[1]
The title of this paper is borrowed from the pioneering last chapter
of James Weinstein's excellent work, The Corporate Ideal in
the Liberal State, 1900–1918 (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968).
The last chapter is entitled, "War as Fulfillment."
[2]
Robert Higgs, Crisis And Leviathan (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1987), pp. 123–158. For my own account of the collectivized
war economy of World War I, see Murray N. Rothbard, "War Collectivism
in World War I," in R. Radosh and M. Rothbard. eds., A New History
of Leviathan: Essays on the Rise of the American Corporate State
(New York: Dutton. 1972), pp. 66–110.
[3]
F.A. Hayek, "The Intellectuals and Socialism," in Studies in
Philosophy, Politics and Economics (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1967), pp. 178ff.
[4]
On the conscription movement, see in particular Michael Pearlman,
To Make Democracy Safe for America: Patricians and Preparedness
in the Progressive Era (Urbana: University of Illinois Press,
1984). See also John W. Chambers II, "Conscripting for Colossus:
The Adoption of the Draft in the United States in World War I,"
PhD diss., Columbia University. 1973; John Patrick Finnegan, Against
the Specter of a Dragon: the Campaign for American Military Preparedness,
1914–1917 (Westport, Conn. Greenwood Press, 1974); and John Gany
Clifford, The Citizen Soldiers: The Plattsburg Training Camp
Movement (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1972).
[5]
On ministers and the war, see Ray H. Abrams, Preachers Present
Arms (New York: Round Table Press, 1933). On the mobilization
of science, see David F. Noble, America By Design: Science,
Technology and the Rise of Corporate Capitalism (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1977), and Ronald C. Tobey, The American
Ideology of National Science, 1919–1930 (Pittsburgh: University
of Pittsburgh Press, 1971).
[6]
Cited in Gerald Edward Markowitz, "Progressive Imperialism: Consensus
and Conflict in the Progressive Movement on Foreign Policy, 1898–1917."
PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, 1971, p. 375, an unfortunately
neglected work on a highly important topic.
[7]
Hence the famous imprecation hurled at the end of the 1884 campaign
that brought the Democrats into the presidency for the first time
since the Civil War, that the Democratic Party was the party of
"Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion." In that one phrase, the New York
Protestant minister was able to sum up the political concerns of
the pietist movement.
[8]
For an introduction to the growing literature of "ethnoreligious"
political history in the United States, see Paul Kleppner, The
Cross of Culture (New York: the Free Press, 1970); and idem,
The Third Electoral System, 1853–1892 (Chapel
Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1979). For the latest
research on the formation of the Republican Party as a pietist party,
reflecting the interconnected triad of pietist concerns – antislavery,
prohibition, and anti-Catholicism – see William E. Gienapp,
"Nativism and the Creation of a Republican Majority in the North
before the Civil War," Journal of American History 72 (December
1985): 529–559.
[9]
German Lutherans were largely "high" or liturgical and confessional
Lutherans who placed emphasis on the Church and its creed or sacraments
rather than on a pietist, "born-again" emotional conversion experience.
Scandinavian-Americans, on the other hand, were mainly pietist Lutherans.
[10]
Orthodox Augustinian Christianity, as followed by the liturgicals,
is "a-millennialist," i.e., it believes that the "millennium" is
simply a metaphor for the emergence of the Christian Church and
that Jesus will return without human aid and at his own unspecified
time. Modern "fundamentalists," as they have been called since the
early years of the twentieth century, are "premillennialists," i.e.,
they believe that Jesus will return to usher in a thousand years
of the Kingdom of God on Earth, a time marked by various "tribulations"
and by Armageddon, until history is finally ended. Premillennialists,
or "millennarians," do not have the statist drive of the postmillennialists;
instead, they tend to focus on predictions and signs of Armageddon
and of Jesus' advent.
[11]
James H. Timberlake, Prohibition and the Progressive Movement,
1900–1920 (New York: Atheneum, 1970), pp. 7–8.
[12]
Quoted in Timberlake, Prohibition, p. 33.
[13]
The Progressive Party convention was a mighty fusion of all the
major trends in the progressive movement: statist economists, technocrats,
social engineers, social workers, professional pietists, and partners
of J.P. Morgan & Co. Social Gospel leaders Lyman Abbon, the
Rev. R. Heber Newton and the Rev. Washington Gladden, were leading
Progressive Party delegates. The Progressive Party proclaimed itself
as the "recrudescence of the religious spirit in American political
life." Theodore Roosevelt's acceptance speech was significantly
entitled "A Confession of Faith," and his words were punctuated
by "amens" and by a continual singing of pietist Christian hymns
by the assembled delegates. They sang "Onward Christian Soldiers,"
"The Battle Hymn of the Republic," and especially the revivalist
hymn, "Follow, Follow, We Will Follow Jesus," with the word "Roosevelt"
replacing "Jesus" at every turn. The horrified New York Times
summed up the unusual experience by calling the Progressive grouping
"a convention of fanatics." And it added, "It was not a convention
at all. It was an assemblage of religious enthusiasts. It was such
a convention as Peter the Hermit held. It was a Methodist camp following
done over into political terms." Cited in John Allen Gable, The
Bull Moose Years: Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Party
(Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1978), p. 75.
