Pavlac B.A. A Concise Survey of Western Civilization: Supremacies and Diversities throughout History
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
256
CHAPTER 11
tive. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels initiated their version in 1848, the year of
so many liberal and nationalist revolutions. Their publication of The Communist
Manifesto began with the phrase ‘‘A specter is haunting Europe—the specter of
Communism.’’ At the time, few knew what these two were talking about. The Mani-
festo called for a proletarian (working-class) revolution. First, the communist revo-
lutionaries would destroy the current regimes, abolishing capitalist private property
and bourgeois sexist laws. Then, workers would control the ‘‘means of production’’
(factories, offices, farms) and construct a society of equality and prosperity.
In subsequent years, Marx expanded on this program and soon conceived a
whole new way of understanding history. He expounded upon ‘‘scientific’’ laws
that explained the past and the future. Borrowing from the dialectic syllogism
applied by the German philosopher Hegel to history, Marx argued that all change
in civilization had been the result of class struggle, what he called dialectical
materialism (see diagram 11.1). In each historical period, a dominant class (such
as the patricians in ancient Rome) had controlled the means of production. An
opposite, or antithetical, group then rose in response (such as the rebellious class
of the plebians). Their clash over economic power generated a new ruling and new
subservient class. Marx claimed that this ‘‘scientific’’ study of history could be used
in his own contemporary age to understand the dominant bourgeoisie and the
exploited proletariat. A violent class conflict was inevitable, but this time the down-
trodden would seize control of their destiny. The proletarians were to organize
themselves for the forthcoming revolution and guide humanity to a new, more
just society. Using ‘‘scientific’’ socialism, Marx claimed that humanity would attain
communism, defined as a condition in which the state withered away, economic
exploitation vanished, and all people lived in peace and harmony. Technically, then,
communism has never yet been achieved.
As an explanation of historical change, Marx’s vision was sloppy. Still, his pro-
gram, whether called ‘‘scientific’’ socialism, Marxism, or communism, held great
appeal. As a comprehensive belief system, it made sense of the past, present, and
future in distinctly human terms. Marx rejected a belief in the afterlife, seeing God
and religion as the equivalent of drugs used to keep the masses of workers tame.
Despite Marxism’s atheistic attitude, it offered hope to the oppressed and it pro-
vided an agenda as an inspirational principle for worker’s organizations.
While planning for their revolution, however, Marxist organizers achieved very
little for workers’ rights. Some communists actually wanted the workers’ lot to get
worse, hoping to provoke rebellion by driving the workers to desperation. Still,
Marxist socialism usually only contained the threat of potential violence. Even
though some Marxists did associate with anarchists, these socialists actually carried
out very little violence before 1917. They were supposed to wait for the collapse of
bourgeois dominance to begin the revolt. In the meantime, workers still suffered.
Some ‘‘scientific’’ socialists began to revise Marxism because they wanted to
improve the workers’ conditions immediately. These revisionists agreed with
Marx’s historical analysis but became skeptical of the need for an actual revolution.
The experience of France showed that revolutions often veered into uncontrolled
violence and destruction.
The revisionists of Marxism offered a third version of socialism, called social
PAGE 256.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:37:44 PS
MASTERY OF THE MACHINE
257
Diagram 11.1. The dialectic, dating back to Aristotle, combines two
pieces of information to create a third. The German philosopher Hegel
applied the process to the history of ideas, suggesting that a dominant
ideology (a thesis) provoked its opposite (an antithesis) and the two
clashed to combine into a new synthesis. That synthesis thus became the
new thesis, which generated its antithesis, continuing the process through
history. Marx applied the concept to the classes that controlled the means
of production. He predicted that the current situation, capitalists against
the workers, would lead to a new utopia of communism and the end of
history.
democracy or democratic socialism. They argued that the predicted catastrophic
class struggle could perhaps be avoided through slow, gradual reforms. Social dem-
ocrats began to establish political parties to help workers. Since workers were the
numeric majority of the electorate in industrialized nations, social democrats
worked to get members elected to representative bodies, where they could then
pass legislation to incrementally improve conditions for workers. For example, the
Social Democratic Party in Germany (founded in 1869) and the British Labour Party
(founded between 1881 and 1906) were the results of this revisionist socialism (and
both were leading their nations’ governments in 2005). Most Western nations, with
the notable exception of the United States of America, have prominent social demo-
cratic parties.
