An Interview with Hans Joas

In his research into the impact of Pragmatism on American society at the turn of the last century, historian and NeoAmericanist editorial board member Professor Andrew Johnston invariably came across the path-breaking work of German sociologist Hans Joas. Although a preeminent social theorist of his own, and indeed perhaps one of the leading public intellectuals of his generation in contemporary Germany, Joas surprisingly began his career with an intellectual biography of the American philosopher and sociologist George Herbert Mead, one of the founders of Pragmatism. Mead’s early 20th century work on the social origins of the self, which depended on a complex theory of social interaction through the use of what he called “signifi cant symbols,” also made him a towering infl uence in 20th century American sociology despite having never published a major statement of his own theoretical premises. According to Johnston, the most notable aspect of Joas’s work was his determination to revive Mead’s reputation and, in particular, explore how Pragmatism and the sociology of the self might help infuse certain German schools of social theory with a healthy democratic bias. Wanting to know how he had come to Mead in particular, and just what he thought his own recent efforts at rehabilitating a trans-Atlantic dialogue of social theory might mean for both Germany and the United States, Johnston met with Joas in August 2006, while he was fi nishing a year as a Fellow at the Wissenschaftskolleg (Institute for Advanced Study) in Berlin. The following are exerts of their larger conversation on pragmatism, the transatlantic flow of ideas and American foreign policy/relations.

Read the full paper...

On Shaky Ground: Thomas Prince and John Winthrop on Earthquakes, Lightning Rods, and God

In the aftermath of the 1755 New England earthquake, preacher Thomas Prince and professor John Winthrop engaged in a four-month public dispute about the causes of earthquakes and the effectiveness of lightening rods. Historians have traditionally characterized their disagreement as battle between science and religion, but this paper traces the conflict instead to a fundamental difference in the two men’s personal theologies. Prince’s conception of a wrathful god and Winthrop’s belief in a more benevolent deity generated the contrasting visions for public welfare evident in their sermons, lectures, and newspaper submissions.

Read the full paper...

Constructing the “People’s Music”:

The Federal Music Project, Nationalism and the New Deal, 1935-1939

In this paper John Gronbeck-Tedesco evaluates the role of the Federal Music Project in promoting Depression-era nationalism during the New Deal’s program of recovery and relief. Drawing upon arguments by Eric Hobsbawm and Benedict Anderson regarding the nature of nationalism, this discussion posits that the U.S. government’s state-sponsored music project was infused with a nationalist discourse that promoted the creation of American folk and American classical music and was tied to notions of democracy, economic prosperity, and multiracial solidarity. Thus, while scholars often distance the U.S. government from the field of American cultural production, Gronbeck-Tedesco argues that the Federal Music Project offers one instance when engineering of the state was directly involved in America’s cultural industries.

Read the full paper...

President W.H. Bush, Masculinity, and America's Invasion of Panama City in 1989

Based on an examination of official and unofficial document, editorial cartoons, and various media sources, Mahoney argues that competing definitions of masculinity influenced George H.W. Bush’s foreign Policy in the invasion of Panama City in 1989, this article participates in a revisionist historiography that considers gender as a significant category of analysis to understand American international relations. The author shows that, at the outset of his presidency, Bush adopted a cautious approach to foreign policy, which emphasized cooperation and peace through diplomacy. But soon Bush’s legitimacy as President was called into question, notably by some elements of the media and a fringe of the public who associated political power with a forceful and aggressive ideal of masculinity. By invading Panama, Bush finally shed his image as a flimsy and meek politician and thus confirmed his legitimacy as President to jingoist elements of American society.

Read the full paper...