PARTISAN REVIEW
A political meeting at which a considerable bloc of Wallaceites is
present can instruct us. The moral and emotional response of the crowd
is being corrupted by this movement, and exposes the political reality.
Any insult of an American leader or crack at American policy gets its
admiring laughter and applause; each defense, no matter how fantastic,
of Soviet policy is applauded and cheered.
Or we may test in this way. Take a Wallaceite (who is not a Com–
munist Party member). Discuss with him, rationally, Wallace's record,
and his social and economic views. Show him-it is not difficult-the
emptiness, absurdity, internal contradictions. He will not be shaken
with the least quiver of doubt. Prove even that Wallace is an "appeaser,"
an aid to the Communists. It will be still as before. But if you forget all
about Wallace, and, somehow (it is not easy), bring him face to face
with the problem of Stalinism; if you convince him of the truth about
Stalinism, then in that same moment of conviction he departs from the
Wallace camp.
But, I am told by liberal and socialist and good-willed and anti–
Communist friends, there is after all more to the Wallace movement
than just the one fact you are obsessed with. After all he has
some
"good ideas," both in negative criticism of our society and in positive
program. I, who am of course a fanatic, reply: no; you are sentimental–
izing; he has no good ideas, not one.
A political idea is not a thing-in-itself; it cannot be separated from
those who hold it, from what is done with it. But is not protest against
racial discrimination a good idea? Not Wallace's protest: because in
political fact
his
protest is an instrument not for improving racial rela–
tions but for exacerbating them beyond healing, as the Stalinists know,
and have so long planned. (Cf., for empirical proof, the Isacson Con–
gressional campaign in the Bronx.) Is it not a good idea to defend
civil rights? Not Wallace's defense: because that means, politically,
unrestricted freedom for NKVD agents to carry out their assignments.
(Cf., the Eisler case.) But Peace, Peace surely is a good idea? Not
Wallace's Peace. His Peace means, politically: giving the world to
Stalinism. (Cf., his comments on Czechoslovakia, his proposals for
China.)
Politics is simple, and it is coarse. Only one vulgar slogan is required
to sum up the truth: "A vote for Wallace is a vote for Stalin."
James Burnham
704