[14]
Timberlake, Prohibition, p. 24.
[15]
Quoted in Timberlake, Prohibition, p. 27. Italics in the
article. Or, as the Rev. Stelzle put it, in Why Prohibition!,
"There is no such thing as an absolute individual right to do any
particular thing, or to eat or drink any particular thing, or to
enjoy the association of one's own family, or even to live, if that
thing is in conflict with the law of public necessity." Quoted in
David E. Kyvig, Repealing National Prohibition (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1979), p. 9.
[16]
Timberlake, Prohibition, pp. 37–38.
[17]
See David Burner, Herbert Hoover: A Public Life (New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1979), p. 107.
[18]
James A. Burran, "Prohibition in New Mexico, 1917." New Mexico
Historical Quarterly 48 (April 1973): 140–141. Mrs. Lindsey
of course showed no concern whatever for the German, allied, and
neutral countries of Europe being subjected to starvation by the
British naval blockade. The only areas of New Mexico that resisted
the prohibition crusade in the referendum in the November 1917 elections
were the heavily Hispanic-Catholic districts.
[19]
Timberlake, Prohibition, p. 179.
[20]
Quoted in Timberlake, Prohibition, pp. 180–181.
[21]
Quoted in Alan P. Grimes, The Puritan Ethic and Woman Suffrage
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), p. 78.
[22]
Grimes, Puritan Ethic, p. 116.
[23]
Ida Clyde Clarke, American Women and the World War (New
York: D. Appleton and Co., 1918), p. 19.
[24]
Clarke, American Women, p. 27.
[25]
Ibid., p. 31. Actually Mrs. Tarbell's muckraking activities were
pretty much confined to Rockefeller and Standard Oil. She was highly
favorable to business leaders in the Morgan ambit, as witness her
laudatory biographies of Judge Elbert H. Gary, of US Steel (1925)
and Owen D. Young of General Electric (1932).
[26]
Ibid., p. 277, pp. 275–279, p. 58.
[27]
Ibid., p. 183.
[28]
Ibid., p. 103.
[29]
Ibid., pp. 104–105.
[30]
Ibid., p. 101.
[31]
Ibid., p. 129. Margaret Dreier Robins and her husband Raymond were
virtually a paradigmatic progressive couple. Raymond was a Florida-born
wanderer and successful gold prospector who underwent a mystical
conversion experience in the Alaska wilds and became a pietist preacher.
He moved to Chicago, where he became a leader in Chicago settlement
house work and municipal reform. Margaret Dreier and her sister
Mary were daughters of a wealthy and socially prominent New York
family who worked for and financed the emergent National Women's
Trade Union League. Margaret married Raymond Robins in 1905 and
moved to Chicago, soon becoming longtime president of the league.
In Chicago, the Robinses led and organized progressive political
causes for over two decades, becoming top leaders of the Progressive
Party from 1912 to 1916. During the war, Raymond Robins engaged
in considerable diplomatic activity as head of a Red Cross mission
to Russia. On the Robinses, see Allen F. Davis, Spearhead for
Reform: the Social Settlements and the Progressive Movement, 1890–1914
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1967).
[32]
For more on women's war work and woman suffrage, see the standard
history of the suffrage movement, Eleanor Flexner, Century of
Struggle: The Woman's Rights Movement in the United States
(New York: Atheneum, 1968), pp. 288–289. Interestingly, The National
War Labor Board (NWLB) frankly adopted the concept of "equal pay
for equal work in order to limit the employment of women workers
by imposing higher costs on the employer. The "only check," affirmed
the NWLB, on excessive employment of women "is to make it no more
profitable to employ women than men." Quoted in Valerie I. Conner,
"'The Mothers of the Race' in World War I: The National War Labor
Board and Women in Industry," Labor History 21 (Winter
1979–80): 34.
[33]
See Raymond B. Fosdick, Chronicle of a Generation: An Autobiography
(New York: Harper & Bros., 1958), p. 133. Also see Peter Collier
and David Horowitz, The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty
(New York: New American Library, 1976), pp. 103–105. Fosdick was
particularly appalled that American patrolmen on street duty actually
smoked cigars! Fosdick, Chronicle, p. 135.
