1. I agree that there are many similarities between what Klein describes and the current situation. Is "Three Cups of Tea" "The Ugly American" of today? Yet, I think there was something valuable in the middlebrow response of the 1950s. Isn't the open hand better than the closed fist? I think these people genuinely wanted to relate to Asia in a better way than the colonial powers did. Of course, their initial efforts were maladroit and they had mixed motives because they were confronted by
an existential threat from the Soviet Union, but I do not see an alternative to trying to establish mutual understanding.

2. I agree that Klein's book is conceptually rich. I was therefore disappointed that in spite of this
sophistication she seemed at times to revert to reductionist interpretations. It is true that these middlebrow individuals wanted to preserve free markets for the United States, but I do not think that was their only motivation. Klein's nadir comes when she implies that Tom Dooley was largely motivated by his homosexuality.

3. I agree that Klein really makes the cultural elites look selfish. In the interest of preserving their social position did they really not care about the United States trying to establish healthier relationships with the rest of the world? I cannot imagine that New York intellectuals were opposed to the Popular Front or that they thought that Broadway musicals represented Popular Front culture.