I think that Renaissance humanist philosophy is often
misunderstood; and this mistake matters to me because I favor a revival
of the real methods of the humanists. The standard view is that Renaissance
humanists taught original doctrines, especially the "dignity
of man" that was the theme of Marsilio
Ficino‘s famous oration. They are thought to be "humanists"
because they believed in the centrality of human beings as opposed to
God.
My Oct. 30 entry argues that
today’s "progressives" are best understood as conservatives,
seeking to maintain a set of institutions that they do not believe are
well designed, but which they prefer to the speculative market alternatives
promoted by the Right. I did not mean this as a criticism, since such
conservatism is valuable. Edmund Burke taught that we should hesitate
to overturn interrelated social systems that have evolved over generations;
they embody the experience of the people who have learned to live with
them. It is easy to prove that their design is inefficient or inequitable,
compared to some chalkboard alternative. But radical changes often go
awry. On these grounds, Burke rightly preferred the Old Regime in France,
for all its aribitrary, wasteful, unjust features, to the revolutionary
system that fell apart after it had cost millions of lives. Similarly,
I respect people who believe that public schools, unions, and welfare
programs are better than the radical alternatives suggested by economic
theory. The problem with progressivism is not that it is wrong. Rather,
it is politically and rhetorically weak, for it’s always difficult to
win elections with a grudging defense of the status quo.
I spent this morning walking around Hyattsville, MD, with high school kids, who were entering data about each street segment into Palm Pilots. We want to collect information that will help us see what features of each block make it attractive or unattractive for walking. For example, are the sidewalks clear and continuous? How much vegetation is there? Are there curb cuts? Is there an incline? We will later collect information about (a) people’s eating and exercise habits; and (b) the availability of various types of food and recreation in the neighborhood. When we put everything together, we should be able to build a statistical model showing what features of the local environment influence people’s choices to walk and buy food. We’ll also be able to generate public maps showing where one can walk most safely and buy the healthiest food in the community.
I was in New York City today, trying to help raise foundation money for a campaign to implement the recommendations of the Civic Mission of Schools report. (The last sentence contains far too many prepositions, but I’m too tired to fix it.) We are proposing that coalitions in several states would advocate policies to promote civic education. A multi-state advocacy campaign will cost a lot of money, but after today, I’m cautiously optimistic that we will be able to raise the necessary funds.
En route from Colorado to DC: I frequently talk to progressives who claim that Republicans and conservatives play the political game more skillfully (and roughly) than Democrats and liberals, which explains the success of the Right. Democrats would win if they could come up with simpler and more effective messages; choose issues that embarrass Republicans or split their constituencies; and tie individual conservative leaders to scandals.