Notes
chapter one—the myth of diversity
  1. The University of Michigan staffs diversity offices with nearly one hundred employees. Apparently, this is typical. The University of Texas at Austin and the University of California, Berkeley report similar numbers. What do all these diversity officials do? A trade organization, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE), came into being a dozen years ago to figure this out or, in its words, “to guide the nascent diversity profession.” [“History,” National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, undated, https://www.nadohe.org/history] The organization now prospers with dues, annual conferences, and a journal. I’m taking the figures of the size of the diversity offices from Mark Pulliam, “The Campus Diversity Swarm,” City Journal, October 10, 2018. One prestigious liberal arts college, Amherst College, boasts a staff of twenty in its Office of Diversity & Inclusion—this in a school of 1800 students. All those listed do not work full-time in the office, but at Amherst we know how some officials passed their time. This office published a 36-page glossary, Common Language Guide, which it modestly described as “a list of carefully researched and thoughtfully discussed definitions for key diversity and inclusion terms.” [Resource Center Team, Common Language Guide (Amherst, MA: Amherst College, Office of Diversity & Inclusion, March 2019)]. The guide thoughtfully included such key terms as “cisheteronormativity” and “homonationalism.” The publication caused a stir when it found its way online and elicited a retraction from Amherst’s president. See Rand Richards Cooper, “Is This ‘Common’ Language? A College’s Misguided Guide,” Commonweal, April 22, 2019, https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/common-language. Probably in response to unwanted criticism about the size or activities of its diversity enterprise, Amherst, as of September 2019, lists only seven employees in its Office of Diversity & Inclusion. This appears to be a bureaucratic masquerade inasmuch as the larger staff of diversity officers still exist but have been simply been removed from the page. A visit to the Internet Archive WayBack Machine confirms that twenty were listed as late as June 5, 2019. By July 14, 2019 the extra thirteen names had been removed. [“Meet us,” (Amherst, MA: Amherst College, Office of Diversity & Inclusion, June 5, 2019. September 11, 2019.) Internet Archive. https://web.archive.org/web/20190201061633/https://www.amherst.edu/amherst-story/diversity/office-of-diversity-inclusion/meet-us]].
  2. Some of these paragraphs are drawn from my article “The Cult of Diversity,” Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 62 No. 30 (April 8, 2016), B7–9.
  3. Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, eds. Edwin R.A. Seligman and Alvin Johnson, 15 vols. (New York: Macmillan Company, 1930–1935).
  4. Dictionary of the History of Ideas: Studies of Selected Pivotal Ideas, ed. Philip P. Wiener (New York: Scribner, 1973–74).
  5. Routledge International Handbook of Diversity Studies, ed. Steven Vertovec (London: Routledge, 2015).
  6. Encyclopedia of Diversity in Education, ed. James A. Banks (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2012).
  7. The University of California, Los Angeles library catalog kicks out 877 books in a keyword search of “diversity” for books published in 2018. This means that diversity shows up in the book’s title or subtitle—or sometimes in a chapter title, subheading, or the book’s description.
  8. Peter Wood, Diversity: The Invention of a Concept (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2003), 112.
  9. “Appendix to Opinion of Powell, J.: Harvard College Admissions Program,” University of California Regents v. Bakke (1978), No. 76811, United States Supreme Court. Argued: October 12, 1977; Decided: June 28, 1978.
  10. See Jon A. Shields and Joshua M. Dunn Sr., Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016).
  11. Marcus Lee Hansen, cited in my book Dogmatic Wisdom: How the Culture Wars Divert Education and Distract America (New York: Doubleday, 1994), 155–56.
  12. Robert D. Putnam, “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century,” Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 30 No. 2 (June 2007), 137.
  13. Amanda Hess, “Asian-American Actors are Fighting for Visibility. They Will Not be Ignored,” New York Times, May 25, 2016,.
  14. Ira Wagler, Growing Up Amish (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2011), 7–9.
  15. Deborah Feldman, Unorthodox: The Scandalous Rejection of My Hasidic Roots (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2012), 89, 35.
  16. Quotes from Annie Lowrey, “After Charlottesville, Business Leaders are Dumping the Trump Administration,” The Atlantic, August 15, 2017 For some other references of corporate support for diversity, see Peter Baehr and Daniel Gordon, “Paradoxes of Diversity,” in The SAGE Handbook of Political Sociology, eds. William Outhwaite and Stephen P. Turner (London: SAGE Publications, 2018), 977–78. The authors also note what they call “a ‘conundrum,’ how difficult it is to talk about diversity without praising it.” (p. 991).
  17. The “No Enemy on the Left” slogan marked a popular frontism that goes back to the Russian Revolution of 1905. See Donald W. Treadgold, Lenin and His Rivals: The Struggle for Russia’s Future, 1898–1906 (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1955), 130–33 and 255–72
  18. “The Family of Man” exhibition and book have been a favorite whipping target for leftist critics, subject to what one scholar has called “several decades of critical disdain.” [Fred Turner, The Democratic Surround: Multimedia and American Liberalism from World War II to the Psychedelic Sixties (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013), 197]. You know the riff. The exhibit represents American triumphalism and imperialism. It “elides” colonialism, genocide, poverty. All this can be found in a recent collection, The Family of Man 1955–2001: Humanismus und Postmoderne: eine Revision von Edward Steichens Fotoausstellung = Humanism and Postmodernism: A Reappraisal of the Photo Exhibition by Edward Steichen, eds. Jean Back and Viktoria Schmidt-Linsenhoff (Marburg, Germany: Jonas Verlag, 2004). For a more measured discussion, see Janine Marchessault, Ecstatic Worlds: Media, Utopias, Ecologies (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017); and Turner’s The Democratic Surround. Indeed, Turner argues that the “Family of Man” project was less American propaganda than a “promotion of diversity as the basis of national unity.” (p. 201).
  19. Edward O. Wilson, The Diversity of Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992/2010), 254.
  20. Johan Rockström et al., “A Safe Operating Space for Humanity,” Nature, Vol. 461, Issue 7263 (September 24, 2009), 472–75.
  21. Pim Martens and Carijn Beumer, “Biodiversity Keeps People Healthy,” in Health of People, Places and Planet, eds. Colin D. Butler, Jane Dixon, and Anthony G. Capon (Canberra, Australia: ANU Press, 2015), 480, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1729vxt.46.
  22. Daisy Chung and Michael Greshko, “Silent Spring on the Farm,” National Geographic (September 2018), 17.
  23. “Self-Reliance,” in The Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Four Volumes in One (New York: Tudor Publishing, n.d. [1930]), 54–55.
  24. Walter Benjamin, “The Storyteller,” Illuminations, ed. Hannah Arendt, tr. Harry Zohn (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968), 84.
  25. Joe L. Frost, A History of Children’s Play and Play Environments (New York: Routledge, 2010), 261.
  26. Robert Paul Smith, Where Did You Go? Out. What Did You Do? Nothing (New York: Norton, 1957/2010), 105.
  27. It is not only the decline of play that troubles Horwitz but also the popular opinion that ratifies it. Although most Americans probably grew up playing in the outdoors without adults, these same citizens now opine that such activity is too dangerous for children—and even should be outlawed. “Almost half of Americans would like to criminalize all pre-teenagers playing outside on their own.” Steven Horwitz, “Cooperation over Coercion: The Importance of Unsupervised Childhood Play for Democracy and Liberalism,” Cosmos + Taxis, Vol. 3 No. 1 (2015): 4, 8; and Steven Horwitz, Hayek’s Modern Family: Classical Liberalism and the Evolution of Social Institutions (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 200–205. Of course, the topic of how to educate for democracy is hardly new; it has marked progressive education for more than a century. “For the creation of a democratic society we need an educational system,” declared John Dewey, where moral-intellectual development is “a cooperative transaction of inquiry engaged in by free, independent human beings.” John Dewey, Introduction to Elsie Ripley Clapp’s The Use of Resources in Education (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1952), reprinted in Dewey on Education: Selections, ed. Martin S. Dworkin (New York: Teachers College Press, 1959), 133–34. Typically this tradition of progressive education paid little attention to the value of play itself.
  28. John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1985), 125–27.
  29. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, tr. Arthur Goldhammer (New York: Library of America, 2004), 829.
  30. Joseph Brodsky, Less than One: Selected Essays (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1986), 385.
  31. For a careful examination, see Koenraad W. Swart, “‘Individualism’ in the Mid-Nineteenth Century (1826–1860),” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 23 No. 1 (January–March 1962): 77–90.
  32. See Jerrold Seigel, The Idea of the Self: Thought and Experience in Western Europe since the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 469–71.
  33. Viktor Orbán, “Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Speech at the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s Ceremony to Mark the Start of the 2017 Business Year,” tr. uncredited, Miniszterelnok.hu, February 28, 2017, http://www.miniszterelnok.hu/prime-minister-viktor-orbans-speech-at-the-hungarian-chamber-of-commerce-and-industrys-ceremony-to-mark-the-start-of-the-2017-business-year/.
  34. J.P. Mayer, Prophet of the Mass Age: A Study of Alexis de Tocqueville, trs. M.M. Bozman and C. Hahn (London: J.M. Dent and Sons, 1939). Matthew Mancini, in his Alexis de Tocqueville and American Intellectuals (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2006), expends much effort in refuting what he sees as the “myth” that Tocqueville was ignored until after World War II. Nevertheless, Mayer’s point still stands, even for the United States. No book-length biographies appeared. The partial exception, George Wilson Pierson’s Tocqueville and Beaumont in America, was published in 1938 and, as Mayer notes, looks at the Frenchman “without the intention of interpreting his political ideas as a whole.” (Mayer, Prophet of the Mass Age, trs. M.M. Bozman and C. Hahn, 215).
  35. J.P. Mayer, Alexis de Tocqueville: A Biographical Essay in Political Science, trs. M.M. Bozman and C. Hahn (New York: Viking Press, 1940), 186, 203. This is the retitled American edition of Prophet of the Mass Age.
  36. Nancy Scheper-Hughes, as quoted in Thomas Fuller, “Let Right-Wing Speakers Come to Berkeley? Faculty is Divided,” New York Times, September 22, 2017.
  37. One of the signers of this protest was Judith Butler, a chaired professor at the University of California, Berkeley. “The idiocy of American left academia can easily be explained through an example of Judith Butler, because she at the same time considers an academic essay as . . . violence and Hamas and Hezbollah as part of the broad left.” Unattributed, cited in Juraj Katalenac, “‘American Thought’: From Theoretical Barbarism to Intellectual Decadence,” Adidas Marxism blog, August 25, 2017, https://adidasmarxism.wordpress.com/2017/08/25/american-thought-from-theoretical-barbarism-to-intellectual-decadence/#_ftnref5. Butler was also one of the academic luminaries who wanted a feminist philosophy journal to retract an article because of the “harm” it caused. This letter, signed by hundreds of professors, offers an incomparable example of academic thuggery and political correctness. The complainants charge, among other things, that an article on “transracialism” “fails to seek out and sufficiently engage with scholarly work by those who are most vulnerable to the intersection of racial and gender oppression (women of color).” “Open Letter to Hypatia,” Google Docs, initiated April 29, 2017, https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1efp9C0MHch_6Kfgtlm0PZ76nir-WtcEsqWHcvgidl2mU/. In 2012 the city of Frankfurt awarded Butler its Adorno Prize. A real shanda.
  38. Nancy Scheper-Hughes as quoted in Fuller, “Let Right-Wing Speakers Come to Berkeley?”; and Nancy Scheper-Hughes, “The Great Wall of UC Berkeley vs. Baby Face Shapiro,” CounterPunch, September 13, 2017, https://www.counter-punch.org/2017/09/13/the-great-wall-of-uc-berkeley-vs-baby-face-shapiro/.
  39. In a democratic age, the commissars of censorship are the professors themselves, who feel “harmed” or “damaged” by various writings and demand censorship and retraction. The incidents pile up. In addition to those mentioned in previous endnotes, one petition signed by more than fifteen thousand insisted on having an academic journal, Third World Quarterly, retract an article. See Colleen Flaherty, “Is Retraction the New Rebuttal?” Inside Higher Ed, September 19, 2017, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/19/controversy-over-paper-favor-colonialism-sparks-calls-retraction; and Peter Wood, “The Article That Made 16,000 Ideologues Go Wild,” Minding the Campus, October 4, 2017, https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2017/10/04/the-article-that-made-16000-profs-go-wild/.
  40. Daniel Bell, The End of Ideology (New York: Free Press, 1960/1962), 404–405.
  41. Francis Fukuyama, “The End of History?” National Interest, 16 (Summer 1989), 3–18. Note that I’m referencing the essay, rather than the book published a few years later, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Free Press, 1992).
  42. The exchange took place first in the writers’ fictions, and then spilled over into nonfictional life.
  43. Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, tr. Arthur Goldhammer (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014).
  44. I’m borrowing a few sentences from my piece “Piketty v. Marx,” New Republic, June 7, 2014.
  45. Harry G. Frankfurt, in his On Inequality (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015), tries to stand outside the pack, but barely does. He argues that equality is not an intrinsic value, though he approves its pursuit. That does not take us very far. He does make a good case that economic equality can become a fetish. He could be reminded that Marx said it better (although Marx himself borrowed the formulation): “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!” Karl Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Program,” in Selected Writings, tr. uncredited, ed. Lawrence H. Simon (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1994), 321.
  46. Kenichi Ohmae, The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies (New York: Free Press, 1995), 1.
  47. I’m combining two translations: G.W.F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, tr. J. Sibree (New York: Dover, 1956), 20–21; and G.W.F. Hegel, Reason in History, tr. Robert S. Hartman (Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1953), 26–27. For the original, see G.W.F. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte: Die Vernunft in der Geschichte, ed. J. Hoffmeister (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1970), 79–80.
  48. Marx’s term “radical chains” is from his Introduction to “A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right,” first published in two parts in the journal Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher (February 7 and 10, 1844); the translation, by Gregor Benton, is from Karl Marx’s Early Writings (London: Pelican Books, 1975).
