READERS who are not already well-versed in it may be interested in the hot controversy over attacks launched by David Horowitz’s Front Page Magazine against Diana West’s new book American Betrayal, about the Communist infiltration of the American government in the 1930s, a book which I cannot comment upon because I haven’t read it. At her site, West has many responses to what appears to amount to vicious denunciation. At Family Security Matters, Michael McCann yesterday wrote:

Why, then the visceral, personal attack on Diana West by Frontpage Mag? The revelations of her powerful narrative seemed to have rocked the boat. When I read David Horowitz’s initial editorial response, I honestly wondered if he read the same book I read or if he had, indeed, read the book at all. After attacking her competency, Horowitz writes, “West has already shown herself to be a very angry, very self-centered and a very reckless partisan, with a paranoid streak and a disposition to think in extreme terms that have only a tenuous and deceptive relation to the truth.” With effort, I can think of a few people who might fit this description but the least likely is Diana West.

I categorically reject his statement, word for word, as having no basis in truth. Such a statement cannot be surmised or even remotely construed from her recent book or from any of her many articles with which I am familiar. Where, how and why did Horowitz come up with this? As regards to competency, her work speaks for itself. This is not the problem. But when he says, “It’s not about our desire to suppress West’s ideas…”, I would say, it is exactly about suppressing her ideas and doing so immediately before they gain more traction. Moreover, the venom and stridency of this unwarranted attack goes beyond all bounds of decency. How does one characterize the attempt to destroy someone and a reputation built over a lifetime? There is no instance in which this O.K. A dispassionate collegial dispute among peers would have been of benefit to all. What we observe is Horowitz’s authoritarianism bordering on the sadistic with the obvious and singular goal to humiliate, cause pain and destroy. This is as readily apparent as it is reprehensible.

— Comments —

James P. writes:

It is amusing that National Review contains a review of West’s book that attacks her for “defaming FDR.” Has so-called conservatism now dragged itself so far to the Left that “conservatives” now feel they must defend Roosevelt and all his works? Apparently so. I am pretty sure I remember a time when National Review did not speak so highly of FDR, especially with regards to his foreign policy.

I have not read Betrayal, but I have read Paul Kengor’s book Dupes, which argues that the American Left was consistently gulled by the Soviets. I found the book unsatisfying because he constantly gives the dupes the benefit of the doubt — i.e., they were suckers, not traitors. Personally I think West is closer to the mark and “betrayal” is exactly the right word for how the Left behaved from 1917 to 1991.

Douglas writes:

I have also been following the controversy at FrontPage Mag. I have not read Diana West’s book. However, over the past few years, I have noticed the website has taken up many causes that are not conservative. I have wondered if this is a case of the editors trying to seem fair and balanced or are they really beginning to lean left. Lawrence Auster told of his being banned as one of their contributors. He did not believe they were actual conservatives.

I have posted many comments asking them why they do not weigh all the evidence and why they still consider Joe McCarthy to be so despicable. Ann Coulter wrote a good book about Joe McCarthy with good references which led me to read Whitaker Chamber’s “Witness.” A very good read I might add. This was an eye-opening book. With the release of the Verona documents, his story has been substantiated. Mr. Horowitz seems to disregard all this.

I wonder if the fact that Mr. Horowitz’s parents did suffer under McCarthy’s hunt for Communist influences his thoughts on this matter.

Bjorn Larsen writes:

You may remember the shabby treatment Lawrence Auster received from Horowitz a number of years ago – a far worse set of salvos is now being directed at Diana. It illustrates the perfect storm that erupts when someone challenges a serious dogma, even amongst free-speech advocates.

Joe A. writes:

At one point in my life as a youthful activist, I knew David Horowitz on a first name basis.  My copy of Radical Son was a personal gift to me and others who dined with him one night in the 1990s.

The entire substance of the book was his birth to a family of genuine Soviet spies, dispatched from Ukraine, with orders to assimilate to the American society, gain its trust and subvert it for the Soviet Union’s purposes.  He described secret cell meetings in the basement of his Brooklyn home; how his parents worked to “stack” public meetings with Fellow Travellers and fellow spies to give the appearance of widespread agreement with subversive proposals.

Later in the book he tells his story of his generation – the Red Diaper Babies – who would recreate the cause as the New Left, correcting the errors of their parents’ Stalinesque excesses.  “Compassionate Communism” I think would be a fair description.

Finally he tells his story of conversion to anti-Communism at the murder of Betty van Patter and his subsequent ostracism from the Left on a personal basis.

I have often wondered at such “conversions.”  Does a man truly change in his heart?  Or is it merely a reaction to an extreme event subject to eventual homeostasis?

It would not surprise me to learn David Horowitz, faced with his impending mortality after a turbulent life, desired to reconcile with his once-self and return home again, to end as he began.

Certainly he would not be the first, or last, to do so.  But it means we must also keep an open mind when assessing our friends and allies.  Perhaps there is more to life than politics (shocking!) but it is not possible to remove politics from life. Come Lord Jesus, come.

James P. writes:

On McCarthy, Stanton Evans Blacklisted By History is a must-read.

Please follow and like us: