A Tale of
Two Obituaries
To comment
on this article go to BÕManÕs Revolt.
Some time ago I searched out an
article in The New York Times, and
shortly after that a pitch for an online subscription began appearing in my
inbox. ÒThe New York Times,Ó it
said, Òsatisfies your need to know by connecting you to award-winning
journalism, fresh perspectives and innovative multimedia; anytime, anywhere.Ó
And those of us who watch the quiz
show Jeopardy in the Washington, DC,
area are regaled every weeknight with a Times
advertisement that promises to deliver to your door for 50% off some
of Òthe worldÕs finest journalism.Ó
I count myself among those not
taken in by their blandishments.
The late conservative journalist, Joseph Sobran,
was another. Here is how he begins
his classic essay, ÒThe Jewish EstablishmentÓ:
In the
early 1930s, Walter Duranty of the New York Times was
in Moscow, covering Joe Stalin the way Joe Stalin wanted to be covered. To
maintain favor and access, he expressly denied that there was famine in the
Ukraine even while millions of Ukrainian Christians were being starved into submission.
For his work Duranty won the Pulitzer Prize for
journalism. To this day, the Times remains the most
magisterial and respectable of American newspapers.
Now
imagine that a major newspaper had had a correspondent in Berlin during roughly
the same period who hobnobbed with Hitler, portrayed him in a flattering light,
and denied that Jews were being mistreated - thereby not only concealing, but
materially assisting the regime's persecution. Would that paper's
respectability have been unimpaired several decades later?
There you have an epitome of what
is lamely called "media bias." The Western supporters of Stalin
haven't just been excused; they have received the halo of victim hood for the
campaign, in what liberals call the "McCarthy era," to get them out
of the government, the education system, and respectable society itself.
In my article, ÒThe New
York Times and
Joseph StalinÓ
I show further that ÒDuranty was hardly a rogue
reporter duping his employer.Ó In
his covering up for Stalin and his glorification of the brutal, genocidal Communist
state of the Soviet Union, he was merely carrying out his bossesÕ orders.
ÒBut thatÕs all in the distant past,Ó I can hear
the objection. With all that weÕve
learned about the evils of the Soviet Union and world Communism we donÕt see
anything like that anymore in The Times, do
we? Well, letÕs have a look at
their obituary for a man who in many ways was Communist ChinaÕs Walter Duranty, and this obituary was published only nine years
ago:
Israel Epstein, Prominent Chinese Communist, Dies at 90
By
DOUGLAS MARTIN
Published: June 2, 2005
Israel
Epstein, a journalist, author and propagandist for China whose passion for
Communism was fueled in long interviews with Mao in the 1940's and was not
dimmed by imprisonment during the Cultural Revolution, died last Thursday at a
hospital in Beijing. He was 90.
His
death was announced by the official New China News Agency.
Mr. Epstein edited China Today, an
English-language Chinese newsmagazine, translated the sayings and writings of
Mao and Deng Xiaoping and advised the Chinese government on how to polish its
overseas image. He became a Chinese citizen, joined the Communist Party and
served on official government and party committees.
He and
perhaps a dozen other aging foreign-born residents of Beijing were sometimes
seen as the last true believers in a revolution that has sometimes seemed
blurred by time's passage and China's embrace of free markets and consumerism.
In 1996, The
Observer, the London newspaper, said, "Perhaps the most loyal Communists
in the country today are foreigners, veteran fellow travelers from a vanished
era of idealism."
Mr. Epstein
hung Mao's portrait on his bedroom wall; knew the American journalist Edgar
Snow well enough to help edit his books; was a protŽgŽ of the widow of Sun Yat-sen, the founder of China's first republic; and was
able to say the five years he spent in prison on false charges during the
Cultural Revolution had helped improve him by shrinking his ego. For decades China's
top leaders visited him on his birthdays.
"My
basic ideas have not changed," he told The Observer. "I see no reason
to change them."
Israel
Epstein was born on April 20, 1915, in Warsaw, then under Russian control. His father was imprisoned by the czarist authorities for leading a
labor uprising, and his mother was once exiled to Siberia.
"The
earliest influence on me came from my socialist parents," Mr. Epstein said
in an interview with China Daily in 2003.
After the
outbreak of World War I, his father was sent by his company to Japan to develop
business in the Pacific region. As the German Army approached Warsaw, his
mother, with him in her arms, fled the city and traveled east to be reunited
with her husband. After experiencing anti-Jewish sentiment in several places,
they settled in Tianjin in north China. He was then 2.
Mr. Epstein
began his career as a journalist at 15, working for the Tianjin-based Peking
and Tientsin Times, an English-language newspaper. He covered China's struggle
against Japanese invaders for United Press and other Western news
organizations.
