The Corner

How Do Words Work? A Reply on the Common Good

Share this story

A view of the dome of the Capitol building in Washington, D.C. September 19, 2025.

Kent Nishimura/Reuters

I confess I had to read Danโ€™s post โ€œWhat Exactly Is โ€˜the Common Goodโ€™?โ€ twice before I could believe he wrote it. Was he really suggesting that the prime criterion through which political discourse has been conducted from Aristotle through the Founding Fathers was either empty pettifoggery or, worse, a ruse? Perhaps Dan suffers very acutely from an undue fear of Adrian Vermeule and JD Vance. How else to explain a conservative (!) in National Review (!) recommending a form of prescribed amnesia that would render the political vocabulary of our Founding Fathers into a foreign language? Along with basically all classical political philosophy.

Dan points out, in several ways, that the meaning of โ€œthe common goodโ€ is contested, and he tries to demonstrate its uselessness by noting that while the Founders said they wanted to โ€œestablish Justiceโ€ and promote โ€œthe general Welfareโ€ when describing the goals of government, they โ€œavoided these terms when describing the powers of government.โ€

Michael Brendan Dougherty

About the Author

Michael Brendan Dougherty

Michael Brendan Dougherty is a senior writer at National Review Online.

Comments

Advertisement

Advertisement