The Dialectics of Détente

The Protracted Conflict

In NR’s last issue I discussed the logic of detente as conceived by the United States. Our rulers think of detente as a diplomatic equivalent of a business deal. Each party to the deal is an independent agent with its own special interests, but both function within the rules of the market. In negotiating the deal, each aims to get something it wants and each assumes it will have to give something in return. Both believe that the net result of the give and take process will be of mutual benefit. The mutual benefit (=profit) in this case is assumed to be, as a starter, assurance against nuclear war, to be followed up by trade and cultural exchanges leading toward cooperation and, in time, friendship. The underlying equation of the deal is the simplest sort of algebra. Through the negotiations, the quids and quos on the two sides of the equation will be adjusted to bring about a simple equality.

JB

About the Author

James Burnham

The Protracted Conflict

In NR’s last issue I discussed the logic of detente as conceived by the United States. Our rulers think of detente as a diplomatic equivalent of a business deal. Each party to the deal is an independent agent with its own special interests, but both function within the rules of the market. In negotiating the deal, each aims to get something it wants and each assumes it will have to give something in return. Both believe that the net result of the give and take process will be of mutual benefit. The mutual benefit (=profit) in this case is assumed to be, as a starter, assurance against nuclear war, to be followed up by trade and cultural exchanges leading toward cooperation and, in time, friendship. The underlying equation of the deal is the simplest sort of algebra. Through the negotiations, the quids and quos on the two sides of the equation will be adjusted to bring about a simple equality.