Memoirs: Fifty Years of Political Reflection

by Raymond Aron, George Holoch (Translator)

Raymond Aron has won the respect and admiration of leading figures from all spheres of twentieth-century life and from all points of the political spectrum. An independent thinker who was often called the lone voice of reason in the heat of political conflicts, Aron became well known for his bold, penetrating ideas. His dispassionate, probing analyses of international affairs, ethnic conflicts, social and economic problems, and contemporary history have become increasingly influential in the U.S. and foreign arenas of political discourse and public policy. Whether working with the Free French in London during World War II, voicing early support for the reconstruction of a devastated post-war Germany, or offering new insights on peace and war in a nuclear age, Aron consistently brightened areas of inquiry by his capacity for cogent and forthright reflection.In the foreground of many of the most important political events of the twentieth century, he developed relationships with others similarly engaged figures such as Charles de Gaulle, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Henry Kissinger, all of whom appear in his prize-winning Memoirs. Aron stimulated debate and elicited strong attachments in his roles as journalist, author, adviser, and professor in philosophy, political science, and sociology in Europe and the United States, where he contributed to periodicals such as the "New York Times Magazine", Commentary, and Foreign Affairs. Since his death in 1983, Aron's brilliant works of social and political philosophy have found an increasingly large following among younger readers whose appreciation can only deepen with this behind-the-scenes glimpse of the man and his thoughts.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, Philosophy, French Literature, Memoir, Politics

510 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1983

About the author

Raymond-Claude-Ferdinand Aron (French: [ʁɛmɔ̃ aʁɔ̃]; 14 March 1905 – 17 October 1983) was a French philosopher, sociologist, journalist, and political scientist.
He is best known for his 1955 book The Opium of the Intellectuals, the title of which inverts Karl Marx's claim that religion was the opium of the people – Aron argues that in post-war France, Marxism was the opium of intellectuals. In the book, Aron chastised French intellectuals for what he described as their harsh criticism of capitalism and democracy and their simultaneous defense of Marxist oppression, atrocities, and intolerance. Critic Roger Kimball[2] suggests that Opium is "a seminal book of the twentieth century." Aron is also known for his lifelong friendship, sometimes fractious, with philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre.[3]
He is also known for his 1973 book, The Imperial Republic: The United States and the World 1945-1973, which influenced Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, among others.
Aron wrote extensively on a wide range of other topics. Citing the breadth and quality of Aron's writings, historian James R. Garland[4] suggests, "Though he may be little known in America, Raymond Aron arguably stood as the preeminent example of French intellectualism for much of the twentieth century."

Reviews

[Szplug · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'd long been aware of Aron's status as a French writer and thinker, but it wasn't until Tony Judt's Reappraisals that I was motivated to discover for myself all of the sterling qualities that the latter lauded the former as possessing. I was highly impressed with The Opium of the Intellectuals , Main Currents in Sociological Thought , and the few essays I've read in The Dawn of Universal History , all of which reveal the Frenchman's placid but passionate renunciation of totalitarianism and despotism, firm—but relentlessly and soberly critical—support for the liberal democratic values of the West, and, especially, his immensely deep intellectual foundation, one fed by a continuous regimen of works in philosophy, sociology, economics, political science, history, and world literature. They also display a sharply intelligent and astutely analytical mind capable of expressing itself in prose of a pleasing gracefulness that never sacrifices clarity in attempting an ornate profundity (turn away from that mirror, Sastre).

