400
PARTISAN REVIEW
What I am saying is that the proposition that the decline of
America will lead
to
the decline of political and intellectual freedom
is a half-truth.
It
does not take into account all the other factors that
create totalitarian parties and regimes. And it ignores the fact that the
affairs of the country have been in the hands of those who
seem
least
capable of dealing with them. Unless one has
some
alternative poli–
tics, one is simply putting one's faith in the people and ideas one
never trusted much in the past. And
if,
as you imply, your position is
that of critical support of the policy of the lesser evil-a position
taken by liberals and radicals when their ideal, long-range program
did not appear to
be
viable-then it
seems
to
me
your critical attitude
should
be
both stronger and clearer.
But aside from the practical and immediate implications of an
argument which is basically an appeal
to
Realpolitic, I think one must
have
some
larger vision,
if
only for intellectual reasons,
some
idea
of a better social order, which would provide a perspective from which
to criticize both the communist and our own societies. Otherwise
one's political identity is dissolved in that jumble of opinions that can
never extricate themselves from the assumptions of the status quo.
Even
if
it is true that America is now the guardian of freedom, this is
at best a reassuring observation, perhaps a fact, but scarcely a theory,
and hardly distinguishable from the ready-made opinions of all the
stalwarts of the popular media. No politics, other than support for
America, follows from such an attitude, support, that is, in the event
of a confrontation with Russia, which in any case few people would
question. Obviously, your own knowledge and insight, for which I
have great respect, are incomparably greater, but they are not given
an adequate outlet in a statement that confines the future of freedom
to the limits of American power.
Hence, the real question is not whether liberty is bound up with
the American future, but how
to
evaluate American policies and mo–
tives. Obviously, reactionaries would have widely different estimates
and programs from those of socialists, for example.
You speak of the change in the ratio of American
to
Soviet
power, but of the persistence of the "fellow-travelling" mind as a
constant. Here, too, I think you are fight. However, I believe you are
wrong in your assessment of its importance and its influence. In the
