Rosenstock-Huessy offers this synopsis of the beliefs of Dewey’s pragmatic followers:

1. God is immanent in society.
2. “Hman speech is merely a tool, not an inspiration; a set of words, not a baptism by fire.” Dewey exhorts us to find a new set of words to formulate a new “moral ideal.” In a response reminiscent of Flannery O’Connor, Rosenstock-Huessy says, in effect, if it’s only a “set of words,” then to hell with it.

3. “Society includes all men regardless of their evil character. Everybody can be educated or re-educated. The body politic needs no self-purification.”
4. The voice of authority is “always out of place. Conflicts can be solved by discussions between equals.”

Rosenstock-Huessy suggests similarities between Dewey and Confucius: Both lived safely within an unthreatened empire, both encourage us to stay calm, to get excited about nothing. Both tell us to keep smiling placidly, and Dewey adds an American ingredient by encouraging us to expect painless, unending progress. As Rosenstock-Huessy puts it, “Confucius and Dewey are very wise, very old, very kind and patient, very sure of being on the inside. Hence, prudence, justice, temperance, industry, self-control are their virtues. Cannot the murder be improved, the wicked be enlightened, the wars abolished?”

What irks Rosenstock-Huessy about this American Confucius is that he is entirely dependent on Christian capital, which has cultivated the more militant passions that Dewey eschews. Dewey ignores the cross that was necessary to create the social order he inhabits, and assumes that it will continue and improve without any further crosses to bear.