FREE INQUIRY devotes this special section to Sidney Hook, who is both a distinguished philosopher and a dedicated secular and democratic humanist. Hook is professor emeritus at N.Y.U. and a . fellow at the at .

An Interview with Sidney Hook at Eighty

"The most important issue facing on a world scale is whether a free society can survive the multiple assaults of ."

Paul Kurtz: What in your opinion is the most important issue Commission of Inquiry into the Truth of the Trials. facing humanism in the world today? Long before Solzhenitsyn published his remarkable Gulag Sidney Hook: The most important issue facing human- Archipelago, which should be required reading for everyone ism on a world scale is whether a free society can survive the who discusses the internal regime of the , there multiple assaults of totalitarianism. By a free society I do not was sufficient evidence of the multiple ways in which the Soviet mean "a free-enterprise society," but one in which citizens have Union was violating not only human rights but its own norms the power to determine through the democratic political of legality. After the war, Great Britain and the United States process the economic as well as the other institutions under actively abetted the commission of the gruesome crime of the which they wish to live. On this view it is seriously misleading to forcible deportation of millions of refugees—men, women, and phrase the issue as the choice between capitalism and children from Soviet territory into the merciless hands of the in any of their varieties rather than between and GPU. No one in the Allied High Command—military or totalitarianism. It is obvious that political democracy, in which political noted the significance of the fact that even some of a legally recognized opposition party functions under the the survivors of Dachau sought to end their lives in the most protection or guarantee of basic civil rights, is a necessary horrible ways in order to avoid deportation. condition of a free and open society. It makes possible the The news recently released about the Chinese Gulag and extension of the values of democracy as a way of life to other the Vietnamese Gulag shows that essentially there is little areas. Despite the semantic corruption in the usage of the term difference in the degradation and cruelty of the treatment democracy by the enemies of the free society, it is manifestly visited upon their peoples by Communist totalitarian regimes. true that without political democracy no other kind of It should sorely trouble the conscience of those who hailed the democracy is possible. Chinese cultural revolution and the victory of the Hanoi The acuteness of the totalitarian threat to free institutions regime. There are also non-Communist countries with has increased since the end of World War II and is a result terroristic regimes that warrant our severest dispproval. I cite largely of the failure of the American and British governments the existence of the Communist Gulags not because it is our to realize that, although the Soviet Union was a co-belligerent responsibility to interfere with their internal regimes, much as in the war against Hitler, it was not a democratic ally. In the we may deplore them—that is the task of their own peoples— early days of the war warned that the conditions of but to indicate what is in store for the relatively free cultures of peace should be agreed upon while Stalin was in need of aid the world if the totalitarian regimes expand; and expand they from the , after Hitler double-crossed him, in order have, as the map of the world unmistakably shows. to limit the danger of postwar totalitarian advance. Kurtz: Does this mean that you endorse the position of Dewey had become familiar with the nature of Commun- Alexander Solzhenitsyn, whose book you have referred to? ist totalitarianism as a consequence of his service on the Hook: Not at all. Much as 1 admire his courage,

4 eloquence, and profound psychological insights, I disagree with his supernaturalism, his assumptions derived from Dostoyevsky that is based on religion (Smerdyakov, in The Brothers Karamazov: "If God doesn't exist everything is permissible"), and above all that the defense of freedom and the free society must ultimately rest upon some religious affirmation. I have elsewhere written a critical evaluation of Solzenitsyn's famous Harvard commencement address, and so I will content myself here with the last point. If the defense of the free society rests upon the revival and assertion of religious faith, we are lost. First, what is the religious faith in question? Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, or one of their varieties? Historically the free society of the West has developed in opposition to the authoritarian tendencies of institutional religion. Toleration and freedom of worship—especially freedom not to worship—have not been strongly favored by most religions. Religious freedom, even in the United States, historically owes more to the fact that no sect was powerful enough to impose its dogmas on others than to the enlightened defense of the human right to worship or not to worship according to one's conscience. Would contemporary believers in the God of the Ayatollah Khomeini risk their lives in defense of a free society? Second, by what authority, logical or historical, do we assume that God, if he exists, is on the side of democracy or the open society? Heaven and Hell are strict hierarchically ordered communities. It seems to me theologically presumptuous for Bruce Barton to contend that God is in favor of capitalism and equally absurd to deny this and assert that he is in favor of socialism, not to mention the unspeakable Red Dean of "Humanism to me is the view that morals are Canterbury, who held that the Holy Grail was housed in the autonomous of religious belief." Kremlin. Both Kierkegaard and the author of the Book of Job were convinced that God was beyond good and evil, for these Soviet Union and asserts that its practices in this area are not attributes are essentially related to human weal and woe and much different from what exists elsewhere in the West. And, their norms develop out of human experience. after listening to some Catholic bishops in the United States on Third, in the light of the words and actions of many devout the sinfulness of participating in the nuclear defense strategies churchmen today, I am bewildered by the assertions of some of our free society, one wonders whether they are candidates embattled defenders of the free society that our resistance to the for the Lenin Peace Prize. evils of totalitarianism must be founded on religious faith. One Kurtz: What do you think of the Fundamentalist Right? of the most shocking experiences of my life occurred at the Hook: The Fundamentalist Right is not so much a threat Humanist-Catholic Dialogue in New York at the height of the to the free society today as it is the price we pay for having a free Chinese cultural revolution. 1 spoke in defense of religious society in which the press and the air are open even to those freedom and inveighed against the Chinese execution of who wish to destroy it. You yourself have been the chief target religious missionaries, some of whom had devoted their lives to of the so-called Moral Majority, and I have been next to you on ministering to people who were outcasts in their own their list of "Satanists." I do not believe that they constitute a communities. Whereupon a Jesuit priest spoke up in support of majority, or that their position on many (not all) matters can be Mao's regime with a tirade against Western imperialism, justified on rational moral grounds. Nonetheless, I do not ignoring the vast millions of victims of Mao's despotism. Since believe that they constitute "a clear and present danger." As then the actions as well as the liberation theology of many secular humanists we should seek them out to discuss the issues Catholic priests have in effect made them staunch allies of before their constituencies, which are more numerous than totalitarian guerrillas whose conception of a free society is ours. The trouble is they are more interested in denunciation illustrated in present-day Cuba and Nicaragua. Nor is the than in discussion, as you know better than most. Protestant clergy free from this kind of confusion in thought What the Moral Majority signifies is a periodic and action. The National Council of Churches gave financial phenomenon in American history. When life becomes hard or aid and propagandistic comfort to terrorist groups in Africa. crime becomes rampant or public life-styles give offense to What conception of a free society can the Reverend Billy many ordinary citizens, there is a retreat to religion and a Graham have when under the influence of a bowl of Caspian mobilization of religious fervor to press for reforms, not in Sea caviar he finds no suppression of religious freedom in the their own terms—a good case can be made for the prohibition

