> To:   
> Subject:      Seymour Martin Lipset
> 
> No Hedgehog 
> By Bill Schneider 
> 9 January 2007
> The Wall Street Journal 
> Many years ago, Seymour Martin Lipset, the eminent political
> sociologist who died last week at age 84, startled me, his student,
> with a casual remark. "I don't believe in education," he said. "I
> believe in politics." This great scholar, who had taught at Columbia,
> Berkeley, Harvard and later Stanford and George Mason Universities,
> didn't believe in education? But I knew what he meant. 
> Lipset, of a generation of public intellectuals that includes Daniel
> Bell, Nathan Glazer, Irving Kristol and the late Irving Howe, had a
> deep and enduring faith in democracy. Not democracy as an ideology to
> reshape the world: Democracy as a competition of interests and values,
> a process. He did not believe that people had to be enlightened and
> sophisticated -- "educated" -- in order to function democratically.
> What they had to do was understand and pursue their interests. 
> The ancient Greek poet Archilochus wrote, "The fox knows many things,
> but the hedgehog knows one big thing." Lipset was no hedgehog. He was
> not a man of grand theories or ideologies that set out to organize the
> world. He was far too grounded in reality for that. Lipset knew many
> things. In fact, he knew just about everything -- American politics,
> Christian religious doctrine, Jewish history, Latin American social
> structure, Canadian culture, comparative labor movements, European
> social theory, statistical methodology, Marxist philosophy and models
> of economic development. For starters. Lipset vacuumed up vast
> quantities of information, always looking for the answers to big
> questions. Why do some democracies thrive and others fail? Why is
> there no mass socialist movement in the United States? Why are
> Americans the most religious people in the developed world? Who
> supported Joe McCarthy? The answers were always straightforward,
> commonsensical and keenly observed. 
> In his most famous book, "Political Man" (1960), Lipset dispelled many
> naive notions about democracy. He advanced the idea of working-class
> authoritarianism -- that poorer, less well-educated people are more
> intolerant and less willing to accept the norms of democracy. But so
> what, he said. "In spite of the workers' greater authoritarian
> propensity, their organizations . . . still function as better
> defenders and carriers of democratic values than parties based on the
> middle class." He also showed that trade unions are often corrupt and
> boss-ridden and function poorly as democratic organizations. But so
> what, he said. "Many organizations may never fulfill the conditions
> for a stable internal democracy and still contribute in important ways
> to the democratic process in the total society." 
> In another influential book, "The First New Nation" (1963), Lipset
> argued that the progressive values of equality and achievement have
> always been ascendant in the U.S. They stem from the American
> Revolution, which cast off the conservative yoke of a hereditary class
> system, as well as from the Puritan religious tradition. The U.S. is
> not the only Protestant-dominated country in the world, but it is the
> only one in which the dominant Protestant tradition is that of
> dissenting churches rather than an established church. That explains
> America's unique religiosity as well as its individualism. 
> Lipset used the analogy of loaded dice. Once certain values are loaded
> by defining historical experiences, they will come up again and again
> to shape later events. Thus, he argued, the moderation of American
> class politics "is related to the fact that egalitarianism and
> democracy triumphed before the workers were a politically relevant
> force. Unlike the workers in Europe, they did not have to fight their
> way into the polity; the door was already open." 
> Lipset made his case by contrasting the American and Canadian
> experiences, since Canada was a country defined by its rejection of
> the American Revolution. He even wrote a book on the subject,
> "Continental Divide" (1990). Lipset's ideas were so compelling, he
> could make Canada interesting to Americans. 
> In 1970, Lipset and co-author Earl Raab published "The Politics of
> Unreason," a history of right-wing extremism in America. In it, they
> noted that the extremist impulse here draws from the same sources as
> the democratic impulse, namely, an inexhaustible vein of populist
> anti-elitism. "It is perhaps the ultimate paradox," they wrote, "that
> extremist movements in this country have been powerfully spawned by
> the same American characteristics that finally rejected them." A rich
> and intriguing idea, that. 
> Lipset was full of rich and intriguing ideas. He also had many
> nonacademic virtues. One was a clarity of expression. Another was a
> generosity of spirit. He warmly encouraged generations of students,
> colleagues and collaborators, even those of us who wandered away from
> academe. What Lipset created was not a following, exactly. More like a
> network, drawn together by a moderate temperament and shared
> democratic values. 
> There is an African saying, "Every time an old person dies, a library
> burns down." In Seymour Martin Lipset's case, that is not true. He
> wrote, co-authored and edited some 50 books, and hundreds of articles.
> The library endures. 
> --- 
> Mr. Schneider is senior political analyst for CNN and the co-author,
> with Seymour Martin Lipset, of "The Confidence Gap" (Johns Hopkins
> University Press, 1987). 
> 
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to