Reason is non-negotiable.
—Stephen Pinker
Trump rules the Republican Party with autocratic power, a power given to him by his fanatically loyal base. Democrats are nearly as loyal to their party but rightly reject autocratic leadership. That comes at a cost to unity. So, while heading into an election that could destroy American democracy, we find ourselves divided. On one side is the radical approach—demanding a utopian transformation—and on the other, a liberal approach, which proposes strategic compromises for steady progress.
To choose between them, I will rely on historian Michael Kazin. There is no voice more sympathetic to radical utopian dreams and no one more expert on the history of radicalism than Kazin. Yet, he concludes, “Radicals in the U.S. have seldom mounted a serious challenge to those who held power,” and he finds no example of their success. His claim is that they slowly “transform the moral culture,” which eventually pressures opportunistic liberals to implement fundamental changes.
Even if this were correct, it would not bode well for success in the present emergency. Where Kazin is most helpful is in identifying the radical mode of thought, the radical “ethic” as he calls it. Understanding this leads to a unifying vision that covers most of the material in this book. Using this framework, it becomes possible to look back over nearly two hundred years of political history and see how social progress has been made. Of course, this is a broad view that only answers one question, but it is a most important question.
Ripped Apart
