DOCSLIB.ORG

Joshua Botts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Joshua Botts Journal of Undergraduate Research Volume 2, Issue 5 - February 2001 A Furious Soul: George F. Kennan and American Society Joshua Botts Historians of American foreign relations recognize George F. Kennan as a significant figure in cold war history.1Other historians of modern America, however, have not paid much attention to the one-time Director of the State Department Policy Planning Staff and Ambassador to the Soviet Union. While this is understandable given Kennan's status as a foreign policy expert and critic, it is also unfortunate. Kennan did not limit his attention to matters of international relations. Within the body of his own prolific written output are an indictment of the student radicals, a ringing endorsement of segregation, and a "political philosophy" that reveals Kennan's elitism and skepticism about democracy.2 The importance of Kennan's attitudes about American society lies in how these attitudes shaped his foreign policy views. Kennan's disillusionment with American society led eventually to a stance of neo-isolationism and calls for "self-containment" as he saw greater dangers emanating from within than threatening from without. Though not within the mainstream of the American body politic, George F. Kennan's views were not without precedents. Kindred spirits such as John Quincy Adams, Henry Adams, and Walter Lippmann reveal a tradition of elite intellectual skepticism of democracy. 3 Kennan considered himself a true heir of the founding fathers' distrust of the masses and their dreams of a republic led by an elite in behalf of their less capable fellow citizens. After his extended service in Europe, he saw himself as a latter day Tocqueville, commenting on American society as an outsider.4 Because of the attention paid to his pronouncements on American foreign policy, Kennan tried to advance a domestic agenda. The most significant aspect of this agenda was his proposal for a kind of domestic equivalent to the State Department's Policy Planning Staff. This "Council of State," which Kennan first proposed in 1979, would be composed of an apolitical elite experienced in national affairs and devoted to confronting long-term problems within American society. After Congress passed legislation creating the Council, Kennan posited, the President would select its members from a list of "outstanding citizens" in a manner similar to the nomination of Supreme Court justices. The Council of State would fulfill the founding fathers' vision of the Senate, which he declared was "to look at the nation's problems from a more lofty and detached position than that enjoyed by their fellow legislators of the House of Representatives." Because Senators now too faced popular, direct election, Kennan saw them as unfit for the type of dispassionate, rational analysis of the nation's ills that he hoped the Council could accomplish. Though the Council would be an advisory body, Kennan felt that the prestige of its members would make it difficult for the Congress or the President to ignore its suggestions. Kennan's Council of State would allow for elite governance without abandoning the trappings of democracy.5 The indictment of democracy inherent in Kennan's Council of State runs throughout Kennan's books and manuscripts. In 1938, Kennan witnessed Austria's authoritarian Schuschnigg regime tackle a social insurance law in a manner that had proven impossible for earlier democratic leaders. Out of this observation, Kennan first expressed his deep misgivings about the American democratic political system. "There seemed to be little doubt," Kennan mused, "that if malicious despotism had greater possibilities for evil than democracy, benevolent despotism had greater possibilities for good." He explained how the Austrian government's restrictions on speech could be reasonably compared to American "taboos and conventions," how representative government was in fact impossible for so "checkered and internally divided" a country as Austria, and how Austrian leaders directed their responsibility "to the nation as a whole rather than to vociferous pressure groups." Kennan "could not help but suspect that all democratic regimes were to some extent conspiracies, that all authoritarians were inchained [sic] to the favor of the public." After all, for Kennan the real enemy was not a type of government, but rather "cruelty, stupidity, ignorance, violence, and pretense."6Themes of ignorance and stupidity permeated Kennan's conception of democracy; thus to limit or dilute popular participation in favor of a benevolent elite were logical extensions. The practical conclusions concerning American democracy that Kennan reached in 1938 and never completely abandoned would have gone far to limiting popular power in political affairs. In an essay Kennan wrote at this time and entitled "The Prerequisites," he called for the disenfranchisement of women, blacks, and immigrants as part of a larger reorganization of the United States government along more authoritarian lines.7In each case, the loss of political power would, in Kennan's estimation, would create for the government a kind of paternal responsibility for the welfare of the disenfranchised. "We are kinder," Kennan claimed, "to those who, like our children, are openly dependent on our kindness than to those who are nominally able to take care of themselves."8 Kennan's indictment of "boss-ridden" democracy is especially intriguing. He almost sounds like a Progressive crusading for accountability in government, though a democratic government that was completely accountable to the people would most clearly run afoul of Kennan's instinctive antagonism to democracy and his attachment to elite rule. In a recent article in The New Yorker, Kennan said he supported Bill Bradley's