Politics Was Very Good
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A SHORT HISTORY OF OUR TIME di-lem'ma, 1 di-lem'a; 2 di-lëm'a, n. 1. A necessary choice between equally undesirable alternatives; a per plexing predicament. 2, Logic. A syllogistic argument which presents an antagonist with two (or more) alter natives, but is equally conclusive against him, whichever alternative he chooses. [ < Gr. dilèmma, < di-, two, + lèmma, anything taken.]—dil"em-mat'ic, a. 146 pacifism and the ussr-a discussion 150 battle of the churches in italy, by anton ciliga 155 the socialist labor party, by nathan dershowitz 159 european letter, by nicola chiaromonte 162 an american death camp, by harold orlansky 168 can we cure mental care? by elsie cronhimer 171 ancestors No. 6 - kurt tucholsky: (1) the man with the five pseudonyms, by hans sahl, (2) tucholsky's "testament", (3) herr wendriner under the dictatorship 178 the Wallace cam paign, an autopsy by dwight macdonald 189 commonnonsense, by niccolo tucci 189 remarks on the constitution of the mongolian people's republic, by theodore dryden 191 mr. sindlinger's option on the future, by harvey swados 194 amg in germany, by peter blake 202 the case of the dizzy dean at illinois university 203 on the elections, by dwight macdonald 206 report on packages-to-europe, by nancy macdonald 75c • No. 3,1948 Pacifism and the USSR A DISCUSSION Sir: tical disinterestedness which may at present enable you peacefully to withstand attacks by depraved, demented or May a recent reader comment briefly on what appears sadistic assailants, what would be your attitude if your to be an anomalous situation: the inclusion of the “ Peace wife and children were so threatened? Are you your makers” declaration, signed by the editor, in the very “brother’s keeper,” especially if he is your very own and issue devoted to “ USSR” — i. e., the declaration of absolute a helpless, innocent victim besides? There are crucial ques non-violence in the face of the most horrendous tyranny tions posing the relationship between an absolutistic ethic in world’s history. and its consequences and they are not to be answered by (1) The distinctions, quantitative and qualitative, Tolstoyan evasions or Calhounian flippancies concerning which you draw between USA and USSR leave no doubt the “ Jap raping of grandmothers.” You once approvingly in anyone’s mind that you obviously prefer living in USA. quoted Tucci who said that a man has to love peace the But once recognizing the differences among degrees of way he loves liquor or women— even if it kills him. But evil, as well as the distinction between good and evil, you nothing was said about the moral problem of a love which fail to draw important conclusions. Are not these specific may kill others. moral goods which you defend at present (because they are the only nuclei for a viable, humane society) to be de (4) Finally, isn’t Peacemakers subscribing to the Sta fended also during a war period? Or does it make no dif linist rationale of “ capitalist encirclement” in assuming ference to your ideals that a totalitarian invasion would that the only reason for Russian militarism, expansion and exterminate you completely and leave no pacifist alive mass fear is our military program? It would be more ac to perpetuate them? I think you will agree that Gandhi curate to say that their expansion also has an internal logic and his followers would not have lasted very long had of its own, that the fears of the Russian people do not de they been under Hitler’s rule instead of England’s. And pend upon foreign events but upon what the rulers tell you probably know that no German soldier could have them. And as for our disarmament knocking “ the props entertained lightly the possibility of turning pacifist or of from under the war propaganda” of those leaders, it would committing suicide, because his relatives would have suf merely give them a splendid opportunity (aided by con fered death or imprisonment. trived incidents of the Communist Parties) to bring “ social (2) Non-violence is predicated upon the assumption ist liberation” to Europe and the greater part of Asia. that your action converts the enemy’s hostility to good will. Long Island, N. Y. " m a c k w i n s o n “ Violence,” you Peacemakers maintain, “ cannot remove violence, but only add to it.” There is no denying that in many interpersonal relationships non-violence is effective, Sir: provided that the enemy possessess a sufficient residue of humaneness which can be appealed to. This psychological The spring (USSR) issue of politics was very good. I conversion, however, does not work so simply in inter feel it makes even more clear the following: (1) if Stalin group conflicts and is a complete impossibility when your wins the war, this will be a world catastrophe; (2) if enemy is an invading army not only brutalized by war Stalinism has a certain “ environment of despair,” it is a but previously