Essays Reflecting the Art of Political and Social Analysis

Lawrence Davidson

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9783319980041
• eBook ISBN: 9783319980058
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: American Government
• Index: Politics & International Relations

In 2011, Lawrence Davidson founded his website, tothepointanalyses.com, as a home for his brief essays on contemporary issues touching on US domestic and foreign policy. Over the last few years, Davidson's analytic reflections on contemporary politics have garnered over six million views. Now, for the first time, these essays are collected together to form a coherent, punchy look at American Politics in 2018. Contextualized by a new prologue and new conclusion, as well as updated with new material throughout, these essays provide a cogent demonstration of the power of analytical thinking to create clear and understandable descriptions of issues that impact us all, but are most often obfuscated by propaganda, lying by omission, or other forms of distortion. For those who encounter this work, it is hoped that they will come away with a clearer, if not happier, idea of what sort of world we are all living in.

© The Author(s) 2019

Lawrence DavidsonEssays Reflecting the Art of Political and Social AnalysisCritical Political Theory and Radical Practicehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98005-8_1

Begin Abstract

1. Prologue: On the Art of Analysis

Lawrence Davidson¹ 

(1)

West Chester University, West Chester, PA, USA

 

End Abstract

The work presented in this volume is a selection of short essays dedicated to the analyses of various timely issues: international law, human rights, the proper role of the intellectual , US domestic concerns, foreign policy, and problems presented to us by Israel and its guiding ideology of Zionism. Most of these essays first appeared on the author’s blog: www.​tothepointanalys​es.​com.

Let’s begin with a general discussion of the art of analysis.

On the Art of Analysis (June 2018)

Part I—Analysis

If we go to the dictionary and look up the word “analysis,” we will get something like this: “detailed examination of the elements or structure of something.” Actually, at its most rudimentary, people perform this sort of analysis all the time. At this basic level, it has immediate survival value, as when we attempt to cross a busy street. Also, at this level we may do the analysis without realizing we are doing so—it is often automatic.

The important point here is the proximity of need. The closer the situation is to our local, immediate situation, the more we might analyze. Another consideration is temperament. Some people are more insightful than others. However, it is probably legitimate to assume that the further the situation gets from the local and the immediate, and whatever our temperament, the less we bother to analyze matters. In these latter cases, we either ignore the situation altogether or substitute a filler or proxy analysis given to us by the media, government, or other “opinion makers.”

This implies that there are not many people who we can call serious analyzers of non-local issues. We certainly do not want to mistake the media’s “talking heads” for such people. Most of them are like the ancient Sophists, who trained people to be convincing regardless of the facts. Modern “talking heads” are in the business of propagandizing their opinions and not supplying objectively accurate analyses.

Well, how about philosophers and scientists and academicians generally? While academic training can give you the techniques of critical thinking, it does so while simultaneously demanding specialization, which is, of course, a restriction of in-depth knowledge to specific areas—a form of topical localization. Academia might be one of the most specialized professional environments in the modern world.

Another place where you will find professional analyzers who, like academicians, are confined to a specialized subject is the intelligence agencies of a government. Particularly at the middle levels of, say, the State Department, you will find real experts in their assigned areas (usually country or sub-country areas). Unfortunately, they are not readily listened to by the politicians who make policy decisions.

Part II—Critical Thinking

How about the issue of critical thinking? In the West, there is always talk of teaching critical thinking. However, the effort hasn’t been widely instituted and hasn’t been very successful where tried. Why not? One possible reason is that most teachers do not themselves approach thinking in this way so, without their own special training, they are not equipped to teach this method. Another part of the answer leads us back to the fact of localness. The truth is that even if you manage to teach children, students, and academic specialists how to think critically, it is difficult for them to do so if they have no knowledge of the subject at hand—or only the knowledge the government or media has supplied. In other words, to effectively think in a critical fashion you need knowledge of the subject and, beyond the local or some specialized realm, knowledge is just what the average person lacks.