candidacy in the 2000 presidential election because he "had ventured the hope that he could make himself the head of something resembling an independent political movement in the country, no longer dependent on the great moneyed interests. If we really could get campaign reform, then I could see chances of the growth of a new form of politics and government in this country."9 The comparison of Kennan to Progressives is an interesting one. Both sought rational government by a scientific elite, yet they did so for different reasons. Progressive liberals hoped centralization and bureaucratization would improve the lives of all members of society. Tellingly, Progressives held great faith in the power of informed public opinion to help achieve rational government. Theirs was essentially an optimistic, though paternalistic, vision for democracy.10 Kennan was a conservative desperate to limit the power of the irrational, uninformed masses, whose influence had so degraded American society. Kennan's distaste of American popular culture, particularly the automobile, advertising, environmental degradation, and the intellectual vacuum perpetuated by the mass media, originated from Kennan's particular brand of conservatism.11 Kennan's organic conservatism sought a slow, deliberate evolution of society, eschewing sharp changes justified as progress.12 Ordered liberty stood at the center of Kennan's political thought, linking him to America's earliest Puritan settlers. George Kennan's agenda was not limited to such organizational imperatives. Kennan also presented ideas to solve, or at least ameliorate, the plight "of the American Negro," America's "greatest social and political problem." Because of the alienation that Kennan saw of blacks from American political life, he called for a system of segregation akin to apartheid.13For Kennan, the solution to America's racial differences stood in "some sort of a voluntary segregation and autonomy for large parts of the Negro community."14Writing in 1968, Kennan criticized "the stock proposals for correcting" the race problem because they did not control the urban migration of blacks that Kennan saw at the root of the trouble. Either "economic incentives" or "direct administrative control" (like he witnessed in South Africa in 1967 and commented favorably upon 15) were necessary to forestall "the migration of new poverty into" the cities already racked with unrest. Kennan's concerns went far beyond the demographic problem of urban migration. He asked if it was "realistic to suppose that the American Negro is going to find his dignity and his comfort of body and mind by the effort to participate and to compete as an individual in a political and social system he neither understands nor respects and for which he is ill-prepared."16 By the 1990s, Kennan had moderated these views, but remained skeptical of government social engineering efforts such as busing students to achieve desegregation.17 At the root of Kennan's critique of American society was his belief that it was a "self-indulgent, undisciplined permissive system."18At the twilight of the Second World War, Kennan claimed that the coming peace would reveal the decline of American society that had occurred during hostilities. "No great effort," Kennan said, "can be carried out by our people beyond our borders without a corresponding neglect of internal administration and internal discipline." The coming peace would demand that American leaders pay attention to both the internal and external environment.19 In the "Long Telegram" of February 22, 1946, Kennan stressed the importance of the "health and vigor of our own society" to the nascent international struggle with the Soviet Union. He claimed that "every courageous and incisive measure to solve
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Paranoid Style in American History of Science *
    The Paranoid Style in American History of Science * George REISCH Received: 31.5.2012 Final version: 30.7.2012 BIBLID [0495-4548 (2012) 27: 75; pp. 323-342] ABSTRACT: Historian Richard Hofstadter’s observations about American cold-war politics are used to contextualize Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and argue that substantive claims about the nature of sci- entific knowledge and scientific change found in Structure were adopted from this cold-war political cul- ture. Keywords: Thomas S. Kuhn; The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ; Richard Hofstadter; “The Paranoid Style in American Politics;” Cold War; James B. Conant; Brainwashing. RESUMEN: Las observaciones del historiador Richard Hofstadter sobre la política americana en la Guerra Fría se uti- lizan para contextualizar La estructura de las revoluciones científicas de Thomas Kuhn y sostener que algunas afirmaciones fundamentales sobre la naturaleza del conocimiento científico y el cambio científico que se pueden hallar en La estructura fueron adoptadas de esta cultura política de la Guerra Fría. Palabras clave: Thomas S. Kuhn; La estructura de las revoluciones científicas ; Richard Hofstadter; “The Paranoid Style in American Politics”; Guerra Fría; James B. Conant; lavado de cerebro. It is the use of paranoid modes of expression by more or less normal people that makes the phenomenon significant. –Richard Hofstadter (1964, 4) 1. Introduction The conventional wisdom holds that Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions of- fered a revolutionary critique of existing scholarship about science. The book swept aside misconceptions wrought by three kinds of intellectuals—logic-chopping philos- ophers who confused their logical models and formulas with historical fact, Whiggish historians who viewed science’s past through the lenses of the present, and text-book writers whose brief, potted historical introductions obscured science’s dynamic, revo- lutionary history.
