Common theme: any centralised power structure will have a tendency to consolidate its authority by fostering intolerance. The more totalitarian the central power, the more violent and arbitrary will be the political purges. It really doesn’t matter what exactly they are being intolerant about, the objective of the exercise is to impose fear and obedience.

So the important question is, did Quadrant encourage tolerance or intolerance? I’ll leave the answer for people who actually read it.

Can you point to a single western nation that came close to a communist revolution?

Does Italy count? (We’d have to agree on a definition of “close”)
I find the whole implied triumphalism a bit strange given the looming prospect of Chinese dominance. Or are they not real communists?

The fact that the CIA thought it worthwhile to finance Quadrant in the most anti-communist country in the world next to the US shows what a paranoid rabble they were, and still are. They neednt have bothered. All the major newspapers were 100% anti-communist already. Please dont point me to any Cato institute link of historical accounts of the communist conspiracy to take over unions. There was never any real threat. I say again 99% of people in Australia would punch you in the nose if you said you were a communist. Can you point to a single western nation that came close to a communist revolution?

Stalin was bad because he killed his own people, invaded neighbouring states and supported communist revolutionaries in the third world. Apart from the nukes (a big issue) he was never a threat to Australia.

Just for the record Rafe since you seem to think it is necessary that every Australian do this not only am I sorry for the Stolen Generation but I hereby acknowledge that the communists and fellow travellers were on the wrong side if by communists you mean supporters of the Russian state rather than those who just believed in more state ownership or industrial democracy. But the friends of Quadrant were also on the wrong side. Like Joe McCarthy, they used an imaginary threat and a small number of vocal Australian Russia supporters to support a general right wing agenda and distort the political landscape for decades. Not so different from the way the imaginary threat of the Muslims destroying the world is used these days.

You can think of it as an exam which was failed by a great many lefties, especially intellectuals. But as Orwell wrote, it helps to be a certain kind of intellectual to support communism.

Some intellectuals are still rusted on, Eric Hobsbawn for example.

What do you think about that?

The knockers of Quadrant have yet to understand or admit that in the Cold War the friends of Quadrant were on the correct side and the communists and fellow travellers were not.

Not sure what you mean by the “correct” side. I can understand they were on “our” side, or the “winning” side, but what on earth is the “correct” side. It sounds as if they sat an exam.