Radical civic virtue: women in 19th‐century civil society

Abstract

This article contests the conservative revisionism that emphasizes the importance of traditional families, pietistic religion, individual moral virtue, and small government for undergirding democratic self-government. The first part exposes the conservative misreading of American history and political theory. The second part uses the civic engagement of middle-and upper-class women in 19th-century America to construct a progressive alternative to conservative narratives. It shows that women did not stay home and focus on the family during the 19th century but instead entered civil society to address the problems created by industrialization, formed social reform movements, built institutions to pursue a social justice agenda, and demanded that the government take an active role in solving public problems. Their civic engagement built on and created social capital, grew out of and produced a sense of civic virtue (defined as public-spiritedness), and resulted in the demand for progressive government.

How do we do public service? The socio-psychological status of public servants

“…Rather than trying to 'infuse the public sector with the values of the private sector…perhaps a new reassertion of the values and virtues of democracy should be directed' (Gawthrop, 1998, p. 130). Civic virtue put differently is public spiritedness (Snyder, 2004). Premeaux and Bedeian (2003) also provide a differing emphasis of civic virtue, the term they use is 'speaking up' defined as 'openly stating one's views or opinions about workplace matters, including: the actions or ideas of others, suggested or needed changes, and alternative approaches' (p. 1538).…”

Antiracist Education in Theory and Practice: A Critical Assessment

“…Their ideas require the cooperation of peer reviewers, editors, and publishers. Antiracist education's rapid growth may be attributed, at least in part, to the fact that its proponents are located within settings that have so-called "mobilizing structures," including academic departments, schools, professional societies, and peer networks that develop common understandings, create a collectivist orientation, coordinate activities, and lend urgency to the matter (Frickel and Gross 2005;Snyder 2004;cf. Clarke 1987;Wald et al 1989).…”

“What Daughters, what Wives, what Mothers, Think You, They are?” Gender and the Transformation of Executions in theUnitedStates

“…As Linda Kerber has pointed out, the notion of separate spheres, beyond mere description, conceals an underlying tension around how the separation is produced and sustained; is it “an ideology imposed on women, a culture created by women, [or] a set of boundaries expected to be observed by women?” (Kerber :17). Others have noted that the separate spheres thesis applies primarily to white women of the middle class and hence has little to do with the daily lives of either black women or white working class women (Elbert ; Stansell ), and yet others have found evidence that also for the white middle‐class the notion of separate spheres fails to fully capture women's experiences with the public and domestic domains (Kierner ; Ryan ; Snyder ). It is possible, then, that nineteenth‐century concerns about women in public are better viewed as evidence of women's persistent presence in public life than their retreat from it (Vickery ).…”