    [Show full text]
  • A Measure of Detachment: Richard Hofstadter and the Progressive Historians
    A MEASURE OF DETACHMENT: RICHARD HOFSTADTER AND THE PROGRESSIVE HISTORIANS A Thesis Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS By Wiliiam McGeehan May 2018 Thesis Approvals: Harvey Neptune, Department of History Andrew Isenberg, Department of History ABSTRACT This thesis argues that Richard Hofstadter's innovations in historical method arose as a critical response to the Progressive historians, particularly to Charles Beard. Hofstadter's first two books were demonstrations of the inadequacy of Progressive methodology, while his third book (the Age of Reform) showed the potential of his new way of writing history. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................i CHAPTER 1. A MEASURE OF DETACHMENT..........................................................................1 2. SOCIAL DARWINISM IN AMERICAN THOUGHT………………………………………………26 3. THE AMERICAN POLITICAL TRADITION…………………………………………………………..52 4. THE AGE OF REFORM…………………………………………………………………………………….100 5. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………………………139 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..144 CHAPTER ONE A MEASURE OF DETACHMENT Great thinkers often spend their early years in rebellion against the teachers from whom they have learned the most. Freud would say they live out a form of the Oedipal archetype, that son must murder his father at least a little bit if he is ever to become his own man.
    [Show full text]
  • Theorizing Three Cases of Otherness in the USA: Hofstadter, Foucault, and Scott
    University of New England DUNE: DigitalUNE All Theses And Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 5-1-2017 Theorizing Three Cases Of Otherness In The SU A: Hofstadter, Foucault, And Scott Austin Coco University of New England Follow this and additional works at: http://dune.une.edu/theses Part of the Political Science Commons © 2017 Austin Coco Preferred Citation Coco, Austin, "Theorizing Three Cases Of Otherness In The SAU : Hofstadter, Foucault, And Scott" (2017). All Theses And Dissertations. 136. http://dune.une.edu/theses/136 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at DUNE: DigitalUNE. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses And Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DUNE: DigitalUNE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Austin Coco Dr. Ahmida PSC 491 4/18//17 Theorizing Three Cases of Otherness in the USA: Hofstadter, Foucault, and Scott Austin Coco Coco|1 Dr. Ahmida PSC 491 4/18//17 Theorizing Three Cases of Otherness in the USA: Hofstadter, Foucault, and Scott Introduction This essay examines three cases of otherness: the Italian other in the 1920s, the Communist other during the Red Scare of the 1950s, and the Muslim other in post-2001. The similarities and differences of these cases will be analyzed through Richard Hofstadter’s analysis of the production of otherness for what he calls the paranoid style, Foucault’s analysis of power relations, and James Scott’s analysis of power relations and language. This essay will assess the theoretical methods behind “otherness” that Hofstadter, Foucault, and Scott use, the three cases of “otherness”, and the similarities and differences between the cases and how the theoretical mechanisms apply.
    [Show full text]
  • What Kind of Book Is the Ideological Origins of the American Revolution?