Fall 1982 5 of hard-core pornography as a clear and present danger of the basis of some shared interests derived from common needs, incitement to violence against women—but in the light of the humanist seeks to expand the area of shared interests, Revelation and the Sacred Book. hopefully to induce those with conflicting interests to mediate I welcomed the conference on Science, the Bible, and them, if not to live and help live at least to live and let live. The Darwin, but there is a danger that we may have been talking humanist is tolerant of different faiths but not of those which mostly to each other. I approve thoroughly of FREE INQUIRY'S are actively intolerant of others. presentation of biblical criticism. It is long overdue. I suggest, Kurtz: Would you consider yourself an atheist or skeptic however, that another conference be convoked on "The Bible and in what sense? from the Standpoint of Rational Morality," to which all the Hook: In any sense of the words that would avoid preachers of the Moral Majority should be invited. Discussion confusion. I have always been impressed by Charles Peirce's of some of the more remarkable episodes in the Bible could remark that "there is such a thing as the ethics of words" and a open up new perspectives. Although I am no prophet, I believe philosopher has an intellectual obligation to abide by them. the Moral Majority in its present organized phase is a transient Historically we can understand why Spinoza and Hegel used phenomenon, but the irrational and unscientific attitudes it the word God. If they had called themselves "atheists" they expresses will remain with us for a long time. So long as we can might not have survived. But I am puzzled by the tendency of engage them in debate, we can contain them. There is no need modern philosophers to use the term, since the traditional to exaggerate their power. They are less of a danger to theologians are sure to nestle some of their beliefs under the today than the radical minority on protective shadow of its penumbral connotations. W hen university campuses was a few years ago. With due allowance people say, "God is love," before long we find that He is much for the maturity of students, the scientific study of evolution more than that. When reading the manuscript of Dewey's should also discuss some of its difficulties and problems. The Common Faith, I asked him why he used the term God for the most effective way of getting those who insist upon making validity of moral ideals. Among other things, he said he mandatory the presentation of the biblical story of creation to thought there was no danger that he would be misunderstood. withdraw their proposal would be to insist that this story be Wieman proved him wrong. The God human beings worship is subjected to the same rigorous analysis and criticism we adopt a person of sorts, and with respect to him I am no more a in considering other hypotheses. The greatest fear of the skeptic or agnostic than I am about Santa Claus. I am willing to religious fundamentalists is an incisive, objective analysis of call myself an atheist except when it is assumed— gratuit- their dogmas about the origin and nature of the physical ously—that an atheist must be a Communist. world. In passing I should like to clear myself of the gentle Kurtz: As one of our leading secular-humanist philoso- impeachment of some of my colleagues that, in my defense of phers, precisely what do you think is? human rights in my various writings, I have violated Peirce's Hook: "Precisely" is hardly the word to use in character- maxim about the ethics of words. I plead not guilty, because in izing a broad movement whose historical development is my analyses of the concept of human rights, I always deny that overlaid with many nonessential features. Humanism to me is human rights are natural rights and that they exist independent- the view that morals are autonomous of religious belief, that ly of man, society, and history. For me, human rights are they are relevant to truths about nature and human nature, morally justifiable claims made in behalf of all persons to the truths that rest on scientific evidence. Humanism in this sense enjoyment of certain basic freedoms, goods, and services which does not entail any specific metaphysical or epistemological reflection establishes as necessary to achieve a disirable human belief. For all their philosophical differences John Dewey, estate. Morally justifiable claims are rational proposals to treat , and Brand Blanshard are humanists. By human beings in certain ways. Human rights are not names of secular humanism I mean the view that religious belief and any metaphysical entities. Since they conflict, none is absolute disbelief are a private matter and therefore there should be a or always supreme. separation of church and state. (I have developed the position On the other hand, I find unwarranted the contention of in my book The Place of Religion in a Free Society [Universi- Ayer and his lesser disciples that I have no intellectual right to ty of Nebraska Press].) I find that secular humanists are the call myself an atheist since the term "God" is unintelligible to strongest protagonists of religious freedom, not as "the them. I do not believe we have a right to legislate what exists in residuary of ecclesiastical animosities" but as intrinsic to the world on the basis of a special theory of meaning. The term freedom of thought. Belief