SOURCE: "Dewey's Social and Political Commentary," in Guide to the Works of John Dewey, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, Southern Illinois University Press, 1970, pp. 218-56.

[In the following essay, Brickman—a professor of Educational History and Comparative Education—defends his conclusion that Dewey's commentaries on politics and society form a cohesive and consistent whole.]

A milestone in Dewey's intellectual development was his lecture, "The Ethics of Democracy," delivered in 1888 to the Philosophical Union of the University of Michigan. To Merle Curti, this paper was evidence that Dewey possessed "a thoroughly democratic and even radical social point of view as early as 1888."¹ The philosopher argued that democracy was a broad concept which necessarily embraced not merely politics, but also the economy and industry. He combined "a criticism of quantitative individualistic theory of political democracy with a definitely moral interpretation in terms of 'liberty, equality, fraternity.'"² His insistence that no political democracy is possible without economic and industrial democracy was evidently derived from the thought of Henry Carter Adams, a colleague in the field of political economy, who urged "a development in economic life parallel to that which had taken place in politics, from absolutism and oligarchy to popular representation."³ As interpreted by his daughter, Dewey's political philosophy at this stage in his career was probably not as radical as it sounded. In any event, it was alarming enough to his parents, who came to live with him during the closing years of his tenure at the University of Michigan. "While his father was hurt at his sons' recreance to the Republican party, associated in his mind with the preservation of the union, and his mother at their defection from the religious teachings of their boyhood, both were sufficiently liberal in their views and had sufficient confidence in their children to keep the family relation a close one."⁴

Externally, to be sure, Dewey maintained a posture of conformity throughout the Michigan period. He "remained the devout Congregationalist, participating in Bible institutes, teaching Bible classes, giving courses on the life of Christ, Paul's Epistles, and Church history, and attending Congregationalist conventions."⁵ Yet, either his parents were highly perceptive or else the socialist ideas were penetrating his outward conformist attitude to a degree at the end of his Michigan sojourn. At any rate, Dewey absorbed the spirit of social service, which was manifesting itself in the form of a back-to-the-people movement in literature, sociology, economics, and adult education, both in the United States and abroad. Faculty and students at Michigan became involved in dreaming about and working toward a better society. Dewey, James H. Tufts, George H. Mead, and Alfred Lloyd, philosophers all, and Robert E. Park, a sociologist, "constituted the core of a 'leftist' group," rejecting New England orthodoxy and seeking "liberation in social movements and the new psychology."⁶

Particularly of significance was Dewey's association with the brothers Corydon and Franklin Ford, social reformers of the type of Henry George, Edward Bellamy, and socialists of every description. One outcome was the planning in 1892 of a monthly, "Thought News," under Dewey's editorship, with the objective of discussing political, educational, religious, and scientific issues "as parts of one moving life of man."⁷ What Dewey intended to do in this publication was to demonstrate that philosophy was not simply "a matter of lunar politics," but that it had "some use." He disclaimed any notion of a social revolution but stressed instead the role of philosophic ideas "as tools to point out the meaning of phases of social life," thereby having "some life value."⁸ Even though this publication was stillborn, the idea underlying it came to life years later in Dewey's political writings in the New Republic.

The upshot of Dewey's association with the Ford brothers was the acceleration of his assimilation of socialist thought and action. One example of this was his analysis, in an article published in January 1891, in the International Journal of Ethics, on the moral justification of strikes. In a basic work on ethics, Outlines of a Critical Theory of Ethics, published in the same year, Dewey again referred, by way of illustration, to the labor problems and summed up his definition of a moral law as "the principle of action, which, acted upon, will meet the needs of the existing situation as respects the wants, powers, and circumstances of the individuals concerned. It is no far-away abstraction, but expresses the movement of the ethical world."⁹ He ended this discussion by stating that "the consideration of specific institutions, as the family, industrial society, civil society, the nation, etc., with their respective rights and laws, belongs rather to political philosophy than to the general theory of ethics."¹⁰ With these words, Dewey made it clear that moral questions were not to be treated as abstruse philosophic speculation, but rather as issues to be resolved by thought processes leading to action.

It is noteworthy that, in the Outlines, his second work on philosophy, Dewey mentioned appreciatively Thomas Hill Green, Francis H. Bradley, Edward Caird, Samuel Alexander—Britons all—as sources of his ideas on ethics. He even was generous enough to pay tribute to Herbert Spencer and Leslie Stephen, with whom he expressed disagreement. To his inspirers Dewey gave credit for the core of his theory: "the conception of the will as the expression of ideas, and of social ideas; the notion of an objective ethical world realized in institutions which afford moral ideals, theatre and impetus to the individual; the notion of the moral life as growth in freedom, as the individual finds and conforms to the law of his social placing."¹¹ In addition, Dewey acknowledged his indebtedness "to my friend, Mr. Franklin Ford," for the point concerning "the treatment of the social bearings of science and art."¹² Interestingly, while he cited the works of the British thinkers, he made no reference to any of the writings by his friend.

Dewey's effort to make philosophy practical in Michigan, in the manner of the Ford brothers, did not turn out to be successful, apparently because their procedures did not suit precisely his character and temperament.¹³ However, his talents and ambitions along these lines were furthered to a better degree during the decade, 1894-1904, when he served as chairman of the Department of Philosophy, Psychology, and Pedagogy at the University of Chicago. Here he taught, among others, courses on the History of Political Ethics and Contemporary Theories Regarding Ethical Relations of the Individual and Society.¹⁴ In the field of education, one of his courses was the Evolution of the Curriculum in the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Centuries "with reference to general social and intellectual conditions."¹⁵ It will be seen that Dewey was stressing the socio-political content in his academic work. Moreover, his initiative in the establishment of a Laboratory School at the University of Chicago involved constant attention to social values and problems.

But Dewey, as might have been expected, was not satisfied to operate within the confines of the campus. America at the turn of the century was seething with political and social unrest related to unemployment, the Populist movement, capital-labor tensions and violence, and revolutionary ideology. Chicago, by the time Dewey arrived, had become "the center of radical thought in the United States," and Jane Addams's Hull House, founded in 1889 to help the impoverished, immigrant laborers, was "its moral spokesman."¹⁶ At Hull House, the philosopher found a fertile field and kindred spirits to encourage him to undertake fresh ventures in the application of his discipline to the problems of man and society. The persons associated with Hull House, "though filled with idealism, were intensely practical, and had a sense of how to achieve social legislation, and how to make democracy meaningful to persons who had never experienced its workings. They were not single-ideaed, quasi-crack-pots such as the brothers Ford but people who combined vision with resourcefulness."¹⁷ Here Dewey met and exchanged ideas with such individuals as Florence Kelley, translator of Friedrich Engels' The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1884; and Henry Demarest Lloyd, the muckraker whose Wealth against Commonwealth attacked monopolies, especially the Standard Oil Company. "The Hull House circle was the American analogue of the English Fabians, with an admixture of the self-sacrifice of the residents of Toynbee Hall."¹⁸

During his association with Hull House, John Dewey was able to meet foreign radical and revolutionary thinkers who were guests of the house. Probably the most noted of these was the Russian Prince Peter A. Kropotkin, the theoretical architect of revolutionary anarchism who advocated the substitution of mutual-aid communities for state authority and private property. Among the other socially conscious foreigners met by Dewey was Alexander Zelenko, a Russian engineer who resided during 1903-4 at Hull House and who carried back with him the settlement idea of Jane Addams and most likely Dewey's educational principles as well.¹⁹ Through Zelenko, other Russian educators were influenced to experiment in education along the lines exemplified by Dewey in his Laboratory School. Thus, the celebrated Stanislav T. Shatskii acknowledged his debt to the careful analysis by John Dewey, "especially his 'philosophy of pragmatism' which persistently demanded careful examination of theoretical ideas in their practical application."20 On another occasion, Shatskii stated: "In 1904 new educational principles coming from American settlements penetrated into Moscow. These principles were based upon the idea of social reform through education."²¹ This phrase expressed fully what Dewey was trying to accomplish not only through the Laboratory School, but also through his lectures on social psychology and on the socio-economic philosophy of Henry George at Hull House.²² This is what he derived from his association with Jane Addams and others in the settlement house.²³

Since Russia has been mentioned and since it was to occupy at a later date a significant place in Dewey's socio-political thought, it would be appropriate to mention at this point a possible source of his interest in that country. While he must have read about Russia in his undergraduate and graduate periods, he very likely learned even more from his future wife, Alice Chipman, who "was active at the University of Michigan in the Samovar Club which spent its senior year discussing Turgenev, the great novelist of the Russian back-tothe-people movement."²⁴ No doubt Jane Addams shared with Dewey her impressions of her visit in 1896 with Count Leo Tolstoi at Yasnaya Polyana.²⁵ Likewise, he may have heard about Tolstoi and his work from President William Rainey Harper of the University of Chicago. These vicarious contacts, plus the awareness of the growing acceptance of his educational doctrines in Russia, must have made Dewey more sensitive to the situation of that country and to the growing momentum toward political and social change.

During his stay in Chicago, there were other important developments in Dewey's thinking. For one thing, he began his gradual divorce from the logic and metaphysics of Hegel.²⁶ For another, he became more active in psychological circles, to some extent in connection with his educational interests. During 1899-1900, he served as president of the American Psychological Association and emphasized the relation of psychology to education and social practice in his presidential address in 1899. He indicated that "education is primarily a social affair" and that "educational science is first of all a social science,"²⁷ as is psychology. He deplored "the gap between psychological theory and the existing school practice,"²⁸ as well as the ethically defective teaching method, which, "while giving the child a glibness in the mechanical facility of reading, leaves him at the mercy of suggestion and chance environment to decide whether he reads the 'yellow journal,' the trashy novel, or the literature which inspires and makes more valid his whole life."²⁹ To him, precept and performance were no less significant in pedagogy than in society.

The teacher "lives in a social sphere—he is a member and an organ of a social life. His aims are social aims; the development of individuals taking ever more responsible positions in a circle of social activities continually increasing in radius and in complexity."³⁰ Even his methods have to be social and ethical. In short, Dewey was convinced of "the social and teleological nature of the work of the teacher."³¹ It is the teacher who must bring about the interrelatedness of pupil, the school, and social life.

The application of psychology to the school constitutes a clear example of the necessity of similar application to other social institutions. Psychology will afford "insight into the conditions which control the formation and execution of aims, and thus enable human effort to expend itself sanely, rationally and with assurance."³² And the psychologist, even if concerned with technical problems, is a contributor "to that ordered knowledge which alone enables mankind to secure a larger and to direct a more equal flow of values in life."³³ The same, of course, might be said, from Dewey's standpoint, of all the other areas of knowledge.

It would be helpful at this point in the review of the historical high spots in the development of John Dewey's sociopolitical involvement to take stock of his published works through 1904. Virtually all of his writings embraced the categories of philosophy, psychology, and education. The social element appears from time to time, but the political is seldom to be seen, except as intertwined with considerations of society. By way of early example, in his address in 1892 to the Students' Christian Association of the University of Michigan, the theme of the relation of Christianity to democracy, Dewey substituted democracy for religion as the road to truth and freedom. "Democracy, as freedom, means the loosening of bonds; the wearing away of restrictions, the breaking down of barriers. . . . Democracy is, as freedom, the freeing of truth."³⁴ Furthermore, "It is in the community of truth . . . that the brotherhood which is democracy, has its being."³⁵ Through the medium of democracy the truth based on the social equality of human beings will prevail.

