One must be grateful for Paul Goodman's long-standing independent radicalism. It has the virtues of high intelligence, programmatic resourcefulness, and an ample supply of generosity to adversaries of all camps. Unlike many radicals, Goodman argues with the opposition. In the current scene he emerges as a necessary double critic – of the Establishment (which he has always been) and of recent “radical” idiocies (idiocy is Goodman's word, not mine), which he can talk about with the assurance of a man whose credits with the radical young are many. His evident exasperation with the know-nothing character of recent militancy has not dissolved either his affection for the young or his faith that the promise of a better future is in them.

So he can speak of shrill fanaticism and self-righteous violence, and wonder whether those whose minds are daily blown really have minds at all, without raising his voice to the pitch of indignation. In criticizing the current scene, tone is as important as the substance of the criticism; and tone is a complex matter of temperament, intelligence, good faith and experience.