Modernity and Liberalism
May 29th, 2016 by amcadams
PART I
This section of our course is devoted to understanding what I call the MODERN NATION-STATE. To this end, I will begin by drawing a connection between two qualities we all share in common: “modernity” and “liberalism.” At this point, we will be dealing with several abstract concepts. Once we begin to consider concrete, historical examples, these abstractions will become real to you.
My personal guarantee: By the end of this course, you will see how everything fits together into one neat and tidy, dynamic story.
1. LECTURE: Wednesday August 24
Reflections on the evolution of political institutions: The making of the MODERN NATION-STATE and the indeterminate nature of human history.
Today’s Assumption: The MODERN NATION-STATE is distinguished by its capacity to bring together different peoples and contending identities. This state form represents a novel way of organizing human beings. To be clear, not all states are NATION-STATES. And, not all peoples want to come together. Sometimes, things just don’t work out, especially in politics. Just look at the disastrous circumstances we are currently witnessing in what used to be called “Iraq.”
Assignments: Watch the two videos below and reflect upon the issue of historical change which I address in today’s class. Also, look ahead to your Friday discussion section. Note that you have reading assignments and a short essay which you must turn in at the beginning of your section.
The nature of historical change. Paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould talks about the approach to studying change which I happen to find totally convincing—the theory of evolution. Watch the first 6 minutes of this stimulating video: LISTEN As you listen to Gould, ask yourself how his arguments about evolution, “punctuated equilibrium” (what is this?), and the extinction of dinosaurs might be applied to the evolution of political ideas and institutions.
Changing the nature of human beings. Are we the end of history? Ray Kurzweil tells us about the “Singularity”: LISTEN Kurzweil presents a provocative and more than a little bit disturbing answer to this question. How would Gould react to Kurzweil’s predictions?
2. DISCUSSION SECTION: Friday, August 26
PRINT AND READ the following article by Samuel Huntington and reflect upon what it means to be an American. How do we decide who belongs in the United States? How do we decide who does not? Assuming you are an American citizen, how did you acquire this title?
Samuel Huntington: “The Hispanic Challenge,” Foreign Policy, March/April 2oo4. PRINT AND READ
You may also find this article through JSTOR at HESBURGH LIBRARY E-JOURNALS
“Pope Francis’ Speech to Congress” READ
Emma Lazarus, “The New Colossus,” on America’s Statue of Liberty: PRINT AND READ
See the original HERE
Compare these two articles:
Joe Matthews, “Switch to Español,” READ
Sean Kennedy, “Learning English should be part of the American experience” READ
Assignment:
Under what terms does Samuel Huntington welcome Hispanics (and Hispanic Catholics) into the American nation-state? Are his terms reasonable and appropriate?
Go to this link to find instructions for writing a one-paragraph response to these questions: HERE
3. LECTURE: Monday, August 29
Reflections on what it means for citizens of the United States to live in modern times.
Today’s Assumption: We are all MODERN. By this statement, I mean that we share conceptions of truth and ideas about how to organize our lives which differ fundamentally from those held by other people in the world.
Assignment: Read Roger Scruton, The West and the Rest: vii-xi, and chapter 1.
Jen Christensen, “The Most Accurate Clock in the World is Redefining the Second” READ
4. LECTURE: Wednesday, August 31
Reflections on a political invention, the LIBERAL NATION-STATE. LIBERALISM is a specific form of human belongingness in modern times. However, it is not the only one. Others forms include FASCISM and LENINISM.
Today’s Assumption: We are all LIBERALS. (Sorry, Ted Cruz and Scott Walker, but it’s true.) However, this no cause for alarm. In making this claim, I do not mean that we are “liberals” in the politically-charged sense that is au courant with American politicians. Rather, I am referring to classical LIBERALISM, a conception of political order that was invented (not discovered) by people like Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill.
Assignment: Read Chapter II, “Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion,” in John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1869): PRINT AND READ
Then, listen to musician Frank Zappa talk about freedom of speech HERE Do you agree with Mr. Zappa? If not, where do we draw the line on what constitutes free speech in a LIBERAL society? Or should there be a dividing line at all?
Then, read about the University of Chicago’s response to “trigger warnings” HERE Should Notre Dame institute trigger warnings?
5. DISCUSSION SECTION: Friday, September 2
Discussion Topic:
How would John Stuart Mill and Frank Zappa respond to the following controversy? Are they right?
In February 2005, a tenured University of Colorado Professor, Ward Churchill, touched off a firestorm when he accused the World Trade Center victims of 2001 of being members of the “technocratic corps” and “little Eichmanns.” Should the University of Colorado have had the right to fire Churchill, as they did, over this (and other) controversies? Should Hamilton College have withdrawn his invitation to speak?
Ward Churchill, “People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens”: PRINT AND READ
“Ward Churchill Speaks” and itInterview with Bill O’Reilly: READ AND LISTEN
Assignment (due on this date)
Write a one-paragraph response to the following question: Was it right for Hamilton College to withdraw its invitation to Ward Churchill? Justify your response.