Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
->For left-to-liberal intellectuals from {{the thirties}}, the knowledge of the atrocities being committed in Stalinist Russia was an especially shattering “[[SillyRabbitIdealismIsForKids reality-check.]]” Gradually but unmistakably, the tone of liberal thought underwent a radical change or reversal.\\\
to:
->For left-to-liberal intellectuals from {{the thirties}}, 30s}}, the knowledge of the atrocities being committed in Stalinist Russia was an especially shattering “[[SillyRabbitIdealismIsForKids reality-check.]]” Gradually but unmistakably, the tone of liberal thought underwent a radical change or reversal.\\\
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
->For left-to-liberal intellectuals from {{the thirties}}, the knowledge of the atrocities being committed in Stalinist Russia was an especially shattering “[[SillyRabbitIdealismIsForKids reality-check.]]” Gradually but unmistakably, the tone of liberal thought underwent a radical change or reversal.\\\
By the time he was writing his 1948 study of the work of Creator/HermanMelville, Richard Chase could speak of the ways in which Melville spoke to the “new liberalism,” the vanguard of which Chase occupied. Bad, “old” liberalism [[GoodIsImpotent was facile, unimaginative, wavering in its rejection of totalitarianism]]. The new liberalism, on the other hand, was bracingly new: unequivocally opposed to totalitarianism and the fuller, broader account of human motives it provided; determined to speak of “progress,” “history,” and “the liberation of the masses”...Because conservative dogma seemed confirmed by the recent war, left-to-liberal intellectuals scrambled, in essay after essay, to explain recent history as a lesson in innocence and naiveté, in heated opposition to the “unalloyed” liberalism that coursed through U.S. culture, leaving a “dangerous innocence” in its wake.
-->--'''[[http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc50.2008/StarTrekEnt/ David Greven]]'''
----
By the time he was writing his 1948 study of the work of Creator/HermanMelville, Richard Chase could speak of the ways in which Melville spoke to the “new liberalism,” the vanguard of which Chase occupied. Bad, “old” liberalism [[GoodIsImpotent was facile, unimaginative, wavering in its rejection of totalitarianism]]. The new liberalism, on the other hand, was bracingly new: unequivocally opposed to totalitarianism and the fuller, broader account of human motives it provided; determined to speak of “progress,” “history,” and “the liberation of the masses”...Because conservative dogma seemed confirmed by the recent war, left-to-liberal intellectuals scrambled, in essay after essay, to explain recent history as a lesson in innocence and naiveté, in heated opposition to the “unalloyed” liberalism that coursed through U.S. culture, leaving a “dangerous innocence” in its wake.
-->--'''[[http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc50.2008/StarTrekEnt/ David Greven]]'''
----
