For years conservatives have asked themselves why the intelligencia tends to liberalism and even communism. Conservatives are accustomed to thinking in rational, practical and economic terms. Thus, we have forever attempted to impose upon the left some rational, practical or economic motive, or failing that, we have simply shrugged our shoulders and chalked up liberal motivations to emotionalism. Somehow, these explanations have proved unsatisfactory.

Allan Levite, in his important new book, "Guilt, Blame, and Politics" has finally discovered the psychological engine that propels liberalism in the face of considerable evidence that leftist notions do not work in the real world. (The failure of the welfare state, the fall of communism in East Europe and its decline in Asia are events ignored or explained away by the left.) Indeed, he makes clear that there is a reason that the American media and academia espouse views that, if analyzed, could be labeled "Marxist".

Mr. Levite clearly states the reason in the title of this work, "Guilt". It is not difficult to dredge up examples of leftist writers and leaders who cite guilt as the primary reason for their conversion to liberalism, most often saying they were ashamed to live in material abundance while others in the world suffered. In fact leftists seem to wallow in self-denigration. They feel that their own status and wealth are unearned, therefore they assume that all wealth is unearned and make it their goal not merely to redistribute wealth but to eliminate it altogether. Asceticism is the hallmark of leftist thought as epitomized in the lifestyle imposed by Mao on billions of Chinese or the state imposed austerity on the serfs of Soviet Russia where over 20 million were murdered in an attempt to impose a new economic system.

"Guilt, Blame, and Politics" is well researched. It cites statistics and anecdotes from a wide variety of sources. These examples illustrate that most of the Bolshevik leaders in the Russian Revolution were from the upper middle class and that it was money from the wealthiest members of Russia's commercial elite that fueled the early stages of the soviet movement. This does not mean they necessarily felt guilty about their own wealth. Nevertheless, it clearly put these leaders well within what Mr. Levite calls the guilt profile (most radicals tend to be well-educated, materially supported, and/or removed from manual labor). Lenin himself noted that the proletariat would never foment revolution on its own. He seemed to feel that the workers could only develop a trade-union mentality; that is they could only aspire to the wealth of the middle class. Lenin was not seeking to raise up the workers; he sought to tear down the upper classes.

Modern liberalism's leaders fall within the same profile. Eight of the ten wealthiest members in the Senate are Democrats; the Rockefellers are renown for bankrolling liberal causes. Hollywood is notorious for its leftist views.

This is the thrust of Mr. Levite's argument. Leftists wish to level society in a way that will alleviate their own guilt feelings for not having to perform manual labor. The only way to do this is through the government because only the government has the power to overcome man's tendency to liberty and its corollary the acquisition of property. Even the leftist knows he cannot control his own behavior to conform to the austere standards he would impose upon all society. Thus he needs government to do the dirty work. He also needs government to sanction his own position in society; so that he does not have to feel guilty about living off the blood, sweat and tears of others.

Mr. Levite's book is packed with such insights. In a chapter on political symbolism he states:

"Even if much of what passes for compassion is actually the result of guilt, this would not make sympathy for the poor, or efforts to alleviate their condition, any less legitimate or desirable. But sympathizing with someone's predicament is wholly different from feeling partly responsible for its existence. Also, a criterion is needed to distinguish the results of guilt from those of compassion. A truly compassionate person would judge policies and programs by the amount of improvement they produce, and would be receptive to criticism, since finding a program's flaws might enable them to be corrected. But guilt-oriented activists judge by moral standards instead--the morality of the intentions rather than the results--and assume that skepticism or doubt come from sinister motives."

In "Guilt, Blame and Politics", Allan Levite addresses related questions in-depth, delving even further into the liberal psyche. He explains liberalism's propensity to mitigate personal responsibility. He reveals why blame is the favorite political tactic of the left. He describes how the politics of blame have affected polling. He clearly explains America's move toward political correctness. This is a complete, thorough and readable study.

"Guilt, Blame, and Politics" is the most important book about the politics of the left to be published in a long time. In the hands of conservatives it can do much to mitigate the psychological damage liberalism has imposed upon our society. In the hands of the general public it will help to debunk the leftist's illogical rants. In the hands of liberals it will be another reason to whine.

If you want to understand the left - this book is a must read!

More details on "Guilt, Blame and Politics", by Allan Levite.