The Crisis of Modern Times: Perspectives from The Review of Politics, 1939-1962

20 “Human Estrangement and the Failure of Political Imagination” (1959)

C h a p t e r 2 0 Human Estrangement and the Failure of Political Imagination Glenn Tinder Glenn Tinder (1923–), the youngest contributor to The Review of Politics in this volume, was born in California and received his PhD from the University of California at Berkeley in political science. He spent most of his career teaching at the University of Massachusetts. Tinder places himself in the existentialist tradition of Karl Jaspers, Søren Kierkegaard, and Gabriel Marcel, though he considers Plato and Kant to be the philosophers who influenced him the most. His thinking was also shaped by Russian authors, particularly novelists such as Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Boris Pasternak. Tinder’s writings are based on a Christian perspective of philosophy, history, social concerns, and especially politics. He has argued that political order is best attained not through all-encompassing ideologies like Marxism, but instead through Christianity’s more accurate understanding of the potential and limitations of human beings. Tinder has advocated what he calls a “prophetic stance,” in which human beings recognize the limits of political community in contradistinction to the Kingdom of God. At the same time, he has argued for the importance of rectifying injustice and holding out hope for the formation of a just polity and a true human community. It is a well-known human tendency to continue applying remedies after the problem for which they are suitable has been solved. Concentration on a particular difficulty becomes habitual to such a degree that its disappearance may not be immediately realized. And new problems may take its place for some time without being noticed. 374 Human Estrangement and the Failure of Political Imagination 375 One wonders whether a condition of this kind does not prevail at present in the politics of Western nations. For one thing, are not the traditional issues of political controversy losing their power of compelling attention and arousing emotion? For a period of roughly a century prior to the outbreak of World War II there was intense political activity and excitement; this was due above all to the conditions of life which early industrialism imposed on the working classes. Proposalsforgovernmentalinterventionintheeconomycausedheateddisputes; socialist doctrines were evolved and contested; and the rise of trade unions caused fierce altercations. While these questions are still discussed, they do not give rise to the bitterness they once did; it is probably not going too far to say that most people no longer care greatly about the alternatives involved. At the same time, if there has been a waning of those emotions associated with the old political issues this hardly represents the attainment of a new confidence and serenity. On the contrary, uneasiness is perhaps more profound and widespread than it has been for centuries. As old disputes become less intense, fear for the very foundations of civilization grows. Phenomena as diverse as Hitlerism, nuclear weapons, and juvenile delinquency are among a host of unfamiliar specters. Finally, however, despite an apparent slackening of the furor surrounding old controversies and the emergence of new fears, the terms of political debate do not seem to have been substantially altered. There are of course new questions, such as those concerning atomic energy, and new forms to old questions, especiallyinthesphereof foreignpolicy.Yetatthecenterof politicallifetherestillcontinue the old disputes regarding the proper role of government in the economy, the merits of socialism, and the appropriate power of unions. Those concerned with politics still in many cases define their basic philosophies—whether “liberal ” or “conservative”—in terms of the positions they take with respect to these issues. The consequence is that one may feel that most political debate is not very enlightening. Social reformers and party managers may seem often to be pursuing arguments which fail either to ignite former emotions or to give utterance to those now prevailing. To what extent the challenges of a generation or two ago have been mastered, and what the causes are of the present disquietude, the various political disputants, embroiled in old debates, may not help one to discover. There is reason, then, to ask whether our political imagination is not captive to passing problems, and perhaps oblivious to others appearing in their place. I That there is at present a maladjustment of some kind between imagination and realityinthesphereof politicsseemshighlyprobableinviewof thefactthatpolitical spokesmen and leaders, on the one hand, and many of the most sensitive writers and thinkers, on the other, are apparently not...