Morris Janowitz (October 22, 1919 – November 7, 1988) was an American sociologist and professor who made major contributions to sociological theory, the study of prejudice, urban issues, and patriotism.
He was one of the founders of military sociology and made major contributions, along with Samuel P. Huntington, to the establishment of contemporary civil-military relations.
[4] After graduating from Washington Square College, he worked for the Library of Congress and the Justice Department Special War Policies Unit.
The compilation of 40 volumes in the Heritage series led Janowitz to reflect upon the philosophical foundations for sociology, recalling influential pragmatists such as George Herbert Mead, Sydney Hook, and perhaps most importantly, John Dewey.
[9] Janowitz remained in the department until his retirement in 1987, focusing more heavily on his academic pursuits, which culminated into a trilogy of books published between 1976 and 1983: Social Control of the Welfare State, The Last Half-Century, and The Reconstruction of Patriotism.
[11] In 1953 Janowitz summoned a group of scholars, including Samuel P. Huntington, to Ann Arbor, Michigan to discuss the future study of the armed forces.
[4] The Professional Soldier was a major accomplishment and established the study of the military as a sub-field in sociology by creating a "fertile research agenda" which other scholars could and still do follow.
[2] It remains one of the foundational works in the area of civil-military relations,[12] and was particularly important given that previous foci of sociology had avoided the study of the armed forces.
This led Janowitz to develop a dichotomous epistemic framework, consisting of two competing perspectives about the proper use of the armed forces in international relations.
These efforts culminated into the development of a trilogy of books published between 1976 and 1983: Social Control and the Welfare State, The Last Half-Century, and The Reconstruction of Patriotism.
After the end of World War II, many began to question the role and size of the peace-time U.S. military, arguing against increased militarization of American culture.
Huntington's liberal theory of civil-military relations seemed to flow from thinkers like Thomas Hobbes, who advocated that the role of the military was to protect society from threats emerging from the state of nature present in international relations, unbound by the social contract; and John Stuart Mill, who argued strenuously that the military must be regulated and controlled by the state so that it may not pursue its own objectives counter to democratic society.
[citation needed] Janowitz's theory of civil-military relations, on the other hand, seemed to recall the ancient Roman republic, which embraced external conflict as a motivating and cohering force for domestic culture, and encouraged civic participation and a sense of "citizenship" necessary for the maintenance of the nation.
The other problem with Huntington's theory is that it advocated for a more conservative realism in international relations, requiring a more "spartan" cultural attitude unacceptable to the American people.
Sociology had been weakly tied to pragmatism at the Chicago School through George Herbert Mead and the theory of symbolic interaction, which emphasized a micro-social research agenda.