dehumanized by totalitarian conditioning stable enough political form. Should I be correct on these since the birth of its members. Your attempted “ strikes, points, your position as a pacifist is embarrassed. boycotts and non-cooperation” could elicit nothing but the The war has already started; there is no question of bloodiest retaliation. Violence, incidentally, can remove whether there will be one. The question yet to be decided counter-violence, as well as non-violent resistance. Civilized is what kind of hot war. Rather than for the left intellectu communities throughout history have used violence suc al to oppose the war on pacifist grounds, I feel he should cessfully against disruptive belligerents whose iniquity was support it, and thereby attempt to influence its course. not necessarily the result of the communities’ resolute That last can possibly be done, but the war itself can no desire to “keep the peace.” (3) You affirm that “ Every individual must find for himself the power to lead the life of non-violence and p o litic s brotherhood.” Assuming that you have mastered the mys VOLUME 5, No. 3 (Whole No. 41) SUMMER, 1948 Business Managers: Judy Miller, Nancy Macdonald. Editor: Dwight Macdonald Note POLITICS is published quarterly at 45 Astor Place, New York 3, N. Y., by Politics Publishing Co. Telephone: GRamercy 3-1512. For reasons not unconnected with the postal regulations Subscription: $3 for one year, $5 for two years. Add 30c a year governing second-class matter, the present issue, which ap for Canada, 50 for other foreign countries. Single copy 75c. pears early in November, is officially styled the Summer issue. Copyright November, 1948, by Politics Publishing Co. Reentered as The Editor extends his customary regrets, apologies and second-class matter March 10, 1948, at the post office at New York, N. Y., under the Act of March 3, 1879. condolences to the readers. 146 politics more be stopped than radiations from the sun. The only I said before if Stalinism is granted an environment of thing that could stop the war is God, and He is unreliable. despair, it is a stable political form. It differs from Nazism The pacifist view, I understand, is that nothing is more in this respect, for Nazism was stable only in reference to morally horrible than war, and that to support war the paranoid German nationalism, an artificiality. Stalinism individual and society at large must necessarily become is more adaptive politically, within the framework of re depraved. Also, war “ solves” nothing— no moral good can action and despair. What more overwhelming environment possibly come from it. However, although these views are of world-wide, not just American, despair can be imagined doubtless correct in themselves, I believe they are based than the one I have pictured so briefly? The Soviet Union on a choice that does not exist. The choice is to support or would find itself materially omnipotent, with the earth’s oppose America, not to support or oppose the war. goods and tools, and the Stalinist bureacracy would find If you can grant that the chance of pacifist victory7 in itself in the ideal atmosphere of poison: busy policing a na the USSR has a probability of zero, then let me ask: tion surrounded by stricken barbarians. Under these cir what would be the consequences of a pacifist victory in cumstances, Stalinism could survive indefinitely; no auda America? (Now, if the pacifist bases himself on an ex cious Titos would dare appear. pectation that his principles will never win and therefore If pacifism is morally tenable in the face of the war, never matter—except to his own pure soul— then he is then a different set of consequences must be conceived, supposing its triumph. If this can’t be done, the American certainly a moral parasite. But, I’m sure no sincere pacifist effort against Stalin must be supported. I’d be interested would object to this question, but would welcome it. I to know how and where you disagree. make this point only because there are some people who think it is morally sufficient to support principles outside New York City c a l d e r w i l l i n g h a m the context of application.) Pacifism then wins, and the American people, sick of P.S.: slaughter, refuse to fight another war. There is a total In this letter, I have not tried to do anything more than strike, the armed forces throw down their arms, the war suggest the consequences of a pacifist victory. As things government collapses. And, the exultant message is flashed now stand, on an entirely non-pacifistic basis, it is pos to the Soviet people: friends, join us and disobey your sible to contemplate the chance that the war will remain leaders, etc.! cold, that Stalinism, subjected to the pressure of an Amer What would happen? Stalin would proceed to dispatch ica that would fight, perhaps might disintegrate, via such an expeditionary force to the United States— not for old- defection as that of Tito.