  49. Malcolm Bull, “Vectors of the Biopolitical,” New Left Review, 45 (May/June 2007), 7. Bull edited the special edition of New Left Review in which this is the lead article.
  50. Perry Anderson, The H-Word: The Peripeteia of Hegemony (London: Verso, 2017). “In considering the fortunes of the concept [hegemony], the approach adopted here will in the first instance be an exercise in comparative historical philology.” (pp. vii–viii).
  51. Herbert Marcuse cited these words of Beckett in his dark conclusion to One-Dimensional Man (Boston: Beacon Press, 1964), 243. I follow his lead.
chapter two—“a diversity crisis!”: sneakers, species, and speech
  1. Niall Ferguson, Civilization: The West and the Rest (New York: Penguin Press, 2011), 197, 240–43.
  2. For instance, Michael Zakim underlines the relationship of ready-made clothes and capitalism but confines himself to the United States. See his Ready-Made Democracy: A History of Men’s Dress in the American Republic, 1760–1860 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003).
  3. “Cloth and clothmaking are often seen as rather frivolous.” Kassia St. Clair, “Embarrassment of Obscurities: Women, Weaving and History,” Times Literary Supplement, October 26, 2018, 25.St. Clair explains that the study of textiles has been neglected in part because it was the work of women.
  4. Thomas Carlyle, Sartor Resartus, eds. Kerry McSweeney and Peter Sabor (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987/1999), 12, 41.
  5. Sven Beckert, Empire of Cotton: A Global History (New York: Penguin Random House, 2014/2015), xii, 81.
  6. Beverly Lemire, Fashion’s Favourite: The Cotton Trade and the Consumer in Britain, 1660–1800 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 24–25.
  7. Woodruff D. Smith, in Consumption and the Making of Respectability, 1600–1800 (New York: Routledge, 2002), 136–38, discusses the new fashion of clean white cotton underwear.
  8. Stephen Yafa, Cotton: The Biography of a Revolutionary Fiber (New York: Penguin Books, 2005), 59.
  9. Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Capital: 1848–1875 (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1975). The Degas painting appears on the cover of the paperback edition published in London by Abacus in 1997.
  10. Marilyn R. Brown, Degas and the Business of Art: A Cotton Office in New Orleans (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994), 16–18.
  11. See Douglas A. Farnie, “The Role of Merchants as Prime Movers in the Expansion of the Cotton Industry, 1760–1990,” in The Fibre That Changed the World: The Cotton Industry in International Perspective, 1600–1990s, eds. Douglas A. Farnie and David J. Jeremy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 29–30.
  12. Beckert, Empire of Cotton, xiv.
  13. Quentin Bell, On Human Finery, 2nd ed. (New York: Schocken Books, 1976), 105..
  14. Lee Simonson, “Fashion and Democracy,” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, New Series, Vol. 3 No. 3 (November 1944), 65–72.
  15. Friedrich Vischer, “Fashion and Cynicism,” tr. Kelly Barry, in The Rise of Fashion, ed. Daniel Leonhard Purdy (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2004), 155–56.
  16. Claudia B. Kidwell and Margaret C. Christman, Suiting Everyone: The Democratization of Clothing in America (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1974), 115.
  17. Simonson, “Fashion and Democracy,” 72.
  18. Johann Georg Korb, Scenes from the Court of Peter the Great: Based on the Latin Diary of John G. Korb, a Secretary of the Austrian Legation at the Court of Peter the Great, tr. Charles MacDonnell, ed. F.L. Glaser (New York: Nicholas L. Brown, 1921), 31–32. To call Peter’s actions 18thth- century measures is a small stretch. Peter returned from Europe in 1698.
  19. Peter’s decree, cited in Christine Ruane, “Subjects into Citizens: The Politics of Clothing in Imperial Russia,” in Fashioning the Body Politic: Dress, Gender, Citizenship, ed. Wendy Parkins (New York: Berg Publishers, 2002), 49–70. See also Robert K. Massie, Peter the Great: His Life and World (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1980), 234–39.
  20. In another example, Alecu Russo, a 19th-century Moldavian Romanian writer, noted and partly regretted the introduction of Western clothes in his corner of the Ottoman Empire. He called the frock-coat and waistcoat “the clothes of equality.” He stressed the link between Enlightenment and fashion: “[N]ew ideas took our country by storm at the same time as the trousers . . . The change in costume signalled the new spirit of awakening. The new ideas and progress emerged from the tails of the frock coat and the pocket of the waistcoat.” Alecu Russo, cited and translated by Angela Jianu, “Women, Fashion, and Europeanization: The Romanian Principalities, 1750–1830,” in Women in the Ottoman Balkans: Gender, Culture and History, eds. Amila Buturović and İrvin Cemil Schick (London: I.B. Tauris, 2007), 214–15.
  21. Liza Crihfield Dalby, Kimono: Fashioning Culture (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993), 76–77.
  22. Selçuk Esenbel, “The Anguish of Civilized Behavior: The Use of Western Cultural Forms in the Everyday Lives of the Meiji Japanese and the Ottoman Turks during the Nineteenth Century,” Japan Review, 5 (1994), 157.
  23. Citations from Camilla T. Nereid, “Kemalism on the Catwalk: The Turkish Hat Law of 1925,” Journal of Social History, Vol. 44 No. 3 (Spring 2011), 707–728; and Alev Çınar, “Subversion and Subjugation in the Public Sphere: Secularism and the Islamic Headscarf,” Signs, Vol. 33 No. 4 (Summer 2008), 891–913.
  24. All my information derives from Leander Schneider, “The Maasai’s New Clothes: A Developmentalist Modernity and Its Exclusions,” Africa Today, Vol. 53 No. 1 (Fall 2006), 101–131. A later campaign, Operation Vijana, sought to go in the opposite direction. See Andrew M. Ivaska, “‘Anti-mini Militants Meet Modern Misses’: Urban Style, Gender, and the Politics of ‘National Culture” in 1960s Dar es Salaam, Tanzania,” in Fashioning Africa: Power and the Politics of Dress, ed. Jean Allman (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2004), 104–121. Other essays in this volume deal with the issues of Westernization, colonialism, and nationalism as they play out through clothing in Africa.
  25. Zehra Ayman and Ellen Knickmeyer, “Ban on Head Scarves Voted Out in Turkey. Parliament Lifts 80-Year-Old Restriction on University Attire,” Washington Post, February 10, 2008.
  26. Lisa Trivedi, Clothing Gandhi’s Nation: Homespun and Modern India (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2007), 76–80, 124–25, 155.
  27. Emma Tarlo, Clothing Matters: Dress and Identity in India (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 324–28.
  28. Eric Hobsbawm, Interesting Times: A Twentieth-Century Life (New York: Pantheon Books, 2002), 261.
  29. Jonas Hanway, cited in Neil McKendrick, “Commercialization and the Economy,” in The Birth of a Consumer Society: The Commercialization of Eighteenth-Century England, eds. Neil McKendrick, John Brewer, and J.H. Plumb (London: Europa Publications, 1982), 53.
  30. Frank Trentmann, Empire of Things: How We Became a World of Consumers, from the Fifteenth Century to the Twenty-First (London: Allen Lane, 2016), 73–74.
  31. Michael Harrington, The Other America: Poverty in the United States (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1964), 12–13.
  32. Erving Goffman, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (New York: Anchor Books, 1959).
  33. Wilhelm von Humboldt, Linguistic Variability and Intellectual Development, trs. George C. Buck and Frithjof A. Raven (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1972), 5.
  34. Ibid., 141, 127–28.
  35. Wilhelm von Humboldt to Karl Gustav Brinckmann, October 22, 1803, cited and translated by Paul R. Sweet, Wilhelm von Humboldt: A Biography, Vol. 1: 1767–1808 (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1978), 278.
  36. James W. Underhill, Humboldt, Worldview and Language (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009), 3.
  37. Michael C. Gavin et al., “Toward a Mechanistic Understanding of Linguistic Diversity,” BioScience, Vol. 63 No. 7 (July 2013), 524.
  38. Martin Luther, tr. George V. Schick, cited in Theodore Hiebert, “The Tower of Babel and the Origin of the World’s Cultures,” Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 126 No. 1 (Spring 2007), 48. I’m citing Luther against the grain of Hiebert, who argues that the conventional interpretation of the Tower of Babel is mistaken, and that the story bespeaks a positive idea of God diversifying mankind.
  39. René Centassi and Henri Masson, cited and translated by Esther Schor, Bridge of Words: Esperanto and the Dream of a Universal Language (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2016), 16.
  40. Zamenhof, cited and translated by Schor, Bridge of Words, 16, 63.
  41. Umberto Eco, The Search for the Perfect Language (The Making of Europe), tr. James Fentress (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1995), 19.
  42. Joseph H. Greenberg, “The Measurement of Linguistic Diversity,” Language, Vol. 32 No. 1 (January–March 1956), 109–111.
  43. Michael Krauss, “The World’s Languages in Crisis,” Language, Vol. 68 No. 1 (March 1992), 10.
  44. Paul Newman, “The Endangered Languages Issue as a Hopeless Cause,” in Language Death and Language Maintenance, eds. Mark Janse and Sijmen Tol (Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2003), 1.
  45. “UNESCO Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger,” UNESCO, 2010, updated July 5, 2017, http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/endangered-languages/atlas-of-languages-in-danger/.
  46. David Crystal, Language Death (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), i.
  47. Mark Janse, “Introduction: Language Death and Language Maintenance—Problems and Prospects,” in Language Death and Language Maintenance, eds. Mark Janse and Sijmen Tol, ix.
  48. Crystal, Language Death, 1.
  49. Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, “The Stakes: Linguistic Diversity, Linguistic Human Rights and Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education—or Linguistic Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity and an Even Faster Destruction of Biodiversity and Our Planet,” keynote presentation at Bamako International Forum on Multilingualism, Bamako, Mali, January 19–21, 2009, http://www.tove-skutnabb-kangas.org/pdf/Tove_Skutnabb_Kangas_Keynote_presentation_at_Bamako_International_Forum_on_Multilingualism_Bamako_Mali_19_21_Jan_2009.pdf. See Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, Linguistic Genocide in Education—or Worldwide Diversity and Human Rights? (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000), esp. 291–378.
  50. Krauss, “The World’s Languages in Crisis,” 7–8.
  51. Luisa Maffi, “On the Interdependence of Biological and Cultural Diversity,” in On Biocultural Diversity: Linking Language, Knowledge, and the Environment, ed. Luisa Maffi (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2001), 8.
  52. “The Loss of Diversity,” Terralingua, undated, http://terralingua.org/biocultural-diversity/the-loss-of-diversity/.
  53. David Harmon, “On the Meaning and Moral Imperative of Diversity,” in On Biocultural Diversity, ed. Luisa Maffi, 61.
  54. L.J. Gorenflo, Suzanne Romaine, Russell A. Mittermeier, and Kristen Walker-Painemilla, “Co-Occurrence of Linguistic and Biological Diversity in Biodiversity Hotspots and High Biodiversity Wilderness Areas,” PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America), Vol. 109 No. 21 (May 22, 2012), 8037.
  55. Wilson, The Diversity of Life, 301.
  56. Julie Lockwood and Michael McKinney, “Preface,” in Biotic Homogenization, eds. Julie L. Lockwood and Michael L. McKinney (New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2001), vii; John L. Gittleman, “Foreword,” in Biotic Homogenization, eds. Julie L. Lockwood and Michael L. McKinney, v.
  57. Julian D. Olden and N. LeRoy Poff, “Toward a Mechanistic Understanding and Prediction of Biotic Homogenization,” American Naturalist, Vol. 162 No. 4 (October 2003), 457.
  58. Christoph Bühler and Tobias Roth, “Spread of Common Species Results in Local-Scale Floristic Homogenization in Grassland of Switzerland,” Diversity and Distributions, Vol. 17 No. 6 (November 2011), 1089–1098.
  59. Jeffrey R. Duncan and Julie L. Lockwood, “Spatial Homogenization of the Aquatic Fauna of Tennessee,” in Biotic Homogenization, eds. Julie L. Lockwood and Michael L. McKinney, 245–58.
  60. Dian Spear and Steven L. Chown, “Taxonomic Homogenization in Ungulates: Patterns and Mechanisms at Local and Global Scales,” Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 35 No. 11 (November 2008), 1963.
  61. David M. Richardson, “Biodiversity versus Biomonotony,” Diversity and Distributions, Vol. 8 No. 2 (March 2002),126.
  62. Julian D. Olden, Michael E. Douglas, and Marlis R. Douglas, “The Human Dimensions of Biotic Homogenization,” Conservation Biology, Vol. 19 No. 6 (December 2005), 2036–2038.
  63. Eric A. Smith, “On the Coevolution of Cultural, Linguistic, and Biological Diversity,” in On Biocultural Diversity, ed. Luisa Maffi, 99. For this argument, see also Gorenflo, Romaine, Mittermeier, and Walker-Painemilla, “Co-Occurrence of Linguistic and Biological Diversity in Biodiversity Hotspots and High Biodiversity Wilderness Areas.”
  64. John Edwards, Language and Identity (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 232–33.
  65. George Steiner, After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 122–23.
  66. James W. Underhill, Creating Worldviews: Metaphor, Ideology and Language (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011), 226–27.
  67. Joshua A. Fishman, cited by Jane H. Hill, “‘Expert Rhetorics’ in Advocacy for Endangered Languages: Who is Listening, and What Do They Hear?” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, Vol. 12 No. 2 (December 2002), 129.
  68. Underhill, Creating Worldviews, 228.
  69. Skutnabb-Kangas, “The Stakes: Linguistic Diversity, Linguistic Human Rights and Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education.”
  70. H.E. Baber, The Multicultural Mystique: The Liberal Case against Diversity (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2008), 32.