The atheism of most ‘‘scie ntific’’ socialist s contrasted with the fourth socialist
movement, namely Christian socia lism . These socialists based their effor ts on the
PAGE 257.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:38:16 PS
258
CHAPTER 11
Christian call to ‘‘love thy ne igh bor. ’’ Jesus c onst antl y preached about helpi ng the
poor and powerless and avoiding the sins of wealth. Pope Leo XIII in Rerum
Novarum (Of New Things, 1891) specifically tried to find a middle ground between
the private property absoluti sts and the more radical socialists. The Roman Catholic
Church sugg este d tha t whi le pr ope rty is a right to be protecte d, ow ners hip i nclu ded
responsibi lity to the wor kers . The pope described the workers as miserably exploited
by the unchecked greed of capitalism. He proclai med that the dignity of human
beings requires that workers deserve a just salary (not merely a barely livable one).
Christian socialists rejected the utopian dreams of new communities and the atheistic
historical views of Marxists and social democra ts and instead offered a more moder-
ate, even conservati ve, alternative. They founded organizations for distributing charity
to the poor, for helping workers reach a decent living wage, or even for forming
political parties to run for political office.
Some Christian socialists joined in a fifth kind of socialism, which was to orga-
nize labor unions (trade unions in Britain, syndicalism in France). Trade union-
ism originated out of self-help—workers themselves offering care for sick and old
workers. They soon tried to demand better working conditions and pay. At first,
liberals and conservatives passed laws prohibiting unions from protecting workers’
interests. Or, in America, companies hired workers from many different nations so
that they could not converse with one another and organize into unions (see figure
11.4).
Workers organized anyway. By the end of the century, unions were trying to
use the strike (work stoppage) as a way to force managers into giving them better
contracts. Unions carried out tens of thousands of strikes in industrialized nations
in the last decades of the nineteenth century. The strikers hoped to gain public
sympathy (through marches and picketing), instigate boycotts (refusal to buy the
Figure 11.4. This sign from a Pennsylvania coal mine illustrates the
diversity of nationalities brought to build America’s industry.
PAGE 258.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:38:53 PS
MASTERY OF THE MACHINE
259
company’s products), and prevent companies from hiring replacement workers
(called ‘‘scabs’’ by the unionists). The companies, in turn, tried to break these
strikes through force and, naturally, this violence provoked more violence. Before
1914 and World War I, the government almost always sided with the capitalist fac-
tory owners when fighting erupted.
A sixth variant of socialism finally came from the liberals and conservatives who
had so long and so well represented the desires of the capitalists. The liberals in
particular worried about keeping votes, as they saw workers flock to the rolls of
socialist political parties. Both conservatives and liberals finally took some steps
toward meeting the needs of workers at the end of the nineteenth century. The
greatest measures were taken by the archconservative Chancellor Bismarck in Ger-
many, who wanted economic stability and political order (see chapter 12). He
openly practiced a state socialism, where the government helped workers. In the
1880s, while still vigorously opposing the growing Social Democratic Party, Bis-
marck passed laws providing for health insurance, work accident insurance, and
even retirement pensions (social security) for German workers. In turn, England
ended its inhumane poor laws and legalized labor unions with their right to strike
and picket. Poverty became less of a crime or a private failure and more of a social
need to be addressed by legislation.
In many industrialized states, the passing of child-labor laws (prohibiting them
from working) also had a revolutionary affect on Western society (see figure 11.5).
