Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America

Rating:
Summary: The Endless Culture Wars!
Review: In this work Hunter looks at the culture wars and how they play out in the fields of the family, education, government and the media. His book is well researched and makes several good points. For instance, he argues that both sides must agree on basic definitions and standards before debate can make any sense. I had trouble with two aspects, though.

First of all, although the first half of the book is devoted to our history and earlier culture conflicts, Hunter never adequately explains how those fights led to our present one. How, for instance, does Protestant-Catholic argument about Bible use in public schools translate into today's argument over condom distribution? How does discrimination against Jews cease while controversy over homosexuals increases? It is clear that new coalitions have formed, but it is less clear just why.

Secondly, Hunter has an bothersome tendency to sprinkle the book with sociological jargon. He may be a sociologist, but the terms don't add much to our knowledge. Groups are said, for example, to use positive and negative face when talking about themselves and their opponents. But in the end isn't mud slinging simply mudslinging. Isn't ugliness mere ugliness. And while any book of this kind needs examples, Hunter goes overboard by providing examples everywhere. As a result the book becomes hopelessly predictable at times.

Rating:
Summary: The Endless Culture Wars!
Review: In this work Hunter looks at the culture wars and how they play out in the fields of the family, education, government and the media. His book is well researched and makes several good points. For instance, he argues that both sides must agree on basic definitions and standards before debate can make any sense. I had trouble with two aspects, though.

First of all, although the first half of the book is devoted to our history and earlier culture conflicts, Hunter never adequately explains how those fights led to our present one. How, for instance, does Protestant-Catholic argument about Bible use in public schools translate into today's argument over condom distribution? How does discrimination against Jews cease while controversy over homosexuals increases? It is clear that new coalitions have formed, but it is less clear just why.

Secondly, Hunter has an bothersome tendency to sprinkle the book with sociological jargon. He may be a sociologist, but the terms don't add much to our knowledge. Groups are said, for example, to use positive and negative face when talking about themselves and their opponents. But in the end isn't mud slinging simply mudslinging. Isn't ugliness mere ugliness. And while any book of this kind needs examples, Hunter goes overboard by providing examples everywhere. As a result the book becomes hopelessly predictable at times.

Rating:
Summary: Accessible, Insightful Sociological Research
Review: The most significant contribution of James Davison Hunter's Culture Wars resides in the controversy and extensive scholarship that followed the publication of his book. In this work Hunter examines the discourse and methodologies of contempporary social movement organizations, and arrives at an interesting conclusion: while denominational differences may have declined in the second half of the 20th century, significant struggles within the realm of religion remain. The main divide that the author focuses on is that between the "orthodox" and "progressives." While the author does an admirable job of making connections between politics, religion, and social movements, his final anaylsis seems a bit simplistic. Hunter suggests that most of the current debates within American public culture can be expressed as struggles between two monolithic groups. However, other authors who have responded to Hunter's work have taken issue with this point, arguing that in terms of attitudes toward economic justice, the alignments that Hunter describes do not hold. In general, Hunter has provided an accessible, provocative account of contemporary conflicts in the public realm. His conclusions about what these conflicts mean for the future of American democracy are also quite insightful. The main limitation of the work is that his analysis may be overly simplistic, with not enough attention paid to the nuances of the debates that he describes.

Rating:
Summary: Accessible, Insightful Sociological Research
Review: The most significant contribution of James Davison Hunter's Culture Wars resides in the controversy and extensive scholarship that followed the publication of his book. In this work Hunter examines the discourse and methodologies of contempporary social movement organizations, and arrives at an interesting conclusion: while denominational differences may have declined in the second half of the 20th century, significant struggles within the realm of religion remain. The main divide that the author focuses on is that between the "orthodox" and "progressives." While the author does an admirable job of making connections between politics, religion, and social movements, his final anaylsis seems a bit simplistic. Hunter suggests that most of the current debates within American public culture can be expressed as struggles between two monolithic groups. However, other authors who have responded to Hunter's work have taken issue with this point, arguing that in terms of attitudes toward economic justice, the alignments that Hunter describes do not hold. In general, Hunter has provided an accessible, provocative account of contemporary conflicts in the public realm. His conclusions about what these conflicts mean for the future of American democracy are also quite insightful. The main limitation of the work is that his analysis may be overly simplistic, with not enough attention paid to the nuances of the debates that he describes.

Rating:
Summary: Still Relevent and Timely After All These Years!
Review: The title of my review refers to the fact that this book, while published in '91, is still quite an accurate portrayal of how the culture wars are conducted. The passing of 13 years and tenure of two presidents has not served to ameliorate the culture war between 'traditionalists' and 'progressives.' Hunter, then, was certainly right.

