This is from the Claremont Review of Books, which is a right wing and often Trumpist publication that at least has the sense, if not substance, of intellectual rigor of the one, only, and original publication, The New York Review of Books.
What I love about the linked-to article from the Claremont Review is the end, where the writer recognizes that the last step of the book author's formulation of "Communist equals Traitor" is not proven. I felt the same as I spent a long time perusing the biographical book on the famed, eccentric biologist JBS Haldane, which was the attempt to prove Haldane was a Soviet spy. Haldane definitely cut an eccentric, contrary figure in British culture and even in the scientific world. He was a known and an open apologist for Stalin and Stalinist Russia. Haldane was one of those minds who was seemingly beyond brilliant. However, his engineer's mind which helped him with the study of genetics, mathematics, and evolutionary biology led him to a politics rancid in a cynical acceptance of things that did not fit, like how does a State claiming fealty to workers kill so many people, especially workers themselves? Well, said this particular mind, it can't happen. In other words, if the theory does not fit reality, deny the reality. It is almost as if Haldane was a French Communist...:)
Haldane failed refusing to apply British empiricism within a Marxist analysis, something Bertrand Russell nearly always applied. Russell presents an interesting contrast because Russell was a contemporary of Haldane, was a brilliant mathematically oriented mind, but rejected dogma across the board--and was an early and persistent critic of the Soviet Union. Russell was most misunderstood on our shores and in England during World War I, which he openly opposed and went to jail for sedition in England, and again in the 1950s, when, in a continuing argument with philosopher Sidney Hook, was of the view we were too enthralled with nuclear warfare, too ready to kill off a large portion of the planet for a battle with the Soviet Union, and that we needed to take a risk for peace, than risk war. This was satirized and then fossilized into a "reality" that Russell was of the view, "Better Red than dead." If one reads the written public correspondence, Russell merely expresses confidence the Soviet Union would fail, and that it was ludicrous to get so worked up to risk nuclear war. As we saw in world history, Russell proved far more prescient. The public correspondence may be found in this book from Sidney Hook, which I feel shows why Hook, ironically, as a moral philosopher, was fairly shallow.
Anyway, I linked to the Claremont article-review of the political biography of Haldane because I wonder, did the writer at the Claremont Review of Books show this parsing about not making the final connection between being a Communist and still not being a spy because the right wing is beginning to recognize the need to start defending a compromised President (Traitor) Trump? Hmmm....Just wondering.
Oh, and I cannot resist my favorite Haldane story. It seems Haldane was once in the company of British theologians who asked Haldane, an avowed atheist, about the idea of a God or God-like Creator of our planet. Haldane is supposed to have replied the Creator appears to have had an inordinate fondness for beetles. Here is a very good back story regarding the history of the anecdote.