  71. Max Horkheimer, “Vernunft und Selbsterhaltung,” Gesammelte Schriften, Vol. 5: >Dialektik der Aufklärung< und Schriften 1940–1950, ed. Gunzelin Schmid Noerr (Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Verlag, 1987), 328..
  72. Walter Benn Michaels, The Trouble with Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality (New York: Picador, 2016), 148–67.
  73. Victor Ginsburgh and, Shlomo Weber, How Many Languages Do We Need? The Economics of Linguistic Diversity (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011), pp. 147,. 203. A Belgian economist of Russian-Jewish-Austrian origin, Ginsburgh was born in what is today Rwanda and identifies himself as a native Swahili speaker.
  74. Christopher Clark, Iron Kingdom: The Rise and Downfall of Prussia, 1600–1947 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006), 184.
  75. Edwin H. Zeydel, “The German Language in the Prussian Academy of Sciences,” PMLA, Vol. 41 No. 1 (March 1926), 126–50.
  76. See Harold Mah, “The Epistemology of the Sentence: Language, Civility, and Identity in France and Germany, Diderot to Nietzsche,” Representations, 47 (Summer 1994), 64–84.
  77. “Passport Conference: Resolution Adopted by the Conference on Passports, Custos [sic] Formalities and Through Tickets in Paris on October 21st, 1920,” (League of Nations Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit: Geneva, November 1, 1925), 5. Martin Lloyd, in The Passport: The History of Man’s Most Travelled Document (Stroud, Gloucestershire: Sutton Publishing, 2003), summarizes the response to the League of Nation passport requirements (pp. 121–30).
  78. See Adrian Tahourdin, “Globish Lit.,” Times Literary Supplement, February 15, 2019, 26, https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/globish-lit/; and Alison Flood, “‘An Insult’: French Writers Outraged by Festival’s Use of ‘Sub-English’ Words,” The Guardian, February 4, 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/feb/04/an-insult-french-writers-outraged-by-festivals-use-of-sub-english-words.
  79. Minae Mizumura, The Fall of Language in the Age of English, trs. Mari Yoshihara and Juliet Winters Carpenter (New York: Columbia University Press, 2015), 52.
  80. Mizumura, The Fall of Language in the Age of English, 169, 66. For an outsider’s—and more upbeat—view of the effect of English on Japanese, see Mark Abley, The Prodigal Tongue: Dispatches from the Future of English (London: Arrow Books, 2009), 101–121.
  81. Peter Hessler, “Talk Like an Egyptian,” New Yorker, April 17, 2017, 56.
  82. Mizumura, The Fall of Language in the Age of English, 78–81.
  83. Mizumura, The Fall of Language in the Age of English, 41, 202–203.
  84. Karl Marx, “Preface to the First Edition,” Capital, Vol. 1, tr. Ben Fowkes (London: Penguin Books, 1990), 90.
  85. Kenneth Pomeranz, The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 13. For a critique, see Robert Brenner and Christopher Isett, “England’s Divergence from China’s Yangzi Delta: Property Relations, Microeconomics, and Patterns of Development,” Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 61 No. 2 (May 2002), 609–662.
  86. Deirdre Nansen McCloskey, Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016), 153.
  87. See David Crystal, English as a Global Language, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
  88. Mizumura, The Fall of Language in the Age of English, 202.
  89. Colleen Flaherty, “Not a Small World After All,” Inside Higher Ed, February 11, 2015, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/02/11/mla-report-shows-declines-enrollment-most-foreign-languages.
  90. Russell A. Berman, “The Real Language Crisis,” Academe, Vol. 97 No. 5 (September–October 2011), https://www.aaup.org/article/real-language-crisis#.WWMWTITyuDI.
  91. See Richard D. Brecht, “America’s Languages: Challenges and Promise,” American Councils for International Education, November 15, 2015, https://www.amacad.org/sites/default/files/academy/multimedia/pdfs/AmericasLanguagesChallenge-sandPromise.pdf.
  92. See Saul Rosenzweig, The Historic Expedition to America (1909): Freud, Jung and Hall the King-Maker, 2nd ed. (St. Louis, MO: Rana House, 1994).
  93. Jean-Nicolas Beisel and Simon Devin, “Biomonotony: Definition and Assessment for Macroinvertebrates in European Running Waters,” in Biological Invaders in Inland Waters: Profiles, Distribution and Threats, ed. Francesca Gherardi (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2007), 369.
  94. Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, tr. Norman Kemp Smith (London: Macmillan & Co,, 1963), 668.
chapter three—playing with diversity
  1. Philippe Ariès, Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life, tr. Robert Baldick (New York: Vintage Books, 1962), 129.
  2. Nicholas Orme, Medieval Children (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001), 5. Another historian notes that Ariès was “an amateur ‘weekend historian.’” Colin Heywood, A History of Childhood: Children and Childhood in the West from Medieval to Modern Times (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2001/2003), 12. Heywood in fact offers a judicious appraisal of Ariès. For a good and skeptical overview of the field, see Linda A. Pollock, Forgotten Children: Parent–Child Relations from 1500 to 1900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983).
  3. Even Bruegel’s painting, as compelling as it is, raises more questions than it answers. As one recent study put it, “Bruegel’s Children’s Games has no precedent.” It is “so unique . . . that there is no adequate explanation for the fundamental question it raises: in 1560 who would commission a painting with this unusual subject and why would they want it?” Margaret A. Sullivan, Bruegel and the Creative Process, 1559–1563 (Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Publishing, 2010), 75. For a thoughtful study, see Edward Snow, Inside Bruegel: The Play of Images in Children’s Games (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1997).
  4. Plutarch, “A Consolation to His Wife,” in Selected Essays and Dialogues, tr. Donald Russell (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 297–98.
  5. Orme, Medieval Children, 86, 52.
  6. Daniel Defoe, The Complete English Tradesman, in The Complete Daniel Defoe Collection (Amazon Digital Services LLC: Coyote Canyon Press, 2010).
  7. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile; or, On Education, tr. Allan Bloom (New York: Basic Books, 1979), 33–34.
  8. Ellen Key, The Century of the Child (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1909), 45–46. The original Swedish version was first published in Stockholm by Albert Bonniers Förlag in 1900. See Torborg Lundell, “Ellen Key and Swedish Feminist Views on Motherhood,” Scandinavian Studies, Vol. 56 No. 4 (Autumn 1984), 351–69. Key took the phrase from Swedish feminist Frida Stéenhoff’s 1896 play Lejonets unge, published under the pseudonym Harold Gote. On Key and Stéenhoff, see Is There a Nordic Feminism? Nordic Feminist Thought on Culture and Society, eds. Drude von der Fehr, Anna G. Jónasdóttir, and Bente Rosenbeck (London: Routledge, 2003), 31–33.
  9. Neil Postman, The Disappearance of Childhood (New York: Delacorte Press, 1982), 128.
  10. Viviana A. Zelizer, Pricing the Priceless Child: The Changing Social Value of Children (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), 5.
  11. Walter Benjamin, The Correspondence of Walter Benjamin, 1910–1940, eds. Gershom Scholem and Theodor W. Adorno, trs. Manfred R. Jacobson and Evelyn M. Jacobson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 524. According to Scholem, Lieb “was the only person in the years of Benjamin’s emigration whom Benjamin addressed with the familiar du after only a few encounters.” Gershom Scholem, Walter Benjamin: The Story of a Friendship, tr. Harry Zohn (London: Faber & Faber, 1981/1982), 207. On Lieb and Benjamin, see Chryssoula Kambas, Walter Benjamin im Exil: Zum Verhältnis von Literaturpolitik und Ästhetik (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1983), 203–215. See also her “Actualité politique: Le concept d’histoire chez Benjamin et l’échec du Front Populaire,” in Walter Benjamin et Paris: Colloque international 27–29 juin 1983, ed. Heinz Wismann (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1986), 273–84.
  12. Walter Benjamin, tr. Rodney Livingstone, “The Handkerchief,” Selected Writings, Volume 2: 1927–1934, eds. Michael W. Jennings, Howard Eiland, and Gary Smith (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 658; and Benjamin, tr. Livingstone, “Experience and Poverty,” Selected Writings, Volume 2, 731.
  13. Benjamin, tr. Livingstone, “Experience and Poverty,” Selected Writings, Volume 2, 731–32. See also Martin Jay, Songs of Experience: Modern American and European Variations on a Universal Theme (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2005), 312–43.
  14. Benjamin, tr. Livingstone, “The Handkerchief,” Selected Writings, Volume 2, 658.
  15. Walter Benjamin, tr. Edmund Jephcott, “The Storyteller,” Selected Writings, Volume 3, eds. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002), 143–44.
  16. “Everything that was to become important during the twentieth century—from quantum physics to women’s emancipation, from abstract art to space travel, from communism and fascism to the consumer society, from industrialized slaughter to the power of the media—had already made deep impressions in the years before 1914.” Philipp Blom, The Vertigo Years: Europe, 1900–1914 (New York: Basic Books, 2008), 3.
  17. Larry McMurtry, Walter Benjamin at the Dairy Queen: Reflections at Sixty and Beyond (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1999).
  18. McMurtry, Walter Benjamin at the Dairy Queen, 16.
  19. Ibid., 45, 25.
  20. Ibid., 20–21.
  21. Benjamin, tr. Livingstone, “The Handkerchief,” Selected Writings, Volume 2, 658.
  22. McMurtry, Walter Benjamin at the Dairy Queen, 81.
  23. Stefan Zweig, The World of Yesterday, tr. Anthea Bell (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2013), 46–47.
  24. At least two essays deal with the “Walter Benjamin Industry”: See Noah Isenberg, “The Work of Walter Benjamin in the Age of Information,” New German Critique, 83 (Spring–Summer 2001), 119–50; and Udi E. Greenberg, “The Politics of the Walter Benjamin Industry,” Theory, Culture & Society, Vol. 25 No. 3 (2008), 53–70. Both take up the popularity of Benjamin, although neither address the absence of a discussion of McMurtry. Isenberg, in fact, uses as an epigraph a quote from McMurtry but does not return to him in the text.
  25. Walter Benjamin, tr. Howard Eiland, “Berlin Childhood around 1900,” in Benjamin, Selected Writings, Volume 3, eds. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002). 350.
  26. McMurtry, Walter Benjamin at the Dairy Queen, 105–106.
  27. Walter Benjamin, The Arcades Project, trs. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 105. See Carlo Salzani for a comprehensive discussion of Benjamin and boredom: “The Atrophy of Experience: Walter Benjamin and Boredom,” in Essays on Boredom and Modernity, eds. Barbara Dalle Pezze and Carlo Salzani (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2009), 127–54.
  28. Jude Stewart, “Making Time for Boredom,” Atlantic (June 2017), 23
  29. “Programme,” International Interdisciplinary Boredom Conference, June 16–17, 2017, http://boredomconference.com/?page_id=760.
  30. Lars Svendsen, A Philosophy of Boredom, tr. John Irons (London: Reaktion Books, 2005) and Peter Toohey, Boredom: A Lively History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2011).
  31. Benjamin, The Arcades Project, trs. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin, 108. For a good overview of the boredom literature, see the introduction, “The Delicate Monster: Modernity and Boredom,” to Essays on Boredom and Modernity, 5–34.
  32. Svendsen, A Philosophy of Boredom, tr. John Irons, 21.
  33. Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life, tr. Alastair Hannay, ed. Victor Eremita [a pseudonym for Kierkegaard] (London: Penguin Books, 1992), 227–28.
  34. Anton Chekhov, The Plays of Anton Chekhov, tr. Paul Schmidt (New York: Harper-Collins Publishers, 1997), 209.
  35. For a (jargon-clotted) discussion of subjectivization of boredom, see Elizabeth S. Goodstein, Experience Without Qualities: Boredom and Modernity (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005), esp. 101–246.
  36. See Patricia Meyer Spacks, Boredom: The Literary History of a State of Mind (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 7–8.
  37. Robert Paul Smith, Where Did You Go? Out. What Did You Do? Nothing (New York: Norton, 1957/2010), 106–107.
  38. Johan Huizinga, America: A Dutch Historian’s Vision, from Afar and Near, transl. Herbert H. Rowen (New York: Harper & Row, 1972), pp. 237, 115–-116. This book is in fact composed of two separate pieces by Huizinga “Man and Masses in America,” from 1918, before he visited the States;, and “Life and Thought in America,” from 1926, after his visit.
  39. Johan Huizinga, Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture, tr. Johan Huizinga (Boston: Beacon Press, 1955), 8–9.
  40. J. Huizinga, In the Shadow of Tomorrow, tr. J.H. Huizinga (New York: Norton & Co., 1936), 15.
  41. Huizinga, Homo Ludens, tr. Johan Huizinga, 205–206. Two good—not new, but insightful—overviews of Huizinga are Robert Anchor, “History and Play: Johan Huizinga and His Critics,” History and Theory, Vol. 17 No. 1 (February 1978), 63–93; and Henry M. Pachter, “Masters of Cultural History III: Johan Huizinga—The Historian as Magister Ludi,” Salmagundi, 46 (Fall 1979), 103–119.
  42. For a recent assessment of its impact, see Lisa Jardine, “The Afterlife of Homo Ludens: From Johan Huizinga to Natalie Zemon Davis and Beyond,” Temptation in the Archives: Essays in Golden Age Dutch Culture (London: University College London Press, 2015), 84–101
  43. For a survey of the scholarly debate, see Thomas Henricks, “The Nature of Play: An Overview,” American Journal of Play, Vol. 1 No. 2 (Fall 2008), 157–80,.
  44. William Wells Newell, Games and Songs of American Children (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1883), 11–12. On Newell, see Alexander F. Chamberlain, “William Wells Newell—1839–1907,” American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 9 No. 2 (April–June 1907), 366–76.
  45. Howard P. Chudacoff, Children at Play: An American History (New York: New York University Press, 2007), 126–53.
  46. Bruce Watson, The Man Who Changed How Boys and Toys Were Made: The Life and Times of A.C. Gilbert, the Man Who Saved Christmas (New York: Viking, 2002), 6.
