PLACE DI m mummw-Moum wrocord.
TO AVOID FINES rotum on or before data duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

usu Mn Minn-am Action/Equal Oppommny Imam
Mini-pi

 

ABSTRACT
GOVERNMENT ON THE COUCH:
HAROLD LASSWELL AND ERICH FROMM

AS POLITICAL THEOR ISTS

by'Franklyn‘Wedgwood‘York

This paper presents summaries of the psychological
and political.theories or Erich.Frcmn and Harold Lasswell.
An attempt is then made to evaluate their contributions to
political theory.

Fran. and Lssswell.were selected because they are
concerned with all or politics, they are perhaps the best
known exponents of a psychological approach to politics, and
they represent two ways of viewing the problem. Fromm is a
psychologist writing about politics and Lasswell is a political
scientist using psychology.

Lasswell's psychology is found to contain a psychoana-
lytic component, a perceptual psychology relating to the use
of symbols and a statement or the values men pursue. His political
science introduces the concept of world revolutions and offers

the hOpe that a new science, policy science, may be created.

Franklyn wedgwood York

A brief description is given of the community Lasswell
envisions through the use of policy science.

Fromm's psychology is seen to be based on the
human situation -- man's fundamental aloneness and related-
ness and his self awareness. The human situation creates
an existential dichotomy; the way man reacts to his exis-
tential dichotomy determines the kind of man he is. If man
exercises his reasoning, working and loving capacities, he
is good. If not, his personality becomes crippled. Fromm's
political science is concerned with the effect society has
on.man's development. Fromm finds modern society wanting in
many respects and outlines a community where man may develop
his potentialities to the fullest.

Fromm's political theory is evaluated. His insight
into many of the human effects of politics is seen as his
strength. His vagueness and failure to acknowledge societal
problems as something which requires serious study are seen
as his major weaknesses.

Lasswell's political theory is seen as a revolt
against the formalism of many earlier political scientists.
Lasswell.is praised for cutting through the rituals of
politics to political reality. He is questioned for cher-

ishing premature hepes for his policy science.

Franklyn‘wedgwood York

Finally,Lasswell and Fromm are compared; it seemed
that Lasswell placed far more importance on the means of ats;~
taining the good society than did Fromm. The importance of
a political theorist's view of man in determining his political
theory is mentioned. Lasswell and Fromm are distinguished
from their less psychologically oriented colleagues by the
breadth of wheir theories, by their concern for all of
politics’effects on the individual and by their desire to

prescribe as well as describe.

mm ( M

GOVERNMENT ON THE COUCH:

HAROLD LASSWELL AND ERICH FROMM
AS POLITICAL THEORISTS

BY
Franklyn Wedgwood York

A Thesis
Submitted to the College of Social Science
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Social Science

1963

To my Father

.0

m/ .5.

ll...

0,.

N3

To my Father

.0.

m/

r}

I'.

13 -

To my Father

Acknowledgements

I should like to thank Drs. Donald M. Johnson,
Joseph A. Schlesinger, Bruce L. Smith, and Charles Wrigley
for their counsel and assistance. Special thanks go to

Dr. Donald Olmsted , the chairman of my committee.

iii

I.

II.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Lasswell's Psychology. . . . . 4

Fromm's Psychology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Lasswell's Political Science . . . . . . . . . .25

Fromm's P01itical SCiencee o e e e e e e e e e 035
Fromm Evaluation. 0 e o e e e e e e e e e e e e 50

LaSSWell Evaluation 0 e e e e e e e e e e e e e 61

The Psychological Approach to Politics. . . . . 71

iv

INTRODUCTION

The history of science offers several examples of
the progress of one science stimulating another.

Progress in the study of geology and genetics has
aided the theory of evolution.

In more modern times both chemistry and physics
have contributed to the study of life in the new discipline
biophysics. .

The amazing deductions of Newtonian physics made
many men try to construct similar systems to explain all
phenomena. Laplace made such an attempt.

In the social sciences, one field has frequently come
to the aid of another and often the field aided is political
science.

There seems to‘be a apecial fascination in writing
about politics. Perhaps it is because the grand theorists
of the past like Spencer, Benth. and Marx were interested
in reconstructing society and politics is the study of those
who hold final power in society.

In any casg our own age has not been bereft of one
social science coming to the aid of another. And perhaps
our age is peculiarly suited to political explanations
contributed by psychology.

2

To repeat a truism, it seems that never has an
age both promised and threatened so much. We are faced with
the contrasting visions of a disease and poverty free mill-
ennium and a thermonuclear hell! Political knowledge has
lagged so far behind the physical sciences that their dis-
coveries may destroy us instead of aiding us.

This paradox cries for explanation, and among the
explanations which have been offered are those of the
clinical and social psychologists. There is a supreme
irrationality in progress for one's own annihilation, and
psychology which since Freud has been concerned with the
irrational in man may have much to offer in the study of
politics.

I have chosen to examine the theories of Lasswell
and Fromm because:

1. They are perhaps the most famous exponents of

a psychological approach to politics.

2. One is a psychologist writing about politics, the
other a political scientist using psychology to
help explain politics.

3. Both Lasswell and Fromm take a broad view of
politics and are concerned with explaining all
of politics rather than some one part.

This thesis is not a very systematic appraisal of the

political theories of Fromm and Lasswell. Also, I fear that
the presentation of the views of Fromm and Lasswell is too

long and my evaluation of them too short. I can only answer

3
that social science theories of the breadth of Lasswell's
and Fromm's are not yet themselves very systematic and that
it seemed advisable to present Fromm's and Lasswell's views
as I saw them so that the reader would have a better idea

what I was trying to evaluate.

LASSWELL'S PSYCHOLOGY

An award to Lasswell from the American Council of
Learned Societies speaks of him.as the "selective transmitter
of the Freudian vision;' this seems a succinct description
of Lasswell's psychoanalytic accomplishments. As might be
expected of a political scientist, it is in the application
of psychoanalysis to politics rather than in the creation
of new psychoanalysis that Lasswell shines.

But there is more to Lasswell's psychology than
just psychoanalysis. my reading of Lasswell has suggested
the following three part division of his psychology.

1. A psychoanalysis based largely on Freud, with

an admixture of Sullivan in his later writings.

2. 1 sort of perceptual.psychology to explain the

importance of political symbolism.or propaganda.

3. An enumeration of the goals or values men pursue.

I. Psychoanalysis
Let us examine each of these psychologies beginning

with psychoanalysis. Freud invented psychoanalysis, and
Lasswell.is quite ready to acknowledge his importance.

L-
.2

xodern psyCEOjatholo:y is
and undoubted:
Freua

0 J. , — A . 4- '? .« ,-\

1c.s 51 a resunc develop int,

- ‘5 l - f . M - —. q H- nos-«I

v ti- most revelut OIIspy 1 uIc 1s . mvnd

(

q

n I . r -r r 4- J-‘,— ‘ . .. r 1‘55 e g
Las $811 is a richer orpnoeoz FreLIdian, espe01o7 V

C”)

in his srlier writihos. Tues e xsmiles taken from Tsvoho-

‘0..- a-a — 5,2 . V .
fl—

. “A" T? m- ~ - °a -. 2.2. , I! a.-L A 13.,
ratholosr and Iolitics Lu" trove illustIsclve one iHuC“pSulfl
1 ._.L d _

 

l"‘
:3
U)
CO
d
} J
1
Lute
('4‘

in comparin
' . d“ \r ‘ N 1 v --. .. ~-‘ ~»\ re IL ,\ v- 4- .
1. Lasswell is oltcn cencerneo site 3 sligie ornlndcic

event .

n- -. 7 I. -‘-~ -- a ('1 ‘.h j W".
A Saleeman s solicituoe Ior inc biinu 1o t he»; t9 L13
.—' ‘ 1 . 1.- ,, .. n , - ”_ .
s1ster s “hlilLS Out one cvo 01 his -SVoflI as c t.“
. z. I' ° 4- ,1. ,1 4. . 3, .L.,r 1 .LI. .0 .
A Judge s overSIOn so ”n attorne" 1: Uri e to one Cigar
‘L‘ . - H 1,! ‘ .‘- _e 1‘ A‘Mp - :9 ‘ .L’- e_ . f!” n P
the attorney is S.ILJIK’YflJlQu Tuxdgifle CLO gauge 01 In
‘4' ‘ .‘fi ..- q. A “
mipleasaLc $011001 inciosh ./

. . ° .01- . , .°
2. Lassyell is clean concernec tit

se:. :1 etioloc'v

Va.

Zia i” on ccitotor Lessvell discuss -s, is motivrted by
his struggle to keep his sexuality in check.4

lbs“: G, anotheII:"WIt"§eI, ixaznotivated_nfirjxazis envy
to have a Isle child.

3. Lossxell conceives of libido, in relation 0 a

w 4- q 1- . a -, .0
limited niaiter or amount of II

 

1,. a ,..,_-'1 12----LIA1N .1 gas
1L1rolo D. us toll, ischogac;o_o_y CLC Iolitlos,

-- , _. ‘.~ n? In. .2 .- .o I. : ,,.,.- VA. v' I- an! .. ..
(Co Irifit 1;,0, L-ivers1ty OI CliCHVO; i<m or : Vining Tress
f‘f .-,--\ ‘_‘ ‘- J, .9, .L 0 P7
1,90, Co. as: tools C-1clOL), p. l(.

 

 

 

6
Lsrcis sis: is ancouIe“eo by olstscl- s i: the early
love rel: tionSIijs or ey overindul:cnce an“ simir.tion
in the family circle. Lioi do which is blocked in movin
toward osjects settles back upon the self 0

M

‘x’

...- . .1. .p '1 *1 1 -,-- .. °
4. IMAOPSQHCC 01 esr1y csi-tcneoe elueriences. Less
' ~_e _ s a“: ~19 w '5 .v _ .e v e 5 e
tell s1: asses t1e c11lenooo 01 elm st 0 errone 1n s13 oio-
U
Mirth ‘1"135. (\o
v a- LJ-i‘uu .
'— Q ‘9‘ | -.| - ~‘R - J‘ ‘3 f. ‘3'. I'I "‘ .1 S J’ . f‘. 4'.1 . Y?
3. Ierisps most 1mporpus 1 r n1- p011t1sil .1eory,
.- ,. .v . 4. ‘l- 4.4. . '3 1 . , , 4.
a me. .11t CIa11ous outloo1 on unfetteree Lum1n natur—
& ° .. 0 vs .- a - .«L , - I- .- J.
n Jouertlist L S no "as d to crL'ace Lv n1s latent
0
-w - 4-
:10...OSO--L1341.L LILr .
'1 e 'e f. .. ‘.\-~-. _e ”L- ‘ 4. .e r“ 9‘ J- r _v_ _e
A CPlVlflv 1e11r11cr cor J, 1: motiv.ced Ly cascr2t1on
O
(I - r

' 4.x \ . o . . .1 -. 1 4.

ves 1n the League 0: l s one OIIle Iesee b0

a. 1 .\/~ g . ‘~ —’-‘ -.l r a ‘ a» .

or L1e ’Ullt he Ice 5 in lIsroer1nj KLTCCPO'S :1;
o

\_.
Q

a v e
- (-1 -- van-I5 o (1 n .q- r. '1': (a ,a 11)?“ (m
L1... ».A4‘. 'ulueu tut.'1.pka. 14“. L) TAN... LIL L3 0

——-.r\1 fl 3. ea"
- ‘--~—-vl.e—il.l.d‘

(D

In "Th Triple Appeal Principl-," Lsssrel

retention of three employees by an execut1ve on the basis of

Q I -I Q
I

:e 1e, ego, one stperego.

I‘J

iut

s
95‘

their atrial to t colorless

s1illf ul controller arrssls to the ejo “r1rcijl of " '

‘ :-:‘_Ie I
I
my. C--

mcvr.

A -- 9 a . 3. L , J- .I w, 4. .- .. 4. -n .1. - .,- J. .L‘
n com_ulS1ve 1rr1c3c13¢ 14rc1nec o- a secret or; s_je:ls so one
-v 1‘ ~ (’1' -‘ rafir‘ -‘\‘.- ‘. 1‘ n firm-I 1‘ re ‘fi ‘\Vv- 4- - 7" re ‘N 1 --. 4-1-3 ‘ ‘4
0.4.6 bk bi J-O' I.) L -101. (.v/ _ O ‘1‘. L-..— a_. 5-0 '..—L/ ULa‘J. C J L.) : NLI LJU1A_\—l 11;; I» _._ k..- L10; .
.m— 1 .I - '7 a- 2. . '2 .3. 4». '.~,-'. . - I— ~ !

