Excerpts from Masterpieces

Dissections and Specimens from literature

The Wrath of Nations by William Pfaff

TAGS: None

The fol­low­ing excerpts come from William Pfaff’s The Wrath of Nations: Civ­i­liza­tions and the Furies of Nation­al­ism. His work, which you can find at williampfaff.com, is essen­tial read­ing in for­eign pol­icy thought for the lay polit­i­cal thinker.

The char­ac­ter of the Byzan­tine employ­ment of power across the many “nations” of the empire made the for­tunes, inter­ests, and some­times the sur­vival of the emperor’s sub­jects depen­dent upon fam­ily, clan, and com­mu­nal attach­ments and alliances. Dis­sim­u­la­tion, indi­rec­tion, and pli­ancy if not obse­quious­ness in deal­ing with power were qual­i­ties of sur­vival, and cer­tainly of suc­cess. The influ­ence of this politico-cultural inher­i­tance is dis­cernible in all the once-Byzantine coun­tries. (As these included Sar­dinia, Sicily, Cor­sica, and a part of main­land Italy, there is a sense in which the Mafia can be called a prod­uct of Byzantium.)*

*On the other hand, the Sicilian-American Mafia leader Joe Bonanno, in his mem­oirs, pub­lished in 1983, describes the Mafia of the 1930s as a way of life “which pre­cedes the for­ma­tion of cit-states and later of nations.”

pg 62

Bis­marck, Clemenceau, and Glad­stone all opposed the impe­ri­al­ist par­ties in their coun­tries because, as Arendt said, they grasped that impe­r­ial expan­sion “could only destroy the polit­i­cal body of the nation-state,” since the nation state, “based upon a homoge­nous population’s active con­sent to its gov­ern­ment,” could not inte­grate a colo­nial pop­u­la­tion as the ear­lier forms of inclu­sive and non-national empires could. * *This obser­va­tion obvi­ously is impor­tant with respect to the ten­sion expe­ri­enced in many Euro­pean coun­tries today as a result of immi­gra­tion from their for­mer colonies, and it also empha­sizes the over­all suc­cess of the United States in cre­at­ing a kind of inter­nal, inclu­sive “empire” in which immi­grants have until recently nearly all been suc­cess­fully inte­grated. Whether this will con­tinue to be the case in the future is a ques­tion of great impor­tance for the United States. There is dispir­it­ing evi­dence that it may not, and of course there are many now in the United States who say that it should not, that the cul­tural assim­i­la­tion of immi­grants is a form of cul­tural aggres­sion. This, in my opin­ion, is a sen­ti­men­tal and unhis­tor­i­cal opin­ion, and a threat to the country’s future.

pg 70–71

In his wartime novel Arrival and Depar­ture Arthur Koestler (him­self Jew­ish and Zion­ist) has one of his char­ac­ters, a young Nazi diplo­mat, describe Nazism as “a real rev­o­lu­tion and more inter­na­tion­al­ist in its effects than the storm­ing of the Bastille or of the Win­ter Palace in Petrograd…Every new, cos­mopoli­tan idea in His­tory has first to be adopted by one par­tic­u­lar nation, become a national monop­oly as it were, and become for­mu­lated in nation­al­ist terms before it can begin its uni­ver­sal expan­sion.…” The young Nazi speaks of the future inte­gra­tion of Europe’s resources, indus­tries, energy, and trans­porta­tion, the strip­ping away of restric­tions and abol­ish­ing of fron­tiers, in a way that antic­i­pates what actu­ally has hap­pened since 1945 in the course of Europe’s eco­nomic uni­fi­ca­tion and cre­ation of a Sin­gle Euro­pean Mar­ket. “[We] are exper­i­ment­ing,” he con­cludes, “but exper­i­ment­ing on a scale never dreamt of before. We have embarked on something–something grandiose and gigan­tic beyond imag­i­na­tion. There are no more impos­si­bil­i­ties for man now.”

