Editor^s CommentnWe have completed the first full year of the Chroniclesnof Culture and it’s time for a bit of summing up and soulsearching.nWe e are most often accused of two venial sins: liberalbaitingnand negativism. Of course, both charges have thencommon rockbottom. We concentrate on Liberal Culturenbecause it is the reigning sociocultural sovereign whosenwisdom and morality we question and challenge. Caring fornvalues of intellect and literary excellence, we unfortunatelynhave little to point out as satisfactory answers to the libculturalndominance. Whenever we run across them in fiction,narts or humanities, we praise them to the skies. However,nas there are not enough of them of the quality we wouldnwholeheartedly approve, we are often accused of soundingnnegative by our own brethren in Weltanschauung.nThis, certainly, is a comedy of errors. We need not gonback to Roger Williams to try to explain negativism andngive it a fair and reasonable interpretation. What happenednin the ’50s will do. It was a time of economic prosperity innAmerica, not unmarred, but serene, social moods, slow butnsteady progress of American humanitarianism, steady improvementsnin civil rights at home, and of American moralnauthority abroad. Liberals, especially their radical variation,ndid not like it at all. Through complicated socioculturalnprocesses, they succeeded in instilling in a good part of thenenlightened strata a feeling of distrust and contempt for thensocial truce, for the healthy, if simplistic, anticommunismnand anticollectivism of the masses, for the sentiments ofnsatisfaction with the well-justified patriotism. They begannto negate the American values. They went victoriously intonthe ’60s and declared America, as Americans knew her,nan abyss of dimwitted complacency, a plastic wasteland ofnmoral stupor and ticky-tacky existence. This was negativismnat its best (or worst). It started the bizarre belly dancing ofnthe American liberal intellectual, which has continued fornroughly a quarter of a century to the point of negativisticnirrationalism. The tradition of Western civilization holdsnthat there is nothing wrong with the critique of one’s societynor country, provided we all stick to some criteria of reasonablenessnand normalcy. The rest of the world saw in Americana better reality; the liberal radicals saw in it a worse realityn—such a discrepancy has produced a glut of stale lies, uselessnbut rabid moral cliches and social pseudoremedies. Once theynbecame institutionalized by the Liberal Culture and its media,na movement toward their exposure and purification was inevitable.nAnd it’s here where our negativism comes in: wenfeel compelled to negate the pernicious negation of America.nFrom today’s perspective, we clearly see how the manicnrage against America—its ethos and food and traditions andnpurpose—became a viral disease of both the nation’s bodynand soul. The fashion of branding as corruption and vicenChronicles or Culturennnanything the neurotic mind of a liberal abhorred turned intonan affliction of the everyday process of living. When allnprimary truths became twisted by the grossly subjectivistnperceptions of liberal writers, gurus, theorists, et alii, who,nin addition, knew how to turn their hatred of America intona most profitable profession, the wholesome vectors of societynwere quickly obliterated. One could see protesters who fiercelyndemanded the right to protest while they, without bar ornhindrance, shouted their protests in the streets in broadndaylight; this was conceived as and called an act of noblenliberation by the collective liberal mind, which amounts tonthe same level of brain power as calling a tree a bird. However,nthe media at large, faithful to their liberalism, sustainednsuch a falsification of the reality. It left us with nonchoice but to negate such “truth” and “fact” and “reality,”nand prodded us to sift through the ravages of the torn fabricnof American common sense, normalcy, and understandingnof the basics of being. It is, perhaps, why now, when wenopenly reject a lie, we are reproached for being obsessed withnnegativism by those who still, by the end of the ’70s, feelnmore comfortable with glittering liberal and radical fantasiesnthan with the decency of unassailable and factual evidence.nTo try to trace the enmity between their negativism andnour negation of it, we would have to chart the Interplay betweennthe liberal world view and ours, and outline the pointsnwhich induce us to firm resistance and rejection. Let’s takenspiritual fairness. We have never accused the liberals of evilnintentions, only of Intellectual error which leads to distortednmoral judgment. The danger of the Liberal Culture is especiallynpoignant for us. This cultural pattern maximizes thencamouflaged totalitarianism Inherent in the liberal persuasion;nas touted from every page of the liberal press, it deniesnmoral legitimacy, or even positiveness, to any of our ideologicalnattitudes. Our economic beliefs are decried as rooted Inngreed, our social and moral philosophy Is, to a liberal, anproduct of antihuman alienation, thus condemnable in advancenwithout hearing and in every possible respect. Thenfoundation of liberal individualism is the faith in the perfectabilitynof man—a high-minded presumption but neverthelessndisputable; this blind trust gives the American liberal anpeculiar odor of liberal saintliness, frantically diffused bynthe media all over America throughout the last half a century.nA liberal believes that evil is automatically accumulated byntradition, stability and the mere history of social relations;nanyone who attempts to contradict this fallacy is branded annenemy. We do not consider ourselves enemies of liberals,nwe only negate their patterns of thinking—and this is enoughnfor liberals to see us as enemies. Curiously enough, somenpeople of good will and intelligence, who perceive the liberalnself-deception, still do not consider our exposure of thisndeception a help to our fellow man, but an unbecoming,naggressive negativism. Why.’nThough the liberals sincerely oppose communism andn