vious that they long ago abandoned a pluraUsm based onnauthentic differences of views. By exerting a totalitarianlikengrip on the opinion-forming industry, their apologists andncritics are able to bar any truly opposing point of view from thenpages of influential liberal journals that loudly proclaim urbi etnorbi their pure and benign ideological nonpartisanship. Longngone is that kind of intellectual pluralism which predicated thenAdams-Jefferson difference as a treasure of American politicalnphilosophy. Today, Adams’s writing would run the risk of beingnrejected out of hand by any junior editor at any majornpublishing house, while Jefferson, in order to elaborate on hisnconvictions in an atmosphere of uninhibited toleration, wouldnneed to obtain a fellowship grant from the American EnterprisenInstitute.nV>ulture is a crutch word: we use it to denote the productionnand distribution of ideas and images. Behind every,neven the most vulgar, sitcom, there’s an idea; from the sitcomncomes an image. But where did the Liberal Culture come from ?nDid it originate in technology, in social transmutations? This isnwhat they would have us believe. But culture is not the result ofnattitudes, it is their generator, producer, manufacturer, source.nCultures in history have prospered within a climate of contention,ndissension and internal adversary forces—provided thatnsome rules of equal opportunity and respect supported thenfeirness and vigorousness of the discourse. That ambiance doesnnot exist in today’s America. The dominance of the LiberalnCulture is absolute in nature and totalitarian in method—especiallynwhen it comes to the distribution of images. Nonliberalnthought is distorted by the firmly liberal communicationsnmedia and presented as political, cultural, moral, even intellectualndeviltry—without the benefit of a fair hearing,nwithout the chance for an honest exchange of views. There arencountless editorial devices and stratagems which enable thenleadership of the New York Times or CBS to present such a procedurenas evenhandedness, an Olympian impartiality in thenstruggle of ideas, a benevolent wisdom that transcendsnideological and cultural adversities. In reality it is thenmanipulative and merciless suppression of another point ofnview—which always happens to be a nonliberal one.nIt appears that, in the near future, the crucial fight will benbetween world views and philosophies for the human mind.nThis struggle will certainly take place in America, and we intendnto be there on the batdefield. What we will be standingnagainst is a culture that has disintegrated the vocabulary ofnideas of the old bourgeois culture, that has stultified notions onnwhich humankind built its hopes over millennia, conventionsnthat throughout history have made us and our lives better. Thisnnew culture has annihilated our cherished sensibilities andntrampled their remains into the morass of modern existence. Itnis a culture in which new catechetic words reign: liberation, entitlement,nself-realization. According to the current liberaln«GOING MONTHLY •ngospel, women must be liberated from their womanhood, andnanyone who asks for anything makes it politically legitimate bynthe mere process of asking, while the pinnacle of humanness isnto be found in singles bars, or freakish potential-movementnhappenings, or on the psychoanalytical couch. It is a culture innwhich behavioral slime is considered the prime element ofnliterature, lesbianism is seen as a natural law at PrincetonnUniversity, compassion has become a social regulation, fashionnmagazines preach revolution, and traitors to their country arenpresented to youth as symbols of integrity. One consequence ofnthis culture is that a vast segment of the population is forced tonwork hard to support a class of parasites, many of whom—nthanks to economic priorities gone berserk—have turned theirnlives into a grotesque Grand Guignoloidxags and kinky crimenand who provide their own troubadors with an obscure wealth.nIt is a culture in which a nurse earns less per year than a cretinousn, unwashed rock singer spends on dope per day. For this culturenwe have nothing but the deepest contempt, and we wantnto make it known. In the 1930’s a German antifascist by thenname of Kurt Tucholsky, before he was tortured by the nazis innDachau, addressed himself to his nation in one of his last warnings:n”All I wish is for you to remember, I was against!” So arenwe, when we face the travesty of humanness and the humiliationnof reason in ‘ur first four years have convinced us that there is an audiencenamong the young American intelligentsia whose criterianfor truth, reason and intellectual honesty have not been shapednby Time magazine, or Rolling Stone’s poetry, or MothernJones’s jaded, vicious socialism—often written by the scions ofncorporate tycoons. We do not think that the acknowledgedncenters of antiliberalism have the correct answer to the culturalnpogrom unleashed by the vast liberal spectrum which rangesnfrom open Soviet stooges at the Washington, D.C. radicalnthink tanks to the jaundiced anti-Americans of The Nation ornVillage Voice stripe to the pseudohumanitarian parrots of thenleft-wing Republican Party. We want to speak to that audiencenout there. This is why we will double the frequency of our commentary.nnn—LeopoldTyrmandnFor subscription information aboutntlie new, montlily Chronicles of Culturensee our ad on page 19 of til is issuenor write us at:nChronicles of Culturen934 N. Main St.nRocl