I find Aron to have been a truly remarkable man. At times difficult to relate to being neither a contemporary nor French—occasionally bringing up names and events for which I'm in the dark, though, by their very tone, doubtless of pertinent awareness for those who lived through or near their occurrence—these reminiscences are nonetheless endowed in full measure with the intelligence, honesty, humanity, and placid reasonableness that marked itself within his writing—nowhere more evident than his humble deprecation of placing first in the Agrégation de Philosophie of 1928, framing that brilliant achievement within the context of his hewing to academic consensus whilst praising Jean-Paul Sartre's greater originality in accomplishing the same in the following year. Indeed, though Aron would gain fame in the postwar years as both a popular journalist and renowned professor of sociology at the ENA, Sorbonne, and Collège de France, his early academic exertions were made in the realm of philosophy, for which he possessed a powerful acumen. Sartre claimed, in his latter years, to having disliked discussing philosophy with anyone apart from Aron—who always did me in, as the former saw it. Sartre, the creator, the visionary mind, the actionless revolutionary, forever restless within the world, deemed himself unable to penetrate the refutations and rebuttals from his contemporary and, ere their break in the Sixties, close friend, the critic, the analytical mind which excelled at pointing out the flaws and strengths within the work and viewpoints of others without being capable of bringing anything of originality into the world from its steely depths. Or at least, that's how the author determined the reality to be. And who am I to argue with the man in the face of such expressed and displayed strengths?

It's proved a pleasure to imbibe his generous remembrances of his friendships—sometimes fractious, but enduring—with the likes of Sartre, Paul-Yves Nizan, André Maulraux, Friedrich Hayek, Allan Bloom, and Henry Kissinger, while placing himself and his eminently rational voice and wise perspective within the tumultuous years and events he witnessed, including the breakdown of the Third Republic, the Second World War, the Cold War, European reconstruction, the French Colonial Wars and imperial break-up, the student revolt of the late sixties, and the full emergence of the Industrial Society, of which he had explicated the structure when it was still in transition. He writes movingly about his experience as a non-religious Jew in France, born of passionately patriotic parents who were dealt a severe, faith-questioning blow by the antagonisms and prejudices unveiled by the Dreyfus affair. Accounts of his father's inability to find true happiness in a world wherein he deemed himself to have squandered his talents—he was ruined financially during the Great Depression—marked Raymond deeply, leading him to question his own choices and pursuits and efforts throughout his life. He also paints a touching—though distant, in Aron's manner—portrait of his brother Adrien, a man whose intellect the author stated as being truly formidable, but who opted to pass his life in cynical outlook and the detached pursuit of personal pleasures: tennis, bridge, and stamp-collecting

An arresting element to his story is that of how direct exposure to the reality of the political fragility of the Weimar Republic, its subsumption to the energized anger of the National Socialists, and the enervated response by an imperiled and despondent France riven by party factionalism and paralysis led to his own politico-philosophical maturity—abandoning the abstractions, aloofness, and armchair dogmatizing of the academic philosophes in favor of a realism—but not quite realpolitik—that took into account historical trends and evolutions, the actual betterment of the working masses, and the advancement of left-wing goals through sustained participation within the democratic-liberal-capitalist structures of the West combined with an unyielding opposition to fascism and communism (the fact that he was a blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jew must have confused the hell out of the Rhenish Nazi-converts in whose midst he lived in early-thirties Cologne). By the time he returned to France from Germany in 1934, he had already made it a point, when critiquing the Third Republic government of the day, to ask If you were in the minister’s position, what would you do? In the furtherance of such pragmatism he proceeded to immerse himself within economics and political science in order that he might have a sounder understanding of how polities actually functioned in the existing world. Via his early books—having received Durkheim with reservations whilst finding Weber revelatory—Aron served as an introductory guide of modern German sociology to the French public, at the same time steering Sartre, Merleau-Ponty, and others towards Husserl and Heidegger. Having escaped occupied France for a position with the Free French in stalwart Britain, Aron emerged from the end of the Second World War able to converse with fluency in the three dominant languages of a Europe in desperate need of pragmatic personalities capable of assisting with the overwhelming demands of reworking and rebuilding in the face of tense East-West relations and a shattered infrastructure.

Ofttimes finding himself alone amidst a sea of passionately turbulent voices amongst the left and the right, Aron never wavered from his support for Western liberal values, intellectual clarity, and the pursuit of truth, no matter how isolated the taking of such stances might render one. It was an attitude that he internally queried:

At the same time, I questioned myself, particularly about my incination toward solitude. Would I always find more or less subtle reasons to remain marginal, outside any party, any movement? I remembered the German student in 1933 who criticized me for being incapable of mitmachen,of joining up.

