JOIRVMISMnApologia Pro Domo SuanWe at the Chronicles of Culturenhave repeated it from our birth. Perhapsnat the beginning of the century thenHberal in the universe of the Americannpress represented the pursuit of truthnand justice. But once he achieved power,nhe was on the moral skids until henhit bottom around the end of the 1960’s.nThat was the triumphant era of NewnJournalism, advocacy journalism, investigativenjournalism. With a novel setnof principles and guidelines, liberal journalismnestablished its new role in thenAmerican culture by way of formidablynmonopolistic self-promotion. Hence thennew press credo was not to discover andnreport on reality, but to correct it—thatnis, to shape this society’s dreams, knowledgenand mores. It ended in an abysmalndegringolade of the very substance ofnjournalism. Prevarication, mendacity,nhypocrisy, casuistry and outright liesnbecame the very gist of that which isnspuriously called editing, and the suppressionnof nonliberal points of viewnintroduced a sense of totalitariannmethodology in treating the news. Thenlies about Vietnam and Watergate (ornthe bending of both truth and reality)nwere so subtle that journalists couldnlabel it “freedom of expression” or “thenvariety of interpretations.”nNow this spiritual empire of liesnis beginning to unravel. After thenPulitzer Prize was awarded for a fabrication,nthe subsequent laureate, one Ms.nCarpenter, has been accused of grossndistortions in her Pulitzer-winningnstory. Then there is a certain Mr. Dalynfrom the New York Daily News who,nit seems, concocted a report fromnNorthern Ireland in which he quotednpeople who never existed and vividlyndescribed events that never took place.nBoth Ms. Carpenter and Mr. Daly arenalumni of the Village Voice, the cradlenof New Journalism, press advocacy andnmerciless investigation. It is a bizarrenjournal, financed by a cynical capitalisticntycoon, a publication devoted at thenChronicles of Culturensame time to sexual degeneracy andnpolitical neo-Bolshevism. But it nownseems clear that it is essentially a trainingncenter for well-heeled, trendy, brazennliars. DnEntente CordialenDon’t they seem, at first glance, tonbe an odd couple? They surely do, butnit is an illusion. Actually, there’s a warm,ntender understanding between The NewnYorker, the flagship of moneyed, Westchester/FairfieldnCounties-based supraclassnof VSOP liberals, and The Militant,nthe fiery organ of unrepentant Trotskyitenrevolutionaries who still vow tonshape the world according to the Programmenof the Third International. Thencatalyst which demonstrates their mistyeyednmutual fondness for each other isnPoland, 1981. Both eminent publicationsnallotted space to lengthy, sentimentalninterviews with and divagationsnabout the Solidarity movement. Innneither piece did the noun “commu­n(continued from page 5)nto be only hypocritical conventions. Yetnthe bourgeois culture venerated economicnand social activism, worshipedncreative energy, respected lawfulness,nenforced a stable social order in whichncivilization, civility and civic valuesnthrived—in short: it made existence anrewarding and meaningful experience.nNow we have a so-called mixed economynand a system of rewards that bordersnon insanity. Is the great wealthncreated today deserved.” Should a moronicnactor, a cynical manipulator ofnmass culture, a cretinous pop singer, anvulgar movie entrepreneur, a scoundrelnof a publisher who sponges on murder­nEDITOR’S COWMEN Innnnism” or the adjective “communist”nmake a single appearance. Reading thosenelucubrations, one would not have thenslightest idea that Poland is a communistnsociety—forced to exist within thenframework of a totalitarian state, conceivednand structured upon a complexnMarxist-Leninist theoretical basis accordingnto strict communist doctrinenwhich was devised and is ruled by peoplenwho call themselves communists. Onenwould never know that the Polish workersnand their Solidarity movement arenheroically combating that doctrine, thatnstate, that rule and those people who formnthe communist government. Not onenvocable about such nastiness could benfound in either TheNew Yorker or ThenMilitant. According to the former, thenPolish workers are fighting some nebulousn”authority.” According to The Militant,nthey are battling some enigmaticn”bureaucrats.” A simple, precise statementnof communism’s wretched failurenwill never pass the lips of an Americannarchliberal or leftist. Dnous instincts be financially rewarded—nas they are today, in a climate of anticapitalismnin which any system ofnvalues wilts.”nI’m afraid that the haves and havenotsnhave no coherent answers to thesenquestions. The have-somes seem to bendeeply disappointed with the currentneconomic arrangement. This is why historynand the future await the havesomes’nascendancy to social, politicalnand moral power.*n—Leopold Tyrmandn*This is a portion of a chapter fromnThe Prudent Progressive or An Arcadianof New Wisdom.n