In 1894, Dewey published reviews of works in social psychology and a penetrating review of James Bonar's book on the historical relations of philosophy and political economy.³⁶ This was perhaps his formal, inchoate initiation into the turbulent world of writing in the arena of applied social sciences.

The social emphasis appeared in such writings on education as "Ethical Principles Underlying Education" and "My Pedagogic Creed," both published in 1897. In the former, he proclaimed that, "apart from the thought of participation in social life the school has no end nor aim,"³⁷ and that "the only way to prepare for social life is to engage in social life."³⁸

Before leaving Chicago, Dewey wrote again on sociopolitical topics of interest to him. The views expressed in his classic, The School and Society, found expression once more in an address, "The School as Social Center," which he delivered in 1902 to the National Educational Association. In addition, he published the first of his numerous statements on the nature and significance of academic freedom, a subject which was to occupy his mind and energies for many years.

The period from 1904 to 1930, when Dewey served as professor of philosophy at Columbia University in New York City, was undoubtedly the most fruitful one in his life, especially from the standpoint of socio-political thought and activity. New York, even more than Chicago, was a cosmopolitan center of liberal politics, social welfare, and labor organization. During this quarter-century, the philosopher published more than a score of books and a large number of articles and book reviews. In 1915, he helped to found and served as the first president of the American Association of University Professors, an organization devoted to the preservation of academic freedom. The following year he became a charter member of the Teachers Union in New York City and was one of the few educational leaders to write and work for this type of organization.³⁹

Some students of the life and work of Dewey have called attention to the fact that, during the decade of 1904-14, he was chiefly absorbed by technical philosophical problems. His writings were not concentrated on socio-political questions as such. However, "It was the war that precipitated his production for political publics per se. And his political public was possibly already recruited to some extent by his educational work."⁴⁰ Along with other liberals, Dewey found himself catapulted into the sociopolitical struggle of ideas and public policy.

In Ethics, of which he was coauthor with his former colleague, Professor James H. Tufts, Dewey inveighs against corruption in politics, especially as practiced by the large public utility companies. As he saw it, the proposals for reform involve, at bottom, "questions of the right and wrong use of political power and authority."⁴¹ In other words, Dewey was applying the principles of ethics to the controversies and conflicts engulfing industry, labor, commerce, and government. He summed up his moral criterion to judge social institutions and political acts in the following formula: "The test is whether a given custom or law sets free individual capacities in such a way as to make them available for the development of the general happiness or the common good."⁴² Stated from the standpoint of society, "The test is whether the general, the public, organization and order are promoted in such a way as to equalize opportunity for all."⁴³ Dewey did not merely play around with words; his actions correlated highly with his statements.

The philosopher rejected both the subordination of the individual to the group and that of the majority to the minority. "A true public or social good will ... not subordinate individual variations, but will encourage individual experimentation in new ideas and new projects, endeavoring only to see that they are put into execution under conditions which make for securing responsibility for their consequences."⁴⁴ A "just social order," in his view, was one in which there existed a balance of the individual and the group. This balance was constituted by the promotion of criticism and the reorganization toward the better distribution of goods. "Not order, but orderly progress, represents the social ideal."⁴⁵

One thought in the Ethics deserves special attention. Dewey noted with appreciation the development of national states during recent decades but was also aware of the dangers of unrestrained nationalism. He criticized the notion of si vis pacem para bellum and urged instead the consideration of "an international State of federated humanity, with its own laws and its own courts and its own rules for adjudicating disputes."⁴⁶ He warned against the dangers of the armament race on the ground that "the possession of irresponsible power is always a direct temptation to its irresponsible use."⁴⁷ It was "unmitigated nonsense" to argue for the necessity of war as a preventive measure against "moral degeneration." Dewey thus aligned himself with the historic and contemporary ideas and programs which strove for peace and international political co-operation. What he said did not represent anything novel; long before Kant's essay on "Perpetual Peace" of more than a century prior to Dewey's book, there were projects by thinkers of various countries to bring about lasting peace and harmony among nations. No doubt, Dewey's voice helped in the formulation of intellectual opinion in behalf of a League of Nations.

The advent of World War I provided John Dewey with much upon which to reflect. His major contribution toward the understanding of some of the issues at stake was German Philosophy and Politics (1915). This volume contained the text of three lectures delivered in February 1915 at the University of North Carolina. The air in the United States had not been charged as yet with suspicion against Germany. Dewey acknowledged that Germans had "philosophy in their blood" and that Germany was "the modern state which provides the greatest facilities for general ideas to take effect through social inculcation."⁴⁸ While he appreciated that there was "freedom of academic instruction" in Germany, he was also keenly aware that the state played a crucial role in the selection of professors and teachers, especially in fields closely related to political policy. Dewey's sensitivity to academic freedom was evident in his writings⁴⁹ and in the fact that in January 1915 he had become one of the founders and the first president of the American Association of University Professors. Moreover, in his capacity as president of this organization, he wrote a letter protesting an editorial in the New York Times supporting the dismissal of Scott Nearing, assistant professor of economics, from the University of Pennsylvania.⁵⁰

The "educational and administrative agencies of Germany provide ready-made channels through which philosophic ideas may flow on their way to practical affairs."⁵¹ Such ideas may be those of Kant, Schleiermacher, and Hegel. Yet, Germany lacked, in Dewey's view, a political public opinion such as found in France, Britain, or the United States. It was the university, rather than the newspaper, that gave public opinion its "articulate expression." And this, to Dewey, was a mixed blessing. In point of fact, he saw serious dangers in the indoctrination of the public in a priori truth by German philosophers, either directly or through the intermediacy of war planners and generals.

Apart from the justification of war by German philosophers, Dewey was also aware of their contribution to the development of a racial ideology in Germany. "A purely artificial cult of race has so flourished in Germany that many social movements—like anti-Semitism—and some of Germany's political ambitions cannot be understood apart from the mystic identification of Race, Culture and the State."⁵² To an extent, such ideas were seen by him as stemming from the teachings of Fichte and Hegel.

When the United States entered the war in April 1917, the entire nation was mobilized. The government, in cooperation with the schools and colleges, made an organized attempt to channel the energies of all children, teachers, and administrators to aid the war effort. In 1917, Columbia University, where Dewey was professor of philosophy, issued a series of Columbia War Papers.

The first of these pamphlets was Dewey's "Enlistment for the Farm." Here the philosopher, rejecting the idea of military drill for adolescent boys, proposed "training drills with the spade and the hoe,"⁵³ so that the pupils and teachers might help in increasing the nation's food supply. He urged "educators and teachers to develop Constructive Patriotism ... to help evolve in the growing generation the idea of universal service in the great battle of man against nature, which is something American, something great; and which is not a military idea transplanted from Europe."⁵⁴ In this way, the educators will not only contribute toward the conclusion of the war, but they will also have "a chance to link the school with life. It is a chance to develop for the first time in the history of the world in time of war a constructive and industrial instead of a destructive and militaristic patriotism. All can join without distinction of race and creed, or even of previous sympathy. It is service not only for our own country and for the countries on whose side we are fighting, but a service to the whole world when peace shall again dawn."⁵⁵

Dewey spoke like a true patriot. He recognized the reality of the war and wished to do what he could to terminate it. His contribution lay in participation on as educational a level as possible, with an eye toward the realization of democratic values and of the values of the peace to come.

In World War I, Dewey proved that he was not a professional pacifist. He did not advocate or practice opposition to or sabotage of the war effort. While not giving up his devotion to peace, he was convinced that peaceful activity, such as agriculture, would in time help bring a more lasting peace than that achieved by force of arms. In any event, this seems to have been the rationale by which he was able to remain at peace with himself.

All through the war, Dewey focused his attention on the peace ahead. In June 1918, for example, he commented on President Wilson's doctrine of a world safe for democracy and insisted that democracy could be safely anchored in the world only if there would be a development toward "a federated world government and a variety of freely coöperating self-governing local, cultural and industrial groups."⁵⁶ Autocracy involves uniformity and the straining of human nature to the breaking point. Democracy, the great hope of the future, signifies diversification. It releases and relieves the stresses and strains of human nature—and this, to Dewey, "is the ultimate sanction of democracy, for which we are fighting."⁵⁷

When the possibility of the League of Nations came under increasing discussion and debate in the closing months of the war, Dewey offered his views. His position in November 1918 was in favor of a League, but one which was more than a legal and political organization. As he saw it, the dominant idea of a League which would be engaged in arbitration, conciliation, and military enforcement of its decisions "is negative not constructive, and doomed to fail at some critical moment. . . . The real problem is one of organization for more effective human association and intercourse."⁵⁸ This was the lesson drawn by Dewey from the war and he may have had a premoniton of the debacle that the League of Nations was to suffer from about 1935 to the beginning of World War II. He made this point repeatedly in speeches and articles, but again he had to suffer neglect and opposition. When the pressure for the United States' joining the League was stepped up in liberal circles with the passing 1920s, Dewey felt it necessary to take a definitive stand. In March 1923, he addressed himself in the New Republic to the question, "Shall We Join the League?"⁵⁹ Dewey stressed that, among other reasons, the League was weak and "its international character is a farce" so long as Germany and Russia were not permitted to join. Moreover, "Europe does not want and will not tolerate our coöperation except on its own terms, and it is divided against itself as to those terms."⁶⁰ The people of the United States, in Dewey's view, were also "ignorant, inexperienced, governed by emotion rather than by information and insight" and, accordingly, "the notion that we have only to offer ourselves as universal arbiter—and paymaster—and all will be well is childish in the extreme."⁶¹ The very fact, he concluded, that "only appeal to emotion can possibly be successful in engaging us to enter the League of Nations is the most conclusive reason possible for our staying out of it."⁶² Dewey continued to uphold this position even after criticism in the periodicals. In his reply to a critic, he added another point: "The League is not honestly named. It is a League of governments pure and simple."⁶³

Dewey was no isolationist. He was in favor of genuine international co-operation on all fronts and in relation to all peoples. The League of Nations was weighed in his scale of values and was found wanting. Hence, his opposition.

Before leaving the war period, it will be appropriate to refer to an unpublicized inquiry conducted under the direction of Dewey, at the request of Albert C. Barnes, in the spring and summer of 1918, among the Polish immigrants in Philadelphia. The aim of the inquiry, as stated by Mr. Barnes, was to discover the barriers to democratic living among the Poles, so that a practical plan might be devised "to eliminate forces alien to democratic internationalism and to promote American ideals in accordance with the principles announced by President Wilson in his various public communications."⁶⁴ Dewey's team, which included two young philosophers, Brand Blanshard and Irwin Edman, gathered the data on the life of the Polish immigrants, especially with reference to the conflict between the conservatives and radicals and to its relation to events in Europe. That this information had bearing on the war was evident from the fact that Dewey presented his confidential report in August 1918 to the Military Intelligence Bureau of the Army in Washington. It is possible that recommendations of this eighty-page report may have had some impact on the development of postwar United States policy with regard to the reconstitution of Poland. Probably few philosophers have had the opportunity that Dewey had to participate directly in the process leading to the formation of international policy.