Without believing in an historical materialism, Aron nonetheless refused to make political or cultural judgements without placing the subject in question in its appropriate historical positioning, nor refused the task—whether in the service of journalism, teaching, or political counseling—of making demanding and blunt assessments while endeavoring to appreciate the opposing point-of-view with a breadth greater than that afforded to his own. As mentioned above, at many points in his career Aron found himself the sole voice of reason, championing difficult and/or unpopular positions—particularly during the wars of French Decolonization in Indochina and Algeria, and the student uprising of 1968—no matter the opprobrium directed his way. Such difficult and lonely perches were ofttimes retroactively made easier by the number of times those who had most vociferously opposed him during acrimonious and controversial periods would admit to him, many years down the road and peering backwards through the lenses of hindsight, the accuracy and truth of his words. It's a tricky bit of business to reveal several such episodes without taking on airs proud or self-satisfied—and so it's to Aron's credit that he manages to handle recurring moments of this nature with a deprecation that quietly acknowledges the rightness of his advocacy without denying the judiciousness of his opponent's attacks back when things were far from being either obvious or settled.

Aron was clearly a highly influential intellectual, both within France and, increasingly over the postwar years, without; and while he never shies away from detailing the conflicts, crises, arguments, and analyses that he was involved with, he always assesses his contributions with a modest air; without dissembling or displaying a false humility, manages to acknowledge those who both praised and critiqued his various expressed positions before critiquing them and himself from the vantage of hindsight. If he comes across as somewhat hard in his self-judging, he displays nothing but generosity in that which he casts outwards, even against those, like Sartre, who wounded him deeply with their hostile words during some of his most vulnerable moments. A common complaint cast against Aron was that he was a cold man: too rational, too businesslike, too eager to prove his intellectual superiority to be able to relate to living human beings in all of their irrational, messy, complicated trials. Aron defends himself against such calumnies with a calm that is yet passionate—it's clear that he took such accusations to heart. He does carry himself with an air of reserve: he is sparse in the details he reveals of his family, particularly his wife and children; but such temperance means that when he does bring them into his story, the depth of his feeling, whether it be joy or sorrow or satisfaction, is that much more powerfully limned.

What can I tell you? I dig the guy—the way he lived, the manner in which he conducted himself, the potency of his thought, the generosity of his spirit, the middle-line-straddling avenue of his participation. In the course of Memoirs Aron reviews the entirety of his bibliographic output, which was prodigious: beyond the dozen or so works translated into English, he penned several more books and hundreds of articles, essays, and columns, together with transcribed lectures, throughout a lengthy career. When he provided a succinct, but detailed, overview of his most renowned work in translation, The Opium of the Intellectuals, I went back and read the review I had penned for the work. I am pleased as punch to be able to state that, set aside the backwards-peering reminiscence of the master himself, I was able to nail that sucker. It gave me a satisfied glow inside like nothing else: perhaps in a vein to how Aron must have felt at various points of redemption, though he handled such things with that truthful humility—bruised and blossomed, at times, as with anything human, but sincerely felt and expressed, which is what separates the doyens from the dilettantes (I said turn away from that mirror!). This was a pure pleasure for myself, one that I proceeded through slowly, drinking it in, taking copious notes (which, as always, never manage to actually make it into the review), and just enjoying being edified and enlightened and, yes, entertained by the summative life's journey of a particularly brilliant and singularly impressive individual. Merci, RA.

[Ronald Jean-toussaint · Rating 3 out of 5]

Review in both FR/ENG
Figure intellectuelle majeure du 20e siècle, qui a réussi à être juste et prudent dans ces prédictions la ou Sartre et d’autres intellectuels se sont plongé dans le communisme, le socialisme, le maoïsme avec abandon et parfois le désir passionné d’être en train de faire l’histoire. Aron a gardé une attitude plutôt froide, parfois polémique dans sa jeunesse, mais souvent plus réservée, et à la recherche d’une « raison » du moins pire.


