How Evil Succeeds? Because Truth Tellers Are Ostracised

In an article at, Jack Cashill recalls the ordeal Whittaker Chambers went through when he tried to expose the Communist infiltration of FDR regime.

Evil succeeds not because nobody notices that it is advancing, but because it also makes sure that those who have responsibility to act against it are compromised from the beginning. To bring down a people, their ruling elite is first hollowed out from within.

It was, not invariably, but in general, the “best people” who were for Alger Hiss and who were prepared to go to any length to protect and defend him. It was the enlightened and the powerful, the clamorous proponents of the open mind and the common man, who snapped their minds shut in a pro-Hiss psychosis, of a kind which, in an individual patient, means the simple failure of the ability to distinguish between reality and unreality, and, in a nation, is a warning of the end.

I came across this paragraph days after the media unloaded on Giuliani for daring to say the obvious about the Harvard Law grad in the White House, namely that he does not love America, at least under any useful definition of the word “love.” When Giuliani followed up, saying, “From the time he was nine years old, he was influenced by Frank Marshall Davis, who was a communist,” he was introducing evidence to people who had long since snapped their minds shut about Obama. Most, even in the media, had likely never even heard of Davis.

Those of us who have tried to share uncomfortable truths about Obama, no matter how obvious, have experienced some of the frustration Chambers felt and likely endured at least a sliver of the abuse. Then as now, it is what Chambers called “the great body of the nation” that keeps its mind open “waiting for the returns to come in.”

As to why our progressive betters respond as they do to the truth tellers in their midst, Chambers nailed that as well:

The simple fact is that when I took up my little sling and aimed at Communism, I also hit something else. What I hit was the forces of that great socialist revolution, which, in the name of liberalism, spasmodically, incompletely, somewhat formlessly, but always in the same direction, has been inching its ice cap over the nation for two decades.

When Chambers changed sides in this epic showdown, he thought he was abandoning the winning side for the losing one. All these years later, I am not sure he wasn’t right.” (from the article)

Read the whole article here.