In 1981 Susan Sontag gave a speech at a rally by the American left supporting Solidarity in Poland. In the speech she forthrightly (some would say rudely) took the left to task for failing to oppose Communism and for excusing tyranny. She also called Communism "Fascism with a human face." 28 years later do her words still matter and in hindsight - are we now repeating the same mistakes Sontag so strongly condemned 28 years ago?
I recently finished Edmund White's book "City Boy," which is a rollicking account of his life as a gay man before and after Stonewall in New York City. It's also an account of his friendship and eventual estrangement from many in the intellectual class of the American left, including Susan Sontag and Gore Vidal. In Sontag's case he never could make peace with the fact that she was a closeted lesbian (the lesbian part was OK, the closeted part wasn't) and in Gore Vidal's case, well, they loath one another for a whole host of reasons - not the least of which is what White feels was Vidal's homoerotic attraction for and fascination with Murray Federal Building bomber Timothy McVeigh.
It was while reading this book that I first heard of the speech Sontag gave in 1981 where she blasted much of the left for its failure to condemn Communism with the same vehemence that it condemned other forms of tyranny and oppression. Curious, and unfamiliar with the topic, I downloaded the speech from The Nation and read it. I also read the comments from those angry with Sontag (whom the Nation called "rude"). Portions of the speech are shown below:
I have the impression that much of what is said about
politics by people on the so-called democratic left-which
includes many people here tonight-has been governed by
the wish not to give comfort to "reactionary" forces. With
that consideration in mind, people on the left have willingly
or unwittingly told a lot of lies. We were unwilling to identify
ourselves as anti-Communists because that was the
slogan of the right, the ideology of the cold war and, in particular,
the justification of America’s support of fascist dictatorships
in Latin America and of the American war on
Vietnam. (The story, of course, starts much earlier, in
Europe in the late ,1920s, with the rise of fascism, whose
principal war cry was anti-Communism.) The anticommunist
position seems already taken care of by those
we oppose at home.
I want to challenge this view.
I repeat: not only is
fascism (and overt military rule) the probable destiny of all
Communist societies-especially when their populations are
moved to revolt-but Communism is in itself a variant, the
most successful variant, of fascism. Fascism with a human
face.
And in our efforts to criticize and reform our own societies, we owe
it to those in the front line of struggle against tyranny to tell
the truth,’without bending it to serve interests we deem are
just. These hard truths mean abandoning many of the complacencies
of the left, mean challenging what we have meant
for many years by "radical" and "progressive." The
stimulus to rethink our position, and to abandon old and corrupt rhetoric.
For this, as Edmund White writes:
She was howled off stage, and for months afterward left-wing thinkers of every stripe relentlessly attacked her. She was giving comfort to the newly elected Reagan... I admired Susan's bravery. In Europe, where the Left had genuine power still and had to live out its contradictions, virtually no one remained pro-Soviet. She was giving aid and comfort to the enemy, her critics said. She had betrayed the cause - whatever that was at this late date. In fact Susan was speaking to an isolationist and dated and extremely naive Left.
I think the main thrust of Sontag's criticism of the left during the time she spoke was correct. There was entirely too much avoidance of criticism of the Communist bloc for fear that by doing so we would be helping our enemies on the right. I was not even 10 years old when she gave this speech, so I'm speaking from dim memories of my own - but it feels correct.
And it also feels relevant even though the subject at hand is longer Communism. There is often a fear within this community, the "progressive" community, of open and honest criticism of ideas, ideologies or regimes which represent totalitarianism for worry of giving aid and comfort to those whom we oppose at home. We fear giving ammunition to a domestic and foreign agenda which many of us strongly feel fuels militarism, discrimination and tyranny while not recognizing that many of the same regimes and movements many of us are afraid of criticizing practice militarism, discrimination and tyranny - the very things we condemn in our own country.
Recently I stated that one of my main fears when discussing a withdrawal from Afghanistan is that women and girls will once again be subject to the tyranny of the Taliban. I was called a "wingnut" and told that concern was a "right-wing talking point." I didn't say this because I support an unending occupation of Afghanistan or a buildup of troops. I said it because I feel it. Frankly I could care less if it is a right-wing talking point, it's valid criticism and a legitimate concern. The Taliban represent tyranny and we should be speaking out against tyranny - not dismissing criticism of it as a "right-wing talking point." This is exactly the same argument Sontag was making in her speech, that we have, in many ways:
thought we loved justice; many of us did. But we
did not love the truth enough.
In that sense Sontag's criticism still rings true almost three decades after it was given. I'd like to know if anyone remembers this event and the passions that speech brought to the fore then and which it seems to continue do so today.