ably difficult to reconcile the Colonel’srnrestraint toward foreign dictators with hisrnconstant harping on domestic tyranny,”rnBut there is nothing to reconcile. On thernfront page of the Tribune for Septemberrn21,1943, one of McCormick’s best politicalrncartoonists, Carey Orr, vividly illustratedrnthe Colonel’s critique of the risingrnwelfare-warfare state: “Dictators on thernHome Front” depicts a glum-lookingrnUncle Sam locked in a stockade, representingrnthe “regimentation of the Americanrnpeople”; standing beside him is arnNew Deal bureaucrat in spectacles,rnbrandishing a set of keys and declaring,rn”Well, I’ve accomplished my main warrnobjective!” This point was made inrnprint—before, during, and after WorldrnWar II —in countless Tribune editorials.rnCould Smith, the McCormick expert,rnpossibly have missed it?rnWhile duly reciting the facts. Smithrnfails adequately to describe the emotionalrnand political atmosphere of the immediaternprewar era, when the interventionistrncampaign to bring in the UnitedrnStates and save the British Empirernreached fever pitch. He mentions, forrnexample, that the Tribune “found spacernto print the isolationist creed of LillianrnGish as delivered to a Chicago rally inrnMarch 1941,” and quotes a line from thernColonel’s letter to the famed actress:rn”Few professional people dare antagonizernthe organized forces of the Colonials.”rnHe neglects to tell us that MissrnGish was soon forced to recant her creed,rnrefrain from speaking at antiwar rallies,rnand resign her seat on the national committeernof America First without makingrnpublic the reason—namely, her inabilityrnto find work as a result of her antiwar activities,rnand a $60,000 contract offeredrnon the condition that she disassociaternherself from America First and cease herrnpublic speaking. He mentions the concertedrneffort by government agencies, inrncooperation with British intelligence, torndiscredit leaders of the America FirstrnCommittee, but does not go into anyrndetail. While he recites the bare factsrnof FDR’s continuing campaign to silence,rncensor, and ultimately put the Tribunernon trial for “espionage,” he fails tornreport the widespread support for suchrnefforts among the opinion-making elites.rnWhen the Tribune revealed FDR’s secretrn”Victory Plan,” hatched long beforernPearl Harbor, for a million-plus Americanrn”expeditionary force” to Europe,rnSmith tells us that the Presidenf s initialrnreaction was “to send Marines to occupyrnTribune Tower,” but fails to note thatrnthis act would have evoked cheers fromrnthe journalistic chorus. Reporting on arnmeeting of the Overseas Writers Associationrnattended by several prominent governmentrnofficials. New York Daily Newsrncolumnist John O’Donnell quoted thernadvice of the assembled writers to theirrnfriends in high places: “Get him on hisrnincome tax, or the Mann Act. Hangrnhim, shoot him or lock him up in a concentrationrncamp” (New York Daily News,rnMarch 30, 1942). In late March 1942, arndelegation of journalists (includingrnGeorge Seldes and William Shirer) metrnwith Attorney General Francis Biddlernand urged him to take action againstrnthe “copperhead” McCormick. WalterrnWinchell yapped that the Tribune wasrnactively helping the Axis powers. ThernChicago Sun ran an ad accusing McCormickrnof treason, and the Chicagornchapter of Americans for DemocraticrnAction put out a pamphlet echoing therncharge, while adding a few of its own andrncalling for “all justified legal steps” to berntaken against the Tribune. In failing tornsketch the context of the Roosevelt administration’srnwar against the Colonel,rnSmith abdicates his role as an historian.rnThe result is that much of the urgencyrnand drama of the duel between McCormickrnand the President is lost, andrnthe text—just when it ought to becomernexciting—takes on a perfunctory air.rnSmith is far too busy psychoanalyzingrnhis subject to take the Colonel’s ideas seriously:rn”His hatreds made him whole,”rnwrites Smith, in a typical passage. “Theyrnhelped ward off depression, excuse hisrnisolation, and keep him in the spotiight.”rnIn Smith’s view, McCormick did notrnhave any ideas worth examining atrnlength, only “hatreds” whose expressionrnexplained the Tribune’s editorial line.rnLiving before the invention of Prozac,rnthe Colonel gave vent to a primitivernsubstratum of thought that, for Smithrnand his liberal confreres, is beyond thernpale.rnOf course, the medicalization of rightwingrnpolitics is a classic smear techniquernfirst developed in Theodor Adorno’s ThernAuthoritarian Personality (1950), a massiverncollaborative work that tried torndemonstrate the psychopathologicalrnroots of “conservative-authoritarian”rnthought. Adorno and his associates diagnosedrnopponents of Franklin Rooseveltrnas afflicted by a “usurpation complex”rnand a deep unconscious fear that theirrnparents were not their real family. Shornrnof its Reichian-Marxist jargon, Adorno’srnwork was taken up by the postwar defendersrnof the corporate liberal statusrnquo, and applied to the “radical right” ofrnthe 1950’s and early 60’s. SociologistrnDaniel Bell, in his 1962 essay “ThernDispossessed,” described the hard rightrnas “outside the political pale, insofar as itrnrefuses to accept the American consensus.”rnBell’s essay later appeared in anrnanthology. The New American Rightrn(1963). The unifying theme of the anthologyrnwas an examination of “the neglectedrnsocio-psychological elements inrnpseudo-conservatism,” as Richard Hofstadterrn—inventor of the phrase “the paranoidrnstyle in American politics”—put it.rnFollowing Hofstadter’s example. Smithrnemploys “paranoid” to describe McCormick’srnopposition to the U.N., to thernNew Deal, and to British banking andrnother interests whose military and financialrnrescue was accomplished whenrnAmerica entered the war.rnIt may indicate a touch of right-wingrn”paranoia” on my part to note thatrnSmith’s sustained assault on the memoryrnand legacy of Colonel McCormick wasrncommissioned by officials of the RobertrnR. McCormick-Tribune Foundation,rnbut it is worth mentioning just the same,rnif only as an ironic commentary on therntragic degeneration of a newspaper dynastyrnand the regional political culturernit once championed. As the official biographerrngiven full access not only to thernColonel’s papers but to those of his familyrnand to the corporate records of the Tribune,rnSmith was apparently intended torndebunk, denounce, and delegitimize hisrnsubject beyond all redemption. In thisrnhe did not succeed: McCormick’s vividrnpersonality, and the natural appeal of hisrndistinctively American brand of politics,rnshine through the murk of even ProfessorrnSmith’s prose. One can only hopernthat some enterprising scholar will onernday write the kind of biography thernColonel deserves, paying proper tributernto his bravery in the face of repressionrnand his continuing influence on therncourse of American politics. In the filesrnof the old Tribune, and in the life of itsrnpublisher, practically the whole story ofrnthe Old Right is contained: its plainspokenrnpopulism, its distrust of the OldrnWorld, and its libertarian ferocity combinedrnin the uncompromising fightrnagainst overwhelming odds. This is a storyrnworth knowing and telling: one day itrnwill be told.rn28/CHRONlCLESrnrnrn