Enduring Interest

TOTALITARIANISM AND IDEOLOGY #6: Nathan Pinkoski on François Furet’s The Passing of an Illusion: The Idea of Communism of the Twentieth Century

To lead into the next season of Enduring Interest, we're re-releasing our first two seasons, covering totalitarianism and ideology and liberal education.  We'll be back on September 8 with a new season covering free speech and censorship.

Nathan Pinkoski, Research Fellow and Academic Director at the Zephyr Institute, and I discuss François Furet’s terrific book The Passing of an Illusion: The Idea of Communism of the Twentieth Century—first published in English in 1999. We talk a bit about Furet’s biography—he’s regarded as one of the greatest historians of the French Revolution. Like many French intellectuals who came of age in the years after the Second World War, Furet became a communist during that period and then became disillusioned shortly thereafter. The book is not a straightforward history of communism, but an account of the communist idea and how it managed to attract so many disparate figures into its fold. This gives Passing an Illusion a very distinctive character—it’s by turns philosophical, political, and historical and includes wonderful miniature biographical sketches.

Nathan and I examine Furet’s account of the revolutionary passions that provided the fuel for the grand ideological movements of the twentieth century: bourgeois hatred and bourgeois self-hatred. We turn next to Furet’s account of ideologies and ideological governments which he argues are novel, twentieth century political phenomena. Nathan suggests that Furet roots the unprecedented character of these movements in their prioritization of action over thought. We also spend some time discussing the crucial role that anti-fascist discourse played in raising the world-wide reputation of communism to its greatest height.

We end with some thoughts of the continuing relevance of Furet’s book. In the final chapter of the book, Furet notes, “The end of the Soviet world in no way alters the democratic call for another society, and for that very reason we have every reason to believe that the massive failure of Communism will continue to enjoy attenuating circumstances in world opinion, and perhaps even renewed admiration.” Listeners should be sure to check out Nathan’s essay “The Strange Rise of Bourgeois Bolshevism” (indebted to many aspects of Furet’s analysis) which appeared as the lead essay in Law & Liberty’s Forum series in May of 2020.

TOTALITARIANISM AND IDEOLOGY #5: Clare Cavanagh on the poetry of Czeslaw Milosz

To lead into the next season of Enduring Interest, we're re-releasing our first two seasons, covering totalitarianism and ideology and liberal education.  We'll be back on September 8 with a new season covering free speech and censorship.

In this episode I speak with Clare Cavanagh, Frances Hooper Professor of Arts and Humanities and Professor of Slavic Languages and Literatures at Northwestern University. She’s the author of a forthcoming authorized biography of Czeslaw Milosz and a prize-winning translator of the poets Adam Zagajewski and Wislawa Szymborska. Her essays and translations have appeared in publications including The New York Times Book Review, the New York Review of Books, the Times Literary Supplement, and Partisan Review. Some of her recently taught courses include What is Lyric Poetry? ; Gender and Revolution in Soviet Russian Culture; Heart of Europe: Poland in the Twentieth Century; Poetry and the Cold War; and 19th Century Russian Poetry.

Clare and I discuss three poems by Czeslaw Milosz: “You Who Wronged”; “Child of Europe”; and “Mittelbergheim.” These poems are from an early collection called Daylight, some which were written when Milosz was working as a cultural attaché for the post-war Polish government. Clare calls Daylight a “book of struggle” where Milosz is asking questions about his audience and his own perspective and role as a poet. He writes about the falsification of history and the corruptions of ideology. We draw some connections between the poems and the arguments elucidated in his famous book The Captive Mind. Clare also offers her thoughts on Milosz’s conception of the role of poetry broadly speaking.

We conclude our conversation with some recommendations for listeners on where one might start to engage with Milosz’s vast body of work. Clare also shares some of her experiences in meeting Milosz in Krakow and her impressions of him.

TOTALITARIANISM AND IDEOLOGY#4: James Pontuso on Václav Havel’s Audience, The Unveiling and Protest

To lead into the next season of Enduring Interest, we're re-releasing our first two seasons, covering totalitarianism and ideology and liberal education.  We'll be back on September 8 with a new season covering free speech and censorship.