Hunter's main thesis with this book is that, quite frankly, the culture war being fought over our schools, family policy, law, entertainment, etc. is not a war that will likely EVER engender a consensus. In fact, as it stands now, it seems even to proclude rational debate in favor of charged rhetoric, miscaricaturizations of opponents, and...well...mudslinging.

Hunter asserts this thesis, backs it up with chronicles of how the culture war has been conducted thus far, and conjectures as to why it is so. First, he says, we are dealing with core philosophic differences over questions to do with 'how the world should be.' Thus, both sides have deep emotions on the said issues. Second, there is no incentive to try and foster consensus because in an adversarial system like ours, the game is about power - the power to get your policy instituted and your other's quashed. Third, each 'side' operates using somewhat incompatible philosophic assumptions. To the anti-abortion-rights activist, it is a child and abortion is murder. To the abortion rights activist, it is only potential life and prohibiting abortion is denying the mother freedom of person. Where one sees freedom (either of the mother or fetus), the other sees either servitude or murder. Incomatibilities like these, says Hunter, will ensure that there will be no satisfactory end to the culture war - just a long, tiring, rhetorically charged, and endless, struggle.

Hunter makes his arguments well, is quite convincing, and is as objective as possible. He gives both sides due consideration, never caricaturizing them. While the book focuses on the culture wars from somewhat of a religious perspective (Catholic and Evangelical v. Liberal Protestant and Jew) in the end, the book is about the culture war PERIOD. Highly reccomended reading.

Rating:
Summary: Why the culture wars continue?
Review: This was a textbook for me in seminary. I am in a conservative Presbyterian denomination and studied at a very conservative seminary, and this book got some interesting reviews from the students.

For me, it was a little difficult, since I don't have much background in sociology, but as I trudged through it I really grew to appreciate it. Some of my other classmates loved it too, but there were several who were quite taken aback by it. They didn't like it because Hunter didn't come out and condemn those who were on the wrong side of the culture wars.

But that is just the point - in this book he does not try to point out who is wrong and who is right, his object is to demonstrate why neither side is able to persuade, or prevail against the other.

Each side in the culture war has it's own set of presuppositions and assumptions that it speaks from. Because of this, that which seems most persuasive to one side completely misses those on the other side, because they don't share the same presuppositions. We are talking past one another.

Another problem that Hunter addresses is the issue of extremes and inflammatory rhetoric. Hunter says that, by and large, the culture wars are being fought by people on the extreme ends of their positions. So, the battle of the culture wars is usually fought with inflammatory rhetoric that doesn't persuade, it just angers.

As a sidenote I recently read a story about how communists used to train their young recruits. This particular communist said that when a young person adopted communism the best thing they could do was immediately set them on a street corner passing out communist leaflets. They would get attacked mercilessly, but this attack would only serve to harden and solidify the young communist in his or her beliefs.

I think Hunter shows this - the inflammatory rhetoric used by those on the extreme ends of the culture war debates, only serves to harden the other side in their respective positions.

So, if you are looking for quick answers, or a strategy to defeat your opponents, you won't find it here. But, if you are willing to begin to at least try to understand your opponents, as well as the larger issues, this is a great place to start.

Rating:
Summary: Why the culture wars continue?
Review: This was a textbook for me in seminary. I am in a conservative Presbyterian denomination and studied at a very conservative seminary, and this book got some interesting reviews from the students.

For me, it was a little difficult, since I don't have much background in sociology, but as I trudged through it I really grew to appreciate it. Some of my other classmates loved it too, but there were several who were quite taken aback by it. They didn't like it because Hunter didn't come out and condemn those who were on the wrong side of the culture wars.

But that is just the point - in this book he does not try to point out who is wrong and who is right, his object is to demonstrate why neither side is able to persuade, or prevail against the other.

Each side in the culture war has it's own set of presuppositions and assumptions that it speaks from. Because of this, that which seems most persuasive to one side completely misses those on the other side, because they don't share the same presuppositions. We are talking past one another.

Another problem that Hunter addresses is the issue of extremes and inflammatory rhetoric. Hunter says that, by and large, the culture wars are being fought by people on the extreme ends of their positions. So, the battle of the culture wars is usually fought with inflammatory rhetoric that doesn't persuade, it just angers.

As a sidenote I recently read a story about how communists used to train their young recruits. This particular communist said that when a young person adopted communism the best thing they could do was immediately set them on a street corner passing out communist leaflets. They would get attacked mercilessly, but this attack would only serve to harden and solidify the young communist in his or her beliefs.

I think Hunter shows this - the inflammatory rhetoric used by those on the extreme ends of the culture war debates, only serves to harden the other side in their respective positions.

So, if you are looking for quick answers, or a strategy to defeat your opponents, you won't find it here. But, if you are willing to begin to at least try to understand your opponents, as well as the larger issues, this is a great place to start.