Book Reviews

478 BOOKS CAPTURINGTHE CULTURE: FILM,ART, AND POLITICS by Richard Grenier Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1030 15th Street NW, Washington, DC 20005 • 1991 • 392 pages • $24.95cloth Reviewed by Greg Kaza I deological studies revolve around more than politics; they involve culture as well. Lenin was the first socialist to implement Marx's nightmare vision in the political realm. But another Marxist-the Italian Antonio Gram sci-played a crucial role in Marxism's spread to the cultural realm. Neoconservative Richard Gre nier notes in this intriguing book that Gramsci was "the most prescient analyst of the contemporary relationship of art and politics.... Culture, Gram sci felt, is not simply the superstructure of an eco nomic base-the role assigned to it in orthodox Marxism-but is central to a society." Gramsci's famous slogan was "Capture the cul ture." Grenier documents how Gramsci's disciples continue their "long march through the institu tions" of the cultural world. The collapse of social ism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe has totally discredited Lenin's political work. But Gramsci's legacy remains with us in the form of a powerful cultural left. In this collection of essays originally published in Commentary, The Wash ington Times and The New York Times, Grenier explores how "the modern artist's predisposition to estrangement has flung him, in America espe cially,straight into Gramsci's arms."

Many of Grenier's insights would warm the heart of any classical liberal. Reds, Warren Beat ty's film about the Russian Revolution, "has poli tics after all," Grenier observes. "They are what can be called the 'politics of intent,' as opposed to the politics of achievement. If one has noble intentions, and means well toward one's fellow man, and one's heart is pure, and generous, and filled with love, then that is what matters. If one's ideas are unworkable, bring social disruption, dis aster, and even tragedy on a colossal scale-one can't be expected to foresee all that, can one?" Despite the socialisticbias of Reds, there are high lights. At one point, Jack Nicholson, portraying Eugene O'Neill, drily remarks, "Something in me tightens, when an American intellectual's eyes shine at the mention of Russia." Important post-World War II European film makers unknown to the average American-but not to flattering leftist critics-are an easy mark for Grenier. The late director Rainer Werner Fass binder and other "New Wave" film-makers were creations of the West German government. "For without lavish government funding," Grenier observes, "this New German cinema would not only never have survived, it would never have been born." Fassbinder was part of "a subsidized underground cinema."

Grenier writes, "When you see [the Greek director Kostantinos Costa-Gavras in Europe] there are no evasions. He's your straight, mind numbing Marxist. ... But whenever he flies to America he converts to free enterprise .... He takes Americans for political illiterates, and fair is fair, he's usually right." The Frenchman Franc;oisTruffaut was a differ ent sort of film-maker. Grenier observes that it "was not hard for General de Gaulle or his culture minister, Andre Malraux, to grasp that France had produced in Truffaut and [his followers] a school of film-makers whose conservatism, both cultural and political, was profound .... [Truffaut] simply could not abide a cinema that told him, in accor dance with the modish ideas of the Marxianized French elite culture of his early years, that the world was a rotten place, evil, doomed .... " De Gaulle and Malraux moved quickly. Fassbinder was part of a government-subsidized, left-wing cinema, whileTruffaut wassubsidized by a govern ment of the political right.

Some libertarians may be disturbed by Gre nier's reduction of culture to the Cold War, but they should be more troubled by the scant atten tion paid to the South and Midwest, arguably the foundation of American culture. This comes as lit tIe surprise. To a neoconservative such as Grenier, New York is the center of the world. Despite this oversight, Grenier's book does contain one obser vation about that vast tract of land west of the Hudson River. Clint Eastwood, he writes, "draws the skilled industrial workers, farmers, men who if they no longer work with their hands come from a different America than the Vassar that produced Jane Fonda and Meryl Streep." Fine. But there is much more that Grenier could have said about the South and Midwest. Shortly after the Bolsheviks took power in the Soviet Union, Lenin declared, "Of all the arts, for us cinema is the most important." Richard Grenier observes, "Only in America ... is it possible for a critic to be in the editorial offices of an influential organ of the press ... and have an editor say: 'Who's Gramsci?'" Two good reasons, despite its shortcomings, to read this book. D Greg Kaza is Vice Presidentfor Policy Researchat The MackinacCenterof Midland, Michigan, and co-authorof the book, Michigan: An Agenda for the '90s.

