|
The Women's Freedom Network Newsletter
September/October, Vol. 5, Number 5.
Real Politics: (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1997)
Reviewed by Claire Morgan |
O ne of my professors likes to remind his students that much of what currently passes for political theory is utterly useless in helping citizens to live their lives, never mind guiding them to live better lives. This is because contemporary political theory is dominated by analytic philosophy--sets of arid, logical, and frequently rather tedious arguments about "possible worlds" that might exist behind veils of ignorance. For those of us who find it challenging enough to deal with actual people who live real lives in this world, it is tempting to forget about political theory altogether, and to seek guidance in other disciplines, such as economics or psychology. However, a look at Jean Elshtain's work reminds us that all is not lost.
Real Politics is a collection of essays--most of them previously published in various academic journals and other scholarly collected works. The subjects of the essays range from critiques of methodology to reflections on the small town in American literature, from existentialism to Rortyian liberalism. A sizable portion of the book is devoted to Elshtain's critical commentary on the feminist movement and its associated issues and politics. Readers of this newsletter are familiar with one of the lines of reasoning Elshtain employs--part four is titled "Neither Victims nor Oppressors: Beyond a Politics of Resentment" (although they may not have associated it with Elshtain's work specifically), so I shall not dwell on that here. Instead, it seems to me that what Elshtain offers is of particular value as an example of how to argue, and how to argue well. Beyond that, she presents us with a set of values that are firmly rooted in an appreciation of human constraints and worldly complexity. What political theory desperately needs is a return to theory that not only advances a set of values, but that also offers an analysis of what it (actually, really, plausibly) takes to get those values realized in the world. Real Politics proffers glimpses of such a political theory lurking beneath critical commentary.
The dedication in the front of Real Politics reads "To the memory of my father, Paul G. Bethke, who taught me how to make peace, and of my mother, Helen Lind Bethke, who taught me how to fight." This is a telling remark, and one that sets the stage for the essays that follow. For Jean Elshtain is nothing if not a critical commentator--as the essays collected in this volume serve to show. However, she is never unduly harsh, and her criticism takes the form of constructive critique, rather than ideological bashing. This is, after all, the work of a scholar. Elshtain is passionately committed to a point of view (democracy), but she never sacrifices her critical faculties to that commitment. On the contrary. Her democratic perspective is born of a commitment to heterodoxy and a general disposition to open-mindedness. She uses her values to guide her toward her conclusions, rather than to determine them.
Since Real Politics is a series of critical commentaries it is important to note that we are not presented with a coherent theory outlining Elshtain's own perspective, and at first one wants to ask where she is coming from. But this is just the point--and part of the discovery process that she wants to lead us through. Engaging the world with critical thought is central to her approach, and she does this by taking on the arguments of others, and examining them carefully, thoughtfully, and rigorously. As one pores over the analysis--this is a serious book with many profound and indeed, provocative points, so it requires a certain amount of concentration--her view emerges from the analysis of those she criticizes, together with those she admires. Elshtain cites the following conversation to illustrate how one should approach the world:
Toward the end of her remarkable career, Hannah Arendt and her colleague, the political scientist Hans Morgenthau, had the following exchange, reported in Elizabeth Young-Bruehl's biography of Arendt. Morgenthau queried: What are you? Are you a conservative? Are you a liberal? Where is your position within contemporary possibilities?" And Arendt responded: "I don't know. I really don't know and I've never known. And I suppose I never had any such position -- And I must say I couldn't care less. I don't think the real questions of this century will get any kind of illumination by this sort of thing."
Such ideas are evidently endorsed by Elshtain herself, and she goes on to discuss them in the context of feminist debates. She says:
Arendt was right. Those feminist texts that proclaim, in effect, "shut up and fight" or "shut them up in order to better fight" offer illumination into nothing except the workings of dogmatic minds and ideological projects. Contrastingly, those feminist writers and scholars who refuse to join the circle, who retain their independence of mind and thought, in the long run better serve any feminism worth its salt. By that I mean a feminist position open to debate, committed to democracy, prepared to pursue politics as the art of the possible." (p125)
Politics, for Elshtain, refers to "how human beings govern and order a way of life in common." It is an activity that ought to be bounded by limits, but it is not without hope. She says, "We are beings for whom much is simply given. We can carve out some possibilities; we can stake out some territory. But we cannot remake the world." Indeed, in contrast to Plato and other grand theorists, Elshtain considers her work to be about "undermining certain pretensions and calling into question calls to action that would lead us, if not over the abyss, at least deeper into the morass." To that end, following Arendt, she advocates a politics that is active rather than passive, but borrowing from Vaclav Havel, one that also carries with it a sense of morality, and particularly responsibility_which is to say, a knowledge that ideas have consequences. She uses reason to stake out reasonableness rather than rationalism, to fashion a via media, or vital center.
In practice this will mean that in Elshtain's view the democratic project is never quite finished, never quite realized. But we continue to work hard to do the best that we can, subject to limits, complexity, and contradictions. Indeed, what strikes me about Elshtain's democratic theory, in contrast to her colleagues--is that it is grounded in humanism. This is why her feminism, like the broader politics that she locates it within, is real, not disembodied, abstract, or utopian.
Clearly, this is not a book for ideologues, and others who are similarly intellectually lazy. Indeed, given the array of subjects (staggering by todays highly specialized standards), together with the rarefied language of academic discourse, it seems likely that those who already follow the "hot topics" in academia will enjoy this book the most. On the other hand, Elshtain's prose is clear, and she often writes with humor [a tale involving a ponytailed cab driver's discussion of "postmetaphysical" theory ("For me, life is one big metaphor") certainly brought a smile to my face,] as well as humility (we are reminded of the limits that humans--including academics_must live with), so patient non-academic readers will also find much of interest.
In an essay titled "Democracy's Middle Way," Elshtain says, "This is tough stuff. But, then, democracy is not for sissies." Neither are this book or Elshtain's thoughts. Read her and think.
Jean Bethke Elshtain is a noted scholar and a professor at the University of Chicago, and is currently a member of the board of the Women's Freedom Network.