in supernaturalism is compatible God is intelligible to me, and I usually find some anthropomor- with secular humanism when the autonomy of moral judgment phic conception of God peeping out of the nebulous is recognized and this is coupled with acceptance of separation abstractions of contemporary theologians. At any rate the of church and state. Epicurus and were burden of proof for the existence of anything in dispute in this supernaturalists of sorts, but as I read them they are, or would world rests on those making the assertion. be, secular humanists. Let's face it. Freedom of religious belief or disbelief is To a humanist, no great human problem is purely integral to freedom of thought. Traditional lines of division on technical. Moral judgment is always involved. Reasonable this issue no longer hold. There is less religious freedom and moral decisions always require recognition of the human intellectual freedom in countries like the Soviet Union and its interests involved, their historical contexts, and the assessment satellites, where atheism is the state religion, so to speak, or in of the consequences of alternative policies in meeting them. On Iran, where a Muslim theocracy runs amok, than in most other

6 countries. I am therefore prepared to make common cause with was opposed to supporting the war against because I anyone who genuinely believes in religious and intellectual believed that it would result in fascism in the United States. freedom, regardless of our other differences, but not with any But, when Hitler reached the English Channel, I came out for professed atheist who supports a totalitarianism, of any cut or our involvement in the struggles against him on the ground that fashion. the risk of his victory and the consequent worldwide extinction Kurtz: Many people have labeled you a "neo-conserva- of freedom was greater than the risk of internal repression, tive." Is that an accurate description of your political which we could prevent. We succeeded, but with two ? unfortunate yet not fatal lapses (the treatment of our Japanese Hook: No. Most of those who have characterized me as a citizens and the prosecution of the Socialist Workers Party). neo-conservative or one of the godfathers of the movement On some central matters I have not altered my views. All have not read what I have written. The use of labels rather than my life I have been opposed to invidious discrimination on an analysis of issues is the bane of political discussion. Irving grounds of race, religion, sex, and national origin, and quota Kristol has defined a neo-conservative as "a liberal slugged by systems based on it. Today the miscalled programs of reality." To me a liberal is one who is, and always was, prepared affirmative action, which distort the plain intent of the key to test his ideals in the light of relevant experience. Anyone who executive orders and congressional legislation, violate every clings to a position or an ideal "no matter what" is a fanatic. liberal principle in this area—notably, the civil service principle Since the good life consists of devotion to a plurality of ideals that posts should go to those who are most qualified, and that or values, anyone who is prepared to sacrifice everything to one the sins of the fathers, the Bible notwithstanding, should not be end, no matter how exalted, will make a shambles of his moral visited upon their innocent offspring. Does this make me a neo- economy and the world as well. As Dewey pointed out, the conservative? In my life, many of the conservatives I have moral situation is defined not by the conflict between the good known have practiced discrimination, especially in the and the bad—there is no conflict when they are recognized as universities and professions. Now so-called liberals do. such—but between the good and the good, the right and the Since I became interested in politics, I have always.been right. Intelligence, which is the only absolute value in the sense impressed by Jefferson's fear of judicial despotism in that it is the judge of its own limitations, enables us to choose democracy. During the thirties it was common liberal coin. I the alternative which offers the best prospect of strengthening still believe that the power of a nonelected Supreme Court to the entire structure of human rights and values. This holds true nullify congressional legislation is a usurpation of power. The in both social and as well. first time the Court dared to exercise its power of nullification, I confess to having learned something from experience. sixty years after the Constitution was adopted, it contributed to When I published Towards the Understanding of the Civil War. The attitude of many militant liberals to this on the fiftieth anniversary of Karl Marx's death, his analysis of power of