[34]
The American Social Hygiene Association, with its influential journal
Social Hygiene, was the major organization in what was
known as the "purity crusade." The association was launched when
the New York physician Dr. Prince A. Marrow, inspired by the agitation
against venereal disease and in favor of the continence urged by
the French syphilographer, Jean-Alfred Fournier, formed in 1905
the American Society for Sanitary and Moral Prophylaxis (ASSMP).
Soon, the terms proposed by the Chicago branch of ASSMP, "social
hygiene" and "sex hygiene," became widely used for their medical
and scientific patina, and in 1910 ASSMP changed its name to the
American Federation for Sex Hygiene (AFSH). Finally, in late 1913,
AFSH, an organization of physicians, combined with the National
Vigilance Association (formerly the American Purity Alliance), a
group of clergymen and social workers, to form the all-embracing
American Social Hygiene Association (ASHA).
In this social
hygiene movement, the moral and medical went hand in hand. Thus
Dr. Morrow welcomed the new knowledge about venereal disease because
it demonstrated that "punishment for sexual sin" no longer had to
be "reserved for the hereafter."
The first president
of ASHA was the president of Harvard University, Charles W. Eliot.
In his address to the first meeting, Eliot made clear that total
abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, and even spices was part and parcel
of the anti-prostitution and purity crusade.
On physicians,
the purity crusade, and the formation of ASHA, see Ronald Hamowy,
"Medicine and the Crimination of Sin: 'Self-Abuse' in 19th Century
America," The Journal of Libertarian Studies I (Summer
1972): 247–259; James Wunsch, "Prostitution and Public Policy: From
Regulation to Suppression, 1858–1920," PhD diss., University of
Chicago, 1976; and Roland R. Wagner, "Virtue Against Vice: A Study
of Moral Reformers and Prostitution in the Progressive Era," PhD
diss., University of Wisconsin, 1971. On Morrow, also see John C.
Burnham. "The Progressive Era Revolution in American Attitudes Toward
Sex," Journal of American History 59 (March 1973) 899,
and Paul Boyer, Urban Masses and Moral Order in America, 1820–1920
(Cambridge Harvard University Press, 1978), p 201. Also see Burnham,
"Medical Specialists and Movements Toward Social Control in the
Progressive Era: Three Examples," in J. Israel, ed., Building
the Organizational Society: Essays in Associational Activities in
Modem America (New York: Free Press, 1972), pp. 24–26.
[35]
In Daniel R. Beaver, Newton D. Baker and the American War Effort
1917–1919 (Lincoln, Nebr.: University of Nebraska Press, 1966),
p. 222. Also see ibid., pp. 221–224; and C.H. Cramer, Newton
D. Baker: A Biography (Cleveland: World Publishing Co., l96l),
pp. 99–102.
[36]
Fosdick, Chronicle, pp. 145–147. While prostitution was
indeed banned in Storyville after 1917, Storyville, contrary to
legend, never "closed" – the saloons and dance halls remained
open, and contrary to orthodox accounts, jazz was never really shut
down in Storyville or New Orleans, and it was therefore never forced
up river. Also, on later Storyville, see Boyer, Urban Masses,
p. 218.
[37]
See Hamowy, "Crimination of Sin," p. 226 n. The quote from
Clemenceau is in Fosdick, Chronicle, p. 171. Newton Baker's
loyal biographer declared that Clemenceau, in this response, showed
"his animal proclivities as the 'Tiger of France.'" Cramer, Newton
Baker, p. 101.
[38]
Clarke, American Women, pp. 90, 87, 93. In some cases,
organized women took the offensive to help stamp out vice and liquor
in their community. Thus in Texas in 1917 the Texas Women's Anti-Vice
Committee led in the creation of a "White Zone" around all the military
bases. By autumn the Committee expanded into the Texas Social Hygiene
Association to coordinate the work of eradicating prostitution and
saloons. San Antonio proved to be its biggest problem. Lewis L.
Gould, Progressives and Prohibitionists: Texas Democrats in
the Wilson Era (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1973), p.
227.
[39]
Davis, Spearheads for Reform, p. 225.
[40]
Fosdick, Chronicle, p. 144. After the war, Raymond Fosdick
went on to fame and fortune, first as Under Secretary General of
the League of Nations, and then for the rest of his life as a member
of the small inner circle close to John D. Rockefeller, Jr. In that
capacity, Fosdick rose to become head of the Rockefeller Foundation
and Rockefeller's official biographer. Meanwhile, Fosdick's brother,
Rev. Harry Emerson, became Rockefeller's hand-picked parish minister,
first at Park Avenue Presbyterian Church and then at the new interdenominational
Riverside Church, built with Rockefeller funds. Harry Emerson Fosdick
was Rockefeller's principal aide in battling, within the Protestant
Church, in favor of postmillennial, statist, "liberal" Protestantism
and against the rising tide of premillennial Christianity, known
as "fundamentalist" since the years before World War I. See Collier
and Horowitz, The Rockefellers, pp. 140–142, 151–153.