Ironically, many commoners had actually resisted earlier efforts of enlightened des-
pots to provide universal education. Schooling increased the economic burden of
children for their parents. Sending children to school meant they could not contrib-
ute to the family labor force until their teen years. Nineteenth-century elites also
discouraged education for all people, perfectly aware that workers with education
did not often want to do dirty, hard labor. They feared workers would aspire to rise
above their ‘‘assigned’’ social level. That is why, even in the West today, a university
education is considered a ticket to a middle-class lifestyle. While education was
not an immediate cure-all, a compulsory, basic grade-school education at taxpayer
expense in state schools soon became the norm in the West. Literacy approached
100 percent in many Western industrialized countries by 1900.
Meanwhile, improved production through worker efficiency and new technol-
ogy made corporations more and more powerful. Until the modern corporation,
most businesses had been small, local institutions based on families and the part-
nerships of a few individuals. The corporation became a business where a multitude
of people could pool their capital resources (stockholders) and elect representa-
tives (a board of directors), who then appointed a chief manager (president or
chief executive officer) to run the company. The corporation was an artificial legal
construction: it could, like a person, own property, incur debt, sue, and be sued.
Meanwhile, the people who owned that corporation were immune—only vulnera-
ble for the amount of stock that they held. This legal status granted corporations a
huge advantage over mere mortal citizens, since they could theoretically exist for-
ever. This was, of course, blatant hypocrisy by the ruling elites. They could form
corporations that represented and united the voice of thousands of stockholders,
but they would not allow unions to represent and unite thousands of workers?
PAGE 259.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:38:54 PS
260
CHAPTER 11
Figure 11.5. These boys worked in and around the coal mines rather
than going to school. Note that one is missing an arm, probably from an
industrial accident.
These corporations, fed by huge flows of capital, soon came to dominate Western
economies both within their home nations and around the world.
Corporations were so successful that many quickly bloated into burgeoning
conglomerates. Huge corporations combined with others as cartels or trusts.
These associations conspired to establish monopolies, the control of prices and
production of whole economic sectors, reducing or completely eliminating compe-
tition. Railroads, steel, oil, and even sugar came under monopolistic control in
many nations. Critics in the United States called the owners ‘‘robber barons,’’
unfairly enriched by exploited workers; the tycoons saw themselves as sharp busi-
nessmen justly compensated with unimaginable wealth. Some governments
PAGE 260.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:39:31 PS
MASTERY OF THE MACHINE
261
became concerned at this concentration of economic power in a few hands. The
dominant ‘‘free market’’ economic theory of laissez-faire (or classical liberal eco-
nomics) required competition to keep the system fair and efficient. Since cartels
crushed competition, governments soon felt compelled to enact antitrust laws to
break up the trusts and monopolies. Some capitalists cried that this intervention
would ruin economic growth, but governments responded by citing the need to
protect their citizens from exploitation.
The question of whether profit-making necessarily excludes fair treatment of
workers and consumers has been a challenge faced by citizens of the West ever
since the nineteenth century. What actions should citizens or their governments
take to regulate or promote the rights of mortal individuals against legal corpora-
tions? The bundle of ideas advocated by diverse socialists still provides answers to
the world today. Socialism’s concept of equality originated in the suffering of the
workers early in the Industrial Revolution. Therein lay its appeal, even as versions
of socialism underwent varied successes and failures in the twentieth century.
Review: How did socialists address problems manufactured by the Industrial Revolu-
tion?
Response:
THE MACHINERY OF NATURE
The technology that powered the Industrial Revolution was, of course, based on
scientific principles established by the Scientific Revolution. Science continued to
advance in areas not focused on profits. Scientists wanted to know how the uni-
verse worked. While Newton had supplied many answers about the movements of
the planets, scientists began investigating other aspects of the earth itself, life upon
it, and even people themselves. How did nature function, especially if science left
God out of the equation? Scientists were determined to find out by using observable
and experimental data to explain the workings of nature.
