DOCSLIB.ORG

View That Need Serious Consid­ Eration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
View That Need Serious Consid­ Eration ASPECTS OF THE SOCIAL PHILOSOPHIES OF JOHN DEWEY AND REINHOLD NIEBUHR AS THEY RELATE TO EDUCATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By JOHN MARTIN RICH, B.A., M.A, The Ohio State University 1958 Approved by Advisee¥ Department of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank Professor Everett J. Kircher and Lewis A. Bayles, former assistant instructor in philosophy of education, for early direction in understanding the significance of this study. I am grateful to Professors Robert E. Jewett and Bernard Mehl for careful reading of my manuscript and for their many thoughtful criticisms and suggestions. The deep and continued interest and encourage­ ment shown by my mother has done so much in helping me to see my educational development in its full perspective. Without the untiring assistance, patience, and understanding of my wife, this dissertation would not be possible. I could never express the profound gratitude and respect that I hold for my major adviser, Professor H. Gordon Hullfish, who has given so freely of his time, energy, and critical intelli­ gence not only to my dissertation, but throughout my entire doctoral program. ii To Jeffrey for a better and brighter world iii CONTENTS Chapter Page INTRODUCTION 1 I. THE BASIS OF SOCIAL RELATIONS 5 Introduction 5 Section I. Niebuhr A. The Nature of Individuality 7 B. The Dimensions of the Self 14 C. The 'Will-to-Live' and the • Will-to-Power'. 20 D. The Individual and the Social 26 Section II. Dewey A. The Individual and Society 32 B. Language and "Mindful" Behavior 38 Section III. Discussion Introduction 49 A. Human Nature 50 B. The Basis of Human Association 52 C. The 'Individual' and the 'Social' 54 D. Communication and Social Behavior 63 II. THE PROBLEMS OF FREEDOM AND AUTHORITY IN AMERICAN DEMOCRACY 70 Introduction 70 Section I; Niebuhr 73 A. The problem of Human Freedom 73 B. A Christian Interpretation of Freedom in History 76 C. Justice: Its Obstacles and Fulfillments . 79 Section II: Dewey A. The Nature of Human Liberties 84 B. Liberty and Natural Rights 88 C. Stability and Change . • 91 iv CONTENTS (CONT'D) Chapter • Page Section III: Discussion Justice and Coercive Measures 95 III. POLITICS AND THE SOCIAL ORDER 105 Introduction 105 Section I: Niebuhr A. The Process of Group Organization 107 B. The Use of Political Power 110 C. Power Politics and the International . Community 119 Section II: Dewey A. Political Pluralism 126 B. The Problems of Individualism ....... 135 C. A New Direction for Liberalism 142 Section III: Discussion A. Introduction to the Political Scene .... 147 B. The Use and Abuse of Political Power . 149 C. Self-interest and Objectivity in Political Action 154 D. Social Changes and Political Problems Facing American Democracy 156 IV. EDUCATION 162 Introduction 162 A. Aims of Education 164 B. Local Contrel of Education 169 C. Liberalism and the Idea of Progress .... 172 D. Education, Society, and Social Reform . 179 BIBLIOGRAPHY 193 v INTRODUCTION The twentieth century arrived in an atmosphere of hope and promise. It was then generally believed that rela­ tionships among peoples everywhere would be increasingly humanized and enhanced. But this noble hope was soon to be shattered. By mid-century man could look back upon two world wars, the psychic isolation of societies, totalitarian revolutions and their concomitant dehumanization of social relations, and proverty and squalor juxtaposed with opulence and waste. It is small wonder that the minds of many men turned from their former optimism, engendered by a belief in the inevitability of progress, to that of apprehension, doubt, and distrust. "Some find refuge in a fanatical faith and in reliance upon infallible leaders of the people; others seek evasion of responsibility in simplifying and comforting panaceas; many are simply wary and have given up the attempt to understand and to act."1 Many false prophets have arisen, meanwhile, ready to present a multitude of solutions. But these have not eradicated the causes of disorder and, in consequence, anxieties have worsened when false panaceas have been exposed. An ominous realization has grown among us that •^Hans Kohn, The Twentieth Century, preface. 