[41]
Davis, Spearheads for Reform, p. 226; Timberlake, Prohibition,
p. 66; Boyer, Urban Masses, p. 156.
[42]
Eleanor H. Woods, Robert A. Woods; Champion of Democracy
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1929), p. 316. Also see ibid., pp. 201–202,
250ff., 268ff.
[43]
Davis, Spearheads for Reform, p. 227.
[44]
H.L. Mencken, "Professor Veblen," in A Mencken Chrestomathy
(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1949). p. 267.
[45]
Quoted in the important article by Jean B. Quandt, "Religion and
Social Thought: The Secularization of Postmillennialism," American
Quarterly 25 (October 1973): 404. Also see John Blewett, S.J.,
"Democracy as Religion: Unity in Human Relations," in Blewett, ed.,
John Dewey: His Thought and Influence (New York: Fordham
University Press, 1960), pp. 33–58; and John Dewey: The Early
Works, 1882–1989, eds., J. Boydstan et al., (Carbondale: Southern
Illinois University Press, 1969–71), vols. 2 and 3.
[46]
On the general secularization of postmillennial pietism after 1900,
see Quandt, "Religion and Social Thought," pp. 390–409; and James
H. Moorhead, "The Erosion of Postmillennialism in American Religious
Thought, 1865–1925," Church History 53 (March 1984): 61–77.
[47]
Carol S. Gruber, Mars and Minerva: World War I and the Uses
of the Higher Learning in America (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State
University Press, 1975), p. 92.
[48]
Quoted in Gruber, Mars and Minerva, pp. 92–93. Also see
William E. Leuchtenburg, "The New Deal and the Analogue of War,"
in J. Braeman, R. Bremner, and E. Walters, eds., Change and
Continuity in Twentieth-Century America (New York: Harper &
Row, l966), p. 89. For similar reasons, Thorstein Veblen, prophet
of the alleged dichotomy of production for profit vs. production
for use, championed the war and began to come out openly for socialism
in an article in the New Republic in 1918, later reprinted
in his The Vested Interests and the State of the Industrial
Arts (1919). See Charles Hirschfeld, "Nationalist Progressivism
and World War I," Mid-America 45 (July 1963), p. 150. Also
see David Riesman, Thorstein Veblen: A Critical Interpretation
(New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1960). pp. 30–31.
[49]
Hirschfeld, "Nationalist Progressivism," p. 150.
[50]
Gruber, Mars and Minerva, p. 92.
[51]
Hirschfeld, "Nationalist Progressivism," p. 142. It is intriguing
that for the New Republic intellectuals, actually existent
private individuals are dismissed as "mechanical," whereas nonexistent
entities such as "national and social" forces are hailed as being
"organic."
[52]
Quoted in Hirschfeld, "Nationalist Progressivism," p. 147. A minority
of pro-war Socialists broke off from the antiwar Socialist Party
to form the Social Democratic League, and to join a pro-war front
organized and financed by the Wilson administration, the American
Alliance for Labor and Democracy. The pro-war socialists welcomed
the war as providing "startling progress in collectivism," and opined
that after the war, the existent state socialism would be advanced
toward "democratic collectivism." The pro-war socialists included
John Spargo, Algie Simons, W.J. Ghent, Robert R. LaMonte, Charles
Edward Russell, J.G. Phelps Stokes, Upton Sinclair, and William
English Walling. Walling so succumbed to war fever that he denounced
the Socialist Party as a conscious tool of the Kaiser and advocated
the suppression of freedom of speech for pacifists and for antiwar
socialists. See Hirschfeld, "Nationalist Progressivism," p. 143.
On Walling, see James Gilbert, Designing the Industrial State:
The Intellectual Pursuit of Collectivism in America, 1880–1940
(Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1972), pp. 232–233. On the American
Alliance for Labor and Democracy and its role in the war effort,
see Ronald Radosh, American Labor and United States Foreign
Policy (New York: Random House, l969), pp. 58–71.
[53]
In fact, Jacob Lippmann was to contract cancer in 1925 and die two
years later. Moreover, Lippmann, before and after Jacob's death,
was supremely indifferent to his father. Ronald Steel, Walter
Lippman and the American Century (New York: Random House, l981),
p. 5, pp. 116–117. On Walter Lippmann's enthusiasm for conscription,
at least for others, see Beaver, Newton Baker, pp. 26–27.
