The multiculturalists in our universities have been undermining the study of history for some time. Especially victimized has been the venerable course, the "History of Western Civilization," the status of which is beginning to suffer subordination to courses stressing non—Western cultures. Defenders of this tendency are busy hawking their rationales. One of them emphasizes the necessity of knowing the non—Western world in this era of globalization.

It seems to this writer that the opposite argument is weightier, that the more the West is involved with non—Western cultures, the more intensively Western culture, particularly its history, should be studied. The multiculturalists evade the fact that globalization is not simply a 20th-century phenomenon, but has been an evolving process since at least the end of the fifteenth century. During this long period, the West gradually unified the world, so that all cultures are now in considerable contact with one another. The vast extent of this development is exemplified and symbolized by the preponderance of the English language, now the lingua franca of the planet. Globalization is in truth a largely Western achievement. It follows that the causes underlying this phenomenon can be discerned only by means of a more intense study of the history of Western civilization.

Another multiculturalist contention is regard for the self-respect of the numerous students of non—Western extraction in this country. Should they not, it is argued, be spared a sense of alienation? The difficulty is that the more such students absorb themselves in their non—Western backgrounds, the more alienated they may become. There is the additional danger that such involvement may attenuate their economic competence in the United States.

Partial solutions to this problem were actually in effect years ago, when ethnics lived in a largely Anglo society. The response of my father in the 1930s was not untypical. He enrolled me in a late afternoon school which offered instruction in Jewish history and culture, and paid for it out of his own pocket. Thus the attainment of cultural and ethnic self—respect in those days was a personal matter, not a transcendent educational issue requiring the attention of society as a whole.

The belittling of the "History of Western Civilization" is often due to antagonism against Western civilization per se. The United States bears the brunt of such deprecation. Detractors in our midst and in other countries demonize the United States for its materialism and lack of reverence for nature and the environment. Yet the success of Americans in accumulating worldly goods is no necessary sign of materialism; nor is the lack of material success by some other nations a mark of non—materialism or "spirituality." As to turning away from the sanctity of nature, other nations are adept at it. Americans, unlike peoples elsewhere, appear to refrain from the killing of tigers and other animals for their aphrodisiac qualities.

The foregoing does not imply that the West is above criticism. One reason for the study of Western civilization should be the cognizance of its vices as well as its virtues. A leading vice has been the subjugation of other cultures on the hypocritical, ideological plea of preserving or extending Western civilization. Catholic Spain was a past master at this practice. Catholicism and the dreaded Inquisition, which the Spaniards equated with Western civilization, were banners of conquest. The social and economic problems in present-day Latin America are at least partially derived from the semislavery and Catholicism that Spain imposed on the indigenous peoples of that continent.

Hitler’s invasion of Russia in 1941 was another manifestation of aggression justified by sanctimonious regard for Western civilization. Russian communism was of secondary importance to the Hitlerites. What really permeated their psyches and steadied them for the invasion was the alleged racial inferiority of the Russian Slavs. Hitler’s well—known ultimate aim was to transform a subjugated Russia into an idyllic homeland for millions of German immigrants. But Russia’s ensuing counterattack, after the failure of the invasion, gave her control of Eastern and Central Europe. The Cold War that followed was therefore the consequence of Hitler’s eastward expansion in the name of his racially inspired regard for Western civilization. In a sense, Hitler’s war did not end until the end of the Cold War, just a short time ago in 1989—1990.

Let us now move to a more positive aspect of Western civilization, its long tradition of critical thinking despite widespread obscurantism. The Middle Ages, so inaccurately termed "the Age of Faith," gave us many thinkers with a modern cast of mind. It was really a period of contradictory impulses. On the one hand reigned a mysticism close to madness, while on the other was a budding empiricism ancestral to the empiricism of the last few centuries. The extreme mysticism is exemplified in the following passage:

"Whenever you are prompted by grace and mean to follow up your blind seeking, make sure that you put away your physical senses (hearing, sight, smell, taste, and touch), your spiritual senses (by means of which you understand things) and all that is known through these channels . . . Put away things that are present or past . . . everything that has as yet not occurred . . . so as to be united with Him who is above all being and knowledge." 1

This species of mysticism was rife in the 14th century, the very same century which produced enlightened thinkers like the proto—empiricist, William of Ockham, and Marsiglio of Padua, the famous opponent of papal pretensions.

Some freethinkers consign all elements of religion to the garbage heap of superstition. As distasteful as the general tenor of many religions may be, the progressive potentialities of some of them should be ungrudgingly recognized. Elements in both Calvinism and Episcopalianism2 come to mind. John Calvin’s idea of the Trinity, for example, has an unexalted, modern, even scientific ring. He said:

"To the father is attributed the beginning of action, the fountain and source of all things, to the son, the wisdom, counsel and arrangement in action, while the energy and efficiency of action is assigned to the spirit." 3

A fervent Muslim would take a dim view of this statement. He would regard it as an impious breakdown of the spiritual unity of God. And so it is. Yet the breakdown or analysis of spirituality is a step toward secular, scientific preoccupations. The full sweep of progress from which the Muslims have been separated may be partially the result of their uncompromising spiritual monotheism.

One commentator remarked:

"Calvinistic theology found it easier to accommodate itself to the mechanistic universe described in 18th-century science than did the salvation theology of Luther or the human pomp of baroque Catholicism." 4

Many of the founding fathers were reared in a Calvinistic atmosphere. This heritage cleared their paths into adopting deism, skepticism, and the critical mentality in general. John Adams, for example, came from a Calvinistic and clerical family that went back to the English settlement of Massachusetts.

It is hoped that the arguments and illustrations presented in this article will impress the reader with the urgency of understanding the history of the civilization in which she or he lives, one which is still spreading. Neither its vices nor its virtues should be ignored. It is also of special importance for freethinkers to know that their ideas have not arisen out of nothing, but have been part and parcel of Western culture for a very long time. How otherwise can they combat the simplistic Pat Robertsons, who equate the religious beliefs of the first presidents with their own?

The last three decades have been years of most precipitous decline in historical teaching, study and curiosity. How long can this go on without intellectual damage? Even our vaunted economic and technological preeminence may be affected if our minds never look back.

Some efforts have been made to restore the status of the "History of Western Civilization." In 1991, a Mr. Lee M. Bass, a Texas billionaire, gave $20 million to Yale University for the creation of an impressive Western civilization curriculum. But the resistance of the multiculturalist professors was so intense that the project was never realized. In 1995, Mr. Bass gave up, and his money was returned. 5 One stumbling block was his desire for veto power over the choice of professors. In normal life, outside of a university, he who pays the piper calls the tune. University people, however, resist accommodation to this adage. They are heirs of the faculties of the Middle Ages, which insisted on absolute autonomy and freedom from external control.

Givers to educational institutions are rightly imposing greater restrictions than ever on the use to be made of their money. While this is salutary, perhaps more vigorous measures are necessary. Since the great universities are no longer vanguards of intellectual progress and are too heavily politicized, why contribute to them at all? The rich would do better to start from scratch by founding small colleges or academies which would revive the humanistic tradition. One humanistic study, the History of Western Civilization, would thereby receive its fair share of attention.

Footnotes:

1. The Cloud of Unknowing And Other Works; p. 209. Penguin Books, London, 1978.

2. The Episcopalians were influenced by Calvinist theology.

3. John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion; p. 126, Vol. One. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1981.

4. G. R. Elton, Reformation Europe 1517—1559; p. 216. Harper Torchbooks, New York 1963.

5. See the New York Times, March 15, 1995. Page one, Section one.

---