1 2 the "grounds of our civilization, of our certitude, are breaking up under our feet, and familiar ideas and institu­ tions vanish as we reach for them like shadows in the falling dusk." Imminent danger was never more disquieting, even as the promise of our age was never greater. From out of these pressing necessities, America has sought the solution to her problems, basically, by aligning with one or the other dominant trends of thought in our age. The unified approach, found in the writings of John Dewey, who has been America's greatest exponent of this position, offered the scientific method of problem-solving, the reorgan­ ization of human experience, and the development of human values in a naturalistic setting. The other approach is dualistic, appealing for cosmic support as it seeks the resolution of human problems. In America, Reinhold Niebuhr, the widely known Christian theologian, has met the challenge with a persuasive political realism buttressed by a Christian orthodoxy. Throughout his writings he re-interprets Christian ethics for social and political life in the perplexing twentieth century, since he recognizes the failure of Christianity in the past to deal with the social scene. Niebuhr, with Randall, acknowledges that the predominant credence once given so freely to the religious approach has waned considerably since the Middle Ages. "All in all, the — Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Vital Center, p. 1. 3 outstanding religious phenomena of the century has been not so much the fading of faith, as its transfer from a theologi­ cal and cosmic to a human and social object."3 These two writers embody, within a delimited social locus, the predominant directions our culture takes in aspir­ ing to bring about a better world. The writer assumes, however, that Niebuhr and Dewey, though they present two greatly divergent philosophic positions, are concerned with similar problems and, at times, share somewhat similar conclusions of great significance. The purpose of this investigation, then, is threefold. First, it will investigate the divergent philosophic positions of these social critics, to bring out any and all fruitful similarities. Second, it will analyze selected aspects of the complex problems of social and polit­ ical life in America as these are reflected within these social problems. Third, it will explore the implications of the social and political climate in American life, as seen by these social critics, as these bear upon public education as a social institution within a pluralistic culture. There are four major chapters, each composed of three major parts. Sections I and II of each chapter present expository statements of the basic ideas of Dewey and Niebuhr 3 John H. Randall, Jr., The Making of the Modern Mind. P. 539. 4 on the particular subject of the chapter. Section III of each chapter is a discussion of these ideas. Chapter I deal with the basis of social relations. It considers the nature of man, the way in which he becomes social in habits and outlook and, finally, analyzes the communicative process to discover how social relations are made meaningful. Chapter II is concerned with the problems of social justice. The relationship of formal law-making and organiza­ tional processes of society to the need for human freedom is examined. Chapter III considers the powers of state in relation to voluntary groupings and primary social relations. Dif­ ferent levels of community relations are explored through a consideration of the use of social power. Finally, the possibilities of forming an international community, and the persistent obstacles that impede progress in this direction, are discussed. Chapter IV applies the findings of the first three chapters to the problem of uncovering the social role of American public education within the context of a dynamic, complex, and presently disturbed society. CHAPTER I THE BASIS OF SOCIAL RELATIONS Introduction This chapter endeavors to bring to the fore some significant assumptions concerning human nature and social relations. The problem of man's relationship to his fellows has raised fundamental questions that men have confronted for years; yet the questions still need further and renewed consideration. Amongthe questions that need further study are: What are the potentials of human beings in achieving a higher level of life? How does the need arise to converse and interact with one's fellows? What are the possibilities for creativity and growth? In the writings of John Dewey and Reinhold Niebuhr we find major and divergent philosophic systems that deal pro­ foundly and persuasively with this subject. Their divergent outlook leads them into different channels of thought, and the resulting consequences provide some fruitful contradic­ tions in respective points of view that need serious consid­ eration. It is the purpose of this chapter to inquire into their