[54]
Hirschfeld, "Nationalist Progressivism," pp. 148–150. On the New
Republic and the war, and particularly on John Dewey, also
see Christopher Lasch, The New Radicalism in America, 1889–1963:
The Intellectual as a Social Type (New York: Vintage Books,
1965), pp. 181–224, especially pp. 202–204. On the three New
Republic editors, see Charles Forcey, The Crossroads of
Liberalism: Croly, Weyl, Lippmann and the Progressive Era, 1900–1925
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1961). Also see David W. Noble,
"The New Republic and the Idea of Progress, 1914–1920,"
Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 38 (December 1951):
387–402. In a book titled The End of the War (1918), New
Republic editor Walter Weyl assured his readers that "the new
economic solidarity once gained, can never again be surrendered."
Cited in Leuchtenburg. "New Deal," p. 90.
[55]
Rexford Guy Tugwell, "America's War-Time Socialism" The Nation
(1927), pp. 364–365. Quoted in Leuchtenburg, "The New Deal," pp.
90–91.
[56]
In January 1927, Croly wrote a New Republic editorial,
"An Apology for Fascism," endorsing an accompanying article, "Fascism
for the Italians," written by the distinguished philosopher Horace
M. Kallen, a disciple of John Dewey and an exponent of progressive
pragmatism. Kallen praised Mussolini for his pragmatic approach,
and in particular for the élan vital that Mussolini
had infused into Italian life. True, Professor Kallen conceded,
fascism is coercive, but surely this is only a temporary expedient.
Noting fascism's excellent achievement in economics, education,
and administrative reform, Kallen added that "in this respect the
Fascist revolution is not unlike the Communist revolution. Each
is the application by force …of an ideology to a condition.
Each should have the freest opportunity once it has made a start…."
The accompanying New Republic editorial endorsed Kallen's
thesis and added that "alien critics should beware of outlawing
a political experiment which aroused in a whole nation an increased
moral energy and dignified its activities by subordinating them
to a deeply felt common purpose." New Republic 49 (January
12, 1927), pp. 207–213. Cited in John Patrick Diggins, "Mussolini's
Italy: The View from America," PhD diss., University of Southern
California, 1964, pp. 214–217.
[57]
Born in Ireland, David Croly became a distinguished journalist in
New York City and rose to the editorship of the New York World.
Croly organized the first Positivist Circle in the United States
and financed an American speaking tour for the Comtian Henry Edgar.
The Positivist Circle met at Croly's home, and in 1871 David Croly
published A Positivist Primer. When Herbert was born in
1869, he was consecrated by his father to the Goddess Humanity,
the symbol of Comte's Religion of Humanity. See the illuminating
recent biography of Herbert by David W. Levy, Herbert Croly
of the New Republic (Princeton: Princeton University Press;
1985).
[58]
See Jerry Israel, Progressivism and the Open Door: America and
China, 1905–1921 (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press,
1971).
[59]
For a refreshingly acidulous portrayal of the actions of the historians
in World War I, see C. Hartley Grattan, "The Historians Cut Loose,"
American Mercury, August 1927, reprinted in Haw Elmer Barnes,
In Quest of Truth and Justice, 2nd ed. (Colorado Springs:
Ralph Myles Publisher, 1972), pp. 142–164. A more extended account
is George T. Blakey, Historians on the Homefront: American Propagandists
for the Great War (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky,
1970). Gruber, Mars and Minerva, deals with academia and
social scientism, but concentrates an historians. James R. Mock
and Cedric Larson, Words that Won the War (Princeton University
Press, 1939), presents the story of the "Creel Committee," the Committee
on Public Information, the official propaganda ministry during the
war.
[60]
See the useful biography of Ely, Benjamin G. Rader, The Academic
Mind and Reform: The Influence of Richard T. Ely in American Life
(Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1966).
[61]
Sidney Fine, Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State: A
Study of Conflict in American Thought 1865–1901 (Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 1956), pp.239–240.
[62]
Fine, Laissez Faire, pp. 180–181.
[63]
John Rogers Commons was of old Yankee stock, descendant of John
Rogers, Puritan martyr in England, and born in the Yankee area of
the Western Reserve in Ohio and reared in Indiana. His Vermont mother
was a graduate of the hotbed of pietism, Oberlin College, and she
sent John to Oberlin in the hopes that he would become a minister.
While in college, Commons and his mother launched a prohibitionist
publication at the request of the Anti-Saloon League. After graduation,
Commons went to Johns Hopkins to study under Ely, but flunked out
of graduate school. See John R. Commons, Myself (Madison,
Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1964). Also see Joseph Dorfman,
The Economic Mind in American Civilization (New York: Viking,
1949), vol. 3. 276–277; Mary O. Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity:
A Crisis in the Professionalization of American Social Science,
1865–1905 (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1975),
pp. 198–204.