The postwar period was a time of international intellectual exposure for Dewey. During February and March 1919, he lectured at the Imperial University in Tokyo and these lectures resulted the following year in the publication of Reconstruction in Philosophy. From 1919 to 1921, he lectured at the National Universities of Peking and Nanking in China. In 1924, he studied the education in Turkey; in 1926, in Mexico; and in 1928, in Soviet Russia.

His Letters from China and Japan, written informally in collaboration with his wife, showed considerable insight into the international dynamics of politics, economics, education, and culture.⁶⁵ In a more formal way, he presented in China, Japan and the U.S.A. (1921) a series of seven articles published originally in the New Republic. Here Dewey discussed international political problems and tried to draw some inferences for United States foreign policy in the Far East. His conclusion, typically enough, was that there was a need for China and the Orient to have "freer and fuller communications with the rest of the world"—not merely an open door to commerce, but even more "to light, to knowledge and understanding."⁶⁶ He called upon liberals to "work for the opened door of open diplomacy, of continuous and intelligent inquiry, of discussion free from propaganda."⁶⁷Dewey thus extrapolated his doctrine of interaction in a democratic society on an international scale.

John Dewey's experiences with thinking on international problems during the war and his sojourn abroad after World War I no doubt sensitized him more than ever before to political and social issues involving various nations in different parts of the globe. His writings, whether in book or article form, touched on these problems to a greater or lesser extent. His firsthand exposures to the social and educational systems of Turkey (1924), Mexico (1926), and Soviet Russia (1928) were too brief to permit him to attain any degree of depth: Furthermore, Dewey had no more knowledge of Russian, Spanish, and Turkish than he had of Chinese and Japanese. Since he did quote from original writings, he evidently had to depend upon interpreters, foreigners who were well acquainted with the English language, and any available translations. Consequently, even though he was able to gain insight into social, educational, and political problems in these countries, it is likely that he would have had a clearer understanding had he had the necessary linguistic skills and had his residence there been of longer duration. In any event, this period in Dewey's life, which culminated in his retirement in 1930 from his professorship at Columbia University, was characterized by frequent participation in international cultural and educational activities.

This is not to imply that Dewey did not give due attention to domestic problems in American society. In 1929 alone, he became president of the People's Lobby and national chairman of the League for Independent Political Action. All through the 1920s he was critical of the materialistic values underlying the era of prosperity. Not that he failed to appreciate the importance of economic advances in a democratic society, but he insisted that genuine cultural values be kept free from exploitation by the wealthy. Although Dewey was aware of the existence of a struggle among classes in the United States, he rejected the doctrine of utilizing the class struggle in the achievement of social change. Unlike other educators, he possessed a "more realistic economic interpretation of institutions and culture";⁶⁸ yet, with many of them, he maintained that education was the major means by which to bring about the improvement of society and of man.

The year 1929 saw the publication of numerous articles and four books: Characters and Events (2 vols.), Impressions of Soviet Russia, The Quest for Certainty, and The Sources of a Science of Education. The first of these, subtitled "Popular Essays in Social and Political Philosophy," was a timely collection of articles on recent and current issues at home and abroad originally published in the New Republic and in a multitude of other magazines. The first volume includes the material published separately as Impressions of Soviet Russia. In the words of the editor, Joseph Ratner, who was Dewey's disciple, this compilation reveals the application of the philosophy of instrumentalism to the criticism of current issues. Instrumentalism states that the home of intelligence is in this world, where it acts "as critic and regulator of the forces operative within it. This doctrine, which is the philosophic raison d'être of these essays, is also one of their fundamental unifying principles."⁶⁹ A reading of the chapters of both volumes will disclose the correctness of this observation. Dewey was consistent in relating his abstract principles of socio-economic thought to the specific problems of everyday life.

In Impressions of Soviet Russia, Dewey brought together fifteen articles which had appeared from 1920 to 1928 in the New Republic. Here is a record of his observations, and analyses of education, society, culture, and other aspects of life in the USSR, Mexico, China, and Turkey, countries which he had visited. He endeavored to be as objective as possible, and he made certain to express his appreciation, wherever he thought it advisable, of ways of life other than his own. On the other hand, his effort at being fair did not blind him to the dangers of dictatorship. Thus, he referred to the existence of "secret police, inquisitions, arrests and deportations," but went on to balance this by observing that "life for the masses goes on with regularity, safety and decorum."⁷⁰ It is debatable as to what extent Dewey attained depth during his visits to Soviet Russia and the other countries. Nevertheless, it is well, especially in the light of later controversies involving Dewey and the Soviet Union, to take note of the fact that the American philosopher did not see Soviet Russia as all black or all white or even all red.

Another work made up of articles reprinted from the New Republic is Individualism, Old and New (1930). In this little book, Dewey discussed critically various problems of the day and upheld the role and status of the individual in a world where he seemed to be submerged. He urged once more that due attention be paid to the values of the scientific method of thought. "The general adoption of the scientific attitude in human affairs would mean nothing less than a revolutionary change in morals, religion, politics and industry."⁷¹ Possibly one instance of Dewey's use of this type of thinking may be the following statement: "I cannot obtain intellectual, moral or esthetic satisfaction from the professed philosophy which animates Bolshevik Russia. But I am sure that the future historian of our times will combine admiration, of those who had the imagination first to see that the resources of technology might be directed by organized planning to serve chosen ends with astonishment at the intellectual and moral hebetude of other peoples who were technically so much further advanced."⁷² Let it be noted that these were written three to four years before the coming of the New Deal.

John Dewey, aged seventy when he retired from his professorship at Columbia University, was named professor emeritus of philosophy in residence and he continued in this capacity until 1939. During this decade, he lived through the worldwide economic depression; the New Deal; the emergence and consolidation of dictatorships in Germany, Italy, the USSR, Japan, and Spain; the crises of the Spanish Civil War, the Italo-Ethiopian War, and the Munich Pact; and the onset of World War II. From 1939 to 1952, the year of his death, he experienced the devastating World War II and the early stages of the Cold War.

In the socio-political realm, he published Liberalism and Social Action (1935), Freedom and Culture (1939), and the revision of German Philosophy and Politics (1942). Of special interest were the reports issued under his direction: The Case of Leon Trotsky (1937) and Not Guilty (1938), containing data on the allegations by Stalin against Trotsky; and The Bertrand Russell Case (1941), a critique of the ban upon the appointment of the British philosopher at the City College of New York. In addition, he wrote countless articles and reviews in the New Republic, the Social Frontier, the Journal of Philosophy, and other journals, as well as numerous small publications. His productivity went on, seemingly undiminished by advancing age. He was intensely interested, as always, in everything pertaining to man and he gave expression to this interest in his multifarious writings. He followed closely the course of educational development in the United States, participated assiduously in the debate over Progressive Education, and contributed a vigorous volume, Experience and Education (1938), in defense of his concept of education and in opposition to the distortions of his doctrine.

One example of Dewey's doctrine of freedom is his advocacy of the objective appraisal of social planning as a method of stabilizing society in a period of turmoil. He stated his conviction that all forms of knowledge and skill should be applied to a social problem without regard necessarily to the fact that a particular procedure is in operation in an antidemocratic milieu. Society should be free to experiment with the technique of organized planning even if it is associated with the Soviet Union. "To hold that such organized planning is possible only in a communistic society is to surrender the case to communism."⁷³

Instead, the Soviet Russian effort should spur those of a diverse political faith to expend their effort to use all possible knowledge to improve their own social organization and institutions. As Dewey saw it, the situation did not call for a choice between capitalism and communism, but rather "between chaos and order, chance and control: the haphazard use and the planned use of scientific techniques."⁷⁴ It will be seen that Dewey anticipated the thought and activity of those who undertook to set society and its economy aright after the dislocation of the Depression.

The socio-economic crisis of the Depression in the early 1930s led Dewey and other educators to interrelate the situation of society and the school even more closely than ever before. One product of such an effort was a collaborative volume, The Educational Frontier (1933), edited by William H. Kilpatrick. Two chapters, "a joint product" of the thought of Dewey and John L. Childs, were "written out" by the former. Here was expressed the conviction that an educational philosophy which is to be meaningful for the United States "must be the expression of a social philosophy and ... the social and educational theories and conceptions must be developed with definite reference to the needs and issues which mark and divide our domestic, economic, and political life in the generation of which we are a part."⁷⁵ The "moral and human import" of the democratic tradition is at the foundation of the social organization. Planning is necessary for a sound society, but not in the way already in practice in Russia and Italy. What is needed is not a planned society, but rather a planning society, and herein lies the crucial difference "between autocracy and democracy, between dogma and intelligence in operation, between suppression of individuality and that release and utilization of individuality which will bring it to full maturity."⁷⁶

As a conclusion to the entire volume, Dewey stresses that "life based on experimental intelligence provides the only possible opportunity for all to develop rich and diversified experience, while also securing continuous coöperative give and take and intercommunication."⁷⁷ The experimental method, as "the only one compatible with the democratic way of life," makes possible an enlarged area of human understanding and consensus. This is not to say that there must be full agreement. The experimental method extends "intelligence as the method of action," so that, in cases of differences, "it will conduce to agreement to differ, to mutual tolerance and sympathy, pending the time when more adequate knowledge and better methods of judging are at hand."⁷⁸ The processes of desirable social change and of education are "correlative and interactive. No social modification, slight or revolutionary, can endure except as it enters into the action of a people through their desires and purposes. This introduction and perpetuation are effected by education. But every improvement in the social structure and its operations releases the educative resources of mankind and gives them a better opportunity to enter into normal social processes so that the latter become themselves more truly educative."⁷⁹

The growth of interest in communism and in the USSR in various circles in the early 1930s was a great factor in increasing Dewey's writings, speeches, and activities along socio-political lines. As Communists became more outspoken and activistic in American life, Dewey felt called upon to restate the principles of democracy. In a symposium of philosophers on Marxism, he made clear five reasons why he was not a Communist: The United States is "profoundly different [from the USSR] in its economic, political, and cultural history"; communism uses a "monistic and one-way philosophy of history"; the class war is not "the means by which such [class] conflicts can be eliminated and genuine social advance made"; "the emotional tone and methods of discussion and dispute .. . are extremely repugnant"; and "a revolution effected solely or chiefly by violence can in a modernized society like our own result only in chaos."⁸⁰ Dewey did not beat around the rhetorical bush; he called a hammer and sickle a hammer and sickle: "official Communism has made the practical traits of the dictatorship of the proletariat and over the proletariat, the suppression of the civil liberties of all non-proletarian elements as well as of dissenting proletarian minorities, integral parts of the standard Communist faith and dogma."⁸¹ He accused the Communists of responsibility for the growth of fascism. "As an unalterable opponent of Fascism in every form, I cannot be a Communist."⁸²

The danger of the Communist and Fascist dictatorships for a democratic society also occupied Dewey's mind in Liberalism and Social Action (1935). On the very first page he called attention to the attacks upon liberalism by "those who want drastic social changes effected in a twinkling of an eye, and who believe that violent overthrow of existing institutions is the right method of effecting the required changes."⁸³ He pointed out that in "three of the great nations of Europe" liberalism ceased to flourish with the suppression of civil liberties. Classical liberalism, in his view, was characterized by the three values of "liberty; the development of the inherent capacities of individuals made possible through liberty, and the central role of free intelligence in inquiry, discussion and expression."⁸⁴ One should "look with considerable suspicion upon those who assert that suppression of democracy is the road to the adequate establishment of genuine democracy."⁸⁵ Dewey recognized that an apparent exception "to dependence upon organized intelligence as the method for directing social change is found when society through an authorized majority has entered upon the path of social experimentation leading to great social change, and a minority refuses by force to permit the method of intelligent action to go into effect. Then force may be intelligently employed to subdue and disarm the recalcitrant minority."⁸⁶ The trouble with the historical liberals was they did not apply organized effort to attain their social objectives. "Earlier liberalism regarded the separate and competing economic action of individuals as the means to social well-being as the end. We must reverse the perspective and see that socialized economy is the means of free individual development as the end."⁸⁷

InLiberalism and Social Action, Dewey threw out a direct challenge to his fellow liberals and to the antiliberals. It is not at all surprising that Sidney Hook predicted that this little work "may well be to the twentieth century what Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto was to the nineteenth."⁸⁸ Dewey later characterized the views he expressed in Liberalism and Social Action and in Individualism, Old and New as those of a "democratic socialist." Such a position, it might well be understood, would invite criticism and censure from both right and left.