the Supreme Court, with its absurd 5-4 votes that capitalism seemed sound. Now, as we approach the one- determine the destiny of the nation, depends upon whose ox is hundredth anniversary of his death, it is clear that his analysis being gored. To my mind a principled democrat who accepts was faulty. The relative prosperity of Western economics, the the division of powers must give preponderance to the emergence of the state, and the intensification of legislative body, which is directly responsible to the people. The nationalism defeated his major predictions. The Soviet Union Supreme Court, like the presidential veto, should be a check has transformed the socialist dream into a totalitarian on an impulsive or unreflective congressional majority. But nightmare. Indeed, Lenin and his followers refuted the theory provision should be made to override vetoes. We elect our of historical materialism by showing it was possible to seize legislators not our justices. Today the Courts are deciding political power and then build under it a new economic questions that do not fall within their legitimate province. substructure or foundation, which the Marxian theory Listening to apologists for our imperial judiciary, one gets the declared historically impossible. In one respect, however, the impression that the Court itself is the only legitimate judge of Russian October Revolution confirmed Marx's analysis. He what falls within its province. contended that the attempt to collectivize a backward nation with an economy of scarcity would lead to the socialization of "If the defense of the free society rests upon the misery. He was right, but he failed to account for the attempt to do what he declared couldn't be done and for the momentous revival and assertion of religious faith, we are lost." consequences, of the attempt; nor do Marxist theories do justice to the event-making personality of Lenin, without Does this make me a neo-conservative? whom the October Revolution could not have occurred, and As one who believes in democracy as a way of life, I am other event-making personalities in history, including Marx bewildered by the outcry in liberal quarters against the himself. convocation of a constitutional convention or the denial of the But the very ideals that led me to an early acceptance of right of Congress to determine the appellate jurisdiction of the and the Russian Revolution led me in the light of Supreme Court, which is clearly specified in the Constitution. experience to criticize them. History, Marx's own test, has been On all sides I hear the panic cry: "Who can tell what the guilty of /ese-Marxism. Today we must go beyond it. delegates will do if they get together? They may abolish the Bill Yes, I have been wrong about many things and have of Rights, approve the death penalty, or what not!" The fact changed my mind in the light of evidence. In the late thirties that three-quarters of the states must approve any decision cuts

Fall 1982 7 no ice with these fearful minds. Apparently they believe that a issue of our time, it is appropriate to stress that the strongest majority of our citizens are too stupid or too vicious to be and most consistent opponents of totalitarianism at home or entrusted with self-government. On what grounds then can abroad have been the members of the American organized- they hold to the democratic faith? I have always thought it labor movement. Contrast their position with respect to axiomatic that in a democracy the appeal from an unenlight- Poland to that of the banking community. Many who say that ened majority must be made not to an enlightened minority but they put freedom first really mean that they put profit first. I am to an enlightened majority. As labels are used these days horrified to find that some so-called libertarians with their perhaps that makes me a downright reactionary. I take no fetish for the free market would find nothing wrong in selling stand, at the moment, on any particular issue scheduled for advanced technology and military hardware to the Soviet consideration at a constitutional convention. All I am Union even if they were to be used for the destruction of the free contending for is the democratic legitimacy of such a world. One should not sell rope to the hangmen of freedom. convention. Kurtz: But aren't there other threats to the existence of On the other hand, l have always regarded filibusters as a the free world, for example, as the libertarians claim, from the violation of the democratic political process, and still do, growth of the public sector of the economy? regardless of the issues involved. Hook: We cannot deduce facts from our fingertips or Kurtz: Do you still consider yourself a democratic from first principles of any kind. Let us look at the record! socialist or a social-democrat