Children of Light, Children of Darkness

The Atlantic Monthly has a sometimes thoughtful, at times irritating, article by Paul Elie on the late theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr, and the political struggle being waged by the Left, Middle and Right over his intellectual legacy. An excerpt:

“The biblical sense of history can make Niebhur seem like something other than a liberal. In the ’60’s, his religiosity made him suspect on the New Left, and in the years after his death, his work resonated with the thinkers who were turning against that era’s liberal reforms”

It wasn’t Niebuhr’s religiosity that made him suspect with the New Left but his anti-totalitarianism, something that a movement deeply afflicted with an authoritarian certitude and spasmodic nihilism could ill abide; indeed, they still seem to despise Niebuhr for his unwillingness to equivocate about Leftist tyranny. Elie is correct though, that the original Neoconservatives (the ones who actually made an intellectual journey from Left to Right) such as Norman Podhoretz had high regard for Niebuhr’s writings. I myself first heard of Niebuhr from reading David Stockman’s bitter memoir The Triumph of Politics. Stockman may have repudiated Ronald Reagan but he remained true, almost adulatory, to Niebuhr:

“The scales fell from my eyes as I turned those pages [ of Children of Light, Children of Darkness – ZP] Niebuhr was a withering critic of utopianism in every form. Man is incapable of perfection, he argued, because his estate as a free agent permits-indeed ensures -both good and evil…Through Niebuhr I dimly glimpsed the ultimate triumph of politics” ( Stockman,24).

I do not profess to be an expert on Reinhold Niebuhr or his philosophy, having read only one of his books, but the polemical war over Niebuhr that Elie critiques has, in my view, an air of ahistoricality to it. Perhaps with not the completely unhinged lunacy of the similar debate over Leo Strauss, but like Strauss, Niebuhr has been lifted by both sides out of the mid-20th century intellectual context that illuminated his ideas, in order to serve as a barricade for the political battle over Iraq and the Bush administration.

My gut reaction is that Niebuhr, were he alive today, would be writing things that would not sit well with some of his would-be reinterpreters and with more nuance and wisdom than for which his contemporary critics give him credit.

ADDENDUM:

Peter Beinart, who comes in for much criticism from Elie for the following link, on Reinhold Niebuhr.

Cross-posted at Zenpundit

CNBC Has Competition

It’s about time. CNBC is maddeningly journalistic rather than business-oriented in its style, and its news coverage and program selections are shot through with leftist, anti-business bias. You would think that a network devoted to markets and business would be run by people who actually know something about markets and business. Instead we get hot babes and snarky voiceover “analysis” from j-school hipsters who have all the elitist and group-thinking instincts of modern professional journalists. What a herd. Every once in a while they stumble onto something good and unique but not PC, like Kudlow or the WSJ editors’ show, but then they try to kill it by changing its scheduling and promoting the conventional-wisdom news show or screaming-asshole trading show of the moment in its place.

Finally, they are going to have real competition. This will benefit everyone other than CNBC’s owners and staff.

Someone Explain to Me Why This is News

The great Robert A. Heinlein published a short story entitled Solution Unsatisfactory in 1940.

The plot concerns a secret project to develop an atomic bomb to combat Nazi Germany, but the scientists involved with the project face insurmountable problems. Eventually the idea is hit upon to use the radioactive wastes from their experiments, ground up into a dust, which could be released downwind from enemy cities. The inhabitants of the city would all die in a few days, and the city itself would be poisoned by radioactivity for some years afterwards.

I have no idea if Gen. Douglas MacArthur was a Heinlein fan or not, but he suggested the same scheme during the Korean War. He publicly said that radioactive waste could be used to create an impassable minefield between the Communists and the Allies. That way the US could still use a nuclear weapon of a sort without goading the Soviets into using their own atomic bombs.

Read more

On War, Comprehension and Persuasion

There must be something in the water lately as I have been getting an upsurge of inquiries and public comments regarding information operations, public diplomacy, “soft power” agents of influence, 5GW and similar matters. There are other blogs I can recommend as being better on this score – Beacon, MountainRunner, Kent’s Imperative, Swedish Meatballs Confidential and Whirledview to name but a few. Also, I would suggest that interested readers search the archives of Studies in Intelligence, PARAMETERS, The Strategic Studies Institute, Combined Arms Research Library and the threads at The Small Wars Council. Genuine expertise may be found there and for discussions of theory and emerging trends, I recommend Dreaming 5GW.

That being said, I will offer my two cents anyway.

One point of agreement across the political spectrum and that of informed opinion is that the USG has not done a particularly good job of managing “the war of ideas” in the conflict with Islamist terrorism. Or against state adversaries. Or with persuading neutrals and even our own allies to our point of view. When you are having difficulty drawing even in global popularity contest with a crowd of bearded fanatics who put beheading videos on the internet, it’s time to admit there’s a problem.

Read more