Dewey's activities in relation to communism and Soviet Russia were stepped up in the following years. An investigation of the charges made against Leon Trotsky in the Moscow Trials of 1936 was made by a commission under the chairmanship of John Dewey. After hearings in Mexico, Dewey and his colleagues published two volumes in which Trotsky was exonerated from Stalin's charges.⁸⁹ In various writings,⁹⁰ as well as in these two reports, Dewey reaffirmed his opposition to dictatorship of any kind and his commitment to democracy. The second report, Not Guilty, was described by James T. Farrell as "an example of democratic thinking, reasoning, procedure and of Dewey's own conceptions of free inquiry."⁹¹

Dewey returned to criticize specifically the Marxist theory in his Freedom and Culture (1939). While he contrasted democracy with all forms of totalitarian ideologies throughout the book, he devoted an entire chapter to a critique of Marxism, especially as practiced in Soviet Russia. To begin with, Dewey deplored the neglect by many democrats of the relation of culture to democracy. He stated his conviction that "works of art once brought into existence are the most compelling of the means of communication by which emotions are stirred and opinions formed" and that "emotions and imagination are more potent in shaping public sentiment and opinion than information and reason."⁹² Totalitarian countries have recognized this principle and have taken full advantage of it in controlling their people. Democracy cannot be taken for granted, insisted Dewey, and democratic conditions cannot be expected to maintain themselves automatically. Constant caution, eternal vigilance, and the maximum use of culture and education will enable a society to retain its democratic integrity in the face of the totalitarian threat.

The critique of Marxism and of the Soviet Union appears as Chapter 4, "Totalitarian Economics and Democracy," in Freedom and Culture. Marxism, states Dewey, isolates a single factor, economics, which cannot be isolated from the other forces of society. The view of the Marxist, as summed up by Dewey, is that "the state of the forces of economic productivity at a given time ultimately determines all forms of social activities and relations, political, legal, scientific, artistic, religious, moral."⁹³ Economic determinism did not appeal to Dewey, who was convinced that causation is derived from a broader base. He insisted that effects could be traced to causes by concrete investigation only. The adoption of this method of study would result in the abandonment of the single economic cause. "It would put us in the relativistic and pluralistic position of considering a number of interacting factors—of which a very important one is undoubtedly the economic."⁹⁴

Dewey was not simply a critic of Marxism and totalitarianism; he was a devotee of democracy, not just in name but in fact. His standards for society were his own. His faith in man did not permit him to give weight to some of the forces of tradition, the biblical for instance, which taught the equality of man in a context other than the natural. Such a force also proved a potent weapon in the struggle against totalitarianism. Be that as it may, Dewey's Freedom and Culture was apparently as severe an indictment of the totalitarian nature of Stalinist communism and of its parent theory, Marxism, as had been written up to his time and, to a very large extent, for some time afterward. At the same time, it should also be regarded as a blueprint for democratic thought and action.⁹⁵

During the World War II years, he continued to uphold the cause of democracy and to denounce dictatorship, whether of the right or the left. He refused to go along with other intellectuals in climbing the bandwagon of conformity at any particular time. Nor did he bow to the pressures which sought to impose views upon the public at large. When he was convinced that a fellow philosopher, Bertrand Russell, with whom he was often in intellectual disagreement, was deprived of his academic freedom, he did not hesitate to speak up orally and in writing. In The Bertrand Russell Case (1941), coedited by Dewey and Horace M. Kallen, he assembled statements and documents to illustrate the inequity of the judicial decision preventing the British philosopher from assuming his post at the City College of New York. To this symposium, Dewey contributed an introduction and a chapter, "Social Realities versus Police Court Fictions." In his Introduction, Dewey stressed the consensus by the authors of the book with regard to the "belief in the social importance of public discussion of moral problems, when it is conducted upon the plane of scientific method and with a sense of public responsibility."⁹⁶ The alternative to a serious discussion by competent individuals disciplined by the scientific method is the adoption of totalitarian methods. Dewey expressed the hope that the book may contribute to "the freedom of the human spirit and the democratic way of life."⁹⁷

In his chapter, Dewey deplored the hypocrisy whereby public opinion delighted in "the mass of cheap sexuality presented on the stage and in public prints," but "is easily rallied to oppose serious intellectual discussion of sex and to revile those who act upon a belief that such discussion is a precondition of a better social ethic."⁹⁸ This is a situation of darkness where it becomes "easier for evil customs to endure and to flourish."⁹⁹ However, there is hope for the dispelling of such darkness through the co-operation of learned men, educators, and public-minded citizens to defend the academic and scientific freedom of men like Bertrand Russell.

During World War II, Dewey found himself in a relatively lonely position among America's intellectual circles. It had become fashionable, inasmuch as the United States and the USSR were now allies in a common struggle against Nazi totalitarianism, to regard the Soviet Communist society as an equal to the free society in a democracy. Dewey was firmly convinced of the falsity and danger of this doctrine. As one who had realized the nature of communism as far back as 1932, when members of the party tried to take over the New York Teachers Union, he lost little time in emphasizing that Soviet Russia had not changed its stripes.

During World War II, Dewey did not permit himself to be blinded by the great pressure in behalf of Soviet-American amity to the extent that he was able to minimize the realities of Stalin and the Communist dictatorship. He called public attention to the need for evaluating Stalin's actions in historical perspective. In addition, he warned against "the fatuous one-sided love feast now going on in this country," whereby Communist sympathizers demanded full consideration for the Soviet Union while giving little or nothing in return.¹⁰⁰ This attitude did not endear Dewey to the Communists, whether in the USSR, the United States, or any other country. The cold war between Dewey and the Communists continued to the year of his death—and beyond.

On the other hand, Dewey contributed to the war effort by writing, in behalf of the United States government, an open letter to the Chinese people. He identified the common goal of the Chinese and the Americans—"to preserve our independence and freedom. We both want to see a world in which nations can devote themselves to the constructive tasks of industry, education, science and art without fear of molestation by nations that think they can build themselves up by destroying the lives and the work of the men, women and children of other peoples."¹⁰¹ Together with the Chinese, Dewey looked forward to a new and better postwar world, in which good will, kindness, and humaneness would prevail.

At the end of World War II, the philosopher, now beyond the age of eighty-five, continued his interest in the problems of men. In 1946, he joined nineteen Americans, including John Haynes Holmes, Sidney Hook, Robert MacIver, and Norman Thomas, in protesting the deportation of Sudeten Germans and Hungarians from Czecho-slovakia.¹⁰² His writings embraced philosophy and education for the most part. His socio-political statements appeared at rather rare intervals, in part possibly due to the fact that age made his active participation in human affairs less likely.

On the occasion of his ninetieth birthday, Dewey summed up his socio-political viewpoint in a type of swan song. Again, as on countless earlier occasions, he restated his firm conviction that democracy was the way of life, the basis of education, and the foundation of human society. He was thankful for the widespread recognition given him on his ninetieth milestone and interpreted it "as a sign that faith in the will to realize the American dream through continued faith in democracy as a moral and human ideal remains firm and true even in a time when some people in their despair are tending to put their faith in force instead of in the cooperation that is the fruit of reciprocal good will and shared understanding:—and of nothing else."¹⁰³

John Dewey passed away on 1 June 1952 after a long life of putting these principles into practice to the utmost of his power. He made use of the word—spoken and written—but he also resorted to action in relating his sociopolitical theory to life. He was a thinker and a doer.¹⁰⁴ If he was repetitive, it was because of many demands upon his time and talent, as well as of his recognition that his basic points required restatement in order to attain effectiveness: respect for human nature and dignity, faith in democracy and social intelligence, and progress through co-operation—toward the attainment of the ideal society.

It would be appropriate to conclude with a statement by Paul Arthur Schilpp: "[Dewey] lived what he taught and preached, without regard to the applause of either his professional colleagues or of the masses. Dewey thus showed by action as well as by doctrine his faith in man's intelligent capacities to cope with any situation, with any problem—provided man be willing to pay the price in patient, vigorous, continued cooperative inquiry."¹⁰⁵

NOTES

¹ Merle Curti, The Social Ideas of American Educators (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1935), pp. 502-3.

² Jane M. Dewey, ed., "Biography of John Dewey," in The Philosophy of John Dewey (The Library of Living Philosophers, Vol. I, ed. Paul Arthur Schilpp [Evanston, Chicago: Northwestern University, 1939]), pp. 12-13.

³ Jane Dewey, "Biography of John Dewey," pp. 12-13.

⁴ Jane Dewey, "Biography of John Dewey," pp. 12-13.

⁵ Lewis S. Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement in American Thought," Journal of the History of Ideas, XX (1959), 553.

⁶ Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement," p. 548.

⁷ Prospectus, quoted in Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement," p. 552.

⁸ Interview in Detroit Tribune, 13 Apr. 1892.

⁹Outlines of a Critical Theory of Ethics, in The Early Works of John Dewey, 1882-1898, Vol. III (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1969), p. 351.

¹⁰Outlines, p. 352.

¹¹Outlines, p. 239.

¹²Outlines, p. 239.

¹³Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement," p. 555.

¹⁴George Dykhuizen, "John Dewey: The Chicago Years," Journal of the History of Philosophy, II (1964), 233.

¹⁵Quoted in Dykhuizen, "John Dewey: The Chicago Years," p. 240.

¹⁶Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement," p. 556.

¹⁷Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement," p. 556.

¹⁸Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement," p. 557.

¹⁹William W. Brickman, "Soviet Attitudes Toward John Dewey as an Educator," in John Dewey and the World View, eds. Douglas E. Lawson and Arthur E. Lean (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1964), pp. 68-69.