THE NATIONALREVIEWCOLLEGE GUIDE:AMERICA'S50 TOP LIBERAL ARTS SCHOOLS edited by Charles Sykes and Brad Miner A National Review Book, 150 E. 35th Street, New York, NY 10016 • 1991 • 212 pages • $14.95 paper Reviewedby RaymondJ. Keating I n this age of "political correctness," "cultural diversity," "deconstructionism," and "gender neutrality," one might think that it is no longer possible to receive a traditional, well-grounded liberal arts education. And although it is increas ingly difficult to find sound liberal arts colleges and universities, Charles Sykes and Brad Miner have proven that it is not, in fact, impossible. Their new book presents the prospective college student, his or her parents, and the high school counselor with a steady rudder for evaluating academic quality. The editors identify three styles of American higher education. One is the "land-grant" institu tion, which is based on "technical expertise impor tant to a particular region." A second is the "Ger man" university, focused on "highly technical research." The third style, and the editors' over arching preference, is the "English" university, as it is "designed to graduate well-rounded scholar citizens."

The criteria for evaluating academic excellence used by Sykes and Miner by no means typify the average college guide. Size, percentage of faculty Ph.D.'s, amount of research grants, or the number of published works by faculty members are not to be found among their tools of evaluation. The edi479 tors have three primary criteria upon which a col lege or university is judged: 1. by the quality and availability of the faculty; 2. by the quality of the curriculum, with special regard for schools with a liberal arts "core" ... that respects the tradition of the West; 3. by the quality of the intellectual environment: that elusive interaction among students, faculty, administrators, alumni, and townspeople-the entire university community. As for the faculty,the editors consider "teaching ability above other measures of performance." This contrasts sharply with the prevailing, though misguided, publish-or-perish mentality in aca demia today.

Sykes's and Miner's criteria, while firmly grounded on the traditional ideal of what a college should be, represent, in today's environment, the exception rather than the rule. For if they were not the exception, such a book wouldn't be needed. It is, in fact, a most useful college guide, as its sole focus is on the quality of education. William F. Buckley Jr., in the book's introduc tion, expounds on this idea of a quality education: "And such education, [the editors] are convinced, requires not merely that graduates of an institution emerge technically qualified to handle the machin ery of the modern world. They must learn some thing about what happened in the evolution of the modern world. And they must be exposed to some of the reasons why the bias gradually crystallized in favor of human freedom, and why the freedom of the marketplace is essential to that freedom." Such thoughts on education are deemed outmod ed by many academic institutions, and by some are even considered taboo.

Indeed, the search for truth has been supplant ed in many academic settings by relativism, egali tarianism' multi-culturalism, and an over-sensi tized environment that excludes debate. Sykes and Miner, on the contrary, in their own words, "have opted as often as possible for schools that have not supplanted education with political indoctrination, have not subverted justice in pur suit of equality-whatever that is." They explicitly "reject any university that tolerates ... assaults on academic freedom." A few of the editors' own comments about var ious colleges and universities are in order to gain a feelfor the temperament of this guide (all the insti480 THE FREEMAN • DECEMBER 1991 tutions chosen by Sykes and Miner are worth con sideration; the comments I have selected are mere ly for illustration): "Although it is hopelessly out of step to pursue wisdom rather than 'diversity' these days, that seems exactly what BU's [Boston University's] new pilot core curriculum attempts to do."

"It is worthwhile to recall that nearly all of the early American colleges and universities began as church-related institutions, reflecting the belief that liberal learning was integrally tied to a recog nition of the role of faith in history and culture." "It is no exaggeration to say that the history of liberal learning in the twentieth century has largely been the story of higher education's response to the remarkable core curriculum put into place dur ing the first half century by Columbia College." "[Furman's student volunteer] program not only instillsthe values of voluntarism, but also pro vides a firsthand lesson in non-statist approaches to social problems." "While the vast majority of schools compro mised both their independence and academic integrity by accepting ... federal controls, Hills dale fought back in a decade-long struggle that cul minated in Hillsdale's refusal to all federal support. ... Since then, Hillsdale has gone it alone, building its programs around the traditional prin ciples of freedom, morality, free enterprise, indi vidualism, and independence."

"There is no mistaking the traditionalism of campus life at [Thomas] Aquinas. Students address one another as Mr. and Miss in the class room, adhere to a dress code, eschew drugs, and follow a strict moral code." The NationalReviewCollegeGuideis unique. It doesn't adhere to current academic trends but, rather, critically evaluates them in light of a tradi tional, proven core of knowledge. The fact that Columbia is the only Ivy League school to make this top 50list is instructive. The Ivies have faltered in recent times. For example, "At Yale," the edi tors. note, "the denial of a core of knowledge is made explicit." Sykes and Miner advise these insti tutions to "return to the basics-to teach under graduates systematically a core of tested knowl edge, and to revive the tradition and discipline so rigorously followed throughout all but a few recent years in their long histories." Sykes and Miner issue other caveats pertaining to some of the socalled top institutions in this nation. For example: "Imagine the surprise of stu dents in Duke's English Department who take a sensible-sounding course in Shakespeare only to discover that the professor teaches King Learas a critique of sixteenth-century British capitalism."