First, a new phase of the Scientific Revolution crystallized as the new science of
geology developed as a means to study the earth. The tradition al We ster n explanation
for the earth’s history had been drawn from the biblical Bo ok of Genesis . Jews began
their calendar with their calculated date of the beginning of creation , equivalent to
PAGE 261.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:39:32 PS
262
CHAPTER 11
3761
B.C.
In t he seventeent h century, Irish bishop James Ussher had calculat ed the
earth’s age from biblical genealogies: he concluded that God created the world on 24
October 4004
B.C.
At first, the influence of scrip ture inclined scientists to think along
the lines of a theory of catastr oph ism t o explain geology. According to this theory,
rare and unusual events of enormous power, resembling divine inte rven tion ,
explained the featur es of the earth . While the theory of catastrophism provided some
understand ing of the earth’s past, new discoveries soon called it into question.
Charles Lyell’s book Principles of Geology provided a new theory in 1829. Lyell
proposed the theory of uniformitarianism to explain the history of the earth,
saying that the same (uniform) processes shaping the earth today have always acted
to remold the planet. Thus, erosion and deposition, uplift and sinking of land-
masses, volcanoes, earthquakes, glaciers, and so on have formed every existing
landscape. He concluded that the earth was not fixed, but in flux. Since many of
these processes move infinitesimally slowly, the theory required that earth be at
least millions of years old.
Many Christian who interpreted the Bible literally opposed this new theory,
since these numbers contradicted calculations based on Genesis. Nonetheless, the
practice of science increasingly left God out of the equation. Indeed, most scientific
evidence collected over the nineteenth century clearly supported uniformitarian-
ism, while almost none backed up catastrophism. Uniformitarianism could, by mea-
surable natural processes, account for the highest mountain and the deepest valley.
Just as with theories of heliocentrism and universal gravitation, scientists embraced
the theory of uniformitarianism because it had explanatory power and conformed
to the evidence of nature.
Fossils provided much of the evidence for research into the earth’s history.
Scientists found petrified remains both of contemporary-looking organisms and of
strange creatures that did not seem to exist anymore. Excavations for mines, canals,
building foundations, and so on in the industrial age unearthed more and more
fossils. Scientists began to organize these fossilized bones and called the large crea-
tures dinosaurs (‘‘terrible lizards’’). As geologists compared layers of rock in which
fossils were found, science showed that dinosaurs had lived many millions of years
ago before becoming extinct. But how had those monsters, or many other life-
forms, died out, while others still seemed to be around?
A second phase of the Scientific Revolution was born as biologists tried to solve
that very mystery. The oldest layers of rock showed a few simple living things, such
as algae. More recent rock layers showed a connected diversity of life, as evidenced
by the appearance of new species (a scientific category of living things that could
reproduce with each other). As eons wore on, some species, like the dozens of
kinds of dinosaurs, had clearly gone extinct. Others, like ferns, clams, and cock-
roaches, had survived into the present with little change. The fossil record showed
that overall, life had become increasingly diverse and complex over time. Scientists
called this process of biological change evolution.
Christian religious literalists opposed evolution as vehemently as they earlier
had denied the age of the earth or, going back to Copernicus, located the earth at
the center of the universe. Evolution, the age of the earth, and the earth’s noncen-
tral place in the universe are, nonetheless, scientific facts. Many nonscientists com-
PAGE 262.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:39:32 PS
MASTERY OF THE MACHINE
263
plained (and still complain) that the idea of evolution is a theory, meaning a mere
guess with little supporting evidence. These people apparently misunderstand sci-
ence. Scientific theories are not just good guesses; they offer comprehensive expla-
nations of the facts. Evolution is a scientific fact, as real as the earth’s revolving
around the sun. In the mid-nineteenth century, scientists sought a natural mecha-
nism to explain the fact of evolution, how life on earth had become more diverse
and complex over the eons.
Charles Darwin (b. 1809–d. 1882) provided a scientific theory to explain the
fact of evolution. He pondered the issue for years after investigating the unique
species of finches, iguanas, and tortoises on the Galapagos Islands off the western
coast of South America, which he had visited during his voyage on the ship Beagle
in the 1830s. Darwin finally published his book The Origin of Species (1859) only
when a fellow naturalist, Alfred Wallace, was about to publish on the same subject.
