Political Rationalism in Unlikely Places by Damien K. Picariello A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Political Science) in the University of Michigan 2014 Doctoral Committee: Professor Arlene W. Saxonhouse (Chair) Professor Donald J. Herzog Associate Professor Mika T. LaVaque-Manty Professor Michael Makin “Having devoted my energies to the question of social organization in any future society that will replace the present one, I’ve come to the conclusion that all creators of social systems, from ancient times down to our own in 187-, were dreamers, story-tellers and fools, who contradicted themselves and understood absolutely nothing about natural science or that strange animal called man…But since the future form of human society is needed right now, when we’re finally ready to take action, in order to forestall any further thought on the subject, I’m proposing my own system of world organization. Here it is!” he said, tapping his notebook. “I wanted to expiate on my book to this meeting as briefly as possible, but I see it’s necessary to provide a great deal of verbal clarification; therefore my entire explication will take at least ten evenings, corresponding to the number of chapters in my book.” (Laughter was heard.) “Moreover, I must declare in advance that my system is not yet complete.” (Laughter again.) “I became lost in my own data and my conclusion contradicts the original premiss from which I started. Beginning with the idea of unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I must add, however, there can be no other solution to the social problem except mine.” Shigalyov1 1 Fyodor Dostoevsky, Devils, trans. Michael R. Katz, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1992, 426. Copyright Damien K. Picariello 2014 Acknowledgments My intellectual and personal debts are many. Though I cannot hope to acknowledge everyone who has contributed both to this project and to my development as a scholar and teacher, I hope these acknowledgments will go some way toward recognizing these contributions and expressing my gratitude. First and foremost, great thanks are due to Arlene W. Saxonhouse. Arlene provided encouragement of every kind from the beginning of my graduate education to its end, and has contributed immeasurably to the way I think and write about political theory. Her generosity and kindness have been remarkable, and her guidance has kept me moving forward as a student and scholar. All errors, blind spots, and shortcomings are, of course, my own – but everything good in this thesis owes something to Arlene. Thanks are due as well to the other members of my committee. Mika LaVaque-Manty has shaped and inspired my teaching, serving as both a model and a source of valuable advice. Don Herzog has been generous with his encouragement, his time, and his gentle yet incisive feedback. Michael Makin encouraged me to pursue a line of thinking that evolved into a chapter of this thesis, and graciously agreed to participate in this project after providing a semester’s worth of valuable insight. All four members of my committee have my profound thanks. I cannot recognize by name all of my colleagues in the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan who have contributed to my education; I will name some, but not nearly enough. Zev Berger, Pamela Brandwein, Lisa Disch, Alex ii Jakle, Rob Mickey, Ben Peterson, Bonnie Washick, Justin Williams, elizabeth Wingrove, and Mariah Zeisberg all have my gratitude. Thanks are due also to all of the participants in the Department’s Political Theory Workshop, who have provided both helpful feedback and a wonderful experience of collegiality and mutual support. I’m also grateful to the Department itself, including the wonderful administrative staff, for providing me with much-needed resources and help. My gratitude belongs as well to the Earhart Foundation, which has been extremely generous with me throughout the last several years. Their financial support has been tremendously appreciated, and their continued belief in my potential as a scholar and teacher has been immensely encouraging. Montgomery Brown has both facilitated the earhart Foundation’s support of my education, and been a source of friendship and valuable advice. The difference this support has made in the progress of my graduate education has been profound. Special thanks are due to Josh Shipper and Alton Worthington. Their friendship has been constant and strong, and I appreciate it more than I can say. I have no idea how much time we spent talking about the ideas behind this project. Come visit me. My parents, Jil and Lenny Picariello, and my brother, Alex, are the greatest support anyone could ask for. I’ve said it all before, but one more time: thank you, thank you, thank you. Finally, my thanks (and so much more) are due to erin Baribeau. I’m grateful for all the things. There isn’t a single one that you don’t make better. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………………………………..ii List of Images………………………………………………………………………………………………….v Chapter One……………………………………………………………………………………………………1 Introduction Chapter Two……………………………………………………………………………………………………47 Political Rationalism and Matters of Perspective in Gulliver’s Travels Chapter Three…………………………………………………………………………………………………95 Moral Rationalism and Murder in Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment Chapter Four…………………………………………………………………………………………………..127 Mortals, Machines, and Political Rationalism in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis Chapter Five……………………………………………………………………………………………………171 Conclusion: Political Rationalism and Prudence Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………………………196 iv LIST OF IMAGES Image 1: Metropolis 130 Image 2: The Clock 131 Image 3: The Workers 136 Image 4: The Workers’ City 137 Image 5: Freder and Maria 141 Image 6: Machine Face 145 Image 7: The Surface 146 Image 8: The Tower 146 Image 9: Joh 147 Image 10: Clock Machine 149 Image 11: The Machine-Man 151 Image 12: Freder at Work 153 Image 13: Conceiving the Tower 155 Image 14: The Transformation 157 Image 15: Dancing 158 Image 16: Watching 158 Image 17: Watching Closely 159 Image 18: eyes 159 Image 19: Incitement 160 Image 20: Burning 166 Image 21: Suffering Joh 167 Image 22: The Mediator 168 v Chapter One Introduction “Bill Gates, Microsoft co-founder and prominent philanthropist, lambasted the federal government Wednesday evening for its current dysfunction. ‘You don’t run a business like this,” he said during POLITICO’s Playbook Cocktails. “This is a non-optimal path … a business that is maximizing its output would proceed along a different path … ‘In business, the idea of measuring what you are doing, picking the measurements that count like customer satisfaction and performance … you thrive on that,’ he said.”2 ““It seems like common sense to use evidence about what works to get better results…How could anyone be against it?” Michele Jolin, Results for America3 “But have I not heard you say often that to solve a case a man has only to lie back in his chair and think? Do that. Interview the passengers on the train, view the body, examine what clues there are and then – well, I have faith in you! I am assured that it is no idle boast of yours. Lie back and think – use (as I have heard you say so often) the little grey cells of the mind – and you will know!” M. Bouc4 2 Jessica Meyers, “Bill Gates on D.C.: ‘You don’t run a business like this’,” Politico, March 3, 2013, retrieved at http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/bill-gates-on- dc-you-dont-run-a-business-like-this-88830.html. 3 David Bornstein, “Can Governments Play Moneyball?” The New York Times, April 16, 2014, retrieved at http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/can- government-play-moneyball/. 4 Agatha Christie, Murder on the Orient Express, New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2011, 57-8. 1 Part One: Political Rationalism in Unlikely Places This thesis aims to enrich our understanding of “political rationalism,” a concept I draw from Michael Oakeshott. I do this by exploring depictions of political rationalism in works of fiction: in a play, an imaginary travelogue, a novel, and a film. These are the “unlikely places” to which the title points. The purpose of exploring fictional depictions of political rationalism is to better equip us to analyze, understand, and raise questions about, real life examples. To that end, this thesis’ conclusion departs from the world of fiction and turns to The Federalist Papers, which addresses itself to, and argues about, a real political community. I. What is Political Rationalism? Steven Pinker, Harvard University’s Johnstone Family Professor of Psychology, writes in The New Republic: “the worldview that guides the moral and spiritual values of an educated person today is the worldview given to us by science. Though the scientific facts do not by themselves dictate values, they certainly hem in the possibilities.” “The facts of science,” he claims, “undercut any moral or political system based on mystical forces, quests, destinies, dialectics, struggles, or messianic ages.” Later, he focuses specifically on the questions and problems of political life: Take our understanding of politics…The new sciences of the mind are reexamining the connections between politics and human nature…The application of science to politics not only enriches our stock of ideas, but also offers the means to ascertain which of them are likely to be correct. Political debates have traditionally been deliberated through case studies, rhetoric, and what software engineers call HiPPO (highest-paid person’s opinion). Not 2 surprisingly, the controversies have careened without resolution…With the advent of data science – the analysis of large, open-access data sets of numbers or text – signals can be extracted from the noise and debates in history and political science can be resolved more objectively.5 In other words, according to Pinker, the techniques and findings of the natural sciences, applied to the domains of morality and politics, allow us to reach increasingly objective solutions to moral and political disputes.