312
PARTISAN REVIEW
positions that clearly have become untenable. This is true, for instance,
in the field of "declinism": a recurrent fashion predicts the imminent
decline and fall of the United States, or indeed all other great powers.
When these predictions do not come true, it is always possible to claim
that while the thesis was basically correct, the time frame was not. And
if one waits long enough, almost every such prediction does come true–
later rather than sooner. But there are some who find the admission of
error beyond their endurance.
TALMUD FOR TROTSKYISTS: One recent example should suffice. Before
September
II
it was fashionable among mainstream Middle Eastern
experts to play down the existence of radical groups engaging in terror–
ism.
It
was argued in these quarters that Western observers who per–
sisted in drawing attention to the terrorist phenomenon were not just
ignorant but deliberately malicious in pointing to the existence of
groups like bin Laden'S, that this was a sensationalist industry fabricat–
ing false and even ludicrous information and deliberately trying to poi–
son relations between the West and the Muslim world.
This inclination to ignore the terrorist phenomenon is easy to under–
stand in retrospect; it is more difficult to find explanations for declara–
tions of this kind after September
I I,
Bali, Mombasa, Moscow, and so on.
Professor Joel Beinin of Stanford University is the president of the
Middle East Studies Association (MESA), a leading professional organi–
zation in the field. (MESA has
2,600
members.
It
calls itself "non-polit–
ical," but those perusing its web site may not be entirely convinced by
this statement.)
It
has become somewhat embattled in view of its record
but has apparently retained the support of most of its members. In his
recent presidential address Beinin had angry words about what he called
the new field of terrorology, which is sensationalist and disseminates
ridiculous explanations about alleged global networks of terrorists .
These terrorologists, whom he considers almost as bad as the neocon–
servatives, had their own journals, conferences, and research institutes.
Fortunately, he went on, members of his organization did not take part
in this endeavor, and there was great wisdom in this abstention. For all
the terrorologists did was to draw attention to mere symptoms, thus
impeding genuine and informed research into the deeper roots of ter–
rorism. Thus, in the final analysis, the terrorologists accomplished vir–
tually nothing of intellectual or practical significance: "Their studies
have not noticeably decreased the acts of violence against civilians
throughout the world."
