emptying societ}’ of what makes it eivilized. For example, for allrnto start from scratch, there would have to be no inheritance.rnWas it concern about equalih’ of opportunit)’ that once gavernthe United States the most confiscator)’ estate taxes in the Westernrnworld? Or were those taxes inspired by the related presnmphonrnthat self-made men are especially admirable and are,rntherefore, the onh’ ones realK’ entitled to their propert’? Thernlatter reflects the American prejudice in favor of people engagedrnin utilitarian pursuits, a prejudice so pronounced andrnone-sided that success in business is assumed automatically tornqualift- a person for influence in other areas, including—if thernsuccess is sufficienth’great—the presidenc’.rnAn older Western tradihon had a very different bias. Thernnarrow and mercenary attitudes assumed to be characteristicrnof people in trade and production were thought to nrakernthem less than suitable for inclusion in the highest social andrnpolitical circles, which required breadth of mind and sensibilit}’.rnThis bias reflected the classical Greek ideal that those whornset the tone should be capable of partnership in the life of therngood, the true, and the beautiful. Property vas merely an indispensablernmeans to this end. The active life of leisure, not busyness,rnwas the highest fonn of life, a notion that helped definernthe Western idea of the gentleman. Members of the Westernrn”bourgeoisie” modeled themselves on the nonutilitarian attitudesrnof the aristocracy, which is one of the ways in which thernhigher purposes of life were integrated into economic life.rnL^isparagement of nonutilitarian pursuits (especially inrnAmerica) has long militated agairrst the highest form of gatekeeping.rnThe trend can be traced back to John Locke, amongrnothers. His latitudinarian version of Puritan Christianity helpedrnelevate the selt-made, “productive” man by asserting that an individualrncreates value by “mixing his labor” with things in naturernand thus becomes entifled to ownership. Busily workingrnawa at tangibh useful tasks is pleasing to God. Locke’s emphasisrndemoted “nonproductive,” contemplative work andrnthose elites who engage in it. He counseled that the young berneducated for a life of usefulness and gain. Locke disparagedrnmuch that had been highK alued in cadier Western culture, asrnwhen he wrote that “parents should labour to hae [the poeticrnvein] shfled and suppressed.” Poetr)’ usually goes together withrngaming, he asserted, and they are alike in that fliey “seldomrnbring any Advantage.”rnThe formation of new, discriminating American elites wouldrnrequire a rediscovery of the eentralih’ of nonutilitarian endeavor.rnTo make such a statement at a time when the arts, the universities,rnand the chinches are in deep trouble may seemrnqviixotie as well as discouraging, but a floundering civilizahonrncannot be rescued by uncultured makers and doers. Unfortunately,rndoers of a nasty kind are often the ones who take advantagernof desperate circumstances, hi the long run, onlv a rein-rn’igorahon of mind, imagination, and moral character will makerna difference. Wliat specific elites might emerge from such a development,rnwe cannot foretell. Wliat we can be predict is thatrnflie’ would put hucksters, smut-peddlers, demagogues, and otherrnself-seekers in their place. <-rnNight Patrolrnby Bruce GuernseyrnMy father never sle|Dt real well after the warrnand as m’ mother tells, he woke in fearrnso deep, so far away, he seemed to starernstraight out at nothing she could see or hear.rnOr worse—she wraps her robe around her, rememberinghe’drnsit there grinning, bolt upriglit beside her,rnthis mad look on his face, the bed springs quiveringrned. with some hilariU’ the night had wnispenrnAnd once, “He did this, your father, I swear he didhernmust have been still dreaming, rest his soul —rnhe tried to close my frightened eyes, my lids,rnto thumb them shut like he was on patrolrnthe way he’d learned so they would sleep, the dead.rnAnd then he blessed himself and bowed his head.”rn20/CHRONICLESrnrnrn