Harry
Elmer Barnes: R.I.P
Murray N. Rothbard
On August 25, 1968,
less than a week after completing the final draft of the article which
constitutes this issue of Left and Right,
Harry Elmer Barnes died at the age of
79.
All persons leave an
irreplaceable gap when they die; but this gap is truly enormous in the
case of Harry Barnes, for in so many ways he was the Last of the Romans.
He was the last, for example, of that stratum of rural Protestant boys
who shed their religion at college and went on to constitute almost the
entire founding generation of American scholars and university teachers.
More specifically, he was the last of the founders of the “New
History,” that movement at the turn of the century which, headed by
Barnes’ friends and mentors Charles
A.
Beard, Carl L. Becker, and James Harvey Robinson, virtually founded the
profession of historian in
America and placed its entire stamp on historiography until the advent of
World War II. And Harry Barnes was the last of the truly erudite
historians. In a field of accelerating narrowness and specialization
where the expert on France in the 1830’s is likely to know next to
nothing about what happened to France in the 1840’s, Harry Barnes ranged
over the entire field of historical study and vision. He was the
Compleat Historian; and it was the historical approach that informed his
work in all the other social science disciplines in which he was so
remarkably productive: sociology, criminology, religion, economics,
current affairs, and social thought. Surely his scholarly output was
and will continue to remain unparalleled, as even a glance at a
bibliography of his writings will show.
The quantity and
scope of his productive output would alone stamp Harry Elmer Barnes as a
memorable scholar, but this alone barely begins to scratch the surface
of how remarkable a man he was. For he was that rarity among scholars,
a passionately committed man. It was not enough for Harry to discover
and set forth the truth; he must also work actively and whole-heartedly
in the world on behalf of that truth. His was the opposite attitude
from the detached irony of his friend Carl Becker. He believed,
properly but increasingly alone, that it was the ultimate function of
the vast and growing scholarly apparatus to bring about a better life
for mankind; that the ultimate function of the scholarly disciplines is
to aid in carving out an ethics for mankind and then to help put such
ethics into practice. As devoted as he was to the discipline of history
throughout his lifetime, he was just as devoted to putting its lessons
to the service of man. Not for Barnes was the antiquarian “scholarship
for scholarship’s sake”; for him the guiding star was scholarship for
the sake of man. Hence the appropriateness of Carl Becker’s
affectionate label for Barnes: “The Learned Crusader.”
It was Harry’s
passionate commitment to truth that lost for him the applause of
scholars and multitude alike and cast him, for the last two decades of
his life, into outer darkness. During the 1930’s, Harry Barnes was
acclaimed, by scholars and laymen, as one of the foremost intellectual
leaders of his time. His books were reviewed, invariably favorably, on
the coveted Page One of the
New York
Sunday Times Book Review. His column in the Scripps-Howard papers
was read attentively by millions. But, in terms of continuing wordly
eminence, Harry made one fatal mistake: he insisted, for ever and
always, on being true to his convictions and to his principles, let the
chips fall where they may. Hence, when liberal opinion, shortly before
America’s entry into World War II, began to flip-flop en masse from its
previous devotion to neutrality and non-intervention, and beat the drums
for war. Harry Barnes, like his fellow liberals John T. Flynn and
Charles A. Beard, stood steadfast. He refused to be stampeded by the
interventionist war hysteria and he refused to keep his mouth shut over
an issue so vital for mankind. He refused, like so many of his friends
who knew better and had less to lose, to take the safer and more
opportune course. He stood foursquare against the drive to war, and for
his pains was summarily removed from his post as columnist by Roy
Howard, who again knew better but felt that he had to bow to the intense
pressure of interventionist advertisers against Harry Barnes. Like
Beard and Flynn, Barnes found himself hounded by former friends and
colleagues and denounced as a “Nazi” merely for cleaving to the liberal
and pro-peace principles which all alike had shared a few short months
before.
As America emerged
from World War II as the world’s mightiest militarist and imperialist
power, and prepared to launch the Cold War to maintain and expand that
Empire, the Liberal Establishment, now vital in operating and
apologizing for the Empire, would have been prepared to forgive and
forget, as they did for many others. All Harry would have had to do was
to keep quiet, to at least silently accept the New Order and the New
America, and, above all, to refrain from taking the lead, as he had done
after World War I, in revising the myths about the war and in calling
the crimes of his own and allied governments to account at the bar of
history and justice. Other historians, still “isolationist” about World
War II, were willing to shut up and remain unpunished by the
Establishment; but not Harry Elmer Barnes. Harry was a learned
crusader; other men might grow more conservative and timid and
accommodating to the powers-that-be as they grew older and more settled;
but never Harry Elmer Barnes. That was to be his great burden during
the remaining years of his life; but that was also to be his undying
glory.
For two decades after
World War II Liberal scholars and intellectuals led the way in the great
“consensus” celebration of what
America had become. But Harry Barnes could not participate in this jejune
celebration. He reviled the militarism, the witch-hunts, the
imperialism, the military-industrial economy, the “totalitarian
liberalism” as he called it, that now characterized
America, as well as the detached and Mandarin nature of the social science
disciplines. He attacked all of these new trends, but he saw also that
their roots lay in America’s entry into World War II, and that therefore
a new general insight into the truths behind that war was vital if
America were ever to throw off the shackles of its New Order.