    What Kind of Book is The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution? eric nelson first read Bernard Bailyn’s The Ideological Origins of the I American Revolution when I was a nineteen-year-old stu- dent in the Harvard History Department’s sophomore tutorial. The text was assigned by my late friend and teacher Mark Kish- lansky, who began our discussion of the book by posing the same deceptively simple question that he asked about each his- toriographical masterwork on the syllabus: “What kind of book is this?” I remember thinking rather smugly that, in this case at least, the question had an obvious and straightforward answer: surely, Ideological Origins was a work of intellectual history— and, more specifically, a contribution to the history of early American political thought. But it now strikes me that this an- swer, while not incorrect, was, and is, quite beside the point. Mark was not asking us a banal question about the genre to which Bailyn’s monograph belonged, but rather a deep one about how Bailyn understood that genre. To present Ideological Origins as a history of political thought is, implicitly, to defend a particular conception of what sort of thing “political thought” is and what its history looks like. What, Mark wished us to pon- der, is that conception? I found myself asking this question with a renewed sense of urgency more than fifteen years later as I grappled witha I am indebted to Bernard Bailyn, Richard Bourke, Jonathan Gienapp, James Hank- ins, Michael Rosen, and Quentin Skinner for extremely helpful comments on this essay.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mad, Mad World of Textbook Adoption
    The Mad, Mad World of Textbook Adoption Foreword by Chester E. Finn, Jr. Introduction by Diane Ravitch 1627 K Street Northwest Suite 600 Washington D.C. 20006 (202) 223-5452 (202) 223-9226 Fax www.edexcellence.net September 2004 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute is a nonprofit organization that conducts research, issues publications, and directs action projects in elementary/secondary education reform at the national level and in Dayton, Ohio. It is affiliated with the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. Further information is at www.edexcellence.net/institute, or write us at 1627 K Street Northwest Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20006 This report is available in full on the web site. Additional copies can be ordered at www.edexcellence.net/institute/publication/order.cfm or by calling 410-634-2400. The Thomas B. Fordham Institute is neither connected with nor sponsored by Fordham University. Cover illustration by Thomas Fluharty, all rights reserved Design by Katherine Rybak Torres, all rights reserved Printed by District Creative Printing, Upper Marlboro, Maryland Executive Summary extbook Adoption: The process, in place in twenty-one states, of Treviewing textbooks according to state guidelines and then man- dating specific books that schools must use, or lists of approved text- books that schools must choose from. Textbook Adoption Is Bad for Students and Schools It consistently produces second-rate textbooks that replicate the same flaws and failings over and over again. Adoption states perform poorly on national tests, and the market incentives caused by the adop- tion process are so skewed that lively writing and top-flight scholarship are discouraged.
    [Show full text]
  • David Greenberg
    DAVID GREENBERG Professor of History Professor of Journalism & Media Studies Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey 4 Huntington Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901 646.504.5071 • [email protected] Education. Columbia University, New York, NY. PhD, History. 2001. MPhil, History. 1998. MA, History. 1996. Yale University, New Haven, CT. BA, History. 1990. Summa cum laude. Phi Beta Kappa. Distinction in the major. Academic Positions. Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. Professor, Departments of History and Journalism & Media Studies. 2016- . Associate Professor, Departments of History and Journalism & Media Studies. 2008-2016. Assistant Professor, Department of Journalism & Media Studies. 2004-2008. Appointment to the Graduate Faculty, Department of History. 2004-2008. Affiliation with Department of Political Science. Affiliation with Department of Jewish Studies. Affiliation with Eagleton Institute of Politics. Columbia University, New York, NY. Visiting Associate Professor, Department of History, Spring 2014. Yale University, New Haven, CT. Lecturer, Department of History and Political Science. 2003-04. American Academy of Arts & Sciences, Cambridge MA. Visiting Scholar. 2002-03. Columbia University, New York, NY. Lecturer, Department of History. 2001-02. Teaching Assistant, Department of History. 1996-99. Greenberg, CV, p. 2. Other Journalism and Professional Experience. Politico Magazine. Columnist and Contributing Editor, 2015- The New Republic. Contributing Editor, 2006-2014. Moderator, “The Open University” blog, 2006-07. Acting Editor (with Peter Beinart), 1996. Managing Editor, 1994-95. Reporter-researcher, 1990-91. Slate Magazine. Contributing editor and founder of “History Lesson” column, the first regular history column by a professional historian in the mainstream media. 1998-2015. Staff editor, culture section, 1996-98. The New York Times.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Historiography by William J. Reese This Is Not A
