76
PARTISAN REVIEW
evidence from those Grenada papers, however, suggests that Bishop
and his cadre conned Harrington, who reserved his anger for those
Social Democrats who saw reality more clearly than he and who per–
sisted in telling the truth.
And yet, there is much to admire about Michael Harrington.
He has an enduring hope that the majority of human beings on our
planet can somehow democratically control the conditions of their
life. He has single-handedly not let us forget the evil and injustice of
grueling poverty in the richest country in the world, and he has
worked around the clock to build a political movement he hopes will
lead towards that goal. How sad that this quest has, in recent years,
pushed him uncritically towards the far left, and led him to support
politicians and movements hardly worthy of his concern and best
political efforts.
-R.R.
•
•
•
Ronald Radosh's review of my recent life - if not of my re–
cent book - argues that, in a noble quest for a beautiful dream, I
have moved "uncritically towards the left," supporting "politicians
and movements hardly worthy of ... [my] concern and best politi–
cal efforts." Why did I thus betray my otherwise decent self?
Because I was "seeking an opening to the avowed antidemo–
cratic left - including fellow travelers who may have broken with the
old pro-Moscow Communist Party, but whose intellectual orbit and
political practice had not strayed beyond the point of their origin.
Thus Harrington, who had rejected marching with Communists in
peace marches of the sixties, now sought to have his old enemies join
him in his new organization." More bluntly put, I was an oppor–
tunist and, I would add, a stupid opportunist since it was clear that
the people to whom Radosh refers would not have filled a good-sized
hall, much less served as the basis for a new movement.
Of somewhat more world-historical significance, a similarly
simplistic psychology is used to account for the behavior of the entire
European social democracy in the third world. They, too, are said
to have sold their soul for a mess of Marxism-Leninism.
I will not, the reader will be happy to learn, correct all of
Radosh's errors of fact and polemical exaggerations. What I will do
is to treat a few exemplary questions posed by his critique which