  47. Henry Petroski, “Engineering: Work and Play,” American Scientist, Vol. 87 No. 3 (May–June 1999), 208.
  48. Harold Kroto, “Biographical” and “Addendum, July 2012,” NobelPrize.org, 1996/2012, https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1996/kroto-bio.html.
  49. All information and quotes from Maaike Lauwaert, “Playing Outside the Box—On LEGO Toys and the Changing World of Construction Play,” History and Technology, Vol. 24 No. 3 (2008), 221–37. Lauwaert argues that Lego has backed away from some of the extreme theme-centered sets.
  50. Tim Walsh, Timeless Toys: Classic Toys and the Playmakers Who Created Them (Kansas City, MO: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 2004), 26.
  51. Amanda Dargan and Steven Zeitlin, City Play (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1990), 166.
  52. Stuart Brown, with Christopher Vaughan, Play: How It Shapes the Brain, Opens the Imagination, and Invigorates the Soul (New York: Avery (Penguin Books), 2009), 107.
  53. Ginger Adams Otis, “What Happened to New York’s Storied Street Games?” New York Post, May 9, 2010, https://nypost.com/2010/05/09/what-happened-to-new-yorks-storied-street-games/.
  54. Brian Sutton-Smith, A History of Children’s Play: The New Zealand Playground, 1840–1950 (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1981), 249–53, 288–89.
  55. Richard F. Ward, A Lifetime’s Non-Ordinary Events: A Modified Autobiography (Victoria, BC: Trafford, 2010), 3.
  56. See, for instance, Jane Martinson, “Apple’s In-App Game Charges: How My Kids Ran Up Huge Bills,” Guardian, March 26, 2013.
  57. Aldous Huxley, Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited (New York: Harper Perennial, 2004), 37–38.
  58. New York Street Games DVD, PBS Distribution, directed by Matthew Levy, produced by Craig Lifschutz and Matthew Levy, 2009/2011.
  59. Senator Robert Hendrickson, cited in James Gilbert, A Cycle of Outrage: America’s Reaction to the Juvenile Delinquent in the 1950s (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 75. For a more recent overview, see Jason Barnosky, “The Violent Years: Responses to Juvenile Crime in the 1950s,” Polity, Vol. 38 No. 3 (July 2006), 314–44.
  60. See, for instance, Stephanie Pappas, “As Schools Cut Recess, Kids’ Learning Will Suffer, Experts Say,” Live Science, August 14, 2011, https://www.livescience.com/15555-schools-cut-recess-learning-suffers.html.
  61. Hara Estroff Marano, A Nation of Wimps: The High Cost of Invasive Parenting (New York: Broadway Books, 2008), 88.
  62. Cited in Malcolm Harris, Kids These Days: Human Capital and the Making of Millennials (New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2017); excerpted as “The Working Classroom” in Harper’s (November 2017), 11
  63. Henry S. Curtis, “Public Provision and Responsibility for Playgrounds,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 35 No. 2 (March 1910), 121.
  64. The advertisement is reproduced in Brenda Biondo, Once Upon a Playground: A Celebration of Classic American Playgrounds, 1920–1975 (Lebanon, NH: University Press of New England, 2014), xviii.
  65. See the website of the National Program for Playground Safety (NPPS) at the University of Northern Iowa: http://www.playgroundsafety.org/ [accessed August 22, 2019].
  66. See Deborah K. Tinsworth and Joyce E. McDonald, Special Study: Injuries and Deaths Associated with Children’s Playground Equipment, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC, April 2001, https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/playgrnd_0.pdf. Most of the injuries are falls and fractures.
  67. Vivian Wang, “After Recall, Devoted Playground Crowd Asks: Where Did the Slides Go?” New York Times, June 10, 2017.
  68. For a good survey that highlights counter-trends, see Carroll Pursell, From Playgrounds to PlayStation: The Interaction of Technology and Play (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2015), 30–51.
  69. John Tierney, “Can a Playground be Too Safe?” New York Times, July 18, 2011.
  70. Susan G. Solomon, American Playgrounds: Revitalizing Community Space (Lebanon, NH: University Press of New England, 2005), 79–85.
  71. Michael Gotkin, cited in Pursell, From Playgrounds to PlayStation, 49. Another landscape designer concurs about the American playground: “It’s a rubber floor, a little structure surrounded by a fence, it’s like a play jail,” declares Meghan Talarowski, cited in Ellen Barry, “In Britain’s Playgrounds, ‘Bringing in Risk’ to Build Resilience,” New York Times, March 10, 2018. See the study Talarowski authored, London Study of Playgrounds: The Influence of Design on Play Behavior in London vs New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles (Philadelphia, PA: Studio Ludo, 2017).
  72. Darell Hammond, Kaboom! How One Man Built a Movement to Save Play (New York: Rodale, 2011), 224–26.
  73. Hanna Rosin, “The Overprotected Kid,” The Atlantic (April 2014)
  74. Ibid.
  75. “U.S. Travel Data Show Decline in Walking and Bicycling to School Has Stabilized,” Safe Routes Partnership, April 8, 2010.
  76. Mayer Hillman, John Adams, and John Whitelegg, One False Move . . . A Study of Children’s Independent Mobility (London: Policy Studies Institute, 1990), 45. I’m averaging the numbers for both eight- and nine-year-olds.
  77. Sandra Hofferth, David A. Kinney, Janet S. Dunn, “The ‘Hurried’ Child: Myth vs. Reality,” Maryland Population Research Center, February 29, 2008.
  78. Donald F. Roberts and Ulla G. Foehr, “Trends in Media Use,” The Future of Children, Vol. 18 No. 1 (Spring 2008), 11–37.
  79. Rhonda Clements, “An Investigation of the Status of Outdoor Play,” Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, Vol. 5 No. 1 (March 2004), 72.
  80. Some dips in obesity rates have recently been recorded: “Early childhood obesity rates have begun to level off and even decline.” [Laura M. Segal, Jack Rayburn, and Stacy E. Beck, “The State of Obesity: Better Policies for a Healthier America,” Trust for America’s Health/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2017, 31, https://media.stateofobesity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/19162039/stateofobesi-ty2017.pdf] Three points about these numbers: 1) As this report notes, “Despite these positive trends, childhood obesity remains an American epidemic.” [p. 27] 2) The trend for adolescents continues to increase. [See Cheryl D. Fryar, Margaret D. Carroll, and Cynthia L. Ogden, “Prevalence of Overweight and Obesity Among Children and Adolescents Aged 2–19 Years: United States, 1963–1965 through 2013–2014,” National Center for Health Statistics, https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/obesity_child_13_14/obesity_child_13_14.pdf] 3) These findings about the recent decline have been challenged. A new study concludes, “Despite previous reports that obesity in children and adolescents has remained stable or decreased in recent years, we found no evidence of a decline in obesity prevalence at any age. In contrast, we report a significant increase in severe obesity among children aged 2 to 5 years since the 2013–2014 cycle, a trend that continued upward for many subgroups.” [Asheley Cockrell Skinner et al., “Prevalence of Obesity and Severe Obesity in US Children, 1999–2016,” Pediatrics, Vol. 141 No. 3 (March 2018)].
  81. Jaak Panksepp, “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders, Psychostimulants, and Intolerance of Childhood Playfulness: A Tragedy in the Making?” Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 7 No. 3 (June 1998), 91.
  82. Peter Gray, “The Decline of Play and the Rise of Psychopathology in Children and Adolescents,” American Journal of Play, Vol. 3, No. 4 (2011), 443–63.
  83. See Peter Gray, Free to Learn: Why Unleashing the Instinct to Play Will Make Our Children Happier, More Self-Reliant, and Better Students for Life (New York: Basic Books, 2013).
  84. Sherry Turkle, Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age (New York: Penguin Press, 2015), 108–109.
  85. All quotes in this paragraph and following from Stefan Zweig, tr. Don Reneau, “The Monotonization of the World,” in Weimar Republic Sourcebook, eds. Anton Kaes, Martin Jay, and Edward Dimendberg (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1994), 397–400.
  86. W.T. Stead, The Americanization of the World (New York: Horace Markley, 1901), 1–2.
  87. Georges Duhamel, America the Menace: Scenes from the Life of the Future, tr. Charles Miner Thompson (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1931), 201, 194, 71. On Duhamel and other interpretations of the United States by French intellectuals, see Jean-Philippe Mathy, Extrême Occident: French Intellectuals and America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), esp. 52–103.
  88. Oliver Matuschek, Three Lives: A Biography of Stefan Zweig, tr. Allan Blunden (London: Pushkin Press, 2011), 92.
  89. Georg Simmel, tr. Edward Shils, “The Metropolis and Mental Life,” in The Blackwell City Reader, eds. Gary Bridge and Sophie Watson (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2002), 11–19.
  90. George Miller Beard, American Nervousness, Its Causes and Consequences (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1881), 13–14.
  91. Sigmund Freud, “‘Civilized’ Sexual Morality and Modern Nervousness,” in his Collected Papers, Vol. II, tr. Joan Riviere, ed. Ernest Jones (London: Hogarth Press/Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1949), 79–80. See Philip P. Wiener, “G.M. Beard and Freud on ‘American Nervousness,’” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 17 No. 2 (April 1956), 269–74.
  92. Beard, American Nervousness, 52, 193–291.
  93. Ibid., 125, 138.
  94. Ibid., 135–36.
  95. McMurtry, Walter Benjamin at the Dairy Queen, 105.
  96. Tim Wu, The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads (New York: Knopf, 2016), 350.
  97. Dr. Seuss, And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street (New York: Vanguard Press, 1937).
chapter four—diversity and its vicissitudes: across the centuries
  1. Charles Darwin, cited in Jonathan Weiner, The Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in Our Time (New York: Vintage Books, 1995), 157.
  2. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (New York: Bantam Classics, 1999), 8–38.
  3. Hope Jahren, Lab Girl (New York: Vintage Books, 2017), 63.
  4. William Fitzgerald, Variety: The Life of a Roman Concept (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016), 4–5.
  5. Chrysippus, “Beauty of Living Things,” in Władysław Tatarkiewicz, History of Aesthetics, Volume 1: Ancient Aesthetics, tr. uncredited, ed. J. Harrell et al. (The Hague: De Gruyter Mouton, 1970), 195; and Plutarch, tr. uncredited, “The Contradictions of the Stoics,” Complete Works of Plutarch (Hastings, East Sussex/Amazon Digital Services LLC: Delphi Classics, 2013), section 21. I’m combining the two translations.
  6. Epicurus, tr. Cyril Bailey, “Letter to Herodotus,” NewEpicurean.com, http://newepicurean.com/epicurus/letter-to-herodotus-elemental-edition/.
  7. Lucretius, cited in Steven J. Dick, Plurality of Worlds: The Origins of the Extraterrestrial Life Debate from Democritus to Kant (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 10–11. The English translation, as On the Nature of Things, is by W.H.D. Rouse (London: Loeb Classical Library (William Heinemann), 1924).
  8. See David Cressy, “Early Modern Space Travel and the English Man in the Moon,” American Historical Review, Vol. 111 No. 4 (October 2006), 961–82.
  9. Bernard Le Bovier de Fontenelle, Conversations on the Plurality of Worlds, tr. H.A. Hargreaves (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1990), 16, 45–46. If a French philosopher of the Enlightenment gave us an elegant presentation of the plurality of worlds, it is not surprising that an American philosopher of the campus gave us an inane version. To follow an (unsympathetic) review of On the Plurality of Worlds by David Lewis, whom the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy calls “one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century,” the Princeton professor posited the existence of “fabulous alternative universes that are never empirically detected by us.” Fontenelle’s diverse faces are left far behind. In Lewis’s alternative world anything and everything proliferates, including “tiny purple anthropologists who study human culture unobserved,” “colossal human-eating monsters 50 feet in height” and, best of all, “professional philosophers earning salaries in excess of 37 million dollars.” This is diversity à la American philosophy. See Nathan Salmon, Review of Lewis, On the Plurality of Worlds (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986) in Philosophical Review, Vol. 97 No. 2 (April 1988), 237.
  10. Desiderius Erasmus, On Copia of Words and Ideas, trs. Donald B. King and H. David Rix (Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press, 1963), 16–17, 38–42.
  11. G.W. Leibniz, Theodicy, tr. E.M. Huggard, ed. Austin Farrer (Chicago: Open Court, 1985), 198, sec. 124.
  12. See the collection The Language of Nature: Reassessing the Mathematization of Natural Philosophy in the Seventeenth Century, eds. Geoffrey Gorham et al. (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2016).
  13. Galileo, “The Assayer,” Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo, tr. Stillman Drake (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, 1957), 238.
  14. Darwin, The Origin of Species, 399–400.
  15. Francis Darwin, cited in Mea Allan, Darwin and His Flowers: The Key to Natural Selection (London: Faber and Faber, 1977), 18; and Tim Wing Yam, Joseph Arditti, and Kenneth M. Cameron, “‘The Orchids have been a Splendid Sport’—An Alternative Look at Charles Darwin’s Contribution to Orchid Biology,” American Journal of Botany, Vol. 96 No. 12 (December 2009), 2128–54. For a lovely appreciation of Darwin’s devotion to flowers, see Oliver Sacks, “Darwin and the Meaning of Flowers,” New York Review of Books (November 20, 2008).
  16. Galileo, tr. Stillman Drake, “The Assayer,” 238.
  17. Mary J. Henninger-Voss, “How the ‘New Science’ of Cannons Shook Up the Aristotelian Cosmos,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 63 No. 3 (July 2002), 375.
  18. Arthur O. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960), 293–94.
  19. Friedrich Schleiermacher, On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers, tr. John Oman (New York: Harper & Row, 1958), 55, 110, 281.
