Lessons Unlearned

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

 

George Santayana, The Life of Reason

 

 

I think many of the political problems we seem to be having these days stems from our differing perspectives on human history and experience:

 

In the main, whether by dint of personality or education, conservatives tend to show more respect for tradition and institutions.  This stems from a reading of History that shows (a) most innovation leads to failure or disaster; (b) there are few things new under the sun; (c) most "innovations" have already been tried...and were discarded for a good reason; (d) there are some human values that we simply have to accept a priori, since applying sterile logic to the human condition leads to a sterile and withering nihilism that is not conducive to human growth; (e) as our capacity for unintended consequences appears to know no limits, we need to be very careful when making changes; (f) a page of history being worth a volume of logic, experience will be a better guide for us than abstract logic; and, therefore, (g) small, incremental changes are likely to lead to better results than grand plans based on the hope that we can remake the world to our liking.

 

It seems to me that modern-day liberals (as opposed to Classical Liberals, who would likely be described as "conservatives" in today's political climate) tend to scoff at tradition, and set their sights on remaking the world into something better.  This, in turn, leads to (a) a rejection of History as a guide to the future; (b) the belief that Man is infinitely malleable; (c) the belief that one can devise solutions to problems through the use of logic, rather than practical experimentation; and, as a consequence (d) the conviction that the "masses" must be led to the future, since they are incapable of knowing what's best for them; and (e) the conclusion that ultimate wisdom is to be found in educated elites, rather than History, Experience, or Tradition.

 

Personally, I think we're far better off muddling through as best we can and tinkering at the margins to make things better, than we are trying to devise "grand plans" to solve all our problems in one fell swoop.  Evidence for this abounds, even if we limit our search to the last Century:

 

Exhibit A:  Soviet Russia

Exhibit B: The War on Poverty

Exhibit C: Modern Feminism, and the entire PC movement

Exhibit D: Obamacare

 

It is all well and good to be a dreamer and idealist, and to devise grand notions for making the world a better place.  But as tradition notes, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and it's usually unwise to fix something that isn't broken.  The conceit that humans can foresee all the consequences of what they're doing leads us to farce and tragedy; and I suspect that our descendants will be looking back on our Age of Folly and shaking their heads...wondering how their ancestors could have been so stupid.

 

Of course, that may not prevent them from making their own stupid mistakes.  But it seems to me that one benefit of looking at the past is to see and learn from the mistakes of others --- including the conceit that "Our Era" has the answers to problems that have plagued Mankind since the beginning, and that human folly is limited to the past.

 

I hope one day, humanity can master this lesson; it's one that our generation seems never to have learned.

JEFFREY CAMINSKY, a retired public prosecutor from Michigan, writes on a wide range of topics. His books include the Guardians of Peace-tm science fiction adventure series, The Sonnets of William Shakespeare, and the acclaimed Referee’s Survival Guide, a book on soccer officiating. All are published by New Alexandria Press, and are available on Amazon, as well as directly from the publisher.

The Better Angels of our Nature

This year marks the 150th anniversary of the start of the American Civil War, one of the defining moments in the history of the greatest republic the world has known. So far, it seems to be marked the public largely by apathy and inattention. For nerds like myself, however, with an abiding interest in history and the human condition, it is a time for reflection on any number of things --- from the follies of Mankind to the extraordinary good fortune that has blessed this country from its inception.

My current book is Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin. Her Pulitzer Prize winning study of the unique and self-made genius of our 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, illustrates the subtle and often-happenstance differences that mark the difference between good men and great ones. Lincoln, blessed with a gifted mind but suffering the handicap of little formal education, shared the same drive toward accomplishment that propels many talented people to make something of their lives. But his kindly, gentle disposition --- and the struggles he had to endure to overcome an impoverished upbringing, hardships that would have crippled most lesser men --- gave him advantages that let him transcend much of the petty partisan bickering that afflicted his era, as well as our own.