On y trouve des portraits de nombreux intellectuels brossé rapidement. Leurs attitudes, leurs remarques, quelques mots sur l’esprit du temps.
Historiquement riche pour avoir un aperçu du 20e siècle du point de vue d’un intellectuel éminent, traversant la guerre, la philosophie, le journalisme et la formation de son itinéraire intellectuel.
Du socialisme naissant, aux colonisations de l’Algérie et Vietnam, à mai 68, la position de la Russie, l’hégémonie américaine et à l’époque soviétique sont traités et traversés par les dialogues, les polémiques de l’époque, qui permettent d’en faire un document historique réflexif plutôt qualitatif.

Un livre comme celui ci invite à l’humilité quand on considère la complexité des vrais enjeux politique.
D’une certaine manière si parfois un grand auteur suscite des vocations, d’autres peuvent aussi anéantir, de par leur taille, leur amplitude intellectuelle, les velléités et les somnambulismes vocationel qui peuvent animer ceux qui s’intéresserait à la politique de loin. Lui même bien qu’il ai joué un rôle important s’estime encore en dessous de la tâche de la politique, et a tenté plutôt avec joie d’en être l’éclaireur qui serait le plus prêt possible de la vérité.
On y découvre que la « realpolitik » reste en partie de nombreuses négociations économiques complexes, des diplomaties, des prises en compte étriqués, des interdépendances entre états, systèmes de productions, réflexions sociologiques qui sont bien loin des moralisations sur l’égalité, savoir quelle civilisation est la bonne, l’expansion de l’empire ect…

La pertinence du livre lu dans une époque comme la nôtre ce situe plutôt dans la distance de l’érudition qui se confronte à l’histoire. Ce qui contrastre dramatiquement avec les tentative anti-intellectuelle et irritante(luhmann) des médias qui galvanisent le discours de politiques forcé, de moralisme mielleux, et de prises d’attentions spectaculaires, qui engendrent d’eux même d’autres débat automatiques, et des « contextes » de conversations qui se « gauchiste » et vont à « droite » de manière compulsive et irréfléchie.

Le livre est volumineux et parfois trop lourd en récitation de propos sur lui même vu des autres, ou des longueur théorique, qui justifient peut être un peu trop ces propres propos passé(ce qu’on peut tout de même apprécier pour voir s’il pense que ces idées restent valable ou non)

Quelques Citations et idées:
J’ai toujours pensé la liberté comme une libération progressive: « la délivrance vient de la conscience qui rompt avec les illusions puériles, reconnaît le monde tel qu’il est, et non tel que le rêvent les enfants ou le d��crivent les parents »
L’individu n’est jamais pleinement libre, il continue de délibérer dans les limitations de la continuité de ces engagements passe et de ces décisions.


Méfiance à l’égard des révolutions: toutes les sociétés sont injustes, reste à savoir ce qu’est une société juste et si elle est réalisable. La politique c’est l’art de choisir le moins pire.
Les sociétés modernes et démocratiques ne invoquent des idéaux en une large mesure irréalisable et par la voix des gouvernements aspirent à une maîtrise inaccessible de leur destin.

A major intellectual figure of the 20th century, who managed to be fair and cautious in his predictions at a time when Sartre and other intellectuals plunged into communism, socialism and Maoism with abandon and sometimes a passionate desire to be making history. Aron maintained a rather cold attitude, sometimes polemical in his youth, but often more reserved, and in search of a "reason" for the lesser evil.


There are portraits of many intellectuals in rapid succession. Their attitudes, their remarks, a few words on the spirit of the times.
Historically rich, for an overview of the 20th century from the point of view of an eminent intellectual, through war, philosophy, journalism and the formation of his intellectual itinerary.
From nascent socialism, to the colonizations of Algeria and Vietnam, to May '68, the position of Russia, American hegemony and the Soviet era, the book's dialogues and polemics make it a rather qualitative, reflective historical document.

A book like this is a humbling reminder of the complexity of the real political issues at stake.
In a way, if sometimes a great author arouses vocations, others can also, by their size and intellectual amplitude, annihilate the vocational ambitions and somnambulisms that can animate those remotely interested in politics. Even though he has played an important role, he still considers himself to be below the task of politics, and has rather happily tried to be a pathfinder as close as possible to the truth.
We discover that "realpolitik" remains in part a matter of complex economic negotiations, diplomacy, narrow-minded consideration of interdependencies between states, production systems, sociological reflections that are far removed from moralizing about equality, which civilization is the right one, empire expansion and so on...