and in what sense? Since 1890 the public sector of our economy has grown Hook: These terms require extensive explication to be tremendously. Yet if we contrast the state of religious freedom, meaningful, and I have written at length about them in my political freedom, artistic freedom, academic freedom, ethnic recent book Philosophy and Public Policy. At present I am a freedom, freedom of the press and communication, and member of Social-Democrats, U.S.A., and I eschew the term freedom of tolerated life-styles, it seems to me to be democratic socialist because of the recent behavior of Willy indisputable that in every one of these areas freedoms today Brandt and the , which has refused to have luxuriated far beyond what was the case in 1890, when our adopt resolutions condemning the Cuban Gulag and Castro's economy was much freer and less regulated than it is today. The terroristic regime. This group has also solidarized themselves economy, Marxists and some anti-Marxists to the contrary, with the ruling camarilla in Nicaragua and the extremist does not uniquely determine our culture so that expansion of guerrillas in El Salvador. They also support those who charge economic control necessarily leads to the control of all other the U.S. with colonialism in Puerto Rico, whose citizens— areas of life. We are not on the road to serfdom. Nor are the unfortunately, for my part—have by free vote opted for other Western welfare states so long as political democracy commonwealth status or statehood by overwhelming remains intact. The phenomena I deplore, like the subordina- majorities rather than for independence. Sometimes I believe tion of individual rights to group rights and the growth of the Brandt is aping the role of Fierlinger in Czechoslovakia. This imperial judiciary, reflect the failure of our political courage believer in , like Kreisky in and and wisdom rather than our economic helplessness. We could Palme in Sweden, is following a policy that imperils Western eliminate these political excrescences on our body politic freedom. without modifying our mixed economic system. As a social-democrat I am still a supporter of a strong and Kurtz: Does not the growth of nuclear weapons threaten genuine . If all the fraud and incompetence were all society, free and unfree? wrung out of the main poverty programs, they would be less Hook: Yes. Every sane person is or should be opposed to burdensome. Inflation and unemployment are our major nuclear war. But the real problem is how to prevent such a war? economic problems. Listening to the economists today is like Until now reliance upon the principle of deterrence has kept the listening to conficting teams of psychiatrists debating the sanity peace. But what about the future? Will a nuclear freeze do it? of a defendant. I am not convinced that anyone knows how to Not unless the nuclear freeze is verifiable by on-site inspection, cope with the major problems. Because of the potential of and not if it results in leaving the Soviet Union in a position of totalitarianism that lies in a socialized economy should nuclear superiority that may tempt it to engage in nuclear political democracy ever be abridged or lost, I prefer a mixed blackmail. Agreements are not self-enforcing. Our free culture economy in which only when the private sector fails to meet the guarantees that if the United States violated any agreement legitimate needs of the community should resort be made to the there would be a public outcry. In the USSR there is no public sector. In adopting economic policies we should try to indepdendent press or public opinion. Every member of the live up to the principle of approximate equality of burdens and Helsinki Watch Committee, set up to monitor the Soviet sacrifices. I am very sympathetic in general to the domestic fulfillment of its pledges at the Helsinki Accords, is in jail. The program of the organized American labor movement, although Soviets cheer on the nuclear-freeze movement in the West but not always in agreement with it. For example, I regard the crush it inside their own borders and in their satellites. Is that a strike of the air-controllers union as a piece of colossal sign of sincerity? Recall it was the United States that offered to stupidity on the part of its leaders that should have been surrender its monopoly of atomic weapons to an international disavowed by the AFL-CIO. Nonetheless I agree that the authority a proposal accepted by all nations except the Soviet community has a moral responsibility to provide opportunities Union.•The Kremlin's rejection of the generous proposal of the for employment to all who are willing to work. Baruch-Lilienthal Plan led Bertrand Russell unwisely to Because I believe that the defense of freedom is the basic advocate that the Soviet Union be atom-bombed.

