OPINIONSrnCulture Politicsrnby Marshall L. DeRosarn’The results of political changes are hardly ever those which their friends hope forrnor their foes fear.”rn—T.H. HuxleyrnThe Southern Tradition:rnThe Achievement and Limitationsrnof an American Conservatismrnby Eugene D. GenovesernCambridge: Harvard University Press;rn138 pp., $22.50rnThe Southern Front: Historyrnand Pohtics in the Cultural Warrnby Eugene D. GenovesernColumbia: University of Missouri Press;rn320 pp., $29.95rnIn political circles, it has become fashionablernto talk about “culture wars.”rnThe discussions usually touch on the issuesrnof abortion, euthanasia, sexual orientation,rnschool prayer, gun control, andrnwelfare, among others. These arc issuesrnthat campaign consultants can use tornpolarize the electorate in attempts tornmaximize support for their clients andrnminimize support for their clients’ opponents.rnThe only casualties arc the defeatedrncandidates, and as for fatalities,rnwell, it’s just not that sort of war. Evenrnthe nonpoliticos, the activists who yell atrneach other from opposite sides of thernstreet, are doing just that, yelling and notrnshooting each other. When an activistrndoes break the rules of engagement andrnactually commits a violent act which resultsrnin someone getting hurt or killed,rnthe perpetrator is punished accordingly.rnThe phrase culture war is a misnomer;rnculture politics is more descriptive, highlightingrnthe push to control the policymakingrnprocesses. Indeed, these are con-rnMarshall L DeRosa is an associaternprofessor of political science at FloridarnAtlantic University and the author ofrnThe Ninth Amendment and thernPolitics of Creative Jurisprudence:rnDisparaging the Fundamental Rightrnof Popular Control, published this fallrnby Transaction.rntests, and there is a correlation betweenrnthe winners in these political contestsrnand the pace of cultural development.rnHowever, I am not convinced that electingrnBob Dole will significantly alter therndirection of cultural development, as opposedrnto reelecting Bill Clinton. In bothrninstances, cultural decline will proceedrnalong the same lines, albeit at differentrnspeeds.rnTo arrest or, more significantly, tornchange the direction of cultural developmentrnwould, indeed, require warlikernactions, and this is why Professor Genovese’srntwo most recent books arc essentialrnreading for those of us who take ourrnpolitics seriously. Cenovesc cautions usrnnot to take lightly the significance of thernpolitical and cultural developments thatrnare currently unfolding; they reveal tumorsrnin the American body politic thatrncould prove to be fatal. However, wernmust be careful not to kill the patient torncure the disease.rnGenovese provides a unique diagnosisrnof what ails our culture. Having foughtrnagainst traditional American culturernmost of his professional life—^he makesrnno bones about being a longtime Marxistrnsupporter of the Soviet Union andrnbeing an atheist—^he has come to the realizationrnthat humanity’s best hopes liernin recasting traditional values to addressrncontemporary problems, especially traditionalrntenets of Americans’ religiousness.rnHe admits thatrnThe empirical investigations disturbedrna historian with the biasesrnof an atheist and a historical materialistrnwho had always assumed,rnhowever mindlessly, that religionrnshould be understood as no morernthan a corrosive ideology at thernservice of ruling classes. If, at thernbeginning someone would haverntold me that religion wouldrnemerge as a positive force in myrnbook—indeed, as the centerpiecern—I would have laughed andrnreferred him to a psychiatrist. Inrnthe end, the evidence proved overwhelming,rnand I had to eat my biases,rnalthough not my Marxism.rnHere is the key to understandingrnGenovcse’s theoretical impulses. He acknowledgesrnthe value of religion, but arnreligion along the lines of the Socraticrnnoble lie, an instrumental religion to bernutilized in the quest for arresting the declinernof American culture. Under hisrnmodel, religion would be in the servicernof a newly established ruling class, providingrnsolid ground “on which to standrnin a persistent struggle to reconcile thernclaims of social justice, individual freedom,rnand a respect for human dignity inrnan age in which the moral as well as intellectualrnfoundations of the requisite socialrnconsensus have crumbled.” Hence,rnreligion provides the “ethical and moralrnbaselines” that historical Marxism “dis-rn32/CHRONICLESrnrnrn