It is not easy to get around this, though perhaps it can be ameliorated. It helps to cultivate a certain skeptical attitude that prevents one from taking too much at face value. For instance, when it comes to the political statements we are bombarded with daily—or their commercial equivalents, advertisements, it is good to keep in mind the old Latin question, “cui bono?” or “who benefits?” from the view being espoused? Then, if one takes the time to learn about the issue, to gain some knowledge of it, it will be easier to spot biases and ulterior motives. Playing the “devil’s advocate” is another good tactic—one can also think of this as a form of Socratic learning.

The problem with all of this is not just that so few are skeptical of what they are told, but also that it never occurs to them that it is necessary to be so. After all, they have been raised and remain culturally embedded in what one might call a closed informational environment. Under such circumstances, it is almost natural to just find a crowd that basically agrees with you and run with it—even if it is right over a cliff.

Part III—The Accidental Analyst

On the other hand, one would think that the experiences of late adolescence, at least for those in the West, would produce large numbers of skeptics and questioners, if not systematic analyzers. After all, this is the time of life when older children seek independence from their parents. But a lasting skepticism is not a common result. This may be because most people at this stage simply transfer their guide for thought from parents to teen peer groups. From teen peer groups, one usually moves on to professional peers and other groups such as one’s religious community. Therefore, most of us never develop a general and long-lasting critical independence of mind.

It may be that many of those relatively few who do attain such a frame of mind come to it in an unplanned way. By this, I mean that something unexpected happens to broaden out and make independent the skepticism of adolescence.

I imagine war is this sort of catalyst for many young people of potentially critical mind. There is nothing like conscription to separate out the independent minded from those enamored of the Pied Piper. Noting the return of body bags can also do it. The feminist movement might serve as a catalyst for critical-minded young women, giving them a healthy skepticism about the inherent rightness of their cultural status quo. How much social room there subsequently is for such evolving male and female questioners to act on their skepticism is another issue.

There must be a good number of other catalysts that wait out there to randomly trigger long-lasting questioning. Nonetheless, such catalytic events are the exception and not the rule. Thus, the critically thinking are a distinct minority.

Part IV—Making It an Art

It seems to me that, however you might come to it, once one begins seeing the world in a critical fashion it can quickly become a habit—and then something of a passion. At this point, one should start to think of analysis as an art form.

As with any art or skill, you need practice to stay accomplished or get better. One way to do this is to read widely and think critically about what you learn. One might begin by choosing a news item or op-ed that appears in one’s daily paper—something that does not sound quite right. Learn something about the issue and then deconstruct the piece. Particularly, good targets are the commentary and “expert” statements that one finds on television. One might even practice on the ubiquitous commercials that bombard us. If one practices enough, a basic form of critical thinking becomes second-nature. You then can construct strong and insightful critiques of almost anything you bother to learn something about. Those critiques can be like pieces of art, with a logical beauty all their own.

Part V—Pitfalls

There are several pitfalls to becoming adept at seeing the world in this fashion. The first is to learn to be selective. If you start to go around seeing the illogic and weakness of all the positions taken and propositions made around you, you will quickly drive yourself insane. In fact, there is very little about culture, any culture, that is fact-based and logically demonstrable. Most of it is a product of ongoing tradition and non-rational emotional comfort. So, if it is something that does not violate your values, just let it go. Developing a good, and maybe a bit dark, sense of humor helps with this.

Second, learn to display your analytical abilities with discretion. To not do so is to almost certainly alienate many of those around you.

Finally, let’s try to avoid cynicism. This is a serious danger. For once you have learned the “art of analysis,” it is hard to stay silent without turning into a cynic. And then, cynics often end up as misanthropes. This obviously does not do you any good.

Part VI—Conclusion

With all these pitfalls, what does one do if one finds oneself evolving into this frame of mind? How does one avoid immediately ruining one’s closest relationships and slipping into manic depression? It is at this point that you have to take things in hand. Here are some suggestions:

1. 1.
   Make like-minded friends. That is, find others who are heading in the same intellectual direction you are but are not over-the-top cynical or angry about it. If you are in college or university, this is relatively easy to do. If you are out in the work-a-day world, it is harder. For the latter, try a continuing education class in some subject that invites discussion and exchange of views. Even a relevant book club might do. However you manger it, having a community is important.
    
