abounded: crime, drunkenness, corruption, environmentalndestruction, declining public health, the misery of old-agenpensioners, the disintegration of the family, shortages ofnfood and basic commodities, declining living standards,nold-fashioned poverty — the socialist countries had them all,nand they were getting worse, not better. Under statensocialism alienation, too, became a malaise that held in itsngrip not only idealistic intellectuals with high expectationsn(as has been the case in the West), but the masses ofnordinary people as well. No sense of purpose, community,nor optimism, but a new sense of stagnation and decline,neven decomposition, became the hallmark of these countries.nWhile Western intellectuals continued to dwell on andnlament the ravages and injustices of capitalism, socialistnsystems increasingly acknowledged the failures of the statecontrolledneconomy — its massive inefficiency and lack ofnproductivity, its inability to meet human needs. Cautiously,nsocialist leaders sought to reintroduce private enterprise.nThere is a huge irony in all this. While state-controlledneconomies were in spectacular decline and leaders ofnsocialist countries began to gradually dismantle the ideologicalnfoundation of these malfunctioning institutions, Marxismncontinued to bask in the reverence of academicnintellectuals in the West. These Westerners continued toncling to it while in the countries where Marxism has beennthe centerpiece of the official value system, a guide tonpractice and major source of legitimacy, it became a totallyndiscredited and irrelevant doctrine, and not only for thenmasses (who never embraced or understood it), but also fornthe intelligentsia.nFor the most part, the estranged, adversarial intellectualsnin the West have resolutely averted their eyes from thesendevelopments, from the resounding moral and materialnfailures of these state socialist countries. They are especiallyndisinclined to detect any connection between the ideas andnideals of Marxism-Leninism and the sorry state of affairs innthe Communist bloc.nThe persistence of these attitudes can be linked to theninstitutionalization of the values that motivated the protestnmovements of the 1960’s, and gave rise to, the adversarynculture. Signs of the survival of these political and culturalnvalues have been numerous and hard to miss. They includenthe candidacy of Jesse Jackson in both the 1984 and 1988npresidential campaigns, and the support he received notnonly among blacks (not relevant for this argument), butnamong the white liberals and especially the academicncommunity.nAnother reflection of the persistence and influence of thenadversary culture has been the successful frustration, attributablenin large measure to the highly-organized pro-nSandinista lobby, of the efforts of the Reagan administrationnto sustain the anticommunist guerrillas of Nicaragua.nA third indication has been the virtually completentriumph of the moral equivalence school in public discoursen— the belief that there are no moral distinctions worthnmaking between the American and Soviet political systems,nand that both deserve to be viewed with equal cynicismn(though on closer inspection the upholders of this theoryntend to be far more critical of the United States than thenUSSR). A recent version of the moral equivalence argu­nment was made by J. Anthony Lukacs in The New YorknTimes in March. According to Lukacs, the death sentencenpassed on Salman Rushdie by the Ayatollah Khomeini couldnbe compared to the rage American veterans felt at thentrampling of the American flag at an art exhibit in Chicago.nA fourth manifestation of the adversary culture may benfound in its continued growth and entrenchment in townsncontrolled or dominated by radical-left groups. Usually thesenare campus towns — such as Berkeley, Santa Cruz, SantanMonica, Ann Arbor, Madison, Burlington, Amherst.nThe recent movement to reform the curriculum in thencolleges and universities so as to enhance its “non-Westerii”ningredients may also be seen as a reflection of this mindset.nThe “multicultural” or “cultural diversity” courses andncurricula generally consist of materials conveying criticismnof Western cultural values and political institutions from anMarxist, Third World, or militant feminist perspective — anviewpoint already available in many courses, but now madenmandatory for everybody in the new programs.nHow have these developments affected the politicalnpilgrimage? While the pilgrimage of Westerners to thenSoviet Union came to a halt after World War II, in the lastnfew years a new generation of Westerners has begun to visitnthe Soviet Union in growing numbers. In the l980’s it hasnbeen primarily the longing for peace, and the hope thatnhuman contacts at the grass roots level will help to avert annuclear holocaust, rather than the pursuit of political utopia,nthat brought well-meaning Westerners and especially Americansnto the Soviet Union. (Others, in smaller numbers, gonin pursuit of lucrative business contracts, but revealinglynenough, trade itself is often justified less as a profit-makingnactivity than as a means for promoting peace and mutualnunderstanding.) Whether or not such hopes are morenrealistic than those that inspired the earlier generation ofnpilgrims is debatable.nChina, ever since the death of Mao, has lost much of itsnpolitical attraction. Stories of its embrace of capitalism havenflooded the American media and sympathizers can nonlonger thrill at the high-minded regimentation its totalitariannmorality produced, or be animated by the egalitarian fervornof the Cultural Revolution.nCommunist Vietnam, while it had its champions duringnthe war and played host to many prominent Western,nespecially American, visitors, never attracted large numbersnof pilgrims. It remained quite inaccessible due to its distancenand political controls. (The boat people also made a dent innits supporters’ enthusiasm.) Occasional Western delegationsnin the I980’s were given the usual treatment. Among themnwas an American church group (composed of members ofnthe Church Worid Service and United Methodist Committeenon Relief) that was profoundly impressed by a modeln”re-education camp,” which it saw under circumstancesnreminiscent of the well-organized visits to Soviet, Chinese,nCuban, and Nicaraguan model prisons that I describe innPolitical Pilgrims.nAlthough Nicaragua has taken center stage in the pilgrimagesnof the 1980’s, Cuba under Castro has retained a fairnamount of support in the same circles, even though it hasnremained one of the most repressive, intolerant, militaristic,nand economically mismanaged of all Communist systems. ItnnnJUNE 1989/29n