systems in order to illuminate this perennial problem. Throughout the history of philosophy and the social sciences, scholars have speculated on the nature and limits 5 6 of man that derive fromnatural and acquired potentials, and how these potentials or basic capacities are used to estab­ lish and further social relations. There have been a profu­ sion of theories advanced depicting man in many diverse ways: from that of extreme depravity to that of infinite perfect- ability, with most scholars, writers, and students of human nature falling somewhere between these extremes. By first postulating man's basic nature, social theorists have moved forward deductively to the nature of society and social control. If man were viewed as essentially depraved and corrupt, greater and more stringent social controls and less individual freedom were needed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BEFORE the ORIGINAL POSITION the Neo-Orthodox Theology of the Young John Rawls
    BEFORE THE ORIGINAL POSITION The Neo-Orthodox Theology of the Young John Rawls Eric Gregory ABSTRACT This paper examines a remarkable document that has escaped critical at- tention within the vast literature on John Rawls, religion, and liberalism: Rawls’s undergraduate thesis, “A Brief Inquiry into the Meaning of Sin and Faith: An Interpretation Based on the Concept of Community” (1942). The thesis shows the extent to which a once regnant version of Protestant the- ology has retreated into seminaries and divinity schools where it now also meets resistance. Ironically, the young Rawls rejected social contract liber- alism for reasons that anticipate many of the claims later made against him by secular and religious critics. The thesis and Rawls’s late unpublished remarks on religion and World War II offer a new dimension to his intellec- tual biography. They show the significance of his humanist response to the moral impossibility of political theology. Moreover, they also reveal a kind of Rawlsian piety marginalized by contemporary debates over religion and liberalism. KEY WORDS: John Rawls, community, liberalism, religion, political theology, public reason PROTESTANT THEOLOGIAN REINHOLD NIEBUHR DIED IN 1971. In that same year, philosopher John Rawls published his groundbreaking work, A The- ory of Justice. These two events symbolically express transformations in American intellectual and political culture that remain significant today. In the academy, religious defenders of a liberal consensus had been chal- lenged by ascendant secular liberalisms and emergent religious voices critical of liberalism of any kind. Parallel developments in the political culture had begun to see the fracturing of coalitions that transcended di- verse religious and secular commitments in order to support democratic institutions and practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Realism, Responsibility, and the Good Lawyer: Niebuhrian Perspectives on Legal Ethics
    Realism, Responsibility, and the Good Lawyer: Niebuhrian Perspectives on Legal Ethics Timothy l¥. Floyd * 1esus said to him, 'Why do you caU me good? No one is good but God aUr.n~'" ' - Luke 18:19. I. INTRODUCTION Is it morally permissible for a lawyer, when representing a client, to take actions that harm other persons or the common good? When criticized for such conduct, lawyers typically justify their actions by pointing to the professional rules that govern their conduct. Those rules rc:;quire lawyers to' represent clients zealously and diligently within the bounds of the law.l Most law­ yers believe this professional obligation requires them to help a client achieve any lawful objective, regardless of the effect on other persons or the public good. A lawyer who takes lawful ac­ tions to further a client's lawful interests need not fear profession­ al sanction for causing harm to others. Freedom from professional discipline, however, does not amount to moral justification. Over the past fifteen years. a re­ markable number of commentators, including several professional philosophers, have debated the morality of the lawyer's profession­ al duty of client loyalty. The debate is often phrased in terms of whether "a good lawyer can be a good person," a question posed by Charles Fried.2 Fried employed the metaphor of the "lawyer as friend." Arguing that persons are morally justified in preferring the interests of friends over other persons, Fried concluded that lawyers should be viewed as "special purpose friends.. " Accordingly, "it is not only legally but morally right that a lawyer adopt as his * Associate Professor of Law, Texas Tech Univc;rsio/.
