As the nation approaches the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution, a new book argues that the greatest threat to the republic may not come from foreign adversaries, but from internal movements seeking to fundamentally reshape the constitutional system.
Jonathan Turley, constitutional law scholar and author of Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, says the United States is facing a modern form of revolutionary fervor that echoes the early stages of the French Revolution.
Turley recently discussed his book in the context of comments made by Texas State Representative Gene Wu, who suggested that minority communities must unite against a shared “oppressor” to “take over” the country. For Turley, such rhetoric reflects a broader ideological current that seeks to dismantle constitutional restraints in favor of majoritarian rule.
In his book, Turley examines why the American Revolution produced the oldest and most successful constitutional democracy in history, while the French Revolution devolved into the Reign of Terror. He argues that the difference lies in the American framers’ deliberate effort to restrain the passions of the majority and prevent what they described as “democratic despotism.”
The founders, Turley explains, feared that unchecked majority rule could quickly become mob rule. Their solution was a system of separation of powers, federalism, and constitutional limits designed not for moments of consensus, but for moments of political rage.
He contends that elements of today’s political culture resemble what he calls “neo-Jacobin” thinking, drawing a parallel to the Jacobins of Revolutionary France. Early Jacobin leaders spoke in the language of rights and democracy, but ultimately embraced terror as a tool of political virtue. Turley sees similar calls today to overhaul the Constitution, restructure institutions, and weaken checks on majoritarian power.
He notes that some contemporary legal scholars have openly argued for changes ranging from altering the structure of the Supreme Court to revising foundational constitutional principles. Turley warns that efforts to “pack” the Court or otherwise neutralize judicial review could remove what he calls the “secret sauce” that has sustained the republic for two and a half centuries.
In addition to cultural and political forces, Turley also explores how technological and economic shifts could test the durability of the American system. He points to artificial intelligence and automation as developments that may disrupt entire sectors of employment, potentially creating a dependent citizenry reliant on government support.
The founders, he argues, understood that political liberty was inseparable from economic liberty. The same year as the Declaration of Independence, Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations, a work Turley says the framers admired because it complemented their political philosophy. A free republic, in their view, required a citizenry capable of economic independence.
Turley cautions that if large segments of society become economically dependent on the state, the balance between liberty and governance may shift in ways that undermine constitutional safeguards.
Despite these concerns, he remains cautiously optimistic. Turley points to recent court decisions reinforcing executive authority in areas such as immigration law, as well as civil verdicts that reflect skepticism toward certain cultural orthodoxies, as signs that constitutional mechanisms are still functioning.
He emphasizes that the American system was built for turbulent periods, not tranquil ones. Its longevity, he argues, should not breed complacency. The republic’s survival depends on whether citizens are willing to defend the constitutional framework that has guided the country for 250 years.
The question, Turley suggests, is the same one observers asked at the nation’s founding: what is America? The answer, he contends, will determine whether the constitutional experiment endures for another 250 years or yields to the pressures of a new revolutionary age.