FINALLY -- IN AUDIOBOOK!
ALSO AVAILABLE IN PAPERBACK
"It is not simply a good book about history. It is one of those books which makes history. ... "
-- Vladimir Bukovsky, co-founder of the Soviet dissident movement and author of Judgment in Moscow, and Pavel Stroilov, author of Behind the Desert Storm.
"Diana West is distinguished from almost all political commentators because she seeks less to defend ideas and proposals than to investigate and understand what happens and what has happened. This gives her modest and unpretentious books and articles the status of true scientific inquiry, shifting the debate from the field of liking and disliking to being and non-being."
-- Olavo de Carvalho
If you're looking for something to read, this is the most dazzling, mind-warping book I have read in a long time. It has been criticized by the folks at Front Page, but they don't quite get what Ms. West has set out to do and accomplished. I have a whole library of books on communism, but -- "Witness" excepted -- this may be the best.
-- Jack Cashill, author of Deconstructing Obama: The Lives, Loves and Letters of America's First Postmodern President and First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America
"Every once in a while, something happens that turns a whole structure of preconceived ideas upside down, shattering tales and narratives long taken for granted, destroying prejudice, clearing space for new understanding to grow. Diana West's latest book, American Betrayal, is such an event."
-- Henrik Raeder Clausen, Europe News
West's lesson to Americans: Reality can't be redacted, buried, fabricated, falsified, or omitted. Her book is eloquent proof of it.
-- Edward Cline, Family Security Matters
"I have read it, and agree wholeheartedly."
-- Angelo Codevilla, Professor Emeritus of International Relations at Boston Unversity, and fellow of the Claremont Institute.
Enlightening. I give American Betrayal five stars only because it is not possible to give it six.
-- John Dietrich, formerly of the Defense Intelligence Agency and author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy.
After reading American Betrayal and much of the vituperation generated by neoconservative "consensus" historians, I conclude that we cannot ignore what West has demonstrated through evidence and cogent argument.
-- John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D., Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
"A brilliantly researched and argued book."
-- Edward Jay Epstein, author of Deception: The Invisible War between the KGB and the CIA, The Annals 0f Unsolved Crime
"This explosive book is a long-needed answer to court histories that continue to obscure key facts about our backstage war with Moscow. Must-reading for serious students of security issues and Cold War deceptions, both foreign and domestic."
-- M. Stanton Evans, author of Stalin's Secret Agents and Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies
Her task is ambitious; her sweep of crucial but too-little-known facts of history is impressive; and her arguments are eloquent and witty. ... American Betrayal is one of those books that will change the way many of us see the world.
-- Susan Freis Falknor, Blue Ridge Forum
"American Betrayal is absolutely required reading. Essential. You're sleepwalking without it."
-- Chris Farrell, director of investigations research, Judicial Watch
"Diana West wrote a brilliant book called American Betrayal, which I recommend to everybody ... It is a seminal work that will grow in importance."
-- Newt Gingrich, former House Speaker
"This is a must read for any serious student of history and anyone working to understand the Marxist counter-state in America."
-- John Guandolo, president, Understanding the Threat, former FBI special agent
“What Diana West has done is to dynamite her way through several miles of bedrock. On the other side of the tunnel there is a vista of a new past. Of course folks are baffled. Few people have the capacity to take this in. Her book is among the most well documented I have ever read. It is written in an unusual style viewed from the perspective of the historian—but it probably couldn’t have been done any other way.”
-- Lars Hedegaard, historian, journalist, founder, Danish Free Press Society
The polemics against your Betrayal have a familiar smell: The masters of the guild get angry when someone less worthy than they are ventures into the orchard in which only they are privileged to harvest. The harvest the outsider brought in, they ritually burn.
-- Hans Jansen, former professor of Islamic Thought, University of Utrecht
No book has ever frightened me as much as American Betrayal. ... [West] patiently builds a story outlining a network of subversion so bizarrely immense that to write it down will seem too fantastic to anyone without the book’s detailed breadth and depth. It all adds up to a story so disturbing that it has changed my attitude to almost everything I think about how the world actually is. ... By the time you put the book down, you have a very different view of America’s war aims and strategies. The core question is, did the USA follow a strategy that served its own best interests, or Stalin’s? And it’s not that it was Stalin’s that is so compelling, since you knew that had to be the answer, but the evidence in detail that West provides that makes this a book you cannot ignore.
-- Steven Kates, RMIT (Australia) Associate Professor of Economics, Quadrant
"Diana West's new book rewrites WWII and Cold War history not by disclosing secrets, but by illuminating facts that have been hidden in plain sight for decades. Furthermore, she integrates intelligence and political history in ways never done before."
-- Jeffrey Norwitz, former professor of counterterrorism, Naval War College
[American Betrayal is] the most important anti-Communist book of our time ... a book that can open people's eyes to the historical roots of our present malaise ... full of insights, factual corroboration, and psychological nuance.
-- J.R. Nyquist, author, Origins of the Fourth World War
Although I know [Christopher] Andrew well, and have met [Oleg] Gordievsky twice, I now doubt their characterization of Hopkins -- also embraced by Radosh and the scholarly community. I now support West's conclusions after rereading KGB: The Inside Story account 23 years later [relevant passages cited in American Betrayal]. It does not ring true that Hopkins was an innocent dupe dedicated solely to defeating the Nazis. Hopkins comes over in history as crafty, secretive and no one's fool, hardly the personality traits of a naïve fellow traveler. And his fingerprints are on the large majority of pro-Soviet policies implemented by the Roosevelt administration. West deserves respect for cutting through the dross that obscures the evidence about Hopkins, and for screaming from the rooftops that the U.S. was the victim of a successful Soviet intelligence operation.