  20. See Paul R. Sweet, Wilhelm von Humboldt: A Biography, Volume 1: 1767–1808 (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1978), 60–62.
  21. On Humboldt and the French Revolution, see Frederick C. Beiser, Enlightenment, Revolution, and Romanticism: The Genesis of Modern German Political Thought, 1790–1800 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992), 111–37.
  22. Wilhelm von Humboldt, The Limits of State Action, tr. and ed. J.W. Burrow (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1993), 10.
  23. Ibid. For the original German version, see Wilhelm von Humboldt, Űber die Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Staates, ed. Rudolf Pannwitz (Nürnberg: Verlag Hans Carl, 1946), 27.
  24. For this, see Ulrich Muhlack, Das zeitgenössische Frankreich in der Politik Humboldts (Historische Studien, Vol. 400) (Hamburg: Matthiesen Verlag, 1967), 14; and Gerald N. Izenberg, Impossible Individuality: Romanticism, Revolution, and the Origins of Modern Selfhood, 1787–1802 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), 48.
  25. See Paul R. Sweet, “Young Wilhelm Von Humboldt’s Writings (1789–93) Reconsidered,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 34 No. 3 (July–September 1973), 477–78. Sweet argues that this dimension of Humboldt has been neglected by commentators.
  26. Humboldt, The Limits of State Action, tr. J.W. Burrow, 14.
  27. Newton and others reached for the metaphor of the pygmy sitting on the shoulders of giants to explain why the moderns achieved more. See Robert K. Merton’s wonderful On the Shoulders of Giants: A Shandean Postscript (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993). See, in general, Joseph M. Levine, The Battle of the Books: History and Literature in the Augustan Age (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991).
  28. Quoted in Hans Baron, “The Querelle of the Ancients and the Moderns as a Problem for Renaissance Scholarship,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 20 No. 1 (January 1959), 19.
  29. Fontenelle, “Discourse Concerning the Ancients and Moderns,” in The Achievement of Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle, ed. and tr. Leonard M. Marsak (New York: Johnson Reprint, 1970), 1–8.
  30. See, in general, Robert Leroux, Guillaume de Humboldt: La formation de sa pensée jusqu’en 1794 (Paris: Société d’edition: Les Belles lettres, 1932), 264–78; and Siegfried Battisti, Wilhelm von Humboldts ‘Ideen zu einem Versuch, die Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Staats zu bestimmen’ und das Subsidiaritätsprinzip (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1987), 78–80.
  31. Humboldt, The Limits of State Action, tr. J.W. Burrow, 18. Of course, as all commentators and biographers indicate, Humboldt’s own life contradicts the main message of The Limits inasmuch as he becomes a state employee and educational reformer.
  32. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile; or, On Education, tr. Allan Bloom (New York: Basic Books, 1979), 452–53.
  33. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Government of Poland, tr. Willmoore Kendall (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 1985), 11.
  34. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being, 298.
  35. See Melvin Richter, “‘That Vast Tribe of Ideas’: Competing Concepts and Practices of Comparison in the Political and Social Thought of Eighteenth-Century Europe,” Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte, Vol. 44 (2002), 199–219.
  36. For a recent restatement of this issue, see Keegan Callanan, “Liberal Constitutionalism and Political Particularism in Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws,” Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 67 No. 3 (September 2014), 589–602.
  37. Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, tr. Thomas Nugent (New York: Hafner, 1949), Vol. I, 298–99.
  38. Ibid., Vol. II, 170–71.
  39. Pierre-Simon Laplace, cited in Charles W.J. Withers, Zero Degrees: Geographies of the Prime Meridian (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2017), 107–108.
  40. Arthur Young, Travels during the Years 1787, 1788 and 1789 of the Kingdom of France (Dublin: R. Cross et al., 1793), 43–44. Web.
  41. See Ronald Edward Zupko, Revolution in Measurement: Western European Weights and Measures since the Age of Science (Philadelphia, PA: American Philosophical Society, 1990), 113–17.
  42. C. Doris Hellman, “Jefferson’s Efforts towards the Decimalization of United States Weights and Measures,” Isis, Vol. 16 No. 2 (November 1931), 266–314; Marcello Maestro, “Going Metric: How It All Started,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 41 No. 3 (July–September 1980), 479–86.
  43. John Bemelmans Marciano, Whatever Happened to the Metric System? How America Kept Its Feet (New York: Bloomsbury, 2014), 6.
  44. Romme, cited in Jacques Costagliola, Romme. Le mulet d’Auvergne (1750–1795) (Paris: Dualpha, 2008), 435–36.
  45. See Eviatar Zerubavel, “The French Republican Calendar,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 42 No. 6 (December 1977), 868–77.
  46. Richard A. Carrigan Jr., “Decimal Time: Unlike the Metric System of Measurements, Decimal Time Did Not Survive the French Revolution. But is Dividing the Day by Tens a Possibility for the Future?” American Scientist, Vol. 66 No. 3 (May–June 1978), 305–313.
  47. Romme, cited in Sanja Perovic, The Calendar in Revolutionary France: Perceptions of Time in Literature, Culture, Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 112.
  48. Zupko, Revolution in Measurement, 149.
  49. Matthew Shaw, Time and the French Revolution: The Republican Calendar, 1789 – Year XIV (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Royal Historical Society/Boydell Press, 2011), 122.
  50. William Bright, “Notes: A Language is a Dialect with an Army and a Navy,” Language in Society, Vol. 26 No. 3 (September 1997), 469.
  51. See Alyssa Goldstein Sepinwall, The Abbé Grégoire and the French Revolution: The Making of Modern Universalism (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2005).
  52. Peter Galison, Einstein’s Clocks, Poincaré’s Maps: Empires of Time (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2003), 128–29.
  53. Abbé Grégoire remained a symbol of French universalism and egalitarianism. In 1942 the Nazis “destroyed his statue during their occupation of Lunéville,” which was close to his birthplace. Sepinwall, The Abbé Grégoire and the French Revolution, 233–34.
  54. Abbé Grégoire, An Essay on the Physical, Moral, and Political Reformation of the Jews, tr. uncredited (London: C. Forster, 1791), 199–200. Translation slightly altered. See Abbé Grégoire, Essai sur la régénération physique, morale et politique des Juifs (Metz: Claude Lamort, 1789), 160–61. [Google Books]
  55. “Le Rapport Barère,” republished in Michel de Certeau, Dominique Julia, and Jacques Revel, Une politique de la langue. La Révolution française et les patois (Paris: Gallimard, 1975), 295. The quoted phrases are translated in Leo Gershoy, Bertrand Barère: A Reluctant Terrorist (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1962), 230–31; and see, in general, David A. Bell, The Cult of the Nation in France: Inventing Nationalism 1680–1800 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), 169–97.
  56. The questions are in Certeau, Julia, and Revel, Une politique de la langue, 12–14.
  57. “Le Rapport sur la nécessité et les moyens d’anéantir les patois et d’universaliser l’usage de la langue française,” republished in Frank Paul Bowman, L’Abbé Grégoire. Évêque des lumières (Paris: Éditions France-Empire, 1988), 129–48. The quoted phrases are translated by the present author. The issue of overcoming local languages remained a contested issue in French well into the 19th century. For the later period, see Eugen Weber’s classic Peasants into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1870–1914 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1976), esp. 310–18.
  58. See his “Herder and the Enlightenment,” in Berlin, The Proper Study of Mankind: An Anthology of Essays, eds. Henry Hardy and Roger Hausheer (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1997), 359–435. A contemporary and voluminous debate, which often bounces off Berlin, centers on the ideas of pluralism. The task for these political theorists and philosophers is usually how to reconcile pluralism and liberalism. As a recent commentator put it, how “can we best make sense of Berlin’s simultaneous advocacy of pluralism—the claim that there are multiple, incompatible ‘ultimate ends’ which cannot be reconciled or rank ordered—and his commitment to liberalism . . . ?” Ella Myers, “From Pluralism to Liberalism: Rereading Isaiah Berlin,” Review of Politics, Vol. 72 No. 4 (Fall 2010), 605. For instance, one of the principals in this debate declares “there is indeed a link between value pluralism and political liberalism.” William A. Galston, Liberal Pluralism: The Implications of Value Pluralism for Political Theory and Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 57. But these arguments barely pursue the issues raised here. For the most part the participants seek to reconcile various theoretical “claims,” often of a legal or policy nature. Moreover, the exchanges are often premised on the notion that society is increasingly diverse, and therefore the necessity to evaluate conflicting demands arises. “U.S. civil society is becoming increasingly diverse. . . . The application of general public principles to diverse associations . . . is perhaps more complex now than ever before.” (Galston, Liberal Pluralism, 110). For outsiders these debates seem incestuous and anodyne: two dozen political theorists and philosophers reference each other’s work ad nauseam. “In this chapter,” writes Galston, “I continue to examine the major challenges to my account of liberal pluralism that have thus far emerged. These include, first, that my conception. . . .” Galston, The Practice of Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 187. Presumably another chapter will take up the “minor” challenges to his conception of liberal pluralism “that have thus far emerged.” In addition to the debate on pluralism, a kindred one on historicism, which has a longer trajectory, has drawn in philosophers of history. Herder is often considered the originator of historicism, which prizes the particular in history, not the general. An ongoing issue, again, is to what degree this leads to relativism—or pluralism, and what the difference between them is. For an overview and recent airing of the topics, see Anne Löchte, Johann Gottfried Herder: Kulturtheorie und Humanitä̈tsidee der Ideen, Humanitätsbriefe und Adrastea (Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 2005), esp. 203–221.
  59. The chapter dealing with this issue in the standard American biography of Herder is titled “Break with the Enlightenment.” See Robert T. Clark Jr., Herder: His Life and Thought (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1955), 179–213. For a discussion that places Herder in the tradition of critics of bourgeois society, see Andreas Herz, Dunkler Spiegel—helles Dasein: Natur, Geschichte, Kunst im Werk Johann Gottfried Herders (Heidelberg: Winter, 1996), 317–30.
  60. See Siegfried Birkner, Die Mechanisierung des Lebens im Werk Johann Gottfried Herders (Frankfurt am Main: Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität, 1957).
  61. Berlin, “Herder and the Enlightenment,” 392. Berlin translates a passage from “Another Philosophy of History,” in which Herder stated that the ferment of the Middle Ages at least kept at bay a despotism whose tendency is “to crush everything into a deadly uniformity.” (p. 392) This seems a generous translation of Herder. The current translation by Evrigenis and Pellerin (see note 67, below) renders the passage as keeping at bay “death and uniform demolition.” (p. 34) The original phrase is “in Tod und einförmige Zermalmung.” Herder, Sämmtliche Werke, Vol. 5, ed. Bernhard Suphan (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1891), 516.
  62. J.G. Herder, Reflections on the Philosophy of the History of Mankind, ed. Frank E. Manuel (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968), 3.
  63. Herder, “On Diligence in the Study of Several Learned Languages,” Selected Early Works, 1764–1767, trs. Ernest A. Menze and Michael Palma, eds. Ernest A. Menze and Karl Menges (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992), 31.
  64. “Journal of My Voyage in the Year 1769 (Travel Diary),” in J.G. Herder on Social and Political Culture, tr. and ed. by F.M. Barnard (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 83.
  65. Wulf Koepke, Johann Gottfried Herder (Boston: Twayne, 1987), 32.
  66. J.G. Herder, Another Philosophy of History and Selected Political Writings, eds. and trs. Ioannis D. Evrigenis and Daniel Pellerin (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 2004), 80, 69, 89, 84.
  67. For a discussion of Constant’s eclipse in the 19th century, see Helena Rosenblatt, Liberal Values: Benjamin Constant and the Politics of Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 234–48.
  68. See Kurt Kloocke, “Johann Gottfried Herder et Benjamin Constant,” Annales Benjamin Constant, Vol. 29 (2005), 55–72. Kloocke is mainly interested in how the writings of Constant and Herder on religion converge. “In Weimar . . . Constant’s major discovery was the work of Herder. . . . [Herder] was his daily reading matter in January and February of 1804, as he indicated in his diary.” Etienne Hofmann, “The Theory of the Perfectibility of the Human Race,” in The Cambridge Companion to Constant, ed. Helena Rosenblatt (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 255.
  69. “Schleiermacher . . . was above all following in the philosophical footsteps of one predecessor in particular: Herder.” Michael Forster, “Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2015 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta, April 17, 2002, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/schleiermacher/.
  70. Klooke argues that Constant and Schleiermacher converge on basic issues. See his “Benjamin Constant et l’Allemagne. Individualité—Religion—Politique.” Annales Benjamin Constant, Vol. 27 (2003), esp. 151–59.
  71. The literature on Constant is growing exponentially. One of the best recent studies is K. Steven Vincent, Benjamin Constant and the Birth of French Liberalism (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011).
  72. Benjamin Constant, “Principes de politiques”; and “Mélanges de littérature et de politique,” both in Écrits politiques, ed. Marcel Gauchet (Paris: Gallimard, 1997), 306–307, 623. In fact, Constant’s consistency is much in question, especially in regard to his support for Napoleon’s return to power—his 100 days.
  73. Madame de Staël, Ten Years of Exile, tr. Doris Beik (New York: Saturday Review Press, 1972), 52–53, 169.
  74. Constant, “The Spirit of Conquest and Usurpation and Their Relation to European Civilization,” in his Political Writings, tr. and ed. Biancamaria Fontana (Cambridge: Cambridge University Presss, 1988), 71–78; and one phrase from “Des Idées D’Uniformité” in Les ‘Principes de politique’ de Benjamin Constant, Vol. 2, ed. Etienne Hofmann (Geneva: Librarie Droz, 1980), 385–89. In both these texts Constant cites Montesquieu’s passage on uniformity.
  75. Constant, “The Spirit of Conquest and Usurpation,” in Political Writings, tr. and ed. Biancamaria Fontana, 106–109. Constant expands on his indictment of Mably in Les ‘Principes de politique’ de Benjamin Constant, Vol. 2, 438ff. For a recent reconsideration of Mably that partly takes up Constant’s critique, see Johnson Kent Wright, A Classical Republican in Eighteenth-Century France: The Political Thought of Mably (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997).