²⁰As quoted in Thomas Woody, New Minds: New Men? (New York: Macmillan Co., 1932), pp. 47-48.

²¹S. Shatzky [sic,] "The First Experimental Station of Public Education of the People's Commissariat of Education, U.S.S.R.," New Era, IX (1928), 13.

²² Jane Addams, Twenty Years at Hull House (New York: Macmillan Co., 1920), p. 435; Robert L. McCaul, "Dewey's Chicago," School Review, LXVII (1959), 275.

²³Jane Dewey, "Biography of John Dewey," p. 30.

²⁴Feuer, "John Dewey and the Back-to-the-People Movement," p. 548.

²⁵Addams,Twenty Years at Hull House, pp. 267-73.

²⁶Dykhuizen, "John Dewey: The Chicago Years," p. 235.

²⁷"Psychology and Social Practice," Science, n.s. XI (1900), 321.

²⁸"Psychology and Social Practice," p. 323.

²⁹"Psychology and Social Practice," p. 328.

³⁰"Psychology and Social Practice," p. 328.

³¹"Psychology and Social Practice," p. 329.

³²"Psychology and Social Practice," p. 333.

³³"Psychology and Social Practice," p. 333.

³⁴"Christianity and Democracy," in Religious Thought at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor: Inland Press, 1893), p. 66.

³⁵"Christianity and Democracy," p. 67.

³⁶The Psychic Factors of Civilization by Lester Frank Ward, Social Evolution by Benjamin Kidd, Civilization During the Middle Ages by George Burton Adams, History of the Philosophy of History by Robert Flint, and Philosophy and Political Economy in Some of Their Historical Relations by James Bonar.

³⁷ "Ethical Principles Underlying Education," in Third Yearbook (Chicago: National Herbart Society, 1897), p. 12.

³⁸"Ethical Principles Underlying Education," p. 14.

³⁹"Professional Organization of Teachers," American Teacher, V (1916), 99-101.

⁴⁰ C. Wright Mills, Sociology and Pragmatism: The Higher Learning in America, ed. Irving Louis Horowitz (New York: Paine-Whitman, 1964), p. 316.

⁴¹Ethics, with James H. Tufts (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1908), p. 481.

⁴²Ethics, pp. 482-83.

⁴³Ethics, p. 483.

⁴⁴Ethics, p. 485.

⁴⁵Ethics, p. 485.

⁴⁶Ethics, p. 482.

⁴⁷Ethics, p. 482.

⁴⁸German Philosophy and Politics (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1915), p. 14.

⁴⁹ "Academic Freedom," Educational Review, XXIII (1902), 1-14; and "Freedom, Academic," in A Cyclopedia of Education, II, ed. Paul Monroe (New York: Macmillan Co., 1911), 700-701.

⁵⁰New York Times, 22 Oct. 1915.

⁵¹German Philosophy and Politics, p. 16.

⁵²German Philosophy and Politics, p. 100.

⁵³Enlistment for the Farm (Columbia War Papers, Series I, No. 1 [New York: Division of Intelligence and Publicity of Columbia University, 1917]), p. 5.

⁵⁴Enlistment for the Farm, p. 5.

⁵⁵Enlistment for the Farm, p. 10.

⁵⁶ "What Are We Fighting For?" Independent, XCIV (1918), 483.

⁵⁷ "What Are We Fighting For?" p. 483.

⁵⁸ "The Approach to a League of Nations," Dial, XVII (1918), 341.

⁵⁹ "Shall We Join the League?" New Republic, XXXIV (1923), 36-37.

⁶⁰"Shall We Join the League?" p. 37.

⁶¹"Shall We Join the League?" p. 37.

⁶²"Shall We Join the League?" p. 37.

⁶³New Republic, XXXIV (1923), 139-40, in answer to Arthur Oncken Lovejoy's letter, ibid., XXXIV (1923), 138-39.

⁶⁴Confidential Report: Conditions Among the Poles in the United States ([Washington?], 1918), p. 2.

⁶⁵ See, for example, Letters from China and Japan, with Alice C. Dewey, ed. Evelyn Dewey (New York: E. P. Dutton and Co., 1920), pp. 74-76, 179-80, 190, 209, 243-47, and 305-11.

⁶⁶"A Parting of the Ways for America," II., New Republic, XXVIII (1921), 317.

⁶⁷ "A Parting of the Ways for America," II., p. 317.

⁶⁸ Curti, Social Ideas of American Educators, p. 514.

⁶⁹Joseph Ratner, "Preface," in Characters and Events, I (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1929), vi.

⁷⁰"Impressions of Soviet Russia," II. A Country in a State of Flux, New Republic, LVII (1928), 12.

⁷¹Individualism, Old and New (New York: Minton, Balch and Co., 1930), p. 155. [Published originally as "Individualism, Old and New," VI. Individuality in Our Day, New Republic, LXII (1930).]

⁷²Individualism, Old and New, p. 95.

⁷³Philosophy and Civilization (New York: Minton, Balch and Co., 1931), p. 328.

⁷⁴Philosophy and Civilization, p. 328.

⁷⁵ "The Social-Economic Situation and Education," in The Educational Frontier, ed. William Heard Kilpatrick (New York, London: Century Co., 1933), pp. 35-36.

⁷⁶ "The Social-Economic Situation in Education," p. 72.

⁷⁷"The Underlying Philosophy of Education," in The Educational Frontier, p. 317.

⁷⁸"Underlying Philosophy of Education," p. 317.

⁷⁹ "Underlying Philosophy of Education," p. 318.

⁸⁰"Why I Am Not a Communist," Modern Monthly, VII (1934), 135-37.

⁸¹ "Why I Am Not a Communist," p. 135.

⁸² "Why I Am Not a Communist," p. 137.

⁸³Liberalism and Social Action (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1935), p. 1.

⁸⁴Liberalism and Social Action, p. 32.

⁸⁵Liberalism and Social Action, p. 87.

⁸⁶Liberalism and Social Action, p. 87.

⁸⁷Liberalism and Social Action, p. 90.

⁸⁸Sidney Hook, John Dewey: An Intellectual Portrait (New York: John Day, 1939), p. 165.

⁸⁹The Case of Leon Trotsky (New York: Harper and Bros., 1937); Not Guilty (New York: Harper and Bros., 1938).

⁹⁰ E.g., "Truth Is on the March," Report on the Trotsky Hearings in Mexico (New York: American Committee for the Defense of Leon Trotsky, 1937).

⁹¹ James T. Farrell, "Dewey in Mexico," in John Dewey: Philosopher of Science and Freedom, ed. Sidney Hook (New York: Dial Press, 1950), p. 375.

⁹²Freedom and Culture (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1939), p. 10.

⁹³Freedom and Culture, p. 77.

⁹⁴Freedom and Culture, p. 77.

⁹⁵ For other contemporary reaffirmations of democracy, see "Experience, Knowledge and Value: A Rejoinder," in The Philosophy of John Dewey, pp. 607-8; ["I Believe"] in I Believe, ed. Clifton Fadiman (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1939), pp. 347-54; and "Creative Democracy—The Task Before Us," in The Philosopher of the Common Man: Essays in Honor of John Dewey to Celebrate His Eightieth Birthday, ed. Sidney Ratner (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1940), pp. 220-28. For an interesting interpretation of Dewey as a political philosopher, see Hu Shih, "The Political Philosophy of Instrumentalism," pp. 205-19, in the 80th anniversary Festschrift.

⁹⁶ "Introduction," in The Bertrand Russell Case, eds. John Dewey and Horace M. Kallen (New York: Viking Press, 1941), p. 9.

⁹⁷ "Introduction," in Bertrand Russell Case, p. 9.

⁹⁸ "Social Realities versus Police Court Fictions," in Bertrand Russell Case, p. 73.

⁹⁹ "Social Realities versus Police Court Fictions," p. 73.

¹⁰⁰Letter to the New York Times, 11 Jan. 1942.

¹⁰¹ "Message to the Chinese People," in National Archives, Washington, D.C., 2 pp.

¹⁰²Tragedy of a People: Racialism in Czechoslovakia (New York: American Friends of Democratic Sudetens, 1946), pp. 3-6.

¹⁰³"John Dewey Responds," in John Dewey at Ninety, ed. Harry W. Laidler (New York: League for Industrial Democracy, 1950), p. 35.

¹⁰⁴George R. Geiger, "Dewey's Social and Political Philosophy," in The Philosophy of John Dewey.

¹⁰⁵Paul A. Schilpp, "The Faith of John Dewey," in Horizons of a Philosopher: Essays in Honor of David Baumgardt, eds. Joseph Frank et al. (Leiden: Brill, 1963), p. 373.

CHECKLIST

Outlines of a Critical Theory of Ethics, in The Early Works of John Dewey, 1882-1898, Vol. III, pp. 239-388. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1969.

"Thought News," Detroit Tribune, 10 Apr. 1892.

"News for Thought," Detroit Tribune, 11 Apr. 1892.

"He's Planned No Revolution," Detroit Tribune, 13 Apr. 1892. [Interview.]

"Christianity and Democracy," in Religious Thought at the University of Michigan, pp. 60-69. Ann Arbor: Inland Press, 1893.

Review of The Psychic Factors of Civilization by Lester Frank Ward, Social Evolution by Benjamin Kidd, Civilization During the Middle Ages by George Burton Adams, and History of the Philosophy of History by Robert Flint, Psychological Review, I (July 1894), 400-411.

Review of Philosophy and Political Economy in Some of Their Historical Relations by James Bonar, Political Science Quarterly, IX (Dec. 1894), 741-44.

"Ethics and Politics," University Record, III (Feb. 1894), 101-2. [Report of an address to the Philosophical Society in Dec. 1893.]

"Ethical Principles Underlying Education," in Third Yearbook, pp. 7-33. Chicago: National Herbart Society, 1897. [Reprinted separately by University of Chicago Press, 1908, 34 pp.; also reprinted in C-16, pp. 108-38.]

"Psychology and Social Practice," Psychological Review, VII (Mar. 1900), 105-24; Science, n.s. XI (Mar. 1900), 321-33. [Reprinted separately as University of Chicago Contributions to Education, No. 2. Chicago: Univesity of Chicago Press, 1901. 42 pp.]

"Academic Freedom " Educational Review, XXIII (Jan. 1902), 1-14.

Ethics, with James Hayden Tufts (American Science Series). New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1908. xiii, 618 pp.

[Statement] in "Symposium on Woman's Suffrage," The International, III (May 1911), 93-94.

"Freedom, Academic," in A Cyclopedia of Education, II, ed. Paul Monroe, 700-701. New York: Macmillan Co., 1911.

German Philosophy and Politics. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1915. 134 pp. [Reset and reprinted with "verbal corrections," a Foreword and new Introduction, New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1942.]

Comments by William Ernest Hocking, "Political Philosophy in Germany," New Republic, IV (Oct. 1915), 234-36.

Dewey's "In Reply," letter in New Republic, IV (Oct. 1915), 236.

"Professorial Freedom," letter in New York Times, 22 Oct. 1915. [Reprinted as "The Control of Universities," School and Society, II (Nov. 1915), 673.]