1ieldI or1o vno 13 Lastly 1r1esely 11.: 11s co-mon1ers

.2 v --.-- fl 4- ‘ r J'% ‘ ' “ Vvfi‘l‘ O ‘ . . ‘\. -v . q 7
w1tes a ges1s LO tLe executi Ve s COTCUth 1311-1teo 1e.

nuna

TI - 7' I .. “n .0 A?
Lass Iell '8 lo tcr vritings (rower one Icrso1.l1tg_snc

v1 . fi’ 1' \1 q A q ”A T. -.\ .K ‘1', ”v
Democratic CsIr on) less unssosI-ely Ireuo11a and s1om

-~‘

 

 

vr "

 

C'
--’-1

 

H
H m. - _ -- 0 . .. ,. .9 - r.
1 The 131 le Appeal 1ri201fle: A 13121. ““3, arer;
n 1‘? -. w a..- n . A -A‘~' . + r. q . "I ”A f. 7' r-
Journsl 01 soc1e1orv snurry 1;,2; Rtlflhcmfl 1a -1 1:21 :is
‘r - 1 v ._ .--.° . ”.0 . .2 0 .L .. “I. .. . ‘ «r I- n!"
of :LliL_C.1 1enhy101I (O-1oIIC L11vers1tg .Iess, I 1-21, 1;».

 

a Neo Freudian tinge.

l. Lasswell is more concerned with the effects of

status differences on personality.

Dr. B pushed by his mother, who felt she had married
beneath herself, into medicine acquires an anti-
democratic attitude.

2. Lasswell praises Sullivan's conception of infancy.

Unless there is some early basis for trust in the bene-
nvolence of the surrounding world, we can hardly ex-
pect that the individual will develOp prediSpositions
capable of carrying him through adverse experiences.
This is the deep significence of the "good mother"
image in contributing to the formation of a perspective
that fosters inclusive identifications with other
peOple.

3. The most important change in Lasswell's psycho-
analysis, however, is his greater confidence in the benevolent

potentialities of man.

Let us take as the outstanding characteristic of demo-
cratic character, in reference to identifications the
maintenance of an Open as against a closed ego...The
democratic attitude toward other human beings is warm
rather than frigid and expanding rather than exclusive
and constrictive.

Let us Speak of the democratic character as multi-
valued, rather than single valued, and as disposed
to share rather than to hoard or monOpolize.

In PsychOpathology and Politics, Lasswell suggested
the following formula to indicate the relation between private

motives and public consequences.

 

8Harold D. Lasswell, Power and Personality, (COpyright
1948, W. N. Norton & Company; New York: The Viking Press, 1962,
Compass books edition), pp. 152-154.

9Harold D. Lasswell, Democratic Character printed in
The Political Writings of Harold D. Lasswell, The Free Press,
Glencoe, Illinois, 1951, p. 502.

lOIbid., p. 495.

p3 d3r = P Where p = private motives
d = diSplacement onto a
public object
r = rationalization in terms
of public interest
the political ma?
transformed into 1

P

3

The task of psychoanalysis is to penetrate the

II II

rationalizations of political man to find his real motivation.
This is a task for which ordinary logical thought is poorly
fitted. Logical thought considers only conscious motives
which are often but rationalizations for the real unconscious
motives, as the several cases I have quoted and the many more
Lasswell discusses show. Were all the things that Mr. A
agitated for come to pass, Mr. A would find something new

to agitate for. His agitation is not an end in itself but
serves his craving for deference. The judge would not come
to like the attorney by being told what a nice fellow the
attorney was; the judge had to understand the source of his
dislike, the cigar, which to ordinary logical thought would

seem completely unrelated.

II. Perceptual Psychology

The second part of Lasswell's Psychology is the psych-
ological underpinning for his stress on the importance of
symbols in politics. Lasswell is not so explicit about this
part of his psychology as the other parts. Nonetheless I

think we can discern certain psychological premises running

 

llLasswell, PsychOpathology and Politics, pp. 75-76.

9
through his discussions of symbols.

1. The relation between a symbol and its referents is
not always perfectly clear. The same symbol can
mean different things to different peOple. This
is especially true of abstract and value ladden
symbols (e.g. political symbols).

In "Psychology of Hitlerism," Lasswell says that the
Jew served for the lower middle class as the symbol
of the plutocracy and also of the radical agitator.
He served as the symbol of the nouveau riche for

the aristocracy, the symbol of Germany's defeat

in World War I for the soldier, and the symbol of
urban immorality for the strait-laced peasant.

2. Inadequate information allows a symbol to become
increasingly unrelated to its referent.
It was easier to idealize the Belgians in World War I
than it would have been to idealize the French and
the British, since there was less known about the
Belgians.
In a California attitude study, it was found that
the Turks were a more hated group than the Chinese
or Japanese although almost nothing was known about
the Turks o 2
3. Symbolic indoctrination is most effective when it is
unconscious.
In Politics: Who Gets What, When, How, Lasswell says:
A well established ideology perpetuates itself with
little planned prOpaganda by those whom it benefits
most. When thought is taken about ways and means
of sowing cigviction, conviction has already
languished.
4. Symbolic indoctrination is often exceedingly pervasive.

In Politics, Lasswell says:

12Harold D. Lasswell, Politics: Who Gets What When,
How, (Capyright 1958, Meridian Books, Inc., New VorE; 50py-
Ham; 1936, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York).

13Ibid., p. 31.

5.

7.

10

The individualism of bourgeois society like the
communism of a socialized state must be inculcated
from the nursery to the grave...Penny banks instill
the habit of thrift; trading in the schoolyard prop-
agates the bourgeois scale of values...money is
scarce and it is not wise to buy the bicycle now.

Gossip, fiction, motion pictures sustain the theSis
of personal reSponsibility for failure or success.

Social and industrial difficulties are automatically
traced to personal equations. If conditions are
wretched at the X coal mine, it is because the owners
back in New York didn‘t know about it.

Not desperation through unemployment, not insecurity
through crOp failure, not diminished administrative
efficacy because of greater burdens of prohibitory
regulation, but personal motives and struggles are
the subject matter of the secondary means of communi-
cation in the bourgeois world.

When such an ideology impregnates life from start to
finish, the thesis of collective reiponsibility runs
against a wall of noncomprehension. 4

Symbols can be manipulated in ways in which the objects
they refer to cannot. It is much easier to add 1000
and 3000 pounds on paper than to lug that much lead

to a scale.

Again in Politics, Lasswell says:

An established elite is usually so well situated in
control of the goods, violence, and practices of a
community that a challenging elite is constrained to
rely chiefly upon symbols. After all symbols are
cheap and elusive; they can be Spread by word of
mouth beyond the eye of vigilant authority; they

can organize concerted action among the disaffected
and promote he crisis in which other methods are
serviceable.

Manipulators of symbols receive higher deference than
manipulators of things. The writer rates above the
skilled worker.

A symbol is often confused with its referent, thus a

 

14Ibid., pp. 31-03.
l5Ibid., pp. 168-169.

ll
change in symbols is mis aken for a change in things.
The garbageman feels better now that he is known as
a sanitary engineer.

III. Enumeration of Values

 

In Politics and World Politics and Personal Insecurity,

 

Lasswell lists safety, deference, and income as three general,

representative values. In Power and P rsonality and Democratic

 

Character, Lasswell expanded this list to include power, re-

 

Spect, affection, rectitude, well-being, wealth, enlightenment,
and skill.

This enumeration of the values men pursue serves two
purposes. (1) It is a means of finding who the elite are,

1.e. the elite is that part of society which gets the most

safety, deference, income, etc. (2) In Power and Personality

 

and Democratic Character, it is a means of determining an
ideal political order, a Free Nan's Commonwealth.

In Politics, Lasswell discusses the distribution of
safety, deference, and income. He concludes that the safety
peak is not so steep as that of income and deference.

In Power and Personality, Lasswell goes much further

 

in his discussion. He considers the interactions among values
and the ways in which one value may be used to pursue another.
Thus Paderawski's musical skill was a springboard to power

in liberated Poland and CleOpatra's (or Liz Taylor's) use of
affection is well known. As the title of the book indicates,
Lasswell is most concerned with those who seek power as a
value. Lasswell sees the seeking for power as means to over-

come low estimates of the self. He sees this seeking for

12
power as most likely to deveIOp when there are extremes of

indulgences and deprivations.

I.

FROMM‘S PSYCHOLOGY

The Human Situation

The basis of Fromm's psychology is the human

situation, as he calls it. The human situation arises when

animal life which had previously lived according to instinct

evolves to the point that it becomes aware of itself.

At a certain point of evolution, there occurred a

unique break, comparable to the first emergence of
matter, to the first emergence of life, and to the

first emergence of animal.existenceoo.When the animal
transcends nature, when it transcends the purely passive
role of the creature...man is born...This birth.of man
may have lasted for hundreds of thousands of years, but
what matters is that a new species arose,lgranscending
nature, that life became aware of itself.

This self awareness is not without its problems. The

animal had lived in harmony with nature in the sense that it

was instinctually equipped for the conditions it had to meet.

Han,

equipped with self awareness realizes he must die and

is forced to try and solve an insoluable dichotomy on his

own.

Self~awareness, reason, and imagination have disrupted
the "harmony. which characterizes animal.existence. Their
emergence has made man into an anomaly, into the freak of
the universe. He is part of nature, subject to her physi-
cal laws and unable to change them, yet he transcends the

 

-Lblrich Fro-lb The Sane Society ( Hew'York: Rinehart

a Company. 1955), p. 23.

13

14

rest of nature. He is set apart while being a part; he
is homeless, yet chained to the home he shares with all
creatures. Cast into this world at an accidental time
and place, he is forced out of it again accidentally.
Being aware of himself, he realizes his own powerlessness
and the limitations of his existence. He visualizes his
own end: death. Never is he free from the dichotomy of
his existence: he cannot rid himself of his mind, even
if he should want to; he cannot rid himself of his body
as long as hi is alive -- and his body makes him want

to be alive. 7

Fromm feels that in man's existential dichotomy is
to be found the source of all human progress. Man, unlike
the animal, cannot simply repeat the pattern of the Species,
he must live. Man's birth is essentially a negative event.
He is the most helpless of all animals at birth and must
deveIOp as he lives - indeed man's entire life can be looked on
as his further birth and it is the essence of his tragic dicho-
tomy that he must die before his is fully born.

Learning to live with the human situation is hard.

The fact that man's birth is primarily a negative act,
that of being thrown out of the original oneness with
nature, that he cannot return to where he came from,
implies that the process of birth is by no means an
easy cne. Each step into his new human existence is
~frightening...We are never free from two conflicting
tendencies: one to emerge from the womb...from bondage
to freedom; another to return to the womb...to certainty
and security. In the history of the individual, and of
the race the progressive tendency has proven to be
stronger yet the phenomenon of mental illness and the
regression of the human race to positions apparently
relinquished generations ago, show the intense struggle
which accompanies each new act of birth.

What then is the answer to the human situation?

 

17Erich Fromm, Man For Himself (New York: Holt Rinehart
and Winston, 1947), p. 35.

18Fromm, The Sane Society, p. 27.

15
There is only one solution to his problem; to face the
truth...To recognize that there is no power transcending
him which can solve his problem.for him... recognize that
there is no meaning to life except the meaning man gives
his life by the unfolding of his powers, by living pro-
duetively...19

The‘way man reacts to his existential dichotomy deter-
mines the sort of man he is. Basically there are two ways:
(I) To deny his uniqueness and self-awareness through com-
pulsive activity or slavelike submission to powers outside
himself. (2) Living life for himself by the unfolding of
his own productiveness. ‘

This might be called the productive non-productive
dichotomy and it is found throughout Fromm's work. The pro-
ductive non-productive dichotomg'manifests itself in many
ways. To wit:

1. Love v. symbiosis

2. Self-love v. selfishness

3. Humanistic v. authoritarian conscience

h. Pleasure: happiness v. pseudo-happiness

5. Reason v. intelligence

6. Productive work v. laziness or compulsive activity

II. Love

Human existence is characterized by the fact that man
is alone and separated from the world; not being able
to stand the separation, he is impelled to seek for
relatedness and oneness.20

 

19Fromlb Man for Himself, ppm hhrhS
20mm. p. 96.

16
Love is not primarily a relationship to a specific
person; it is an attitude, an orientation of
character which determines the relatedness of a
person to the world as a whole, not toward one
object of love. If a person loves only one
other person and is indifferent to the rest of
his fe low men, his love is not love but a 21
symbiotic attachment, or an enlarged egotism. _

Love is an important part of productiveness; the
ability to achieve oneness with others and yet remain an
independent entity.