8 Yftuaatmisr11Y., ' Even if there is a nuclear freeze at present levels, both sides made remarkable linguistic progress. would still have enough fire power to make each other's The public schools in the past were a unifying experience territory uninhabitable. Much safer is gradual multilateral that developed a common tradition in which subcultural disarmament under ironclad mutual on-site inspection. Those differences were respected. Their success can be gauged from who are urging American unilateral disarmament in hope of the fact that for many years the Catholic hierarchy regarded the survival at any cost do not understand the nature of public school as Public Enemy Number One. With sufficient Communist totalitarianism or the geography of its mind. public monetary support, with aroused and militant parental interest working cooperatively with teachers' organizations, "With all our problems, I do not despair. So long as the public schools may win their way back to public esteem, the democratic process remains intact, it depends on and new achievements. However, I fear that if the voucher us—on our courage, our intelligence, our willingness system is adopted it may destroy the public schools. Parents to take risks and make sacrifices on issue after issue eager to facilitate the educational future of their children will withdraw them from the embattled public schools and seek to to improve matters." enroll them in elite private schools. The latter will be very selective, avoiding the dull, disorderly, and unmotivated (Khrushchev's threat to use nuclear weapons against China was children as they now do. The public schools will be left with the no empty threat.) Instead of being Red rather than dead, they rejects—properly compelled by law to accept them. In such may end up first Red and then dead. Our alternatives are not circumstances even public-spirited parents will lose hope in the limited to war or surrender. We can escape both by intelligent public schools and, out of consideration for their offspring, deployment of our intellectual and material resources. withdraw them. The vicious circle of middle-class flight. from Kurtz: How do we develop the intellectual and rational public schools and lower-class fight in the schools would not be resources of the community? broken. Hook: In a democracy we can do it only by an aroused With respect to higher education I believe there should be and informed public opinion developed through educational universal access to institutions of higher education by anyone institutions on every level. qualified to do the work that defines higher education. The Kurtz: In that case what do you make of the current open-admissions policy has turned many colleges into remedial assault on the public schools, and how can they be institutions. Within the limit of community resources, strengthened? provision may be made for every individual who desires to Hook: I can understand the general dissatisfaction with learn to attend some institution at which he or she may the public schools in view of the decline of even minimally educationally profit (and the community as well), but it does adequate standards of discipline and, in consequence, the not have to be the same institution for all, and it does not erosion of the quality of teaching and learning. The courts are require that they be degree-granting institutions. largely responsible for the inability of the schools to exclude, or Kurtz: Concerning your own work, what books of the isolate for special educational regimens, the incorrigible forty-odd you have written or edited best express your point of troublemakers who have turned some schools into jungles in view? which the teachers themselves have become fearful of life and Hook: and the Tragic Sense of Life and The limb. It requires the shenanigans of only one or two students Quest .for Being. I am trying to complete my political and who cut up in order to conceal their incapacity or unwillingness intellectual autobiography, which 1 hope will be of interest to to learn to demoralize a class and prevent everyone from those who were born yesterday, so to speak, and look at the learning. Democracy in education does not mean that students world as if it had no relevant historical past. The book is still and parents have the same rights and authority as teachers, but untitled. only that each child is entitled to the opportunity to acquire the Kurtz: On a personal note, what has given you the knowledge, values, and skills necessary for desirable growth. greatest joy in life? The community has lost its pride in the public schools and has Hook: Aside from the love of my wife, children, given them step-motherly treatment. There is insufficient grandchildren, and friends, the books I have written, the classes appreciation of the dedicatory efforts of the teachers. Instead I have taught, the battles I have fought, and the sight of my of fleeing from the public schools, parents should organize to students making their own independent way. fight for public schools. Learning cannot take place where Kurtz: In conclusion, looking back on your eighty years, racial tensions are rife. Forced busing, as every honest observer what gives you the most concern about the world today? will testify, has intensified racial tensions. Here, too, the Courts Hook: Many things, but I would have to write a book to have been irresponsible, as well as in undermining the seniority deal adequately with your question. But off-hand I shall system in the tenure of teachers, which subverts teacher morale. mention a few things. The blatant hypocrisy of the double The imposition of bilingual education, a political rather than standard that pervades political and intellectual life. Just the an educationally justifiable measure, compounds the other day I read a letter from a Nobel laureate maintaining that problems. In the pre-World War I ghetto public-school I our judgment about the Israel advance in Lebanon should not attended, children came from the most diverse ethnic be based on whether it furthers Israeli interests or American backgrounds—Polish, German, Italian, Jewish—most from interests but mainly on the criteria of "justice, decency and homes in which English was not spoken, but all the children compassion." This from a man who refused to condemn the

