700
PARTISAN REVIEW
''Earthiness,'' not correspondence to reality, is the prime requirement. As
a matter of fact, "earthiness" here stands for resentment against reality,
for anything in reality that is not factual and does not lead to a factual
System. Among other things, this resentment manifests itself rather na–
turally-as Milosz points out in the case of the conversion of his ex–
colleague Alpha-in the form of "anger
against the losers."
An irresistible
feeling, when the only choice left seems to be the one between justifica–
tion of the winners and "empty nothingness." The losers are the Devil.
First of all, because they are responsible for the rigor of the present
state of affairs and whatever is bad in it; without them, the System would
have started to function under more favorable (i.e., "ideal") conditions.
Secondly, because they were "spiritualists," as their defeat clearly proves.
And, thirdly, because if they were not utterly stupid and wrong, reality
would become ambiguous again; the stark facts, whose meaning the
System has settled forever, would again come to haunt one's mind.
Proving Communism wrong and wicked is not a very interesting en–
terprise by now. The proof can be reached on the ground of facts and
simple evidence.
As
for the Diamat, it is, of course, as Milosz says, "noth–
ing more than nineteenth century vulgarized to the second power."
In it, "history and every branch of human creativity are presented as
governed by unshakable and
already known
laws." "Centuries of
human
history ... are reduced to a few generalized terms. Undoubtedly, one
comes closer to the truth when one sees history as the expression of the
class struggle rather than a series of private quarrels among kings and
nobles. But precisely because such an analysis of history comes closer
to the truth, it is more dangerous. It gives the illusion of
full knowledge;
it supplies answers to all questions, answers which simply run around in
a circle.... What's more, the humanities get connected with the natural
sciences thanks to the materialistic outlook . . . and so we see the circle
closing perfectly and logically."
Why is such a simplification convincing? Why does the mind of a
man "stick" to it? One obvious answer
is
that it offers the only compre–
hensive and univocal explanation of the world that can be derived from
nineteenth-century philosophy and science, the only one that can
be
vulgarized, made accessible to everybody. The Diamat is the
reductio ad
absurdum
of Darwinism, Marxism, and scientific method for the sake
of unity. A
reductio ad absurdum
does not prove that certain notions are
wrong, but it certainly raises a question about them. In any case, it
seems to imply the recognition that the need for a coherent, if not
uni–
vocal and dogmatic, image of the world is a permanent need of man,
not an invention of metaphysicians and theologians.