    History and Historiography by William J. Reese This is not a comprehensive bibliography on historical methods, but it offers a basic introduction to many important publications on the subject. In addition to journals such as History and Theory, there are a wide range of specialized periodicals that emphasize particular approaches to the past, too numerous to mention here. Examples include Social Science History, the Oral History Review, Historical Methods, the Journal of Social History, the Journal of Psychohistory, History and Sociology, and so forth. For postmodern approaches to the past, see Rethinking History. Alderson, William T. and Shirley P. Low. Interpretation of Historical Sites (1985). Allen, Barbara. From Memory to History: Using Oral Sources in Local Historical Research. (1981). Anderson, Jay. Time Machines: Living History Museums (1984). Anderson, Jay, ed., A Living History Reader (1991). Appleby, Joyce, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob, Telling the Truth About History (1994). Appleby, Joyce et al, eds., Knowledge and Postmodernism in Historical Perspective. (1996). Ashcroft, Bill et al., Post-Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts. (2005). Ashcroft, Bill et al., The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. (2006) Aydelotte, William. Quantification in History. (1971). Bailyn, Bernard. Education in the Forming of American Society. (1960) Banner, James M., Jr., and John R. Gillis, eds., Becoming Historians (2009). Barker, John. The Superhistorians. (1982). Barzun, Jacques. Clio and the Doctors: Psycho-History, Quanto- History, and History. (1976). Barzun, Jacques. The Modern Researcher. (c. 1985). 1 Barzun, Jacques. Simple and Direct: A Rhetoric for Writers. (1985). Beauchamp, Edward. Dissertations in the History of Education, 1970-1980. (1985). Becker, Carl. Everyman His Own Historian.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservatism of Richard Hofstadter 45
    The Conservatism of Richard Hofstadter 45 The Conservatism of Richard Hofstadter Ryan Coates Third Year Undergraduate, Durham University ‘We have all been taught to regard it as more or less “natural” for young dissenters to become conservatives as they grow older.’ Richard Hofstadter So proved to be the case for the author of this statement, the outstanding American historian of the twentieth century, Richard Hofstadter (1916-70). This assertion challenges the dominant orthodox portrayal of Hofstadter as the iconic public intellectual of post-war American liberalism. The orthodox interpretation, supported by biographer David Brown and historians Arthur Schlesinger and Sean Wilentz, demonstrates Hofstadter’s ideological progression from thirties radical, briefly a member of the Communist Party, to fifties liberal credited as the founder of consensus history.1 This interpretation draws upon Hofstadter’s most political works, includingThe American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It (1948), The Age of Reform (1955) and most prominently, the essays collected in The Paranoid Style in American Politics (1964), to reveal an apparent all-encompassing hostility toward conservatism. The revisionist interpretation, advanced by Hofstadter’s fellow New York intellectual Alfred Kazin and historians Robert Collins, Daniel Walker Howe and Peter Elliott Finn, challenges this one-dimensional portrayal of Hofstadter’s complex relationship to conservatism.2 Rather than flourishing into the iconic historian of American liberalism, the revisionists contend, Hofstadter’s intellectual development represented a gradual transition that had, by the end of his shortened life, culminated in a conversion to Burkean conservatism. Indeed, Kazin’s description of Hofstadter as a ‘secret conservative in a radical period’ encourages parallels 1 David S.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY Copy.Pages
    ! ! ! QUOTES ON HISTORY ! ! Civilization is a stream with banks. The stream is sometimes filled with blood from people killing stealing, shouting and doing the things historians usually record, while on the banks, unnoticed people build homes, make love, raise children, sing songs, write poetry and even whittle statues. The story of civilization is the story of what happened on the banks. Historians are pessimists because they ignore the banks for the river. ! --Will Durant The historian will tell you what happened. The novelist will tell you what it felt like. ! —E. L. Doctorow History gives us the facts, sort of, but from literary works we can learn what the past smelled like, sounded like, and felt like, the forgotten gritty details of a lost era. Literature brings us as close as we can come to reinhabiting the past. By re- claiming this use of literature in the classroom, perhaps we can move away from the political agitation that has been our bread and butter—or porridge and hardtack— for the last 30 years. ! —Scott Herring Great novelists are the true historians of the times in which they live. Stop and think about it for a minute and I’m sure you’ll find that you didn’t get your impres- sions of what life was like here and abroad in the last 300 years from the history books—but from the novels of such literary titans as Hardy, Dostoevsky, Dickens, Sinclair Lewis, Jane Austen, and Tolstoy. Writers like these had a kind of extrasen- sory perception which enabled them to see beneath the surface of the age—and, of course, the genius to bring people and events to life in stories that enthralled read- ers of their own time as well as later generations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Warren Court: a Distant Mirror? Part One—The Chief