Often derided as ignorant and unfit for office by those who did not know him, Lincoln emerges as a forceful and visionary leader with an impeccable sense of timing --- or blessed with incredible luck, which may be another way of saying the same thing. Sweet-tempered and considerate to those around him, he nevertheless possessed an iron will and drive to make himself into someone worthy of the esteem of his countrymen. And it was a profound blessing upon his country that he emerged, virtually from nowhere, at precisely the moment his country needed a hero.

His kindness and magnanimity still shines through the ages, and he was loved by all who came to know him well, including those who felt cheated and betrayed by his nomination: his rivals for the Republican nomination in 1860, whom he wisely invited into his Cabinet. Sensing the the country needed the strongest leaders he could find, his matchless ability to juggle conflicting egos, emotions, and ideologies among the various pro-Union factions held the country together, and brought out the very best in those strong personalities whose help he needed to save our still-young Republic.

Lincoln was roundly criticized by virtually everyone during his day, for failing to adhere to their own prescribed agendas for the country. His election resulted in the South's seccession, but at the same time he was viewed as vacillating and soft by the radicals for his cautious approach to the issue that was tearing the country apart: slavery. Those who knew him, though, saw this caution for what it was --- an unwillingness to push a fractured country further than it was ready to go, even as he struggled to keep the Nation together. A lesser man, or one of more ideological rigidity, may well have pushed the country over the cliff by racing to abolish what was recognized as the American Curse. And as he maneuvered to keep Europe --- whose mills needed Southern cotton rendered unavailable by the Northern blockade of Southern ports --- from intervening in the conflict on the side of the Confederacy Yet he always pressed in the direction of freedom and equality for all, and when he sensed that the shift in public sentiment had matured sufficiently to set the Nation on the course of freedom for all its citizens, he was resolute in his actions, and determined to keep the country he loved from sliding back.

With all the Herculean challenges and sorrows Lincoln had to confront, what comes through most clearly is his humanity and elemental goodness. His sense of humor was legendary, and his generosity, sweetness of temper, and kind-heartedness inspired love and devotion in everyone who came to know him well. He was able to be magnanimous in defeat as well as victory, and seemed unable to hold a grudge, even against people who meant him harm --- traits as sorely lacking in the politicians of today as they were in Lincoln’s time. The difference appears to have been the character and temperament of Lincoln himself.

Oddly enough, one of the things that resonates most about Goodwin’s portrait of the Lincoln Administration is how closely the small and petty minds of his day resemble those of our own. Fortunately for the country, an unknown candidate appeared from nowhere just when his country needed him, with the intellectual gifts and sense of vision that proved to be exactly what was needed to rescue American from its own follies. In our own day --- with follies abounding, and narrow-minded pettiness all but a job requirement for political office --- it is hard to see how a modern Lincoln can ever emerge. Yet though perhaps not as daunting as the challenges facing the country as it confronted the American curse of slavery, those we face today threaten our financial and cultural future in ways we are only now beginning to realize. And if we have really sunk to the level of being unable to produce a leader equal to the challenges that confront us, we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

JEFFREY CAMINSKY, a retired public prosecutor from Michigan, writes on a wide range of topics. His books include the science fiction adventure novel Clouds of Darkness, the compelling third volume in the Guardians of Peace-tm series, The Sonnets of William Shakespeare, and the acclaimed Referee’s Survival Guide, a book on soccer officiating. All are published by New Alexandria Press, and are available on Amazon, as well as directly from the publisher.

The Federalist, No 62, by James Madison

Among the priceless treasures of American history is work collectively known as The Federalist, written while the adoption of our Constitution was still a matter of public controversy. Some, looking to the chaos and confusion stemming from trying to govern thirteen unruly colonies under the weak and ineffective Articles of Confederation, believed that only a united government could keep America strong and free—or, in the words of the Preamble, to “secure the Blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity.” Others, the Anti-Federalists, feared that a strong, centralized government would be a vehicle for tyrants to impose their will on the population.

