The Nation writer, Sam Husseini, was kicked out of the Trump-Putin press conference for holding up a sign making a mere reference to the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty from the 1960s. I can't wait for the Stephen Cohen-Katrina van den Heuvel apology for Putin on this one...:)
What is behind this snarky remark of mine is, a quarter century ago, van den Heuvel joined in with Victor Navasky in a continuing libel against Freda Kirchwey, calling Kirchwey a pro-Soviet dupe...Kirchwey knew a dictatorship when she saw it, and penned, in 1939, one of the most outstanding, and succinct, left attacks on the Soviet Union called "Red Totalitarianism" (Scroll down for the portion of the essay). I give van den Heuvel credit for reprinting this, but I definitely recall, during the 1980s and 1990s, Navasky, Eric Alterman, and others (including van den Huevel), delighted in libeling Kirchwey for being a Soviet lackey, missing the point that Kirchwey was merely a Popular Front supporter. In doing so, they also missed the point that the Popular Front was a major reason why the New Deal was so successful in promoting its policies during the period of the Popular Front (1935-1939).
Oh well. Leftist defenses of Trumpist coziness with Putin remains remarkable to me. My take, as readers know, is more subtle. I can, if asked, make a case that Trumpists may have a policy basis for cozying up with the Russians in terms of a foreign policy against Islamic fundamentalism, as we see Israel cozying up to Putin for its own reasons of what it calls maintaining "security" in the Golan Heights area. Is that treason, or is it merely a proposed foreign policy to deal with Islamic-based terror around the world? A reasonable question, and one where people may find reasons to disagree as well as agree in the margins.
However, for Cold Warriors and right wingers who love attacking "libtards" and their "socialist/Commie" friends, it means running through the same analysis for Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Owen Lattimore, John Stewart Service, and so many others. And what we would find from this analysis is that one must exonerate each and every one of those people from the perfidies and libels ascribed to them starting in the 1940s. And it requires as well the rejection of the canard of "Liberal equals Socialist equals Communist equals Treason!" It means, in other words, not castigating the patriotism of someone for wanting Medicare for All or calling Bernie Sanders a "Commie" with the implication of his not being a patriotic American.
One may, however, say there is a difference with what is happening with Trump. For Trump is not interested in policy as policy. He is all about personality, flattery, and above all else, money. Putin, and Putin's klepto-republic allies, have saved Trump's financial base for nearly 20 years. That makes Trump's conduct, to my mind, far more nefarious because he is literally putting himself above the nation's interests for his own personal gain and protection. It is the reverse of Nathan Hale as Trump is saying "I regret I have but one country to give for my life." (Hat tip: Phil Ochs talking about South Vietnam's Diem in 1963). What Hiss, White, Lattimore and Service were after was a New Deal foreign policy, and they were neither traitors nor were they people who wanted in any way to hurt our nation's best interests. They were not in it for the money or personal gain. This is what should bother people about Trump's abject behavior toward Putin. It is not even about policy and America's interests at all with Trump, just vanity, flattery, and again money.