    Antitrust , Vol. 33, No. 2, Spring 2019. © 2019 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. established the one-man, one-vote principle, expanded the rights of criminal defendants, bolstered free speech, and protected the right to disseminate and access birth control information. 3 Without the Warren Court, the United States would be a very dif - ferent place than it is today, with Americans having far fewer rights than they now do. During Warren’s tenure, in the area of antitrust, the Supreme Court continued down the path it had pursued since the end of World War II under the leadership of his two immediate prede - cessors, Harlan Fiske Stone and Carl Vinson. Under both Chief Justices, the Court established a record of voting consistently in favor of both the government and private plaintiffs in antitrust TRUST BUSTERS cases. 4 The most notable of the Court’s post-World War II deci - sions in support of strong antitrust enforcement were its 1946 ruling in American Tobacco ,5 finding the country’s leading tobac - The Warren Court: co producers guilty of a criminal violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act for conspiring to raise cigarette prices despite A Distant Mirror? declining demand; its 1948 rulings in Griffit h 6 and Paramount Pictures ,7 requiring the restructuring of the movie industry after Part On e—The Chief: finding that vertical integration by filmmakers into theatre own - ership was an act of monopolization in violation of Section 2; and its 1951 ruling in Timken Roller Bearing ,8 finding a market allo - Earl Warren cation agreement between U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Jefferson and the Agrarian Myth: a Reappraisal of Sources
    FACULTAD de FILOSOFÍA Y LETRAS DEPARTAMENTO de FILOLOGÍA INGLESA Grado en Estudios Ingleses TRABAJO DE FIN DE GRADO Thomas Jefferson and the Agrarian Myth: A Reappraisal of Sources José Augusto Salatino Indelicato Tutor: Anunciación Carrera de la Red 2013-2014 1 2 ABSTRACT This dissertation evaluates Thomas Jefferson’s agrarianism using Richard Hofstadter’s notion of the ‘Agrarian Myth’ (The Age of Reform, 1955). A literature review of studies on Jefferson’s claims for the rural life reveals two contesting views: one favorable to his agrarianism as a moral vision, another condemnatory against the stateman’s eventual pro-capitalist turn for commerce and manufacture. The simplistic reduction both positions make of Jefferson’s motivations to ‘morality’ in opposition to ‘politics’ and ‘economy’ asks for a reappraisal of sources. Here follows a new analysis of Jefferson’s addresses, writings and correspondece dealing with agrarian life and manufacture. The results indicate with Holowchak (2011) that the crux of the debate should not be ‘ethics’ but ‘morality’, but, contrary to him, that Jefferson’s ability to hide the pragmatic use of manufacture under the defense of non-commercial values, may be deemed ‘moral’ (acting depending on circumstance), precisely because it is ‘politica l’ and ‘economic’. KEYWORDS: Thomas Jefferson – Agrarian Myth – Jefferson’s Writings – Morality – Politics – Economy. Este trabajo analiza la presencia en los escritos de Thomas Jefferson de los elementos básicos que componen la noción ‘Mito Agrario’ ideada por Hofstadter (The Age of Reform, 1955). El repaso de las publicaciones existentes en torno el pensamiento de lo agrario en Jefferson muestra que unas aprueban sus actuaciones y otras condenan el giro pro-capitalista que dio en favor del comercio y la manufactura.
    [Show full text]
  • Power, Dissent, and the Contest of Intellectual Virtues in the 1950S
    The Anxiety of Irrelevance: Power, Dissent, and the Contest of Intellectual Virtues in the 1950s Allon Brann Senior Thesis April 2010 Advisor: Professor William Leach Second Reader: Professor Casey Blake 1 Acknowledgments If there is one thing about this essay that most satisfies me, it is that the process of writing it felt like a fitting conclusion to my undergraduate career. In conceiving of my project, I wanted to draw out the issues that most challenged me over four years of study, and to try to interrogate them, side by side, one last time. I want to say at the outset, then, that I believe each one of my extraordinary teachers at Columbia has contributed to this project. There has been no greater intellectual pleasure over the last four years than discovering unforeseen connections between the different texts and problems that I had the opportunity to investigate with each of them. There are, of course, a few whom I must identify here individually. Professor William Leach guided our seminar with great patience and taught me much about good historical writing. In addition to serving as my second reader for this essay, Professor Casey Blake laid the groundwork for my exploration of American intellectual history. He introduced me to many of the figures who have most inspired—and at times, troubled—me in my study of the past, and with whom I hope to continue to engage long after the completion of this project. I am grateful, as well, to Professor Ross Posnock, whose course pushed me to question the role of the thinker in American society, past and present.
    [Show full text]