In discussing love, we must be very careful to dis-
tinguish between what is commonly called love and what is
truly love. Love is used in our culture to refer to every
feeling short of utter disgust. Peeple think that loving is
a matter of finding the right object when love is a general
orientation not directed exclusively toward one person.

The perversion of love most fraught with political
significence is symbiosis. Real love seeks oneness with
others while preserving the individual's integrity. Symbiosis
seeks oneness with another by destroying the integrity of the
self. Symbiosis is a manifestation of the sado-masochist
character.

The masochist seeks to overcome his unbearable state
of aloneness by merging himself with a larger more powerful
entity. The masochist seeks to rid himself of his self by
humbling and debasing it; pain is not the masochist's final

aim, it is the destruction of his self for which the masochist

firibfia

21Erich Fromm, The Art of Lovin (Copyright 1956,
New York: Harper & Bros. I932}, p. 33.

 

17

The sadist is the other side of the symbiotic coin;
the sadist tries to overcome his aloneness by incorporating
others in his self. He seeks absolute power over others.
There is no greater power over another person than that of
inflicting pain, so the sadist is often cruel to his object.
But as with the masochist, pain is not the sadist's ultimate
interest, it is the loss of the independent self. Indeed
there are “kindly” forms of sadism, the sadist is willing to
grant his object anything it wants -- except the most important
thing -- the freedom to he himself.

Everyone has a little sado-masochist in him and the
two traits are generally found together, hence the name.

This should not surprise us, since they spring from the same
desire -- to be rid of oneself.

Sade-masochistic, eSpecially masochistic phenomena,
are likely to be confused with love. It might seem there_is
no better proof of love than the willingness to give up one's
self for another. But love affirms one's self and masochism
is its very Opposite. We shall have more to say about love

in the section on self love.

III. Self Love

Freud was wrong in Opposing self love and love for
others. Libido is not a fixed quantity, which runs out if it
is Spread too thin; Freud's narcisistic person doesn't love
others but he doesn't love himself either.

Men like Calvin and Luther ranted against self love
and called it incompatible with goodness, but this is only

18
because their “good” man was sado-masochist who denied his
self.

Real love is basically a conjunctive relation and
this conjunction extends to oneself as much as to others. The
Biblical injunction "love thy neighbor as thyself" expresses
this idea.

Many peeple whom we think of as self interested have
lost all interest in their real selves. Fromm uses Ibsen's
Peer Gynt as an example. Gynt followed "an army that of
wishes, appetites, desires!” and lost his true self.

The failure of modern culture lies not in its principle
of individualism not in the idea that moral virtue is
the same as the pursuit of self interest, but in the
deterioration of the meaning of self interest, not in
the fact that peeple are too much concerned with their
self interest, but that they are not concerned with

the interest of their real self; not in the fact that
they ars too selfish, but that they do not love them-
selves. 2

In contrast to such "self interest" as Peer Gynt's,
true self interest is a manifestation of productiveness. The
loving person loves himself as much as any one else.

...Not only others, but we ourselves are the ”object"

of our fee ings and attitudes...Love of others and

love of ourselves are not alternatives. On the contrary,
an attitude of love toward themselves will be found in
all those who are capable of loving others.

From this it follows that my own self, in principle, must
be as much an object of my ove as another person. The
affirmation of one's own life, happiness, growth, freedom
is rooted in ones capacity to figve, i.e., in care, reSpect
reaponsibility, and knowledge.

 

22Fromm, Man for Himself, p. 139.
23Ibid., pp. 129-130.

19
True self love is also an expression of potency in
contrast to the sadist's will to power. The man who has the

ability to be himself for himself will be a good man.

IV. Conscience

“There is no prouder statement man can make than to
say: 'I shall act according to my own conscience'.”

24

Socrates preferred death to compromising his conscience.
But the men of the inquisition and predatory warmkers have
also claimed to be motivated by their consciences. What sort
of thing is conscience that it can bring out the best and
worst in man?

Fromm suggests the confusion Springs from the use of
one term, conscience, to cover two very different things,
authoritarian and humanistic conscience.

"The authoritarian conscience is the voice of inter-
nalized external authority.“ The norms and sanctions of the
family, church, and state become internalized and become
"part of oneself." This authoritarian conscience is the reg
sult of the individual's symbiosis with the authority he
happens to serve. And it is this authoritarian conscience
which Freud has called the super ego. Freud mistook this
kind of conscience for all of conscience.

This internalization of authority has two consequences:

,(1) Man becomes the strict taskmaster who treats himself as
his own slave by taking over the role of the authority.

 

24Ibid., p. 141.-

20
(2) The authoritarian conscience more or less cripples the
individual's productiveness and generates sadism and destruc-
tiveness. We see the source of auto da fe better now.

Fromm sees the Oedipus complex not in the child's
incestuous desires, but in his rebellion against the author-
itarian commands of society transmitted by his parents. All
of the parents'frustrations and insecurities are transmitted
to the child who is made to feel guilty for all his normal
strivings. Even in our non-authoritarian culture the child
is expected to conform to "common sense.”

Humanistic conscience is the antithesis of the author-
itarian; humanistic constience is not the commands of a
foreign authority, rather humanistic conscience is knowledge
about ourselves, not abstract alienated knowledge but caring,
loving knowledge. Humanistic conscience enables us to diff-
erentiate these acts which aid in the realization of ourselves
from those which cripple our selves. Conscience can help us
become what we potentially are. It is the voice of loving
care for ourselves.

The voice of humanistic conscience is soft and in our
culture listening to it is cepecially difficult; we have
learned to listen to everyone but ourselves. Tragically the
less man listens to his conscience the softer its voice be-

comes and it is weakest when he needs it most.25

 

25Fromm, Man for Himself, taken from p. 158.

21
V. Reason - Productive Thinking
To understand productive thinking, we must distinguish
between intelligence and reason.
Intelligence is man's tool for attaining practical
goals with the aim of discovering those aSpects of
things the knowledge of which is necessary for
manipulating them. The goal itself or, what is the
same, the premises on which "intelligent” thinking
rests are not questioned, but are taken for granted
and may or may not be rational in themselves.
Reason involves a third dimension, that of depth
which reaches to the essence of things and processes.
...Its function is to know, to understand, to graSp
to relate oneself to things by comprehending them.
It penetrates through the surface of things in order
to discover theég essence, their hidden relationships
their ”reason.“ ,
Intelligence may be directed toward any sort of aim;
the paranoid may show great intelligence in supporting his
irrational premise that everyone is engaged in a conspiracy
against him. Intelligence shows us the "how“ but not the
.WhYo I
In contrast, reason asks, what are we being intelligent
for? Reason would show the paranoid the falsity of his pre-
mises. Reason cares, it is interested in its object. Reason
is not detached and alienated it productively relates the
thinker and his object. Reason is also objective, it sees
things as they are, not as it wishes them to be.
Reason also requires seeing oneself as one is. Reason

is insight into one's existential dichotomy.

 

26Fromm, Man for-Himself, pp. 102-103.

22
VI. Pleasure

Hedonistic ethics was right in locating the source
of happiness in man himself, but it was wrong in equating
happiness with simple pleasure. For there are various kinds
of pleasures, are we to equate the pleasure a masochist feels
in submitting to cruel authority with the pleasure a productive
person feels in creating a beautiful painting?

Freud thought there was one kind of pleasure, the
relief from painful tension. Fromm agrees that this is one
kind of pleasure and calls it a necessary but not a sufficent
condition for happiness. Also while normal physiological
needs are relieved when the sought for goal is obtained, irra-
tional psychic needs such as the craving for power are by
their very nature insatiable.

Fromm also goes on to distinguish between the realm
of scarcity and the realm of abundance. Freud's pleasure is
a phenomenon of the realm of scarcity and essentially an
animal kind of pleasure; Specifically human pleasure is a
phenomenon of the realm of abundance. As an example Fromm
distinguishes between hunger and appetite, hunger is rooted
in the realm of scarcity and to satisfy it is pleasureable
because it relieves painful tension; appetite is rooted in
the realm of abundance and its satisfaction is an expression
of freedom and productiveness.

Fromm then goes on to distinguish between joy which
is the pleasure from a particular expression of freedom and

productiveness and happiness which is a continuous or integrated

23
expression of joy.

To determine whether or not an individual is truly
happy we can not rely on what he says for even though he may
not be consciously lying to us and may actually think he is
happy he may be really very unhappy. Since happiness is an
expression of the whole person, a drawn face or frightened
eyes may reveal far more about a person than his statements.
Fromm calls pleasure or happiness which exists only in the

person's head, pseudo pleasure or happiness.

VII. Work

In the process of work that is the molding and changing
of nature outside of himself, man molds and changes
himself. He emerges from nature by mastering her; he
develOps his powers of cOOperation of reason, his sense
of beauty. He separates himself from nature from the
original unity with her, but at the same time unites
himself with her again as her master and builder. The
more his work develOps, the more his individuality
develops. In molding nature and recreating her, he
learns to make use of his powers, increasing his skill
and creativeness. Whether we think of the beautiful
paintings of Southern France, the ornaments on weapons
among primitive people the statues and temples of

Greece, the cathedrals of the Middle Ages, the chairs and
tables made by skilled craftsmen, or the cultivation of
flowers, trees or corn by peasants -- all are expressions
of the creative transformation of nature by man's reason
and skill.27

In work then, man has another Opportunity to realize
himself. Work reunites man with nature yet preserves his self
integrity. We can observe the importance of work in small
children; they are constantly busy learning new things, dis-

covering and growing. Their products may be clumsy at first,

 

27Fromm, The Sane Society, pp. 177-178.

24
but this does not matter, for it is work as process which
counts, not the thing produced.

Much of modern "work” is not work at all but com-
pulsive activity. Man works because it is his duty, or
because he must to eat; he sees nothing in work but a means
to get money. There is no joy or creativity in his work.
Thus ”work" is often disliked and man is thought of as nat-
urally lazy. The fact that men do not like to work testifies
to the unsatisfactory nature of their work, not to their

inherent lazinessqg

\

a?
Dr. Olmsted has pointed out that Fromm'e discussion

or work borrows heavily from Veblen. I mi t add
that nearly all of Fromm'e work borrows rfgh other

writers and that Fromm often does not
his debt. . acknowledge

LASSWELL'S POLITICAL SCIENCE

I. Introduction
In considering Lasswell's political science, I shall
emphasize those parts of it which are most closely related to
his psychology at the expense of others not so closely related.
I can only plead limitations of time, since Lasswell is a
complex figure and it did not seem possible to do full justice
to him in a Master's thesis. Also, my division of Lasswell's
work into political science and psychology may seem rather
arbitrary. Nonetheless some division seemed advisable and
one can look on these two sections as parts I & II of Lass-
well's psychological political science.
Lasswell sees psychology related to politics by our
old friendly formula. p3 a}: = p
Lasswell provides several interesting examples of the
role of private motivation in public affairs.
John Bright's grief at the death of his wife was trans-
{gigegainto political action in the defeat of the Corn
Joseph II of Austria became "the revolutionary emporer'
with the discoveag that his beloved)lately deceased had

never loved him. J

In Lasswell's psychology I mentioned that extremes of

 

28Lasswell, Power & Personalit , p. 51.

291b1d., p. 51. ,
25

2e;

indulgences and deprivations are likely to lead to accentua-
tion of power as a value.

Genghis Khan was surrounded by memories of a glorious

past in the face of childhood adversity...His entire

childhood was a struggle against adversity. The results

are well known.30
II. Md Revolutions

However, while we are concentrating on the psych-
ological parts of Lasswell's political science, we cannot
ignore one distinctly social or political aspect of his
thinking. This is the idea of changes in the entire political
order. Lasswell sees our political order as changing from
one in which.the skill of "bargaining. was preeminent and
incame and deference were very inequitably distributed to
one in which violence and symbol manipulation are preeminent
and insane and deference are more equitably distributed.
These changes in the political order are marked by 'world
revolutions." Lasswell considers the French.and Russian
Revolutions world revolutions. The French Revolution brought
about the rise of the bourgeosie and the Russian Revolution,
the rise of lower middle class skill groups. Lasswell does not
feel that the true proletarian revolution has occurred as yet.
These world revolutions attempted to unify all

mankind, but each failed and became restricted by revival,
partial incorporation, and functional differentiation.
Restriction by revival is the revival of some of the practices
of the ancien reghme by the new regime; restriction by partial
incorporation is the adaption of same of the revolutiodb

vocabulary or practices by rival elites, thus

 

-.t‘l" ‘P‘“

27
the Nazis took over some of the vocabulary of the Russian
Revolution. The name "Russian Revolution" exemplifies re-
striction by functional differentiation. The world revolution
becomes parochial, the world revolution of 1789 becomes the

French revolution.

