paralyze the U.S. while acceleratingnthe development of their own systemnbehind a screen of deceptions andntreaty violations.nWhile the SDI has won its casenintellectually and enjoys support innpolls, the Soviet strategic defense initiativenis not generally known to thenmajority of Americans dependent fornall they know on the anchormen.nThose tycoons of the cutting roomnprefer to award prime time to Sandinistanevangelists or Soviet Americanistsncoached to resemble smiling Ohio politicians,nor worse still, to the Sagan-nCaldicotts whose formidable argumentsninclude the moral equivalencenof Moscow and Washington.nFor the “peace” and protest movementsnwhose principal message is thenhorror of war, Chalfont argues that atnleast a cautious welcome was to benexpected, to a strategy whose leadingnidea is to defend, not merely avenge, anfree society. Lord Chalfont’s comprehensivenand concise book is an SDInprimer on the nuclear dilemma andnthe present suicide pact of MAD, asnwell as the political and the strategicndimension, the technology and feasibilitynof a strategic defense, the Soviets’nown SDI program, the Initiative in thencontext of arms control, and the largernimplications of a new strategic conceptnfor the United States, NATO, and thenworld. Written by a leading Europeannspokesman in defense and internationalnaffairs, Chalfont’s book is an eminentlyncommonsensical contributionnto the health of the West.nJohn L. Romjue is a historian withnthe U.S. Army.nThe WorldnAccording tonSt. Muggnby Paul StallsworthnVintage Muggeridge—Religion andnSociety, edited by Geoffrey Barlow,nGrand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. EerdmansnPublishing Company; $7.95.nIf we are to believe today’s punditsn— an awfully big “if” — there arenmany global crises threatening then20th century. Nuclear weapons andnoverpopulation currently top the list.nUnfortunately, it sometimes seemsnthat there are only two available responses.nThe first is the “liberal” response,nwhich assumes that mankindnalready possesses the tools and skills tonrepair the world: If only people of goodnintentions will try harder to do thenright things, they can fix everything.nThe other popular response to thencrises of the hour is the “conservative”nresponse—an eat-drink-and-be-merrynattitude toward that which is perceivednto threaten mankind. This responsenrepresents the party of resignation.nThe book under review reminds itsnreaders that there is a third way tonaddress the most pressing problems ofnhuman societies. The third way is notna moderate compromise between thenliberal and the conservative answers.nRather, this third way transcends both.nIts perspective goes beyond the easynoptimism of much of today’s liberalismnand the easy cynicism of somenconservatism. It is shaped primarily bynwhat might be called eternity.nVintage Muggeridge—10 essays,naddresses, and sermons by MalcolmnMuggeridge and the transcripts ofnthree interviews with him by WilliamnF. Buckley Jr.—pictures more thanndid Saint Augustine receiving the newsnof the fall of Rome. And Augustine’snresponse? He turned his thought towardnthe City of God—toward eternity.nLikewise, Muggeridge sees himselfnin the midst of a contemporary culturalncollapse turning his gaze towardneternity.nMuggeridge’s anticipation does notnmean that he has no use or time fornthis world. To the contrary, his concernnwith eternity results in deepenedninsight into the affairs of this world.nHis perceptions are based on two simplenclaims: First, Muggeridge believesn”that God is responsible for Creation,nand God is a God of love, not of hate;nGod is all the qualities that we want tonsee in the world, and nothing can bensettied except in relation to that.” Andnsecond, he believes that “man cannmake an inconceivable mess of anything.”nBy assuming grand divine possibilitiesnand grand human limitations,nMuggeridge is able to see the irony andnstupidity of much human action.nThose who strive for a collective goodnnnwithout God set out “seeking happiness,n[but] fall into despair, seekingnknowledge, into obscurantism and credulity,nseeking freedom, into total servitude,nand seeking security, into totalnvulnerability.” Those who strive fornpersonal happiness also fail miserably.n” ‘To sleep with that girl will make menhappy. To have this money and to benable to do this, that, and the othernthing, will make me happy. To be ablento be eloquent and applauded willnmake me happy.’ None of these thingsnmake us happy. They are wretchednthings.” Like Pascal and ReinholdnNiebuhr, Muggeridge contends that itnis the human condition to be temptednby pride to become like gods and to bentempted by sensuality to become likenanimals.nBut also, the human condition livesnunder the promise of divine possibilities.nThese possibilities were opened,nup to all of mankind in the Incarnation,nand they will reach fulfillment innthe coming Kingdom of God. Beforenthe Kingdom comes, all is not lost, forn”there is this extraordinary happiness,nand the happiness lies in being awarenthat, as a human being created bynGod, one is fulfilling God’s purpose.”nMuggeridge’s themes are heavy, butnhe conveys them lightiy, directiy, andnwith a wonderful sense of humor.nTo 1960’s Edinburgh students henpreached that “whatever life is or is notnabout, it is not to be expressed in termsnof drug stupefaction and casual sexualnrelations. However else we may ventureninto the unknown it is not I assurenyou on the plastic wings of Playboynmagazine or psychedelic fancies.” Hisndescription of the standard guests on anBBC television talk show is as funny asnit is accurate: You have the sociologist;nyou have the “life-purist usually with anmoustache”; you have a “knock-aboutnclergyman of no particular denomination.”nHis irreverence is unmatchable:n”Half a century in the communicationsnbusiness has served to intensifynmy skepticism about procedures whichnpurport to measure statistically individualnand social attitudes, and I havenlong considered that the Romans werenmore sensible in using the entrails of anchicken rather than a slide-rule tonforecast the future.”nIt might be objected that MalcolmnMuggeridge is just a cranky old mannwho has not progressed with the times.nAUGUST 1987 / 29n