In
May 2013, St. Martin's Press released a new book authored by
conservative syndicated columnist and Dispatch
International
correspondent Diana West, titled American
Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation's Character.
On its Amazon.com web page, American
Betrayal's
Book
Description says the following:
West ... uncovers a body of lies
that Americans have been led to regard as the near-sacred history of
World War II and its Cold War aftermath.... American
Betrayal
lights up the massive, Moscow-directed penetration of America’s
most hallowed halls of power, revealing not just the familiar
struggle between Communism and the Free World, but the hidden war
between those wishing to conceal the truth and those trying to expose
the increasingly official web of lies.
Before long, numerous conservative authors and websites had offered favorable assessments of American Betrayal. In early August
2013, FrontPage Magazine as well posted a positive review of the book, calling it “an eye-opening, unsettling read.”
Soon after the
publication of that review, however, FrontPage editor-in-chief David Horowitz
received an email about American Betrayal from Ronald Radosh, a highly respected historian
who has been a pioneer in documenting the
guilt of the Rosenbergs, analyzing the Amerasia
spy case, dissecting the Communist
infiltration of Hollywood, and telling the blunt truth about the
crimes of traitors like Alger
Hiss. In his email, Radosh said that he was greatly disturbed by
Frontpage’s endorsement of West’s book, and proceeded to explain:
It
amounts to a Birch Society type conspiracy history theory of
Communism and the Cold War, with half truths built to unwarranted
conclusions, a failure to comprehend history in context, as well as
great errors of fact that undermine her thesis. For one thing Harry
Hopkins was NOT Agent 19 [as West claims]. That was Larry Duggan. It
makes a big difference. She misuses [historians Harvey] Klehr and
[John Earl] Haynes throughout the book, and when they actually draw
opposite conclusions than she does, based on evidence, she simply
says they are wrong without bothering to prove her point. This is not
a difference of opinion; it is a failure to use evidence correctly in
order to spin her conspiracy theories….This is as important an
issue. Do we really want conservatives to rewrite history based on an
ideological view, while ignoring context, evidence and reality? That
is what she does.
Given
that Radosh’s concern was methodological—the
dishonesty in West’s use of conservative sources, her alleged abuse
of evidence, and her construction of conspiracy theories not based on
facts—Mr. Horowitz felt compelled to examine the blanket
endorsement which the FrontPage review had given the book. He spoke
to the author of that original, positive review, who readily
conceded that he was not familiar with the sources and could not
properly assess such crucial matters as, for instance, West's claim that Soviet
agents had gotten the United States to ship fissionable uranium to
Stalin via the Lend-Lease
Act of 1941. Thus, on Horowitz's instruction, the FrontPage editors
removed the favorable review of American Betrayal and politely informed West that
while a critical
review
(authored by Ronald Radosh) would be forthcoming, she herself could have an equal amount of space, on FrontPage, to defend her book in response.
Upon learning this, West—before Radosh's review had even been posted—accused FrontPage's editors of "behav[ing] like little totalitarians" and engaging in "nasty tactics."
Radosh's
review,
published the following day (August 7), stated the following:
[West]
argues that during the New Deal the United States was an occupied
power, its government controlled by Kremlin agents who had
infiltrated the Roosevelt administration and subverted it. Like
McCarthy, whom West
believes
got everything correct, she believes a conspiracy was at work that
effectively enabled the Soviets to be the sole victors in World War
II and shape American policies in the postwar world.
Writing
sixty years later, she claims that the evidence that has come to
light in the interim not only vindicates McCarthy’s claims but goes
well beyond anything he imagined. Throughout American
Betrayal,
West uses the terms “occupied” and “controlled” to describe
the influence the Soviet Union exerted over U.S. policy through its
agents and spies. She believes she has exposed “the
Communist-agent-occupation of the U.S. government” during the
Roosevelt and Truman eras, and that her discoveries add up to a
Soviet-controlled American government that conspired to strengthen
Russia throughout World War II at the expense of American interests,
marginalize anti-Communist Germans, and deliver the crucial material
for the Atomic Bomb to Stalin and his henchmen. It also conspiredto
cover up the betrayal. In West’s summation: “The Roosevelt
administration [was] penetrated, fooled, subverted, in effect
hijacked by Soviet agents… and engaged in a “‘sell-out’ to
Stalin” that “conspirators of silence on the Left … would bury
for as long as possible, desperately throwing mud over it and anyone
who wanted the sun to shine in.” According to West, it was only
because Washington was “Communist-occupied” that the United
States aligned itself with the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany.
But
Ms. West writes without an understanding of historical context and
lacks awareness of much of the scholarly literature on the subjects
she writes about. Moreover, she disregards the findings of the
sources she does rely on when they contradict her yellow journalism
conspiracy theories. Consequently she arrives at judgment after
judgment that is not only bizarre on its face, but also unwarranted
by the evidence and refuted by the very authorities she draws
on.
Radosh then proceeded to examine West's book
and its inaccuracies in detail.
West,
for her part, chose to reject FrontPage's offer of equal space
within which she could reply to this critical review. Instead, in an
article
which she posted on her own website, West launched a
series of personal attacks not only on Radosh but on the editors of
FrontPage,
calling
them “hypocrites,” “totalitarians,” “ossified
totalitarians,” commissars,” and liars, claiming that they had
“suppressed”—and “purged”—a favorable review of her book
because its opinions were “incorrect,” clearly implying that they
were politically
incorrect. In short, she misrepresented intellectual differences as acts of political
treason or suppression.
This section of Discover The Networks documents the
controversy between Diana West and FrontPage.
FrontPage Review of Diana West's American Betrayal