The relevance of a book read in an age like ours lies rather in the distance between scholarship and history. This contrasts dramatically with the anti-intellectual and irritating (Luhmann) attempts of the media to galvanize the discourse of forced politics, honeyed moralism, and spectacular attention-grabbing, which themselves engender other automatic debates, and "contexts" of conversations that compulsively and thoughtlessly "go left" and "go right".

The book is voluminous and sometimes too heavy in reciting statements about himself as seen from others, or theoretical lengths, which perhaps justify his own past statements a little too much (which can still be appreciated to see if he thinks these ideas are still valid or not).

Some quotes and ideas:
I've always thought of freedom as a gradual liberation: "deliverance comes from the conscience that breaks with childish illusions, recognizing the world as it is, and not as children dream it or parents describe it".
The individual is never fully free, but continues to deliberate within the limitations of the continuity of these past commitments and decisions.


Mistrust of revolutions: all societies are unjust, the question is what is a just society, and whether it can be achieved. Politics is the art of choosing the lesser evil.
Modern, democratic societies invoke ideals that are largely unattainable, and through their governments aspire to an unattainable mastery of their destiny.

[Pessoa · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found the parts about Aron's life very interesting, but the book became a tad bit boring when he delved into theorizing. Half of the time it didn't feel like memoirs.

[Jarno Mehtiö · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mielenkiintoiset muistelmat ei-vasemmistolaiselta ranskalaiselta intellektuellista. Yhdestä harvoista. Aron kiinnostanut sekä edeltä mainitusta syystä että Tony Judtin kehujen takia pidempään.

Muistelmat kävivät läpi ei ehkä niin tyypilliseen tapaan Aronin elämänvaiheita Sartren vuosikurssi-
ja ystävänä ENS:ssä, akateemista elämää ennen maailmansotaa sekä sen jälkeistä akateemista toimintaa Sorbonnen ja College de Francen proffana sekä yhtenä merkittävimmistä kolumnisteista ja julkisista intelektuelleista.

Mikäli Ranskan historia, politiikka ja filosofia ei ole tuttuja. Kirjan ei ehkä ole kaikkein helpoimmasta päästä. Ainakin nimet ja jonkinlainen käsitys mm. saksalaisesta fenomenologiasta, Kantista, Husserlista, Heideggerista, eksistenialismista, Meralu-Ponty, Kajavesta, Hegelistä ja Marxista on hyödyksiä. Ei tosiaan mitään nykyaikaista blogitekstiä ja "kaikilla on kivaa" löpinää.

[Patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

J'ai reçu ce pavé en cadeau à sa parution en 83- je l'ai lu 40 ans après... une lecture aride de cet intellectuel majeur du 20e, qui se dévoile assez peu finalement. Philosophe formé par la sociologie allemande devenu politologue et journaliste sans jamais abandonner l'université, fin connaisseur de Marx à u e époque où tout le monde s'en réclame sans l'avoir lu. Les développements sur l'affrontement entre les régimes libéraux de l'ouest et le régime totalitaire soviétique sont un peu datés, mais on se demande ce que Aron aurait écrit sur le régime de Poutine et la guerre en Ukraine. Aron était anticolonialiste, critique envers de Gaulle (qu'il avait rejoint à Londres), mais aussi clairement anticommuniste, à l'époque des intellectuels "compagnons de route". Des pages fortes sur ses relations avec Sartre son "petit camarade".
Bon, je vais pouvoir passer à autre chose!

[Alain · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wordy, but profound, erudite, captivating. I think the man Aron deserves 5 stars for having lived the life he lived, for his personal choices and ideas, resisting the pull to conform from the French intellectuals (of which Sartre was a superstar). But he may have told this in less than so many pages, and with a little bit of humor to make it more human.

[RAVAGE777 · Rating 2 out of 5]

This nigga bruh 5 pages on 16yo->30yo ????

[Grégoire Et · Rating 5 out of 5]

Le livre qui a changé ma vie.