    [Show full text]
  • Faith and Politics: an Augustinian Reflection Anfaith Augustinian and Politics: Reflection an Augustinian Reflection Robin Lovin Robin Lovin Robin Lovin
    AN OCCASIONAL PAPER AN OCCASIONAL PAPER VOLUME 29 VAON LUMEOCC A29SIONAL PAPER VOLUME 29 Faith and Politics: Faith and Politics: An Augustinian Reflection AnFaith Augustinian and Politics: Reflection An Augustinian Reflection Robin Lovin Robin Lovin Robin Lovin THE CARY M. MAGUIRE CENTER THE CARY M. MAGUIRE CENTER FOR ETHICS & PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY THE CARY M. MAGUIRE CENTER FOR ETHICS & PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY FOR ETHICS & PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY DALLAS, TEXAS SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY DALLAS, TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS VOLUME 1 “The Private and Public Intellectual in the World and the Academy” James K. Hopkins VOLUME 2 “Managed Care: Some Basic Ethical Issues” James F. Childress Part of the Maguire Ethics Center’s mission is to “provide moral reflection VOLUME 3 “Journalism as a High Profession in Spite of Itself” William Lee Miller on contemporary issues.” Certainly, one of the more visible ways we do that VOLUME 4 “The New Media: The Internet, Democracy, Free Speech and the Richard O. Mason is by providing a venue for customary scholarly discourse for select SMU Management of Temperance” professors, and occasionally, visiting scholars. VOLUME 5 “Look, her lips’: Softness of Voice, Construction of Character in King Lear” Michael Holahan In ancient Athens, elders would provide an oral narration intended to pass VOLUME 6 “Pilgrimage and the Desire for Meaning” Bonnie Wheeler along the values, customs and beliefs from one generation to the next one. By the Renaissance, the practice transformed into written form through public VOLUME 7 “Politics as a Calling” Joseph L. Allen essays designed to be widely shared among community members.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Theology After Reinhold Niebuhr and Emmanuel Levinas
    religions Article When Liberalism Is Not Enough: Political Theology after Reinhold Niebuhr and Emmanuel Levinas J. Aaron Simmons 1,* and Kevin Carnahan 2 1 Department of Philosophy, Furman University, Greenville, SC 29613, USA 2 Department of Philosophy and Religion, Central Methodist University, Fayette, MO 65248, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 10 June 2019; Accepted: 12 July 2019; Published: 18 July 2019 Abstract: In this paper, we are interested in extending out the dialectical models of religious ethics and political theology that Reinhold Niebuhr and Emmanuel Levinas began by enacting a conversation between these two theorists. We do this by presenting and critically comparing Niebuhr’s and Levinas’s thought as concerns three key issues in moral and political theory: (1) the nature of persons, (2) the source and content of the moral ideal of love and the political ideal of justice, and (3) the impossibility and yet continued practical relevance of ideals for social life. Ultimately, we conclude that they mutually offer reasons to find hope in the face of political cynicism. Keywords: political theology; Emmanuel Levinas; Reinhold Niebuhr; postmodern ethics; liberalism; justice; love In 2007, Simon Critchley suggested that “we are living through a chronic re-theologization of politics” (Critchely 2007, p. 5). This “re-theologization” is occurring, he contends, because people are trying desperately to find some sort of meaning in a world threatened by “nihilism.” “In a word”, he provocatively states, “the institutions of secular liberal democracy simply do not sufficiently motivate their citizenry” (Critchely 2007, p. 7). He continues on to propose that “this motivational deficit is also a moral deficit, a lack at the heart of democratic life that is intimately bound up with the felt inadequacy of official secular conceptions of morality” (Critchely 2007, p.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Decade Immediately Following the Second World War, Many Of