In this episode I speak with James Pontuso, the Charles Patterson Professor of Government and Foreign Affairs at Hampton Sydney College, about Václav Havel’s trilogy revolving around the remarkable character Ferdinand Vaněk.

We discuss Havel’s life as a playwright, dissident, and statesman and the immediate context in which these plays were written—the “normalization” regime in post-1968 Communist Czechoslovakia. Havel wrote the first play Audience in the summer of 1975 to amuse his friends during gatherings at his cottage in the country. Despite this modest beginning, not only would Havel go on to write two more plays about Vaněk, but three other authors would also make Vaněk a character in their one-act plays. Havel once picked up a hitchhiker, who, without knowing whose car he had entered, began quoting lines from Audience. The plays would go on to be performed in theaters around the world.

The character Vaněk is a writer who is known to have taken oppositional stances in his home country. He is often frustratingly shy and somewhat reticent to share his opinions. In each play he speaks much less often that his interlocutors do, who in each case need something from Vaněk. While Vaněk engages them awkwardly and at a distance, he does so with genuine sympathy—yet he also makes it clear there are certain lines he will not cross. Jim and I talk about the kind of moral responsibility that Vaněk seems to embody. We also discuss Havel’s plays more broadly and the tradition of absurdist theater. The plays are genuinely philosophical in their treatment of themes like friendship, virtue, and responsibility. They are also by turns very funny and sad.

We hope you enjoy the episode. Be sure to check out Jim’s book Václav Havel: Civic Responsibility in the Postmodern Age. And Theater 61 Press has a very nice edition of the trilogy called The Vaněk Plays.

TOTALITARIANISM AND IDEOLOGY #3: Daniel J. Mahoney on Raymond Aron’s ”The Opium of the Intellectuals”

To lead into the next season of Enduring Interest, we're re-releasing our first two seasons, covering totalitarianism and ideology and liberal education.  We'll be back on September 8 with a new season covering free speech and censorship.

In this episode I speak with Daniel J. Mahoney, Professor and Augustinian Boulanger Chair in the Department of Political Science at Assumption University, about The Opium of the Intellectuals by the great French political thinker Raymond Aron. Dan argues that Aron was the leading French political thinker of the 20^th century. Aron’s expertise transcends our intellectual subdivisions—he wrote substantial works in the fields of political theory, philosophy, international relations, political economy, and sociology. He also was an important contributor to political debates in France as a columnist over the course of his long career as a thinker and writer.

The Opium of the Intellectuals was first published in France in 1955 and was directed not at out-and-out Communists but at sympathizers and fellow-travelers. Dan explores Aron’s critique of the “Myth of Revolution”—revolution, Aron suggests, is not an instrument of emancipation and it eliminates pluralistic institutions. Aron, who knew Marx much better than the self-described Marxists in France, argued that the incoherent mixture of historical inevitability and revolutionary voluntarism was there in Marx from the very beginning. Aron argued again and again that history has meaning but not in the Hegelio-Marxist sense. For him the absence of historical determinism was a sign of hope.

Aron was a great critic of the existentialist philosopher Sartre and his followers. “The doctrinairism of the existentialists,” he wrote, “is particularly revealing. It presents, exaggerated to the point of caricature, the intellectual errors which paralyze all political thought. The existentialists begin with an almost nihilistic denial of all human or social constancy, only to end with a dogmatic affirmation of ‘a single truth’ in an area where the truth cannot be single. The critique of dogmatism is at the same time a critique of nihilism.” Thus one of Aron’s key lessons in the book is that the ultimate source of fanaticism is nihilism—not a devotion to the idea of truth.

We conclude with a discussion of Aron’s response to his critics called “Fanaticism, Prudence, and Faith,” an essay which is included as an appendix in the English edition of Aron’s book which Dan edited.

TOTALITARIANISM AND IDEOLOGY #2: Perry Link on ”China: The Anaconda in the Chandelier”

To lead into the third season of Enduring Interest, we're re-releasing our first two seasons, covering totalitarianism and ideology and liberal education.  We'll be back on September 8 with a new season covering free speech and censorship.