[64]
Quandt, "Religion and Social Thought," pp. 402–403. Ely did not
expect the millennial Kingdom to be far off. He believed that it
was the task of the universities and of the social sciences "to
teach the complexities of the Christian duty of brotherhood in order
to arrive at the New Jerusalem "which we are all eagerly awaiting."
The church's mission was to attack every evil institution, "until
the earth becomes a new earth, and all its cities, cities of God."
[65]
Gruber, Mars and Minerva, p. 114.
[66]
See Rader, Academic Mind, pp. 181–191. On top big business
affiliations of National Security League leaders, especially J.P.
Morgan and others in the Morgan ambit, see C. Hartley Grattan, Why
We Fought (New York Vanguard Press, 1929) pp. 117–118, and
Robert D. Ward, "The Origin and Activities of the National Security
League, 1914–1919," Mississippi Valley Historical Review,
47 (June 1960): 51–65.
[67]
The Chamber of Commerce of the United States spelled out the long-run
economic benefit of conscription, that for America's youth it would
"substitute a period of helpful discipline for a period of demoralizing
freedom from restraint." John Patrick Finnegan, Against the Specter
of Dragon: The Campaign for American Military Preparedness, 1914–1917
(Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1974), p. 110. On the broad and
enthusiastic support given to the draft by the Chamber of Commerce,
see Chase C. Mooney and Martha E. Layman, "Some Phases of the Compulsory
Military Training Movement, 1914–1920," Mississippi Historical
Review 38 (March 1952): 640.
[68]
Richard T. Ely, Hard Times: The Way in and the Way Out
(1931), cited in Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American
Civilization (New York: Viking, 1949). vol. 5, p. 671; and
in Leuchtenburg, "The New Deal," p. 94.
[69]
Ely drew up a super-patriotic pledge for the Madison chapter of
the Loyalty Legion, pledging its members to "stamp out disloyalty."
The pledge also expressed unqualified support for the Espionage
Act and vowed to "work against La Follettism in all its anti-war
forms." Rader, Academic Mind, pp. 183ff.
[70]
Gruber, Mars and Minerva, p. 207.
[71]
Ibid., pp. 208, 208n.
[72]
Ibid., pp. 209–210. In his autobiography, written in 1938, Richard
Ely rewrote history to cover up his ignominious role in the get–La
Follette campaign. He acknowledged signing the faculty petition,
but then had the temerity to claim that he "was not one of the ring-leaders,
as La Follette thought, in circulating this petition…." There
is no mention of his secret research campaign against La Follette.
[73]
For more an the anti-La Follette campaign, see H.C. Peterson and
Gilbert C. Fite, Opponents of War: 1917–1918 (Madison:
University of Wisconsin Press, 1957), pp. 68–72; Paul L. Murphy,
World War I and the Origin of Civil Liberties in the United States
(New York: W.W. Norton, 1979), p. 120; and Belle Case La Follette
and Fola La Follette, Robert M. LaFollette (New York: Macmillan,
1953), volume 2.
[74]
Thus, T.W. Hutchison, from a very different perspective, notes the
contrast between Carl Menger's stress on the beneficent, unplanned
phenomena of society, such as the free market, and the growth of
"social self-consciousness" and government planning. Hutchison recognizes
that a crucial component of that social self-consciousness is government
statistics. T.W. Hutchison, A Review of Economic Doctrines,
1870–1929 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1953), pp. 150–151, 427.
[75]
Fine, Laissez-Faire, p. 207.
[76]
Solomon Fabricant, The Trend of Government Activity in the United
States since 1900 (New York: National Bureau of Economic Research,
1952), p. 143. Similarly, an authoritative work on the growth of
government in England puts it this way: "The accumulation of factual
information about social conditions and the development of economics
and the social sciences increased the pressure for government intervention….
As statistics improved and students of social conditions multiplied,
the continued existence of such conditions was kept before the public.
Increasing knowledge of them aroused influential circles and furnished
working class movements with factual weapons." Moses Abramovitz
and Vera F. Eliasberg, The Growth of Public Employment in Great
Britain (Princeton: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1957),
pp. 22–23, 30. Also see M.I. Cullen, The Statistical Movement
in Early Victorian Britain: The Foundations of Empirical Social
Research (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1975).
[77]
See Joseph Dorfman, "The Role of the German Historical School in
American Economic Thought." American Economic Review, Papers
and Proceedings 45 (May 1955), p. 18. George Hildebrand remarked
on the inductive emphasis of the German Historical School that "perhaps
there is, then, some connection between this kind of teaching and
the popularity of crude ideas of physical planning in more recent
times." George H. Hildebrand, "International Flow of Economic Ideas-Discussion,"
ibid., p. 37.