III. Psychology of Hitlerism

We have seen how the individual may act on the polit-
ical order but this is only half the story; the political
order acts on the individual.

Lasswell's article, ”The Psychology of Hitlerism,"
provides an example of this interaction of personal and
political forces.

Changes in the social (political) status of the lower
middle class led to their suffering deprivations of safety,
deference, and income. The lower middle class was being
shoved under by the rising German plutocracy; the inflation
of the 1920's dealt the final blow when their precious savings
were wiped out and they saw themselves merged with the deepised
proletariat.

But these deprivations were not transformed into
political action until the apprOpriate rationalization or
symbolism was found. Marxism provided a symbolism against
the plutocracy but Marxism was a working class ideology.
Nationalism had provided an ideology but Germany's humiliating
defeat in World War I had greatly weakened this symbol.

Into this situation stepped Adolf Hitler, the son of

an Austrian customs inepector.

28

Hitler had the answers, he had something for every-
body. The lower middle class was given the Opportunity to
put meaning into life with the symbols of Germany's new might.
Germany had not lost the war; she had been betrayed by Jewish
internationalists. Their economic troubles were not from
capitalism but Jewish profiteering. Marxism was not the
ideology of the little man but the creation of a scheming Jew.
The excesses of the twenties for which the middle class felt
secretly guilty, were likewise the work of the Jews, hadn't
psychoanalysis been invented by a Jew?

For the professional peOple, Hitler had the answers,
Germany's professions were crowded. They were dominated
by Jews. The solution was easy.

For the industrialists, Hitler promised an end to
radical Jewish labor agitators. For the land owners who were
threatened by the rising capitalism, an end to Jewish inter-
national finananciers.

Many of these aims were clearly conflicting and almost
the only group Hitler performed for was the industrialists.
How was Hitler able to succeed?

If we recall the discussion of symbols in Lasswell's
psychology, we may see the matter a little clearer.

Hitler made the Jew serve as a symbol of all Germany’s
troubles. The Jew_was particularly well suited to cathect the
hostilities of the lower middle class and Hitler originally a
member of that class understood their hostilities.

Hitler made few real improvements in the state of the

29
lower middle classes, but a change in symbols is often mis-
taken for a genuine change. 'New meaning has come to life,
symbols are welcome substitutes for bread, and a.lowered
standard of living is but a sacrifice to the cause of national

resurrection."3

IT. Policy Sciences

Lasswell's political science, however, is by no means
solely for the benefit of thtse'who merely like to watch the
world go by. Lasswell not only wishes to understand politics,
he also hOpes to implement democratic values.

For the implementation of dempcratic values and the
free man's commonwealth, Lasswell sees the need at a new
profession, policy science. The policy scientist must be
master of all.the social sciences.

...a different type of education will become necessary
for those who administer society or think about it.
This education will start from the premise that it
takes longer to train a good social scienSést than it
takes to train a good physical scientist.

The policy scientist will understand psychoanalysis
so that he will know his own and other's real motivations;
he will know the interactions among the various values men
pursue. Also, he will be able to place events in their proper
historical perspective, aid these trends which further his

goals and fight those which impede them. is an example of

 

31Lasswell, “The Psychology of Hitlerism," Political

uarterl (London, 1933). Reprinted in final sis of PoIItIcaI
Be av or, Oxford University Press, l9h8, pp. 533-236;

32Lasswell, Psychopathology and Politics, p. 201.

30

lack of understanding of historical trends, Lasswell, in
Eggggand Personality, cites the bickering of socialists
and capitalists.

Both capitalists and socialists assumed that with
the elimination of the other, the millenium would arrive.
Heaven on earth would be assured by the perfect market or
the perfect government. But “monopoly politicians“ (big
businessmen) and party politicians (government bureaucrats)
have made a mockery of these dreams. The socialists' “world
Revolution" and the capitalists' “war to restore business"
would result in thermonuclear anihilation or the consolidation
of the garrison state.

Capitalists and socialists should recognize the
similarity of their aims and work together to preserve freedom

from war and the garrison state.33

V. Symbolism
The policy scientist should recognize the need for

promoting a democratic myth through the ApprOpriate symbol
manipulation.

In his earlier writings (World Politics and Personal
Insecurity and Politics), Lasswell has stressed the irrational
basis of this myth. In W P & P I, Lasswell says that an
"American Capita ' would:

1. Have a slogan for a title

2. Be thick, so as to appear authritative and dis-
courage reading by the masses

 

33Lasswell, Power & Personality, pp. 206-215.

31

3. Be systematic and quantitative, so as to
appear impressive.

4. Have an ethical legalistic as well as an
analytic vocabulary

5. USe illustrations which refer mainly to
American experience.

6. Have an invidious style, so as to instill the
prOper rancor toward the negative symbols

7. Be somewhat ambiguous, contradictory and obscure
as a whole so as to facilitate redefinition by
the elite.

8. Be dull, to discourage reading by the masses

9. Have an activist prescription34

VI. The Good Society

Throughout his earlier writings, Lasswell is con-
vinced of the basic irrationality of man and takes a very
dim view of politics efficacy in solving human problems.

...The consensus on which order is based is necessarily
nonrational...The capacity of the generality of man-
kind to disembarass themselves of the dominant legends
of their early years is negligible, and if we pose the
problem of unif ing the world we must seek for the
processes by wh ch a noggational consensus can be most
expiditious y achieved.

Lasswell suggests that the best way to get men to
unite is to get them to fight against somebody so that all
hostilities are directed against objects outside the community.
”The well known peacefulness of being at war.“ But with the

world as our community, who are we to unite against? Lasswell

 

_ 34Lasswell, World Politics & Personal Insecurit ,

Copyright 1934; Reprinted in I Stud of Power, Cepyrigfit

1950; The Free Press, Glencoe, IIIInoIs, p. i
aslbido, p. 2370

 

32

follows Andre Maurois's suggestion and considers the poss-
ibility of the earth's being unified by an attack from the
moon, but he concludes that the minority faction on earth .
would probably unite with the majority faction on the moon,
creating a new interplanetary balance of power.36

Lasswell considersthe setting up of some sort of
world control agency. We could multiply League of Nations
edifices and erect on every continent offices furnished in
aaubaahwrand gold. But what coercive power would these have?
Any attempt to attain power would run up against vested
interests and fail.

Lasswell is also somewhat dubious about the efficacy

of democratic procedures.

The premise of democracy is that each man is the best
judge of his own interest, and that all whose interests
are affected should be consulted in the determination of
policy...The findings of personality research show that
the individual is a poor judge of his own interest. The
individual who chooses a political policy as a symbol

of wants is usually trying to relieve his own disorders
by irrelevant pallatives. 7

Lasswell sees the best chance for a good society in
what he calls preventive politics. Preventive politics is
the diagnosing and treatment of those conditions in society

which lead to pathological results.

The preventive politics of the future will be intimately
allied to general medicine, psychopathology, physiological
psychology and related disciplines. Its practioners will
gradually win respect in society among puzzled pe0ple

who feel ageir responsibilities and who respect objective
findings.

 

36Ibid., p. 238.
37Lasswell, Psychopathology and Politics, p. 194.
381bid., p. 203.

33

Lasswell's later writings, Power and Personality
and Democratic Character, have taken a more Optimistic view
Of the possibility Of a good society (but still sure of the
need for policy science or preventive politics). Through the
policy sciences it may some day be possible to create a free
man's commonwealth.

Lasswell discusses the possibilities of a free man's
commonwealth most fully in Democratic Character. The basis
of the free man's commonwealth is the broad shaping and shar-
ing of the eight values mentioned in Lasswell's psychology;
power, reSpect, affection, rectitude, well-being, wealth,
skill and enlightenment. This list may be summarized under
the headings of deference and welfare. Power, reSpect,
affection, and rectitude are deference values; well-being,
wealth, skill and enlightenment are welfare values.

The democratic character, the citizen of the free man's
commonwealth, is distinguished by an Open rather than a closed
ego.

Let us take as the outstanding characteristic...the
maintenance of an Open as against a closed ego. By
this expression our intention is to convey the idea
that the democratic attitude toward other human beings
is warm rather than frigid, inclusive and expanding
rather than exclusive and constricting...Such a person
transcends most of the cultural categories that divide
human beings from one another and senses the common
humanity across class and even caste lines within the
culture, and in the world beyond the local culture.
Let us speak of the democratic character as multi-
valued, rather than single-valued, and as disposed

to share rather than to hoard or monOpolize. In

particular, little significance is gtgpched to the
exercise of power as a scOpe value. 9

 

39Lasswell, Democratic Character, pp. 495, 498.

By scOpe value, Lasswell means an all encompassing
number one value,as Opposed to limited instrumental value

311,

Exclusive concentration on any one value can have
deleterious consequences for society as Lasswell shows.

Preoccupation with rectitude produces the blue nose,
well-being the hypocondriac, wealth.the miser, skill.the
amoral technician.

The democratic character should have all the
components of his personality at his disposal. Conflict
within the self prtduces all.manner of nervous diseases.

The job of creating the free man's commonwealth
is not easy.

The task is nothing less than the drastic and continuing
reconstruction of our own civilization and most of the
cultures of which we have any knowledge. Since the basic
postulate of behavior is the maximization of indulgences
over deprivations, our task is to consolidate democratic
conduct by directing the indulgences toward those who

act democratically and the deprivations toward those

who do notJl-O

Am in his earlier writings Lasswell sees this as a job
fur'the social sciences. Indeed he calls this their goal.

It is insufficently acknowledged that the role of
scientific work in human relations is freedom rather
than prediction. By freedom.is meant the Bringing into
the focus of awareness of some feature of the personality
which has hitherto operated as a determining factor upon
the choices made by the individual, but which has been
Operating unconsciously. Once elevated to the full
focus of waking consciousness the factor which has

been operating “automatically" and 'compulsively' is no
longer in this privileged position. The individual is .
now free to take the factor into consideration in the
making of future choices.h1

 

hoMes Po 5130
all'b—id-s Po 52,40

FROMM'S POLITICAL SCIENCE

I. The Human Situation

To begin Fromm's political science, let's return to
the human situation. Man is faced with an existential dich-
otomy, aware of himself, man is faced with the task of living
his life. Man must die before he is fully born, and man
must seek some way of overcoming his terrible sense of alone-
ness.

Although Fromm's greater concern with societal
influences is considered a distinguishing point between him
and Freud, Fromm is by no means convinced that society is
the paramount influence on personality.

While it is true that man can adapt himself to almost
any conditions, he is not a blank sheet of paper on
which culture writes its text. Needs like the striving
for happiness, harmony, love and freedom are inherent
in his nature. They are also dynamic factors in the
historical process which, if frustrated, tend to arouse
psychic reactions, ultimately creating tbs very con-
ditions suited to the original strivings. 2

However, although these existential dichotomies are
given, we must be very careful to avoid confusing them with
merely historical dichotomies.

Radically different from existential dichotomies are the

many historical contradictions in individual and social
life which are not a necessary part of human existence

 

42Fromm, The Sane Society, p. 81.
35

36

but are man made and soluable either at the time they
occur or at a later period in human history. The con-
temporary contradiction between an abundance of tech-
nical means for material satisfaction and the incap-

acity to use them exclusively for peace and the welfare

of the peeple is soluable; it is not a necessary con-
tradiction but one due to man's lack of courage and
wisdom. The institution of slavery in ancient Greece

may be an example of a relatively nsoluable contradiction,
the solution of which could be achieved only at a later
period of history when 4&9 material basis for the equality
of man was established.

In The Sane Society Fromm points out some of the
unnecessary contradictions in modern society. These include:

1. Our abundant crOps are a burden, although there
arelgillions of peOple starving throughout the
wor e

2. We use our high literacy rate to read the cheapest
kind of trash, but decry any attempt at govern-
ment regulation as an infringement upon our
libertYe

3. We have greatly reduced the average number of
working hours but do not know how to use our
newly gained free time.

4. We and the advanced Western countries have a
higher suicide and alcoholism rate than less
develOped countries.

Important as these contradictions are, they are dwarfed by
such paradoxes as:

5. Our increasing material abundance has made
possible greater and greater wars in which each
side considers itself fighting for all that is
holy and glorifying God by killing off millions
of men. A few years after the slaughter yes-
terday's enemies are today's friends and vice
versae

6. Now we are faced with the possibility of mutual
thermonuclear annihilation.

43Fromm, Man for Himself, p. 43.

37

II. Historical Sketch

Why? Fromm says that man has achieved freedom from
but not freedom to.

