INTELLECTUALS AND POLITICS
599
respond fully to them would require an act of textual analysis–
of deconstruction-since almost every sentence contains a false
assumption, a misstatement of fact, a hidden piece of ideology, or
a distortion of the view of people who disagree with them, in–
cluding myself.
In general, what Brooks and Dickstein are presenting in the
guise of political thinking is an echo of the ideology into which
a part of the left has buried its head in Germany and England.
It
is neither socialist, nor social democratic, nor revolutionary,
nor even Marxist. It reflects that unthinking sector of radical
opinion in the peace and disarmament movement that has no
program for the prevention of war other than a vague call for a
reduction in arms-often for unilateral disarmament. Claiming
to
be critical of the Soviet Union, its emphasis is anti-American.
It
underestimates systematically the aims and the power of the Soviet
Union.
It
is automatically against any increase in American arma–
ment. It mocks the idea of deterrence as a preventive of nuclear war,
which it seems to conceive of as an instrument of American ag–
gression.
It
talks of the cold war as though it were an American
invention.
It
exploits real and politically induced fears of a nu–
clear holocaust.
It
is above all anti-anticommunist: opposed to all
varieties of anticommunism, from the liberals to the conserva–
tives, lumping them all together for polemical purposes.
The world according to Dickstein and Brooks projects a very
selective picture of what is going on today.
It
consists of the peace
movement, disarmament, American warmongering, Salvador,
Nicaragua, the Palestinians, the MX missile, the cold war liberals.
This is a familiar scenario that in this country is found in such
weighty and objective publications as
The Nation
and
The Vil–
lage Voice.
Where are Poland, Afghanistan, Syria, the PLO,
Cambodia, the Arab terrorists with links to the Soviet Union, the
communist guerrillas in various part of the world, helped poli–
tically, financially, and militarily by the Cubans and other com–
munist countries? Where is the question of the economies of
America and Western Europe? Where is there any indication of
interest in the survival of Western democratic society? Where is
there any indication that the French socialists-and intellectuals
-unlike the German and American pacifists, want to defend their
country-and themselves?
This ideological ensemble draws on the moral credit of the
