Andrew Mcnally on John Dewey, America's Peace-Minded

Charles F. Howlett, Audrey Cohan. John Dewey, America's Peace-Minded Educator. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2016. 328 pp. $45.00, paper, ISBN 978-0-8093-3504-6. Reviewed by Andrew McNally Published on H-SHGAPE (April, 2017) Commissioned by Jay W. Driskell At worst, intellectual biographies transform a scholarly output of Deweyana surely rivals that of human being into a shelf of books written by the most other American intellectuals. It’s difficult, subject. Or, they admire their subject so much therefore, to imagine what freshness one could they rollick in oversharing their subject’s banali‐ uncover. Nevertheless, Audrey Cohan and Charles ties. (Imagine three chapters on the benevolent in‐ Howlett’s John Dewey: America’s Peace-Minded fluence of a mathematician’s paternal uncle dur‐ Educator manages to uncover more. The book un‐ ing late adolescence, or an exegesis of a literary snarls his prose and says something fresh about critic’s passion for kiting in Wales--okay, I exag‐ Dewey’s commitment to peace and international‐ gerate, but we can all point to our favorite exam‐ ist movements. By doing so, the book illuminates ples of this type of excess). The best, however, do new reasons for the popularization of the peace both--reveal the spirit of a person’s contributions movement during the interwar years. The authors precisely through her least conspicuous moments. do not answer all of the questions they raise, but (Nick Salvatore’s biography of Eugene Debs, or they do open a conversation about Dewey’s role in Linda Gordon’s biography of Dorothea Lange the making of American internationalism. come to mind for me). Howlett and Cohan overstate their case in Anyone would fnd this trick hard to master saying that “researchers have not previously ad‐ in the case of John Dewey. Dewey is too often re‐ dressed his [Dewey’s] idea of education as an in‐ garded with a degree of mysticism: hard to read, strument of reform and democratic fairness” (p. hard to miss, and hard to question, so great is the xvi). Yet, with the exception of Howlett’s earlier reverence for his influence, and so pungent is his Troubled Philosopher (1977), few have asked reputation for tangled prose. At least a half-dozen questions about Dewey’s sense of international academic monographs exclusively about Dewey justice. As a result, the authors seem eager to have been published since 2000 alone, and the make up for lost ground. In the opening section, H-Net Reviews they outline an ambitious agenda for their book. Dewey’s pragmatist, “democracy-as-a-way-of-life” They aim to show changes in Dewey’s views on philosophy emblematized the emergence of a po‐ peace, in particular his transformation “from a litical philosophy more like modern pacifism. progressive idealist supporting America’s war Howlett and Cohan--borrowing Martin Ceadel’s aims” during the First World War to, after, “one term--call this “pacificism,” a belief which views who would only condone a permissible war as a peace more as a means than a principled end. For matter of conscience” (p. xv), and to explore the the authors, Dewey’s conversion to pacifism helps connections between changes in Dewey’s views explain these broader transformations in the with the broader secularization and populariza‐ peace movement. tion of the peace movement during the interwar Their most persuasive writing is not that years. They furthermore attempt to elaborate his which defends the inconsistency of Dewey’s views contributions to early twentieth-century interna‐ on war and peace. Neither does their strongest tionalist thinking, and to explore the ways that writing foist, as they are sometimes liable to do, a Dewey induced “grassroots participation to influ‐ procrustean narrative onto the development of ence and direct the affairs of society” (p. xvii). Un‐ his views. The most successful of their chapters der this umbrella of goals, the book covers a lot of rather keep the book’s many goals in view as they bibliographic territory. It surveys much of chart Dewey's halting acceptance of the peace Dewey’s substantial written legacy in the philoso‐ movement. For example, one chapter explores phy of social action. The book weaves together his Dewey’s struggle to reconcile his pragmatist be‐ 1880s writings like Outlines of a Critical Theory of liefs with his support for the First World War. Ethics with much later works like his 1939 work, Howlett and Cohan how Dewey struggled to Freedom and Culture. square his stated support for the war with some Howlett and Cohan situate their work within of the war's more antidemocratic outcomes. He the standard historiography of the peace move‐ experienced ferce criticism from former devotees ment. For historians like Charles Chatfield, David like Randolph Bourne. I was not convinced when Patterson, Lawrence Wittner, and Merle Curti, Howlett and Cohan take Dewey at his