In the ensuing public debate, a writer known only as Publius, wrote a series of persuasive essays, pointing out the benefits on the new federal constitution, as well as explaining its provisions to the reading audience. In truth, the essays were written by three giants of American history: James Madison, who would become our fourth president; Alexander Hamilton, who would become our first Secretary of the Treasury; and John Jay, who would become the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

In the sixty-second essay, James Madison explained the purpose and theory behind having a second house in the Legislature, which the proposed Constitution called the Senate. Among its benefits was intended to be to lend a degree of stability to the new government: since its members would serve six-year terms, he argued, they would be more inclined to take a broader view—and would serve as a brake upon the House of Representatives, which—being elected every two years (and expected to have a high turnover, service in the House being perceived as a sacrifice for those elected to serve), would lack the institutional memory needed to keep the young nation on a steady course.

To the modern reader, such concerns may seem prophetic—for Madison wrote of the need of the nation to avoid being “inconstant” or to “carry on...affairs without any plan at all,” to escape becoming “a speedy victimness to...unsteadiness and folly.” A constant parade of ever-changing laws and regulations, he feared, would give the “moneyed few” a distinct and unconscionable advantage over the industrious masses—for money would enable the elites to monitor and manipulate changes in the laws to their own advantage, while leaving the rest of the country in scrounging for a living in the dust and mud. And constantly changing laws would “be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood,” leaving the “prudent merchant” or farmer or manufacturer reluctant to “hazard his fortunes” on any new enterprise, mindful of the fact that the laws were as variable as the wind, and that his fortunes would always be at the mercy of “an inconstant government.”

Like many passages in the Federalist, Number 62 is remarkable for its concise logic, the gracefulness of its expression, and the persuasive quality of the writing. It is also among the most prescient and insightful commentaries on the risks of self-government—and its lessons about incoherent and intrusive laws appear to have been forgotten, when they should be required reading for everyone, most particularly those who aspire to take upon themselves the responsibility to write our laws and set our policies.

From The Federalist, No. 62, by James Madison:

To trace the mischievous effects of a mutable government would fill a volume. I will hint a few only, each of which will be perceived to be a source of innumerable others.

In the first place, it forfeits the respect and confidence of other nations, and all the advantages connected with national character. An individual who is observed to be inconstant to his plans, or perhaps to carry on his affairs without any plan at all, is marked at once, by all prudent people, as a speedy victim to his own unsteadiness and folly. His more friendly neighbors may pity him, but all will decline to connect their fortunes with his; and not a few will seize the opportunity of making their fortunes out of his. One nation is to another what one individual is to another; with this melancholy distinction perhaps, that the former, with fewer of the benevolent emotions than the latter, are under fewer restraints also from taking undue advantage from the indiscretions of each other. Every nation, consequently, whose affairs betray a want of wisdom and stability, may calculate on every loss which can be sustained from the more systematic policy of their wiser neighbors. But the best instruction on this subject is unhappily conveyed to America by the example of her own situation. She finds that she is held in no respect by her friends; that she is the derision of her enemies; and that she is a prey to every nation which has an interest in speculating on her fluctuating councils and embarrassed affairs.

The internal effects of a mutable policy are still more calamitous. It poisons the blessing of liberty itself. It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?

Another effect of public instability is the unreasonable advantage it gives to the sagacious, the enterprising, and the moneyed few over the industrious and uniformed mass of the people. Every new regulation concerning commerce or revenue, or in any way affecting the value of the different species of property, presents a new harvest to those who watch the change, and can trace its consequences; a harvest, reared not by themselves, but by the toils and cares of the great body of their fellow-citizens. This is a state of things in which it may be said with some truth that laws are made for the few, not for the many.

In another point of view, great injury results from an unstable government. The want of confidence in the public councils damps every useful undertaking, the success and profit of which may depend on a continuance of existing arrangements. What prudent merchant will hazard his fortunes in any new branch of commerce when he knows not but that his plans may be rendered unlawful before they can be executed? What farmer or manufacturer will lay himself out for the encouragement given to any particular cultivation or establishment, when he can have no assurance that his preparatory labors and advances will not render him a victim to an inconstant government? In a word, no great improvement or laudable enterprise can go forward which requires the auspices of a steady system of national policy.