In 1941, a
short item in The New York Times reported that he had been killed, but it later
turned out that he had faked his death to divert the Japanese who were hunting
him. He anonymously submerged into a Japanese internment camp for a while.
Mr. Epstein
became acquainted with Mr. Snow after his editor assigned him to review one of
Mr. Snow's books, and Mr. Snow showed him his classic "Red Star Over
China" before it was published. Mr. Snow reciprocated by reading Mr.
Epstein's unpublished works.
In Hong
Kong, Mr. Epstein worked with Soong Ching Ling, Sun Yat-sen's widow, whom he had met in left-wing political
activities in the 1930's. She arranged for him to visit Mao, Zhou Enlai and their revolutionary comrades at their base in
China's northwest in 1944, and Mr. Epstein said his conversations in a cave
with Mao had changed his life.
In 1944, Mr.
Epstein visited Britain, then spent the next five
years in the United States, where he published "The Unfinished Revolution
in China" to good reviews. Other books he wrote were first published in
Chinese and included "From Opium War to Liberation" in 1954, "Tibet
Transformed" in 1983 and "Woman in World History: Soong Ching Ling" in 1993.
In 1951, Ms.
Soong invited him to return to China to edit China Reconstructs, later renamed
China Today. He was editor in chief until his retirement at 70, and then editor
emeritus.
His five
years in prison during the Cultural Revolution, on charges of plotting against
Zhou, ended in 1973 with a personal apology from Zhou and a restoration of his
exalted position.
His
prominence in China was suggested by the annual talks Mao had with him. Deng
attended Mr. Epstein's retirement reception in 1985. On April 17, the Chinese
president, Hu Jintao, visited him and praised his "special
contributions" to China.
Mr.
Epstein first wife, Elsie Fairfax-Cholmeley, died in
1984.
He is survived by his wife, Wan Bi, two children and two
stepchildren.
He will be
buried at the Babaoshan Cemetery for Revolutionaries.
ÒWhat a
fine, idealistic, even heroic, though perhaps a trifle misguided man he was,Ó
the reader canÕt help thinking. The
obituary is mainly factual, but consider how the facts are presented and what
the article leaves out. Contrast
its opening lines from those of the British Telegraph:
Israel
Epstein, who has died in Beijing aged 90, was one of the last survivors of the
band of foreign apologists for Mao Tse Tung, and
propagated a heroic image of modern China's creation by the Great Helmsman which is only now starting to be unstitched.
One
should not separate, as The Times
does, Epstein the propagandist for Mao Tse Tung, from
the evils of what he was selling. The
Telegraph article also shows more
clearly that EpsteinÕs pro-Chinese Communist propaganda work, directed at
Western audiences by this hardened Marxist, began during World War II.
From
the New York Times perspective, when
Epstein came to the United States he turned into some sort of fine, objective
scholar, producing the book The Unfinished Revolution in China Òto good reviews.Ó What they donÕt tell us is that the most
widely read and influential of the lot was turned out in the
pages of their own newspaper by one Owen Lattimore. You can read his entire glowing review
in my article ÒMcCarthy
Target Touted Soviet AgentÕs Book in NY
Times.Ó As I say in that article:
Readers of
this web site will recognize Lattimore. He is
the powerful adviser to the Truman administration who a couple of years later,
after China had fallen to the Communists, called for surrender of Korea to the
Reds in another New York newspaper, The Daily Compass. His concluding
lines were, ÒThe thing to do, therefore, is to let South Korea fall—but
not to let it look as though we pushed it. Hence the recommendation of a parting
grant of $150,000,000.Ó
And there is
a good, but sinister, reason why The
Times could speak of the positive reviewer reception of EpsteinÕs book in
the plural. This comes from page
144 of Freda UtleyÕs The China Story:
In America,
during the 1940Õs, the union of the friends of the Chinese Communists enjoyed
what amounted to a closed shop in the book-reviewing field. Theirs were
almost the only views expressed in such important publications as the New
York Times and New York Herald Tribune Sunday book supplements and
the Saturday Review of Literature—publications which
make or break books. (The Sunday Book Review supplement of the New
York Times seems in recent months to have discarded many of its old
reviewers in favor of others without Communist sympathies.) If one looks
through their back numbers, one finds that it was rare that any book on China
was not given to a small group of reviewers. Week after week, and year
after year, most books on China, and on the Far East, were
reviewed by Owen Lattimore, John K. Fairbank, Edgar
Snow, Nathaniel Peffer, Theodore White, Annallee Jacoby, Richard Lauterbach,
and others with the same point of view.
As we show
through the Senate testimony of Alfred Kohlberg in ÒThe Institute of Pacific Relations and Communist
China,Ó
that Communist dominated organization had a virtual hammerlock during that
period over who got books published about China and who wrote reviews of them.
