James Burnham: The Prophet of the Managerial Age

James Burnham remains one of the most significant, if frequently overlooked, architects of modern American conservative thought. A former Trotskyist who broke with Marxism in 1940, Burnham spent the remainder of his life providing a cold, realist dissection of power dynamics in the 20th century. His work transitioned from the radical left to the foundational right, where William F. Buckley Jr. eventually hailed him as the “number one intellectual influence” on National Review.

The Rise of the Managerial Class

Burnham’s primary contribution to political theory was his 1941 work, The Managerial Revolution. He argued that the world was moving away from traditional capitalism toward a new social structure: managerialism. In this system, power is held neither by owners of property nor by the working class, but by a “managerial elite” of technocrats, bureaucrats, and administrators.

According to Burnham, as modern industry and government grew more complex, they required specialized expertise that traditional capitalists lacked. Consequently, this new class seized control of the “commanding heights” of economy and culture. He viewed the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and even FDR’s New Deal as different variations of this global managerial trend.

Elite Strategy and the “Suicide” of Liberalism

In his subsequent works, Burnham refined this realist lens. In The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom (1943), he argued that politics is an eternal struggle for power among elites. Drawing on theorists like Vilfredo Pareto and Gaetano Mosca, he contended that democracy is only possible when competing elite factions check one another’s power, preventing any single group from achieving total dominance.

By 1964, Burnham turned his attention to the ideological state of the West in Suicide of the West. He famously characterized modern liberalism not as a solution to civilizational problems, but as a “syndrome” facilitating the West’s decline. He argued that liberal guilt and an obsession with universalism weakened the West’s “will to survive” against external threats like Soviet expansionism.

Legacy and Modern Relevance

Burnham’s influence is visible today in the works of writers like Michael Lind and the late Samuel Francis, who utilized “managerial class” theory to explain contemporary populist revolts. His focus on institutional jameskburnhamdds.com capture and the “administrative state” continues to provide a framework for paleoconservative and neoconservative critiques of modern governance. While some of his specific predictions—such as the inevitability of totalitarian victory in WWII—failed, his analysis of the technocratic elite remains a cornerstone of political realism.

Would you like to explore how his managerial theory compares to contemporary critiques of the “Administrative State”?