A former Conservative Party candidate for the Senate and a professor of political science at St. John's University, Paolucci frequently writes for the National Review. Here he indicts the ""liberal intelligentsia""--Rostow Schlesinger, Fulbright, Niebuhr, even Albert Einstein--for its internationalist, a ""crusade against nationhood"" which he considers parallel to the Communist internationalist conspiracy. He urges instead a return to the pre-World War I ""national commitment to balance of power as the permanent basis for civilized foreign relations."" This makes him a hawk on Vietnam: ""The bombing of North Vietnam. . . marked a return to the traditional concept."" Paolucci offers his own reading of American history as a progression toward equality and freedom, stresses the need to stop Communist expansion, and discusses the mushrooming powers of the Presidency, the stages of American political growth, nuclear weapons, the future of, foreign policy, and the present Presidential election. In a move that will not please the liberal (?) supporters of Hubert Humphrey, Paolucci commends the Vice President for having ""cleansed his thinking of much if not all of the old internationalist bias,"" enabling him now to ""contribute a great deal, in the near future, toward healing our grave national divisions."" The book is a polemic couched in scholarly language, but as Paolucci acknowledges, few professional historians and political scientists, fewer still of the intelligentsia at large, will give credence to his views. Its main interest is as an ultraconservative's endorsement of Humphrey.