Also missing
from the Times obituary is the charge
made by Communist defector Elizabeth Bentley before the Senate Internal
Security Subcommittee in 1951 that Epstein Òhad been a member of the Russian secret police
for many years in China.Ó
Selling Us
out to Another Ignoble Cause
These days,
the foreign interest that The NY Times
and its brethren in the U.S. news media are shilling for is mainly not
Communism, but Zionism. Here we
return to Sobran and ÒThe Jewish
Establishment.Ó
Jewish-owned
publications like The Wall Street Journal, The New Republic, The Atlantic
Monthly, U.S. News & World Report, the New York Post, and New York's Daily
News emit relentless pro-Israel propaganda; so do such pundits as William
Safire, A.M. Rosenthal, Charles Krauthammer, Jeane
Kirkpatrick, and George Will, to name a few. That Israel's journalistic partisans
include so many gentiles - lapsed goyim, you might say - is one more sign of
the Jewish establishment's power. So is the fact that this fact isn't mentioned
in public (though it is hardly unnoticed in private.)
So
is the fear of being called "anti-Semitic." Nobody worries about
being called "anti-Italian" or "anti-French" or
"anti-Christian"; these aren't words that launch avalanches of vituperation
and make people afraid to do business with you.
It's
pointless to ask what "anti-Semitic" means. It means trouble. It's an
attack signal. The practical function of the word is not to define or
distinguish things, but to conflate them indiscriminately - to equate the
soberest criticism of Israel or Jewish power with the murderous hatred of Jews.
And it works. Oh, how it works.
When
Joe McCarthy accused people of being Communists, the charge was relatively
precise. You knew what he meant. The accusation could be falsified. In fact the
burden of proof was on the accuser: when McCarthy couldn't make his loose
charges stick, he was ruined. (Of course, McCarthy was hated less for his
"loose" charges than for his accurate ones. His real offense was
stigmatizing the Left.)
The
opposite applies to charges of "anti-Semitism." The word has no precise
definition. An "anti-Semite" may or may not hate Jews. But he is
certainly hated by Jews. There is no penalty for making the charge loosely; the
accused has no way of falsifying the charge, since it isn't defined.
SobranÕs list of
blatantly Israel-first columnists is now a bit out of date. For The
Washington Post alone one can now add to Krauthammer and Will the names, at
the very least, of Michael Gerson, Jackson Diehl,
Fred Hiatt, and Richard Cohen. None
of their regular columnists take as critical a view of the actions of the
Israeli government as one is likely to find routinely in IsraelÕs daily Haaretz.
For a brief period of time, the
pro-Israel grip on opinion molding was not so complete as it is now, at least
in the Washington, DC, area. In the
1980s and early 1990s, the fledgling Washington
Times, in a serious effort to attract readers, featured some of the very
best conservative columnists in the business, and Joseph Sobran
was at the top of that list. It
also featured John Lofton, Patrick
Buchanan, and the late Sam Francis. It also had the late Reed Irvine, but his reason for being
eventually terminated wasnÕt so much ideological as it was excessive truth
seeking and the departure of Joe Goulden from his
organization. During that period I ended my subscription to The Washington Post in favor of The Washington Times.
Those days are now long gone. One by one The Times dropped its good, relatively independent, conservative
columnists, and these days it can hardly be distinguished from Fox News. Joe Sobran died
much too young at age 64 in 2010, but brilliant writer that he was, he had long
since been banished from the pages of National
Review, where he had made his mark, and from The Times, publishing only in the Catholic magazine, The Wanderer, and in an excellent Internet blog.
Obituary
#2
Considering what he had had to say
about them, one should expect that The
New York Times would give Sobran a somewhat less-than-complimentary
obituary, and it did not disappoint. The obituary that caught my eye,
though, was the one in The Washington Post:
Joseph Sobran, 64, conservative columnist and
editor
By Matt Schudel
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 2, 2010; 7:38 PM (with my own critical links)
Joseph Sobran, 64, a fiery conservative columnist and magazine
editor whose hostile views toward Israel and Jews led to his ouster as a top
editor of National Review magazine in 1993, died Sept. 30 at Fairfax Nursing
Center in Fairfax County. He had complications from diabetes.
In the
mid-1980s, Mr. Sobran was a rising star of the
intellectual right. He was a senior editor at National Review, personally
recruited by the magazine's founder, William F. Buckley Jr., and had a wide
following as a syndicated newspaper columnist, essayist and speaker.
Motivated by
a strong Catholic faith, Mr. Sobran (pronounced SOH-brun) hardened his social views and cultivated a growing
belief in U.S. isolationism in international
affairs. He began to clash with Buckley on foreign policy matters during the
Reagan administration and developed a deep antipathy toward Israel and Jewish lobbying
interests
in the United States.