-- Bernie Reeves, founder of The Raleigh Spy Conference, American Thinker
Diana West’s American Betrayal — a remarkable, novel-like work of sorely needed historical re-analysis — is punctuated by the Cassandra-like quality of “multi-temporal” awareness. ... But West, although passionate and direct, is able to convey her profoundly disturbing, multi-temporal narrative with cool brilliance, conjoining meticulous research, innovative assessment, evocative prose, and wit.
-- Andrew G. Bostom, PJ Media
Do not be dissuaded by the controversy that has erupted around this book which, if you insist on complete accuracy, would be characterized as a disinformation campaign.
-- Jed Babbin, The American Spectator
In American Betrayal, Ms. West's well-established reputation for attacking "sacred cows" remains intact. The resulting beneficiaries are the readers, especially those who can deal with the truth.
-- Wes Vernon, Renew America
Friday, September 21, 2007 7:08 AM
One of the supreme delights of blogging, of course, is the fact that the Internet enables the muttered responses of the individual reacting to the world around him to reach a heretofore unimagined audience. This sense of equalizing empowerment comes down to this: Today, the breakfast table; tomorrow the world!
Take the author of a book, for instance. Pre-'net, on reading what, in this particular case, she determines is an unfair and/or superficial review, she could have complained to her husband and written a letter to the editor. Her husband, being the right sort, would comfort her, but would the letter be printed? Maybe, maybe not. And then what happens? It's off to the recycling bin. Today, however, she can complain to her husband, write a letter to the editor AND, whether it was printed in the paper, post it on her website forever.
Here, then, is my response to the review of The Death of the Grown-Up in the Wall Street Journal by John Leo, which was a disappointment not because it was unfavorable--honest--but because it failed either to present or engage with the bulk of the book's thesis.
John Leo calls my book, "The Death of the Grown-Up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization," "provocative" (Bookshelf, Leisure & Arts, Aug. 21), but he doesn't know the half of it.
At least, he didn't review the half of it -- or, to be precise, the last two-thirds of the book that connect the cult of perpetual adolescence not just to the old culture wars from which multiculturalism ascended, but to the new culture war -- the real culture war -- that the West, now in a period of adolescent-style identity crisis, faces in this era of resurgent jihadist Islam. Having finished writing his review, perhaps he can finish reading the book.
It's not so much a matter of having the last word as having a word at all.
Now, for the other review that cried out for some response, the one that ran in The New York Times by William Grimes. At least Grimesy grasped the thesis, even if he did stoop to ad hominem attack and non-supported statements to reject it. I'm not holding my breath until the Times publishes this letter, so here it is, an Internet Exclusive.
To the Editor:
In his review of my book, “The Death of the Grown-Up: How America’s Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization,” William Grimes makes it plain to readers of the New York Times that he did not like it. Sure, there were a few crumbs for the author (“she writes with great flair,” she “has a sense of humor,” she “makes a principled, conservative cultural argument unflinchingly, “ she “does know how to get the pulse racing,” etc.). But the review was overwhelmingly a complete rejection of my key thesis examining the impact of the infantilization of our culture—which the book analyzes in terms of family life, manners and morés, pop culture, the rise of multiculturalism, the loss of Western identity—on the current war against Islamic jihad.
Indeed, Mr. Grimes brands my thesis “half-baked.” At no point, however, does he even begin to demonstrate why--unless ad hominem attacks on an author for not having sufficient “intellectual firepower” count for analysis at the New York Times. He neither mounts reasoned opposition to my main points, nor does he point out a single error or disconnect in my historical argument or logical progression. “To get from the baseball cap to Bin Laden, Ms. West takes more leaps than Carl Lewis,” Mr. Grimes writes—offering no example of elliptical thinking. “She is long on assertion and light on data,” he declares—offering no example of unsupported statements.
Mr. Grimes dismisses my “grand thesis about the West’s failure to confront Islam”--which I ultimately put down to the absence of “adults” mature enough to own up to the politically incorrect differences between the West and Islam, leaving us prattling on about the “religion of peace” and one-size-fits-all yearnings for “freedom.” Here, he seems to abandon all pretense at mounting a professional critique. I make this case “none too convincingly,” he writes (again, no examples). This is a sloppy—dare I say immature?--way to dismiss, for example, a factual analysis of the crucial differences between conceptions of human rights in the West and the Islamic world contained in a comparison of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and several Islamic human rights documents, including the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights, which hold sharia (Islamic law) supreme. It is also a sloppy way to dismiss the weighty research of such scholars of Islam including John Ralph Ellis, Bernard Lewis and Franz Rosenthal, who are cited, for example, in a discussion of the disparate meanings of freedom in the West and Islam. (In Islam, freedom, or hurriyya, may be defined as “perfect slavery” to Allah.) “The generalizations fly fast and free,” Mr. Grimes writes, “obscuring completely valid points in the process.” Generalizations--what generalizations? He doesn’t cite one. And if these “points” I have supposedly “obscured” are so “completely valid,” what in tarnation are they?
Mr. Grimes doesn’t have the answer. Talk about “long on assertion and light on data, ” not to mention unconvincing arguments. Frankly, I expected more “intellectual firepower” from the New York Times.
As Laura Ingraham might say, Power to the People.