    ‘A Central Issue of Our Time’: Academic Freedom in Postwar American Thought A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Julian Tzara Nemeth August 2007 2 This thesis titled ‘A Central Issue of Our Time’: Academic Freedom in Postwar American Thought by JULIAN TZARA NEMETH has been approved for the Department of History and the College of Arts and Sciences by Kevin Mattson Professor of History Benjamin M. Ogles Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 Abstract NEMETH, JULIAN TZARA., M.A, August 2007, History ‘A Central Issue of Our Time’: Academic Freedom in Postwar American Thought (108 pp.) Director of Thesis: Kevin Mattson In the early years of the Cold War, more than one hundred American academics lost their jobs because university administrators suspected them of Communist Party membership. How did intellectuals respond to this crisis? Referring to contemporary books, articles, organizational statements, and correspondence, I argue that disputes over academic freedom helped shatter a tenuous liberal consensus, unite conservatives, and challenge defenses of professorial liberty among academia’s largest professional organization, the American Association of University Professors. Specifically, I show how Sidney Hook and Arthur Schlesinger Jr.’s dispute over academic freedom was representative of larger quarrels among liberals over McCarthyism. Conversely, I demonstrate that conservatives such as William Buckley Jr. and Russell Kirk overcame serious differences on academic freedom to present a united front against liberalism, in and outside of the academy. Finally, I show the difficulty an organization such as the AAUP encounters when defending professional values in a democratic society.
    [Show full text]
  • The Self and the Dramas of History by Reinhold Niebuhr
    The Self and the Dramas of History return to religion-online The Self and the Dramas of History by Reinhold Niebuhr One of the foremost philsophers and theologians of the twentieth century, Reinhold Niebuhr was for many years a Professor at Union Theological Seminary, New York City. He is the author of many classics in their field, including The Nature and Destiny of Man, Moral Man and Immoral Society, The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness, and Discerning the Signs of Our Times. He was also the founding editor of the publication Christianity and Crisis. The Self and the Dramas of History, was published in 1955 by Charles Scribner’s Sons. This material prepared for Religion Online by Harry and Grace Adams. In this volume Professor Niebuhr explores the philosophical and theological relationship of the human self to itself, others and God, with particular reference to both Hellenic and Hebraic frames of reference in Western thought, and as seen in the evolution of communities. Part I: The Dialogues of the Self with Itself, with Others, and with God Chapter 1: The Uniqueness of the Human Self : Greek philosophy defined the uniquely human in terms of man’s rational faculty, whereas Hebraism’s metaphor of man’s being created in God’s image can be understood as the self’s capacity to dialogue with itself, with others and with God. Chapter 2: The Internal Dialogue of the Self The dialogue which the self carries on within itself is certainly more complex than understood in classical philosophy. Depth psychology has uncovered many of these complexities.
    [Show full text]
  • Should I Help the Empire with My Hand? Confucian Resources for a Paradigm of Just Peacemaking Confucianism Is Not Generally Considered to Be a Pacifist Tradition
    Should I Help the Empire with My Hand? Confucian Resources for a Paradigm of Just Peacemaking Confucianism is not generally considered to be a pacifist tradition. However canonical texts like the Mencius offer important elements that could undergird a paradigm of just peacemaking: a prophetic critique of the status quo on grounds of social welfare, an emphasis on relationality, a strategic position advocating the extension of empathy, and a faith in the goodness of human nature and thus the perfectibility of human persons. Among other things, these points represent significant motivators for social justice, conflict transformation, and restorative justice. Perhaps most importantly, however, the this-worldly orientation of the Confucian tradition, as found in