The Middle Ages were characterized by material want
and great lack of personal freedom. Eyen so, each man knew
where he belonged, each man was related to his work and under-
stood his place in the world in terms of the readily compre-
hensible medieval cosmography.

Medieval man's life was hard, but the church promised
eternal bliss if he tried to live a good life and did good
works. The tribulations and injustices of the present world
were to be rectified by a divine hand in the next. Money
making was viewed as a necessary evil, to be closely watched
lest it become an and rather than a means. Communism was
the ideal rendered unreachable by man's original sin. The
guilds were for the mutual protection of all members and any
inventions or advantageous buying had to be shared with
fellow guild members.

The Renaissance changed all this. The traditional
cosmography was swept aside by Copernicus. Luther and Calvin
did away with the idea of a church mediating for man and a
God happy with each good work, I'as an Old woman with a few
coins.‘

But traditional ways ytélded most to the new deity,
money. Money making was no longer regarded as a necessary
evil but as the virtue. A man built his way to heaven on

golden stairs. The guilds became different: some members

38
accumulated more money than others and began to hire others.
The basis of equality of guild membership was destroyed.
Capital had begun to employ labor.

In short, then, the Renaissance freed man from the
bonds of the middle ages. There was no need for a vast
church mediating between man and God, God had no need of a
clerical hierarchy to do his job for him. He could keep in
touch with each of us on an individual basis. Birth and
lineage were of little importance, a man was as good as the
amount of money he could accumulate. The guild restrictions
on seeking one's advantage were a handicap to the progress
of man.

The Renaissance destroyed the medieval bonds which
had restricted man but they also destroyed the meaning which
these bonds had given to life.

In Fromm's psychology we saw that the individual is
driven to overcome his existential dichotomy. We also saw
that there are two general ways of doing this:

1. Attempting to deny his self awareness.

2. Accepting his existential dichotomy, and recog-

nizing that the only meaning in life is the

meaning he puts into it by living productively,
through love, work and reason.

In Esca e From Freedom, Fromm says:

Once the primary bonds which gave security to the
individual are severed, once the individual faces

the world outside of himself as a completely

separate entity, two courses are open to him since

he has to overcome the unbearable state of powerlessness
and aloneness. By one course he can progress to "posi-
tive freedom;' he can relate himself Spontaneously to
the world in love and work, in the genuine expression

of his emotional, sensuous, and intellectual capacities;

39
he_can thus become one again with man, nature, and
himself, without giving up the independence and
integrity of his individual self. The other course'
open to him is to fall back, to give up his freedom,
and to try to overcome his aloneness by eliminating
the gap that hgi arisen between his individual self
and the world.
Fromm discusses two ways of escaping freedom:
1. Authoritanism

2. Automoton conformity

III. Naziism

The political orders providing a means of escape
into authoritarianism are the modern dictatorships, part-
icularly Naziism.

In discussing Naziism, Fromm sees it as determined
by both psychological and economic factors. He criticizes
those explanations of Naziism which attribute it to one
factor.

Fromm cites the following factors in the rise of
Naziism:

1. The great decline of the national symbols of
Germany following World War I.

2. The fear of German industrialists of communism.

3. The disillusionment of the labor and liberal
classes.

4. The decline of the lower middle classes begun by
the turn of the century and greatly accelerated
by the inflation of the twenties and the depression
0 the thirties.

5. The authoritarian predispositions of the lower
middle class which gave Naziism a great appeal for

their

44Fromm, Escape From Fgeedom (Rinehard & Company,
New York, 1941), p. e

40
In the interests of brevity, I shall Skip over the
first four points, mentioning only that they are very Similar
to Lasswell's analysis in ”The Psychology of Hitlerism' and
that Fromm attributes great weight to the role of Germany's
industrialists in her politics.
The important thing is that it was not Hitler who caused
World War II, but the same alliance between industry
and the military wgich had been the driving force be-
hind World War I.4
The fifth point, the authoritarian predispositions
of the lower middle class, Fromm considers crucial. Fromm
discusses Naziism in relation to the concept of symbiosis
and finds that Hitler's relation to his followers is a sado-
masochist one. He also indicates the masochism mixed in
with Hitler's sadism, as when Hitler delights in discussing
”nature the cruel queen of all wisdom."
Fromm closes his discussion by again stating his
basic appraisal of authritarianism.
The function of an authoritarian ideology and practice
can be compared to the function of neurotic symptoms.
Such symptoms result from unbearable psychological con-
ditions and at the same time offer a solution that makes
life possible. Yet they are not a solution that leads
to happiness or growth of personality...The escape into
symbiosis can alleviate the suffering for a time but it
does not eliminate it...The authoritarian systems cannot
do away with the basic conditions that make for the

quest for freedom; neither can they exterminate the
quest for freedom that springs from these conditions.46

 

45Fromm, Ma ‘Man Prevail? (Cepyright 1961, Anchor
Books Edition, 196I), pp. I7I-I72. _

46Fromm, Escape From Freedom, pp. 238-239.

41
IV. Modern Democracies

Se Naziism was an escape from freedom, so what?
America is the home of the free; our sons fought and died to
defeat Naziism. We have the highest standard of living the
world has ever known; surely America and the Western democracies
have achieved "positive freedom.“

Fromm is not sure (as a matter of fact, he's pretty
damned sure we haven't). For Fromm, a good society would
promote mental health, which is:

Mental health is characterized by the ability to love
and to create, by the emergence from incestuous ties

to clan and soil, by a Sense of identity based on one'S
experience of self as the subject and agent of one's

own powers, by the grasp of reality inside and outside
of ourselvei.7 that is, by the develOpment of objectivity
and reason.-

Once again we see that the road to man's salvation
is work, love, and reason. In Fromm's Psychology, each of
these modes of relatedness to be genuine and productive, had
to come from man himself and be for man himself. Now let's
follow Fromm's analysis to see the effects of modern democratic
society on love, work, and reason. . ,

Naziism replaced love with symbiosis, modern society
has replaced it with a superficial and manipulative friend-
liness. Modern man does not love as a passionate affirmation
of his simultaneous separateness and relatedness to the

world, rather he is friendly in order that he may ”get some-

thing." Peeple are enjoined to have a "pleasing personality“

 

‘

47Fromm, The Sane Society, p. 69.

42
so that others will like them and do things for them.
Marriage is looked on as a sort of business partnership with
each partner (even our language equates the two!) expected
to be fair and to ”hold up his end of the bargain."

There is a fundamental ambivalence in modern society
toward love. On the one hand there is themanipulative atti-
tude just discussed, on the other we are constantly admonished
not to be self centered and not to think only of ourselves in
pursuing our own interests. But as we found out in Fromm's
psychology the trouble is not that we love ourselves too
much but too little.

What has modern society done for reason? Certainly
we have plenty of intelligence; we build bigger cars, more
complex gadgets and better bombs. But we seldom ask for what.

Much of modern thinking is pseudo thinking. Our
Opinions are convincingly put but they are not really our
own.

Fromm gives the example of an old fisherman giving
a weather forecast on the basis of his own long experience
and contrasts this with a modern urbanite offering a forecast

as his own while parroting what he has heard on the radio.48

Modern man takes other's thoughts and manipulates
them. He is so busy being intelligent that he has no time

to exercise his reason.

A great deal of The Sane Society is devoted to discuss-

 

48Fromm, Escape from Freedom

43
ing work in modern society. In Fromm's psychology, we saw
that work should be a means of man's realizing himself. In
the process of creating.man asserts his integrity and related-
ness.

But to do this work must be meaningful. Today men
are paid higher and higher wages and work shorter and shorter
hours but their work becomes increasingly less satisfactory.
Modern technology has subdivided each task until often the
individual office or factory worker performs only the most
meaningless tasks. The worker may only screw in a belt or
refile forms; he has but the haziest conception as to how
his task fits in with the purpose the whole organization is
trying to accomplish.

Machinery, the things man built to aid him, have come
to rule him. Things employ men.

Fromm cites Park Forest, Illinois as an example of
where modern society is taking us.

Park Forest, as most know, is a planned community
of junior executive homes. PeOple move to Park Forest out of
economic necessity but even those who go on to earn enough
to move to more individually designed living quarters are
loath to leave Park Forest.

The basis of Park Forest's charm is its warmth; every-
one is accepted and a craving for acceptance is characteristic
of the alienated selfless man modern society has produced.

Men crave acceptance from others because they have not

accepted themselves.

J.
'u C U. C

acceptan o is a i="eu ?y adjustxent or
‘olior word con form1ty. TLC rosiecnte of -ar;
deified social utility. A’justroat bejins c rly
likes to be By himself, this is : mittcr -0“ ceicruo

- WA .- J.-. are A _._ .1 -
in CO: uuiey lira. m Uunion
on his motoaorrbisis; tufore

. ‘u f. C". - Q. ' fl -: Fr‘ 1". 7?
lie in bed ounce; morning and

V n Jim 1
2-» . .- -~ .n . ~. ,
s1"n .-or3r. LOX since?" the 14rO:

I A

7,. - . ° ..- .L .3 4.1. .. .9
they oxen 11 ..e VlLLCS 1.1...- fu-e

v

T 0

.fi 11? t" A 3 a .A ”,1 ...a p. - T

, Lab Oil - ’ L. j
V

*Vly t'c ,' .5- ilk

A non offers :rofuse Ojolo;ice

a... ”a. y..-

.
--~.~ h or: m' :vn’n -..--i r‘ r-x-r ~-r
S} . b.) . TLLV II Oo-l.-.‘s‘8 in L} 5—1 A teaaayvt

—A.

e
.1 1% ,E‘ficqyn‘lyfis'e.

h. 0 IQ F ‘ 0‘ j I‘ ‘ . I
. n . A. - . .‘ V .3 ‘0’ A :a-e - ,’
£1 (1 l o -' ' . I C V b

fi-LV :l;l—-‘s-— L... \U- \. ._

_,__0-\
individual h“mfln cullieies

*‘nK.

ill
r“!

A. L; C
\—

O
'- n r“

et:cut v

.1
COL”...

den:

e 3 .e . a“
n for not inviting his
'1 .. J. .. . .L
1]”- ‘3' co r1- e i.u
. J». .0 -'. 'V 4L y 5 2e. 4-
".L-O 15.1.1.4. uO “.mguSu
. .- . .9. . - J.. "' J._°-
2.01.1111, iii-3.1.620 L--G
a- n . ‘ . -.
1:427 "1iorla. u:

_ O
, - .
‘ w s

4..
ESL.

3: effect of

just:

- a
'nl (

-
A.....--a.\lgL .x.

('2

e

C‘ 1'1

C Amvac

\JA-Ao— A

- .. .L
v . » nvr .—~ A
CJCI‘; O--G Ce,

taper or

0
e at"
A ce— ‘J L.‘

1“

.-J‘.

.
‘ r‘x wry:
L

--o'

3 C $613.1“:

-1

O o-
I! "5‘0
d-~—V

N '1 11—0 ewVv-C‘L 14" NO

‘v’l
a.

4.
11?? so

, 00:1

Cu.-.€;'

‘

‘

Cy

J-‘nn‘aw

Us-

else.

.n. - a
.. flenfls

V ...

flete

FORCE".

U

a- - ~_ L‘- .- a 1 e... ..
but by eio,r romeo .ncfiimit'

_ n" , "VAL“
Calla L..- Ln.)

-F‘ a -! - - ~ A-
-0p in ustLiLj

to

 

 

u... L).—

in
._.¢
. / fi~ ~~-_y4~ "A C‘ t‘ ‘l‘ ‘A if? -. A J-
L‘ 'flO-..a‘a’ ---’3 I 4;;'ul .130-)— ./ LJ y
. .L : N i, ",1- r: .1”. ,1 .:. I! v.2: -. r .0, n” r? 7*
On 01-9, I1’.‘O_'\.IL, L), |:—-_....—.....-. Lee .|--

.'r«-gr T. ',‘1(_'311-rr’ ‘X1ql-n-1:.+ jcfi-fi»

1
i-‘.—v- , UL.A-~/ , :‘bk ‘Le..‘ - C, ..._, ,/,

45

one another. The piece de resistance of this conformity,
Fromm feels, is the residents' unquestioning acceptance of
it. Does it work, not why, has become the key question.

Park Foresters have adjusted then, but are they happy?
Fromm thinks not. We saw in discussing his concept of happi-
ness that neither simple pleasure nor the individual's state-
ments are sufficient guides to determine whether or not he
is happy. Happiness must be something which comes from the
whole person's productiveness, Park Forest happiness is pseudo-
happiness.

Park Foresters are intelligent, do they have reason?
”At Park Forest, everybody is in the same boat, but nobody
seems to know where the boat is going.”

