Return of the Strong Gods (R.R. Reno)

In Return of the Strong Gods, R.R. Reno analyzes the trend of thought in the 'long twentieth century' (which continues to present day), focusing on the postwar consensus and arguing that the open society it espouses will do more harm than good. 

A summary of Reno's arguments: after World War II, the world wanted to do what it could to prevent the return of totalitarianism. Various cultural leaders (philosophers, sociologists, etc.) argued that "solidarity and our drive toward transcendence" were fundamental threats; instead, we must have an "open society" where (basically) many things are accepted but weakly held. Truth is abandoned- the 'strong gods' that drive people to higher ideals and encourage them to impose their beliefs on others must be removed, replaced by 'weak gods' of multiculturalism and other things. In other words, people shouldn't believe their way is correct or superior. They shouldn't overly value their past or heritage. "Love enflames ambitions, some of which impel us toward evil ends. Love inspires sacrifices, some of which are misguided and self-destructive. At their worst, perverse loves can beckon us to sacrifice others." Therefore, collective loyalties are bad; instead, we must deconstruct, weaken, criticize, disenchant. Only then can we "escape the bloody cycles of self-destruction" as "we stifle the all-too-human impulse to consolidate around shared loyalties." The goal is peace at all costs. This is called the postwar consensus, and it has reigned supreme for decades.

While acknowledging that "men [can] do horrible things in the service of strong gods," Reno argues that they are necessary- that the postwar consensus had understandable intentions but missed the mark. "To be human is to seek trascendent warrants and sacred sources for our social existence." Strong gods "are whatever has the power to inspire love- love of the divine, love of truth, love of country, love of family . . . the strong gods of public life are quite simply the objects of our shared loves. They are whatever arouses in us an ardor to wed our destinies to that which we love." And so the problem is that the postwar consensus "works against the return of the strong gods, which means it works against love and solidarity. This loveless consensus is sparking populist revolts," which explains Trump's election in 2016 and similar events in some countries in Europe.

So what is the way forward? Reno claims that "False loves can be remedied only by true ones. A humane future in the West will require nurtuing noble loves." So we need strong gods- but the right ones. "We need to learn to speak again of the loves we share," and to look 'up' and disenchant "the half-truths of conventional wisdom so that a fuller truth can shine forth." "The best safeguards against the dangers of lover's perversion are the loves that ennoble and give us rest." 

----------------

This was a good read. I agree with some of Reno's arguments, which do a good job explaining our current society and how we got to this point. We all have gods; we all have truths that drive our lives. We all rally around something. Nobody truly is open to everything; we all draw the line somewhere. My prayer is that we rally around the right things.

While good, the book was repetitive and focused on explaining the current mentality; I wish he would have spent more time on proposed solutions (which are brief and only at the very end). 

Rating: A-