Faith and Politics: How the "Moral Values" Debate Divides America and How to Move ForwardTogether by John DanforthReview by: Walter Russell MeadForeign Affairs, Vol. 86, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 2007), pp. 164-165Published by: Council on Foreign RelationsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20032239 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 14:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Council on Foreign Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ForeignAffairs.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.74 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 14:16:43 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Recent Books

in American political and cultural history who has never received his due. A populist and an evangelical, he straddled cultures and constituencies that were already begin ning to separate in his day; indeed, today it is very hard to imagine a world in which the country's leading populist politician

with redistributionist economic views could simultaneously be one of the country's leading spokespeople for the Christian right. In this distinguished contribution to American letters, Kazin proves himself to have had both the historical vision and the generosity of spirit necessary to have crafted the richest and most nuanced portrait of

Bryan since the former "Boy Orator of the Platte" died. Ever since H. L. Mencken danced on Bryan's grave following Bryan's confused and feeble performance under Clarence Darrow's withering cross-exami nation at the "Scopes Monkey Trial" (on teaching evolution in public schools),

many self-described progressive intellec tuals have accepted the image of Bryan as an ignorant yahoo from the sticks. But

with the reemergence of evangelicals as an important political presence, Democrats are trying to rebuild the old bridges. This

may be tough; most white evangelicals today are more pro-market than they were in Bryan's day. Ironically, African Ameri cans are now the largest group among

whom the economics and the religion of Bryan, the lifelong segregationist champion of the old democracy, still hold sway.

Democratic Party, now need, they claim, is a synthesis of both: people with good policy ideas who know how to win elections. This insight does not exactly dazzle with its originality, nor will readers be surprised that the authors modestly suggest that this

wondrous synthesis is precisely what they themselves embody-but let all that pass.

The book's real importance is as a guide to the thinking of two bright, centrist

Democrats whose views will be carefully reviewed as the party prepares for 2008.

The most important big idea in the book is that Democrats should stop defending the New Deal and instead concentrate on recasting it for a more mobile society. Portable pensions and health care are two of the cornerstones of this vision. Less hopeful is an idea that the authors appear to set great store by: a compulsory period of three months of national service and training for all Americans under 25. Wonks

will observe that the time is too short to teach anything useful and that while the cost would be high, the real benefits would be few. Hacks will wonder whether even a short-term, nonmilitary draft is really the proposal best calculated to build wide spread support among younger voters.

Faith and Politics: How the 'Moral Values" Debate DividesAmerica and How to Move Forward Together. BY SENATOR JOHN DANFORTH. Viking, 2006,

224 pp. $24.95.

Few Americans bring more experience in both religion and politics to the table than Danforth, an Episcopalian priest and a former senator, ambassador to the United Nations, and special envoy to Sudan, where he helped broker the accord ending a long civil war that had taken on overtones of a Christian-Muslim

The Plan: Big IdeasforAmerica. BY RAHM EMANUEL AND BRUCE REED.

PublicAffairs, 2006, 224 pp. $19.95. Washington, write Emanuel and Reed,

is divided between Hacks and Wonks. Wonks focus on policy; Hacks want to win. What the country, and especially the

[164] FOREIGN AFFAIRS* Volume86 No.i

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.74 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 14:16:43 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Recent Books

religious conflict. His current book is both a plea and a warning. Danforth wants American Christians to define their role in the world as supporters of a "ministry of reconciliation": building peace by overcoming differences and healing old

wounds. With, as Danforth points out, a significant minority of Muslims embracing calls for a holy war against non-Muslims, this ministry is urgently needed. Turning to domestic politics, Danforth warns that an increasingly strident and intolerant Christian activism on the political right threatens the comity and tolerance that a

ministry of reconciliation requires. That Danforth, whose political success was based in part on his reputation as a pro life voice in the Senate, now warns about the undue strength of the religious right is a significant event in the politics of American religion. Clearly, as they look around the

world for opportunities to launch a min istry of reconciliation, American Protestants should consider the possibility of address ing the splits in their own ranks that have so bitterly divided evangelical and liberal Protestants in recent decades. Having helped broker peace in southern Sudan, perhaps Danforth can now help Southern Baptists and Congregationalists learn to get along.

problems faced by the 15 million Muslims in the European Union and those encoun tered by the EU in trying to cope with them. The issue, Shore points out, goes

way beyond the matter of terrorism and may get more troublesome as Europe,

with its aging population and low birthrate, needs more immigrants. In his interviews

with Muslims in most European countries, he has found deep "ambi-Americanism" and "ambi-Europeanism." There are, of course, profound political causes for their hostility to the United States, but there is also "among younger European Muslims a growing sense that Europe and America are spiritually empty" and a feeling of being rejected by the Europeans among whom they live. Their consequent fundamental ism (which "simply means returning to the fundamentals of a religious doctrine") is not synonymous with terrorism, but it is often perceived as a first step toward vio lence especially since "Muslims on the

whole still represent part of the underclass, overrepresented in unemployment, low wage earnings, and political disenfran chisement." Shore is, however, confident that solutions can be found, and he makes a series of "modest proposals"-such as retiring the vocabulary of war from the current language and creating a "Head Start" program for low-income Muslims in Europe. This eminently readable vol ume deserves to be widely known and seriously pondered.

Western Europe STANLEY HOFFMANN

Breeding Bin Ladens:America, Islam, and the Future ofEurope. BY ZACHARY SHORE. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006, 240 pp. $25.00.

Shore's wise and thoughtful book addresses Europe's "Muslim problems"-those

A Question ofBalance: How France and the United States Created Cold War Europe. BY MICHAEL CRESWELL. Harvard

University Press, 2006, 256 pp. $49.95. Creswell intelligently examines the negoti ations that led to West Germany's rearma

ment after the French Parliament rejected

FOREIGN AFFAIRS January/February2007 [165]

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.74 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 14:16:43 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions