Suppose all that has been suggested here were to happen. Suppose the Western alliance did publicly proclaim its realization that it had been deceived by communist disinformation, that its policies of detente and arms limitation had been misguided, t…
Suppose all that has been suggested here were to happen. Suppose the Western alliance did publicly proclaim its realization that it had been deceived by communist disinformation, that its policies of detente and arms limitation had been misguided, that the alliance was now united in its determination to face the challenge. What then? It is obvious that there can be no quick solution to an ideological struggle that has continued unabated since 1917. Perhaps there never can be a solution. Perhaps the two camps, each representing a way of life abhorrent to the other, must for all foreseeable time oppose each other. But is this so bad a thing? Is it unthinkable that ideological and political competition should become permanent? Might not open competition between two fundamentally opposed systems be the best way to sort things out? Might not the two systems, in vying with one another, improve each other?
There seem to be three possible scenarious around which the history of the next half century will be written.
In the first, communism, meeting neither ideological nor political resistance from the West, continues along its present course to disarmament, then to convergence with the West on its own terms, and so to world domination.
In the second, the West realizes in time the nature of the communist threat, solves its own national problems, unites the noncommunist world, and adopts a policy of open competition between the two systems; as a result, the peoples of the communist bloc repudiate their leaders and the communist empire disintegrates.
The third scenario resembles the second except that both systems remain intact and competition continues for a very long time.
And who shall say that unrelenting competition between two opposing systems of government, each secured by the nuclear deterrent, would not prove fruitful? But where are the statesmen who will recognize this path of possible safety and guide their peoples along it?
—Golitsyn, New Lies For Old, pgs. 365-6
***For the record, I don't agree with O'Connell's claim that "white nationalists" are necessarily feds or controlled op (rather paranoid, though there are certainly infiltrators and agents provocateurs to be found). To me, they mostly just seem like people with intact instincts who want to secure a future for their kids.