the Mencian example, offers a theoretical model with potential for dissolving the traditional paradigm’s dichotomy found in such oppositions as ideal and real, faithfulness/effectiveness, and clean hands/dirty hands that have historically made debates between pacifism and Just War so intractable. David Kratz Mathies David Kratz Mathies (PhD, Boston University) is Assistant Professor of Philosophy and Religion at Missouri Western State University. “Just Peacemaking” is the name given to a new paradigm advocated by Glen Stassen and an impressive collection of fellow scholars. [1] These thirty authors, themselves a mix of pacifists and just war theorists, have done an admirable job of grounding their peacebuilding model in both empirical evidence of concrete practices [2] and Christian
    [Show full text]
  • Multicultural Cold War: Liberal Anti-Totalitarianism And
    MULTICULTURAL COLD WAR: LIBERAL ANTI-TOTALITARIANISM AND NATIONAL IDENTITY IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA, 1935-1971 by Gregory Smolynec Department of History Duke University Date: April 24, 2007 Approved: ___________________________ John Herd Thompson, Supervisor ___________________________ Warren Lerner ___________________________ Susan Thorne ___________________________ Suzanne Shanahan Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of Duke University 2007 ABSTRACT MULTICULTURAL COLD WAR: LIBERAL ANTI-TOTALITARIANISM AND NATIONAL IDENTITY IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA, 1935-1971 by Gregory Smolynec Department of History Duke University Date: April 24, 2007 Approved: ___________________________ John Herd Thompson, Supervisor ___________________________ Warren Lerner ___________________________ Susan Thorne ___________________________ Suzanne Shanahan An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in the Department of History in the Graduate School of Duke University 2007 Copyright by Gregory Smolynec 2007 Abstract In Cold War North America, liberal intellectuals constructed the Canadian and American national identities in contrast to totalitarianism. Theorists of totalitarianism described Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as monolithic societies marked by absolutism and intolerance toward societal differences. In response, many intellectuals imagined Canada and the
    [Show full text]
  • Dewey's Cultural Theory and Psychology When the History Of
    Dewey’s Cultural Theory and Psychology When the history of Cultural Psychology is being discussed one often encounters the names of Lazarus, Steinthal, and Wundt in Germany, Rivers and Bartlett in Britain, and Vygotsky in the former Soviet Union. Missing from mention is the name of the American John Dewey. This is understandable since he did not explicitly formulate a theory of culture and psychology but, nonetheless, the theme runs throughout his numerous publications. It is this that I shall endeavor to encapsulate and, in the process, reveal Dewey’s anticipation and rejection of evolutionary psychology. Such a task is impossible to do justice to in a limited space but I hope that I may at least offer some signposts to where the mind of this seminal thinker may be mined. In his eightieth year, while reflecting back upon his psychological theorizing, Dewey (1939a) noted that the traditional, mentalistic psychology was being transformed by biology and cultural anthropology. Human experience (experience meaning here “participation in activities,” and “of doings and undergoings”) is what it is, he contended, because of its subjection to cultural agencies and intercommunication. In retrospect, he referred to the approach that he had been developing as “socio-biological psychology” and “biological- cultural psychology.” His intention, with these appellations, was to convey the idea that cultures stimulate innate tendencies and remake them; they promote and consolidate those tendencies into patterns of purposes that are fitted to the prevailing cultural conditions (Dewey, 1939/1989). According to Dewey the biological constitution of humans is common to the people of whatever grouping and, because of that, innate tendencies cannot be appealed to in accounting for the differences between groups.
