#: 495587 S7/JFK Debate  [POLITICS]
    29-Feb-96  09:09:22
Sb: #Prouty Book Critique 3
Fm: D.T. FUHRMANN 71301,527
To: ALL

Continued....part 3:


Finally, to complete Chapter 1, Prouty turns once again to his primary
concern....the CIA.  His assertion:

"By the end of World War II the great financial powers of the Western world,
aided by their omnipotent Wall Street lawyers, had decided it was time to
create a new world power center of transnational corporations and, in the
process, to destroy the Soviet Union and socialism.  To achieve this 
enormous objective they chose as their principle driving force the covert 
power and might of the CIA and its invisible allies."  (Page 18)

No sense of the vast changes in communications and transportation and
industrial development resulting from technology and modernization. No sense
of historical forces and sociocultural trends at work. Only the secretive,
cabalistic decisions and efforts of the notorious and ever-elusive "them."

Nor is there any sense of the turbulent changes then occurring in Europe in
the aftermath of the war. No indication that the actions and attitudes 
of the Soviets played any role, only that this "high cabal" as Prouty 
calls them has decided to "destroy the Soviet Union and socialism."  
Setting aside for the moment the question this raises regarding Prouty's 
own sympathies and political preferences (is he a fan of Stalin's Russia? 
A supporter of the socialist worker's paradise?), Prouty still offers no 
evidence of these momentous decisions actually being made.  Only an 
assertion.

In summing up Mr. Prouty's first chapter, a paragraph from Richard
Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" provides (IMO) a
trenchant assessment of views such as that which Mr. Prouty is offering 
here:

"The central image is that of a vast and sinister conspiracy, a gigantic and
yet subtle machinery of influence set in motion to undermine and destroy 
a way of life.  One may object that there ARE conspiratorial acts in 
history and there is nothing paranoid about taking note of them.  This is 
true. All political behavior requires strategy, many strategic acts 
depend for their effect on a period of secrecy, and anything that is 
secret maybe described, often with but little exaggeration, as 
conspiratorial. The distinguishing thing about the paranoid style is not 
that its exponents see conspiracies or plots here and there in history, 
but that they regard a "vast" or "gigantic" conspiracy as THE MOTIVE 
FORCE in historical events.  History IS a conspiracy set in motion by 
demonic forces of almost transcendent power, and what is felt to be 
needed to defeat it is not the usual methods of political give and take, 
but an all-out crusade.  The paranoid spokesman sees the fate of the 
conspiracy in apocalyptic terms....Time is forever just running 
out....He does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and 
compromised....Since what is at stake is always a conflict between 
absolute good and absolute evil, the quality needed is not a willingness 
to compromise but the will to fight things out to the finish....This 
demand for unqualified victories leads to the formation of hopelessly 
demanding and unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even 
remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid's 
frustration."   [SOURCE: Richard Hofstadter, "The Paranoid Style in American
Politics, 1965]

One might additionally note that the constant failure of the conspiracy
theorist to attain their lofty goals of overcoming the alleged 
conspiracy, not to mention their inability to persuade other people to 
support their views, all simply provides further "evidence" of the power 
and reach of the despised conspiracy. Every setback, every obstacle, 
every objection or argument is simply ascribed to the efforts and effect 
of the hated conspiracy. And every bit of information or knowledge which 
fails to confirm or support the views of the conspiracy theorist becomes 
indirect "evidence" that the conspiracy is that much more omniscient and 
that much more omnipotent.

Thus far all we have from Mr. Prouty is some rumors, some assertions and
allegations which he does not support with anything other than his own 
say-so, incidents of meetings taken out of context, and a theory of 
history which verges, in Richard Hofstadter's words, on the "paranoid 
style." What we do NOT have is solid substantiation, careful analysis of 
historical events and circumstances, or any serious explanation of the 
situation which existed in 1945/1946 as the Cold War began. His use of 
footnotes is not to provide the reader with the references and sources 
for his assertions and allegations, or for the bases on which he has 
built his arguments.  They are for the most part merely casual asides 
which offer yet another opportunity to make more assertions and 
allegations, still without reference or citation.  When, in rare 
instances, Prouty does actually refer to another work, it is without 
clearly indicating page numbers....and in each case (in Chapter One at 
least) it turns out he is lifting the material out of context in order to 
use it to support or bolster his own opinions and arguments.

Maybe he will do better in the next few chapters.........

That's it for today, but to be continued soon........<g>

dtf
aae, BSdE

There is 1 Reply.