In this episode I speak with renowned China scholar Perry Link, the Chancellorial Chair for Teaching Across Disciplines at the University of California, Riverside, about his now classic 2002 essay “China: The Anaconda in the Chandelier.”

We discuss the origins of the essay and its initial reception, as well as Professor Link’s blacklisting and why this was actually a kind of liberation. We dig into the system of psychological control and censorship that the Chinese Communist Party relies on and contrast that with the more mechanical, ideological training that has been used in other totalitarian regimes. Link explains how the vagueness of the ideological rules and arbitrary application of those rules are essential aspects of this system of control. We talk in depth about his anaconda metaphor and what it communicates about the character of the repression.

Professor Link and I also discuss the repression of the Uyghurs in East Turkistan. Link explains what the leaders of the Party might be thinking in order to justify their actions. We end with a discussion of the great dissident Liu Xiaobo—Link has recently completed a biography with Wu Dazhi tentatively titled Long March Toward Freedom: The Life, Times, and Thought of Liu Xiaobo.

TOTALITARIANISM AND IDEOLOGY #1: Jacob Howland on Yevgeny Zamyatin’s WE

To lead into the third season of Enduring Interest, we're re-releasing our first two seasons, covering totalitarianism and ideology and liberal education.  We'll be back on September 8 with a new season covering free speech and censorship.

In the inaugural episode of Enduring Interest, I speak with Jacob Howland, McFarlin Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at the University of Tulsa, about Yevgeny Zamyatin’s great dystopian novel WE.

Jacob and I talk about Zamyatin himself—his early commitment to the Bolshevik cause in the early 1900s and his disillusionment following the revolution of 1917. The novel was written in 1920 but was suppressed in Russia. Zamyatin managed to smuggle the manuscript out of the country and it was first published in English translation in 1924. Tune in to hear an excerpt from the author’s shockingly candid letter to Stalin protesting the suppression of his work.

Jacob argues that Zamyatin’s “fertile and poetic imagination” enabled him to write a subtle and dense book that sketches the conflict between the mathematical, thumotic soul and the poetic, erotic soul. Zamyatin saw that the militant, rationalizing impulse at the core of totalitarian politics distorts and destroys the obstacles in its path. D-503, the novel’s main character, is transformed by erotic longing and his act of writing—both lead him down a path of self-discovery.

Our conversation takes some interesting turns. Other authors discussed include Plato (lots of Plato!), Dostoevsky, Marx, Havel, Milosz, Huxley, and Orwell. Jacob judges WE to be superior to both 1984 and Brave New World. Enjoy!

Pamela Jensen on Rousseau’s Letter to d’Alembert

Here’s the second episode in our occasional series on lesser-known works by authors of acknowledged classics. We discuss Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Letter to d’Alembert on the Theater. D’Alembert published an article on Geneva for the Encyclopédie in 1757 which included a recommendation that Geneva should have a theater. Rousseau soon took up his been to argue against his friend’s proposal. “In so doing,” wrote Allan Bloom, “Rousseau presented as complete a treatment of the arts in relation to politics as has ever been produced.”

This conversation includes an overview of Rousseau’s remarkable career, an introduction to the context for the letter, and a discussion of the letter’s many themes and proposals. We take up the question of amusements or entertainments and their importance to the political life of any nation. We spend some time on the theater in general and French theater in particular and Rousseau’s understanding of what this institution does to our passions. The letter is a remarkable work in that it moves back and forth between general themes and very concrete discussions of particular peoples and their habits and institutions. Rousseau discusses Genevan institutions and makes proposals for new ones near the end of the letter. We look closely at his analyses and proposals and discuss his understanding of the relation between love and liberty.

Other topics include: (1) why drunkenness is ok (2) Spartan women and naked marching (3) how to get rid of dueling (4) why actors are liars and should be avoided (5) why a Miss Geneva pageant makes sense but the theater doesn’t.

My guest is Pamela Jensen. She is Professor of Political Science Emerita at Kenyon College, where she taught modern political philosophy and politics and literature for thirty-four years. She is widely published on a range of authors and themes but see in particular her work on Rousseau, Shakespeare, and Ralph Ellison. She has a truly outstanding essay on Rousseau’s Letter entitled, “Love and Liberty in Rousseau.” This can be found in a book called Love and Friendship:  Rethinking Politics and Affection in Modern Times, edited by Eduardo A. Velasquez.

