172
PARTISAN REVIEW
a fair social price for political cooperation. They serve as con–
venient tails to one or the other of the two main political kites.
They magnify trivial differences between these parties into great
issues of principle, shamelessly reversing themselves from year
to year and place to place instead of building a reservoir of power
from the steady flow of justified resentment, social vision and
knowledge, which springs from the experiences of the masses with
old line politics. They channel this potential power into the same
political ditches, with new slogans that center on the excitements
of the moment. As practical men they scorn all theories and then
show by their practices that they are victimized by incompatible
theories. Every time they make a deal they justify it on the reason–
able ground that they are choosing between fascist reaction and
democratic liberalism. And were this in fact the choice, they
would be justified many times over. But to date we have never
been confronted by such a choice in America, and their subsequent
abrupt reversals in position expose the hollowness of their pre–
tense that we have. What a chatter they made about Landon's
dangerous tendencies in 1936 and Willkie's incipient fascism in
1940! We can safely predict that they will say the same thing
about Roosevelt's political opponent in 1944 in order to justify
their failure to pursue independent political action.
2. The second expression of political unrealism is the extent
of their dependence upon individual leaders-Roosevelt and Wal–
lace in America, Churchill in England-to win their social battles
for them. Few things are more amazing than the sight of those
who are social determinists-in however modified a fashion–
wallowing in the euphoria of hero-worship. For most of the Amer–
ican Left, it would be no exaggeration to say that Roosevelt has
taken the place of a program. His intentions are good, he knows
best, some of his closest friends are liberals, some of his worst
enemies are labor-haters-why spoil matters with carping criti–
cism so long as Hitler remain undefeated? That is the new political
theme song. And what if, as a result of present war-policies, Hitler
still remains undefeated? What if big business is permitted to
sabotage the war effort when new industrial processes and demands
of a war economy threaten its capital investments? What if the
social gains of the New Deal, which were not Roosevelt's free
gifts-but concessions to keep capitalism on an even keel-are
