Comment
THE WORLD ACCORDING TO NORMAN
1.
Norman
Radical belief has often been likened
to
religious faith. But
religious conversion usually comes later in life, and there are fewer
deconversions. Rarely is a shedding of belief dramatic or followed by
a violent swing lO the extremes of disbelief. Yet the political history of
American and European intellectuals, particularly since the thirties,
consists largely of youthful conversions to some form of radicalism
and subsequent disillusion , frequently involving a shift
to
strong
antiradical views. Many of us who broke with the communists in the
thirties and have tried since then to maintain our political balance
have watched with dismay and sadness how many of our friends and
colleagues have somersaulted into the camp of the conservatives.
Neoconservatism, the most recent movement to the right, has become
the euphemism for a variety of former radicals and latecomers who
have moved to positions ranging from mild conservatism to total
reaction.
One of the recent swingers is Norman Podhoretz, editor of
Commentary,
who was mildly left through the sixties, then gradually
reversed himself, and now is a leading figure in the neoconservative
fraternity. Podhoretz's account of his intellectual history in his
political memoir,
Breaking Ranks,
which was intended lO explain
and justify his political shifts, does not make them more acceptable or
attractive. Unfortunately, he justifies more than he explains. The drift
of his argument in defense of his present position is that he has come
lO see not only Russia , but the entire left as a threat to America and
to
all civilized values, which seem to be identical.
Now there would be little disagreement and no need for high–
powered polemics if all Podhoretz were saying was that in the present
situation America is better than Russia and worth defending or that a
part of the liberal left supports backward and dictalOrial regimes and