In this period of slackening academic stan dards and gross politicization, this book should be a primary source for those who seek a quality education. D Mr. Keating is New York Director of Citizens for a Sound Economy. DRUGS AND CRIME edited by Michael Tonry and James Q. Wilson Universityof ChicagoPress, 11030 S. LangleyAvenue, Chicago, IL 60628 -1990 - 574 pages - $39.95 cloth Reviewedby Doug Bandow T he socalled drug war remains one of the most contentious issues facing us. There seems little doubt that the government's attempt to stamp out illicit drug use has failed. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, 74.4million people over the age of 12 have tried drugs, despite decades of prohibition. Nearly 27 million people use illegal substances at least once a year. Rates of drug use are now falling, but the declines started before the periodic escalations of the drug war during the 1980s.

At the same time the harm from prohibition and the ever more Draconian enforcement policies legislated by vote-minded politicians has sharply escalated. The U.S. now has more than one million people in prison, giving it the highest rate of imprisonment in the industrial world. Young blacks are more likely to die in urban gun battles resulting from drug prohibition than they were serving in the army in Vietnam. Drug users seeking to pay the inflated prices of illegal sub stances commit thousands of property crimes in cities and suburbs. Children, who receive lesser criminal punishments, are increasingly recruited into the drug trade; many also become users. Even James Q. Wilson admits in Drugs and Crime that "attempting to suppress the use of drugs is costly-very costly."Although he believes that legalization would result in greater problems, many of the essays in Drugs and Crime suggest otherwise, demonstrating how prohibition funds a violent criminal underground while failing to halt drug sales.

For instance, one study of New York City noted that drugs have transformed "the conduct norms of the criminal underclass subculture .... Crack has dramatically expanded the prosperity of the crim inal underclass economy as well as incorporated and strengthened new elements into the criminal underclass subculture." Were drugs not illegal, of course, there would be little ill-gotten wealth to dispense. Alas, the apparent success of police efforts in New York to end street sales has proved largely illusory. "Such intense police pressure, however, did not eliminate drug-selling activity or make major reductions in the number of sellers. Rather, heroin and cocaine sellers developed new strate gies for marketing their products," conclude the researchers. Two other experts have contributed a detailed study of state and local enforcement efforts. The solution to drug abuse, they observe, is hard to find: "While 'the drug problem' and responses to it seem simple enough from the distance of a politi cian's podium, a preacher's pulpit, or an editorial ist's desk, from close up they reveal an almost dis orienting complexity of goals, techniques, and targets. How best to use limited, and largely unco ordinated, enforcement, adjudication, and punish ment resources to address the multifaceted drug problem is anything but obvious."

What is obvious, however, is that tougher enforcement tends to push up drug prices, and hence property crime by addicts stealing to satisfy their habits. The researchers conclude that the evi dence does "suggest that the possibility of a trade off, at least in the short run, between reducing drug consumption and reducing crime is not merely hypothetical. " Another form of violent drug crime inflamed by stricter enforcement policies is described as "sys temic" by researchers: the assaults and killingsthat occur naturally in the course of the drug trade. "Both the nature of the business and the state of the customer-often nervous, perhaps feeling deprivation effects-make violence a frequent outcome in the drug trade." The form of drug-related violence of least con cern is that committed by users because of the pharmacological effects of the drugs themselves. BOOKS 481 The authors of another chapter in Drugs and Crime observe that "use of illicit drugs does not appear to be strongly related to onset and partici pation in predatory crime.... Most of the under lying causative factors, such as irregular employ ment or weak attachment to school or parents, are not amenable to intervention by the justice system.

Moreover, general prevalence figures for drug use do not give much hope that even major reductions in the numbers of people who use illicit drugs could significantlyreduce the numbers of incidents of predatory crime." In the end, even Wilson, critic of drug legaliza tion though he may be, seems to recognize that the drug problem is not easily manageable by govern ment. "Above all, we do not know how to alter the moral climate so that drug use is regarded as loath some," he complains. And until we do change that moral climate, drug use will continue, irrespective of the severity of the government's war on drugs. Drugsand Crimeis first and foremost a valuable resource as to the relationship between drugs, the drug laws, and crime. Its honest appraisal of that relationship makes it much more, however-a case for withdrawing the criminal law from what is most fundamentally a moral problem. D Doug Bandowis a SeniorFellowat the Cato Instituteand a former SpecialAssistantto PresidentReagan.

