Texas-styled right. Thomas Pauken’srnThe Thirty Years War is the politicalrnmemoir of a Texas-reared Catholie lad,rnlured to Georgetown University in 1961,rnwho trains in the political trenches of thernYoung Republican organization duringrnthe Goldwater years. Over the next threerndecades, Pauken becomes a pilgrim,rntaking part in or touching virtualh’ all ofrnthe significant political events of hisrntime. I Ic serves in Army intelligence inrnVietnam, running agents in Chan Docrnpro’ince, and uncovering the careerism,rncorruption, and carefully constructedrnmilitary illusions that were underminingrnthe American cause. He comes home tornwork in the Nixon White House for presidentialrncounsel John Dean, and narrowlyrnavoids taking a job as the liaison betweenrnDean and the Department ofrnJustice regarding “internal securit)’ problems”rn(as in Watergate). He returns tornTexas to study law, run for Congress, andrnbuild the Republican apparatus. Returningrnto Washington as part of the ReaganrnRevolution, he survives a grueling confirmationrnprocess to become head of ACTION,rnthe federal agency overseeingrnthe Peace Corps and VISTA, where hernbattles the leftward trend bequeathedrnby the Carter years. Pauken’s election asrnTexas COP party chairman in 1994rnbrings his pilgrimage full circle.rnThe theme unifying the book is thern”intergenerational fight” between thern”new left” (and fellow travelers such asrnBill Clinton) and the reenergized conservativerncause. This war, he argues, beganrnin the 1960’s over the issues of Vietnamrnand communism and continues in recentrnbattles to this day. Yet Pauken’srnown analysis suggests a more complexrndvnaniic. While he skewers “new leftists”rnfor their fawning support of the VietrnCong, and while he repeatedly endorsesrnthe anticommunist cause, he also admitsrnthat America’s “most fatal mistake” inrnVietnam occurred through Americanrncomplicity in the October 196? deposalrnof President Diem; almost inadvertently,rnhe builds a case against the continuedrnAmerican commitment after that date.rnIn tracing the conflict between leftrnand right in these years, Pauken alsornidentifies a third force in Washington,rnvariously labeled “the American establishment,”rn”corporate liberals,” andrn”pragmatic corporate managers.” As thernideologues conduct massive public battles,rnthis shadowy third force flits m andrnout of Pauken’s story. Oddly, it is thern”corporate liberals,” rather than the leftrnor the right, who usually win, somethingrnPauken might have more fully explored.rnWisely, the publisher has edited lightly,rnand the reader feels sure that this isrnPauken’s own story. The words, phrases,rnand judgments offered have an authenticrnsound, which should make this bookrna ‘aluable resource for future historiansrnof late 20th-century American conservatism.rnReclaiming Morality in America,rnWilliam Murchison’s popular history ofrnmoral collapse in 20th-century /merica,rnreflects another strain of the new Texasrnconservatism. Son of an old Texas family,rna historian trained at the Uniersitv ofrnTexas, and for 20 years a columnist at thernDallas Morning Star News, Murchisonrncarefully dissects the moral disorders ofrnour time.rnDehning morality as “a set of propositionsrnabout who we humans are, with accompanyingrnguidelines for the properrncare and maintenance of our nature,”rnMurchison correctK concludes that therncurrent immorality in America is notrnsimply a product of the I960’s. At therndeepest level, it was the Enlightenment’srnskepticism toward divine authority thatrnundermined moral certainty, andrnopened the floodgates for the “liberations”rnof the 1920’s and 1960’s. Murchisonrnablv traces this attitude’s negativerneffects on “the solemnity and grandeurrnof the marital promise,” and its encouragementrnof pornography, fornication,rnand homosexuality.rnAddressing the issue of possiblernsolutions, Murchison endorses familiarrnpolicy steps: an increase in the federal taxrndeduction for dependents; a schoolrnvoucher plan; and the abolition ofrnno-fault divorce. Yet he places more emphasisrnon the construction of a “newrncounterculture” resting on the “threernteaching institutions: family, church,rnand school.” Repentance and characterbuilding,rnhe insists, can be achievedrnthrough new forms of entertainment,rnmorality-infused schools, and the mutualrnreinforcement of family and church.rnIf Murchison falls short, it is in underestimatingrnthe countercultural requirementsrnfor moral reform. Vouchers, forrnexample, will not be enough to generaterna new order (and, indeed, may subjectrnprivate schools that receive them to newrnforms of state guidance). The morernpromising avenue here is home education,rnwhich truly renews the functionalrnbasis of the family. Moreover, family declinernm this centur) has been driven byrnthe expansion of both state and industry.rnWhile Murchison properly understandsrnand excoriates the former, he spends toornlittle time on the consequences of thernlatter.rnTaken together, Pauken’s “movementrnconservatism” and Murchison’s “socialrnconservatism” combine well, and explainrnmuch about recent political changes inrnTexas. Missing from both books, however,rnis a full appreciation of the importancernof the economic populism thatrndrove the Wallace campaign in 1972. Ifrnand when that native Southern ingredientrnis reintroduced into the formula, thernresults will be potent for conservatism,rnfor the Republican Party, for Texas, andrnfor the nation.rnAllan Carlson is the president of ThernRockford Institute and the publisher ofrnChronicles.rnThe Politics ofrnCausationrnby Sol SchindlerrnBalkan Tragedy: Chaos andrnDissolution After the Cold Warrnby Susan L. WoodwardrnWashington, D.C.:rnThe Brookings Institution;rn536 pp., $42.95rnThere are two popular theories ofrnhow the war in Yugoslavia started.rnDr. Susan L. Woodward in Balkan Tragedyrnshows how both are wrong, and givesrnus a well-documented and convincingrnhistory of the causes that led to the dissolutionrnof Yugoslavia.rnOne opinion, widely held in thisrncountry, is that the fighting in Bosnia isrnpart of a pattern of aggression by thernSerbs against the legitimate governmentsrnof sovereign members of the UnitedrnNations. Internationally recognizedrnborders have been violated by Serbs seekingrnthe creation of a greater Serbia,rnmeaning the incorporation into Serbia ofrnportions of both Croatia and Bosnia, andrnthe forced expulsion of non-Serbianrnpopulations (ethnic cleansing) fromrnthese areas. Such acts of aggression arernMARCH 1996/35rnrnrn