Our future depends "on the correct or incorrect, honest or dishonest use of information." "Formerly ignorance was the enemy, today it is falsehood." Communism and Nazism are both dead, hence it's an interesting point that the Left wants to keep Nazism "alive," so to speak; apparently to sustain the myth that the Right is the danger which we must remain vigilant against, as they continue to trumpet the notion of collectiveness and anti-capitalism under other guises; as well as the notion that enlightened government can transform society if given the power to do so. In a way this is to be expected: "A school of thought that knows it is in a state of decline struggles even more fiercely to preserve its identity." Revel is not at all surprised consequently that French textbooks even into 1980 continued to embellish Sovietism. (I'd add further that Hitler denunciations still out number anti-Stalin comments 1000-1. Moreover, how many films touching on Lenin or Stalin have been made? Why is nothing on film about communism/Soviet brutality in Eastern Europe and the Baltics/Soviet Gulags/Red terror wholesale murderings/show trials & Soviet anti-semitism...just to name a few subjects that are ignored while Nazi issues/characters/events feature in countless films.) But just because the French Revolution, and its communistic offspring, can be seen to have proved a failure (in Eastern Europe, the USSR, Cambodia, Vietnam, Cuba, Angola, Mozambique, North Korea, et al) doesn't mean fans of such states' 'motives' have reconsidered their inclined views. As Lauret Fabius, the former socialist prime minister of France, has put it: "Socialism is a direction." As long as it can claim anything supposedly positive (Castro's famed health system, for instance) it gets a pass on everything else. That's why Stalin always got the benefit of any possible doubts from those so inclined; and such explains the Left's silence when the Soviet Union signed a pact with Hitler, and later when it invaded Czechoslovkia, Hungary, & Afghanistan (all the while railing against the WEST over Pinochet's Chile and South African apartheid & other such states led by more Rightist governments). Last year on TV I saw a prominent author (Simon Winchester) toss an aside that "of course I have great admiration for the Rosenbergs." This notwithstanding the publication, just several years ago, of the "Venona" cables & Russian documents which conclusively prove that the Rosenbergs were traitors. Such is the epitome of Mr. Revel's point: "Arguments/discoveries are not imposed by intellectual conviction." Revel quotes Jonathan Swift in support of this notion: "You cannot reason a person out of something he has not been reasoned into." Such folks are simply going to hold onto their instinctive beliefs & society is going to simply have to wait them out. Revel compares the dynamic to the development of science. Scientific theories often do not triumph over other theories on facts, but rather by having the staying power to hold their own while the previous theories wither on the vine (and the previous theory adherents give way to a succeeding generation). In short, with all our development in education, the accessibility of travel & information, etc., we as a people are not getting any wiser. Society is getting wiser, however, but unfortunately at high cost. (The lesson of failed communism, of government not being able to transform society without recourse to terror, cost tens of millions of lives.) Things would be a lot easier, of course, if people tried using their own brains more. Once something fails over and over again it behooves us to recognize that fact and consider alternate means to achieve the goal at hand.