Bukovsky and Stroilov: ‘American Betrayal’ Will Make History

Below are excerpts from an article by Vladimir Bukovsky and Pavel Stroilov about Diana West’s book American Betrayal. It serves as the introduction to Chapter One from Judgement in Moscow, Vladimir Bukovsky’s book, which has never been published in English before:

West’s ‘American Betrayal’ Will Make History

by Vladimir Bukovsky and Pavel Stroilov

The debate over Diana West’s book American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character has been far below the intellectual standard set by the book itself. Both sides now seem to regret the fact that the debate has degenerated into a personal squabble and are keen to end “the war of words.”

In this spirit, hopefully we shall be excused for declining to respond to personal attacks against us, to accusations that we joined personal attacks against others, and to the criticism that we are blaming the wrong people for starting all those personal attacks. The serious issues raised in Mrs. West’s book certainly deserve a more intelligent debate.

Contrary to the complacent myths of the establishment, the United States and other Western democracies have not won the Cold War. Of course, on the simplistic view of it as a purely military confrontation between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, the former can claim a formal victory simply by having survived its adversary.

However, the Cold War was always much more than just a military conflict. It was an ideological war waged by the totalitarian utopia of Socialism against our civilization; and on that level, the most optimistic view of it is that it still goes on. The Soviet Union is gone, but Russia is still governed by a junta of Gestapo officers; China is still governed by the Communist Party; and the Western world is governed by closet Marxists and Mensheviks, imposing on us yet another version of the same socialist utopia. Those are facts of life, and whether or not you accept Mrs. West’s explanation of their historic causes, they do need some explanation. Surely, if the free world really won the Cold War against totalitarianism, we should have been in a better shape now.

The truth is that the Western Establishment surrendered to Socialism long, long ago. Of course, the left was only glad to surrender: to them, the Soviets were no enemies, but allies pursuing the same goals, though perhaps somewhat mistaken about the tactics. Moreover, while the left surrendered enthusiastically, the right surrendered reluctantly — but they did surrender, too. The “conservatives” accepted socialism as the inevitable future of the world, which could, perhaps, be delayed, but could not be destroyed.

This is why, even at the better moments of the Cold War, their strategy was limited to “containment” of the communist expansion, but never went as far as “roll-back.” This is why, whenever a right-wing government succeeded a left-wing one, it always made a gloomy declaration that “you cannot unscramble the eggs,” and would not try to undo the damage caused by their predecessors. This is why, until the very last moment, anyone even mentioning the possibility of a collapse of the Soviet Union was considered a heretic, if not a lunatic. This is why the most conservative politicians of the West became loyal supporters of Comrade Gorbachev: if socialism as such was invincible, some moderate reforms of the system were the best you could hope for. And finally, this is why the downfall of Gorbachev’s regime came as a total surprise to the entire world — not as a long-awaited victory.

Vaclav Havel once complained that there were whole libraries written about the transition from capitalism to socialism, but not a single book about a transition from socialism to capitalism. Nobody thought that could ever happen. We had given up fighting long ago — and then, the Soviet monster suddenly died a natural death. As Margaret Thatcher famously said, socialism dies when it runs out of other people’s money. So it did in Russia, despite the entire world’s efforts to save it.


Essentially, all we can contribute to this debate is exactly what we have been trying to say for all those years.

Vladimir’s book Judgement in Moscow, written in 1993 and published in most countries of continental Europe, was suppressed in the English-speaking world by means described in the first chapter of it. For many years, even mentioning the existence of that manuscript was something of a taboo in the Western media. Thus, when Claire Berlinsky was brave enough to mention it in the City Journal, that immediately provoked one of those Radosh pogroms against her.

The first chapter of the book, published for the first time by Breitbart News, is probably the best illustration of our thesis.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

For links to previous articles about the controversy over American Betrayal, see the Diana West Archives.

13 thoughts on “Bukovsky and Stroilov: ‘American Betrayal’ Will Make History

  1. ” As Margaret Thatcher famously said, socialism dies when it runs out of other people’s money.”
    Socialism … dies that’s fine. But what about when a country dies? How come that genius did not say that importing millions of Muslims will make the country of third world status, or a country will die when you its police force chased like chickens by Muslims. Bomb Iraq, Libya, .. etc. and stir the people in Yemen, Syria, Iran, Eritrea, Somalia, .. and import millions of Muslims to enrich your poorly-cultured country.

  2. You destroy Socialism and you destroy Islam’s hold on Europe…Millions of folk know something is very very wrong and they see and understand why….Many are too stupid or ignorant but the former outnumber the latter. Socialism, cannot and will never work, nor will Islam. Both are anti human, anti nature, anti evolutionary- they are unnatural and only maintain their “hold” on humanity through blood and terror….That is all that needs to be said.