pg. 71

Some of the nation­al­i­ties of the old empire would today like noth­ing bet­ter than to be rein­te­grated into the suc­ces­sor to the Haps­burg sys­tem. The heir, Otto von Haps­burg, a Euro­pean Par­lia­men­tary deputy, was enthu­si­as­ti­cally, even tear­fully, cheered when he returned to Budapest after the fall of Com­mu­nism, to address the Hun­gar­ian Par­lia­ment in splen­did Hun­gar­ian. The for­mer Haps­burg nations today urgently press their can­di­da­cies for mem­ber­ship in the Euro­pean Com­mu­nity, the new expres­sion of a lost Euro­pean uni­ver­sal­ism. But this new uni­ver­sal­ism is not linked to Ger­man Europe, like that of the Haps­burgs, but to an ear­lier period of Chris­t­ian uni­ver­sal­ism when, as Zamoyski has writ­ten, Pol­ish Luther­ans took for granted that their sons would study at Wit­ten­berg, and Pol­ish Calvin­ists in Basel, while Catholics went to Italy.

That was a Europe where Romanesque churches were built from cen­tral Nor­way and Kirk­wall in the Orkneys to Palermo in Sicily, and from San­ti­ago on the Span­ish Atlantic coast to Krakoów; and Ital­ian archi­tects designed the mon­u­men­tal build­ings of Prague and Leningrad as well as those of Dres­den and Paris. It was a Europe where Charle­magne had Ital­ian and Span­ish as well as Ger­man and French advis­ers. The re-creation of this uni­ver­sal­ism was the moral pur­pose of the Franco-German rec­on­cil­i­a­tion solemnly con­firmed at Kon­rad Ade­nauer and Charles de Gaulle’s meet­ing in the Cathe­dral of Reims in 1962. The new Euro­pean uni­ver­sal­ism is super­fi­cially a mat­ter of eco­nomic and polit­i­cal inte­gra­tion, but its most impor­tant ele­ment is the attempt to reassert this cul­tural unity. In West­ern Europe this has been a suc­cess. How­ever, the ambi­tion (one can­not yet call it a sub­stan­tial effort) to incor­po­rate, or rein­cor­po­rate, what in the past was Byzan­tine and Moslem Europe has as yet been a fail­ure, with omi­nous impli­ca­tions for what is to come.
pg 104–105

The West’s dom­i­na­tion of the world in mod­ern times, exer­cised through com­merce and tech­no­log­i­cal supe­ri­or­ity as well as by impe­r­ial expan­sion, dis­guises from us the scale and con­ti­nu­ity of non-western civ­i­liza­tion. pg 109
But the United States was also the object of hatred com­bined with fas­ci­na­tion as avatar of a cul­tur­ally and eco­nom­i­cally aggres­sive mod­ern West whose chal­lenge to Islamic soci­ety is the fun­da­men­tal cause of the cri­sis which existed there before there was an Israel. This is a crises hav­ing to do with the capac­ity of a civ­i­liza­tion to respond to his­tor­i­cal change. Islam, Judaism, and Chris­tian­ity are the dom­i­nant reli­gions of mankind today because they are intel­lec­tu­ally alive in ways Hin­duism and Bud­dhism are not. All are com­bat­a­tive, con­fi­dent, his­tor­i­cally intol­er­ant sys­tems of val­ues and ways of life. But for Islam, reli­gious con­vic­tion no longer trans­lates into cul­tural or polit­i­cal confidence.

pgs 118–119

Writ­ing before the Sec­ond World War, Arnold Toyn­bee observed that the Moslems, who some thir­teen cen­turies before had com­mit­ted them­selves to the “proud but unproven belief” that God had given them, in their reli­gion, guar­an­tee of a unique des­tiny in this world as well as in the next, “and, in the strength of it, performed…mighty deeds in their ear­lier his­tory, have had time enough to fall on evil days; and the fee­ble­ness of their reac­tion to their latter-day tribu­la­tions indi­cates that Deter­min­ism is just as apt to sap moral in adver­sity as it is to stim­u­late it so long as the chal­lenges encoun­tered are within the range of an effec­tive response.” Of the plight of “the dis­il­lu­sioned pre­des­ti­nar­ian” who has dis­cov­ered that God is per­haps not, after all, on his side, Toyn­bee quoted (FitzGerald’s) “Rubaiyat” itself:

But help­less Pieces in the Game [God] plays
Upon this Chequer-board of Nights and Days;
Hither and thither moves, and checks, and slays,
And one by one back in the Closet lays.

