I got a late start on re-reading Moral Man and Immoral Society for today's diary, meaning I started re-reading today. And it struck me as the most timely of chapters - "The Preservation of Moral Values in Politics." Niebuhr discusses how, given the impossibility of a purely rational approach to political struggle, morality can be maintained in the constant battle of force against force. Niebuhr would have little patience with the willful irrationality of those inciting violence against Democratic lawmakers, because he does value the "preservation of moral values in politics," and at the same time, he offers some cautions that the "reality-based" community should take seriously.
For previous discussions, see invitation to the book club
introduction to the book club
Chapter 1: Man and Society
Chapter 2: Rational Resources for Social Living
Chapter 3: Religious Resources for Social Living
Chapter 4: The Morality of Nations
Chapter 5: Ethical Attitudes of of the Proletariat
(Somehow we seemed to have skipped chapter 6, "Ethical Attitudes of the Privileged Classes")
Chapter 7: Justice through Revolution
Chapter 8: Justice through Political Force
Next week, we will conclude the book club with a discussion of The Conflict between Individual and Social Morality.
In the previous two chapters, Niebuhr advanced two ways in which political struggles strive for justice: revolution and political force. In neither case does he think force can be escaped. In this chapter, he tries to find some ways in which moral values can be preserved in the political context where force always contends against force.
A major caution Niebuhr offers to those seeking an alternative to the brute force of death threats and thrown bricks is the idea that education simply increases rational discourse.
It must be recognised, of course, that education may contain coercive elements. It may degenerate into propaganda. Nor can it be denied that there is an element of propaganda in all education. Even the most honest educator tries consciously or unconsciously to impress a particular viewpoint upon his disciples. Whenever the educational process is accompanied by a dishonest suppression of facts and truths, relevant to the point at issue, it becomes pure propaganda. But even without such dishonest intentions there is, in all exchange of ideas, a certain degree of unconscious suppression of facts or inability to see all the facts. That is the very reason the educational procedures alone cannot be trusted to resolve a social controversy. Since reason is never pure, education is a tool of controversy as well as a method of transcending it. (243)
For example, the recent decision of the Texas legislature Schoolbook Commission to replace Thomas Jefferson with John Calvin in the history curriculum is a clear example of an agenda of propaganda. What became apparent in the responses to that decision, however, was that what was at stake for many was not the "objective" teaching of history, but the preservation of a historical narrative that preserves Enlightenment, rather than premodern ideals. This is an instance where the preservation of a narrative of rational progress is pitted against a theocratic narrative - but in either case, history is being used to advance an ideology. The fact that our ideology values reason does not free us from the factor of coercion in teaching it. For Niebuhr, this tension is simply a hallmark of communal existence, not a fact we should be ashamed of or worried about lending ammunition to those who oppose us.
Niebuhr also spends several pages discussing Gandhi's political strategies, showing where Gandhi is "confused" as a result of trying to be both a saint and a political figure. Nevertheless, he upholds Gandhi's non-violent tactics as one of the surest and effective ways to preserve moral values in political struggle.
Both the temper and the method of non-violence yield another very important advantage in social conflict. They rob the opponent of the moral conceit by which he identifies his interests with the peace and order of society. This is the most important of all the imponderables in a social struggle. (250)
He spends several pages, writing in the early 30s, calling for the kind of non-violent resistance from the African-American community that surfaced into the public discussion in the 1950s and 1960s.