All of modern society is not as far gone as Park
Forest, for the junior executive is particularly susceptible
to the manipulative trend of modern society. A skilled worker
or a farmer is not yet so ready to conform. Nonetheless
Park Forest starkly shows the direction our society is head-
ing, as fewer and fewer peOple will be farmers and skilled

workers, and more and more will be manipulators in the future.

V. The Good Society

If modern society is not fulfilling man's basic needs,
what sort of society will?

Fromm thinks communitarian socialism is an answer and
cites the Boimondu watch case factory as an example. Founded
during World War II, by Marcel Barbu and his friends, Boimondu

is based on the principle that the distinction between employer

46
and employee should be abolished. At first complete freedom
of speech reigned between them, but they found that "telling
each other off" led to a waste of time on the job so, they
unanimously set aside part of the week for a discussion
period.

Their better life was to be more than economic, however,
so they sought to find a common ethical basis. There were
individuals of widely differing beliefs among them, Catholics,
Humanists, Communists, Protestants, materialists, and atheists
but by examining not what they had been taught by rote but
their own individual ethics which they had gained themselves,
they evolved a common ethics.

Thou wilt love thy neighbor

Thou shalt not kill

Thou shalt not take thy neighbor's goods
Thous shalt not lie

etc., etc.50

The group then decided it would like to educate it-
self; their productivity was so high that they were able to
take time off from work for courses in such things as physics,
literature, and basketball.

Payment is for the work of the whole individual.

A first class mechanic who can play the violin, who is
jolly and a good mixer, etc., has more value to the
Community than another mechanic, equally capable -1

professionally, but who is a sourpuss, a bachelor, etc.°

The community is governed by a General Assembly, which

 

50Fromm, The Sane Societ , p. 308; taken from All
Things Common, Claire Hucfiet BISfiOp, Harper & Bros., New
YOI‘ . 950 O

51Fromm, The Sane Societ , p. 310.

47
meets twice a year. Only unanimous decisions are binding on
the members. The general assembly elects the various officers
who do the day to day task of running the community, again

all decisions are unanimous.

Life at Boimondu is organized along two sectors: the

social and the industrial.

The industrial sector is made up of teams of not
more than ten men each, the teams go on to form ShOps which
go on to form the service.

The social sector deals with all other parts of life
at Boimondu. Here too, everything is organized into teams,
which carry on the various social activities of Boimondu.

These teams like these of the industrial sector are
organized into sections. The sections and teams include:

1. Spiritual Section:
Catholic team
Humanist team
Materialist team
Protestant team

2. Intellectual Section:
General Knowledge team
Civic Instruction team
Library team

0 O O

5. Mutual Aid Section:
Solidarity team
Household Maintenance team
Bookbinding team

8. Sports Section:
Basketball team Emen)
Basketball team women)
Cross-country team
Football team
Volleyball team
Physical culture team52

 

52Fromm, The Sane Society, pp. 314-315.

48

Fromm then includes a further list of the principles

of Boimondu. In concluding his discussion of Boimondu, he

says:

Summing up the most remarkable points in the principles
of these Communities, I want to mention the following:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

The communities of work do make use of all modern
industrial techniques, and avoid the tendency of
going back to handicraft production.

They have devised a scheme in which active part-
icipation of everyone does not contradict a suff-
icently centralized leadership...

The emphasis on the practice of life as against
ideological differences. This emphasis enables
men of the most varied and contradictory con-
victions to live together in brotherliness and
tolerance without any danger of having to follow
the “right Opinion" proclaimed by the community.

The integration of work, social and cultural
activities...

The situation of alienation is overcome, work has
become a meaningful expression of human energy,
human solidarity is established withoutrggtriction
of freedom- or the danger of conformity. ‘

Fromm cites other examples of communitarian life,

the Mennonites and Israel's agricultural settlements.

They all contribute to our knowledge of the possibilities
of a new style of life.54

To those who shout, 'Dreamer!,' Fromm answers that

such glib condescension was accorded the railroads and air-

plane in their infancy.

In a later book, May Man Prevail?, Fromm is less

concerned with radical social reform than with averting the

 

“=e
R an:- O

f5
'I'i

rrr‘

ru103x:¢1~

of

I

Q
.n.I,.n.{. P-‘
_ v.4. u--\. J.

O
”r1 7".“ "CI”
4..-. . .....-
\l

‘-
l
A—a.

”.TL'J
v

., . . 4.:
CO;1LCI"VJC-‘. .

.-.O T.

becou

.
r3018 uni

-
I
.

CCU

C C3111".

..
"x r.
~,....-\*

"\

ment

r“ ‘n
. . L

O
" 031.

trxct

“ V“
N e
V .— ~4LK-L

T“ 1'01,"
.-

V“\ (w
.-.n.‘

lo

q

fro;

.1

ocicte

c.
LJ

ese

""I
L .‘.

(:77

But

~

“TOE

.
A

~uxaz

q
a
L-

truly

1
N A
.-C'

t.»

.5.)

I“ (*

‘—
V
1.-.;

pe

I ( e W'\

g
V

' O

J.
c

.'
I
-- v'—L.

Van-1“
.- M...

. '1 ‘i.’
u-flte his

to

tie

r‘
Kid

been

re f‘

4

O 3
v...” 1.—
5 O
1.-.. C.
n;
.f V S
n ..;_
a . .
0. . 1 L
. .
...o H
I
V— ‘.L
C io
w T
C
3...-”
vdLC
.11” by.”
Far
”w“
:1. d...
«,1— ..Tu
...u w“
n
a . V
O T
C
.C C
ass
t :1”
C a;
mi
xv.
.l ,
W...
Va 0
all. C
.b e
a. ..L
E
C v
S 7*
r. L
G T
Pic

9.

_
5L.
7.
Q
C
a
n i
u
at
‘1‘
1.;
F
v d
at.
I.
l.
a
xv.
t
E
n+1,»
n.
J.-.
om;

J
1(.FL r
a“... .
12» hp
.. . .A U
7. ,. .
O C
m. w .
by... s ,
Mao
C T
C .‘
G.C
w... A.
1!; .1.

‘14

at.
w;
1._ S
._._ Io
1- C

on;
e. 7.
as f

 

r-r-

'T'ltfrj.
,bu..-’

~n
‘—
*

u‘

A
Lu- 0 ,

ti

r‘

;'/I

FROMM EVALUAT ION

Fromm's psychology is based on the premise that when
man does things for himself, he is good.

When man submits to things outside himself and denies
his reasoning, working and loving capacities, he is bad.

The good society will further man's capacities and
belief in himself.

I. The Human Scale

Fromm is a graceful writer, sensitive to such pro-
blems as militarism and nuclear warfare, the dehumanizing
influence of modern working conditions, and the banality
of many mass media. Fromm is also a perceptive social critic
in pointing out, for example, that there are few real differ-
ences for the worker in working for a big privately owned or
governmentally owned corporation.

Fromm's interest is man and the ways man can better
himself. Since we are all men, this gives Fromm's work a
general attraction a treatise, on say bee keeping, is likely
to lack.

Fromm's writings have had a great appeal, and I do
not think that the adulation he has been given is entirely
miSplaced.

Fromm's greatest strength is his stressing of a human
scale. Briefly, the concept of human scale is the idea that

50

51
things must be interpreted in terms which are meaningful to
human experience. The human scale concept does not deny the
importance of very large, very distant, or very tiny things,
but it does say that these things should be understood through
scientific training or some other valid means. To say that
light travels at 186,000 miles an hour, that the earth has existed
two billion years, or an electron weighs 1 trillionth of a _
gram is not to speak in meaningful terms to the average man,
and it does not explain these concepts, to say that light
travels very fast, that the earth is very old, or that an
electron is very tiny.

Quantitative differences are qualitative differences
and it is meaningless to come out with some gloriously large
or gloriously small figure without a meaningful context of
knowledge about it. If we say a Ferrari is fast, Adenaurer
is old, or the diamond your sister's cheap fiance bought her
is tiny, pe0ple have an idea of what we're talking about,
applied to light, the earth or an electron, these terms lose
their meaning.

Often analogies are resorted to, to “explain“ such
things as the speed of light, the age of the earth, or the
weight of an electron. But analogies have a purely heuristic
value and like the concepts themselves require a meaningful
context in order to be meaningful themselves. If I say that
a beam of light could travel around the earth twenty times in
the length of time it takes you to blink your eye have I really

made the concept any clearer?

52

Often these analogies that peOple dream up are a
positive hinderance in understanding the concept. Thinking
of light going lickety split, the earth as a sort of super-
annuated Methuselah, or an electron as little itty-bitty
grain of something, makes it more difficult to understand ‘
such things as an absolute limit on speed, geologic change,
or quantum jumps.

In a sense, the ignoring of a human scale is a form
of reduction, things are ”just” bigger or smaller, older or
younger.

Now back to Fromm, although I have taken my illustra-
tions from the physical sciences, the same injunctions against
the use of terms without a human scale, applies to social
phenomena as well. Fromm recognizes this.

Following Berle and Mean's analysis of the ownership
of modern corporations, Fromm points out that owning some-
thing in its entirety, personally, is a very different thing
from owning a tiny part of some vast corporation, such as
General Motors or AT&T. The concept of legal ownership has
lost its meaningful context.56 -

Fromm offers several other examples of this as when
he criticizes the modern work situation for allowing no scope
for man's talents because each man does such a tiny job. He
sees that voting by the millions is not the same as voting in

small numbers. He recognizes that much of our culture is

 

56Fromm, The Sane Society, pp. 104-108.

53

deluged with facts and numbers which have no meaning for the
average man. "The Federal budget is 100 billion dollars.“
”Ten million out of work," ”The world may be plunged into
NUclear warfare," and ”Buy Bufferin' are mixed together
until all sense of meaningfulness and pr0portion are lost.

Fromm's book, May Man Prevai17, is not another
The Twenty#Years Crisis: it is essentially a middlebrow
effort. But Fromm provides a critique of Herman Kahn that
transcends the rest of the book.

Speaking about Kahn's book, On Thermonuclear Warfare,
Fromm says:

The moral problem is even given less weight in Kahn's
reasoning than the psychological one. The only
question posed is how many of us will be killed; the
moral problem of killing millions of fellow human
beings -- men, women, children, -hardly is mentioned...
One comes to a rather shocking suSpicion when one reads
the following statement, a quotation from an earlier
statement Kahn made in testifying before the sub-
committee of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy on
June 26, 1959. "In other words; war is horrible. There
is no question about it. But so is eace. And it is
prOper with the kind of calculations we are making
today, to compare the horror of war and the horror of
peace and see how much worse it is.

Answering a reporter who questioned this statement, Kahn
said ”I meant that the quality of life after a thermo-
nuclear attack would not be much different than before.
And who the hell is happy and normal right now? We'd be
just about the same after a war - and we'd still be
economically useful.57

We are dealing here with one of the most crucial pro-

blems of our age - the transformation of men into

numbers on a balance sheet; one thinks it is a "reasonable”
calculation to weigh the death of one- to two-thirds of

the nation, provided that the economy will soon recover.
Indeed, there have always been wars; there have always

 

57Fromm, May Man Prevail?, p. 196.

54
been peOple who have sacrificed their own lives or
killed other humans - out of love of liberty or in
mere drunken orgies of hate. What is so new and
shocking about the contribution of our age is the
cold blooded use of bookkeeping methods to encompass
the destruction of millions of human beings.5

The ignoring of a human scale is more than just an
academic problem. In social problems it can have tragic
results as Fromm clearly sees.

If his use of a human scale is Fromm's strength, his
not using it is part of his weakness.

E. H. Carr suggests Fromm's other weakness. In The
Twenty_Years Crisis he quotes L. T. Hobhouse as saying, “Among
the most primitive peoples the evidence of the truth of an
idea is not yet separate from the quality that renders it
pleasant.” Carr then goes on to say that this is character-
istic of the primitive or utOpian stage of political science.
Investigators will pay little attention to analyses of cause
and effect but will devote themselves to the elaboration of
visionary projects whose simplicity and perfection give them
a universal appeal. Carr compares such projects to the search
for the philOSOpher's stone.59

Fromm is a utOpian, but he is not looking for the
philOSOpher's stone of politics he thinks we don't need it.
As I see it, this is the other part of his weakness.

Fromm regards man's death as a tragic biological

 

581bid., p. 197.

59Edward Hallett Carr, The Twent Years Crisis 1919-
1939, (London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd., I945), pp.315.

