Because it provoked me to think, I am reading for a second time a book I just finished reading. Moreover, I hardly think myself unique. When I checked the book out of the library, I found the library’s copy carefully highlighted throughout. The book is Civilization and Its Enemies: The Next Stage of History by Lee Harris.
The destruction of the World Trade Center by terrorists inspired Harris to write about civilization and its enemies. Harris is concerned that civilization must win the next encounter. Nonetheless, Harris has little to say about the 9/11 disaster or the terrorists. Instead, his book is about history, philosophy, what he thinks makes our civilization work, and how he believes our own civility threatens it.
Since the book came out in 2004, many other reviewers have already had a go at it. So before I decided to write my own review, I decided look at what others had to say.
- The Globalist provides a summary of the book written by Harris himself (here). Hence I don’t see much point in doing the same.
- Ann Marlowe provides a review at Solon. The review is generally favorable, but as we all are wont to do, Marlowe focused on the aspect of the book she finds most distressing. Harris sees our future in something he calls “team cosmopolitanism.” When Harris interprets history, he sees team loyalties supplanting family loyalties. Marlowe is troubled by Harris’ view of the world.
There is a deeper philosophical problem with Harris’ view of our “way of living together.” Even here in the 50 (or will it be 80?) states, “team cosmopolitanism” doesn’t sound like much fun. The world of work that has been responsible for the great achievements of the West can be a dreary and unpleasant place. The good fellowship it provides is, even in the best case, pallid compared with family feeling and romantic love. Its cohesiveness depends on discouraging imagination, playfulness, contrarian thinking and risk taking, some or all of which most people enjoy. Teams can be fun, but they can also be nasty. (from here)
- The Best Reviews provides two short reviews here. The first is a brief, haughty dismissal. The second recognizes that Harris has written something uniquely interesting.
Concepts such as who the enemy is and why it is imperative to react ruthlessly are extensively examined in the light of past historical events as the French Revolution, World War 1 and the teachings of the great political philosophers.
No doubt, the book is a riveting attack on many naive liberal ideals that refuse to believe that the enemy is motivated by a fantasy ideology bent on destroying the very foundations of Western democratic principles and ideology no matter what it takes.
- The Conservative Monitor endorses Harris’ discussion of Spartan government and the evolution of the team phenomena from the “boy’s gang (here).
In fact it is our civilized manifestation of the gang that makes America the only nation on Earth capable of dealing with the deadly gangs ruthlessly, relentlessly and inevitably (inevitable because their behavior is rewarded by our tolerance) rising up to challenge us. We are one of the few nations capable of destroying evil regimes and evil groups (such as Al-Qaeda) without ourselves succumbing to the temptation to aggrandizement manifested in military operations conducted on a grand scale.
- Western Resistance praises Harris (here) specifically for this excerpt.
Our first task therefore is to try to grasp what the concept of the enemy really means. The enemy is someone who is willing to die in order to kill you. And while it is true that the enemy always hate us for a reason, it is his reason and not ours. He does not hate us for our faults any more than for our virtues. He sees a different world from ours, and in the world he sees, we are his enemy. This is hard for us to comprehend, but we must if we are to grasp what the concept of the enemy means.[...]
Why do they hate us? They hate us because we are their enemy.
Harris thoughtfully tackles important concepts. So I plan on doing a series of posts on Harris’ book. However, I will comment Harris’ ideas from my own distinctly different perspective. Harris’ approach is secular, what Marlowe refers to as mechanistic. Harris admires Western Civilization and the results of the code of honor upheld by the people who created Western Civilization. However, he only considers the religious nature of that code in passing. What concerns Harris are its effects. Moreover Harris thinks the morality of Western Civilization can and is being secularized.
Here are the concepts considered by Harris that I plan to discuss.
- How Ruthlessness Defines the Enemy
- The Team Versus the Family
- Tolerance
- Civility
- What Defines Civilization
- Fantasy Ideology (done April 20, 2009)
- Shame, Capitalism, the Conscious, and Trust
- The Future of Pax Americana
The Cartoons
Cartoon from here.
Cartoon from here.
Cartoon from here.
The barbarians who overran Rome were tribes that were about 600 years behind the Romans. Of course the Romans had the added boost of building on Greek Civilization. So if you look at where Roman tribes were in 200 BC and Greek tribes in 600 BC, then you get a feel for where the Goths, Visigoths, Lombards, Bulgars, etc were in 400 AD and beyond.
Islamic civilization is stuck in the 13th century – to be generous. From North Africa to the contested islands in the Philippines, their culture produces diverse countries and tribes – and their all 800 years behind Western Civilization.
No renaissance, no reformation, no enlightenment, no great awakenings.
Their way of thinking, and worldview, is more barbaric to us than the old Volkerwanderung barbarians were to Rome.
This book looks absolutely spot on, and I think I’ll have to check it out and read it for myself. I’m looking forward to your discussions.
Pingback: RUGGED INDIVIDUALISM VERSUS TRIBALISM « Citizen Tom