And so Harry Barnes
devoted much of the remainder of his life to creating a whole body of
revisionist scholarship about the origins of World War II. As the Field
Marshal of Revisionism after the first World War, Barnes had been in the
company of the bulk of younger historians as well as the whole
intellectual world, but now he was virtually alone, scorned by
historians and laymen alike. But not for a moment did Harry allow
himself to become discouraged or defeated. Single-handed, he virtually
created a new revisionism. For every book and article revising the
official myths about
America and the Second World War, Harry Barnes was there in the forefront,
discovering, inspiring, cajoling, admonishing, editing, promoting. He
was the father and the catalyst for all of World War II Revisionism, as
well as personally writing numerous articles, editing and writing for
the Revisionist symposium Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, and
launching the whole struggle immediately after the war with the first of
numerous editions of his hard-hitting, privately-printed brochure,
Struggle Against the Historical Blackout. Fortunately, Harry lived
long enough to see the tide begin inexorably to turn among the
historical profession, to see a New Left emerge that is beginning to
call into question not only America’s current imperial wars but also
World War II itself: especially in the work of William Appleman Williams
and his students in modern American history. To his friends and
colleagues the fact that Harry lived to see the emergence of his own
vindication after so many years is the only slight consolation for
suffering his loss.
Friendship: this
brings us to Harry’s remarkable qualities as a teacher and as a friend.
That Harry Barnes was one of the great teachers of his era is attested
to by innumerable students, a large number loyal to the end despite
fundamental disagreements on policies and points of view. His personal
charm, his great generosity toward friends and students, as well as his
own prodigious work and erudition. were able to inspire great loyalty
and devotion among his students, and spur their own productive efforts.
As a friend, Harry put all of us to shame with the quantity and quality
of his letters; surely here was one of the most remarkable
letter-writers of our time. Never could any of us write more than one
letter for every three or four of Harry’s; and in them he would pour
forth a seemingly endless stream of learned and candid comment,
analysis, news, criticism, and generous praise. For Harry, friendship
was never casual or superficial; it was devoted and deeply felt, and to
it he gave as much concern and passion as he poured into his work as an
historian or as a crusader. Inevitably, then, these friendships were
often stormy; and I don’t believe there was any friend with whom Harry
did not, at one time or other, break or almost break relations. But
those who knew Harry only by reputation or in his uncompromising
writings can never come to understand or savor Harry in person as he
unfailingly was: cheery, courteous, a witty and often ribald raconteur,
a marvelous and lovable companion. We shall miss him terribly.
Fortunately, Harry’s
friends and colleagues have, for several years, been at work on a
Festschrift, which has grown into a monumental testimonial volume
describing and celebrating every aspect of Harry Barnes’ life and work.
Forthcoming soon, it will be entitled
Harry Elmer Barnes: The Learned Crusader, and it is the sorrow of all of us that Harry, while having read all
of the manuscript, did not have the opportunity to see it in print. The
book deserves the widest possible audience.
In the meanwhile,
Left and Right is privileged to present what tragically turned out
to be Harry Barnes’ last work, a work which he believed to be the final
word on the task which had occupied him for the last quarter of a
century: the true story of
Pearl Harbor.
Characteristically, Harry spent literally years adding to, revising,
and checking the entire article, so that it would pass the highest and
most rigorous standards. His friend, the
Pearl Harbor
expert Commander Charles C. Hiles, helped immeasurably in repeated
reading and checking over the material. We have been delighted and
honored that Harry chose the pages of Left and Right to present
what he proposed to be his final word on the subject, the culminating
synthesis of a quarter century of revisionist inquiry.
Some readers might
ask: why? What’s the point? Isn’t this just a raking up of old coals?
Aren’t we merely pursuing an antiquarian interest when we examine in
such detail what happened over a quarter-century ago? The answer is
that this subject, far from being antiquarian, is crucial to the
understanding of where we are now and how we got that way. For
America’s entry into World War II was the crucial act in expanding the
United States from a republic into an Empire, and in spreading that Empire
throughout the world, replacing the sagging
British Empire in the process. Our entry into World War II was the crucial act in
foisting a permanent militarization upon the economy and society, in
bringing to the country a permanent garrison state, an overweening
military-industrial complex, a permanent system of conscription. It was
the crucial act in creating a Mixed Economy run by Big Government, a
system of State-Monopoly-Capitalism run by the central government in
collaboration with Big Business and Big Unionism. It was the crucial
act in elevating Presidential power, particularly in foreign affairs, to
the role of single most despotic person in the history of the world.
And, finally, World War II is the last war-myth left, the myth that the
Old Left clings to in pure desperation: the myth that here, at least,
was a good war, here was a war in which
America was in the right. World War II is the war thrown into our faces by
the war-making Establishment, as it tries, in each war that we face, to
wrap itself in the mantle of good and righteous World War II.
It is because of its
enthusiasm for World War II and its leader, Franklin D. Roosevelt, that
the Old Left has never been able to understand the straight and true
line that leads from the New Deal and Franklin D. Roosevelt which they
adore, to the Great Society and Lyndon Johnson which they despise.
Lyndon B. Johnson is absolutely correct when he refers to FDR as his
“Big Daddy.” The paternity is clear. It is this much-needed stripping
away of the last remaining good-war and good-war-President myth that
Harry Elmer Barnes accomplishes in his final article. It is a fitting
note for Harry to leave us, for it is in a cause for which Harry fought
and suffered all of his life: the cause of peace and justice and
historical truth.
Rothbard Main Page
Barnes Main Page