rected and the situation is well in hand,
this i- .1 book for those who like
straight-from-the-shoulder writing by an
author who is willing to lay his contentions and interpretations on the line.
Chesly Manl) dues nol shrink from stal-
ing his case, even though man) men consider it overstated.
It is the author's contention thai the
events thai have transpired, and the
policies followed, have not been mis-
leiki's from the standpoint of those instrumental in bringing these' things
about. They have been well-planned
and correctly so- -to achieve the goal ol
a Socialist America in a Socialist world.
I lie Twenty-Year Revolution is nol an
sccounl of failure far from it. ll is an
account of a highly successful program
'" remake the American system into the
opposite of its original character.
TRACES COMMUNIST INFLUENCE
Mr. Manly Iran's Communist influence
111 our national government during the
'•'si twenty-two years. He shows how,
'"'ii' and again, national polic) has been
shaped in the direction ol greatest assistance to international communism.
'hr style- is pungent and concise, indigent without being heavy. The' author
j-'s an impishness ol expression de-
''"infill to those who agree and im-
''"uliii'ilU irritating lo those who do
""' which serves in lighten his unmistakable seriousness. Thai Mr. Manl)
" seriously concerned for the preserva-
ll0'i of the' United Stairs as ei sovereign
"'public of file- men is obvious.
Chesl) Manl) brings up a poinl « hich,
." 'his reviewer, eel least, is thr mosl
'"■portant and most often obscured item
1,1 the whole controversy over the Communisl conspiracy. Quoted is a sentence
'roni ih,. 1953 report (unanimous) of
"' Jenner subcommittee: "I'olie ies and
'"""'.mis laiel lines ii b) members of this
"*''•' conspiracy air still in effecl with-
" '"ii" governmenl ami constitute a con-
.'.''"iii'.' hei/ai el te. i.in national securlt)."
'lls crucial |eeeini weis snowed under In
** welter eel shrill debate over person-
. "l(s. m,i-i ,,f «Iii,m wi'ir no longer
olding governmenl positions.
,, "ow, il is a verj necessary thing thai
Omrnunisl agents hr e'\|eosi-el and re-
0yed from | .ee- it ions where the) can do
~r''a' damage. Mosl Americans loathe'
'""'"utnisni. hut the mosl foolish ihlng
"V could do would hr lo allow Ihcm-
ll M I" hi' manipulated into spending
their time hating Communists (or
"'■'Communists! and being blinded hv
[" '""'"laliiii's. Who they were is of .sec-
"'-'iv importance, In
importance, however important
,"".1 nr as ei starting-point lor un-
il'.'"'-' the damage done. The' important
I '"- is. whal polii ii's did they formu-
u *'■ whal laws did they WTite, what
d^'ims did ih,'\ institale? ll is the
s'u of follv and hypocrisy to throw
ruger lltss in |atl and ronlinttr lo
AcTS FORUM NEWS, April, 1955
embrace, without re-examination, the
policies he laid mil. Kiihrr thr policies
initiated by identified Communisl agents
were in accordance with thr wishes ol
the' Kremlin, or they wen' not. Bul mosl
important, they air destructive nl American sovereignt) ami individual freedom,
or they an- not. This is the poinl whirh
needs to hr determined and which
should govern each case.
If Americans air w tiling ie> accept and
continue the policies initiated by Com-
munisl agents, they have no very logical
complaint againsl the- agents themselves.
ll is lln- l.liueli'si sent ed prejudice or
else clever deception to repudiate a
man hreeiusr he- is ei "Communist" and
at ihe' same time approve of, continue,
and frantically defend thr most important things hr did. Thr illogical posture
must hr resolved one wen or the other.
Tin- half-seated position is as uncomfortable as it is ridiculous. Either Vmer-
i<7i stands up ami says. "No!" and rejects communism, Communists, ami all
their works or rise' il sinks hark into
em easy chair of domestic coexistence
wilh communism ami accords Communists the seimr honor ii accords their
Here is the issue' central lo Chesly
Meenly's concern. America today is in
the position of congratulating itsell em
blowing out the match—while thr house
burns elnwn. What is nre'de'd is more
positive affirmation ol whal America is
tee hi' einel morr clear perception of what
it is noi to hr allowed to become. To
this reviewer, there is nothing that ran
obscure the' crucial Issues so much as
thr present-day intemperate emphasis
upon personalities. II Americans can hr
kr|il busy choosing up sidrs to hair
Communisl and anti-CommnnisI prison.
;ililies. Communist-inspired programs
will have every chance for continuing,
without effective challenge, toward the'
eventual establishment of a Socialist
America as a subdivision of a Socialist
We would do better lo acknowledge
a man's righl to hr ;t Communist, if If'
wishes (subject lo the statute's ele'finimi
criminal acts) and then establish and
practice our right lo refuse lo follow
him. We air going to have to stop letting ourselves hr distracted and mesmerized bv ihr Incessant personalization
of issues. Ami wi' an' going in have in
stop spending our time blaming other
people lot making thr same' mistakes
we' ourselves make. Gear thinking, based
Any book reviewed here uiees l><-
orcicr.-d 1'r.mi Facts Forum for lhe regu-
leer published retail price. Facts Forum
on ethical and moral absolutes, is whal
is required anil each of us has plenty
in wink mi before hr starts blaming
Others. As our study srrvrs lo srrk oul
erroneous concepts ami policies to hi'
rejected and corrected, our work is
constructive. As it seeks out personalities lo blame for the very things we
have condoned or embraced, it is destructive and makes the solution even
Although The Twenty-Year Revolution is strong, this reviewer feels that
tin- author does try to concern himself
with thr issues primarily ami with the
personalities only as the) musl neces-
saril) move across the stage. It is a
useful honk fnr the reader who will lake
tin- same' approach.
(',. W. DeArmond, Jh.
Who Speaks For Man?
By Norman Cousins, The MacMillan Company, 60
Fifth Aveneie. New York II, N. Y., 1953, 318 pp..
Norman Cousins, editor of thr Sninr-
day Review oj Literature and prominent
World Federalist, has written an impassioned ple-ei for strengthening the
I nited Nations into ;i world governmenl
i'ii the Federal principle, lb' believes this
in In- thr onl) escape for thr people nl
the atomic age.', and hi' lake's his position
frankly and honestly. Uf course, there
is always thr risk that people nun ju-i
yawn if thr A-bomb is brandished in
their laces often enough. Hut the gadget
slill seems to hi' ei pretty good sort of
"prop" for the fear-psychology type id
There is much more to thr hook than
Mr. Cousins1 proposals and arguments
for world government. Thr author pos-
sesses .1 topnotch reportorial style, and
hr shares with his reader the rich experiences of extensive travel. Even those-
who mav disagree wilh bis advocation
of world governmenl as this reviewer
does will, nevertheless, find much of
the hook to l.r highly entertaining. Hut
if the author's narrative merits reading,
-11 ileus his proposal command a hearing so earnestly and urgently is il pre-
Mr. Cousins, in his zeal, presents one
of those' "clihi'i-or" propositions: either
vou accept world government or vou gel
nuclear annihilation. Hr rreisons lhat.
since conflicting national governments
cause weirs, thr solution musl be the \i'si-
ing of all war-making power land quite
a bit of other authorit) eis w,-||i in one
world sovereignty tin' United \atieen-.
Apparently, Mr. Cousins does not consider another alternative, which pteints
away from centralization of power rather than inwend more- nf ii. This alternative would hi' in line' wilh ein observation
made bj thr lair Albert ,)a\ Nock thai
il rviTvleorh would transfer thr dis-
(Continued on Page 39)