Civilization and Its Enemies : The Next Stage of History

Rating:
Summary: Very Important, Thought Provoking Work
Review: This book puts forth in a very thought provoking manner the author's idea that the true enemies of our civilization are not necessarily the ruffians that would do us harm, but rather the tendency to forget how we became what we are.

I found this work to be interesting mainly as a sociology lesson on the principles that our society was founded upon, and can see it lived out day to day in my current role training Iraqi Soldiers and talking with them about how their society is build. In most of the non-Western world, the primary social structure and allegiance resides with the family. However, as Harris demonstrates, in the West, we have diminished the importance of the family and replaced it with the Team concept. Harris illustrates the historical building of this system by using the Spartans as the example of how a society was able to totally change its direction.

He also points out an important policy distinction that we need to remember in our dealings with the newly recognized threat of Muslim Terrorism. In the view of the terrorists, the act is an end unto itself, a "fantasy" to use Harris's term, and not necessarily a building block for future policy objective gains. While I believe there are some holes in that theory, which Harris doesn't entertain, it makes for an interesting perspective and definitely one worth considering.

Harris also argues that Capitalism by itself has allowed peace to settle because capitalism has harnessed the aggressive, expantionalist tendencies of men into the pursuit of building and constructing within the system as opposed to the historical outlet of conquering. This argument alone makes the book worthwhile reading.

My only qualm with this book is that the writing is very heavy. This is not a book you can read in your leisure. It takes a concerted effort to read, reflect and digest. If you are going to be trapped somewhere for several hours, this will be a great book to read, and more importantly, to discuss with others. At the very least, this book will make you think and consider current events in a much different light.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant Analysis, Not Easy Reading
Review: This is a brilliant philosophical analysis of the roots of our present civilization, setting forth what is necessary to defend and preserve it. This is not for those seeking easy reading. But Harris' concept of the enemy and of the sources of ruthlessness are path-breaking and desperately needed today. Do make the effort to read this short book; it is the realistic antidote to much airy liberal utopianism.