Mr. Sobran later objected to what he considered executive
overreaching by the administration of George H.W. Bush, writing that Bush was
"the sort of politician our Founding Fathers were tying to prevent."
Mr. Sobran was among the few conservatives opposed to
the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
By late
1991, Buckley had had enough of his fractious protŽgŽ and published a series of
articles about right-wing anti-Semitism. Without overtly calling Mr. Sobran an anti-Semite, Buckley left that clear impression.
Other leading thinkers on the right, including neoconservative author and
editor Norman Podhoretz, didn't mince words in condemning Mr. Sobran's views.
After Mr. Sobran retaliated with essays critical of Buckley in 1993,
he was fired from National Review in 1993.
Over the
years, Mr. Sobran's views veered ever more wildly to
the right, beyond the ken of National Review and anything resembling the
mainstream. He praised an unabashedly racist publication called Instauration, which, in Mr. Sobran's
own words, was "openly and almost unremittingly hostile to blacks, Jews,
and Mexican and Oriental immigrants."
With little substantiation, he wrote of centuries
of Jewish persecution of Christians and denounced Israel as an untrustworthy
"tiny, faraway socialist ethnocracy." He wrote that
the New York Times "really ought to change its name to Holocaust
Update."
He claimed
the attacks of Sept. 11 were caused at least in part by U.S. policies toward
the Middle East, which he said were shaped by "Jewish-Zionist powers that
be in the United States." He spoke at conferences organized by British
Holocaust denier. David Irving.
Increasingly
isolated on the right, Mr. Sobran wrote for
publications of the Catholic Church and the arch-conservative
John Birch Society. He also turned his attention to his lifelong interest in
the works of William Shakespeare.
In 1997, he
published "Alias Shakespeare: Solving the Greatest Literary Mystery of All
Time," in which he contended that Shakespeare's plays were actually
written by Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford.
Mr. Sobran was hardly the first person to make the claim, which
has been widely debunked by literary scholars. Even a critic for the
conservative Washington Times dismissed Mr. Sobran's
argument
as "balderdash."
Michael Joseph
Sobran Jr. was born in Ypsilanti, Mich., on Feb. 23,
1946. After graduating from Eastern Michigan University, he stayed on at the
university to study English literature in graduate school.
In 1972, Mr.
Sobran voiced support for a campus visit by Buckley,
which was opposed by many faculty members. Buckley saw Mr. Sobran's
letter to the school paper and hired him for National Review.
After
leaving National Review, Mr. Sobran - who sometimes
wrote under the bylines of M.J. Sobran and M. Joseph Sobran Jr. - edited a monthly newsletter, Sobran's, containing his essays.
He published "Hustler: The Clinton Legacy" in 2000 and was at work on
books about Shakespeare and Abraham Lincoln at the time of his death.
Mr. Sobran had lived in Northern Virginia since 1983.
His
marriages to Janet Schnabel Sobran and Jeanne Walker
ended in divorce.
Survivors
include four children, Christina Sobran of
Waterville, Maine, Vanessa Williams of Virginia Beach, Kent Sobran
of Toledo and Michael Sobran of Alexandria; a
brother; several half-siblings; and 10 grandchildren.
There you
have it: two obituaries. The first
is of a man who during the short period he lived in the United States may be
described as the archetype of a subversive. He spent almost his entire career in the
service of a genocidal maniac who presided over perhaps the greatest man-made
disaster in human history. Hong Kong-based
historian, Frank Dikštter,
examining recently available archives from China, has said that it was Òlike
[the Cambodian communist dictator] Pol Pot's genocide multiplied 20 times over."
(See also footnote 3 in my article, ÒJohn F. Kennedy on the Loss of China.Ó) The man most responsible for putting the
spin on this inconceivable savagery for Western audiences was rewarded with an
obituary befitting a kindly old uncle.
The
second is of an American journalist widely recognized for the elegance and
clarity of his writing who tossed away an illustrious career by calling things
like he saw them, as a true journalist should. For that he gets treated almost like a
criminal in his obituary.
It
really is quite educational. What,
really, would you expect from a press that has covered up every major outrage
of this writerÕs lifetime, from the assassinations of Secretary of Defense
James Forrestal, John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, Jr.,
to the assault on the USS Liberty, the bombing of the Murrah
Building in Oklahoma City Bombing, and 9/11 and was an early champion of the
wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq?
The
American press being what it is these
days, Joseph SobranÕs obituary is really one to which
we all should aspire. It is a badge
of honor.
David
Martin
August
20, 2014
Home Page Column Column 5 Archive Contact