Lou,
(Note* It's taken me the better part of 4 and a half hours tom complete this post! Sorry if it is a bit scttered. JUST TOO MANY INTERUPTIONS!)
Hunter didn't so much drop Socialism, but more objected to it after seeing what had become of Socialism gong awry in Communism. There is a big misconception that he became an arch conservative, which isn't exactly true. But I do think he was somewhat of a foe of the New Deal. He felt that this would eventually breed more laxidascial qualities in the working classes which he championed. (imagine that? An actual level headed thinking guy!)
To further get into Hunter, in 1940, he released his book, Revolution: How, Why and When? the book expressly outlined all of the fears that his book. Poverty had outlined, and then went on in detail how the failure of Socialism, which had been a victim of the school of Communism and the Russian Revolution where the masses of poverty, and get this: The Left or Liberal governments had done more harm then good by breeding contempt amongst the working masses. However he warned that either the Left or Right in power, where the disbursement of power was one-sided, would be the worst thing for any government, including our own. He felt that the Russian Revolution was proof of where the working masses would revolt because of it--and ironically proving his book Poverty completely accurate.
While that may sound anti-liberal to you, Hunter while becoming an inactive member of the social party simply because of communist connection, he was not really so much an arch-conservative, as he still valued his true socialistic ways, which differed from the New Deal, which he opposed profusely.
You ask, why does Hunter deserve his own society? Well if you should ever read any of his books, you would see that he is well deserving of any praise. The Links is a fantastic book on Golf Architecture. Poverty is almost prophetic for the time that would preceed it. Hunter valued the labor union movement as a good thing for America. His work at Hull House in Chicago would be further proof of this. Most will never give him the full credit he deserves for his best work of all, The Valley Club of Montecito, which should be in all rights considered a co-design with MacKenzie.
Sir Robert,
I'm a bit scattered here on your claim that Hunter only complete 9 holes of MPCC. I 'm going to check on that one and I'll get back to you, because in the past, I think I've found stuff claiming that he built the entire course. I'll have to find it and post it here later.