scientific, but, well aware of the high cost of public dissentnin the Soviet Union, they would have kept their doubts tonthemselves. But Mr. Piel, an American, has the goodnfortune to be a citizen of the freest country in the world.nSince he would not, therefore, have been under anyngovernment coercion to promote a particular viewpoint, wenmust assume his words were sincere. He said, in part:n”During the past four centuries science has been liberatingnincreasing numbers, now nearly one-third, of mankindnfrom toil and want and even from submission to receivednauthority.”nWho are these people, amounting to almost a third of thenworld population, who are liberated from toil and want bynscience? The present world population is five billion and anthird of this is 1.7 billion, so the group certainly cannot benthe Western democracies (USA, Canada, Western Europe,nand Japan), whose total population is only 0.7 billion. Onnthe other hand, the 1.6 billion total population of thenCommunist countries (USSR, its East European empire,nmainland China, Vietnam, plus a few less populous countries)nis slightly less than 1.7 billion. In other words, thenCommunist world amounts to nearly one-third of mankindnand appears to be the only meaningful group that fits thisndescription. The 2.3 billion combined population of thenWestern and Communist blocs is significandy more thannone-third of mankind, so it also seems clear that the groupnin question cannot include the Western democracies.nMr. Piel’s view of the statistics of global liberation, hisnargument (made earlier in his lecture) that science is thenproper context for Communism (in view of its claims to be anscientific form of government), and the circumstances of hisnlecture—all these factors must have combined to give hisnaudience the strong impression that he sees Communism asnthe science that has liberated “nearly one-third of mankindnfrom toil and want.” In fact, this is probably the messagenthat any potential listener would have heard.nThe belief that Communism liberates people does notndeserve comment, though Communist ideology does liberatenone small group of people—the Communist elite whonrule the people in the name of the people. More than 150nyears ago Alexis de Tocqueville anticipated the paradoxicalnpossibility that a ruling minority might use “the interests ofnsociety” as a shield to protect their power and privilege. Henwrote: “Hitherto no one in the United States has dared tonadvance the maxim that everything is permissible for theninterests of society, an impious adage which seems to havenbeen invented in an age of freedom to shelter all futurentyrants.” It was the Communist elite who were Mr. Piel’snhosts and on whose behalf he spoke, knowingly or not.nIf Mr. Piel’s support of Communism has no objechvenbasis, why does he sound like a Soviet propaganda mouthpiece?nCan there be a subjective explanation? Does he havensome reason for resenting the U.S. or the free enterprisensystem? This is hardly likely. In fact, since he and somencolleagues bought the title to Scientific American in 1947,nthe magazine has prospered. So much so that for some yearsnnow Scientific American has been one of the best-knownnpopular science magazines, both in the U.S. and internationally.nWith monthly sales of 600,000 it has also been onenof the most successful commercially (despite losing moneynin the last year or two).nThe abilities, hard work, and guidance provided by Mr.nPiel and his associates were undoubtedly major factors innthis success story. The measure of this success becamenevident in the summer of 1986 when a West Germannpublisher bought the privately owned company ScientificnAmerican, Inc. for $52.6 million. (As part of the deal.nScientific American will continue to operate as an independentnenterprise with Mr. Piel continuing as chairman andnhis son as editor and publisher. Higher offers, which did notninclude this guarantee of the editorial policy’s continuation,nwere refused.) A news item in Nature (10 July 1986)nreported Mr. Piel’s shareholding in the bought-out companynas about one-sixth, in which case his share of the salenwould have been about $9 million.nHis trip to the Soviet Union to hobnob with the Sovietnruling class was nothing new. For more than 50 years now,nfellow travelers have been visiting the land of the victoriousnproletariat, telling the inhabitants that they are liberatednfrom “toil and want,” and then returning to the security andncomfort of the unliberated Western democracies. What isnnew is to see pronouncements such as Mr. Piel’s publishednin the pages of the most prestigious journal of Americannscience.nScience, whose scholarly pages enlighten readers withnpeer-reviewed research papers, authoritative review articles,nand news items, and which has a weekly circulation ofnnnSEPTEMBER 1987127n