Fred Bauer on Norman Podhoretz’s Making It

This month we discuss Norman Podhoretz’s memoir Making It. The book was first published in 1967 and then was reissued in 2017 by the New York Review of Books. Making It was controversial upon publication—friends like Jason Epstein even warned Podhoretz against publishing it. Making It chronicles Podhoretz’s rise from Jewish Brooklyn, to Columbia University, on to Cambridge University, and then to joining the exclusive community of New York Intellectuals. He frames his story with the themes of success, American identity, and the intellectual life. Our conversation here takes up all of these themes and a few more. We discuss why the book proved controversial initially, Podhoretz’s reflections on the question of success, his judgments about the role of the critic, and his understanding of the immigrant bargain as success becomes a real possibility.

Our guest is Fred Bauer. Fred has written for a number of publications, including National Review, City Journal, The Weekly Standard, The American Conservative, Genealogies of Modernity, and elsewhere. His interests include contemporary American politics, accounts of identity, and the role of social and ethical commitments for liberty.

Elizabeth Amato on William Alexander Percy’s Lanterns on the Levee: Reflections of a Planter’s Son

This month we discuss William Alexander Percy’s memoir, Lanterns on the Levee, first published in 1941. Percy lived a full and extraordinary life, beautifully captured in this book. A native of Greenville, Mississippi, Percy writes as a witness of the “disintegration of that moral cohesion of the South.” He was by turns a teacher, lawyer, poet, soldier, planter and adoptive father. We discuss Percy’s portrait of the class dynamics of the south, race relations, the emergence of populist political currents, his experiences in the first World War, and his peculiar aristocratic stoicism. We conclude with some reflections on how Will Percy might have influenced his more famous cousin and adoptive son, the novelist Walker Percy.

Our guest is Elizabeth Amato. Elizabeth is an associate professor of political science at Gardner-Webb University in North Carolina. She earned her bachelor's degree at Berry College and her doctorate at Baylor University. Her first book is The Pursuit of Happiness and the American Regime where she discusses the writings of Tom Wolfe, Walker Percy, Edith Wharton, and Walker Nathaniel Hawthorne. Her scholarly interests include politics, literature, film, happiness, moral education, and American political thought. She has written on Walker Percy and his critique of the alienating character of the American pursuit of happiness. 

Matt Dinan on Aristotle’s social virtues

With this episode Enduring Interest inaugurates a new occasional series on chapters or parts of great books which tend to be ignored or not much talked about. Matt Dinan is back to discuss a series of brief and fascinating chapters in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics on the social virtues: gentleness, friendliness, truthfulness and wittiness. Check out Matt’s essay “Be Nice,” first published in the Fall 2018 issue of The Hedgehog Review, where he touches on some of these virtues.

Matt is an associate professor in the great books program at St. Thomas University in Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada. He does research on classical, Christian, and contemporary political philosophy, and is currently writing a book called Kierkegaard's Socratic Political Philosophy. His essays and reviews have appeared in Perspectives on Political Science and The Review of Politics. Matt is also a contributing writer to The Hedgehog Review. Matt also has a Substack called PREFACES.

 

Matt discussed Kierkegaard’s Two Ages with us about a year ago. When I conceived of the idea for this occasional series on underappreciated parts of great books, I thought each of these episodes would be quite short—brief, quick hitting chats about something very particular. Well, as you’ll hear, Matt gets rolling on social virtues—as advertised—but our conversation covers lots of ground! Matt talks about what makes the Ethics such a rich book, Aristotle’s distinction between moral and intellectual virtue, and the place of these nameless virtues in his full list of moral virtues. But that’s not all. We also hit on the niceness of Atlantic Canadians, the importance of laughter to freedom and community, toddler humor, Norm Macdonald, Shakespearean humor, and a theory of Larry David. No micro-episode can contain Matt—plus I’m much too nice to cut him off. So here’s a very nice, normal sized episode, full of wit and wisdom.