86 Chapter 4
StillmorethrilledthanHofstadterandEkirchaboutthis is HenrySteeleCommager.
Commageris elatedthatWardassessedthattherewasnot too muchgovernismin the
USA,but too little.In Ward’s words,“Modernsocietyis sufferingfromthe veryopposite
of paternalism—fromunder-government.” CommagerapprovinglyquotesWardsaying,
“Individualfreedomcan comeonlythroughsocialregulation.”^41 Refusingto facethe
Orwellianself-contradictionin thatstatement,Commagerfindsit perfectlylogical,pro-
claiming,“Wardcherishedlibertyas sincerely” as anyoneelse.^42
Yet Ward’s explanationfor his supportfor a socializedsystemof educationunder-
minesCommager’s assumptionthat Ward“cherishedliberty.. .” As we did in BookOne,
we quoteWardhimselfon his opinionabouttax-funded,legislation-mandatedgovern-
mentschoolingat its best.Referringto a babyby the pronounofitratherthanheorshe,
Wardproclaims,“Everychildborninto the worldshouldbe lookeduponby societyas so
muchrawmaterialto be manufactured.Its qualityis to be tested.It is the businessof
societyas an intelligenteconomistto makethe verymostof it,”itbeingthe child.^43 In
DynamicSociologyfrom1907,Wardrecommendsthatgovernmentschoolsshieldtheir
studentsfromlearningany ideasthatWarddislikes.Likewise,thesestudentsshouldbe
deprivedof the optionof airingopinionsthatWarddislikes.He rationales,“The forcible
suppressionof the utteranceor publicationin any formof unwelcomeopinionsis equiva-
lentto withholdingfromall undeterminedmindsthe evidenceuponwhichsuchviews
rest;... It is simplythat trueviewsmayas easilybe createdby this methodof exclusionas
falseones,whichlatteris the pointof viewfromwhichthis fact is regarded.The moreor
less arbitraryexclusionof error,i.e., of falsedata,is to a greatdegreejustifiable.... This,
however,is the essenceof whatis heremeantby education,whichmaybe regardedas a
systematicprocessfor the manufactureof correctopinions”^44 (emphasisWard’s).
It shouldbe mentionedthatWard’s avowedprogressivismdid not stophimfrom
lookingdownon the penuriousanduneducated,whomhe describedas “wretchedbe-
ings” and“the unfortunatevictimsof socialimperfection.”^45 Karier’s revelationsabout
Ward’s viewson blacks,the Chinese,and the financiallydowntroddenbringto lightthe
astonishinginaccuracyof DianeRavitch’s depictionof him.Ravitchdescribesthis racial
elitistas a “passionateegalitarian”^46 who“insistedthatnot onlyall classesbut all races
wereequallycapableof learningandemployingthe socialachievementsof mankind.”
Nordo the factsline up withMowry’s assertionthatWardbelievedthat“ability,intelli-
gence,andenergyweredistributedequallyamongall men... .”^47 IfsocialDarwinism
alludesto eugenics,elitism,racism,ethnicconflict,and“classism,” thenit wouldappear
thatthe termsocialDarwinistmoreaccuratelycharacterizesWard’s positionthanthatof
eitherSpenceror Sumner.Yet this is the sameLesterWardwhomPulitzerPrize-winning
CarlDeglercomplimentsfor beingthe antidoteto socialDarwinismon accountof Ward’s
“beliefin the equalityof people.”^48
Not EvenWardLikesthe Social-DarwinismLabel
Notably,though,unlikethe WardapologistsI havequoted,Wardhimselfeventually
cameto realizethat,just as I am presentlyarguing,the socialDarwinismtag is mostlya
formof name-calling.Wardknewfull wellthatpoliticalactivistsdescribesomeoneas a
socialDarwinistin orderto associatehimwithnow-unpopularpoliticalideologiesto
whichhe doesnot trulysubscribe.Bannisternarratesthat at firstin the late 1800s,“Ward
persistentlywarnedcontemporariesof the dangersof conservative”—in this context,Ban-
nistermeansfree-market—”Darwinism,or as he himselffinallycalledit by its modern
name,socialDarwinism.” But,later,Wardfoundthat the socialDarwinismepithetthat he
onceaffixedto otherswassoonbeingexploitedto debunkhis owneugenicism.Science
and Mythcontinues,“In 1905and 1906,Wardlearnedthat othershad theirownversionof