Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got It Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First [Paperback]

Mona Charen's book Useful Idiots is named after Lenin allegedly said it when referring to those in the West with sympathy for the Soviets; but were however despised by the Soviets. The term was then coined as official terminology by the CIA during the Cold War.

Charen dissects a wealth of incidents, the responses, speeches and the ideologies. She describes critically flawed military tactics in Vietnam made by Lindon B Johnson. In effect, making the case that with these errors in tactics helped prolong the Vietnam war. She is however, careful to highlight that a debate over the decision to send in ground troops to South Vietnam would've been an important and moral one, which in light of the hysteria propagated by the media, didn't happen.

Another example of Charen's reasoning is that the argument for disarmament was illogical. She points out that many were convinced the USSR was reacting to US aggression (she convincingly and seriously challenges that hypothesis); so if the US ceased arming itself, the USSR would stop or gradually reduce its own production. In effect ending tension and thus paving the way towards the end of the Cold War. In much of the 70's and early 80's however, the US was actually behind the Soviets in the Arms Race (under the presidency of Jimmy Carter), yet Communism swallowed up no less than 10 countries during that time (South Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, South Yemen, Nicaragua, Grenada, Angola, Ethiopia, Mozambique, and Afghanistan).

Covering such a long period of history, with so much having happened during that time becomes almost impossible to weave together into a coherent whole. But she guides the reader through seamlessly. She provides comprehensive examples of what was said and thought by critics, policy makers and journalists, and then shows they were wrong with what actually happened. Finding myself agreeing at this rather strange shift in historical perception, it rather brought to mind The Uses and Abuses of History.

On ordering a copy, I suspected it would be something along the lines of "politics for middle American housewives". I did find her style to be much less aggressive than many other politics books I could mention. However, as I've lived in Britain my whole life I did find Charen's ideology somewhat disconcerting at first (I put this down to having gotten used to an increasingly Socialist-leaning press in Britain whom I recall never missing an opportunity to ridicule Ronald Reagan. Although, to be fair, this was due to the evidently warm relationship between himself and Margaret Thatcher). Anyway, I soon warmed to Charen finding her arguments refreshing as an antidote to the self-righteous `anti-war at any price' movement. The same movement who, after the US pull-out from southern Vietnam, further pressured the US administration to end aid to southern Vietnam still fighting the northern Communists, which resulted in the Communists take-over and various massacres. This also gave a perfect opportunity for Cambodia to be swallowed by the brutal and genocidal Khamer Rouge.

I found myself increasingly incensed that those of the anti-war movement today remain unapologetic or ignorant without changing their stance towards brutal tyrants and despots, even though in a separate matter, the Taliban are ever closer to Pakistan's nuclear weapon. (Plans laid out quite openly by al-Qa'ida's number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri in Knights Under the Prophet's Banner published in 2001 pre-9/11.)

There will be those (Useful Idiots?) who will find any number of ways to "spin" and misrepresent what is said in this book in order to vilify Charen. These are probably the same people found in much of Europe today implementing democratically suicidal policies for our continent, or accepting militant Islamic immigrants with open arms.

I simply cannot understand the kinds of people living amongst us who, having read about the atrocities of Stalin or the Khmer Rouge, could then be offended by someone hostile to this totalitarianism and write a review saying "Charen advocates all presidents who pursue an aggressive foreign policy are doing it for the good of the world." or "Unintentionally hilarious" in a cynical and callous attempt to make Charen seem like some sort of unconvincing hysteric, or some sort of "war-loving general" from Dr. Strangelove.

Read the book. Her arguments are more intelligent than that.

I ordered this book for less than a quid, but it has become my book of the year. Additionally, for more on the miss-categorisations of the various ideologies of left and right, I'd recommend Liberal Fascism.

This book is right wing- almost shockingly so. The author is confindent that American aggression is always the right course of action. She also argues that any president willing to follow an active and aggressive foreign policy is doing so in order to protect american interests, but above all for the good of the world.

This book focuses on the reactions of liberals in America to various communist governements. The author argues that because these communist states were so brutal (which is a very valid point) anyone who defended them in American society was a "useful idiot." The term apparantly was used by Lenin to describe people in the West who were blind to the "realities" of Communism.

The book's historical accounts are very readable, and interesting. The main argument however is that because Communist states were so evil the American's who opposed them must, by default, be good. Following this logic any Americans who spoke out against these good anti-communist policies (a group of people described as anti-anticommunists) are by default wrong.

This book is well worth reading, but the arguments are far from convincing, and her conclusions are weak. Furthermore a blind acceptace that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction already seems rather outdated and naive.

This is surely one of the worst books ever written. This was a best-seller in the US?! Read it and weep. The book's title is remarkably significant, using the phrase "useful idiots" to describe those on the left in non-communist countries, apparently because that's what Lenin called them. Except that he didn't... "Lenin may never have actually uttered the phrase", the author useful mentions on page 10. Hilarious! I might well write my own book in the future, called "Simple-minded Idiots", because Ronald Reagan once said that about Republicans. (Well, he might have done.)

This book is actually useful as an illustration of the delusional power of ideology. Charen's attempted trashing of leftist views involves her deploying some highly dubious assertions, which simply don't accord with historical accuracy. For instance, the suggestion that American soldiers were not "particularly nasty" to Vietnamese peasants, and that South Vietnam was a viable democratic state (other than an artificial creation borne of the US supporting French colonialism after 1945). (Read George C. Herring's 'The Longest War' for a reasonable account of Vietnam, or else John Pilger's brilliant analysis in 'Heroes'.)

I have given sections of this book to my History students after we have discussed aspects of the Cold War so that they can see how contemporary right-wing Amerians think, and they are truly shocked. It reads as plausible argument, but it's only when you read proper history books that you can see how insidious it really is. The frightening thing is that so many Americans are willing to be taken in by this rubbish. But that's the power of ideology for you!
['ideology': ideas serving as weapons for social interests. (Berger & Luckman 1966: The Social Construction of Reality, p.18)]