"Universal Service as Education," I, New Republic, VI (Apr. 1916), 309-10; II, ibid., VI (Apr. 1916), 334-35. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 465-73; C-12, pp. 92-100.]

"The Schools and Social Preparedness," New Republic, VII (May 1916), 15-16. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 474-78; C-12, pp. 101-5.]

"Professional Organization of Teachers," American Teacher, V (Sept. 1916), 99-101.

"The Hughes Campaign," New Republic, VIII (Oct. 1916), 319-21.

"Ill Advised," letter in American Teacher, VI (Feb. 1917), 31.

Enlistment for the Farm (Columbia War Papers, Series I, No. 1). New York: Division of Intelligence and Publicity of Columbia University, 1917. 10 pp.

"In a Time of National Hesitation," Seven Arts, II (May 1917), 3-7. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 443-46, with the title "The Emergence of a New World."]

"Professor Dewey of Columbia on War's Social Results," New York World, 29 July 1917. [Interview with Charles W. Wood.]

"What America Will Fight For," New Republic, XII (Aug. 1917), 68-69. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 561-65, with the title "America and War."]

"Conscription of Thought," New Republic, XII (Sept. 1917), 128-30. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 566-70.]

"War Activities for Civilians," New Republic, XII (Sept. 1917), 139-40. [Review of National Service Handbook.]

[Statement], New York Times, 9 Oct. 1917.

"In Explanation of Our Lapse," New Republic, XIII (Nov. 1917), 17-18. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 571-75.]

"The Case of the Professor and the Public Interest," Dial, LXII (Nov. 1917), 435-37.

"Democracy and Loyalty in the Schools," New York Evening Post, 19 Dec. 1917; American Teacher, VII (Jan. 1918), 8-10.

"Public Education on Trial," New Republic, XIII (Dec. 1917), 245-47. [Reprinted in C-12, pp. 133-38.]

Confidential Report: Conditions Among the Poles in the United States. [Washington?], 1918. 80 pp.

"Vocational Education in the Light of the World War," Vocational Education Association of the Middle West, Bulletin No. 4, Jan. 1918. [Chicago, 1918]. 9 pp.

"America in the World," Nation, CVI (Mar. 1918), 287. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 642-44, with the title "America and the World."]

"Internal Social Reorganization After the War," Journal of Race Development, VIII (Apr. 1918), 385-400. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 745-59, with the title "Elements of Social Reorganization."]

"What Are We Fighting For?" Independent, XCIV (June 1918), 474, 480-83. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 551-60, with the title "The Social Possibilities of War."]

"Autocracy Under Cover," New Republic, XVI (Aug. 1918), 103-6.

"The Approach to a League of Nations," Dial, LXV (Nov. 1918), 341-42. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 602-5.]

"The Cult of Irrationality," New Republic, XVII (Nov. 1918), 34-35. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 587-91.]

"The League of Nations and the New Diplomacy," Dial, LXV (Nov. 1918), 401-3. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 606-9.]

"The Fourteen Points and the League of Nations," Dial, LXV (Nov. 1918), 463-64.

"The Post-War Mind," New Republic, XVII (Dec. 1918), 157-59. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 596-601.]

"A League of Nations and Economic Freedom," Dial, LXV (Dec. 1918), 537-39. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 610-14.]

"The New Paternalism," New Republic, XVII (Dec. 1918), 216-17. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 517-21, with the title "Propaganda."]

"Japan and America," Dial, LXVI (May 1919), 501-3.

"The Student Revolt in China," New Republic, XX (Aug. 1919), 16-18.

"The International Duel in China," New Republic, XX (Aug. 1919), 110-12.

"Militarism in China," New Republic, XX (Sept. 1919), 167-69.

"Liberalism in Japan," I. The Intellectual Preparation, Dial, LXVII (Oct. 1919), 283-85; II. The Economic Factor, ibid., LXVII (Oct. 1919), 333-37; III. The Chief Foe, ibid., LXVII (Nov. 1919), 369-71. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 149-69.]

"Transforming the Mind of China," Asia, XIX (Nov. 1919), 1103-8. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 285-95.]

"Chinese National Sentiment," Asia, XIX (Dec. 1919), 1237-42. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 222-36, with the title "The Growth of Chinese National Sentiment."]

"The American Opportunity in China," New Republic, XXI (Dec. 1919), 14-17. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 296-303, with the title "America and China."]

"Our Share in Drugging China," New Republic, XXI (Dec. 1919), 114-17.

Letters from China and Japan, with Alice Chipman Dewey. Ed. Evelyn Dewey. New York; E. P. Dutton and Co., 1920. vi, 311 pp.

"The Sequel of the Student Revolt," New Republic, XXI (Feb. 1920), 380-82.

"Shantung, as Seen from Within," New Republic, XXII (Mar. 1920), 12-17. [Reprinted in C-4, pp. 9-21.]

"Our National Dilemma," New Republic, XXII (Mar. 1920), 117-18. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 615-19.]

"The New Leaven in Chinese Politics," Asia, XX (Apr. 1920), 267-72. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 244-54, with the title "Justice and Law in China."]

"What Holds China Back," Asia, XX (May 1920), 373-77. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 211-21, with the title "Chinese Social Habits."]

"Americanism and Localism," Dial, LXVIII (June 1920), 684-88. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 537-41.]

"China's Nightmare," New Republic, XXIII (June 1920), 145-47. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 193-98.]

"How Reaction Helps," New Republic, XXIV (Sept. 1920), 21-22. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 815-19.]

"A Political Upheaval in China," New Republic, XXIV (Oct. 1920), 142-44. [Reprinted in C-4, pp. 27-32.]

"Industrial China," New Republic, XXV (Dec. 1920), 39-41. [Reprinted in C-5, pp. 237-51.]

"Is China a Nation?" New Republic, XXV (Jan. 1921), 187-90. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 237-43, with the title "Conditions for China's Nationhood"; C-5, pp. 252-70. (Reply to: J. W. Helburn, letter in New Republic, XXV [Jan. 1921], 187.)

"The Siberian Republic," New Republic, XXV (Jan. 1921), 220-23. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 185-92.]

"The Far Eastern Deadlock," New Republic, XXVI (Mar. 1921), 71-74.

"The Consortium in China," New Republic, XXVI (Apr. 1921), 178-80.

"Old China and New," Asia, XXI (May 1921), 445-50, 454, 456. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 255-69, with the title "Young China and Old."]

"New Culture in China," Asia, XXI (July 1921), 581-86, 642. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 270-84.]

"Hinterlands in China," New Republic, XXVII (July 1921), 162-65. [Reprinted in C-4, pp. 21-27.]

Response by Dora Winifred Black, "American Policy in China," New Republic, XXVIII (Nov. 1921), 297.

Rejoinder by Dewey, New Republic, XXVIII (Nov. 1921), 297.

"Divided China," I., New Republic, XXVII (July 1921), 212-15; IL, ibid., XXVII (July 1921), 235-37. [Reprinted in C-4, pp. 33-44.]

"Shantung Again," New Republic, XXVIII (Sept. 1921), 123-26.

"Tenth Anniversary of the Republic of China: A Message," China Review, I (Oct. 1921), 171.

"Federalism in China," New Republic, XXVIII (Oct. 1921), 176-78. [Reprinted in C-4, pp. 44-50.]

"China and Disarmament," Chinese Students' Monthly, XVII (Nov. 1921), 16-17.

"A Parting of the Ways for America," I., New Republic, XXVIII (Nov. 1921), 283-86; IL, ibid., XXVIII (Nov. 1921), 315-17. [Reprinted in C-4, pp. 51-64.]

"The Issues at Washington," I. Causes of International Friction, Baltimore Sun, 14 Nov. 1921; II. The Anglo-Japanese Alliance and the United States, ibid., 15 Nov. 1921; III. China's Interest, ibid., 16 Nov. 1921; IV. Suggested Measures, ibid., 17 Nov. 1921.

"Public Opinion in Japan," New Republic, XXVIII (Nov. 1921), Sup. to No. 363, 15-18. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 177-84, with the title "Japan Revisited: Two Years Later."]

"Shrewd Tactics Are Shown in Chinese Plea," Baltimore Sun, 18 Nov. 1921.

"Four Principals [sic] for China Regarded as but Framework," Baltimore Sun, 23 Nov. 1921.

"Underground Burrows Must Be Dug Open," Baltimore Sun, 29 Nov. 1921.

"Angles of Shantung Question," Baltimore Sun, 5 Dec. 1921.

"The Conference and a Happy Ending," New Republic, XXIX (Dec. 1921), 37-39.

"Chinese Resignations," Baltimore Sun, 9 Dec. 1921.

"Three Results of Treaty," Baltimore Sun, 11 Dec. 1921.

"A Few Second Thoughts on Four-Power Pact," Baltimore Sun, 17 Dec. 1921.

"Education by Henry Adams," New Republic, XXIX (Dec. 1921), 102-3.

"As the Chinese Think," Asia, XXII (Jan. 1922), 7-10, 78-79. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 199-210, with the title "The Chinese Philosophy of Life."]

"America and Chinese Education," New Republic, XXX (Mar. 1922), 15-17. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 303-9, with the title "America and China."]

"The American Intellectual Frontier," New Republic, XXX (May 1922), 303-5. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 447-52.]

"Mind in the Making," letter in New Republic, XXXI (June 1922), 48. (Reply to: "Liberalism and Irrationalism," editorial on The Mind in the Making by James Harvey Robinson, New Republic, XXX [May 1922], 333-34.)

"Future Trends in the Development of Social Programs Through the Schools," in Proceedings of the National Conference of Social Work, Washington, May 16-23, 1923, pp. 449-53. Chicago, 1923. Also in Journal of Social Forces, I (Sept. 1923), 513-17.

"A Sick World," New Republic, XXXIII (Jan. 1923), 217-18. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 760-64.]

"China and the West," Dial, LXXIV (Feb. 1923), 193-96. [Review of The Problem of China by Bertrand Russell.]

"Shall We Join the League?" New Republic, XXXIV (Mar. 1923), 36-37. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 620-24; C-ll, pp. 499-502, with the title "On International Coöperation."]

Response by Arthur Oncken Lovejoy, "Shall We Join the League of Nations?" letter in New Republic, XXXIV (Mar. 1923), 138-39.

Reply by Dewey, New Republic, XXXIV (Mar. 1923), 139-40. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 625-28; C-ll, pp. 502-3, with the title "On International Coöperation."]

"If War Were Outlawed," New Republic, XXXIV (Apr. 1923), 234-35. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 672-76.]

"What Outlawry of War Is Not," New Republic, XXXVI (Oct. 1923), 149-52.

"War and a Code of Law," New Republic, XXXVI (Oct. 1923), 224-26. [Reprinted with "What Outlawry of War Is Not," as Outlawry of War: What It Is and Is Not, Chicago: American Committee for the Outlawry of War, 1923, 16 pp.; also reprinted in C-10, pp. 67.7-84, 685-90.] (The two articles are in answer to: Walter Lippmann, "The Outlawry of War," Atlantic Monthly, CXXXII [Aug. 1923], 245-53.)