But the most deplorable effect of all is that diminution of attachment and reverence which steals into the hearts of the people, towards a political system which betrays so many marks of infirmity, and disappoints so many of their flattering hopes. No government, any more than an individual, will long be respected without being truly respectable; nor be truly respectable, without possessing a certain portion of order and stability.

JEFFREY CAMINSKY, a retired public prosecutor from Michigan, writes on a wide range of topics. His books include the science fiction adventure novel The Star Dancers, the exciting second volume in the Guardians of Peace-tm series, The Sonnets of William Shakespeare, and the acclaimed Referee’s Survival Guide, a book on soccer officiating. All are published by New Alexandria Press, and are available on Amazon, as well as directly from the publisher.

Book Review: Collapse by Jared Diamond

Reviewed by Jeffrey Caminsky

Human history is full of tantalizing riddles. Some of the most fascinating of these arise from the appearance of ancient ruins in unlikely places, such as Easter Island, or the dense jungles of the Yucatan Peninsula. To the uninitiated, these ruins are the ghosts of phantom civilizations whose disappearance is a mystery to our 21st Century minds. But like geologists reading Earth’s history in the rocks, archaeologists can often read the history of past civilizations by studying the records of these ruins.

In Collapse, author Jared Diamond brings an inquisitive mind and a varied and distinguised career as a student of humanity to bear on some often-alarming questions about the mysterious disappearances of past cultures and societies. And he asks a disturbing question that often goes ignored in our modern, 21st Century World: If advanced cultures in the past have disappeared—sometimes almost without at trace—can this mysterious past be part of our own future? In this fascinating and highly informative book, Diamond offers some alarming lessons drawn from the historical record, as well as reason to hope for the future.

Employing a five-part analytical framework, the author studies a number of past and present civilizations, hoping to draw lessons to explain why some survived and prospered, while others withered and died. Among the factors which seem to affect a society’s chances of enduring, he points to a civilization’s environmental damage to its surroundings, the impact of climate change, the rise of hostile neighbors or dislocations caused by the decline of trading partners, as well as the choices made by the society itself when confronting past crises that arise through changing circumstances, as being the most important.

Although the infinite variety of people and circumstances makes firm conclusions beyond the reach of our limited knowledge, cultures as diverse as the Vikings and the Japanese, the Anastasi and the Australians, the Chinese and the Polynesians, have all faced similar challenges, many of which are well known to our own era. Ecological fragility, the overuse of both fixed and renewable resources, the over-extension of settlements, and the tenuous interconnections of trading networks are all problems that face 21st Century societies. Now, as throughout history, advanced cultures often export the depletion of their own resources to those of underdeveloped societies that are desperate for cash; and the effect of leaders who come to view their own interests as synonymous with those of their societies—and who therefore make decisions that sacrifice the interests of their people for their own—are hardly confined to ancient civilizations.

But the author gives us reason to hope, as well as cause for concern. Not all societies collapse: some are able to confront and overcome their problems; and others, blessed with rich abundance and a forgiving environment, are able to skirt disaster through dumb luck or good fortune. Throughout the book, the author presents the reader with an interesting blend of history and theory, and his readable and accessible prose enlightens and challenges the reader. This book is not for those made uncomfortable by thinking about the challenges that may lie ahead; but for readers interested in expanding their knowledge of the past, and thinking about the kind of world we may be leaving to our children, its central message is one of cautious hope, tempered with the reality that in this world, all things are transitory...and that even the mightiest civilizations are not immune from the consequences of their own folly.

JEFFREY CAMINSKY, a veteran public prosecutor in Detroit, Michigan, specializes in the appellate practice of criminal law and writes on a wide range of topics. His books include the science fiction adventure novel The Star Dancers, the exciting second volume in the Guardians of Peace-tm series, The Sonnets of William Shakespeare, and the acclaimed The Referee’s Survival Guide, a book on soccer officiating. All are published by New Alexandria Press, and are available on Amazon, as well as directly from the publisher.