[78]
Dorfman, "Role," p. 23. On Wright and Adams, see Joseph Dorfman,
The Economic Mind in American Civilization (New York: Viking
Press, 1949), vol. 3, 164–174, 123; and Boyer, Urban Masses,
p. 163. Furthermore, the first professor of statistics in the United
States, Roland P. Falkner, was a devoted student of Engel's and
a translator of the works of Engel's assistant, August Meitzen.
[79]
Irving Norton Fisher, My Father Irving Fisher (New York:
Comet Press, 1956), pp. 146–147. Also for Fisher, see Irving
Fisher, Stabilised Money (London: Allen & Unwin,
1935), p. 383.
[80]
Fisher, My Father, pp. 264–267. On Fisher's role and influence
during this period, see Murray N. Rothbard, America's
Great Depression, 4th ed. (New York: Richardson & Snyder,
1983). Also see Joseph S. Davis, The World Between the Wars,
1919–39, An Economist's View (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1975), p. 194; and Melchior Palyi, The Twilight of Gold,
1914–1936: Myth and Realities (Chicago: Henry Regnery,
1972), pp. 240, 249.
[81]
Wesley C. Mitchell was of old Yankee pietist stock. His grandparents
were farmers in Maine and then in Western New York. His father followed
the path of many Yankees in migrating to a farm in northern Illinois.
Mitchell attended the University of Chicago, where he was strongly
influenced by Veblen and John Dewey. Dorfman, Economic Mind,
vol. 3, 456.
[82]
Dorfman, Economic Mind, vol. 4, 376, 361.
[83]
Emphasis added. Lucy Sprague Mitchell, Two Lives (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1953), p. 363. For more on this entire topic,
see Murray N. Rothbard, "The Politics of Political Economists: Comment,"
Quarterly Journal of Economics 74 (November 1960): 659–665.
[84]
See in particular James Weinstein, The Corporate Ideal in the
Liberal State, 1900–1918 (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968); and Samuel
P. Hays, "The Politics of Reform in Municipal Government in the
Progressive Era," Pacific Northwest Quarterly 59 (October
1961), pp. 157–169.
[85]
David Eakins, "The Origins of Corporate Liberal Policy Research,
1916–1922: The Political-Economic Expert and the Decline of Public
Debate," in Israel, ed., Building the Organizational Society,
p. 161.
[86]
Herbert Heaton, Edwin F. Gay, A Scholar in Action (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1952). Edwin Gay was born in Detroit of
old New England stock. His father had been born in Boston and went
into his father-in-law's lumber business in Michigan. Gay's mother
was the daughter of a wealthy preacher and lumberman. Gay entered
the University of Michigan, was heavily influenced by the teaching
of John Dewey, and then stayed in graduate school in Germany for
over a dozen years, finally obtaining his PhD in economic history
at the University of Berlin. The major German influences on Gay
were Gustav Schmoller, head of the Historical School, who emphasized
that economics must be an "inductive science," and Adolf Wagner,
also at the University of Berlin, who favored large-scale government
intervention in the economy in behalf of Christian ethics. Back
at Harvard, Gay was the major single force, in collaboration with
the Boston Chamber of Commerce, in pushing through a factory inspection
act in Massachusetts, and in early 1911 Gay became president of
the Massachusetts branch of the American Association for Labor Legislation,
an organization founded by Richard T. Ely and dedicated to agitating
for government intervention in the area of labor unions, minimum
wage rates, unemployment, public works, and welfare.
[87]
On the pulling and hauling among Rockefeller advisers on The Institute
of Economic Research, see David M. Grossman, "American Foundations
and the Support of Economic Research, 1913–29," Minerva
22 (Spring–Summer 1982): 62–72.
[88]
See Eakins, "Origins," pp. 166–167; Grossman, "American Foundations,"
pp. 76–78; Heaton, Edwin F. Gay. On Stone, see Dorfman, Economic
Mind, vol. 4, 42, 60–61; and Samuel Haber, Efficiency and
Uplift: Scientific Management in the Progressive Era 1890–1920
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), pp. 152, 165. During
his Marxist period, Stone had translated Marx's Poverty of Philosophy.
[89]
See Guy Alchon, The Invisible Hand of Planning: Capitalism,
Social Science, and the State in the 1920's (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1985), pp. 54ff.
[90]
Collier and Horowitz, The Rockefellers, p. 140.
[91]
Eakins, "Origins," p. 168. Also see Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity,
pp. 282–286.