"Shall the United States Join the World Court?" Pt. II, Christian Century, XL (Oct. 1923), 1329-34. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 650-65, with the title "Which World Court Shall We Join?" C-11, pp. 511-25, with the title "International Law and the War-System."] (See: Manley Ottmer Hudson, "Shall the United States Join the World Court?" Pt. I, Christian Century, XL [Oct. 1923], 1292-97; and "Shall the United States Join the World Court?" Pt. III, Christian Century, XL [Oct. 1923], 1367-70. [This installment includes statements by Dewey and Hudson and exchanges between them.])

"Science, Belief and the Public," New Republic, XXXVIII (Apr. 1924), 143-45. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 459-64.]

"Secularizing a Theocracy: Young Turkey and the Caliphate," New Republic, XL (Sept. 1924), 69-71. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 324-29, with the title "Young Turkey and the Caliphate"; C-5, pp. 220-34.]

"Angora, the New," New Republic, XL (Oct. 1924), 169-70. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 330-34; C-5, pp. 208-19.]

"Dewey Aids La Follette," New York Times, 23 Oct. 1924.

"The Turkish Tragedy," New Republic, XL (Nov. 1924), 268-69. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 335-39; C-5, pp. 197-207.]

"The Problem of Turkey," New Republic, XLI (Jan. 1925), 162-63. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 340-45.]

"Highly-Colored White Lies," New Republic, XLII (Apr. 1925), 229-30. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 312-16, with the title "The White Peril."]

"Is China a Nation or a Market?" New Republic, XLIV (Nov. 1925), 298-99. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 316-21, with the title "The White Peril."]

"We Should Deal with China as Nation to Nation," Chinese Students' Monthly, XXI (May 1926), 52-54.

"America and the Far East," Survey, LVI (May 1926), 188. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 309-11, with the title "America and China."]

"A Key to the New World," New Republic, XLVI (May 1926), 410-11. [Review of Education and the Good Life by Bertrand Russell.]

"Church and State in Mexico," New Republic, XLVIII (Aug. 1926), 9-10. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 352-57; C-5, pp. 137-49.]

"From a Mexican Notebook," New Republic, XLVIII (Oct. 1926), 239-41. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 358-63, with the title "The New and Old in Mexico"; C-5, pp. 168-80.]

"Bishop Brown: A Fundamental Modernist," New Republic, XLVIII (Nov. 1926), 371-72. [Comments on My Heresy by William Montgomery Brown.] [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 83-86, with the title "William Montgomery Brown."]

"America's Responsibility," Christian Century, XLIII (Dec. 1926), 1583-84. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 691-96; C-ll, pp. 503-8.]

"Introduction," in Militarizing Our Youth: The Significance of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps in Our Schools and Colleges by Roswell P. Barnes, pp. 3-4. New York: Committee on Militarism in Education, 1927.

"Imperialism Is Easy," New Republic, L (Mar. 1927), 133-34. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 372-77, with the title "Mexico and the Monroe Doctrine"; C-5, pp. 181-94.]

"The Real Chinese Crisis," New Republic, L (Apr. 1927), 269-70.

"Psychology and Justice," New Republic, LIII (Nov. 1927), 9-12. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 526-36.]

"A Critique of American Civilization," World Tomorrow, XI (Oct. 1928), 391-95.

"To the Chinese Friends in the United States," Chinese Students' Bulletin, I (Mar. 1928), 4.

"As an Example to Other Nations," New Republic, LIV (Mar. 1928), 88-89. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 697-702.]

Response by James Thomson Shotwell, "Divergent Paths to Peace," New Republic, LIV (Mar. 1928), 194.

Rejoinder by Dewey, New Republic, LIV (Mar. 1928), 194-96.

"China and the Powers: II. Intervention a Challenge to Nationalism," Current History, XXVIII (May 1928), 212-13. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 321-23, with the title "The White Peril."] (Reply to: Major General William Crozier, U.S.A. [Ret.], "China and the Powers: I. What Hope for China?" Current History, XXVIII [May 1928], 205-12.)

"Outlawing Peace by Discussing War," New Republic, LIV (May 1928), 370-71. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 703-6.]

"Why I Am for Smith," New Republic, LVI (Nov. 1928), 320-21.

"Impressions of Soviet Russia," I. Leningrad Gives the Clue, New Republic, LVI (Nov. 1928), 343-44; II. A Country in a State of Flux, ibid., LVII (Nov. 1928), 11-14; III. A New World in the Making, ibid., LVII (Nov. 1928), 38-42; IV. What Are the Russian Schools Doing? ibid., LVII (Dec. 1928), 64-67; V. New Schools for a New Era, ibid., LVII (Dec. 1928), 91-94; VI. The Great Experiment and the Future, ibid., LVII (Dec. 1928), 134-37. [Reprinted in C-10, pp. 378-431; C-5, pp. 3-133.]

"Introduction," in Humanity Uprooted by Maurice Hindus, pp. xv-xix. New York: Jonathan Cape and Harrison Smith, 1929.

"Labor Politics and Labor Education," New Republic, LVII (Jan. 1929), 211-14.

Response by Matthew Woll, New Republic, LVIII (Feb. 1929), 19-20.

Reply by Dewey, New Republic, LVIII (Feb. 1929), 20.

Further reply by Dewey, "Mr. Woll as a Communist Catcher," New Republic, LVIII (Mar. 1929), 99.

"What Do Liberals Want?" editorial in Outlook and Independent, CLIII (Oct. 1929), 261.

[Statement on Censorship], Laughing Horse, No. 17 (Feb. 1930), p. [5].

"What I Believe," Forum, LXXXIII (Mar. 1930), 176-82. [Revised statement in I Believe, ed. Clifton Fadiman, pp. 347-54. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1939.]

"In Response," in John Dewey, the Man and His Philosophy: Addresses Delivered in New York in Celebration of His Seventieth Birthday, pp. 173-81. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1930.

"Religion in the Soviet Union: An Interpretation of the Conflict," Current History, XXXII (Apr. 1930), 31-36.

"Individualism, Old and New," I. The United States, Incorporated, New Republic, LXI (Jan. 1930), 239-41; II. The Lost Individual, ibid., LXI (Feb. 1930), 294-96; III. Toward a New Individualism, ibid., LXII (Feb. 1930), 13-16; IV. Capitalistic or Public Socialism? ibid., LXII (Mar. 1930), 64-67; V. The Crisis in Culture, ibid., LXII (Mar. 1930), 123-26; and VI. Individuality in Our Day, ibid., LXII (Apr. 1930), 184-88. [Reprinted in C-6, pp. 35-171.]

Individualism, Old and New. New York: Minton, Balch and Co., 1930. 171 pp. [" . . . material that originally appeared in the columns of (the New Republic) . . . now incorporated in connection with considerable new matter, in this volume." Prefatory Note.]

"Our Illiteracy Problem," Pictorial Review, XXXI (Aug. 1930), 28, 65, 73.

[Letter to Senator George William Norris], New York Times, 26 Dec. 1930.

Philosophy and Civilization. New York: Minton, Balch and Co., 1931. vii, 334 pp. [Reprints, with revisions, of previously published articles.]

"The Need for a New Party," I. The Present Crisis, New Republic, LXVI (Mar. 1931), 115-17; II. The Breakdown of the Old Order, ibid., LXVI (Mar. 1931), 150-52; III. Who Might Make a New Party? ibid., LXVI (Apr. 1931), 177-79; IV. Policies for a New Party, ibid., LXVI (Apr. 1931), 202-5.

"Surpassing America," New Republic, LXVI (Apr. 1931), 241-43. [Review of The Challenge of Russia by Sherwood Eddy, The Soviet Challenge to America by George Sylvester Counts, and These Russians by William Chapman White.]

"Is There Hope for Politics?" Scribner's Magazine, LXXXIX (May 1931), 483-87.

"Full Warehouses and Empty Stomachs," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (May 1931), 1-3.

"The President and the Special Session," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (June 1931), 1.

"Secretary Klein Asked Basis of Optimism," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (June 1931), 3-4.

Response by Klein, People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Aug. 1931), 3-4.

Reply by Dewey, People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Aug. 1931), 4-5.

"Challenge to Progressive Senators to Act for Relief," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (June 1931), 5.

"The Key to Hoover's Keynote Speech," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (July 1931), 3-6.

"Lobby Challenges Senator Borah's Opposition to Reconsideration of Interallied Debts," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (July 1931), 7-8; "Contradicts Borah on Debt Revisions," New York Times, 15 July 1931.

"Should America Adopt a System of Compulsory Unemployment Insurance?" Congressional Digest, X (Aug. 1931), 212.

"The People's Lobby," New Republic, LXVIII (Aug. 1931), 48.

"President Dewey Opposes Blanket Freight Increase," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Aug. 1931), 6-8.

"President Dewey Calls on Hoover to Recognize Government Responsibility for Unemployment," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Sept. 1931), 1.

"President Dewey Opposes Community Chest Drives for Unemployed," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Sept. 1931), 1-2.

"Setting New Goals at Seventy," New York World-Telegram, 4 Nov. 1931. [Interview with William Engle.]

"The Federal Government and Unemployment," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Dec. 1931), 5.

Ethics, with James Hayden Tufts. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1932. xiii, 528 pp. [Rev. ed., with Preface to the 1932 Edition. The 1908 edition has been completely revised, with "about two-thirds of the present edition . . . newly written, and frequent changes in detail .. . in the remainder."]

The Place of Minor Parties in the American Scene (Government Series Lecture No. 13). [Chicago]: University of Chicago Press, 1932. ii, 9 pp.

"Foreword," in The Coming of a New Party by Paul Howard Douglas, pp. vii-viii. New York: Whittlesey House, 1932.

"Education and Birth Control," Nation, CXXXIV (Jan. 1932), 112.

"A Third Party Program," New Republic, LXX (Feb. 1932), 48-49.

"The Only Way to Stop Hoarding," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Mar. 1932), 1.

"To Replace Judge Cardozo," New Republic, LXX (Mar. 1932), 102.

"Instrument or Frankenstein?" Saturday Review of Literature, VIII (Mar. 1932), 581-82. [Review of Man and Technics by Oswald Spengler.]

"Peace—by Pact or Covenant?" New Republic, LXX (Mar. 1932), 145-47.

"Church Leaders Ask Church to Act on Unemployment," John Dewey et al., People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Mar. 1932), 2.

"Prosperity Dependent on Building From Bottom Up," People's Lobby Bulletin, I (Apr. 1932), 1.

"You Must Act to Get Congress to Act," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (May 1932), 1.

"The Senate Birth Control Bill," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (May 1932), 1-2.

"Joint Committee on Unemployment Demands Congress Act; Speeches at Morning Session," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (May 1932), 3-4.

Are Sanctions Necessary to International Organization? Yes [by] Raymond Leslie Buell; No [by] John Dewey. (Foreign Policy Association Pamphlet No. 82-83, Series 1931-32, June 1932.) New York: Foreign Policy Association, 1932. 39 pp. [Reprinted in C-ll, pp. 566-602, with the title "Sanctions and the Security of Nations."]

