Such a sortie makes it unnecessarynfor TNR to explain why almost all of thenprint medium giants have been savagelynvilifying the business community forndecades, while an overwhelming numbernof American intellectuals teaches thennewspapers how to do it. Which bringsnus to another TNR abuse of truth andndecency, perhaps not quite so gross, butncertainly more devious.nNot long ago, in its back-of-the-booknpage, entitled “Washington Diarist”—ndedicated to promulgating sentiments inna light-hearted way—a staff writer expressednhis thoughts on Ben Wattenbergnand his TV series “In Search of the RealnAmerica,” after having participated innthe introductory cocktails and buffet.nComment continued from page 5nWe quote:n”Wattenberg is a lone voice crying innthe wilderness in defense of capitalism,neconomic growth, democracy, patriotism,netc., with no one to give himnsuccor and support except the MobilnCorporation, the American EnterprisenInstitute and a list of foundations asnlong as your arm. This preposterousnpose of embattled isolation is a particularnfavorite of the neoconservatives.nWhat I want to know is, Where is thisnchorus of failure and guilt.’ Have thenother oil companies been sponsoringnattacks on big business? Have the commercialnnetworks been swamping thenairwaves with left-wing critiques ofnthe American system?”nand state bureaucracy, here—cant is manipulated into social rules by the liberalnintellectual elite. In other words: their lie is totalitarian, ours democratic . . .”nis is an opinion of a keen Polish observer of both contemporarynscenes. The American intellectual elite, with the exception of a disproportionatenminority, is in the bondage of the Liberal Culture.nThus, we have a curious paradox. Throughout our history, societies have livednwithin a framework of the official culture, while elites, or social fringes, createdntheir own, often antithetic, subcultures. They were called schismatic, nonconformist,nBohemian. The Liberal Culture, with its outlawing or normalcy andncancellation of common sense, fits perfectly into the rebellion of the periphery.nHowever, things have become so hopelessly mixed up that we live in a culturalnlimbo. On the one hand, Liberal Culture has global, all-encompassing ambitionsnto become the official culture. It is not far from reaching this goal when little oldnladies from Dubuque are the eager buyers of Hustler in motel newsstands farnfrom home; and all a beefy Midwestern farmer hopes for is to look like RodnStewart at his Sunday barn disco. On the other hand, the honor of rebelling hasnbeen passed to the common people. When the PTA combats the libcultural TVndegeneracy, it’s the society which has become independent and nonconformist,nwhereas the intellectual elites cringe and bootlick the libcultural officialdom.n”Everything has improved for the worse,” a perceptive young lady recentlynremarked, assessing the changes that have occurred during her lifetime.nHer conscious observing of what’s around her—in people’s vicissitudes, books,npolitical condition, movies, urban landscapes, fashion and behavioral styles—closelyncorresponds with the era of the rigid sway of the Liberal Culture. Nothing betterndescribes this culture’s achievements.n—Leopold Tyrmandn30 inChronicles of CulturennnOne does not know what to do withnthis agglomeration of phony indignation,nhalf-truth projected as insight and questionsnformulated to make falsehood soundnlike truth. Before Wattenberg started hisnseries, there were numerous articles,nsome of them outrightly satirical, pointingnout that he—the defender of capitalism—wasnunable to raise a penny for hisnenterprise, while John Kenneth Galbraithnhardly knew what to do with allnthe money showered on him by corporationsnand capitalists. The irony of thensituation was so obvious, and so painfullyndetermined by the bare facts, that pokingnfun at Wattenberg was turning into antrenchant metaphor. For as everybodynwith open eyes knows, we regularly witnessnthe paradox of big companies-sponsoringnattacks on big business at uniyersitynseminars, symposiums, in foundationnstudies, TV programs, and advertisingnplacement in scurrilous journals whichnpromote preposterous post-Marxianncliches under the guise of conservationnor liberationism. Yes, even if they hadnnot been “swamping the airwaves,” thencommercial networks have been injectingnand contaminating the airwaves with left-nVing critiques of the American systemnfor decades—and the TNR staffer knowsnit as well as much less sophisticated TVnwatchers. Actually, he knows it evennbetter, as for 40 years The New Republicnhas waged an uninterrupted fight to makenthe printed press and the media an exclusivenpasture of liberal ideas, rigidlynfenced off from any rational discoursenwith other views.nWhen Mr. Peretz took over, therenhovered some hope that TNR’s customnof assassinating non-liberal thoughtnwould change. That the Voltairian spiritnof fair dialogue and respect for the other’snotherness, so vaunted as a liberal virtue,nmight prevail and make a comeback. Butnhas it been so? TNR always aspired tonfame as an organ of civilized commitment.nThe great art of such a culturalnrole is to know how to be forthrightnwithout slipping into bigotry. What wensee these days in the well-kept pages ofnThe New Republic is, unfortunately, justnbigotry. fCC) On