55
necessity, whereas he feels that the social problems of our
time require only the exercise of man's courage and the
application of wisdom he already has.
We, today, who have easy access to all these ideas,
.who are still the immediate heirs to the great
humanistic teachings, we are not in need of new
knowledge of how to live sanely - but in bitter
need of taking seriously what we believe, what we
preach and teach. The revolution of our hearts
does not requirg new wisdom - but new seriousness
and dedication. 0 ,

The foregoing represents Fromm's utOpianism, the
following, his ignoring of the human scale.

Many.a reader will raise the question whether findings
won by observation of individuals can be applied to

the psychological understanding of groups. Our answer
to this question is an emphatic affirmation. Any group
consists of individuals and nothing but individuals,

and psychological mechanisms which we find operating

in a group can gherefore only be mechanisms that Operate
in individuals. ‘

This statement is a trifle ambiguous and as a matter
of fact, Fromm does make frequent use of social explanations
and does not rely exclusively on the findings of individual
psychology. Nonetheless, this statement exemplifies the
strain running throughout Fromm's work that if peOple want
to have a good society they can just "up and have it.”
Fromm's utOpianism seems to make him forget that one cannot
use concepts without a meaningful context. Fromm ignores the
human scale.

Fromm's utOpianism has a pervasive effect on his

 

6oFromm, The Sane Society, p. 344.

61Fromm, Escape from Freedom, p. 137.

56
social theory.
I. The ills of contemporary society.

Since Fromm does not believe that there are any
great problems to organizing society, he sees societal pro-
blems as somehow unreal-tragic because they are so unnecessary.

As an example, we might take Fromm's criticism of our
mass media.

We have a literacy above 90 per cent of the population.
We have radio, television, movies, a newspaper a day
for everybody. But instead of giving us the best of
past and present literature and music, these media of
communication, supplemented by advertising, fill the
minds of men with the cheapest trash lacking in any
sense of reality, with sadistic phantasies which a
halfway cultured person wogfid be embarrassed to enter-
tain even once in a while.

Admittedly, The State Journal and Father Knows Best
are not the equal of Coleridge or Dostoevsky, but for that
matter neither is Fromm. Simply because peOple can read does
not mean that they are going to read the finest works of
literature at their command, overnight.

Our mass media are lousy, but more good literature
is being read today than ever before if book sales and
library use are any indication. If our taste is improving
slowly,it is still improving. Fromm's utOpianism has lead
him to ignore the strong points of contemporary society.

Fromm's solution is government sponsorship of up-
lifting programs, but plenty of good literature is available
free at the public library and in Great Britain private Amer-

ican style trashy television has proven more popular than

 

62Fromm, The Sane Society, p. 5.

57

Fromm style government sponsored television.

II. Lack of Empirical Support

It is hardly news to anyone who has looked at Fromm's

 

writings that he offers little empirical support for many
of his broadest generalizations.
Undoubtedly a relatively primitive village in which
there are still real feasts, common artistic shared
expressions, and no literacy at all - is more ad-
vanced culturally and more healthy mentally than our 63
educated, newspaper reading, radio-listening culture.

A work need not bristle with statistics and reports
of controlled experiments to be scientific, but these and
statements like them are simply too far out to even be called
false. This is the voice of the poet or mystic not the
student of society. And just as the truth value of an idea
is independent of the quality which renders it pleasant, so
it is independent of the beauty with which it is expressed.

In keeping with such statements as the one just quoted,
we should not expect that Fromm would find congenial the com-
pany of those who regard the problems of society as complex
and requiring considerable study before generalizations are
even tentatively offered.

Indeed, even such broad theorists as Marx and Freud.
are considered prisoners of their time by Fromm and inferior
to such humanistic philosophers as Spinoza.

I sometimes wonder if the vagueness of many of Fromm's

formulations is not part of his appeal. The student of Fromm

 

63Ibid., p. 348.

58
may read what he wishes into them.

Fromm's dislike of a great deal of empirical SUpport
might explain why he seems more at home with history than
with the stricter social sciences. History is still largely
a speculative discipline.

One might think that this lack of concern for fact
gathering would leave Fromm's mind free to Spin new theories.
Unfortunately this is not the case. One of Fromm's books
sounds pretty much like another. Fromm's work is non-cumu-
lative, to use Robert Merton's term.

Fromm's liking for the poetic as opposed to the em-
pirical makes him leave his description of the human situa-
tion in its rather vague original formulation. This seems
a pity for it is an idea that might have been very fruitful,

pr0perly used.

III. HomeOpathy

Maybe some of the preceding criticisms came solely
from my oral sadism, but the following one is from the heart.

I Spent quite a little space in Fromm's political
science describing Fromm's critque of Park Forest and his
praise for communitarian socialism. Fromm said those who
scoffed, were like those who scoffed at the early airplanes
and railroads. I think Fromm's scheme has more in common
with perpetual motion machines and pills to turn water into
gasoline than with early trains or airplanes. But aside from
the unrealizability of the communities of work is their nature.

Fromm sees them as Heaven on earth; I see them as hell.

59
I shall begin my discussion of this by taking a
quotation from John Schaar's book on Fromm.

Fromm has a faith in the noble savage which makes
Rousseau's faith seem a pale negation by com-
parison.

Given this view of man, it is all but impossible
for Fromm to come to terms with the restraining
institutions of a society. In his view practi-
cally all institutional restraints are either
unnecessary or demonstrably harmful. Fromm

wants to abolish the authority of one man over
another.

There is an irony in this. Fromm's faith in man
and his desire to see man freed from restraints
would in the end, turn the individual over to the
worst tyranny of all- the tyranny of neighbors.
This appears most sharply in his utOpia: that
warm and friendly community would bring men so
closely together and expose them so nakedly to the
influences of their neighbors that it is doubtful
rather any free and creative spirit could stand
the ordeal. So eager is Fromm to break down the
barriers between men that he forgets that barriers
are defenses against tgg encroachments as well as
separations from them.

There is little I can add to Schaar's critque, ex-
cept to offer a few examples.

On page 310, of The Sane Society, Fromm mentioned that
payment was to be for all activity which had value for the
group. ”A first class mechanic who can play the violin, who
is jolly and a good mixer, etc., has more value to the comm-
unity than another mechanic equally capable professionally,
but who is a sourpuss, a bachelor etc."

Payment for all activity of value to the group! Are
we going to have our friendly neighbors tell us; we didn't

 

64John H. Schaar, Esca e From Authorit : The Per-
gpectives of Erich Fromm (New York: Basic Books Inc., I961).

60

smile this week, so no bonus. At least in our society a
man can frown if he wants to. Remember Park Forest? I
thought we didn't have much privacy there; Fromm's community
makes the Park Foresters look like hermits. At least a man
could get away at work for awhile, at Boimondu, as the title
of the book Fromm took his, deiscr‘ipti’Qn.from,-_ suggests, all; things
are common.

On pages 314e315 Fromm listed the various teams to
encompass all social and cultural activities. Everything
from humanism to basketball and countereffort (whatever that
is) has a team. Everything is reduced to the same dreary
level. Was Hamlet written by a team? I might mention Fromm's
dubious assumption here that a productive character is always
a nice guy, happy, truly well balanced and so on. Van Gogh,
Wagner, Coleridge, Pound?

Fromm has seen that the good things of life must be
on a human scale: he has forgotten that the bad things come

that way too.

Q

LASSWELL EVALUATION

Lasswell's work might be viewed as a revolt against
the formalism of previous political scientists.

Political science develOped from public law and
was much given to studying the documents of government. This
is still the approach followed in high school government
courses. "The Senate has 100 members.', "A bill to become
law must be passed by both houses of Congress and signed by
the President.', ”The Governor of Michigan serves a two
year term."

This was the approach followed by many Progressives
who saw the solution to the' problems of democracy in various
procedural legal devices. The referendum, direct election of
Senators, the recall, the direct primary and many othen'
devices.

Formalism reached its height in modern times in the
Kellogg - Briand Pact and the declining years of the League
of Nations. This has been beautifully described by E. H.
Carr.

There were determined efforts to perfect the machinery
to standardise the procedure, to close the "gaps” in
the covenant by an absolute veto on all war. The

Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance, The Geneva Protocol,
the General Act, the plan to incorporate the Briand-
Kellogg Pact in the Covenant and "the definition of the

aggressor," were all milestones on the dangerous path
of rationalisation. The fact that the utOpian dishes

61

62

prepared during these years at Geneva proved unpalatable
to most of the principal governments concerned'uheh a
symptom 02 the growing divorce between theory and
practice. 5

Once it came to be believed in League circles that
salvation could be found in a perfect card-index and
that the unruly flow of international politics could
be canalised into a set of logically impregnable
abstract formulae inspired by the doctrines of nine-
teenth century liberal democracy, the end of the
League gs an effective political instrument was in
sight.6

It was just about this time, when the sterility of
studying the institutions or forms of government alone was
becoming painfully apparent, that Harold Lasswell published
his most famous books.

Lasswell goes farther.than Carr, who questioned the
feasibility of a democratic international order. Lasswell
casts doubt on the feasibility of domestic democratic politics.

The democratic state depends upon the technique of dis-
cussion to relieve the strains of adjustment to a chang-
ing world. If the analysis of the individual discloses
the probable irrelevance of what the person demands to
what he needs (i.e., to that which will produce a per-
manent relief of strain) serious doubt is cast upon the
efficacy of discussion as a means of handling social
problems.

The premise of democracy is that each man is the best
judge of his own interest, and that all whose interests
are affected should be consulted in the determination
of policy.

The findings of personality research show that the indivi-
dual is a poor judge of his own interest, The Individual
who chooses a political policy as a symbol of his wants

is usually trying to relieve his own disorders by irrele-
vant pallatives. 7

 

65Carr, The Twenty Years Crisis, p. 5.
66Ibid., p. 6.
67Lasswell, PsychOpathology and Politics, p. 194.

63

In a sense politics proceeds by the creation of
fictitious values...The terms in which he (the
person) couches his own interest vary according to

a multitude of factors but whatever the conditioning
influences may be, the resulting theory of his own
interest becomes invested with his own narcissism.
The political symbol is presumably an instrumental
makeshift toward the advancement of the other values
of the personality; but it quickly ceases to be an
instrumental value and very quickly becomes a
terminal value, no longer the servant.but the co-
equal, or indeed the master. Thus the human animal
distinguishes himself by his infinite capacity for
making ends of his means.

It should not be hastily assumed that because a part-
icular set of controversies passes out of the public
mind that the implied problems were solved in any
fundamental sense. Quite often the solution is a
magical solution which changes nothing in the con-
ditions affecting the tension level of the community,
and which merely permits the community to distract
its attention to another set of equally irrelevant
symbols. The number of statutes which pass the leg-
islature or the number of decrees which are handed
down by the executive, but which change nothing in
the permanent practices of society is a rough index
of the role of magic in politics. 8

Lasswell's disdain for the study of only the forms
of government is shown by his choice of mentors, Marx and
Freud.

Marx and Freud were very different theorists but they
both showed that the most precious institutions of Victorian
Society were a facade concealing a seething reality beneath.

Free trade and laissez-faire economics were not the
greatest glory of all time but were a means of Oppressing the
proletariat. Love for momma was sublimated incest and friend-
ship was latent homosexuality. The manifest functions of

society concealed their real latent functions.

 

68Ib1d.. p. 195.

64

Lasswell sees political institutions as Marx saw
economic institutions and Freud saw individual man.

Almost all of the manifest purposes of politics are
not its latent or real purposes. Nearly everyone of Lasswell's
works is built around this theme. Whether we think of his
many portraits of political personalities, his critique of
ordinary logical thinking, his analysis of prOpaganda, or
his concept of power's use to overcome low estimates of the
self, the same idea is present that the social scientist must
peek beneath the exterior to find reality.

There is an important change in the tone of Lasswell's
later works.

. In World Politics and Personal Insecurity written in
1934, Lasswell said:
_ The capacity of the generality of mankind to disembarass
f themselves of the dominant legends of their early years
fl is negligible, and if we pose the problem of unifying
' the world we must seek for the processes by which a
nonratégnal consensus can be most expeditiously ach-
ieved.

In Power and Personality, written in 1948, Lasswell
said:

The fully developed citizen of a democratic commonwealth
will willingly and skillfully play at least certain mini-
mum roles. He will share the perspectives of democratic
doctrine, which as we have had occasion to say, include
positive identification with humanity (and with all
smaller grou 5 whose activities are consistent with the
larger whole : demands for a society where within the
framework of shared power and respect all values are made
more abundant and available: and expectations that men can

do on a universal and permanent scale what they have 5070
often accomplished on a more temporary and local scale.

 

69Lasswell, Wogld Politics and Personal Insecurity, p.237.
7oLasswell, Power and Personality, p. 150.

