Merk, Frederick. Manifest Destiny and Mission in American His-
tory: A Reinterpretation,with the collaboration of Lois Ban-
nister Merk, 1st ed. New York: Knopf, 1963.
Mannheim, Karl (1893–1947) Hungarian social
theorist and sociologist
Mannheim related political thinking and social context
with more subtlety than Karl MARX, but he agreed with
HISTORICISM that attitudes and IDEOLOGY are condi-
tioned by the group membership of the philosophers.
One’s social class, education, and institutional frame-
work affect the way one perceives politics. However,
with that recognition, Mannheim hoped to establish a
politically neutral “scientific” sociology of knowledge.
Social groups might be able to recognize the biases of
their perspectives and the validity of their opponents’
views and together develop a shared program for social
improvement (like John Stuart MILL’s ideal “free mar-
ketplace of ideas”). He implemented these ideas dur-
ing his period in England (1933–47) when he
advocated social and economic planning as well as
comprehensive public education.
Mannheim taught at universities in his native Hun-
gary (Budapest), in Germany (Heidelberg and Frank-
furt), and in Great Britain (the London School of
Economics and the Institute of Education at the Uni-
versity of London). He wrote on CONSERVATIVEthought,
on economic ambition, and on UTOPIAS. The complex
and many-sided perspectives in Mannheim’s thought
show a subtle, objective intellect, but his ability to see
issues from all philosophical perspectives has made it
difficult to categorize him. This has caused some crit-
ics to accuse him of relativism and paradoxical atti-
tudes (that is, inconsistency).
Further Readings
Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the
Sociology of Knowledge,preface by Louis Wirth. London: K.
Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1936.
Simonds, A. P. Karl Mannheim’s Sociology of Knowledge.Oxford,
Eng.: Clarendon Press, 1978.
Mao Tse-Tung (1893–1976) Chinese Commu-
nist thinker and political leader
Mao was the theoretical and practical leader of the
COMMUNIST Chinese Revolution (1949) and People’s
Republic of China. His ideas blend MARXIST-LENINIST
IDEOLOGYwith classical Chinese philosophy (Confu-
cianism and legalism). One modification of Marxism in
“Mao Tse-tung Thought” was his emphasis on the revo-
lutionary potential of the rural peasantry (as opposed
to the industrial proletariat) and guerilla warfare in the
countryside. His agricultural reforms toward commu-
nal production reflect this emphasis. Mao’s cultural
insularity (he never traveled abroad or became widely
acquainted with foreign ideas) also contributed to his
strong anti-Western bias, a tendency toward isolation-
ism, and brutal persecution of Western intellectuals
and Christian missionaries.
He broke from Soviet communist orthodoxy over
the DICTATORial and BUREAUCRATICquality of the new
SOCIALIST state. Seeing a new ruling class emerging
from the Communist Party leaders in government,
Mao attempted (in the Cultural Revolution of the late
1950s) to decentralize power, break down newly
emerging social HIERARCHY, and democratize socialism.
This led to widespread disorder and violence, causing
Mao’s communist successors to denounce it. The move
of contemporary China to a combination of DESPOTIC
centralized government and greater free-market eco-
nomics represents a rejection of Maoism. He is revered
as a great nationalist revolutionary leader, but his
social theories did not achieve wide success.Marcus Aurelius (121–180) Roman emperor and
Stoic philosopher
In his book, Meditations,the emperor Marcus Aurelius
elaborated his stoical philosophy of patient suffering,
human dignity, dedication to duty, wisdom, and respect
for reason and the LAWof the universe. This meshed
well with a Roman Empire already going into decline
and became almost the official philosophy of the West-
ern empire. Aurelius also dedicated his life to the eco-
nomic prosperity, military expansion, and public VIRTUE
of Roman culture. Stoicism tends to be inward-looking
and private, but Marcus Aurelius believed that it would
also strengthen the morality and power of Rome. His
elevation of Roman religion and superiority put him at
odds with the early CHRISTIANchurch, which regarded
the pagan STATEreligions as idolatry and believed in the
EQUALITYof Roman and barbarian peoples. Despite his
brutal persecutions of Christians and campaigns
against Britain, Germany, and the Parthians, Marcus
was a humane emperor toward the poor (lowering their
taxes), lenient to political criminals, and decreased theMarcus, Aurelius 199