Darwin’s theory of natural selection, also called ‘‘survival of the fittest,’’ pro-
posed that the struggle of creatures for food and reproduction encouraged change.
As living things adapted to their environment and competed with other living
things, certain advantageous characteristics enabled them to survive. Whether by
stealth, strength, speed, or size, some organisms outlived others and lasted long
enough to pass those favorable characteristics on to their own viable offspring. Over
millions of millennia, small, incremental variations slowly separated offspring into
more complex and more diverse species. Species that did not compete successfully,
especially when a climate changed, became extinct. The theory of natural selection
relies on the natural drives for food and sex as a mechanism for diversity. Darwin
outlined a means whereby scientists could frame their study of life on earth. While
a few modifications of Darwin’s theory have since been suggested, all subsequent
study has served only to confirm and support the scientific fact of evolution.
This science notwithstanding, some Christians became even more outraged
when Darwin’s second significant book, The Descent of Man (1869), argued that
humans were descended from the same apelike ancestors as chimpanzees or
baboons. Many Christians were offended by a human connection to beasts and
worried what that would imply about the human soul. They preached that this
godless view of nature would lead to immorality.
Their point seemed proven when social theorists used humanity’s connections
to animals to argue that the ‘‘survival of the fittest’’ was how human societies should
be run. They called their ideology Social Darwinism, even though Charles Darwin
had nothing to do with them and Darwinists such as Thomas Huxley disavowed
their conclusions. The Social Darwinists argued that human ethics should reflect
selfishness, greed, and exploitation of the weak. Thus, the poor deserved their pov-
erty, or the defeated were properly conquered, while the acquisition of wealth
proved the superiority of the upper class. This skewed rationalization encouraged
nationalism, imperialism, and racism. The millionaire oil magnate John D. Rockefel-
ler himself pronounced that ruthless competition in business was not evil, but
instead reflected the laws of nature and God. He himself had risen from a simple
farmboy through hard work, frugality, and secret deals. These ideas in turn stimu-
lated materialism and secularism.
Social Darwinism came from an incorrect reading of natural selection and an
PAGE 263.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:39:33 PS
264
CHAPTER 11
overblown confidence in human social differences. Social Darwinists falsely saw
strength as the only survival virtue and bruising competition as the means. Such
views ignored nature’s success stories. A despised creature like the cockroach sur-
vived with speed, stealth, and the ability to eat garbage. Meanwhile, a dinosaur like
Tyrannosaurus rex had been the biggest and meanest creature, but it became
extinct because it could not adapt. Evolution has no moral direction—it is merely
the description of nature’s work.
Social Darwinists were only one part of a larger movement to apply science to
human activity. A third phase in science during the nineteenth century emerged as
intellectuals invented the scholarly subjects of the social sciences at the end of the
century. These fields sought to analyze human beings and then propose theories
and laws to explain them. The subject of history was tossed into this new category
after being bolstered with statistical studies. The new subject of political science
clarified the multiplying electoral systems of Western democracies. Sociology stud-
ied modern societies, while anthropology examined ancient or primitive cultures.
The West’s new domination of foreign cultures provided new opportunities for
social scientists to compare diverse peoples.
Of great consequence was the decision of sociologists and anthropologists to
scrutinize Christianity. They noted that Christianity resembled many other faiths
and could be compared with them historically. The scholarly schools of higher
criticism even dissected the Bible. Instead of viewing it as a perfect product of
instantaneously inspired creation by the Judeo-Christian deity, higher critics
applied the techniques of textual criticism begun during the Renaissance. Scholars
began to read the Bible as a flawed compilation collected by human beings over
hundreds of years. This method reasonably explained many of the Bible’s contradic-
tions, inconsistencies, and obscurities. From the Book of Genesis alone, odd pas-
sages such as two versions of the creation of humans, different numbers of animals
Noah took into the ark, or the unusually long lives of the first humans could be
attributed to fallible human records.