  76. Constant, “Discours pour la plantation de l’arbre de la liberté,” in Oeuvres complètes, Vol. 1, eds. Lucia Omacini and Jean-Daniel Candaux (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1998), 553.
  77. “Lettres de Benjamin Constant à Prosper de Barante,” (February 25, 1808), ed. Baron de Barante, Revue des deux mondes, Vol. 34 (1906), 250. On Prosper de Barante, see Annelien de Dijn, French Political Thought from Montesquieu to Tocqueville: Liberty in a Levelled Society? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 101–110.
  78. Benjamin Constant, Adolphe, tr. Leonard Tancock (London: Penguin Books, 1964), 41.
  79. Cited in K. Steven Vincent, “Character, ‘Sensibilité,’ Sociability and Politics in Benjamin Constant’s Adolphe,” Historical Reflections / Réflexions Historiques, Vol. 28 No. 3 (Fall 2002), 366.
  80. “On Germany,” in An Extraordinary Woman: Selected Writings of Germaine de Staël, tr. Vivian Folkenflik (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), 321–24. For a discussion of enthusiasm in de Staël (and its difference from fanaticism), see Lucien Jaume, L’Individu effacé: ou le paradoxe du libéralisme français (Paris: Éditions Fayard, 1997), 54–59.
  81. “The Liberty of the Ancients Compared to That of the Moderns,” in Political Writings, tr. and ed. Biancamaria Fontana, 326–27.
  82. See James C. Mohr, “Academic Turmoil and Public Opinion: The Ross Case at Stanford,” Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 39 No. 1 (February 1970), 39–61; and Warren J. Samuels, “The Firing of E.A. Ross from Stanford University: Injustice Compounded by Deception?” Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 22 No. 2 (Spring 1991), 183–90. The sociologist was E.A. Ross, but his case cannot be presented as a simple story of academic freedom and its violation. Ross was not only some sort of political activist and socialist, but also a racist and eugenicist who decried the immigration of Asian laborers. However, Stanford’s vendetta against Ross began on economic grounds, as disdain for his vocal support of the Free Silver movement.
  83. Hans-Joerg Tiede, University Reform: The Founding of the American Association of University Professors (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2015), 29.
  84. Arthur O. Lovejoy, “Reflections on the History of Ideas,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 1 No. 1 (January 1940), 3–23.
  85. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being, 312–13.
  86. Arthur O. Lovejoy, “The Meaning of Romanticism for the Historian of Ideas,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 2 No. 3 (June 1941), 257–78.
  87. Hanns Johst’s Nazi Drama Schlageter, tr. Ford B. Parkes-Perret (Stuttgart: Akademischer Verlag Hans-Dieter Heinz, 1984), 89. The Browning refers to the automatic pistol, widely adopted in Europe, that was designed by the American John Browning. Gavrilo Princip, who initiated World War I with the assassination of an archduke, used a Browning.
  88. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being, 312–13.
  89. Hendrik Verwoerd, cited in Sasha Polakow-Suransky, Go Back to Where You Came From: The Backlash Against Immigration and the Fate of Western Democracy (New York: Nation Books, 2017), 39–40.
  90. See Darrin M. McMahon, Enemies of the Enlightenment: The French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001). For an older study, see Paul H. Beik, The French Revolution Seen from the Right: Social Theories in Motion, 1789–1799 (Philadelphia, PA: American Philosophical Society, 1956).
  91. Zeev Sternhell, The Anti-Enlightenment Tradition, tr. David Maisel (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2010), 17–118.
  92. Karl Mannheim, “Conservative Thought,” in his Essays on Sociology and Social Psychology, trs. Karl Mannheim and Paul Kecskemeti, ed. Paul Kecskemeti (New York: Oxford University Press, 1953), 74–164. See, in general, Jonathan B. Knudsen, Justus Möser and the German Enlightenment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). Knudsen presents Möser as a moderate reformer with a “complicated, ambivalent attachment to the Enlightenment.” (p. 149) In various writings Reiss presents him as a traditionalist. See Hans Reiss, “Justus Möser und Wilhelm von Humboldt: Konservative und liberale politische Ideen im Deutschland des 18. Jahrhunderts,” Politische Vierteljahresschrift, Vol. 8 No. 1 (March 1967), 23–39.
  93. He defends Montesquieu in this matter against one of his critics, Simon-Nicholas Henri Linguet, a French lawyer and journalist. The latter’s Théorie des loix civiles (1767) attacks Montesquieu for equating simplification of laws and despotism. For a recent assessment of Linguet, see Amalia D. Kessler, “Searching for a ‘New System’ of Government: Linguet and the Rise of the Centralized, Administrative State,” Historical Reflections / Réflexions Historiques, Vol. 28 No. 1 (Spring 2002), 93–117.
  94. Justus Möser, Patriotische Phantasien, 2nd ed., Vol. II, ed. by I.W.J. von Voigts, Möser’s daughter (Berlin: Verlag der Nicolaischen Buchhandlung, 1842), 21–24.
  95. Möser, “Über die deutsche Sprache und Literatur. Schreiben an einen Freund,” Patriotische Phantasien—Ausgewählte Schriften aus den Patriotischen Phantasien [http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/buch/patriotische-phantasien-4232/1].
  96. Möser, cited in Klaus Epstein, The Genesis of German Conservatism (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1966), 314.
  97. Hans Baron, “Justus Mösers Individualitätsprinzip in seiner geistesgeschichtlichen Bedeutung,” Historische Zeitschrift, Vol. 130 No. 1 (1924), 38.
  98. Constant, “The Spirit of Conquest and Usurpation,” Political Writings, tr. and ed. Biancamaria Fontana, 154–55. Constant carefully qualifies this argument. He does not want to justify injustices in the name of local mores.
  99. Constant, Les ‘Principes de politique’ de Benjamin Constant, Vol. 2, 389.
  100. See the chapter on Möser in Jerry Z. Muller, The Mind and the Market: Capitalism in Modern European Thought (New York: Anchor Books, 2003), 84–103.
  101. See the discussion in Jaume, L’individu efface, 86–91.
  102. See Hofmann, “The Theory of the Perfectibility of the Human Race,” 248–71.
  103. See de Dijn, French Political Thought from Montesquieu to Tocqueville, 80–88.
  104. Constant, “The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with That of the Moderns,” Political Writings, tr. and ed. Biancamaria Fontana, 314–27.
chapter five—diversity and its vicissitudes: the modern period
  1. Henry Ashby Turner Jr., Hitler’s Thirty Days to Power: January 1933 (New York: Basic Books, 1996), 161.
  2. Benjamin Carter Hett, The Death of Democracy: Hitler’s Rise to Power and the Downfall of the Weimar Republic (New York: Henry Holt, 2018), 3.
  3. Richard Bessel, “The Formation and Dissolution of a German National Electorate: From Kaiserreich to Third Reich,” in Elections, Mass Politics, and Social Change in Modern Germany: New Perspectives, eds. Larry Eugene Jones and James Retallack (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 403. See, in the same volume, Jürgen W. Falter, “The Social Bases of Political Cleavages in the Weimar Republic, 1919–1933), 371–97.
  4. Jerome G. Kerwin, “The German Reichstag Elections of July 31, 1932,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 26 No. 5 (October 1932), 922. The preceding issue of this journal noted that Kerwin was visiting Germany.
  5. The Cambridge University historian Richard J. Evans argues against what he considers the new “conventional” view that Hitler came to power legally. For him, Hitler’s rule begins with a “seizure of power.” Yet he is not convincing. (See “Coercion and Consent” in Richard J. Evans, The Third Reich in History and Memory (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015), 87–117.)) Yes, after January 30, 1933, when Hitler was appointed chancellor, the Nazis used force to consolidate their rule, but what about before that date? To state, as Evans does, that a “power vacuum” existed in Germany; and that conservatives in the cabinet sought to “outmaneuver” Hitler when he became chancellor (which they failed to do) hardly suggests violence. The question is this: what allowed Hitler to demand, and get, the chancellorship in early 1933? Surely the answer points to Nazi popular support, even if it were ebbing.
  6. J.P. Mayer, Alexis de Tocqueville(New York: Viking, 1940), 203.
  7. Louis Napoleon, translated in Fenton Bresler, Napoleon III: A Life (London: HarperCollins, 1999), 229.
  8. See Philippe Blachèr, “L’Étendue du suffrage universel: Sous la IIe République,” Revue Française d’Histoire des Idées Politiques, No. 38 (2nd semester, 2013), 257–68.
  9. Frederick B. Artz, “Bonapartism and Dictatorship,” South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 1 (January 1940), 40. Artz concludes by comparing Bonapartism and contemporary fascism.
  10. Mayer, Alexis de Tocqueville, 201.
  11. Constantin Frantz, in The Impact of the 18th Brumaire, tr. and ed. J.P. Mayer (New York: Arno Press, 1979), 5–6. This includes several texts, including those by Marx and Frantz. In 1932 and 1933 Mayer published separately Marx’s book and Frantz’s in editions I have not seen. But his remarks here on Marx and Frantz, sandwiched between their two texts, which are photo offsets of earlier editions, are dated 1933. The Frantz text in this Mayer 1979 collection is from a 1933 edition retitled as Masse oder Volk: Louis Napoleon, ed. Franz Kemper. J. Salwyn Schapiro, in Liberalism and the Challenge of Fascism: Social Forces in England and France (1815–1870) (New York: Octagon Books, 1964; first edition, 1949) identifies Kemper as a Nazi. (p. 328) Iain McDaniel identifies Kemper as a pseudonym for Mayer. For this and an appraisal of Frantz, see Iain McDaniel, “Constantin Frantz and the Intellectual History of Bonapartism and Caesarism: A Reassessment,” Intellectual History Review, Vol. 28 No. 2 (2018), 317–38 [http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17496977.2017.1361218]. Marxists turned to Marx’s 18th Brumaire and the Louis Napoleon coup as prefiguring 20th-century fascism as early as 1922, with a contribution by the Austrian socialist Julius Braunthal, who analyzed Mussolini’s ‘March on Rome.’ (Braunthal, “Der Putsch der Faschisten,” Der Kampf, Vol. 15 (1922), 320–33). For a survey of these 20th-century Marxist discussions, see Wolfgang Wippermann, Die Bonapartismustheorie von Marx und Engels (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1983), 201–215. Schapiro, in his Liberalism and the Challenge of Fascism: Social Forces in England and France, compares Louis Napoleon and fascist leaders—and notes important differences. (pp. 308–331)
  12. J.P. Mayer, Political Thought in France from Sieyès to Sorel (London: Faber and Faber, 1943), 60.
  13. He did utilize Constant in his later work, The Ancien Régime and the Revolution. See Robert T. Gannett Jr., Tocqueville Unveiled: The Historian and His Sources for The Old Regime and the Revolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003), 32–35.
  14. George Armstrong Kelly, in The Humane Comedy: Constant, Tocqueville, and French Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 3–6, carefully sifts through the evidence.
  15. Constant was a sharp critic of the socialist St. Simonians—for reasons that could be anticipated: they were all about rules, regulations, and uniformity. He said the St. Simonians wanted to create an “industrial papacy.” See “L’Industrie et la morale considérés dans leur rapport avec la liberté,” in Benjamin Constant, Publiciste, 1825–1830, ed. Ephraïm Harpaz (Paris: Champion, 1987), 100–101.
  16. See Alan S. Kahan, Aristocratic Liberalism: The Social and Political Thought of Jacob Burckhardt, John Stuart Mill, and Alexis de Tocqueville (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992); and Annelien de Dijn, French Political Thought from Montesquieu to Tocqueville: Liberty in a Levelled Society? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008).
  17. For instance, diversity does not figure at all in Lucien Jaume’s Tocqueville: The Aristocratic Sources of Liberty, tr. Arthur Goldhammer (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013). Nor does it figure in The Cambridge Companion to Tocqueville, ed. Cheryl B. Welch (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006). Arthur Kaledin mentions it several times in passing in his Tocqueville and His America: A Darker Horizon (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2011).
  18. Silvestre de Sacy, Review of Democracy in America, reprinted in Jaume’s Tocqueville, tr. Arthur Goldhammer, 328.
  19. Alexis de Toccqueville, “Two Weeks in the Wilderness,” in Democracy in America and Two Essays on America, tr. Gerald E. Bevan, ed. Isaac Kramnick (London: Penguin Books, 2003), 879–80.
  20. Here I’m using part of the translation of the text included in George Wilson Pierson, Tocqueville and Beaumont in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1938), 236–37. The original reads, “Le niveau d’une civilisation égale a passé sur elle.” Tocqueville, Quinze jours au désert, ed. Jean Edmond Mansion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1904), 7.
  21. Beaumont, cited in Leo Damrosch, Tocqueville’s Discovery of America (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2010), 67.
  22. Seymour Drescher, Dilemmas of Democracy: Tocqueville and Modernization (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1968), 53.
  23. Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working Class in England, tr. F. Kelley Wischnewetzky (New York: J.W. Lovell Co., 1887).
  24. Alexis de Tocqueville, Journeys to England and Ireland, trs. George Lawrence and K.P. Mayer, ed. J.P. Mayer (London: Faber and Faber, 1958), 106–108. For a refreshing correction to the standard interpretation that Tocqueville ignored industrialization, see Benjamin Storey, “Tocqueville on Technology,” The New Atlantis, No. 40 (Fall 2013), 48–71.
  25. Seymour Drescher, in “Tocqueville’s Two Démocraties,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 25 No. 2 (April–June 1964), 201–216, argues that the two volumes fundamentally diverge in part because of the visit to England.
