Scan barcode
A review by jpwright87
The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness: A Vindication of Democracy and a Critique of its Traditional Defense by Reinhold Niebuhr
3.0
This book has all the stern rationality I would expect from Niebuhr, but it's not especially coherent. Though the book is supposed to be a "vindication of democracy", it really only spends perhaps ten pages on that. The rest of the space is used to chart a course between naivety (light) and cynicism (darkness). The analysis, while always interestingly worded by Niebuhr, doesn't really add enough to my understanding of power politics or worldstatecraft to merit much attention.
He limits himself to what I could call a level 2 analysis. It goes like this: Locke said this, but he was too optimistic about individual freedom. Hobbes said this, but he was too cynical, thinking of individuals as thoroughly egoistic. The truth is in balancing the two.
Fair enough, but saying that balance needs to be achieved isn't a very clear vision.
Certainly there is much that could be helpful to us today, such as curtailing our optimism about creating progress/justice/etc. through government action alone, or of curtailing our current cynicism about humanity generally. The typical solution is to recover a spiritual, moral, and universal element in culture that can remind us of the balance of light and dark that humanity will always be. In fact, it sounded a lot like what you see in David Brooks's moderate conservatism, lauding the impact of community, culture, and other subgovernmental sources of unity. His offhand commentary is probably the best part of his work, in fact. It speaks the least to the topic at hand, but it gives you a clearer understanding of the author's views.
He limits himself to what I could call a level 2 analysis. It goes like this: Locke said this, but he was too optimistic about individual freedom. Hobbes said this, but he was too cynical, thinking of individuals as thoroughly egoistic. The truth is in balancing the two.
Fair enough, but saying that balance needs to be achieved isn't a very clear vision.
Certainly there is much that could be helpful to us today, such as curtailing our optimism about creating progress/justice/etc. through government action alone, or of curtailing our current cynicism about humanity generally. The typical solution is to recover a spiritual, moral, and universal element in culture that can remind us of the balance of light and dark that humanity will always be. In fact, it sounded a lot like what you see in David Brooks's moderate conservatism, lauding the impact of community, culture, and other subgovernmental sources of unity. His offhand commentary is probably the best part of his work, in fact. It speaks the least to the topic at hand, but it gives you a clearer understanding of the author's views.