gdp's Comments

Wonkette : The Sarah Palin Fartknocker Report: Evolution Is For Communists And Other Classics

Tue, 18 Nov 2014 01:20:39 +0000

The Whittaker Chambers Family doubts she made it through Witness at all: http://wcinbooks.whittakerchambers.org/2011/03/gh...

Wonkette : The Sarah Palin Fartknocker Report: Evolution Is For Communists And Other Classics

Tue, 18 Nov 2014 01:18:36 +0000

This member of the Whittaker Chambers Family panned Palin's book, including the comment "read[s] like a cut-and-paste job: comments stuffed between quotes from famous people — often dead, thus unable to protest Palin’s (mis)treatment." Full review is online here: http://wcinbooks.whittakerchambers.org/2011/03/gh...

Pro-Life Blogs : The Infiltration of the U.S. Government || Pro-Life Blogs

Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:54:43 +0000

In fact, if you read his works carefully, you will find that although Chambers considered himself a conservative in the 1950s, he remained acutely uncomfortable with Capitalism. Thus, any idea in his writings on “East-West” conflict (if you insist on such a term) would have been called “North-South” economic imbalances in mid-20th-Century terminology – or latter-day High Imperialism, to use the Marxist-Leninist terminology that Chambers and his generation knew. I’m not trying to curtail your free speech – just asking, on behalf of the Whittaker Chambers Family, that you leave the name of Whittaker Chambers out, because he would have disagreed completely with your own anti-Islamist views. Respectfully – David Chambers | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

Pro-Life Blogs : The Infiltration of the U.S. Government || Pro-Life Blogs

Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:54:30 +0000

Further, Chambers would never have conflated Communism with Islamism, as you do. He would never have conflated a minority of militant Muslims dotted around the world with an entire Western, Communist ideology and its global adherents in the 1920, 1930s, and 1940s. Perhaps you confuse the “East” in Whittaker Chambers’ writings -- clearly about Communism as a modern, irreligious, and very Western political ideology -- and today’s “East” when referring to nations with Muslim majorities. If you do, don’t. It is exactly such over-simplification that multiplies animosities between that tiny group of militant Muslims and practitioners of various Western (primarily American) foreign policies today. [continued]

Pro-Life Blogs : The Infiltration of the U.S. Government || Pro-Life Blogs

Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:54:12 +0000

As for Dr. Evan’s comment of “literally hundreds of communists and Soviet agents in the U.S. government,” just how many did he conservatively estimate? Otherwise, such comments begin to sound like Senator McCarthy’s “I have here in my hand a list of 205” – who of course turned out to be a handful of clearly identified communist members, fellow travelers, or sympathizers. If Dr. Evans stated a safe minimum number in his new book, then you should carefully quote such a number. Keep in mind, too, that although Chambers was willing to ally himself broadly to fight Communism, his last published words on the man were “I deplore the whole McCarthy ruckus” (Letter dated July 17, 1959, Odyssey of a Friend, p. 259). [continued]

Pro-Life Blogs : The Infiltration of the U.S. Government || Pro-Life Blogs

Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:53:47 +0000

For instance, about the "Pumpkin Papers" you wrote: “Evans reminded his audience of the fact that Hiss would have escaped prosecution had it not been for Chambers hiding and then producing the ‘pumpkin papers.’ This evidence was used to indict Hiss for perjury for denying he was a Soviet spy.” In fact, the Pumpkin Papers (really canisters of microfilm) contained nothing of value either to the Soviets or to the U.S. Department of Justice during Alger Hiss’s trials – regardless of how cleverly then-Representative Richard Nixon paraded them to the public as a bluff (aimed at Justice). The “Baltimore Documents” (submitted by Whittaker Chambers to Hiss and his defense team in a related but separate case) held the important, incriminating evidence: typewritten and handwritten notes from Hiss and Harry Dexter White and containing sensitive information. As you wrote it, you are wrong: the “Pumpkin Papers” produced no evidence that ever convicted Hiss. [continued]

Pro-Life Blogs : The Infiltration of the U.S. Government || Pro-Life Blogs

Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:53:15 +0000

Mr. Kincaid, I have some issues with your essay vis-a-vis my grandfather, Whittaker Chambers. First, your presentation of the Hiss Case glosses over many salient facts that you could have presented within the same amount of space. Some of yours were in error and/or misleading. [continued]

Big Hollywood : Why Won't Hollywood Conservatives Make an Alger Hiss Film?

Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:07:28 +0000

Ron, People are talking about a movie, but no one seems to have come up with a compelling approach, much less anything insightful. Certainly, no one has approached our family with such. David Chambers | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

Big Peace : Whittaker Chambers, Communism, And Islam

Wed, 13 Jul 2011 00:57:06 +0000

For comments from the family of Whittaker Chambers on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of his death, please see http://whittakerchambers.org/2011/07/09/whittaker...

http://horwichnationalists.blogspot.com/ : Communist apostate Whittaker Chambers’ Communism, and Islam

Sun, 10 Jul 2011 05:57:13 +0000

2011.07.09 First, thank you for allowing comments. That said, it is disheartening on this, the anniversary of Whittaker Chambers' death, to see your blog follow suit with many others in reprinting this article by Andrew Bostom. On behalf of our family, I have already contacted this author, asking him not to use the name of Whittaker Chambers when talking about Islam or other subject with which Whittaker Chambers was so entirely unacquainted -- a wish he has vehemently chosen not to respect. In fact, earlier this week I asked him to post a comment on that article on his own website. (The request, including comment plus replies, follow below.) Apparently, the author's respect for Whittaker Chambers runs just as short as his actual understanding of Chambers himself. Do not be fooled by long, impressive-looking quotes. Instead, please note that, first, Chambers simply did not and would not today comment on Islam. Second, that is in part because comparing Western and non-Western systems of thought works about as well as comparing apples and oranges. Terms in Christian- or Greek-derived Western philosophy simple do not equate or sometimes even approximate those in Islam or in the Middle East. Distance, time, and historical experience preclude this -- as does the author's obvious antipathy toward Islam. It is hard to imagine that anyone who has read and understood Whittaker Chambers' writings could produce a piece like this article. David Chambers | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/ QUOTE: While we welcome your warm and well read appreciation of the man, the Whittaker Chambers Family asks you to desist from using his name with respect to Islam or any other issue with which he was unfamiliar. Whittaker Chambers had at best a cursory knowledge of Islamic affairs (e.g., history, theology). Like most people of his time, his viewpoint was highly euro-centric. He would not condone use of his name in this manner. If you respect the man and his ideas, then please desist henceforward from using his name like this. UNQUOTE At first, Mr. Bostom replied, "It does not seem you have read the piece at all." When I demonstrated to him that I had read the piece thoroughly, he insisted that "you do not appear to have gotten beyond the introduction." When I again assured him that I had done so, he shut down, saying: "I am a busy physician in academic Medicine" and refusing to publish the comment.

Big Peace : Whittaker Chambers, Communism, And Islam

Sat, 9 Jul 2011 02:35:50 +0000

Dear BigPeace: We have asked Mr. Bostom to post the following comment on his website, but he has declined ("I am a busy physician in academic Medicine, and don't have the time...") Mr. Bostom, While we welcome your warm and well read appreciation of the man, the Whittaker Chambers Family asks you to desist from using his name with respect to Islam or any other issue with which he was unfamiliar. Whittaker Chambers had at best a cursory knowledge of Islamic affairs (e.g., history, theology). Like most people of his time, his viewpoint was highly euro-centric. He would not condone use of his name in this manner. If you respect the man and his ideas, then please desist henceforward from using his name like this. DAVID CHAMBERS | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

Big Peace : 81% of US Mosques Promote Jihad

Sat, 9 Jul 2011 00:26:09 +0000

Mr. Bostom, While we welcome your warm and well read appreciation of the man, the Whittaker Chambers Family asks you to desist from using his name with respect to Islam or any other issue with which he was unfamiliar. Whittaker Chambers had at best a cursory knowledge of Islamic affairs (e.g., history, theology). Like most people of his time, his viewpoint was highly euro-centric. He would not condone use of his name in this manner. If you respect the man and his ideas, then please desist henceforward from using his name like this. DAVID CHAMBERS | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

ScrollPost : Whittaker Chambers, Communism, and Islam

Sat, 9 Jul 2011 00:20:45 +0000

Big Government : Community Organized Crime

Tue, 24 May 2011 11:49:38 +0000

Christian, J. Peters (aka Alexander Stevens) wrote his "Manual" a quarter century earlier: http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/parties/cpusa... Perhaps you have heard about the new book on J. Peters? Review here: http://theamericanmercury.org/2011/01/head-of-the... David Chambers | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

NewsReal Blog : Adopt a Dissenting Book: Whittaker Chambers, Witness

Wed, 17 Nov 2010 03:30:39 +0000

For more information about Whittaker Chambers, please visit http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

Big Government : A Whittaker Chambers Dialogue

Fri, 28 May 2010 12:45:51 +0000

Dr. Snyder, When I asked for the opportunity to respond in a separate post, I did not imagine that you would write the reply, inserting yourself, while picking and choosing from our exchange... ... ... David

Big Government : Whittaker Chambers: The New Deal as Revolution

Sun, 23 May 2010 16:57:48 +0000

Mikatollah, You might interesting the exchange I had with Dr. Snyder in later comments on this article. Sincerely - David DAVID CHAMBERS | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

Big Government : Whittaker Chambers: The New Deal as Revolution

Sun, 23 May 2010 16:34:45 +0000

[continued] I disagree with such statements. The power of the Popular Front and the Communist Party among American intellectuals waxed in the _early_ 1930s due mostly to the Great Depression, the Dust Bowl, and rise of Nazism. Coming just behind these major events were the Great Purges, the Spanish Civil War, and the Hitler-Stalin Pact, which caused great number of those same people to desert the cause -- including him. TIME articles that touched on the New Deal (e.g., "Revolt of the Intellectuals" in 1941 or "The Old Deal" in 1945) were really attacks on Communism. Back then too, he saw then Communism as the real force behind the New Deal. Again, this viewpoint arises from the peculiar, isolated perspective of a former Soviet underground operative, not a student of American politics, nor an editor versed in American politics. Thus, too, what you call his "newfound understanding" was not new at all. By 1941, he had neither read nor followed the New Deal any further. In fact, his viewpoint goes back to his own experience in the early 1930s. At that time, he was a rising literary star. He had written four pieces for the _New Masses_, one of which landed him as first contributing and then managing editor of the _New Masses_. He joined the board of the John Reed Club. He worked with Langston Hughes and two others on forming a "New York Suitcase Theater" (which Hughes established in Harlem later in the 1930s). Hallie Flanagan had adapted his piece "You Can Make Out Their Voices" into a play _Can You Hear Their Voices?_ that was touring the country. The article circulated with the play's revised, better known tile, _Can You Hear Their Voices?: A Short Story_, as a separately published pamphlet. Whittaker Chambers was in fact _part_ of the Popular Front. Then, he ran through a series of highly focused, intense activities (underground espionage, hiding, work for TIME) from 1932-1948. By 1952, when he published _Witness_, he still saw with a lens from the early 1930s. Having helped the Popular Front as a communist, he saw "the spectre of Communism" (a phrase he loved -- and feared) as the Popular Front behind the New Deal. He saw New Deal agencies as entities "which the party could penetrate almost at will" (_Witness_, p. 336). He could not see the New Deal as an American response. The New Deal _accepted_ Capitalism, seeking rather to ameliorate Capitalism's self-cannibalizing nature, after decades of boom-bust. (This is why I believe my grandfather would have enjoyed very much Dr. Tony Judt's new book _Ill Fares the Land_, which I discussed recently in The Washington Times: see http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/21/b....) In sum (and in my opinion), you have fallen into a trap set long ago by Bill Buckley and other early admirers. You have put Whittaker Chambers on a pedestal. This has led other and you (in this case, at least) to take his writings at face value. You have not acknowledged his own self-disqualification, nor examined why he said it. You have not examined when and why he railed against the New Deal as he did. I would appreciate the chance to submit this response as a posting on this website, rather than buried among all the other comments here: could you please see with the publishers of this website whether they would afford me such an opportunity? Respectfully, David DAVID CHAMBERS | http://www.whittakerchambers.org/

Big Government : Whittaker Chambers: The New Deal as Revolution

Sun, 23 May 2010 16:34:19 +0000

Dr. Snyder, I appreciate your respect for my grandfather. May we then agree to disagree, respectfully? I do not equate taking a "first hard look" by someone who knew "little" about the New Deal as making for an expert, worthy of citation. I disagree, too, with your assumption. Just because "he certainly had plenty fo time to learn more" does not prove that he did in fact use that time to learn more. In fact, I would argue, he spent his time otherwise. After some six years in the Soviet underground (1932-1938), he spent a year in hiding (April 1938-April 1939). During that time, he earned money by translating. In April 1939, he went to work at TIME in New York. During those years (1938-1948), he paid little if any attention to the remaining New Deal years in Washington: he worked in Books and Film, Foreign Affairs, and then special projects for Henry Luce. His interests were anything except American politics. When he wasn't working for TIME, he was back on his farm, working. At times, he was recovering from heart-attacks. Judging from his personal library, which I have known rather well for decades, he did not read deeply about the New Deal at any point. Most of his reading seems to have been for TIME book reviews. So, where did my grandfather's ample views on the New Deal come from? In my opinion, his views on the New Deal come the 1930s -- the early 1930s. More specifically, they come from a viewpoint of the power and influence of the Popular Front in the 1930s, overarching --and outdated. In 1951, as he was writing _Witness_, he believed that "the Popular Front mind dominated American life, at least from 1938 to 1948, and it is still grossly premature to count it out" (_Witness_, p. 499). [continued]

Big Government : Whittaker Chambers: The New Deal as Revolution

Sun, 23 May 2010 14:17:30 +0000

Radegunda, That's an interesting viewpoint on verb tense: know vs. knew. Let's look at the sentence again: "It is surprising how little I knew about the New Deal, although it had been all around me during my years in Washington." - Knew: So, during the New Deal years, when he was in Washington, he _knew_ little about it. - Know: Are you implying that after the New Deal, he came to _know_ about it -- "more"? Perhaps I have missed something in _Witness_: is there a passage in which he describes how he came to know more about the New Deal afterwards? As far as I can tell, my grandfather opined on the subject (amply) but never made a statement that describes that he ever came to know more about the New Deal. In the next sentence in that paragraph, he writes that during those New Deal years, "all the New Dealers I had known were Communists or near-Communists." Those were years in the Soviet underground, when my grandmother and he lived highly isolated lives. After defecting, they went into hiding and then buried himself in work at TIME in New York (writing about almost everything except American politics) and on the farm in Westminster until 1948 -- still fairly isolated lives, adding no more contact with the New Deal or New Dealers. David