quisite, fake objectivity, a gem withna factitiously “impartial” tone and cool,npseudoscholarly reasoning. It was writtennby a certain Richard J. Barnet,nco-founder of the Institute for PolicynStudies, an overtly procommunist publishingncenter in Washington, D.C. thatnhas for two decades engaged in the subtlenpromotion of Soviet geopoliticalngoals by means of allegedly apoliticalnactivities. Here is what Mr. Barnet attemptednto drive into the consciousnessnof New Yorker readers:n1) That the U.S. is militarily strongernthan the U.S.S.R., thus justifyingnthe latter in any military buildupnit chooses to pursue;n2) That there exists a polycentrismnof geopolitical decisions in thencommunist camp (Mr. Barnetnclaims that Cuba intervened innAngola “without consulting” thenSoviet Union and that NorthnVietnam’s interests are not “identical”nwith those of the U.S.S.R.—nboth allegations sound, to an EasternnEuropean or a Russian, likena grim joke told by a village idiot);n3) That the Soviet Union is disliked,nrejected and slighted bynthe leadership of its client statesnin Africa and Asia (Mr. Barnetndoes not, however, explain whynall those states form a rigidly unifiednfront at every internationalnforum, executing any Soviet ordernregarding strategic facilities ornamenities for Soviet-manipulatedntraffic in arms).nThe last is the most underhanded allegation.nBy relentlessly promoting it,nthe liberal gentlemen from the Easternnestablishmentarian circles of The NewnYorker stripe have reached an unusualninstrumentality for the Soviet cause—nthey completely isolate this nation fromnthe fundamental truths of our time.nSuch as:n—The supreme (and by now only)ngoal of the Soviet Union is not anworld free from capitalist exploitationnbut the total destruction of thenUnited States as the only existingnsociety which is not only a better,nfreer and more equal society thannthat of the U.S.S.R., but also onenwhich is able to defend itself militarily.nThe existence of a superior democraticninstitution with an infinitely superiorneconomic system is the singlenmost deadly threat to Russianncommunism.n—America’s destruction can be completednonly through a combinationnof internal subversion and globalnassault. As to the latter, it’s enoughnto look at a world map to see what hasnhappened since 1945, changes whichnwere oiled and facilitated by Sovietnglobal subversion. During the VietnamnWar (according to the liberalnpress) neither J. Edgar Hoover nornthe CIA could produce any evidencenof Soviet subversion, as LyndonnJohnson asked them to do. This, ofncourse, is a matchless Soviet triumph.nIn the eyes of people “from overnthere,” such lack of proof provesnonly the ineptness of American securitynorganizations and their ignor-nWhat should a businessman, an executive, a corporate officerntake into consideration when he thinks about himself,nhis family, his business, the world around him?nPersuasion At Work offers options to think about.nChronicles of CulturenFOR SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION SEE PAGE 40.nnnance of 19th-century Russian literature.nIt also proves that thenRussians, white or red, are muchncleverer at political intrigue, deceptionnand strategy than their Westernncounterparts — American politicalnconceptualists could have learnednthat from Joseph Conrad, who wrotenabout it in English, if they had toneschew the subtleties of Dostoyevskynand Merezhkovsky, which may perishnin translation. The CIA’s lacknof proof only proves that Americansndo not understand Russian-Sovietnmethods, not that subversion did notnand does not take place. Thus, whennsmall-time African political thugsncome to New York at our expense,ncondemn us in the U.N. and votenwith the U.S.S.R. on every issue,nto ask the CIA “why?” is a wastenof time. A Warsaw cabbie or a Budapestnwaiter could come up with anbetter explanation.nIn light of what has happened in thenworld since the end of the Vietnam War,nto say that there is no evidence of Sovietnmanipulation of the antiwar movementnin the United States borders on insanity.nNeither Jane Fonda nor RamseynClark would have set foot in Hanoinwithout the consent of the Soviet embassy,nwho had meekly checked with thenproper office in Moscow. Only then didnthe Vietnamese get their instructionsnon how to handle Comrade Fonda andnCitizen Clark, how these “useful idiots”n(Lenin’s favorite term for Western liberals)nshould help once they were backnin California and Manhattan. For details,nthe CIA might ask a trolley conductornin Prague or a Rumanian fruit vendorn— all those little gimmicks and Byzantinenexercises to corrupt a society by feedingnon both naivete and wickedness havenbeen thoroughly tested in Eastern Europenfor 35 years.nThese are some sad reflections thatncome to us as we read the latest outpouringnof cynicism, hatred, viciousnessnand bottomless stupidity from thenleft-liberal press like Village Voice,n