341 CHROHICLESntheir territories and interests; and evenntrue in a larger sense that capitalism isnone of the factors that have providednWestern civilization with its dynamismnover the last 500 years. But neitherncapitalism as an economic system nornthe West as a civilization has beennunique in this respect. World history isnlargely military history, from the dawnnof time until the present day. All societiesnof any scope or duration have madenrecourse to the sword. This is why purenpacifism has traditionally been dismissednas hopelessly naive.nBut the modern union of socialismnand pacifism has had profound policynconsequences. The evenhandedness ofnthe old pacifism was based on the viewnthat all wars were conflicts between rivalncamps of capitalist-imperialists, and thusnboth sides were to be condemned. Inn1939 all four of Lewy’s groups couldnjoin with other antiwar organizations tonissue a book. How to Keep AmericanOut of the War, which argued that thenwar against Hitler was “not a warnbetween democracy and totalitarianism,nbut a death grapple between rivalnimperialists, with aggressors arrayednagainst oppressors.” Britain and Francenwere merely status quo empires attemptingnto defend their ill-gottenngains. Both sides were depicted as toolsnof financial barons.nHowever, now that America’s enemiesnare no longer other “capitalist”nmembers of Western civilization, butnavowed opponents of capitalism (thenSoviet bloc) or anti-Western regimesn(the Third World), evenhandedness nonlonger applies. The opposing campsnare no longer moral equivalents. CapitalistnAmerica is seen as the moralninferior. Thus when Lewy concludesnthat “[s]ince pacifists do not want tonuse force in the defense of the societynin which they live, they argue thatnAmerican democracy is not worth defending,”nhe has it backwards. The leftndecided that America was not worthndefending first. It is now using nonviolencenas a moral argument to underminenAmerica’s survival.nIn the US this line of attack againstncapitalism has proven much more effectiventhan any straight presentation ofnsocialist doctrine. The “children ofnaffluence” have been most susceptiblento this doctrine. The peace movementntells them that any system must benI oppressive that links rights with dutiesnand that requires discipline and sacrificento support the continued provisionnof material goods and personal advancement.nAnd when they violatentraditional norms of conduct and shirkntheir patriotic responsibilities, thenpeace movement is there to soothentheir consciences with false moralizing.nLewy’s book is a valuable study ofnthe most notorious actions of the modernnpeace movement and a grim warningnof where that movement wants tonlead America. But if the movement isnto be stopped, it must be combated onnan even deeper level. The old pacifismnas well as the new radicalism must benexposed as a creed unworthy of anynrespect or consideration.nWilliam R. Hawkins is director of thenFoundation for American Ideals.nOpposing thenDisneyfiersnbyKW. Crocker innThank God for the Atom Bombnand Other Essays by Paul Fussell,nNew York: Summit Books.nPaul Fussell’s enemies are “habitualneuphemizers, professional dissimulators,”nand the “Disneyfiers of life.” Henis in favor of cojones, which is why henends up in one of his essays liking thenIndy 500 in spite of himself, comparingnit favorably to the violence of thenFalklands War, which is going on whilenhe watches the cars racing past him.nFussell’s favorite word is, perhaps,n”irony.” He believes in bravery, andnyet he realizes what bravery stems fromnand what it demands. He remembersnJames Jones and Willie Morris touringnthe battlefield at Antietam with theirnsons. One of the boys asked why thenmen had killed each other there, tonwhich Jones responded that they did itn”because they didn’t want to appearnunmanly in front of their friends.”nFussell comments: “Considering thenconstant fresh supply of young mennand the universal young man’s neednfor assurance of his manhood, Jones’snanswer suggests why reason, decency,nand common sense are as unlikely tonstop the killing in the future as in thenpast. Animals and trees and stonesncannot be satirized, only human be­nnnings, and that’s the reason it’s all goingnto happen again, and again, and again,nand again.” That is tragic, but fornFussell that is no reason to condemnnthe manly virtues. He is opposed ton”humorless critical doctrinaires withngrievances (Marxist, Feminist, whatnhave you),” for the very good reasonnthat he is not a Utopian. Fussell believesnin honesty, in complexity, and in thenreality of human life.nThe three best essays in this excellentncollection are the title essay and itsntwo supporting ones: “An Exchange ofnViews” (with Michael Walzer), andnthe horrifying and salutary “Postscriptn(1987) on Japanese Skulls.” Each ofnthese essays cuts through obfuscationnand cant, and, in “An Exchange ofnViews,” reveals the conflict betweenntwo sensibilities that Fussell designatesnas, on the one hand, the ironicnand ambiguous (or even thentragic, if you like), and, on thenother, the certain. The onencomplicates problems, leavingnthem messier than before andnmaking you feel terrible. Thenother solves problems and cleansnup the place, making you feelntidy and satisfied. I’d call thenone sensibility the literaryartistic-historical,nI’d call thenother the social-scientificpolitical.nTo expect them tonagree, or even to perceive thensame data, would be expectingntoo much.nFussell not only draws a neat and properndistinction, but recognizes the inevitablenand irreconcilable conflict betweennthe two visions. And there is no doubtingnon which side he places himselfnNoting that John Kenneth Galbraithnbelieves that the atom bomb shortenednthe Pacific war by only two or threenweeks, Fussell spells out what those twonor three weeks would have meant fornthe Allies:nTwo weeks more means 14,000nmore killed and wounded, threenweeks more, 21,000. Thosenweeks mean the world if you’renone of those thousands ornrelated to one of them. Duringnthe time between the droppingnof the Nagasaki bomb onnAugust 9 and the actualnsurrender on the fifteenth, then