42 I CHRONICLESn—that God saves the weak^ that Godnrescues those who moan for the burdennof their sins, that the ChristiannGod helps only those who havenstopped trying to help themselves.nAlas, it was not to be, and evangelicalsnturned once again to power or itsnsubstitutes.nLess Than Conquerors is a disturbingnand powerful book, nowhere morenmoving than when describing the continuednevangelical propensity to pursuencontrol. Frank suggests that bynseeking to transform American lifeninto their version of the Good—bynfollowing the pattern of Reformednpublic involvement—evangelicals,nvi’hatever secondary benefit they maynhave bequeathed to the republic, havenforsaken the cross and compromisednthe Christian message.nYet Frank is not calling for separationnfrom the world. Too clearly doesnhe know, in Solzhenitsyn’s memora­nble phrase, that the final line betweenngood and evil runs not between individualsnbut within them. Rather hencalls for the renewal of a religion thatnhas been corrupted by its best intentionsnand the memory of its greatestntriumphs. Not since Joseph Haroutunian’snhistory of theology in 18thcenturynNew England, Piety VersusnMoralism (1932), has there appearednsuch a forceful Christian analysis of annAmerican Christian tradition.nNon-Christians may scratch theirnheads in bewilderment. At least withnNeuhaus and his collaborators there isna recognized vocabulary and a comfortablenset of assumptions. The AmericannWay can almost be equated withnthe effort (no matter where it comesnfrom on or off the religious spectrum)nto build a civilization by the applicationnof moral principle (no matter hownloosely “moral” may be defined). Thencontributors to Unsecular AmericanThe Hammer of Hunger by Charles A. Mosern”Every scarecrow secretly desires to terrorize.”n—Stanislaw LeenThe Harvest of Sorrow: SovietnCollectivization and thenTerror-Famine by Robert Conquest,nOxford and New York: OxfordnUniversity Press; $19.95.nWhen, from time to time, a responsiblenofficial in the UnitednStates suggests we employ our abundancenof food as a “weapon” in ournstruggle with Communist totalitarianism,na clamor of protest arises fromnone end of the country to the other.nBut when the Communists wield foodn—or its lack—as a lethal instrument,nthen the West organizes entertainmentnextravaganzas to assist them. Skillfullynexploiting the humane instincts of decentnpeople abroad. Communist governmentsnare using them to supportncynically brutal wars upon their ownncitizens at home.nThe Harvest of Sorrow is a detailednCharles Moser is professor of Slavic atnGeorge Washington University.ninvestigation of one of the most horrendousnand least-known crimes of anCommunist regime — Stalin’s warnagainst two major internal groupsnwhich he viewed as a threat: the peasantsnand the Ukrainian nation. Withnmeticulous care, extensive historicalnsources, and the best available statistics.nProfessor Conquest has etched anhorrifying picture of Soviet government’sngenocide against its own peoplenin the 1920’s and 30’s.nConquest tells his story of then”terror-famine” against an appropriatenhistorical background. He points outnthat the Communist Party was extraordinarilynweak among the vast peasantnmajority in prerevolutionary Russian—before 1917 there were fewer thann500 Bolshevik peasants in the entirencountry. Although Lenin establishednwhat he called a workers’ and peasants’ngovernment, the peasants instinctivelynunderstood his urban dictatorshipnmeant them no good. During the civilnwar (1918-1922) the Communistsnfaced peasant rebellions which were sonnnstand squarely in that tradition as theyntry to apply sounder moral principlesnin a sounder manner in order to increasenthe soundness of the republic.nFrank, on the other hand, seems to benspeaking an unknown tongue.nChristians, and perhaps some others,nmay yet hope that the messages ofnUnsecular America and Less ThannConquerors are not simply irrelevant ornantithetical to each other. If the ultimatengoal of a Reformed approach tonculture really were the glory of God, asnin principle it was for Calvin, and ifnthe Lutheran message of the cross didnnot rule out public concern for thengood of others, as in practice it did notnfor Luther, then it is at least conceivablenthat believers in the cross mightnact altruistically in public and that thenProtestant Reformation might be reunitednin these latter days of America’snhistory.nextensive that in the spring of 1921nLenin privately admitted his party’sngrip on power was extremely tenuous.nAlthough the Bolsheviks emerged finallynvictorious militarily, the politicalnand economic pressures remained songreat that Lenin had to take “one stepnbackwards” and introduce the socallednNew Economic Policy (NEP).nThis “tactical move” permitted a considerablendegree of private enterprise,nespecially in the countryside, givingnthe peasantry a breathing space for anfew years in the 1920’s.nAfter Lenin’s death in 1924, Stalinnconsolidated his power by movingnagainst the kulaks, or wealthy peasants,nas a class. But his genuine intentnwas to eliminate the peasantry itself byndestroying its political and economicnconsciousness. This policy began innearly 1930 with “class warfare” againstnthe kulaks in the villages, followed bynforced collectivization, designed to liquidatenprivate property in land andnthus bring the rural population undernthe direct control of the party. Thencampaign succeeded, but at such anneconomic and human cost that innMarch of 1930 even Stalin beat antemporary retreat on the issue.n