The New York Times has a strange, repeated "odd tendency to euphemize or dance around communism." The latest example comes in a super-long and pretty boring profile of a 97-year-old World War II veteran. The Times claims the person is known as "the king of the artificial Christmas Tree." The Times writes, "in midsummer of 1949, he went to Camp Unity, a leftist camp in Wingdale, N.Y."
"Leftist" haha. The Times itself reported on July 17, 1932, that it was a communist camp in which "the theoretical revolutionists live the life of the proletariat in Soviet Russia." A subeadline said "Communists sneak off to enjoy a few capitalist pastimes during mock session on lawn." If the New York Times of the 1930s could be accurate in describing a communist camp as communist rather than "leftist," why can't the contemporary Times convey that accurately to readers? Are they afraid of being accused of red-baiting? Is it "no enemies on the left"? A popular front approach? Are the people editing and publishing this copy too young to remember what communism was?