2. 2.
   If you can write fairly well, and enjoy doing so, consider starting a blog. This is what I did and as a strategy, it worked out quite well. And, of course, you do not have to express your analytical ability in the usual essay form. There are other options ranging from poetry, music lyrics, plays, and short stories—all of which work well in one or other Internet form.
    

So the message is, if the muse of the critical intellect has touched you, you must not stay silent. Find your format—the expressive form that fits your temperament. Then, pick your subjects, learn about them, and, one way or another, tell the world. It can be done!

© The Author(s) 2019

Lawrence DavidsonEssays Reflecting the Art of Political and Social AnalysisCritical Political Theory and Radical Practicehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98005-8_2

Begin Abstract

2. Some Contemporary Problems

Lawrence Davidson¹

(1)

West Chester University, West Chester, PA, USA

End Abstract

Contextualizing Chapter Two

Beyond scientific and technological achievements, there is little that is truly new. Most other aspects of society (including social norms) may change costumes as the ages pass and oscillate between the benign and the malignant, but they are not fundamentally new. This certainly is the case when it comes to economic, political, and gender issues. These behaviors reflect ways of seeing things that are centuries old.

In the following chapter, some of the aspects of what are now taken to be the traits of “modernity” are taken up, for instance: capitalism , nationalism , the vagaries of poverty and charity , the status of women and the controversy over sexual harassment . The chapter will end with a consideration of “free choice ” against the ubiquitous background of media propaganda.

And what is the role of intellectuals in these areas? Are they not supposed to be deeply perceptive and forward in their thinking? As it turns out, intellectuals mostly stand in support of their culture and the political status quo. Most serve power rather than question it, particularly at moments of crisis. Those who publicly try to urge alternative points of view can end up despised or worse.

Analysis One: The Role of the Intellectual (May 22, 2014)

Part I—Watershed Moments

World Wars I and II created watershed moments in the lives of Western intellectuals —those who understand various aspects of the world mainly through ideas and theories which they express through writing, teaching, and other forms of public address. Just how were the intellectuals to respond to the call of patriotic duty that moved the vast majority of citizens to support policies that led to repeated mass slaughter? What constituted a proper response is often debated. How most of them did respond is a matter of historical record.

During the world wars, most intellectuals on all sides of the conflicts uncritically lent their talents to their government’s war efforts. Some did so as propagandists and others as scientists. Some actually led their nations into the fray, as was the case with Woodrow Wilson . Wilson held a doctorate from Johns Hopkins University, had taught at Cornell, Bryn Mawr, and Wesleyan, and became president of Princeton University. Eventually, he was elected President of the USA and, having taken the nation to war, sanctioned the creation of a massive propaganda machine under the auspices of a “Committee on Public Information.” He also supported the passage of the Sedition Act of 1918 to suppress all anti-war sentiments. Wilson never experienced combat, but another intellectual, the British poet Siegfried Sassoon , did so in the trenches of the Western front. In the midst of this experience, he wrote, “war is hell and those who initiate it are criminals.”¹ No doubt that was his opinion of the intellectual President Woodrow Wilson .

In 1928, the French philosopher and literary critic Julien Benda published an important book, The Betrayal of the Intellectuals. In this work, Benda asserted that it is the job of the intellectual to remain independent of his or her community’s ideologies and biases, be they political, religious or ethnic. Only by so doing could he or she defend the universal practices of tolerance and critical thinking that underpin civilization. Not only were they to maintain their independence, but they were also obligated to analyze their community’s actions and, where necessary, call them into question.

However, as the memory of the intellectuals’ complicity in World War I faded, so did the memory of Benda’s standard of behavior. By World War II , Brenda’s words held little power against the renewed demands of national governments for citizens to rally around the flag. Thus, in that war, with even greater atrocities being committed, most intellectuals either supported the slaughter or remained silent. Some became fascists, others communists, and all too many once more lent their talents to propaganda machines and war i...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Front Matter
• 1. Prologue: On the Art of Analysis
• 2. Some Contemporary Problems
• 3. The Importance of International Law
• 4. The USA
• 5. On Trump, Guns and Torture
• 6. Israel, Zionism, and the Jews
• 7. Villains and Heroes
• 8. Conclusion
• Back Matter