pg 120

The iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of reli­gion with civ­i­liza­tion in Islamic soci­ety blocks a solu­tion to its con­tem­po­rary prob­lems. Chri­ti­san­ity from the begin­ning dis­tin­guished between reli­gion and the polit­i­cal, sec­u­lar order. There were “things that are Caesar’s“legitimately due to Cae­sar, ruler of an autonomous polit­i­cal and social order. Because of this dis­tinc­tion, it was pos­si­ble for Europe to develop sec­u­lar knowl­edge, a sec­u­lar cul­ture, and, even­tu­ally, even largely to cast off the influ­ence of reli­gion. (How com­plete, or last­ing, this aban­don­ment of reli­gion will prove to be is another ques­tion. There is, as a Vien­nese med­ical the­o­reti­cian and prac­ti­tioner greatly influ­enc­ing this devel­op­ment has said, a return of the repressed.)
pg 123

[Amer­i­can Islamist Bernard] Lewis observes that when Iraq and Iran were at war in the Gulf in the 1980s, pro­pa­ganda on both sides made ‘fre­quent allu­sions to events of the sev­enth and eighth cen­turies. There can be lit­tle doubt that these ref­er­ences are rec­og­nized by the vast major­ity of peo­ple in both coun­tries and indeed else­where in the Mus­lim world, and the force of the allu­sions is well under­stood.’ * *The capac­ity for his­tor­i­cal ref­er­ence of the Amer­i­can polit­i­cal class, not to speak of the Amer­i­can pub­lic, risks exhaus­tion once Munich, Hitler, Holo­caust, Cuban mis­sile cri­sis, and Viet­nam are cited. Czes­law Milosz’s remarks in his 1980 Nobel Prize lec­ture are worth notice in this respect: ‘Our planet, which grows smaller every year with its fan­tas­tic pro­lif­er­a­tion of mass media, is wit­ness­ing a process that defies def­i­n­i­tion, char­ac­ter­ized by a refusal to remember.…In the mind of mod­ern illiterates…who know how to read and write and even teach in schools and universities…history is present but blurred, in a state of strange confusion…[E]vents of the last decades, of such pri­mary impor­tance that knowl­edge or igno­rance of them will be deci­sive for the future of mankind, move away, grow pale, lose all con­sis­tency, as if Friedrich Nietzsche’s pre­dic­tion of Euro­pean nihilism found a lit­eral ful­fill­ment…“
pg 126

As the golden age can­not be reclaimed, and the cul­tural cri­sis deep­ens under the assault of west­ern­ized con­sumerism and pop­u­lar com­mu­ni­ca­tions, with exist­ing gov­ern­ments inca­pable of pos­i­tive response to the west­ern chal­lenge, it is nec­es­sary to assume that the Mid­dle East­ern cri­sis will grow worse. The fun­da­men­tal­ist move­ment is vir­tu­ally the only avail­able recourse or con­so­la­tion, at least for the masses of Islamic soci­ety. Intel­lec­tu­als have the pos­si­bil­ity of a per­sonal syn­the­sis of influ­ences, an indi­vid­ual accom­mo­da­tion and tran­scen­dence, and even the choice of exile; but that does no good for Islamic soci­ety as a whole.

It con­se­quently is dif­fi­cult to see any­thing other than con­tin­u­ing inter­nal con­flict in the Islamic world, and, for a time, the steady progress of fun­da­men­tal­ism as a means to beat off the West’s threat to the inher­ited val­ues of Islam. This effort will not suc­ceed, but it is per­haps unim­por­tant that it will not suc­ceed. Islam will make its way through the cul­tural cri­sis pro­duced by this fail­ure to develop sec­u­lar thought and polit­i­cal the­ory, a mod­ern sci­ence, a the­ol­ogy capa­ble of seri­ous dia­logue with the post-Enlightenment intel­lec­tual soci­ety of the West. The vio­lence and spo­radic ter­ror­ism which accom­pany the fun­da­men­tal­ist move­ment will be of con­se­quence chiefly for the Islamic coun­tries.
pg 130

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you sub­scribe to my RSS feed!

TAGS: None

Leave a Reply

*


+ four = 9

© 2009 Excerpts from Masterpieces. All Rights Reserved.

This blog is powered by Wordpress and Magatheme by Bryan Helmig.