OnDecemberS, 1983,James Bumham waspresentednnth thenfirst Richard M. Weaver Award for Scholarly Letters by ThenIngersollFoundation Mr. Bumham ‘s address to those assemblednat Chicago’s RitzCarlton hotel follows:nI want to begin with a word of thanks to the sponsors of thisnaward, the trustees of the Ingersoll Foundation. It is an honornto be honored in such a fashion, and in the company of such andistiaguished man of letters as Jorge Luis Borges.nAs you may be aware, I have not, in any formal sense, put pennto paper for a period of time. But, clearly, the occasion calls forna few words.nM„ Luch writing is an exercise in self-education. At any rate,nthat is a fair way to describe most of my work, especially if onenstarts with The Managerial Revolution From 1934 until thenwinter of 1939-40,1 was a member of Trotsky’s FourthnInternational. Like many members of my generation, I hadnobserved that the established capitalist order in nearly everynmajor country had, to a large extent, crumbled, taking with itnmuch of the social and political order. For a number of years Inaccepted some of the empty ideological mumbo-jimibo thatnwas associated with the Trotskyite movement.nThen, one day, I tried to relate the political formula which Inhad been manipulating to reality. What, in fact, was the relationshipnbetween the Soviet Union and its neighbors? What werenthe internal dynamics of Soviet society, and what did they havenin common with other major powers, such as the United Statesnand Germany? My book, TheManagerialRevolution, wasanattemptnto ask the right questions and deliver an early, partialnanswer.nWith the hindsight of over 40 years, it becomes clear that thenearly statement of the hypothesis of the managerial revolutionnwas somewhat rigid and doctrinaire. Some of the topical politicalnpropositions were wrong or incomplete. But the essentialnpoint remains valid, and, indeed, has been reconfirmed: thencapitalist system of the 19th century is finished, however muchnsome of our contemporary theoreticians wish to the contrary.nBut capitalism is not being replaced by socialism of the abstractnMarxist ideal, contrary to the confident predictions of itsntheoreticians.nJ. he challenge, then, for serious students of the real world,nis to analyze the precise nature of the historical transition awaynflrom 19th-century capitalism, including the organizationalnforms in which this transition expresses itself. At the same time,nthere is a responsibility to encourage others to promote thosenelements in society during this transition that promise at leastnthe minimum of liberty and justice that distinguish human societynfirom a merely animal existence.nChronicles of Culturen. TO SEE THE WORLD AND MAN •nC:o-MM;lif;’r-nnnIn the process of securing these minimum conditions, I havenalways held, as do the trustees of tonight’s event, that truthfulnessnand rationality are essential priorities in the discussion ofnpublic issues. What this means is that only by renouncing thenstraitjacket of ideology can we begin to see the world and man.nAn ideology is a normative commitment posing as science ornas a universally valid philosophy. It cannot be refuted by evidencenor rational analysis; so long as the commitment holds, itnis irreftitable. In this sense, the ideology of liberalism, as I definednit in the Suicide of the Wes^ is no different from the ideologynof the communists. Where the latter has generally been thenideology of an a^essive, expansionist Soviet state, the formernhas been the ideology of Western suicide.nBut the application of truthfulness and rationality to the dissectionnof ideologies and the promotion of liberty and justicendoes not mean being confined to a narrowly scientific, quantitativenset of instruments. Certainly those who I have called “thendefenders of freedom,” the Machiavellians, did not rely uponnGallup polls or electronic computers to gain their extraordinaryninsights into the nature of the political process. As I observed,na touch playfully, in the opening lines of my book Congressnand the American Tradition, “In ancient times, before thenillusions of science had corrupted traditional wisdom, thenfounders of Cities were known to be gods or demigods.”nTruthfulness in the analysis of human history and conductnshouldmakeatleastaminorallowancefor magic, luck, ordivinenfevor. This point is especially relevant to the theory or historynof government Unless there is some acceptance—^whether bynhabit, tradition, or faith—of a principle which completes thenjustification for government, that government will either collapsenor will have to M back upon force—the ultimate nonrationalnjustification.n