word that prior to the First World War, American pacifism “advancing the social foundations of democracy” was elitist and dogmatic, and consisted largely of lay at the heart of his support (p. 71). But merely members of Christian "Peace Churches,” which re‐ discussing the debates in which Dewey engaged jected personal contributions to war in all forms. does much to illuminate the issues at stake in his [1] From these parochial roots, pacifism became decision to support the war. secularized and popularized in the twentieth cen‐ Cohan and Howlett are quite persuasive in ar‐ tury, spanning a broader set of concerns. Since guing that Dewey’s guiding concern (for better or the 1920s, pacifism has adopted mass movement worse) lay with the outcomes of social policy. techniques while qualifying its insistence on abso‐ Dewey’s shift away from Wilsonian international‐ lute nonparticipation in war efforts. Rather than ism thus came only after he had seen the mili‐ opposition to war in principle, pacifists were taristic effects of the war. The most successful more likely opposed to particularly unjust wars. chapter, for example, examines Dewey’s opposi‐ Howlett and Cohan describe this change as the tion to military training in schools during and af‐ “allure of grassroots protest on behalf of peace to ter the war. Dewey’s creative, individualistic ped‐ generate concrete political and social reform” (p. agogies led him to oppose such training, marking xvi). According to them, the new pacifism “repre‐ his shift toward more pacifist views. The third sented an extension of Dewey’s belief in democra‐ chapter explores actions Dewey took to advance cy as a force for societal improvement” (p. xvi). 2 H-Net Reviews the Outlawry of War movement during the 1920s. to see more evidence that others shared Dewey’s By this time, the underpinning of Dewey’s support motivations. Were pragmatist underpinnings be‐ for the First World War had unraveled. He no hind others’ acceptance of the First World War? longer believed in coercive “force” as an instru‐ Were they also behind others’ embrace of a quali‐ ment for diffusing democracy. Dewey’s newfound fied pacifism after it? Outlawry may have meant preference for moral suasion led Dewey to sup‐ one thing for Dewey. But for others, embracing port the Outlawry campaign. The pacifist move‐ new forms of pacifism may have meant some‐ ment expanded, Howlett and Cohan lead us to be‐ thing different. This would be true particularly lieve, because of a growing faith in peace as a for the “grassroots” that Howlett and Cohan sug‐ means to achieve the end of democracy, and skep‐ gest was so important for Dewey. For example, ticism about the League of Nations’ vision for col‐ many women's organizations played a central role lective security. Although the chapter showed in interwar peace movements. Did they also share Dewey’s close relationship with Outlawry founder Dewey’s beliefs about pragmatism? What about Salmon Levinson, I wondered how many others Quaker pacifists, who as Charles Chatfield shows in the Outlawry campaign shared Dewey's moti‐ in his fascinating work, embraced a social justice- vations. focused pacifism after the war?[2] What role did Indeed, that question--the extent to which, in the WWI-era expansion of state power play in the words of Cohan and Howlett, “Dewey’s activi‐ Dewey's thinking about pacifist nonresistance ties coincided with the appearance of the ‘mod‐ strategies? None of these explanations, of course, ern’ American peace movement” (p. xv)--repre‐ exclude the explanation that Howlett and Cohan sents the strand of argumentation about which I offer. But I fnished the book wondering how most wanted clarification. It is clear from the Dewey was situated within the complexities of a book that Dewey’s views on pacifism and interna‐ broad, grassroots peace movement. Which tail, so tionalism changed over the years. Without ques‐ to speak, was wagging which dog? Was a shared tion, Dewey played an underappreciated role in commitment to views similar to Dewey’s driving a the making of this important movement. Howlett more general shift in the pacifist movement from and Cohan demonstrate that. Dewey wrote regu‐ viewing peace as an end to a means? Or were larly on the subject in national periodicals. He broader political changes pushing Dewey to also acted as interlocutor to many important change the intellectual justifications for his movement fgures and used his celebrity to help views? internationalists like Salmon Levinson popularize Intentionally or not, the image of Dewey that their views in The Atlantic and other periodicals. emerges from the book is one of an intellectual What is less clear from the book is how cen‐ surprisingly engaged in the diplomatic context of tral Dewey’s role was in the development of his time, but one also removed from the class, American pacifism and internationalism, or how race, and gender discourses of his era.

Load more