Neibuhr, Reinhold - The American Future

06/19/2009

The Irony of American History, Ch 7 University of Chicago Press, 2008

This chapter (written in 1951) discusses the prospects of the US in relation to itself and other nations. 1. Author first points out that the US was isolationist for a long time until WWII, where the US realized that technology had connected the world enough so that it couldn't 'be secure in an insecure world' (pg131). So in rising to the occasion and admitting to its abilities to lead and exercise its power, the US also employs its idealism, which author considers too 'oblivious' and needs to come 'to terms with the limits of all human striving, the fragmentariness of all human wisdom, the precariousness of all historic configurations of power...' etc. (pg133)

2. The US's idealism is bolstered by what author sees as two factors, the first being that the US's power is very high on the world stage. While there are some advantages to concentrations of power in uniting states, the negative side is the resentment it can breed, as well as the temptation of the powerful side to abuse its power (pg135). Tempering power 'into the service of justice' has come in three ways: (a) redistribute power, (b) bring power 'under social and moral review', or (c) use religion to keep it in check. (pg135) Author argues that (a) is not relevant in the international community; it's just a fact of history. Option (b) is happening in the form of the United Nations, which author believes is salubrious, especially because 'it is impossible for any nation or individual fully to understand the peculiar circumstances and the unique history of any other nation or individual, which create their special view of reality.' (pg137) In this section author predicts that once the US realizes it must spend enormous efforts to upgrade its war preparedness with new technology, it may come to the UN more willing to work out a solution to the communist conflict. Strategy (c) involves humility and recognizing the 'other' is worthy of respect. (pg139)

3. The second factor that supposedly reinforces the US's idealism is that there seems to be no easy solution to the struggle against the communists. (pg140) This frustrates the US's liberal idealism that holds that a superior way of life should triumph without needing to compromise. What this misses is that 'human communities are never purely artifacts of the human mind and will' (pg142) and humans are creatures of history (pg141)-- meaning that it is sometimes difficult, sometimes impossible to wholly do away with undesirable powers and forces. (pg143) The argument seems to be that because of the US's idealism, it misinterprets this hard lesson as stubbornness or ignorance. (pg143)

4.-5. Author compares individual heroism with national heroism, pointing out the most dramatic difference is that individual heroism can be willingly self-sacrificing and pursue an end without much probability of achieving it, while a nation cannot reasonably do so-- there must be some decent probability of success. Author also states that a democracy could never engage in an 'explicit preventive war' (pg146). In the following section author discusses the tensions in the US and rejects one of the solutions offered: Kennan argues that the US too eagerly extends its moralistic constitutional scheme to other nations, intending to remake them in its own image. This brings out another source of US idealism: that its 'technocratic' mastery of physical nature encourages the same approach toward human nature. (pg147-8) Author rejects Kennan's solution, namely that the US should become solely self-interested. What is needed is true humility regarding the US's abilities and charity regarding other nations.

The selected introduction to Neibuhr's "Moral Man and Immoral Society" involved a polemic against social scientists, modern educators and moralists who seek to better society by doing social science. Author's principal arguments are as follows:
-humans have parts that belong to the 'order of nature' (pgxii) that cannot ever be fully controlled by reason and conscience
-Social change, unlike changes in knowledge (science), involves conflict between the haves and have-nots; therefore the exercise of power is vitally important to changing social situations. This makes the retardation of social sciences compared to the advancement of the natural sciences not a product of 'ignorance' (pgxiv-xv) but of social-structure maintenance.
-Those educators (author uses Dewey as a target) seem to miss the class-struggle aspect of social change and are fraught with 'middle-class prejudices'(pgxiii-xiv)