The growing explanatory power of science and social sciences weakened the hold
of Christianity among the idea makers of W es tern civiliza tio n. In reaction, Christians
of all denominat ions , whe ther Orthodox, Roman Catholic, or Protestan t, began to
split into two large groups with differ ent attitudes toward the Bible. Fundamentalists
reasserted standard Chri stia n beliefs about the divine Jesus who died to keep believ-
ers out of hell. Fundamentalis m developed an interpretation of inerrancy about the
Bible, believin g it to be divinely created, without error, and able to be clearly under-
stood by using the power of the Holy Spirit. Meanw hile , modernists embraced and
learned from a divinely inspir ed Bible composed by flawed humans, trying to recon-
cile these attitudes with Christian dogmas. Modernism accepted science in its world-
view and ambiguity in its faith. Thus, Christianity conti nue d its decline as a belief
system, although most people in the Wes t remained practic ing Christians.
Criticisms of religious belief by the founder of psychiatry, Sigmund Freud (b.
1856–d. 1939), focused on its incompatibility with science. Freud abandoned much
of his Jewish heritage for a more rational look at culture’s interaction with individu-
als. As a psychiatrist, Freud brought new insights into the debate on the origins
of and treatments for mental illness. He famously argued that when a person’s
PAGE 264.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:39:33 PS
MASTERY OF THE MACHINE
265
subconscious drives (id) conflicted with social expectations (superego) and inter-
nalized lessons (ego), then neurosis and even psychosis could result. While this
scheme is not broadly accepted today by the psychiatric community, it had enor-
mous impact at the turn of the twentieth century. Freud also shocked the ‘‘decent’’
society of his turn-of-the-century Vienna when he unveiled how the human sex
drive (libido) could affect mental health. As a result, sex became a part of our public
discourse instead of being confined behind closed doors.
From the mental to the physical world, biological science discovered more prac-
tical applications for public health, largely thanks to Louis Pasteur (b. 1822–d.
1895) of France. First, Pasteur explained the process of fermentation, which saved
the French wine industry. Additionally, his pasteurization process saved milk from
spoiling. Finally, his germ theory of disease helped save lives. Pasteur’s science
proved that microscopic organisms, such as bacteria and viruses, caused many ill-
nesses. Because it does not yet explain all diseases, such as cancer or those of old
age, the germ theory is not perfect. Still, it has led to a huge advancement in medical
cures and disease prevention. Pasteur’s studies proved immunization through both
the old practice of inoculations (giving people a live form of a disease) and new
vaccinations (giving a dead form). Antiseptics (which killed germs on the outside of
the body) were soon followed by antibiotics (which killed germs inside the body).
Modern scientific medicine actually succeeded at improving the health and survival
of people to a degree unknown by any previous society.
Finally, physicists were also busy unlocking the secrets of the universe at the
smallest level. Scientists such as Pierre and Marie Skłodowska Curie in France and
Thomson and Rutherford in England formulated atomic theory. Drawing on ideas
of the ancient Greeks, modern physicists consider atoms to be the smallest part of
matter that possesses the properties of an element. At the time, no one could have
guessed that the atomic force which bound an atom together could be unleashed
to enable humans to destroy all civilization.
Overall, the nineteenth century had rapidly multiplied the options open to the
citizens of Western civilization. The Industrial Revolution drove the economy, with
its varied goods, services, and ideologies available to consumers of the upper, mid-
dle, and lower class. Conservatives, liberals, anarchists, and the several flavors of
socialists argued for different kinds of political economy and revolution. New scien-
tific ideas and inventions opened the doors to the future, while Romantics and
many people of faith found comfort in the past. Christianity continued to fragment.
Despite and because of these internal differences, however, Western civilization
would soon reign supreme over most other peoples around the globe.
Review: How did modern science generate new and unsettling knowledge?
Response:
PAGE 265.................
17897$
CH11 10-08-10 09:39:34 PS