  26. Tocqueville defended the individual but not individualism, which he saw as its antithesis. True individuality emerged in the informal networks of society, but individualism bespoke the mass democratic society characterized by isolation; here everyone pretends to be different, but everyone is the same. The historian Yehoshua Arieli noted the “paradox” that Tocqueville upheld the individual but not individualism. “Tocqueville distinguished between individuality and individualism.” (Arieli, Individualism and Nationalism in American Ideology (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1966), 192) Tocqueville’s The Ancien Régime and the Revolution, ed. and tr. Gerald Bevan (New York: Penguin Books, 2008) makes the case clearly. In the forward Tocqueville complains about “narrow individualism” in which shared interests and understanding recede before atomized citizens. (p. 13) Later in the book he comments that “our ancestors had no word for individualism, a word we have coined for our own use because, in their time, there was no individual who did not belong to a group or who could consider himself to be entirely alone.” But today individualism suggests the end of the individual. “All these men standing apart from each other had become so alike one to another than you would not have seen any recognizable difference if you had made them change places.” (p. 102) Tocqueville was hardly unique in drawing this distinction. “A variety of French thinkers” in the mid–19th century, writes Steven Lukes, “stressed the opposition between ‘individualisme,’ implying anarchy and social atomization, and ‘individualité,’ implying personal independence and self-realization.” Lukes, “The Meaning of ‘Individualism,’” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 32 No. 1 (January–March 1971), 49. For a more recent discussion, see Dana Villa, “Hegel, Tocqueville, and ‘Individualism,’” Review of Politics, Vol. 67 No. 4 (Autumn 2005), 659–86.
  27. Tocqueville, Democracy in America, tr. Arthur Goldhammer (New York: Library of America, 2004), 829.
  28. Here I’m following Seymour Drescher, “‘Why Great Revolutions Will Become Rare’: Tocqueville’s Most Neglected Prognosis,” Journal of Modern History, Vol. 64 No. 3 (September 1992), 429–54.
  29. The chapter “Why Great Revolutions Will Become Rare” reprises these points. This chapter is also one that Tocqueville revised most thoroughly, and he contemplated various titles for it. One of these dropped titles virtually repeats an earlier one, “Why the Americans Seem So Agitated Yet are So Unchanging.” Again see Drescher, “‘Why Great Revolutions Will Become Rare’: Tocqueville’s Most Neglected Prognosis”; and the discussion in Jean-Claude Lamberti, Tocqueville and the Two Democracies, tr. Arthur Goldhammer (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 198–99. On this and many others matters—such as the relationship of Constant and Tocqueville—Lamberti is a thoughtful and careful commentator.
  30. Tocqueville, Democracy in America, tr. Arthur Goldhammer, 722–24.
  31. Tocqueville, The Ancien Régime and the Revolution, tr. Gerald Bevan, 85–89.
  32. Notes cited by Lamberti, Tocqueville and the Two Democracies, tr. Arthur Gold-hammer, 200.
  33. Tocqueville, “Why Great Revolutions Will Become Rare,” Democracy in America, tr. Arthur Goldhammer, 747–60.
  34. Tocqueville, “What Kind of Despotism Democratic Nations Have to Fear,” Democracy in America, tr. Arthur Goldhammer, 816–21.
  35. Tocqueville, “Continuation of Preceding Chapters,” Democracy in America, tr. Arthur Goldhammer, 822, 829; and “General View of the Subject,” 834.
  36. Mill to Aristide Guilbert, May 8, 1835, cited in Iris Wessel Mueller, John Stuart Mill and French Thought (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1956), 134.
  37. Cited in and see Byung-Hoon Suh, “Mill and Tocqueville: A Friendship Bruised,” History of European Ideas, Vol. 42 No. 1 (2016), 55–72. The other careful look at their relationship is H.O. Pappe, “Mill and Tocqueville,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 25 No. 2 (April–June 1964), 217–34.
  38. Cited in André Jardin, Tocqueville: A Biography, trs. Lydia Davis and Robert Hemenway (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1988), 275.
  39. J.S. Mill, “Civilization,” Essays on Politics and Culture, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1963), 56, 60–61.
  40. John Stuart Mill, London Review, in Tocqueville, Democracy in America, tr. Henry Reeves, ed. Isaac Kramnick (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007), 681.
  41. Mill, “M. de Tocqueville on Democracy in America,” in The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill, ed. Marshall Cohen (New York: Modern Library, 1961), 136.
  42. Ibid., 169. The passage quoted is from Volume 2, Book 4, Chapter VII of Democracy in America, but Mills altered the translation.
  43. Ibid., 172–77.
  44. Michael Levin, who bucks the trend, makes this same point in his J.S. Mill on Civilization and Barbarism (London: Routledge, 2004), 125.
  45. John Collwyn Rees, John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 148.
  46. Alan Ryan, The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill (London: Macmillan, 1987), 234, 240.
  47. The Cambridge Companion to Mill, ed. John Skorupski (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). In the Companion’s 600 pages Humboldt appears twice in passing. A more recent anthology has no mention of Humboldt. See J.S. Mill’s Political Thought: A Bicentennial Reassessment, eds. Nadia Urbinati and Alex Zakaras (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007). Conversely, scholars of Humboldt pay close attention to Mill and his relationship to Humboldt. See, for instance, John Roberts, Wilhelm von Humboldt and German Liberalism: A Reassessment (Oakville, Ontario: Mosaic Press, 2015), 91–115.
  48. R.H. Hutton in The National Review (1859), p. 81, as reprinted along with other reviews in Liberty: Contemporary Responses to John Stuart Mill, ed. Andrew Pyle (Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1994).
  49. J.S. Mill, Autobiography, in Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Vol. 1, eds. John M Robson and Jack Stillinger (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 2006), 259.
  50. Richard Reeves, “John Stuart Mill,” Salmagundi, No. 153–54 (Winter–Spring 2007), 48; and see his John Stuart Mill: Victorian Firebrand (London: Atlantic Books, 2007).
  51. David Stack, “The Death of John Stuart Mill,” The Historical Journal, Vol. 54 No. 1 (March 2011), 169.
  52. John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1985), 120–21.
  53. For a discussion of Mill’s use of China, see Robert Kurfirst, “John Stuart Mill’s Asian Parable,” Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique, Vol. 34 No. 3 (September 2001), 601–619.
  54. Mill, On Liberty, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb, Chap. III, 119–40.
  55. Anon., Saturday Review (February 19, 1859), in Liberty: Contemporary Responses to John Stuart Mill, ed. Andrew Pyle, 20.
  56. Cited from his journal in G. Otto Trevelyan, The Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay, Vol. 2 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1875), 385–86. See Robert E. Sullivan, Macaulay: The Tragedy of Power (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009), 461–62.
  57. Anon., British Quarterly Review (1860), reprinted in Mill, On Liberty, ed. Edward Alexander (Peterborough, Canada: Broadview Press, 1999), 218.
  58. James Fitzjames Stephen, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity [first edition: 1873] (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 83–84.
  59. L.S. [Leslie Stephen], “Social Macadamisation,” Fraser’s Magazine, Vol. 86 (1872), 150–68.
  60. For a discussion of character in mid-Victorian thought, see Stefan Collini, Public Moralists: Political Thought and Intellectual Life in Britain, 1850–1930 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), 91–118.
  61. J.S. Mill, Autobiography, in Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Vol. 1, eds. John M. Robson and Jack Stillinger, 259–60.
  62. I’m combining texts from two translations: Constantine Leontyev, “The Average European as an Ideal and Instrument of Universal Destruction,” in Russian Philosophy, Vol. 2, trs. George Kline and William Shafer, eds. James M. Edie et al. (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1965), 272–73; and a different version in Against the Current: Selections from the Novels, Essays, Notes, and Letters of Konstantin Leontiev, tr. George Reavey, ed. George Ivask (New York: Weybright and Talley, 1969), 173.
  63. Leontyev, “The Average European,” trs. George Kline and William Shafer, eds. Edie et al., in Russian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 270.
  64. Nicolas Berdyaev, Leontiev, tr. George Reavey (Orono, ME: Academic International, 1968), 86.
  65. Leontiev, cited in Stephen Lukashevich, Konstantin Leontev (1831–1891): A Study in ‘Heroic Vitalism’ (New York: Pageant Press, 1967), 124.
  66. Leontiev, cited in Ibid., 110. For a good overview of Leontiev, see Sidney Monas, “Leontiev: A Meditation,” Journal of Modern History, Vol. 43 No. 3 (September 1971), 483–94.
  67. Alexander Herzen, From the Other Shore and The Russian People and Socialism, trs. Moura Budberg and Richard Wollheim (New York: Meridian Books, 1963), 6.
  68. Ibid., 93–95.
  69. Herzen, “The Provisional Government and the Revolution,” in Herzen, Letters from France and Italy, 1847–1851, tr. and ed. Judith E. Zimmermann (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1995), 262–63.
  70. Herzen, cited in E.H. Carr, The Romantic Exiles (London: Serif Publishing, 2007), 119.
  71. All of this is recounted with admirable insight and subtlety in Carr’s Romantic Exiles, first published in 1933.
  72. Martin Malia, Alexander Herzen and the Birth of Russian Socialism (New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1965), 14.
  73. Jane Caryle, cited from the Carlyle Papers in Monica Partridge, Alexander Herzen: Collected Studies (Nottingham: Astra Press, 1993), 105. This is written to Jane’s brother, not her husband, to whom she wrote a tamer version.
  74. Herzen, My Past and Thoughts: The Memoirs of Alexander Herzen, Vol. 3, tr. Constance Garnett (London: Chatto & Windus, 1968), 1076–1077.
  75. Mill, On Liberty, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb, 136–37.
  76. Herzen, cited in Aileen M. Kelly, The Discovery of Chance: The Life and Thought of Alexander Herzen (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016), 429.
  77. Herzen, My Past and Thoughts, Vol. 3, tr. Constance Garnett, 1085.
  78. Ibid., 1082.
  79. Cited in Lukashevich, Konstantin Leontev, 49–51.
  80. Hans Baron, “Burckhardt’s ‘Civilization of the Renaissance’ a Century after Its Publication,” Renaissance News, Vol. 13 No. 3 (Autumn 1960), 207.
  81. Jonathan Jones, “Jacob Burckhardt: The Renaissance Revisited,” The Guardian, July 9, 2010.
  82. J.P. Mayer, “Jakob Burckhardt, or The Flight from Politics,” Dublin Review, Vol. 105 No. 418 (July–September 1941), 42.
  83. Albert Salomon, “Crisis, History and the Image of Man,” Review of Politics, Vol. 2 No. 4 (October 1940), 417.
  84. Jacob Burckhardt, The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, tr. S.G.C. Middle-more (London: Penguin Books, 2004), 99.
  85. Lionel Gossman, Basel in the Age of Burckhardt: A Study in Unseasonable Ideas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 243. This is an exemplary study.
  86. Jacob Burckhardts Briefe an seinen Freund Friedrich von Preen, 1864–1893 (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1922), 24 (July 20, 1870).
  87. Burckhardt, cited in Mayer, “Jakob Burckhardt,” 40.
  88. Burckhardt, cited in Gossman, “Jacob Burckhardt: Cold War Liberal?” Journal of Modern History, Vol. 74 No. 3 (September 2002), 548, 552.
  89. Burckhardt, cited in Gossman, Basel in the Age of Burckhardt, 246. For two recent studies that deal with these issues, see Richard Sigurdson, Jacob Burckhardt’s Social and Political Thought (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004), esp. 136–44; and John R. Hinde, Jacob Burckhardt and the Crisis of Modernity (Montreal: Mc-Gill-Queen’s University Press, 2000).
  90. Oliver Zimmer, A Contested Nation: History, Memory and Nationalism in Switzerland, 1761–1891 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 89.
  91. Jacob Burckhardt, On History and Historians, tr. Harry Zohn (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 266. The German phrase for “everything varied and different” was “alles Vielartige und Verschiedene.” J. Burckhardt, Historische Fragmente, ed. by Emil Dürr (Stuttgart: K.F. Koehler Verlag, 1957), 318. Kahan emphasizes the role of diversity in Burckhardt’s thought; see Kahan, Aristocratic Liberalism, 104–105.
  92. For a thorough appraisal, see Niall Bond, “‘Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft’: The Reception of a Conceptual Dichotomy,” Contributions to the History of Concepts, Vol. 5 No. 2 (2009), 162–86.
  93. For his politics and plans for a community of scholars, see Arthur Mitzman, Sociology and Estrangement: Three Sociologists of Imperial Germany (New York: Knopf, 1973), 84–94.
  94. Friedrich Paulsen, An Autobiography, tr. Theodor Lorenz (New York: Columbia University Press, 1938), 329–30.
  95. Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Vol. I (London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1776), 27.
  96. Ferdinand Tönnies, Community and Society (Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft), tr. and ed. Charles P. Loomis (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), 76–81. See David Inglis, “Tönnies and Globalization,” in The Anthem Companion to Ferdinand Tönnies, ed. Christopher Adair-Toteff (London: Anthem Press, 2016), 79–98.
  97. Tarde, cited in and see René Worms, “La Philosophie sociale de G. Tarde,” Revue Philosophique de la France et de l’Étranger, Vol. 60 (July–December 1905), 136.
  98. Tönnies to Friedrich Paulsen, as cited in Rudolph Binion, Frau Lou: Nietzsche’s Wayward Disciple (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1968), 116.
  99. Gabriel Tarde, The Laws of Imitation, tr. Elsie Clews Parsons (Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1962), 383–93. Tarde apparently had hopes for this transformation, since he later wrote a utopian novel that develops these ideas. The last two chapters of his utopian novel, Underground Man, are titled “Love” and “The Aesthetic Life.” Both love and aesthetics flourish in Tarde’s utopia, which exists underground after the sun has burnt out. His new society rests on “our devotion to beauty and our faith in the divine omnipotence of love . . . the starting point of our enthusiasms.” In the “glittering and superficial epochs” that preceded ours, the “age of paper and electro-plating” and of a “contagious monomania” of luxury and globetrotting, “love was held in check.” Now, he writes, love is liberated. Tarde, Underground Man, tr. Cloudesley Brereton (London: Duckworth & Co., 1905), 144–45, 172.