[92]
Stephen Skowronek, Building a New American State: The Expansion
of the National Administrative Capacities, 1877–1920 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1982), pp. 187–188.
[93]
Vice-chairman of the IGR was retired St. Louis merchant and lumberman
and former president of Washington University of St. Louis, Robert
S. Brookings. Secretary of the IGR was James F. Curtis, formerly
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Taft and now secretary
and deputy governor of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. Others
on the board of the IGR were ex-President Taft; railroad executive
Frederick A. Delano, uncle of Franklin D. Roosevelt and member of
the Federal Reserve Board; Arthur T. Hadley, economist and president
of Yale; Charles C. Van Hise, progressive president of the University
of Wisconsin, and ally of Ely; reformer and influential young Harvard
Law professor, Felix Frankfurter; Theodore N. Vail, chairman of
AT&T; progressive engineer and businessman, Herbert C. Hoover;
and financier R. Fulton Cutting, an officer of the New York Bureau
of Municipal Research. Eakins, "Origins," pp. 168–169.
[94]
On the Commercial Economy Board, see Grosvenor B. Clarkson, Industrial
America in the World War: The Strategy Behind the Line, 1917–1918
(Boston: Houghton Mifilin, 1923), pp. 211ff.
[95]
Alchon, Invisible Hand, p. 29. Mitchell headed the price
statistics section of the Price-Fixing Committee of the War Industries
Board.
[96]
Heaton, Edwin Gay, p. 129.
[97]
See Rothbard, "War Collectivism," pp. 100–112.
[98]
See Heaton, Edwin Gay, pp. 129ff; and the excellent book
on the Inquiry, Lawrence E. Gelfand, The Inquiry: American Preparations
for Peace, 1917–1919 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963),
pp. 166–168, 177–178.
[99]
Heaton, Edwin Gay, p. 135. Also see Alchon, Invisible
Hand, pp. 35–36.
[100]
In 1939 the Bureau of the Budget would be transferred to the Executive
Office, thus completing the IGR objective.
[101]
Moulton was a professor of economics at the University of Chicago,
and vice-president of the Chicago Association of Commerce. See Eakins,
"Origins," pp. 172–177; Dorfman, Economic Mind, vol. 4,
11, 195–197.
[102]
Gay had been recommended to the group by one of its founders, Thomas
W. Lamont. It was Gay's suggestion that the CFR begin its major
project by establishing an "authoritative" journal, Foreign
Affairs. And it was Gay who his Harvard historian colleague
Archibald Cary Coolidge as the first editor and the New York
Post reporter Hamilton Fish Armstrong as assistant editor and
executive director of the CFR. See Lawrence H. Shoup and William
Minter, Imperial Brain Trust: The Council on Foreign Relations
and United States Foreign Policy (New York: Monthly Review
Press, 1977), pp. 16–19, 105, 110.
[103]
Ellis W. Hawley, "Herbert Hoover and Economic Stabilization, 1921–22,"
in E. Hawley, ed., Herbert Hoover as Secretary of Commerce:
Studies in New Era Thought and Practice (Iowa City: University
of Iowa Press, 1981), p. 52.
[104]
Hawley, "Herbert Hoover," p. 53. Also see ibid., pp. 42–54. On the
continuing collaboration between Hoover, Gay, and Mitchell throughout
the 1920s see Alchon, Invisible Hand.
[105]
Alchon, Invisible Hand, pp. 39–42; Dorfman, Economic
Mind, vol. 3, 490.
[106]
One exception was the critical review in the Commercial and
Financial Chronicle (May 18, 1929), which derided the impression
given the reader that the capacity of the United States "for continued
prosperity is well-nigh unlimited." Quoted in Davis, World Between
the Wars, p. 144. Also on Recent Economic Changes
and economists' opinions at the time, see ibid., pp. 136–151, 400–417;
David W. Eakins, "The Development of Corporate Liberal Policy Research
in the United States, 1885–1965," PhD diss., doctoral dissertation
University of Wisconsin, 1966, pp. 166–169, 205; and Edward Angly,
comp., Oh Yeah? (New York: Viking Press, 1931).
[107]
In 1930, Hunt published a book-length, popularizing summary, An
Audit of America. On Recent Economic Changes, also
see Alchon, Invisible Hand, pp. 129–133, 135–142, 145–151,
213.
[108]
Department of Labor – FSA Appropriation Bill for 1945.
Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Appropriations. 78th Congress,
2nd Session, Part I (Washington, 1945), pp. 258f., 276f. Quoted
in Rothbard, "Politics of Political Economists," p. 665. On the
growth of economists and statisticians in government, especially
during wartime, see also Herbert Stein, "The Washington Economics
Industry," American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings
76 (May 1986), pp. 2–3.
No comments:
Post a Comment