    [Show full text]
  • “I Am Afraid Americans Cannot Understand” the Congress for Cultural Freedom in France and Italy, 1950–1957
    “I Am Afraid Americans Cannot Understand” The Congress for Cultural Freedom in France and Italy, 1950–1957 ✣ Andrea Scionti Culture was a crucial yet elusive battlefield of the Cold War. Both superpowers tried to promote their way of life and values to the world but had to do so care- fully. The means adopted by the United States included not only propaganda and the use of mass media such as cinema and television but also efforts to help shape the world of highbrow culture and the arts. The Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), an organization sponsored by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), offered U.S. policymakers and intellectuals the opportunity to provide indirect support for anti-Communist intellectuals without being openly associated with their activities. Although the CCF represented one of the main instruments for the United States to try to win the hearts and minds of postwar Europe, it also created new challenges for U.S. Cold War- riors. By tying themselves to the European intelligentsia, they were forced to mediate between different societies, cultures, and intellectual traditions. This article looks at the contexts of France and Italy to highlight this interplay of competing notions of anti-Communism and cultural freedom and how the local actors involved helped redefine the character and limits of U.S. cultural diplomacy. Although scholars have looked at the CCF and its significance, es- pecially in the Anglo-Saxon world, a focus on French and Italian intellectuals can offer fresh insights into this subject. The Congress for Cultural Freedom was the product of a convergence of interests between the CIA’s recently established Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) and a small number of American and European intellectuals, many of them former Communists, concerned about the perceived success of the Soviet cultural offensive in Western Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Neoconservatism Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative Hberkc Ch5 Mp 104 Rev1 Page 104 Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative Hberkc Ch5 Mp 105 Rev1 Page 105
    Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_103 rev1 page 103 part iii Neoconservatism Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_104 rev1 page 104 Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_105 rev1 page 105 chapter five The Neoconservative Journey Jacob Heilbrunn The Neoconservative Conspiracy The longer the United States struggles to impose order in postwar Iraq, the harsher indictments of the George W. Bush administration’s foreign policy are becoming. “Acquiring additional burdens by engag- ing in new wars of liberation is the last thing the United States needs,” declared one Bush critic in Foreign Affairs. “The principal problem is the mistaken belief that democracy is a talisman for all the world’s ills, and that the United States has a responsibility to promote dem- ocratic government wherever in the world it is lacking.”1 Does this sound like a Democratic pundit bashing Bush for par- tisan gain? Quite the contrary. The swipe came from Dimitri Simes, president of the Nixon Center and copublisher of National Interest. Simes is not alone in calling on the administration to reclaim the party’s pre-Reagan heritage—to abandon the moralistic, Wilsonian, neoconservative dream of exporting democracy and return to a more limited and realistic foreign policy that avoids the pitfalls of Iraq. 1. Dimitri K. Simes, “America’s Imperial Dilemma,” Foreign Affairs (Novem- ber/December 2003): 97, 100. Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_106 rev1 page 106 106 jacob heilbrunn In fact, critics on the Left and Right are remarkably united in their assessment of the administration. Both believe a neoconservative cabal has hijacked the administration’s foreign policy and has now overplayed its hand.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitalism in the Classical and High Liberal Traditions*
    CAPITALISM IN THE CLASSICAL AND HIGH LIBERAL TRADITIONS* By Samuel Freeman I. Essential Features of Liberalism Liberalism holds that there are certain individual liberties that are of fundamental political significance. These liberties are fundamental or basic in that they are preconditions on the pursuit of other social values, such as achieving economic efficiency, promoting the general welfare, and mod- erating the degree of inequality in the distribution of income and wealth. None of these liberties are absolute, but the reasons for limiting their exercise are to protect other basic liberties and maintain essential back- ground conditions for their effective exercise. For example, freedom of speech and expression can be limited when it imminently endangers others’ safety or the freedom of their person, but not because the ideas expressed are found to be offensive by vast majorities of people. Liberal basic liberties are also inalienable: they cannot be given up voluntarily or permanently transferred to anyone else, though some liberties are forfeit- able upon criminal conviction for serious crimes. No liberal government would enforce a contract in which a person sold himself into permanent servitude, or alienated his freedom to change religions, or legally bound himself to vote only as his employer insisted. An integral feature of a liberal constitution is the protection of the basic rights and liberties nec- essary to establish and maintain the equal civic status of citizens. What liberties do liberals generally find to have this extraordinary status? Liberals now would all agree that among the basic liberties are freedom of thought, expression, and inquiry, freedom of conscience and of association, freedom and security of the person, and free choice of occupation.
    [Show full text]