U.S. intellectual history since 1877 - Essay Example

?Reinhold Niebuhr suggests there is a persistent flaw in modern American thought that underestimates the power of evil and predatory self-interest. In this way he finds that American liberalism is limited. Dr. Martin Luther King and Allen Ginsburg show how American liberal and progressive thought was challenged, renewed, and expanded as understood through the insights of Reinhold Niebuhr. Yet Malcolm X was almost defeated by the human flaws of which Niebuhr writes, and the writers of the Port Huron Declaration went too far in accepting methods of the children of the darkness as explained by Niebuhr. In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail which he wrote April 16, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King rooted his thoughts to a tradition of philosophers and theologians, including Niebuhr. King expressed how difficult it was to get privileged groups to change. He wrote, “. . . as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.” Niebuhr felt that liberalism essentially lied to itself. Dr. King could see this. Bourgeoisie society, in the south had advanced because of those lies. Niebuhr identifies the ugly powers of self-interest as pulling the chords of individuals outside any real beliefs in community. The morality that the racist South put forward was a cynical one. It was one that could not stand true from the way it dealt with black people. But the point is that this was not merely a feature of the South. As long as the segregation policies existed it was also a feature of the entire country. Hence, from Niebuhr's view, democracy did not have any adequate cultural base. It had one that was built on a house of hate. This is why Dr. King's letter was important. Building on a principle of progressive liberalism in action, King's letter extended the cultural base of the country with some honest truths. One of these truths reflects the human flaw that Niebuhr saw in man. In this letter Dr. King noted this as the inner conflict of man. He explained that he had been disappointed with his Christian and Jewish brothers. He pointed out how they allowed a "negative peace" to exist in the absence of justice. In a way this is similar to Niebuhr's thought of 'the children of light' who, in this case, were somehow led to believe that the progress of black people, according to Southern standards, was okay. Drawing further from Niebuhr, it is possible to say that Southern racism reflected an order that was cynical on the top, and laid upon Niebuhr's "perils of chaos". Dr. King pointed to this chaos. He pointed to it in the white church and its leadership. He made some exceptions. But what stood out were the members of the white religious establishment that opposed the civil rights movement Dr. King led. Dr. King was actually forging the cultural revolution that exemplified an expression of Niebuhr's ideas. It was a revolution that pursued unity while expressing a freedom and participation of formally denied people into a system of democracy. In the active outplay of the Civil Rights Movement, Dr. King led black and white forces to demonstrate how it was possible for America to reflect a real culture of community. That was what King sought and what, while he was living, did. Dr. King stood as the leader who influenced thought and action. There is also a way in which an artist, who has freed his or herself from the limiting confines of human prejudice and self-interest, may also illustrate some of the themes of Niebuhr. Allen Ginsberg is one of these artists. Allen Ginsberg was one of the main poets during the beat generation. He was also a public homosexual during the 1950s when homosexuality was illegal. Ginsberg was at the extreme end of the poets in that he criticized a lot about American society that Niebuhr criticized. Niebuhr, being a Christian, would probably not accept Ginsberg extreme view of homosexuality. But maybe he could have. The important thing is that Ginsberg in his poetry, especially 'Howl', attempted to turn America upside down and look into her. In order to do this all the contradictions of America would come rolling out. Ginsberg had a character it seems that was neither the children of light nor the children of darkness. Perhaps this is what the real artist does. It did not seem like he sympathized with the bourgeoisie spirit that Niebuhr wrote about. Nor did he sympathize with the capitalists on Wall Street or the advertisers of Madison Avenue. Ginsberg seem to represent the freedom from the society that was outside and above the self-interest confines of what Niebuhr wrote about. Important is that looking through his poem Howl one could see that Ginsberg knew an America in the way that Niebuhr didn't. His travels as illustrated in the poem are extensive and very, very human. Also, Ginsberg loved his America while at the same time being deeply critical of it. How would Niebuhr view Malcolm X? Dr. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X fitted each other perfectly. One sought change by non-violence, the other sought change by any means necessary. Yet Malcolm X found out something about the individual man that lay at the root of Niebuhr's analysis. Malcolm X in his early glory days as a leader was romantic. He was an idealist. Under Niebuhr he would be seen as a black prince “children of light”. When Malcolm found out personally that men who pursued good or who had a good organization, were also deeply flawed, he was devastated. As Niebuhr wrote about the “children of light” who could not understand the (and incorporate) the “children of darkness”, Malcolm X couldn't handle this contrast of man’s flaw of self-interest and it defeated him. Niebuhr's analysis could have helped Malcolm X. Dr. King knew about it. He had studied Niebuhr along with all the other philosophers and theologians who Niebuhr himself had studied. Dr. King, facing the human flaws every day, worked through and above them. Malcolm X was crushed when he found out his leader, Elijah Muhammad, who was respected as a beacon of black progressive thought opposing racism, had fathered children outside his marriage. Malcolm went to talk to some of these women himself and received direct evidence. Like the children of light, the American liberals, Malcolm needed to believe that Elijah Muhammad’s values and goals were high and saintly, that they were worthy of human aspirations Malcolm had pursued to save his own life. But when he found out about Elijah Muhammad, it seemed as if truth had fallen from under him. Yet what Malcolm found out was an important observation of Niebuhr, that for progress to be made, the children of light, Malcolm, had to understand, incorporate and control some of the features of the children of darkness. Tired, exhausted, Malcolm knew he had to forge a new ideology. He slowly began to do this, but it was too late. What would Niebuhr have said to Malcolm X? Niebuhr would not have appreciated Malcolm's support of violence during his early leadership role. And he would have cautioned Malcolm about believing in the infallibility of man. Malcolm’s black radicalism may be compared, under Niebuhr’s view to the white radicalism of the Students for a Democratic Society, in their declaration, The Port of Huron statement. This declaration read like a laundry list of Niebuhr's criticisms of American society. These students believed deeply in fighting the evils of racism and uncontrolled capitalism. Niebuhr explains how the children of light, representing part of the American bourgeoisie, accepted the belief of naive rationalism. They believed that society could progress toward a utopia with knowledge of American founders built American upon a history of oppression. The Students for a Democratic Society sought to respond directly to this belief. They took the ball into their hands and felt that change was needed and that they were going to force change. In doing this SDS actually became selfish with their own view of what America was. It was a view that they wanted to force upon others. The SDS promoted, plan and undertook radical actions of protest and then of bombing government facilities. In doing this there were like the children of darkness who whose main creeds, in Niebuhr words, were a bourgeoisie individualism and an ego of self interest. They did not accept a law above them, which for Niebuhr was the Christian law. Hence the SDS, who sought to do good and change society, were actually dictated by the methods of the people they wanted to change. Reinhold Niebuhr looked upon the American experience with hope but with real and practical concern. His own Christian faith allowed him to see the human flaws of self-interest and greed. But at the same time he saw there were good possibilities in humanity. It is a struggle, and he should always be read. Perhaps reading Niebuhr would even help the liberals and conservatives understand both sides of President Obama, or it least, if they are Christian, to find practical ways to express their faith. Works Cited Ginsberg, Alan. Howl. 1955. Accessed at http://www.wussu.com/poems/agh.htm Haley, Alex, and Malcolm X. 1987.The Autobiography of Malcolm X. New York: Ballantine. King, Jr. Martin Luther. 1962. Selection from Letter from a Birmingham Jail. 1962. In David Hollinger and Charles Capper (Eds.), The American Intellectual Tradition, Vol II, 1870-Present. 6th edition, 2010, 377-383. Oxford University Press, Niebuhr, Reinhold. Selection from The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness. 1944. In David Hollinger and Charles Capper (Eds.), The American Intellectual Tradition, Vol II, 1870-Present. 6th edition, 2010, 258-265. Oxford University Press, 258-265. Read More