Book Review

Family North Carolina Magazine—November/December 2008

by R. Matthew Lytle, Ph.D.

A Call to Argue

Howard Fineman. The Thirteen American Arguments: Enduring Debates that Define and Inspire Our Country. New York: Random House, 2008. Pp. 306. $25.00.

Howard Fineman is a man who loves his country and has spent a great deal of time thinking about it. As Newsweek’s senior Washington correspondent, Fineman has had the opportunity to witness events from the perspective of national leaders in the U.S. capital, as evidenced by interviews with the President and other national leaders. Fineman’s puts the experience gained by his position, as well as his reporter’s knack for finding the back-story, to good use in The Thirteen American Arguments.

Fineman lists “thirteen foundational arguments that comprise our public life” (3). These arguments are: 1. Who is a person; 2. Who is an American; 3. The role of faith; 4. What can we know and say; 5. The limits of individualism; 6. Who judges the law; 7. Debt and the dollar; 8. Local v. national authority; 9. Presidential power; 10. The terms of trade; 11. War and diplomacy; 12. The environment; and 13. A fair, “more perfect” union. Fineman contends that each of these arguments were foundational to the beginning of America and continue to play a determinative role in how the nation continues to be shaped.

Arguments reads like a well-written journalistic report on the history of the nation—from the disputes between the Federalists and the Jeffersonians, to the current disputes over such issues as the national debt. Indeed, each chapter frames the argument in question by introducing a historical debate over the issue. Furthermore, these arguments are well illustrated through other episodes from our nation’s history. In nearly all of these cases, Fineman does a masterful job of tying these mini-narratives into a master narrative that proves his point that the argument in question deserves to be listed among the thirteen foundational arguments. Fineman’s obvious gift for storytelling along with his often firsthand knowledge of historical events makes each chapter an enjoyable read.

Fineman sets out to define each argument, but at times cannot help but take sides to the extent that he moves beyond defining into advocacy. This tendency is clearest in Fineman’s discussion of the first argument. While he admirably presents different instances of personhood debates in America by drawing attention to the plight of minorities and women, Fineman’s handling of the unborn in this context is less than admirable. At one point in his discussion of the abortion argument, he puts the phrase “pro-life” in quotes, while leaving the phrase “abortion-rights” without quotes (31). Whether he intends it or not, he implies that the pro-life position is not a valid or genuinely held position, while “abortion-rights” is. In other words, “pro-life” isn’t really about life, but “abortion-rights” is about rights. Perhaps this is Fineman’s contribution to the argument—arguing while defining the arguments. He seems (at least here) to be living his thesis.

Another potential problem lies with Fineman’s methodology. He sets up each argument as a tug-of-war between two extremes. He believes the ideal lies somewhere between these extremes in an Aristotelian “golden mean” of sorts. For Fineman, arguing is the vehicle which propels this nation along a journey of self-discovery and identification: “Arguing keeps us moving fitfully forward—toward being worthy of the gifts God gave us” (5). This dialectic methodology (i.e., finding a synthesis or compromise between two opposites) begs the question of what place—if any—there is for external truth. Is there a final destination, or is the argumental journey a neverending one, so that the synthesis of opposite poles will eventually become a pole in itself with its own opposite? If this is the case, then the process of argumentation becomes an end in itself. Arguments are fine, but they should be concerned with finding what noted apologist Francis Schaeffer called “true truth.“

The dialectical method also gives rise to other questions. Do the arguments define “us” as a nation, or as individuals? Does Fineman see a difference? While it may be possible (and right) to say that America is defined by these arguments, this may not necessarily be a good thing, and yet this may be the only way for a union of disparate people groups to come to a consensus in a fallen world. Still, while the argumentative journey may define us as a nation, it must be the destination that defines the journey.

These problems notwithstanding, The Thirteen American Arguments is a good read. Fineman’s choices of arguments seems right, and his meld of historical and current narratives demonstrates that these arguments helped to shape how Americans have come to understand policy and how this understanding changes over time.

R. Matthew Lytle is director of research for the North Carolina Family Policy Council.