlands transitioned to democratic systems post-Napoleonic Wars, initially restricting voting rights to wealthy men before gradually extending them to all citizens. The 19th and 20th centuries saw further democratization across Europe and beyond, although many systems still reflect elements of their medieval origins.

The modern Swiss model exemplifies a unique approach to democracy, incorporating elements of direct participation, allowing citizens to have a direct say in legislation. This contrasts sharply with the more representative systems seen in many countries today, where voters select representatives who then make decisions on their behalf.

The Variability of Oligarchy

Oligarchy, another ancient form of governance, has also adapted over time. In 800 B.C., many Greek city-states were ruled by small, elite groups. Today, countries like Turkey and South Africa demonstrate contemporary oligarchic structures, where wealth and power are concentrated in the hands of a few. The Koc family in Turkey, for instance, wields significant influence over the nation’s economy, while South Africa’s political landscape has evolved from a racially-based oligarchy to a more inclusive democracy.

This continuity and adaptation of oligarchic principles suggest a preference for stability and efficiency in governance, even as other forms of government continue to evolve.

Conclusion

In conclusion, John Adams’ assertion that the science of government has not significantly progressed compared to other fields is largely valid. While various forms of governance have emerged and adapted over centuries, the fundamental principles established by early thinkers remain remarkably intact. The evolution of political systems often reflects the complexities of human society and the persistent struggle for power and representation. As we navigate the challenges of modern governance, we must consider whether these systems can keep pace with the rapid advancements in other areas of human knowledge and endeavor.

References:

• Adams, John. Letters of John Adams to Thomas Jefferson. 1813.
• Harrison, James. The History of Political Thought. 2018.
• Smith, Adam. The Wealth of Nations. 1776.
• Thompson, Edward. Democracy and Governance: A Historical Perspective. 2020.