  100. Émile Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, tr. George Simpson (New York: Free Press, 1964), 142.
  101. Ibid., 136.
  102. Ibid., 136–39.
  103. Tyler Cowen, Creative Destruction: How Globalization is Changing the World’s Cultures (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002), 14–16, 128.
  104. Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, ed. Alan B. Krueger (New York: Bantam Dell, 2003), 987–88 (Book V, Chapter 1, Article 2d).
  105. Émile Durkheim, Suicide: A Study in Sociology, trs. John A. Spaulding and George Simpson (Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1951).
  106. Henry [Enrico] Morselli, Suicide: An Essay on Comparative Moral Statistics, tr. and abridged by the author (London: C. Kegan Paul, 1881). Thomas [Tomá š] G. Masaryk, Suicide as a Social Mass Phenomenon of Modern Civilization, trs. William B. Weist and Robert G. Batson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970).
  107. See Howard I. Kushner, “Suicide, Gender, and the Fear of Modernity in Nineteenth-Century Medical and Social Thought,” Journal of Social History, Vol. 26 No. 3 (Spring 1993), 461–90.
  108. See, in general, Charles E. Marske, “Durkheim’s ‘Cult of the Individual’ and the Moral Reconstitution of Society,” Sociological Theory, Vol. 5 No. 1 (Spring 1987), 1–14. The last part of The Division of Labor takes up “abnormal forms” that lead to social breakdown, but Durkheim’s whole point is that these forms are “exceptional,” that is, deviation from the normal solidarity.
  109. See W.S.F. Pickering, “The Enigma of Durkheim’s Jewishness,” in Debating Durkheim, eds. W.S.F. Pickering and H. Martins (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 1994), 37.
  110. Émile Durkheim, “Anti-Semitism and Social Crisis” [1899], tr. and ed. Chad Alan Goldberg, Sociological Theory, Vol. 26 No. 4 (December 2008), 299–323.
  111. Ibid., 322.
  112. Durkheim to Bouglé, cited in Pierre Birnbaum, “French Jewish Sociologists between Reason and Faith: The Impact of the Dreyfus Affair,” Jewish Social Studies, New Series, Vol. 2 No. 1 (Autumn 1995), 7. For a careful discussion of Durkheim, his Judaism, and his role in the Dreyfus Affair, see this piece as well as Pickering’s “The Enigma of Durkheim’s Jewishness,” 10–39.
  113. Steven Lukes, “Durkheim’s ‘Individualism and the Intellectuals,’” Political Studies, Vol. 17 No. 1 (March 1969), 25. This article includes the text of Durkheim’s essay.
  114. Durkheim to Paul Lapie and Durkheim to Bouglé, both cited in Birnbaum, “French Jewish Sociologists between Reason and Faith,” 17, 7.
  115. J.S. McClelland, The Crowd and the Mob: From Plato to Canetti (London: Unwin Hyman, 1989), 138.
  116. Gustave Le Bon, The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind, tr. uncredited (Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2002), xii–xiv.
  117. See Robert A. Nye, The Origins of Crowd Psychology: Gustave Le Bon and the Crisis of Mass Democracy in the Third Republic (London: SAGE Publications, 1975), 177–79.
  118. Hans Joas, Introduction to Emil Lederer, “On the Sociology of World War” [1915], tr. Austin Harrington, ed. Hans Joas, European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie / Europäisches Archiv für Soziologie, Vol. 47 No. 2 (2006), 241.
  119. Hans Speier, Foreword to Emil Lederer, State of the Masses: The Threat of a Classless Society (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1940), 15.
  120. Lederer, State of the Masses, 153–55, 72–73.
  121. Lederer, “On the Sociology of World War” [1915], tr. Austin Harrington, ed. Hans Joas, 266, 247, 249. For a recent appreciation of Lederer, see Daniel R. Huebner, “Toward a Sociology of the State and War: Emil Lederer’s Political Sociology,” European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie, Vol. 49 No. 1 (April 2008), 65–90; and the introduction by Claus-Dieter Krohn to the German translation of the State of the Masses, Der Massenstaat. Gefahren der klassenlosen Ge-sellschaft, tr. Angela Kornberger (Graz-Vienna: Nausner & Nausner, 1995), 9–44.
  122. Bourne, cited in Louis Filler, Randolph Bourne (New York: Citadel Press, 1966), 53.
  123. Christopher McKnight Nichols, “Rethinking Randolph Bourne’s Trans-National America: How World War I Created an Isolationist Antiwar Pluralism,” Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, Vol. 8 No. 2 (April 2009), 218.
  124. Philip Gleason remains a good guide to these debates. See his Speaking of Diversity: Language and Ethnicity in Twentieth-Century America (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992).
  125. Randolph Bourne, “Trans-National America,” War and the Intellectuals: Collected Essays, 1915–1919, ed. Carl Resek (New York: Harper & Row, 1964), 107–108.
  126. Randolph Bourne, “The Handicapped,” The Radical Will: Selected Writings, 1911–1918, ed. Olaf Hansen (New York: Urizen Books, 1977), 73–74.
  127. Kallen, quoted in Daniel Greene, “A Chosen People in a Pluralist Nation: Horace Kallen and the Jewish-American Experience,” Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, Vol. 16 No. 2 (Summer 2006), 165.
  128. Leonard Harris and Charles Molesworth, Alain L. Locke: Biography of a Philosopher (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008), 5.
  129. Alain Locke, “Pluralism and Ideological Peace,” The Works of Alain Locke, ed. Charles Molesworth , Forward by Henry Louis Gates Jr.(New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 567. It is a bit extraordinary that this volume, which Gates calls in his forward “the definitive collection of Alain Locke’s work,” offers virtually no information as to where and when these various pieces were written. Locke died in 1954, and his writings span decades. In this regard, an earlier collection is superior: The Philosophy of Alain Locke: Harlem Renaissance and Beyond, ed. Leonard Harris (Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1989).
  130. This phrase comes from an autobiographical note cited by Kallen in “Alain Locke and Cultural Pluralism,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 54 No. 5 (February 28, 1957), 121.
  131. William James, The Will to Believe and Other Essays, in Pragmatism and Other Essays, ed. Joseph L. Blau (New York: Washington Square Press, 1963), 187–88.
  132. James, “On a Certain Blindness in Human Beings,” Pragmatism and Other Essays, ed. Joseph L. Blau, 269.
  133. James, The Varieties of Religious Experience (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1902).
  134. James, “A Pluralistic Mystic,” in James, Writings 1902–1910 (New York: Library of America, 1987), 1310.
  135. Ibid., 1295. Kallen later edited a book by Blood and cited this same passage in his introduction. See Benjamin Paul Blood, Pluriverse: An Essay in the Philosophy of Pluralism, Introduction by Horace Meyer Kallen (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co., 1920), xix. On James’s politics and anti-imperialism, see Jonathan M. Hansen, The Lost Promise of Patriotism: Debating American Identity, 1890–1920 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003), 29–38.
  136. The Philosophy of William James: Drawn from His Own Works, ed. Horace M. Kallen (New York: Modern Library, 1925), 310–11.
  137. James, A Pluralistic Universe, in James, Writings 1902–1910, 776.
  138. “Cultural pluralism is an analogue of political pluralism, and the American idea of political pluralism was also inspired by James.” Louis Menand, The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001), 379. “The metaphysical pluralism that was James’s became the cultural pluralism of Kallen.” Milton R. Konvitz, “Horace Meyer Kallen (1882–1974): Philosopher of the Hebraic-American Idea,” American Jewish Year Book, Vol. 75 (1974–75), 63.
  139. Bourne, “Trans-National America,” War and the Intellectuals, ed. Carl Resek, 117.
  140. Kallen, “Alain Locke and Cultural Pluralism,” 119.
  141. Horace Kallen, “Democracy versus Melting-Pot,” Culture and Democracy in the United States (New York: Boni and Liveright, 1924), 115–24.
  142. Kallen, Culture and Democracy in the United States, 61.
  143. Ibid., 41–43.
  144. Henry Louis Gates Jr., Foreword to The Works of Alain Locke, ed. Charles Molesworth, viii.
  145. For a discussion of the tombstone and Locke’s relations to Baha’i, see David Weinfeld, “Isolated Believer: Alain Locke, Baha’i Secularist,” in New Perspectives on the Black Intellectual Tradition, eds. Keisha N. Blain, Christopher Cameron, and Ashley D. Farmer (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 2018), esp. 95–96.
  146. These quotations are from two manuscripts unpublished during Bourne’s lifetime, “The State” and “Disillusionment,” included in The Radical Will, ed. Olaf Hansen, 356, 360, 366, 405.
  147. Everett Helmut Akam, Transnational America: Cultural Pluralistic Thought in the Twentieth Century (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002), 102.
  148. For a recent appraisal of Kallen, see Werner Sollors, Challenges of Diversity: Essays on America (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2017), 121–43. See also David Weinfeld, “What Difference Does Difference Make? Horace Kallen, Alain Locke, and the Birth of Cultural Pluralism,” which responds to criticism of Kallen by Sollors and others [in Philosophic Values and World Citizenship : Locke to Obama and Beyond, eds. Jacoby Adeshei Carter and Leonard Harris (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2010), 165–88].
  149. John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860–1925 (New York: Atheneum, 1963), 329–30. This is the second edition; the first was published in 1955.
  150. Stephen J. Whitfield, “The Mystique of Multiculturalism,” Virginian Quarterly Review, Vol. 72 No. 3 (Summer 1996), 429.
  151. Kallen, Culture and Democracy in the United States, 122–23.
  152. Kallen, cited in and see the discussion in Greene, “A Chosen People in a Pluralist Nation,” 178. Also see Greene’s book, which notes that Kallen later departed from the biological interpretation of pluralism: Daniel Greene, The Jewish Origins of Cultural Pluralism: The Menorah Association and American Diversity (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2011), 183; and Noam Pianko’s piece which challenges the biological reading of Kallen: “‘The True Liberalism of Zionism’: Horace Kallen, Jewish Nationalism, and the Limits of American Pluralism,” American Jewish History, Vol. 94 No. 4 (December 2008), 299–329.
  153. “It was not his father or grandfather who informed Kallen’s Jewish identity, but his adopted (and non-Jewish) ancestors Barrett Wendell [a Harvard professor] and William James.” Greene, The Jewish Origins of Cultural Pluralism, 78. Nor did Kallen’s own children and grandchildren stick to the Jewish faith. The memorial for his son, David J. Kallen, a sociologist who died in 2009, was held in an Episcopalian Church. [https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/lsj/obituary.aspx-?page=lifestory&pid=126492704] One of David J. Kallen’s sons, Hugh Kallen, has served as a pastor in a Protestant church; videos of his sermons at Bluffton Church in Michigan can be found on YouTube.
epilogue
  1. Constant, Political Writings, tr. and ed. Biancamaria Fontana (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 76–77.
  2. Alejandro Páez Varela, cited in Jon Lee Anderson, “Boundary Issues,” New Yorker, October 9, 2017, 28. See also Andrew Jacobs and Matt Richtel, “A Nasty, Nafta-Related Surprise: Mexico’s Soaring Obesity,” New York Times, December 12, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/11/health/obesity-mexico-nafta.html.
  3. UCLA College of Letters and Science, “Report from the Diversity Initiative Implementation Committee,” September 19, 2014, http://www.uei.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/3-implementation-committee-report.pdf.
  4. Thomas Carlyle, “Signs of the Times,” Selected Writings, ed. Alan Shelston (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1971), 59–86.
  5. Irving Kristol, Two Cheers for Capitalism (New York: Basic Books, 1978). For a survey of American conservative anti-capitalist thought, see Peter Kolozi, Conservatives Against Capitalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 2017). Kolozi considers Kristol to be among such critics.
  6. Robert Lindner, Must You Conform? (New York: Grove Press, 1956).
  7. T. W. Adorno, “Cultural Criticism and Society,” Prisms, trs. Samuel and Shierry Weber (London: Neville Spearman, 1967), 19.
  8. Kraus, cited in Harry Zohn, Karl Kraus and the Critics (Columbia, SC: Camden House, 1997), 19. Translation slightly altered—the original German quote is from Die Fackel, No. 315–16 (January 26, 1911), 13 (Web); and Karl Kraus, “Nestroy and Posterity,” The Kraus Project, tr. and ed. Jonathan Franzen (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2013), 251.
  9. Alexander Mitscherlich, Massenpsychologie ohne Ressentiment (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1972), 44. Translation from Frankfurt Institute for Social Research, Aspects of Sociology, tr. John Viertel (Boston: Beacon Press, 1972), 72.
  10. Gilles Lipovetsky, The Empire of Fashion: Dressing Modern Democracy, tr. Catherine Porter (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), 123–24.
  11. Tocqueville’s career as a politico included some unsavory chapters in which he supported censorship and suppression of the Left. He partially redeemed himself in his arrest protesting the coup of Louis Napoleon. For a careful accounting, see Sharon B. Watkins, Alexis de Tocqueville and the Second Republic, 1848–1852: A Study in Political Practice and Principles (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2003).
  12. Cited in Alfred Werner, “Romain Rolland’s Letters to Elie Walach,” Jewish Quarterly, Vol. 3 No. 1 (1955), 7. Walach, a young Polish-French Jew, was captured and executed by the Nazis in 1942. The phrase “optimism of the will, pessimism of the intellect” is often attributed to Antonio Gramsci, but derives from Rolland—specifically, from Rolland’s review of Raymond-Louis Lefebvre’s The Sacrifice of Abraham, published in L’Humanité, March 19, 1920, 1. See David James Fisher, “Conclusion: Pessimism of the Intelligence, Optimism of the Will” in his study Romain Rolland and the Politics of Intellectual Engagement (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1988), 292–303.