Fall 1982 9 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the suppression in Poland, the Soviet invasions of Czechoslovakia and Hungary, and the terroristic practices of the Hanoi and Cambodian regimes whose innocent victims number in the millions. However, regardless of the outcome in Lebanon, the Palestinians should be given the genuine autonomy promised in the Camp David accords. I am also appalled at the failure of avowed liberals to give Sidney Hook even a hearing to those with whom they disagree—a hangover from the sixties. Just as deplorable is the tendency of pressure groups that have lost a struggle in the legislative process to resort to extra-legal action to impose their position on the community. Those of us who are secular, rationalist humanists A Personal Portrait have been too sanguine about the willingness of vested interests to submit their claims to public criticism and adjudication. It is sometimes necessary to use force intelligently to resist the illegal and unjust use of force. Legal enforcement breaks down in the face of stubborn violations of the law. If enough people violate the immigation laws, sooner or later a demand is made that they be given immunity, which sparks another wave of illegal immigration. The lack of respect for and the vandalism of public property is taken as a matter of course. Almost anything goes in the way of manners. The hypnotic effect of Nicholas Capaldi radio and television, its patent bias and one-sidedness in presenting controversial issues, can only be countered by Legend and Myth raising the educational level of the listeners and insisting on the enforcement of the fairness doctrine. For Americans, this is a time of much soul-searching. It is a Nonetheless, with all our problems, I do not despair. So time when it is difficult to find an idea, not to say an ideal, that long as the democratic process remains intact, it depends on can be taken seriously—one not dismissed as intellectually us—on our courage, our intelligence, our willingness to take partisan, one not the product of fad or of commercial risks and make sacrifices on issue after issue to improve exploitation—an idea that can stand on its own, without MSG matters. As unsatisfactory as conditions are domestically, let us so to speak. Symptomatic of this state of affairs is the special ponder the significance of the fact that if there were a free sigh of relief that intellectuals have learned to breathe when all movement of peoples all over the world, it is not from this those hooks that blaze across the pages of country that masses would flee. Large numbers risk their lives Book Review pass, like comets, before we are obliged to read to become illegal aliens. Although weakened by foolish policy them. In the absence of serious ideas, perhaps we should look in the last few decades, the United States is still the haven of for a serious mind. I have a candidate to recommend—Sidney freedom and the strongest friend and defender of other free Hook. cultures, which in the absence of the United States could not Sidney Hook is both a legend and a myth. Although it is long withstand being absorbed, peacefully or not, by an flattering to be a living legend, there is also a price to be paid for expanding totalitarianism. it. Legends exist in the realm of fiction and pre-history, so in Internationally my chief concern is the rise of neutralism time we find it inconvenient to take them seriously. For those of and in Western Europe and the growth of a policy of us who do daily battle with intellectual pygmies, it is easy to appeasement that may precipitate the war these movements ignore that Hook slew dragons. But even his detractors seek to avoid. This is the same policy that Winston Churchill grudgingly must admit that they enjoy certain privileges declared was responsible for "the needless war," until now the because of battles he fought and won before they were old greatest disaster in human history. enough to write for, or even to read, the New York Review of A historical perspective is necessary, although not Books. sufficient of course for good judgment. Conditions are never Hook is admired by his friends, peers, and students for his what they ought to be. Every achievement generates new brilliance, his courage, and his seemingly unlimited energy in problems. The horizon keeps on receding. We sometimes yield the service of causes to which he is dedicated. He is feared by his to a mood of despair brought on by cumulative frustration, the enemies because of his polemical skills and his ability to see sense of always falling short. A possible corrective is to take historical note of the distance we have come, when we look Nicholas Capaldi is professor of philosophy at Queens College, back at where we started, not to rest in our efforts but to take LUNY. This article is from the . forthcoming book Sidney strength and confidence for further endeavors. The paradox is Hook: Philosopher of Humanism and Democracy, ed. by Paul that we must regard some values as dearer than life in order to Kurtz (, Buffalo, N.Y.) ennoble and preserve life. •

10 MICWQITTOW