The End of Ideology

Read this for graduate American history course. Daniel Bell's book examines the rhetoric of the "radical right" and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.'s 1949 book, The Vital Center, which illustrates the burgeoning Cold War political divisions in the U.S. that had come into prominence in the 1950's. Bell explained that the discourse had become polarized into two camps--"hard" and "soft." People were deemed "hard" if they believed that both international and domestic Communism posed a grave threat to the security of the U.S. Conversely, People were deemed "soft" if they believed that the danger from domestic Communism was nil. Although Bell lamented this seemingly amorphous division in U.S. politics, his research proved that conservatives were not the inventors of this new rhetoric. Actually, Schlesinger's book introduced the hard /soft dichotomy in his defense of liberal anti-Communism. This new polarizing language had a gender component to it as well. The analogy was that a hard stand against all forms of Communism was masculine, and that it was feminine and a real danger to the security of the U.S. to be soft on Communism. It was this gender-based language that helped to push Cold War politics to grow more divisive and mean spirited. Thus, the purpose of Bell's book was to identify and explain the: "excessive preoccupation with--and anxiety about--masculinity in early Cold War American politics." Schlesinger's book, "The Vital Center is habitually cited as a turning point for American liberalism, an unequivocal rejection of extremist politics and an articulation of a new liberal anticommunist political realism." Schlesinger's opening premise was that the industrial revolution put mankind in a state of fear and anxiety, and thus made mankind more apt to turn to utopian and totalitarian forms of government to assuage their fears. Only in the aftermath of the terrible events of WWII were liberals forced to recognize that humankind indeed had the capacity to do evil. This recognition made liberals give up their long held belief in humankind's perfectibility and rationality. Schlesinger realized that the history of appeasing Hitler prior to the war, and the dangers that loomed in making the same mistake with Stalin in the days ahead, made it important to construct a liberal response to Communism that could stand up to the criticism of the political right in America. He wanted to prove that a new liberal doctrine would in fact occupy the vital center in American politics. He attacked the conservatives for their unwillingness to tackle social reforms during the industrial revolution, and he saw insipid conservative capitalists meeting their responsibilities by hiding behind destructive tariffs and monopolies. Schlesinger observed that historically, conservatives turned their backs on robust men, such as Theodore Roosevelt and Winston Churchill; men who acted masculinity. Instead, conservatives embraced the effeminate Neville Chamb

Bell writes clearly about complex issues. His thesis that the world seems to come to an ' end of ideology'has not really held up in time. We see today a kind of total ideology ' radical Islamic fundamentalism' at the center of conflict throughout the globe. This however does not in my judgment diminish the value or quality of the outstanding individual essays that comprise this volume. One brilliant essay alone on the various Sovietology theories is worth the price of the volume. So many learned analyses were provided to understand the Soviet Union at that time, and so few understood the kind of structural weakness which would lead to its self- disintegration. Bell writes convincingly about diverse problems of the advanced industrial society as it is moving in his understanding from a production to a service economy. The essays written in the fifties often show an excellent understanding of the ' information society ' as it is about to enfold. The main thesis is that the world has come to an age where the great Ideologies no longer hold sway is as I have said challenged by present reality. However the book itself is so rich in ideas and social understanding that one can nonetheless read it with great profit.

Three selections from the End of Ideology are worth the price of the book. First, the essay Bell wrote for this latest edition in which he makes a strong case that with the end of ideology, "history" has begun anew. Next, the new introduction he wrote in the mid-70s which discusses the critical reception of this book. Finally, the last chapter of the original book, a masterful history of Marxist thought. In essay on the resumption of history, Bell clears away much of the underbrush that has grown up around the notion of "global capitalism" by pointing out that the end of empire (and that includes the Soviet Union) and the colonial era has had the largest impact on world politics over the past forty years. The reignition of various ethnic groups whose identities had been suppressed under various Uber states and ideologies is just as important a part of the story. The 1975 introduction is a fascinating refutation of his, mostly Marxist, critics. For instance, C. Wright Mills, the maverick sociologist, apparently came after Bell for his review of Mills' "The Power Elite" (included in "The End of Idelogy"). Bell neatly dissects Mills' both in the essay and in his answer to Mills' criticisms. Bell, the empiricist, is the clear winner in these two rounds. The last chapter on Marxism is worth re-reading and re-reading for Bell knows the subject and the players intimately, as only a former boy Socialist born in New York's Lower East Side could. He explains how Marx's transmutation of Hegel's ideas into "dialectical materialism" set the stage for generations of leftist intellectuals to misinterpret or reinterpret events into Marxist prattle according to their understanding or lack of understanding thereof. It's a post-graduation education on Marxism in 35 dense, but, brilliant pages. Two juicy chapters on the American "mafia" and the inflation of crime statistics and the stoking of public fear by law enforcement, although somewhat dated contain some remarkable insights: among them that the "mafia," like American business in general had to move from "production" to the "consumption" mode, i.e., turning toward the consumer to make money through gambling, and away from more traditional, less lucrative businesses such as prostitution. These two articles, written when he covered the labor beat for Fortune magazine, still have an edge now, as the same "crime wave" and "mafia" hysteria continue to be generated by the media and law enforcement.Bell's wide-ranging knowledge, his clear-eyed appraisal of the American scene, his tenacity in trying to discover the real levers of power, are qualities one rarely finds in this era where shouting and sloganeering still suffice -- although much of this now comes not from the left-hand side of the spectrum, but the right.

Although first published in 1960, just before a torrent of social change drenched the US and the world, sociologist Daniel Bell's insightful collection of essays comprising "The End of Ideology" still has much to offer, even as the 21st century approaches. From his thoughtful assessment of the apparent failure of European-style socialism in the United States to his vivid description of the numerous psychological strains burdening the average American worker--the latter still sadly true in our current "information age"--Bell believes that the day of traditional airtight ideological solutions and posturing, for all practical purposes, has ended. According to Bell, much of what sustained the old "urban progressivism" which, despite its flaws, was a force for much positive social change in the US, has largely disappeared. Bell predicted conditions peculiar to American society combined with trends like the steady decline in labor union membership, the steady progress of workplace automation and, even then, the emergence of mass electronic communications would make humans less willing to accept the singular utopian pronouncements of what he called "millennial" movements. Instead, ongoing social fragmentation, diversification and conflict would make coping with major socioeconomic problems along traditional "party" lines unrealistic and self-defeating if not impossible. Given the persisting belief among many that traditional "government" and its obsolete solutions are failing us and the continued rise, diversification and notable influence of vocal, single-interest splinter groups with considerable access to a variety of powerful communications media--despite their familiar revolutionary noises--it is hard to disagree. There is much Bell couldn't have foreseen given his vantage point at the very end of the placid 1950s, but his perceptive yet readable critique of our traditional way of looking at many of our pressing social issues and our political history still has a compelling, hopeful freshness, its basis being, as in his quoting of Thomas Jefferson, "is that the present belongs to the living."