Keeping an Open Mind

The generalized sense that American-style democratic capitalism will never again face a serious challenge is one of the most troubling aspects of our current societal discourse. Today, the notion that America might one day have to confront a fully-formed, radical, and expansionist ideology such as Nazism or Soviet Communism is almost laughable. Yet if history has one clear lesson to offer us, it is this: New challenges will inevitably rise and blindness towards them is extremely dangerous.

Early 20th century Europe was in a situation eerily similar to ours; free trade reigned, passports were not required for travel between states, and democracy and democratic rule were everywhere ascendant. Even traditionally conservative Germany was moving in a democratic direction, as the parliament became more representative, powerful, and willing to confront the Kaiser. The most “brutally repressive” political regime of that time—Czarist Russia—was admittedly harsh, yet in over one hundred years it killed less than four thousand people.

Just as they are today, political philosophers, historians, and public commentators were triumphant in their analyses; they predicted that Russia would soon develop and become democratic, that Germany would not threaten the balance of powers, and that the massive growth of international trade would render a general war impossible. As historian Nial Ferguson noted, anti-militarism was politically ascendant throughout Europe, and the prospect of war looked slim.

It is clear, though, that the inhabitants of early 20th century Europe were blind to forces right in front of them, forces that would soon send their entire world crashing down in flames. Trench warfare would soon break out in a continent that had not known generalized war between the great powers since the time of Napoleon, and it would prove to be wildly more destructive than any previous conflict. Just as drastic was in the increase in political violence: In the first year of Communist rule in Russia ,more people were executed by the regime than during the entire 19th century.

In hindsight it is very easy to explain how all of this occurred. Middle-schoolers now know how flawed was Europe’s system of interlocking alliances and how it made the escalation of conflict virtually inevitable. Similarly, anyone who has read Lenin’s political writings—most noticeably his schizophrenic diatribe “How to Organize Competition”—can see that the Communist terror in Russia did not come out of a vacuum; the leaders of the revolution did exactly what they said they were going to do, which was to “cleanse Russia of all sorts of dangerous insects.”

Noting not only the human cost of such historical blindness, but also its societal and cultural effects, we should be extremely wary of the triumphalism that now marks our present discourse. Francis Fukuyama’s famous “End of History” argument is only the most blatant example of this. Much discussion now seems to assume that the gravest threat we will face in the next century will be fixing Social Security. Yet history has not, and never will, “end” anymore than it did during the 19th century’s “Hundred Years Peace” or during the “Pax Romana” almost two thousand years ago. New challenges, ideologies, leaders, and foes inevitably arise from the shadows.

This is not to suggest paranoia, yet a definite balance needs to be maintained. We as a society should be a bit more humble in assessing our current predominance and a bit more reluctant to pat ourselves on the back for solving all of the world’s problems. The level of economic inequality that currently exists is without historical precedent, and it is certainly within reason that, if the condition of the three billion people that subsist on less than two dollars a day fails to improve, our cherished international free market system could prove untenable. Many times have our forbearers presumed they had seen history’s violent spasms come to an end. It would benefit us greatly not to repeat their mistake.

Mark A. Adomanis ’07, a Crimson editorial editor, is a government concentrator in Eliot House.