FREE MARKETENVIRONMENTALISM by Terry L. Anderson and Donald R. Leal Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 177 Post Street, San Francisco, CA 94108 • 1991 • 208 pages $28.95cloth, $14.95paper Reviewedby WilliamH. Peterson Propertyshould be in a certainsense common, but, as a generalrule, private;for, when everyone hasa distinctinterest,men willnot complainofone another, and they will make more progress, becauseeveryonewillbeattendingto hisown busi ness. Aristotle, Politics,Book II, Ch. 5 T hus did Aristotle take Plato's advocacy of communism to task. Aristotle's stress on private property rights is reflected in the approach to environmental concerns taken by research associates Terry Anderson and Donald 482 THE FREEMAN • DECEMBER 1991 Leal of the Political Economy Research Center at Bozeman, Montana, in their study on how Amer ica should best manage its natural resources and achieve environmental quality.

Anderson and Leal maintain that most of the proposed solutions to perceived environmental problems today callfor centralized, politicized,and bureaucratized approaches that are not even con sistent with the science of ecology.Moreover, they hold these solutions pit winners against losers in a zero-sum game that tears at America's socialfabric. Their brilliant answer of what they call "free market environmentalism" depends on an Aris totelian voluntary exchange of property rights between consenting owners that promotes human cooperation and mutuality of interests. In short, it offers, say Anderson and Leal, "an alternative that channels the heightened environmental con sciousness into win-win solutions that can sustain economic growth, enhance environmental quality, and promote [social]harmony." The authors furnish an example of such har mony in the case of the National Audubon Soci ety's Rainey Wildlife Sanctuary in Louisiana.

There the Society,a group opposed to oil and gas development in most wilderness settings, acted differently when it happened to own the land and mineral rights in an extensive area that is home for deer, armadillo, muskrat, otter, mink, thousands of geese, and many other birds. That home has in no way been measurably damaged by the Society's allowing Consolidated Oil and Gas to extract oil from the wildlife sanc tuary for years in exchange for royalties so that the wildlife group can better carryon its work. To be sure, the Society imposed extra precautions on the company oil wells to prevent pollution in the huge marshland, but the environmentalist group/ business firm partnership still evidences what the authors see as a win-win environmental solution. This solution may provide the key to what to do about the Interior Department's proposal to per mit oil exploration in the 1.5 million acre coastal plain of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge-about 8·percent of the nation's largest preserve. That plain may contain as many as 9.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil, quite possibly America's last great oil reserve, according to petroleum geologists.

But the proposal, backed by President Bush, encounters strong opposition in the environmen tally sensitive, politically attuned Congress.,Still, this opposition seems to ignore the Rainey Sanctu ary and the Alaska pipeline experience of success fully preserving wildlife while producing a valu able resource. And it ignores various recent Middle Eastern oil disruptions, the latest involving Desert Storm. The note on Congress and President Bush points up the inevitable intrusion of politics and the consequent diminution of private property rights in most proposed solutions to pollution. The Clean Air Act of 1977, for example, requires the "best available technology" standards for new coal-fired electricity generating plants. But these standards, administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, precluded specific pollutants emission criteria, thereby not allowing plants to burn cleaner, low-sulfur western coal without hav ing to install expensive stack-gas scrubbers, which cost a lot more to buy and operate.

Where's the politics? Just here: A "clean air/dirty coal" coalition of environmentalists and eastern coal producers lobbied Congress and the EPA for the technological fix. The eastern coal producers worried that a sensible environmental policy would induce electric utilities to buy low sulfur western coal to the exclusion of high-sulfur eastern coal. The environmentalists, for their part, are just not particularly cost-conscious when it comes to pollution control, often arguing that the best solution isn't good enough, that "pure" air and water really means 100 percent pure. The upshot has been not only the undermining of private property rights but higher-cost elec tricity for consumers and, ironically, still more air pollution due to a reduction in the rate of replacement of older, dirtier utility furnaces and boilers. Anderson and Leal neatly encapsulate their strategy of getting private property rights to clinch the war on pollution by noting a sign on the side of a commercial garbage truck: "It may be garbage to you, but it's our bread and butter." D Dr. Peterson,an adjunctscholaratthe HeritageFoundation, is the Lundy Professorof BusinessPhilosophyat Campbell University,BuiesCreek, North Carolina.