"Voters Must Demand Congress Tax Wealth Instead of Want," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (June 1932), 1.

"Making Soviet Citizens," New Republic, LXXI (June 1932), 104. [Review of New Minds: New Men? by Thomas Woody and History of Russian Educational Policy by Nicholas Hans.]

"President Dewey Asks Senators to Stay on Guard," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (June 1932), 2-3.

Democracy Joins the Unemployed. New York: League for Independent Political Action, 1932. 4 pp.

"Prospects for a Third Party," New Republic, LXXI (July 1932), 278-80.

"John Dewey Surveys the Nation's Ills," New York Times, 10 July 1932. [Interview with S. J. Woolf.]

"Get Mayor and Governor to Demand Relief," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (Nov. 1932), 1.

"The Social-Economic Situation and Education" and "The Underlying Philosophy of Education," with John Lawrence Childs, in The Educational Frontier, ed. William Heard Kilpatrick, pp. 32-72, 287-319. New York, London: Century Co., 1933.

"Outlawry of War," in Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, XI, 508-10. New York: Macmillan Co., 1933.

"Preface" [to the English edition], Terror in Cuba (Paris: Courbevoie, la Cootypographie, 1933), pp. 9-10, trans. Jo Ann Boydston, in "Terror in Cuba in 1933," School and Society, XCVI (Nov. 1968), 444-46.

Steps to Economic Recovery (Pamphlets on the Economic Crisis of 1929, Vol. IX,'No. 9). New York: Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, [1933?]. 15 pp.

"Unemployed and Underpaid Consumers Should Not Pay Billion Dollar Subsidy to Speculators," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (Jan. 1933), 1-2.

"The Future of Radical Political Action," Nation, CXXXVI (Jan. 1933), 8-9.

Review of Mr. Justice Brandeis, ed. Felix Frankfurter, Columbia Law Review, XXXIII (Jan. 1933), 175-76.

"Relief Is Vital," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (Feb. 1933), 1-2.

"The Banking Crisis," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (Mar. 1933), 1,-2.

"The Drive against Hunger," New Republic, LXXIV (Mar. 1933), 190.

"Social Stresses and Strains," International Journal of Ethics, XLIII (Apr. 1933), 339-45. [Review of Recent Social Trends in the United States; Report of the President's Research Committee on Social Trends.]

"Congress Faces Its Test on Taxation," People's Lobby Bulletin, II (Apr. 1933), 1-2.

"The Real Test of the 'New Deal'," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (May 1933), 1.

"Superficial Treatment Must Fail," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (June 1933), 1-3.

"Inflationary Measures Injure the Masses," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (July 1933), 1-2.

"Plenty vs. Scarcity," Commerce and Finance, XXII (Aug. 1933), 751-52.

"The Imperative Need for A New Radical Party," Common Sense, II (Sept. 1933),6-7.

"Wild Inflation Would Paralyze Nation," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Sept. 1933), 1-2.

"Lobby Asks Special Session on-Debts," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Oct. 1933), 1.

"Unemployment Committee Asks Adequate Relief," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Oct. 1933), 5-6.

"Farm Processing and Other Consumption Taxes Must Be Repealed," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Nov. 1933), 1.

"The Next Session [of Congress] and the People's Lobby," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Dec. 1933), 1.

"Introduction," in Challenge to the New Deal, eds. Alfred Mitchell Bingham and Seiden Rodman, pp. v-vii. New York: Falcon Press, 1934.

"President's Policies Help Property Owners Chiefly," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Jan. 1934), 1-2.

"New Deal Program Must Be Appraised," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Jan. 1934), 5.

"A Real Test of the Administration," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Feb. 1934), 1-2.

"America's Public Ownership Program," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Mar. 1934), 1.

"Facing the Era of Realities," People's Lobby Bulletin, III (Apr. 1934), 1-2.

"Why I Am Not a Communist," Modern Monthly, VII (Apr. 1934), 135-37.

"What Keeps Funds Away from Purchasers?" People's Lobby Bulletin, IV (May 1934), 1-2.

"Acquiescence and Activity in Communism," New Humanist, VII (May-June 1934), 22. [Review of A Philosophic Approach to Communism by Theodore B. Brameld.]

"No Half Way House for America," People's Lobby Bulletin, IV (Nov. 1934), 1.

Liberalism and Social Action. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1935. viii, 93 pp.

"Needed—A New Politics," in World Fellowship by Charles Frederick Weiler, pp. 119-25. New York: Liveright Publishing Corp., 1935.

"Socialization of Ground Rent," People's Lobby Bulletin, IV (Jan. 1935), 1.

"International Cooperation or International Chaos," People's Lobby Bulletin, IV (Feb. 1935), 6-7.

"Toward Administrative Statesmanship," Social Frontier, I (Mar. 1935), 9-10. [Reprinted in C-8, pp. 66-69, with the title "Democracy and Educational Administration."]

"Taxation as a Step to Socialization," People's Lobby Bulletin, IV (Mar. 1935), 1-2.

"United, We Shall Stand," Social Frontier, I (Apr. 1935), 11-12; School and Community, XXI (Apr. 1935), 143-45. [Reprinted in C-8, pp. 72-76, with the title "The Teacher and His World."]

"When America Goes to War," Modern Monthly, IX (June 1935), 200.

"Our Un-Free Press," Common Sense, IV (Nov. 1935), 6-7.

[Letter to the editor], New Republic, LXXXVIII (Oct. 1936), 249.

The Case of Leon Trotsky. New York, London: Harper and Bros., 1937. xix, 617 pp. [Stenographic report of hearings in Mexico City.]

"Truth Is On the March." Reports and Remarks on the Trotsky Hearings in Mexico. New York: American Committee for the Defense of Leon Trotsky, 1937. 15 pp.

Report of radio broadcast by Dewey and rejoinder by Corliss Lamont, New York Times, 14 Dec. 1937.

Response by Sidney Hook, "Corliss Lamont: 'Friend of the G.P.U.'," Modern Monthly, X (Mar. 1938), 5-8, including telegram from Dewey, p. 8.

"Pravda on Trotsky," New Republic, LXXXX (Mar. 1937), 212-13.

"Righting an Academic Wrong," New Republic, LXXXX (Mar. 1937), 242.

"The Future of Democracy," New Republic, LXXXX (Apr. 1937), 351.

"John Dewey, Great American Liberal, Denounces Russian Dictatorship," Washington Post, 17 Dec. 1937. [Interview with Agnes Ernst Meyer (Mrs. Eugene Meyer).]

"In Defense of the Mexican Hearings," in "Violence, For and Against: A Symposium on Marx, Stalin and Trotsky," Common Sense, VII (Jan. 1938), 20-21.

"Introduction," in Looking Forward: Discussion Outlines, p. 3. New York: League for Industrial Democracy, 1938.

Freedom and Culture. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1939. 176 pp.

"Experience, Knowledge and Value: A Rejoinder," in The Philosophy of John Dewey (The Library of Living Philosophers, Vol. I, ed. Paul Arthur Schilpp), pp. 517-608. Evanston, Chicago: Northwestern University, 1939.

"No Matter What Happens—Stay Out," Common Sense, VIII (Mar. 1939), 11.

"The Basis for Hope," Common Sense, VIII (Dec. 1939), 9-10.

"The Case for Bertrand Russell," Nation, CL (June 1940), 732-33.

"Introduction" and "Social Realities versus Police Court Fictions," in The Bertrand Russell Case, eds. John Dewey and Horace M. Kallen, pp. 7-10, 55-74. New York: Viking Press, 1941.

"Creative Democracy—The Task Before Us," in The Philosopher of the Common Man: Essays in Honor of John Dewey to Celebrate His Eightieth Birthday, ed. Sidney Ratner, pp. 220-28. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1940.

"Address of Welcome," in Thirty-five Years of Educational Pioneering (L.I.D. Pamphlet Series), pp. 3-6. New York: League for Industrial Democracy, 1941.

"Foreword to Revised Edition" and "The One-World of Hitler's National Socialism," in German Philosophy and Politics, 2d ed., pp. 5-7, 13-49. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1942. [New Foreword and Introduction to 1915 edition, which was "reprinted without change, save for a few verbal corrections."]

"Foreword," in S.O. Levinson and the Pact of Paris: A Study in the Techniques of Influence by John E. Stoner, pp. vii-viii. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942.

"Message to the Chinese People," 2 pp., typewritten. [Original English version in National Archives, Washington, D.C.]

"Russia's Position: Mr. [Joseph Edward] Davies's Book [Mission to Moscow] Regarded as Incorrect Picture," letter to New York Times, 11 Jan. 1942; reprinted as "Can We Work with Russia?" Frontiers of Democracy, VIII (Mar. 1942), 179-80.

Comments by John Lawrence Childs, Frontiers of Democracy, VIII (Mar. 1942), 181-82.

Reply by Dewey, "Dr. Dewey on Our Relations with Russia," Frontiers of Democracy, VIII (Apr. 1942), 194.

["Several Faults Are Found in 'Mission to Moscow' Film"], letter of John Dewey and Suzanne La Follette to the editor, New York Times, 9 May 1943.

Response by Arthur Upham Pope, New York Times, 16 May 1943.

Reply by Dewey and Miss La Follette, New York Times, 24 May 1943.

Reply by Pope, New York Times, 12 June 1943.

Reply by Dewey and Miss La Follette, New York Times, 19 June 1943.

"Hitler's Spirit Still Lives: Introduction," John Dewey et al., in Tragedy of a People: Racialism in Czechoslovakia, pp. 3-6. New York: American Friends of Democratic Sudetens, June 1946.

"Behind the Iron Bars," New Leader Literary Section, 13 Sept. 1947. [Review of Forced Labor in Soviet Russia by David J. Dallin and Boris I. Nicolaevsky.]

"American Youth, Beware of Wallace Bearing Gifts," Liberal (Organ of the New York State Liberal Party), II (Oct. 1948), 3-4; New Leader, XXXI (Oct. 1948), xliv, 1, 14, with the title "Wallace vs. a New Party."

"How to Anchor Liberalism," Labor and Nation, IV (Nov.-Dec. 1948), 14-15.

"Communists as Teachers," New York Times, 21 June 1949.

"John Dewey at 90, Finds Tension of World May Result in Good," New York Herald Tribune, 15 Oct. 1949. [Interview with Lester Grant.]

"John Dewey, at 90, Reiterates His Belief that Good Schools Are Essential in a Democracy," New York Times, 16 Oct. 1949. [Interview with Benjamin Fine.]

"John Dewey Responds," in John Dewey at Ninety, ed. Harry Wellington Laidler, pp. 32-35. New York: League for Industrial Democracy, 1950.

"Mr. Acheson's Critics: Their Attacks Feared Damaging to Our World Prestige," letter to the New York Times, 19 Nov. 1950.

"Modern Labor Leader" and "Master Craftsman of Labor," in David Dubinsky: A Pictorial Biography, pp. 13-19, 21-28. New York: Inter-Allied Publications, 1951.

[Contribution to a Symposium], in Democracy in a World of Tensions: A Symposium Prepared by UNESCO, eds. Richard McKeon and Stein Rokkan, pp. 62-68. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951.