² Foucault, Michel, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (New York: Vintage Press, 1973), p. 387Google Scholar.

³ The literature on poststructuralism is overwhelming. A good place to begin is Culler, Jonathan, On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism After Structuralism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982Google Scholar); for an intelligent attempt to apply poststructuralism to political thought, see Connolly, William, Political Theory and Modernity (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988Google Scholar); to diplomatic thought, see DerDerian, James, On Diplomacy: A Genealogy of Western Estrangement (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1987Google Scholar).

⁴ John Adams contended, against Jefferson, that there is no such thing as a “natural aristocracy” of talent and virtue; certain people have undue power and influence for the worst reasons (money, looks, air, gait, etc.) and thus, if elected to office, must be safely isolated in the upper chamber, where their abilities can be exploited and their power placed under surveillance and control. See Diggins, John Patrick, The Lost Soul of American Politics: Virtue, Self-interest, and the Foundations of Liberalism (New York: Basic Books, 1985), pp. 69–99Google Scholar.

⁵ Ibid., p. 83.Google Scholar

⁶ Miller, Perry, The New England Mind: The Seventeenth Century (1939; Boston: Beacon Press, 1964), pp. 3–34.Google Scholar

⁷ Niebuhr, Reinhold, Beyond Tragedy: Essays on the Christian Interpretation of History (1937; New York: Scribners, 1965), p. 223Google Scholar.

⁸ Niebuhr, Reinhold, The Nature and Destiny of Man: Human Nature II (1941; New York: Scribners, 1964), pp. 183–84Google Scholar.

⁹ Niebuhr, Reinhold, The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness (1943; New York: Scribners, 1960Google Scholar).

¹⁰ Niebuhr, Reinhold, Moral Man and Immoral Society (1932; New York: Scribners, 1960), pp. 113–41Google Scholar.

¹¹ Niebuhr, Reinhold, The Irony of American History (New York: Scribners, 1952), p. 63Google Scholar.

¹² See Therborn, Goran, “What Does the Ruling Class Do When It Rules?” in Giddens, Anthony and Held, David, eds., Classes, Power, and Conflict (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), pp. 224–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Lukes, Steven, “Power and Authority,” in Bottomore, Tom and Nisbet, Robert, eds., A History of Sociological Analyses (New York: Basic Books, 1978), pp. 633–76Google Scholar.

¹³ Weil, Simone, “Oppression and Liberty, trans. Wills, Arthur and Petrie, John (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1973), pp. 56–83Google Scholar; Arendt, Hannah, On Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1963Google Scholar).

¹⁴ Niebuhr, Nature and Destiny, pp. 100–101,106.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Sidney Hook to John Dewey, November 4,1931 (Hook Papers, Center for Dewey Studies, Southern Illinois University).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Niebuhr's essay is quoted in Schlesinger, Arthur Jr., “Reinhold Niebuhr's Role in American Political Thought and Life,” in Kegley, Charles W. and Bretell, Robert W., eds., Reinhold Niebuhr: His Religious, Social, and Political Thought (New York: Macmillan, 1961), pp. 125–50Google Scholar. I am indebted to this insightful analysis.

¹⁷ Fox, Richard, Reinhold Niebuhr: A Biography (New York: Pantheon Books, 1985), pp. 136–37Google Scholar. Westbrook, Robert B., John Dewey and American Democracy (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991), pp. 523–32Google Scholar.

¹⁸ See Diggins, John Patrick, “John Dewey in Peace and War,” American Scholar (1981), pp. 213–30.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Dewey, John, Experience and Nature (1925; New York: Dover Publications, 1958Google Scholar).

²⁰ Niebuhr, The Nature and Destiny of Man, pp. 188–91.Google Scholar

²¹ Kyi, Aung San Suu, “The Glass Splinters,” Times Literary Supplement (July 12, 1991), p. 6.Google Scholar

²² Fox, Reinhold Niebuhr, pp. 136–37.Google Scholar

²³ Dewey, John, The Public and Its Problems (1927; Denver: Swallow, 1954), pp. 154–55Google Scholar.

²⁴ Niebuhr, Moral Man and Immoral Society, pp. xi—xii.Google Scholar

²⁵ Dewey, John, Freedom and Culture (1939; New York: Capricorn, 1964), pp. 3–23Google Scholar.

²⁴ Niebuhr, , The Nature and Destiny of Man, p. 80Google Scholar.

²⁷ Weber, Max, “Politics as a Vocation,” in Gerth, H.H. and Mills, C. Wright, eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1946), pp. 77–128.Google Scholar

²⁸ Dewey, John, “No Matter What Happens, Stay Out!,” Common Sense 3 (March 1939), p. 11Google Scholar.

²⁹ Niebuhr, Reinhold, “‘Favorable’ Environments,” Messenger, August 18, 1953Google Scholar, quoted in Shinn, Robert L., “Realism, Radicalism, and Eschatology in Reinhold Niebuhr: A Reassessment,” in Scott, Nathan A. Jr., ed., The Legacy of Reinhold Niebuhr (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975), pp. 85–99Google Scholar.

³⁰ Fox, , Reinhold Niebuhr, p. 285Google Scholar.

³¹ Niebuhr, Reinhold, “Foreign Policy in aNew Context,” The New Leader 50 (February 27, 1967), pp. 17–19Google Scholar.

³² Niebuhr, Reinhold, “The Social Myths in the Cold War,” Journal of International Law (1963), pp. 46–30.Google Scholar

³³ Niebuhr, Reinhold, Christianity and Power Politics (1940; New York: Archon Books, 1969), p. 113Google Scholar.

³⁴ One of Weber's themes was the “paradox of consequences,” the irony of unintended outcomes. Reaganism, in this respect, seems to reverse the Protestant ethic. The seventeenth-century Calvinists worked themselves to the bone out of spiritual anxiety for the salvation of their souls, and the consequence of their religious idealism was capitalist materialism. Reagan starts with the leisure and luxury of materialism and with the rhetoric of evil inspires political hope and democratic idealism. American history has many ironies, and the Reagan administration's taking credit for ending the Cold War by moralizing it seems to be hubris at its Hollywood worst.Google Scholar

³⁵ Miller, Perry, “The Influence of Reinhold Niebuhr,” The Reporter 18 (May 1, 1958), pp. 39–40Google Scholar.

³⁶ Gilder, George, Wealth and Poverty (New York: Basic Books, 1981Google Scholar).