“The Thinnest Veneer of Civilization” is the title of the article. Above it is the stock, golden-afternoon-glow photo of the Roman Forum blaring at the reader that ancient (and not a little blood-soaked) Rome is the reference point for “civilization”. Cliché, certainly, but intriguing to anyone interested in the fate of a society teetering on the precipice of non-civilization.
The article begins with, “Civilization is fragile. It hinges on ensuring the stuff of life.” This seems sensible enough; who could object? It then prioritizes the abilities “to eat, to move about, [and] to have shelter”. To disagree with travel over shelter is to quibble, of course, but the author’s order of things does trigger the first twinge of concern over the sense that this article is not intended as an intellectual exercise.
More than a twinge comes with the claim that “civilization,” the “stuff of life,” included the need “to be free from state or tribal coercion, to be secure abroad and safe at home”. It’s unlikely that a Greek or Roman from 2,000 years ago would have seen it this way, but we can accept that being coerced by the state is, more often than not, unpleasant and not beneficial to the individual.
But “tribal coercion”? What does that mean? Whose tribe? Is this a social construct? A racial one? Does it refer to Native Americans? Or to the African ancestors of Black Americans? If my “tribe” requires me to wear clothes in public and not sleep with my mother, is that tribal coercion? The sense of alarm mounts. Where is this though experiment headed?
By the fourth paragraph, it’s: “[T]he great achievement of Western civilization — consensual government, individual freedom, rationalism in partnership with religious belief, free market economics, and constant self-critique and audit — was to liberate people from daily worry over state violence, random crime, famine and often unforgiving nature.”
The picture is becoming clearer. We’re not talking about “civilization” as a universal idea; we’re talking about the West. More specifically, “rationalism in partnership with religious belief” strongly suggests a reference, a very much American reference, to Christian beliefs on the part of people who, curiously, refuse to acknowledge the separation of church and state that the US Constitution requires.
What is it, though, that makes civilization fragile? “[A]rrogant Western societies” “deluded” by the “leisure and affluence” that their civilization has produced, such that “modern man no longer needed to worry about the fruits of civilization”. Just look at Greece, Rome, Renaissance republics, and 1930s European democracies, the author says; they imploded as “civilization went headlong in reverse”.
Right. Assuming our ancestors’ non-worry over fruits caused their societies to crash, how does this relate to “modern man”? Where is this line of thought headed? “We in the modern Western world are facing just such a crisis.” Do tell us more. What crisis? Who is “we”? What are cause and effect? Most important, what does the author prescribe as remedies to prevent our civilization’s going into reverse?
“We talk grandly about the globalized Great Reset [whatever that is]. We blindly accept the faddish Green New Deal. We virtue signal about defunding the police. We merely shrug at open borders. And we brag about banning fertilizers and pesticides, outlawing the internal combustion engine, and discounting Armageddon in the nuclear age — as if on autopilot we have already reached utopia.”
Whoa! A whiff of reactionary in full screed mode. Who is writing this? “Victor David Hanson is a conservative commentator, classicist, and military historian. He is professor emeritus of classics at California State University, a senior fellow in classics and military history at Stanford University, a fellow at Hillsdale College, and a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.”
Center for American Greatness? Who knew? Nonetheless, the mind flashes the expectation that, as an academic, Hanson surely will offer facts in support of his analysis and conclusions. A reader might disagree with him, but will still be able to follow the thought train to its destination even if his characterization of the problems he’s addressing seems overwrought and not a little oversimplified.
No chance. Professor Hanson’s assertions are a cascade of absurdities and dramatic, almost campy, premises. For example, “arrogant lectur[ing]” by Europeans on climate change resulted in a “dystopian nightmare [where they] will burn dirty wood this winter as their civilization reverts from postmodern abundance to pre-modern survival”. One assumes that it is Hanson who, at least in his eyes, has been arrogantly lectured.
Then, the Biden administration’s policies — among them the cancellation of new federal oil and gas leases — has caused fuel prices to soar. “The Pentagon hectors soldiers based on their race and indoctrinates recruits in the ‘woke’ agenda.” According to Hanson, who clearly is not obligated to link cause and effect, the results have been the fiasco in Afghanistan, the aggression of Putin’s Russia, the bellicosity of China, and threats from Iran.
Biden also “inexplicably destroyed the southern border” (“utter chaos followed”), defunded the police, emptied the jails, and destroyed the criminal justice system, which has “unleashed a wave of criminals. It’s now open season on the weak and innocent”. “The streets of our cities are anarchical — and by intent.” It’s quite an allegation to make, albeit child’s play in the hands of someone shameless enough to pervert reality.
Hanson goes on. Even felons — famously au courant with trends in civilization — have “correctly conclud[ed] that bankrupt postmodern ‘critical legal theory’ [whatever that is] will ensure them exemption from punishment”. Unexplained is how, by definition, a felon can be exempt from punishment. Or whether there’s a consensus among felons as to what “postmodern” means.
“[G]reen nihilists” threaten famine by objecting to massive water projects and dams and fertilizers necessary to grow food. As a result, “millions will soon go hungry, as they have since the dawn of civilization”. Further, major cities “have turned medieval with their open sewers, garbage-strewn sidewalks, and violent vagrants”. The Black Death cannot be far behind.
The source of these evils? “[R]egressive progressivism [sic] [which] discounts all the institutions and methodologies of the past that have guaranteed a safe, affluent, well-fed, and sheltered America. … [W]e arrogantly are reverting to a new feudalism as the wealthy elite — terrified of what they have wrought — selfishly retreat to their private keeps.” Who is “we”? And who is the “wealthy elite,” rich Republicans?
In a case of over-egging, it is “self-inflicted mass shootings [eh?], random street violence, hyperinflation, a nonexistent border, unaffordable fuel and a collapsing military,” which will cause Americans “to appreciate just how thin is the veneer of their civilization”. Professor Hanson fails to tell us what form this appreciation should take. Nor does he venture a guess as to how many Americans can be bothered to share his appreciation.
By this point in the article, it’s obvious that his aim is to trigger the adrenal gland of the like-minded, that great mass — at least 74 million by last count — of unpersuadable and spiteful non-thinkers whose fervor in their beliefs is in inverse proportion to their knowledge. And real as current problems are, their misleading characterization by the likes of Hanson (purportedly an academic) does nothing to address them.
More disturbing still is the reality that Hanson is not the only preacher of pseudo-intellectual dimwittery. There’s considerable demand for what he’s selling, and many are the individual and institutional purveyors to meet it. He and his kind may think they are defending civilization, but a stake through the heart of what they represent is the only way to preserve the bit of civilization we do have.