Rating:
Summary: Lifting the Veil
Review: This is an important book that is well worth reading. Many of the author's arguments and insights are provocative, often, in my view, true, and even when doubtful still worth pondering. I would summarize his argument like this: civilization in the West has been so successful that it has blinded us to what is necessary to create such a civilization in the first place, and what may be necessary from time to time to defend it, i.e., ruthlessness. The story of Western Civilization is the story of how ruthlessness was harnessed by male gangs for a larger public good. Ancient Sparta, whose male population spent almost their entire lives preparing for war, is the foundational example for this claim. What I called blindness, the author calls forgetfulness, and clearly his purpose is to remind us that civilization requires violence and conflict both as a necessary pre-condition, and in the face of an utterly ruthless enemy. Some will object that if we are as ruthless as our enemy, an enemy guided by what the author calls a `fantasy ideology,' then we are no better than they; but the author responds that ruthlessness in the service of civilization is morally superior to ruthlessness in service of a fantasy ideology whose purpose is to destroy civilization. In this sense, 911 was a purely symbolic act of destruction since there was never any tangible goal that could be realized within the confines of our enemy's fantasy ideology. It was purely destructive. The author's argument is developed mostly by reference to well-known political thinkers such as Plato, Rousseau and especially Hegel, as well as certain historical analyses of events or peoples such as the Spartans mentioned above. The tone of the book is slow and deliberate, but it still moves along quickly. As original and interesting as Mr. Harris can be, there are times when he steers perilously close to truism and cliché. His presentation of the ideas of Plato, Rousseau and Hegel, are all accurate as far as they go, but nevertheless, superficial. Other thinkers who have clearly influenced the author are never mentioned including most obviously, Machiavelli, Hannah Arendt and Carl Schmitt. Much as Eric Voegelin is rightly criticized for attributing far too much historical significance to a tiny heretical Christian sect, the Gnostics, so too Lee Harris can be criticized for attributing far too much importance to ancient Sparta. One may be able to see the phenomenon that the author wants to examine in an extreme case like Sparta, but Sparta is not at all a typical case. It simply did not have the kind of historical influence on the future of Western civilization that the author suggests. The issue of forgetfulness is also problematic. I take his claim to be that we have not only forgotten what was necessary to create civilization, but we have forgotten that we have real enemies in the world. I just don't think either is really the case. Students in school today dwell almost obsessively on the horrors of the past, on slavery and the mistreatment of native Americans, for example. Like Philoctetes obsessing over his festering wound, far from forgetting the horrors of the past, they are drilled into us. What we don't learn is the lesson, or at least we don't raise the question, whether our ability to examine the past in this way is built upon the very acts we condemn. As for foreign enemies, it has only been about 15 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and fifty since the end of W.W.II. Most people know that we have had foreign enemies even in the recent past. The problem is what do we do about them and here I think the pragmatism of Americans that the author rightly praises is part of the problem. Our tendency is to think all conflicts can be compromised if we just roll up our sleeves, meet the other side halfway, and prepare to give a little to get a little. Some have turned this traditional pragmatic approach into an abstraction that must apply in all cases so we assume it applies to our enemy as well. But if our enemy divides the world into the righteous and the infidel, and in his eyes we are the infidel, and if he believes that he has not just a right, but a positive obligation, to kill us, then there is nothing to compromise and no agreement will ever be possible. It is very difficult to give up the pragmatism that civilization cultivates when you confront an enemy who seeks your destruction. The author's discussion of intellectuals, though I think it has some truth to it, over-generalizes. Yes, intellectuals tend to develop abstract models, and yes, they are often surprised to discover that the real world just does not always go along. But intellectuals are usually pretty smart, at least the ones I know are, and they know that this is a danger. Most also know that just because it sounds good in the classroom, that does not mean it will work in the real world. It might be fair to say that since W.W.II, we have developed our own fantasy ideology around the abstract pragmatism I mentioned above, and that some intellectuals played an important role in this. The tendency to over-generalize, however, is another pit-fall that the author does not always manage to negotiate. What is perhaps most admirable about the book is the author's willingness to follow his argument wherever it goes without regard for political posturing. It may well be, as some critics have noted, that the book fits more easily into a conservative framework, but there is never any sense that the author starts out to write a conservative tract. He simply follows his mind where it leads him. In any case, there are claims in this book which will offend just about everyone including many conservatives. At the end, though, we expect some practical advice on how to proceed once we recognize that we have an enemy who can only be dealt with ruthlessly. What are we to do exactly? The author mentions the Iraq War a few times in passing and seems to have opposed it, but why? Does not this war cultivate precisely the kind of ruthlessness we need to defeat our enemy? There are many paradoxes at work in this book. It is both original and insightful while at the same time superficial and almost trite. It is modest and measured in tone, yet its purpose is to reveal the value, and indeed the necessity, of ruthlessness. It is a theoretical work which claims, correctly in my view, that we ought to take our bearings from practical activity. Some of these paradoxes can be understood in the sense that the author's aim is to lift the veil of civilization so as to reveal the unpleasant truths underneath. But outwardly many of us accept the veil even though inwardly we know about the unpleasant truths it conceals. Maybe that partially explains the paradoxical tone of the book. It tells us truths, truisms even, that we already know but keep concealed in polite company. If someone declares himself our enemy our outward self wants to understand why and negotiate, even as our inward self knows that at least in this case, no negotiation is possible which means killing them before they kill us (i.e. being ruthless). As I said, this is a serious book written by a serious thinker, and notwithstanding my own criticisms, it is well worth reading.





Rating:
Summary: Al Qaeda's Fantasy Ideology
Review: __________________________________________
Lee Harris's _Civilization and Its Enemies_ is a fine,
penetrating look at how civilization developed, and why enemies will
always, always try to bring it down. An exceptionally lucid treatment of
fantasy ideologies -- Naziism, Communism, Islamic terrorism -- and why
ruthless, violent, totalitarian governments are all similarly monstrous.

The best review I saw online was in the Wall Street Journal -- Google opinionjournal.com.

Yes, parts are turgid, but you can skim those, and the whole book is
just 220 pages. "A/A+"

The heart of Harris's book is "Al Qaeda's Fantasy Ideology", first published in Policy Review, and available online (Google policyreview.org)

Sample:
...in al Qaeda's collective fantasy there may exist the notion of an
ultimate terror act, a magic bullet capable of bringing down the United
States at a single stroke--and, paradoxically, nothing comes closer to
fulfilling this magical role than the detonation of a very unmagical
nuclear device. That this would not destroy our society in one fell
swoop is obvious to us; but it is not to our enemies...

Important book. Don't miss.