Can the Coming Crisis Revitalize our Republic? Thoughts on “Struggles of an Optimist,” a talk by Mitch Daniels ‘71

November 27, 2023 3 min read

By Khoa Sands ‘26


The idea of decline has always held a certain allure to historians and politicians alike. The high prophet of this declinism was Oswald Spengler, whose 1918 book The Decline of the West has become a motivating treatise for the American New Right. For these modern-day doomsayers, the United States is predestined to ruin, beset by internal crises of spiritedness and domestic politics as well as external threats of rising challengers to the US-led world order. These concerns are not unfounded – a revanchist China will be the largest geopolitical crisis of the twenty-first century and any casual observer of American politics can attest to the sorry state of domestic politics in America today.


It was on these concerns that Mitch Daniels ‘71 came to speak at Princeton to the American Whig-Cliosophic Society in an event last month, sponsored by Princetonians for Free Speech, titled “Struggles of an Optimist.” In his speech, Daniels noted that “everyone” from investors to preachers to politicians to pundits is predicting major chaos in the next twenty to thirty years. Although external threats from Russia, Iran, and especially China are serious, the most pressing concern, for Daniels, is the internal troubles of the United States today. 


In Daniels’ view, political polarization and calcification are the most serious threats to our liberal political order. The American populace seems unable to speak to each other about politics, increasingly defining themselves by their political identity. Today, Americans are even segregating themselves by political affiliation, contributing to the cultural, political, and geographic divisions of the country. In the media, politics is increasingly framed as a choice between a party that stands for American liberal democracy and a party that has supposedly rejected it. Certainly, the Right has had a tenuous relationship with democracy, the history of voting rights in the United States and the lies of the 2020 election being no exception. But the story isn’t so simple. Although Conservatives are traditionally wary of populist democracy, the Right increasingly views “the people” as part of the “silent majority,” with strong conservative sympathies. 

On the other hand, the American Left has long had its own anti-democratic impulses. Although the Left is generally in favor of mass democracy, many would prefer to leave substantive political decisions to unelected “experts” and bureaucrats. In the view of many, the Left has become the side of entrenched special interests, unelected bureaucrats, and “the elites” in general. This impulse towards an anti-democratic version of liberalism is especially prevalent at Princeton, a hub of elite power and ideas so often criticized by populist conservatives. 


Despite the obvious threat of autocracy, the more pervasive and plausible threat is that of epistocracy – a form of Noocracy (rule by the wise) theorized by political scientist Jason Brennan in his book Against Democracy. Brennan shares the common concerns about democracy – notably the irrationality and downright ignorance of the people. His solution, “epistocracy” is to prioritize the votes of the politically informed over the masses. A true rule by elites in this manner, according to Daniels, is something to be avoided at all costs, as it erodes the democratic foundations of our Republic. In Daniels’ view, political polarization and calcification and the impulse towards epistocracy as well as foreign and economic threats combine to create the coming crisis. 

Yet – as noted in the title of his talk – Daniels is not a pessimist resolved toward declinism. The first generation after a crisis, he noted, is the “hero generation,” which must rebuild society. The silver lining is that a society has the greatest potential for growth and improvement after a crisis, because, in Daniels’ words, “calcified special interests are destroyed.” 


Having served as President of Purdue University, one of the top public universities in the country, Daniels returned to Princeton to speak on the role of “elites” in America in light of this coming crisis. Elites are necessary, Daniels claimed, yet elites must be exemplary leaders. Above all, they must be empathetic, not sympathetic. Daniels walked a thin line between optimism and declinism and between elitism and populism. Elites are necessary, yet America must maintain our democracy against epistocratic impulses. A crisis is coming, yet it may just present an opportunity to revitalize our republic. What is missing from elite education then is a sense of noblesse oblige, a responsibility towards the common welfare of the republic. The elite Liberalism so prevalent in the Ivy League must democratize itself in service of the common good. If the next generation leads with empathy instead of sympathy and self-sacrifice instead of selfishness, the American Republic can be revitalized to weather any crisis. 

Khoa Sands ‘26, a PFS Writing Fellow, is a General Officer of the American Whig-Cliosophic Society and a Vice President of the Princeton Human Values Forum.


Leave a comment


Also in Princeton Free Speech News & Commentary

Guest Essay: Choosing Trustees Requires Greater Transparency

June 13, 2024 1 min read

Cory Alperstein ’78, Lynne Archibald ’87, Robert Herbst ’69, Jessie Press-Williams *23, Hannah Reynolds ’22, Ryan Warsling *21
Princeton Alumni Weekly

Excerpt: Every year, the Committee to Nominate Alumni Trustees calls for nominations for elections to be held in April. As alumni who care about Princeton and its place in the world, we responded. However, in the unofficial year of democracy, our experience has left us with many questions about who really runs the University.  . . . Our concerns relate . . . to the process and profound lack of transparency of the Board of Trustees and the Committee to Nominate Alumni Trustees.
Read More
Princetonians Student Free Speech Survey Shows More Work Needs To Be Done

June 12, 2024 7 min read 1 Comment

By Ed Yingling '70
PFS Co-Founder

The Princetonians for Free Speech (PFS) second annual survey of Princeton students is now available. This survey provides information on student attitudes on key free speech issues. Because the survey is being done annually, comparisons can be made to see if Princeton is making progress. Unfortunately, with three important exceptions, on most issues the survey shows little or no progress from the troublesome results in the first survey. In a few cases, the results are worse than last year. Clearly Princeton still has work to do.

Read More
James Madison Program: Reunions 2024 with Ben Sasse and Robby George

June 10, 2024 1 min read

Read More