    Nobody in Europe is going to stand by and let these two evils remain. Sooner rather than later-around 2015 I reckon, all hell will break loose-Goodbye Islam, Goodbye EU!

    People are bloody angry- I know because I listen to them! 1789 will look like a Vicar’s tea-party…Mark my words-This will happen every very soon. And there are too many of us to defeat…

      • Hesperado, that’s a wonderful idea, but I ask – in all sincerity w/ no snark – tell us how we unravel it.

        You’re a good writer, and your analyses are usually spot on. If you want to do an essay, I’d be willing to repost it here. Please let me know.

  3. Regarding the authors’ paras 5 & 6, I recall that Margaret Thatcher “rolled back” socialism here in the UK, much to the chagrin of those of us on the Left!

    The CIA, I believe, plotted the defeat of Chile’s democratically elected President Allende, helping pave the way for the undemocratic Pinochet regime, which was of course a great success.

  4. A serious intelligent debate about these issues is not wanted. It will lead to revelations that few want to hear. Vladimir Bukovsky and Pavel Stroilov give the optimistic view that the Cold War is still going on. I would suggest that this war is over and that the “Soviets” have won. Diana West gives the decisive date of 1933 for the start of “Soviet” corruption of America. This corruption actually precedes that date. Closet Marxists and Mensheviks long ago captured the commanding heights of our system. A debate on these issues will reveal the complicity of many of our “leaders,” some still living, in mass murder and slavery. The dominant philosophy we are dealing with goes by many names: liberalism, socialism, communism, progressivism, etc. They all owe a debt to nihilism. Their end product is chaos. Irving Kristol pointed out, “What began to concern me more and more were the clear signs of rot and decadence germinating within American society – a rot and decadence that was no longer the consequence of liberalism but was the actual agenda of contemporary liberalism.”

  5. “I would suggest that this war is over and that the “Soviets” have won.”

    As long as some of us still breathe, they have not “won”. I agree with those who state that the cold battle (war is a misnomer for a show of force) has not been won. But I do not agree that the war has been lost. It only takes ONE determined individual to turn things around. That person is still missing, but will appear when one least expects it.

    • From your keyboard to the Karma Dude’s eyes. I’ll take one if he or she can be found.

      All I see so far are the bought-and-paid-for type professional pols…the few people of integrity are destroyed if they get any Tea Party support at all. The GOP and the machine pols are terrified of populists. So afraid that they’re willing to go down to defeat rather than accept the kind of practical help the Tea Party grassroots volunteers can provide.

      On the left, those grassroots “volunteers” are paid for by Obama’s slush fund, OfA. On the right – say, during our last presidential election – Romney almost broke both legs running away from free Tea Party help. That fear, fed by those Beltway RNC ‘analysts’ who warned him off, was a huge factor in his defeat. And he still doesn’t get it.

      • I’m not American, and probably understand your politics less well than most posters here. But in your country and mine (the UK) any party that offers a programme too far from the centre ground stands little chance of being elected, which surely means the Republicans must distance themselves from the Tea Party or remain in opposition?

        • The Tea “Party” has never considered itself a party. It’s a grassroots movement which will back any politician calling for lower taxes (T.E.A. = Taxed Enough Already) and will at least attempt to slow the cancerous growth of the federal government.

          Members have been harassed, intimidated, audited by the IRS and ridiculed by the professional crony politicians in Washington.

          They don’t want a third party; they simply want those in D.C. held accountable for their drunken sailor spending.

      • It seems to this distant observer that the US is heading the way of much of the West. You get a choice of voting left or very left. The right will be split between true conservatives and psuedo-Cons handing victory to the very left. Those “hard right, far right, ultra right” conservatives will be demonised by all right (sic) thinking people in the media, the academy & politics. Its already happening of course, but it can and will get much much worse.

        Here in NZ we had a referendum on appealing the law which states children can’t even be lightly smacked by a loving parent. 88% voted against the stoopid law. Naturally the referendum was ignored by ALL political parties. I joked at the time that we would soon regard with horror the attempt of parents to spank their own kids – it was a gag at the time, but now, if we believe our media, academics & politicians, its a given.

        Better get that 3rd Party up and running now yanks, don’t wait, things won’t improve.

        • The left would love a third party. It would mean they’d be in permanent control because the only thing a third party would do is divide the right.

          Either we’d go with the multi-party fractionalizing of the parliamentary system (which is now a better system than what we’ve got) – which I don’t *ever* see happening, not with our form of republic, or we have long periods with one party in charge. Ever since LBJ bought the black vote with his “War on Poverty” it has been increasingly hard for the GOP to gain much traction since socialism is anathema even to the Big Govt Pubs like George BUsh. So we push on to the bottom until all the money is gone…and then who knows what will happen??

  6. Pingback: Cleaning up the Blood and Broken Glass | Gates of Vienna

Comments are closed.