65

Nonetheless there is a basic continuity in Lasswell's
political theory. His later works reflect far greater Opti-
mism in the beneficent potentialities of man,but he does not
see these potentialities being brought out by ordinary pol-
itical means.

Lasswell is in favor of democracy in his later books
but it is the ends of democracy which Lasswell favors, not
the ordinary means to their achievement. Lasswell sees the
job of promoting democracy as the task of the policy scientist,
who is the personification of the practitioner of preventive
politics he discussed in PsychOpathology and Politics. Lass-
well has two aims then, as I see it.

1. To penetrate the covering of rationalizations and
irrelevant symbols which conceals the real work-
ings of politics.

2. To suggest means to a rational political order,

a free man's commonwealth, to put politics on a
firmly scientific basis.

How well has Lasswell succeeded? Very well in his
first aim, I think: the second is more difficult and it is
not surprising that his successes have been more modest here.
Let's briefly consider Lasswell's luck with his first and
close by considering his second.

After being deluged with exhortations to love mother,
God,home and country, urgings to get America moving, and
cries to save democracy, Lasswell makes revealing and re-
freshing reading.

Lasswell's many personality sketches show the devious

means by which personal motivations are rationalized in terms

66
of the public good. One may consider the exhibitionist
Judge 2 who loved to show the anomalies of the law, the
socialist M whose love of man was a reaction formation of
his hatred of his brother, P, the great patriot who prays
for war so that he may destroy and work off his guilt feelings
at the same time by risking death, or the many other cases
Lasswell discusses.

Lasswell injects a bit of humor into the dry science
of politics. S wrote letters to public men accusing them of
graft and being dominated by "big biz." Mr. Sinclair was
after him because he had written a letter to the Chief Justice
calling his Honor's attention to the Teapot Dome Scandal.
Sinclair had paid S's own sister to throw him out on the
street. 3 prevented John W. Davis's election, “I wrote Hearst
and that turned the trick.“

Lasswell's analyses of ideology and prOpaganda are
likewise good reading. There is his insightful statement of
the inculcation of bourgeois values and his delightful list
of the requirements for an ”American Capital.“

His description of cartoon stereotypes in Politics
is instructive. For years Japan was portrayed as a little man
with a kimono; growing Japanese power changed the sterebtype
to one of a military man. 0

He graphically describes one of the effects of imminent

revolution on formerly sacred symbols.

67
Diabolism appears, which consists in reversing the
previous taboos; the Bronx cheer supercedes the
salute to the flag.71

Bybreaking down the barriers of formalism, Lasswell
has let his imagination stray far beyond the courthouse and
legislature.

What is locally called government often has very little
to do with this function. We know that what is called
government in a mill town may have but a modicum of
influence on important decisions; thgy may be made by
the board of directors of the mill.7

.Lasswell quotes Eugene O'Neill's Mourning Becomes
Electra, in describing politics as a substitute for success
in one's private life.

Lasswell is a realist in his description of politics
and by being a realist he has been able to see the sources
and workings of politics, in places a formalist would have
Missed.

What now of Lasswell's luck with constructing a more
rational political order? How goes the free man's common-
wealth?

The free man's commonwealth is a large order.

The task is nothing less than the drastic and continuing

reconstruction of our civilization and most of the cul-
tures of which we have any knowledge.73

But the need is great and nothing less is safe.

In c0ping with our present-day difficulties in the hope
of reducing provacativeness, we must not lose sight of

 

71Lasswell, World Politics 8 Personal Insecurity,
p. 1070

72Lasswell, The Anal sis of Political Behavior, p. 6.

73Lasswell, Democratic Charactgg, p. 513.

68

the fact that even certainty of annihilation cannot pro-
tect us from the paranoid psychotic. If we knew that
another war would actually eliminate us, we would not be
safe from war. All mankind might be destroyed by a
single paranoid in a position of power who could imagine
no grander exit than using the globe as a gigantic fun-
eral pyre. And the paranoid need not be the leader of a
great state. He can be the head of a small state or
even of a small gang.

Even a modicum of security under present-day conditions
calls for the discovery, neutralization and eventual
prevention of the paranoid. And this calls for the
overhauling of our whole inheritance of social institu-
tions for the purpose of disclosing and eliminating xhe
social factors that create these destructive types.7

And we have the tools.
We cannot at this moment in history, pride ourselves up-
on what we know or what we put into practice about human
relations. Nor can we rely upon any one path to the
understanding of politics and society. We can, however,
congratulate ourselves upon possessing many of the pro-
cedural tools which are capable of penetrating further
into the interelations of man in society than has been
possible hitherto. And we possess a new sense of direc-
tion and of urgency for the effective application of
the instrumentalities of science and policy.
Before we congratulate ourselves too much, however,
I should like to throw a little cold water on Lasswell's
scheme.

Robert K. Merton in his brilliant book, Social Theory
and Social Structure, calls for an abandonment of grand theerizing
and' QUsfi emphasis on theories of the middle range. Merton
sees hopes for vast conceptual schemes which will direct the
attentions of thousands of research workers as apocalyptic.

Merton points out that just because Social Science and physics

 

74Lasswell, Power 8 Personality, p. 184.
75Lasswell, Democratig_Characte;, p. 525.

69
exist in the same century does not mean they are at the
same stage of develOpment. Twentieth century social science
has far more in common with 16th century physics than it does
with twentieth century physics. Social science lacks many
centuries of intervening work; Einstein cannot follow hard
on the heels of Kepler.

Merton compares the need for the solution of social
problems with the need for a cure for heart disease. If
seventeenth century medicine had been judged on its ability
to cure heart disease because of the need for a cure, it
would have been judged an utter failure. So it is with social
science, necessity is the mother of invention but we need
the father of the requisite scientific knowledge.

Lasswell has suggested a World Survey of Personality
Formation and various sampling procedures to guide the policy
scientist. Also, as I mentioned in the section on his pol-
itical science he feels that the aim of social science should
not be so much prediction as the increasing of human freedom.

The increasing of human freedom sounds much prettier
than mere prediction, but it really begs the question. Any
science can have practical as well as theoretical aims.
Merton describes the use of Seventeenth century astronomy and
physics in aiding navigation. But in order to achieve its
practical aims a science must be able to predict what effect
its prOposed means will have. In order to navigate, sailors
had to be able to predict the relation between their sextant

readings and their location on the sea. In order to increase

70
human freedom, Lasswell must be able to predict which actions
will do so.

In the line of prediction, social science's achieve-
ments have been quite modest. Our election predictions are
still little better than those of intuitive unsystematic
observers. Yet, Lasswell thinks of embarking on the vast
task of predicting which kinds of environments produce which
kinds of personality. To be sure a start has been made along
these lines, but only a start. We do not have nearly enough
systematic information to even think about beginning a whole-
sale reconstruction of society.

Merton distinguishes between systematic social theory
and an approach to social problems.

I think Lasswell has an approach, albeit a sephisticated
one. Lasswell has a number of remarkable insights but these
do not bear any real deductive relationship to one another.
SOphisticated as Lasswell's books are, they are no more 50p-
histicated than Carr who does not make Lasswell's claims for
social science.

Lasswell is unquestionably a brilliant thinker and
a highbrow writer unlike the middlebrow writer Fromm. His
realism and his far ranging imagination have added greatly
to our knowledge of political science. But he should be
careful in his attempts to produce an Einsteinian political

science that he does not produce a Hullian one.

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH TO POLITICS

In my introduction I mentioned that it might be
interesting to see the differences in the approach of a
political scientist using psychology and a psychologist writ-
ing about politics. Clearly there are a great many differ-
ences in Fromm and Lasswell's approach. Fromm has a naive
faith in man‘s ability to better himself and sees the ideal
political order as a basically simple one.* Lasswell sees
the ideal political order as a rather complex one, requiring
great SOphistication in its governing. If we throw in Freud
for good measure the difference between Fromm and Lasswell
may become a bit clearer. Freud in Civilization and Its Dis-
contents is very dubious about the possibility of any political
order being able to make man truly happy.

Now my point is that Fromm is a good deal more like
Freud than Lasswell is. Fromm like Freud sees politics as
something somehow extraneous and artificial. In Fromm's view
man is good living in the right society but this is because
he was good to begin with not because the society makes him

good. It is Lasswell who assigns the most importance to

 

*If I may be a bit fanciful, I should like to hazard
the guess that this one of the things that makes Fromm easier
reading, for Fromm is writing for the lay citizen who will
bring about his own utopia, whereas Lasswell is writing for
the policy scientist who will bring it about for the citizen.

71

72
achieving the right political order, through the exercise of
policy science.

This comparison of Freud, Fromm, and Lasswell also
illustrates the intimate connection between one's view of
man and one's view of politics. All political scientists
have some sort of hmplicit psychology; it might be beneficial
if they made it explicit as Lasswell and Fromm do theirs.

If Freud is a child of Hobbes and Fromm a child of
Rousseau, Lasswell might be called a child of Comte. With
these differences in mind we may point out some of the similar-
ities in Fromm's and Lasswell's work which differentiated
them from more orthodox political scientists.

Compared to their less psychological brethren, Lass-
well and Fromm manifest a broader view of politics in two
ways.

First as mentioned before, Lasswell and Fromm are
concerned with all of politics. Their work contrasts with
such books as The Costs of Democpacy, which is concerned with
campaign funds, U. S. Senatops and Their Woplg, which traces
the careers of the solOns of our upper house, and Southern
Politics, which is concerned with the politics of a particular
region. Lasswell and Fromm are concerned with all the politics
of all the world.

Second, Lasswell and Fromm are concerned with all of
politics' effects on the individual. In contrast with those
theorists who are concerned soley with pocket book effects,

Lasswell and Fromm take a broader view of the interaction of

73
the political order and the individual. Lasswell discusses
the way in which certain political jobs gratify certain kinds
of personalities and considers various values the political
order may bestow. Fromm stresses the need for a political
order which will further all the productive capacities of
man.

Finally, Fromm and Laswell have not been content to
merely describe politics, their psychology has made them see
certain political practices as beneficent and others as
malevolent. Both Fromm and Lasswell have found ordinary
political procedures inadequate and have described utOpias

which fulfill the needs their psychologies see man as having.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Birnbach, Martin, Neo Freudian Social Philoso h , Stanford
University Press, Stanford, California, I961.

Carr, Edward Hallett, The Twenty Years Crisis 1919-1939,
MacMillan 8 Company, Ltd., ion on 949.

Fromm, Erich, The Art of Loving, Harper ColOphon Books,
Harper 8 ow, New York 8 Evanston, 1956.

Esca e From Freedom, Rinehart 8 Co., New York,
I941.

Man For Himself, Holt Rinehart 8 Winston, New
YOI' ’ 4 0

May Man Prevail?, Doubleday 8 Co., Garden City,
New York, I961.

The Sane Society, Rinehart 8 Co., New York, 1955.

Sigmund Freud's Mission, Harper 8 Brothers, New
YOI‘ ' 95 0

Freud, Sigmund, Civilization And Its Discontents, Tr by Joan
Riviere, DouBIeday 8 Co., Garden City, New York, 1958.

Lasswell, Harold Dwight, The Anal sis Of Political Behavior,

Oxford Universiky gress, New York, I948.

Democratic Character, printed in The Political
Writin s of HaroId D. Lasswell, The Free
Press, Glencoe, IIIinoIs, I95I.

National Securit and Individual Freedom,
McGraw HiII Book Co., New York, I950.

Politics: Who Gets What When How, Meridian

Books Inc., I958; Copyrigfit I956, McGraw

Hill Book Co. .
Power 8 Personalit , The Viking Press New York,
I962; COpyrIght 1948, WW Norton 8 Co.

Power 8 Societ , Harold D. Lasswell 8 Abraham
KapIan, YaIe University Press, New Haven, 1950.

74

 

 

75

Lasswell Ps cho atholo and Politics, The Viking Press,
cont'd. New York, 1960; Copyright 1930, The University
of Chicago.

 

"The Selective Effect of Personality on Political
Participation“ Printed in Studies in the Sc0pe
and Method of The Authoritarian Persgnality,
The Free Press, Glencoe, IIlinois, 1954.

The World Revolution of Our Time: A Framework
For Basic PoIicy Research, Stanford University
Press, Stanford, California, 1951.

World Politics 8 Personal Insecurit COpyé
right, I934; Reprinted in A Stud OI’Power,
The Free Press, Glencoe, IIIinois, I950.
Merton, Robert K., Social Theory And Social Structure, The
Free Press of GIencoe, Illinois, 1949.

Schaar, John H., Escape From Authority, The Pers ectives of
Erich Fromm, Basic Books Inc., New Yor , l 1.

"IWWWWWII ‘