Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: This article reverses prevailing scholarly assumptions according to which in Victorian Britain Caesarism was neglected in both theoretical parlance and public discussion. It shows how intellectuals as ideologically different as Bagehot, Seeley, and Maine, as well as other (less well known) commentators writing in newspapers and periodicals, theorized about Caesarism–Napoleonism primarily according to cultural considerations. This means that they looked at “democratic Caesarism” as a form of society rather than exclusively as a political phenomenon, emphasizing how a series of civilizational deficiencies attributed to the masses enabled Caesarist politics. Moreover, the article argues that these critiques were part of a broader (Arnoldian) antidemocratic discourse that targeted democracy as a cultural desert. Democratic Caesarism was thus seen as being characterized by the masses’ uncultured attitudes, ethical–political irresponsibility, and exaggerated care for materialistic interests. The main goal of this criticism was to expose the damaging consequences of democratic life for British politics and civilization.
Source: Modern Intellectual History
Author: Cesare Cuttica
Institutions: University of Helsinki, Université Paris 8
Language: English
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,550
Funder: Gerda Henkel Foundation
OpenAlex ID: W7212012603
FWCI:
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: