Part V The Communist Trojan Horse in Action
14 — Communist Strategy and Tactics
In preceding chapters I have briefly outlined the history and internal structure of the Communist Party, USA. Now we must consider the Party’s attack against noncommunist society in the United States.
The Communist Party, USA, is a weapon of attack, not only for the day of revolution but for now. To Party leaders each day is a day of preparation and dress rehearsal for the day when they hope to come to power. Noncommunist ranks must be infiltrated, penetrated, and subverted. The success of the communist mission depends on capturing the enemy’s stronghold from within.
To this end the Party employs a variety of mass-agitation techniques. The communist is in the market places of America: in organizations, on street corners, even at your front door. He is trying to influence and control your thoughts. Mass agitation weakens the noncommunist enemy and builds Party structure.
Communists conceive of their attack against capitalist society in terms of warfare. They see the Party as the “vanguard,” leading the proletariat in battle against the bourgeoisie. Periods of offense and defense, attacks and retreats, skirmishes, even pitched battles and casualties are demanded. They realize that victory can be achieved only by force and violence.
This warlike character of communist policy is reflected in Party expressions such as “strongholds of reaction,” “mobilizing the masses,” “advanced detachments of the proletariat,” “storming the fortress of capitalism,” “seizing the initiative.” Basic battle plans are conceived in terms of strategy and tactics.
The ultimate aim of the Communist Party is the establishment of a Soviet America. For more than a generation, never for a moment have American communists forgotten their allegiance to the Soviet Union. This is the ultimate strategy of the Communist Party, USA.
Party leaders realize, however, that they are a minority. They simply cannot march straight to victory. For that reason the approach (tactics) must be varied, flexible, and constantly subject to change.
To communists, strategy means the determining and carrying out of long-range goals (such as winning a war), whereas tactics are the working out of strategy on a day-to-day basis (winning particular battles and engagements). “Tactics,” Stalin said, “are a part of strategy, subordinate and subservient to it.”
To achieve the long-range goal, retreats and maneuvers sometimes are necessary. Is it not like climbing an unexplored mountain? asks Lenin. How can we “renounce beforehand the idea that at times we might have to go in zigzags, sometimes retracing our steps, sometimes abandoning the course once selected and trying various others?”
That explains the communist phrase, “strategic retreat.” It means: Don’t be afraid to take two steps backward today if it will help to achieve three steps forward tomorrow.
Keep the goal always in mind, teach the communists; remember that the enemy is superior in numbers, better armed, more experienced. Moreover, communists must be willing to endure hardships. Lenin urged: “... if you are not inclined to crawl in the mud on your belly, you are not a revolutionary but a chatterbox....” Fight hard and be disciplined, “carefully, attentively and skilfully taking advantage of every, even the smallest ‘fissure’ among the enemies....” Seize “every, even the smallest opportunity of gaining a mass ally, even though this ally be temporary, vacillating, unstable, unreliable and conditional.” And “Those who do not understand this fail to understand even a grain of Marxism....”
Use anything to advance the ultimate goal: offensive and defensive tactics, legal and illegal, long- and short-range policies. All are part of the over-all battle plan..
Don’t allow the Party to advance too rapidly. Stop, consolidate, maintain contact with the masses. “... an advance without consolidating the positions already captured is an advance doomed to failure.” Likewise, never make a permanent truce with the enemy. Don’t be trapped by his lures, bribes, and promises. Cooperation or collaboration with noncommunists must never be more than a “tactic.” It must have as its actual long-range goal the weakening and discrediting of democracy and its eventual destruction. The task of the revolutionary leader is to gauge the comparative strength of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie and decide what particular tactics are then most likely to promote revolution.
Communists employ various tactics in devising methods to inject themselves into various phases of American life. Their obligation to defend the interests of the Soviet Union dictates their tactics in seeking to obstruct and undermine public confidence in our foreign policy. Thus, seizing upon the inherent desire of all Americans to reduce taxes, the Daily Worker editorializes that foreign aid should be curtailed and billions should not be taken “out of our pockets for a new phony ‘emergency’.... The huge seventy-billion a year ‘defense’ budget is rushing America to inflation, and economic crisis.” Actually, communists would like to develop an economic crisis.
Then they urge the development of a peacetime economy by advocating trade between the United States and Russia because Russia would benefit. Political Affairs thus urges, “The only remaining untapped market for U.S. goods is the Soviet Union, China and the Peoples’ Democracies, in which the threat of crises of overproduction has been removed forever....”
In seeking to curry favor with labor, communists employ tactics of calling for immediate demands such as higher wages, a shorter work week, increased vacations, and an abolition of the high cost of living. To that end a communist labor tactician calls for putting “... ideological differences aside in order to work together in behalf of a single immediate objective or a number of immediate objectives... the unions must work together....”
The immediate demand tactics are also employed by the communists to find favor with Negroes by urging the abolition of “Jim Crow Laws,” “full representation,” and “the fight for Negro rights.” The controversy on integration has given the communists a field day.
They also have a program “... to stimulate broad united-front actions in the rural communities in defense of the economic interests of the farming masses”; “to weld youth unity”; and to “work still harder” for mothers.
A primary tactic of the Communist Party is to preserve the legal status of the Party. Thus, any organization which has the duty to investigate or expose communist activity is singled out for attack. For years the Party has campaigned against the House Committee on Un-American Activities, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, and the Senate Investigating Committee. The Department of Justice and the FBI have not been spared, and we have come to judge our effectiveness by the intensity of communist attacks.
The Red Fascists have long followed the practice of making full use of democratic liberties: elections, lawful agitation and propaganda, and free speech, press, and assembly. Their basic premise: Reap every advantage possible. However, if it will help, don’t hesitate to use illegal methods, such as underground operations, terrorism, espionage, sabotage, lying, cheating. “We have never rejected terror on principle, nor can we do so. Terror is a form of military operation that may be usefully applied....” wrote Lenin. Morality is strictly a bourgeois device. To the communists everything that promotes the revolution is moral, legal, and beautiful.
Many people are confused by the Party’s abrupt twists and turns, such as denouncing the United States as an “imperialist” nation from 1939 to 1941, then overnight, after Russia’s entrance into the war, hailing America as a great ally. Communists often look like frightened rabbits chasing back and forth. But in reality these “changes in the Party line” are merely shifting tactics, all designed to promote the ultimate goal of world revolution. They are not changes in heart.
The Communist Party, USA, has been and is engaged in an all-out war against American freedom. Its tactics of confusion, retreat, advance, infiltration, and hypocrisy are in full play. The attack is both legal and illegal, offensive and defensive, open and concealed.
Above the surface a gigantic propaganda and agitation campaign is in progress, a campaign that depends for success upon the support of noncommunists. Basic communist strategy dictates that noncommunist hands, knowingly or unknowingly, under communist guidance, must further the influence of the communist world.
To understand communist strategy and tactics, as designed to destroy American democracy, we must first observe above-ground communist operations: mass-agitation campaigns, infiltration techniques, and Party fronts; then in Part VI we will consider the underground organization.
15 — Mass Agitation
As stated in Chapter 10, the Party’s attack is geared to the wide variety of American life. Communism has something to sell to everybody. And, following this principle, it is the function of mass agitation to exploit all the grievances, hopes, aspirations, prejudices, fears, and ideals of all the special groups that make up our society, social, religious, economic, racial, political. Stir them up. Set one against the other. Divide and conquer. That’s the way to soften up a democracy.
Here is the advice of a top leader giving instruction on how to spread the Party’s influence:
Study your friends. See what they spontaneously talk about. What problems interest them?
—is he an unemployed worker, skilled in his craft but without work?;
—a storekeeper? Maybe business isn’t so good;
—a trade-union man or a dairy farmer? What are their problems?;
—a young man just out of school? Looking for a job?;
—a member of a minority group?;
—a young mother worrying about sending her child to kindergarten?
“... unless each one of us grasps the meaning of this individual approach to every one of our friends and acquaintances, we are in danger” of being ineffective.
Agitation must be carried on in specialized fields: among women, among youth, among veterans, among racial and nationality groups, farmers, trade unions. That’s the responsibility of the Party commissions.
Consider youth, a prime target of communist attack. Communists start out with this major premise: American imperialism aims to create a corrupt, completely militarized youth—a “gagged,” “scared” generation. This theme is expounded by word of mouth, in forums, in literature, in cartoons, hoping to exploit the lofty dreams of youth.
The approach always has two sides: (1) the deceptive line designed for public consumption, and (2) the real Party line designed to advance communism. Consider this deceptive line for youth:
1. Increase trade with all countries, including the communist bloc, to provide “hundreds of thousands of new jobs for young people.”
2. Outlaw all mass destruction weapons (atomic bomb).
3. Promote universal disarmament and peace.
4. Reduce military expenditures and repeal the draft.
5. Repeal all “repressive legislation” and “restore the Bill of Rights.”
6. “Restore full academic freedom for students and faculties.”
7. Promote world-wide “youth friendship for peace and democracy,” drop all bars to the travel of youth.
8. Appropriate more money for schools, community centers, etc.
That is the line designed for public consumption. Sounds acceptable, doesn’t it? But the communists are not genuinely interested in improving the status of American youth.
For window-dressing, they always support items desired by most of the people: lower taxes, higher wages, better housing, old-age security, higher farm income. These are thoroughly legitimate interests. To support these aims, and many others, is not to be a communist. The Party is simply attempting to exploit such interests for its own selfish aims They become Party “talking points.”
Behind this front, as in the call for world-wide youth friendship, more education, academic freedom, and so on, lurks the ulterior motive, the real Party line. The attractive “come along” points are merely bait. Look closely to see how the adoption of these demands, as conceived by the Party, would distort their true meanings and aid the communist cause:
“Restore the Bill of Rights,” in communist language, means eliminating of legal opposition to communism, stopping all prosecution of communists, and granting amnesty to those presently in jail. “Repeal the draft law” and “peace” mean curtailing our national defense effort and allowing Russia to become militarily stronger than the United States. “Increase trade with the Soviet Bloc” means selling materials that could be used by the communist nations for armaments. “Restore academic freedom” means to communists that we should permit the official teaching of communist doctrine in all schools and that we should allow communists to infiltrate teaching staffs. If the communists had their way, America would be rendered helpless to protect herself. Incidentally, notice the communist use of the word “restore,” indicating that freedom is already gone and that the Party stands for its return.
Now substitute “veterans” for “youth.” The approach is the same: Increased trade with all countries, including the communist bloc, would mean thousands of new jobs for veterans. “Restore” academic freedom so veterans can think as they want. Promote world-wide veteran friendship. Drop all bars to the travel of veterans. Also, it is good propaganda policy to add a few “come along” points appealing specifically to veterans. The technique continues: substitute “women,” “trade union members,” “nationality groups,” etc.
The propaganda platform contains a combination of immediate “come along” demands, designed for deceptive and specialized appeal, and basic policy aimed to advance the communist cause.
Thus the Party, through its specialized and immediate demands, is able to gain entree into various groups and create favorable working conditions for future revolutionary action. Very quickly, for example:
—a veterans’ meeting endorses “peace.”
—a nationality festival passes a resolution for “peace.”
—a youth affair favors “peace.”
—a neighborhood group comes out for “peace.”
—a women’s rally fights for “peace.”
Whatever its composition, the group, once under communist control, is switched to the Party line. The feigned interest in legitimate demands is merely a trap.
Even holidays are used to enhance the Party’s aims. For example, the Daily Worker once headlined a story “Mother’s Day to Be Marked by Peace Tables....” Postcards should be distributed on Mother’s Day, the story continued, “declaring the deepest need of all American mothers to be a ban on A-and H-bombs....”
Also planned, according to the story, were special Mother’s Day leaflets and placards as well as balloons for the children reading “World-Wide Ban of A- and H-bombs.”
Many people sincerely believe, for many reasons, that these bombs should be banned. However, to communists, the true meaning of peace and banning the A- and H-bombs is weakening the United States and advancing Russian aggressive aims.
And so it goes. A discussion may start about the low price of oats, better working conditions on the second shift, equal pay for women, the death rate among Eskimos, but it will end with the endorsement of “peace”; “amnesty for the Smith Act victims”; “repeal of the Internal Security Act of 1950 and the McCarran-Walter Immigration and Nationality Act.”
Scattered, variegated, and inarticulate interests, under Party guidance, are brought into a common denominator: support for the Party line.
The Party line, in fact, is the sum total of all Party demands at any given time. You must learn to see it as a whole. Some demands are always present and seem innocent enough, such as those for higher wages, lower taxes, and better housing. But, remember, communists don’t really care about genuine social reforms. These immediate demands are strictly for agitational purposes. They serve to arouse people and to cause tension. William Z. Foster says very candidly: “Our Party is a revolutionary Party. It aims not simply to ease conditions a bit under capitalism for the workers but to abolish capitalism altogether.”
If ever achieved, these demands will be restated in more extreme form.
Other demands in the Party line are short-term; that is, they may quickly change, depending on the current national and international situation. Consider the Party’s stand that Formosa should be returned to China proper. Suppose the present communist regime in China were overthrown and a government hostile to Soviet Russia gained power. This demand would be quickly abandoned. On the other hand, certain demands never change, such as support of the Soviet Union.
The attack is primarily agitational. Propaganda, although valuable, is a long-range softener, to be handled chiefly on an intellectual level by the educational department; agitation is immediate, inflammatory, conducive to acute discontent, the specialty of the field organizer.
Lenin’s distinction is decisive. A propagandist, he says, to explain unemployment must talk about the capitalist nature of the crisis, the need for building a socialist society, etc. “‘Many ideas’” must be expounded, “so many indeed that they will be understood as a whole only by a (comparatively) few persons.”
But the agitator, on the other hand, selects one well-known aspect of the problem, such as “the death from starvation of the family of an unemployed worker.” He will concentrate on imparting a single idea to the masses: why this family died. Or, in Lenin’s words, he will show “the senseless contradiction between the increase of wealth and increase of poverty.” Evoke discontent and revolt now. “Leave a more complete explanation... to the propagandist.” Here is an example of how agitation works:
The communists publish a story: John Doe has been arrested, the charge is murder. Of course it is a tragic event. Crime always brings sorrow. It reflects maladjustment in society and points up abuses that genuinely need correction. But the communists aren’t interested in John Doe. They do not try to discover the true facts in his case, study his background, or improve his condition. Here in the day’s news is a human tragedy that can be exploited for propaganda purposes. That is enough.
The Party machinery springs into action, typical of thousands of mass-agitation campaigns.
The communist press publicizes the case with pictures, an interview with the wrongdoer, stories about his family. It carries heart-rending and sentimental accounts, without regard to truth or the suffering of the victim of the crime or the sorrow of his loved ones.
If the arrested person is a member of a minority group, or a veteran, the father of ten children, a union member or unemployed, the agitational appeal is broadened. “Union Member Framed on Murder Charge.” “Unemployed Veteran Railroaded to Jail.” “Father of 10 Arrested on False Charges.” Almost always the charge of “police brutality” is thrown in too.
In a few days a decision must be made. Should the campaign continue? Maybe the case is quickly over, no special interest having been aroused. Or the “victim” himself announces that he’s been treated fairly and has no personal ill feelings. That’s the end. The Party drops it.
Such campaigns are sometimes carried on for months or years, with varying degrees of intensity. The Party is a self-appointed collector of “victims” of “framed evidence,” “lynch justice,” “Gestapo brutality,” “academic witchhunts.” These “martyrs of injustice” include old-timers like Sacco and Vanzetti and the Scottsboro Case, now remembered only in “memorials”; and recent ones, such as the “Martinsville Seven,” the “Trenton Six” or the Rosenbergs; or hot-off-the-griddle varieties, such as those appearing in the current Party press. All are trotted out at the slightest twist of tongue or pencil as exhibits of capitalist “terror” and communist “benevolence.”
Certain exploitation standards determine whether the campaign is to continue: Can large numbers of people be influenced? Is a public official involved—the more prominent the better—who can be undermined and smeared? Will other communist ventures be aided? Can the Party gain recruits? (Mass agitation is always linked to Party building.) Can financial gains be secured for the Party?
The Party searches American life for agitational points: the eviction of a family, the arrest of a Negro, a proposed rise in transit fares, a bill to increase taxes, a miscarriage of justice, the underpayment of a worker, the dismissal of a teacher, a shooting by law-enforcement officers. Some of the cases, unfortunately, do reflect mistakes or blemishes in American society. Others are twisted by the Party into agitational items.
Once the decision has been made to continue the campaign, the next step is probably the formation of the XYZ Committee to Save John Doe: a communist front, born at 9:00 A.M., full grown by 10:30 A.M., mailing out letters by noon. This gives the illusion of organized interest, focuses attention, and masks communist participation. Purpose (deceptive) is to gain “justice” for the defendant; purpose (real): to advance communism.
Attract attention by building up a bonfire of agitation. Suddenly, almost like magic, a “women’s” group in Oregon, a “farmers’” meeting in Oklahoma, a “consumers’” conference in West Virginia pass resolutions: “Save John Doe!” Literature is scattered, other groups contacted. The Party becomes the agitational base. Who is John Doe? The members don’t know, except that he’s the newest twist in the Party line. That’s enough!
The Party has now started a mass-agitation campaign. Its success depends on securing noncommunist support. Members contact community leaders, such as judges, members of the city council, doctors, lawyers, clergymen, educators, social workers, trying to obtain statements or testimonials.
The communist is no longer a shadowy figure deep underground or meeting secretly at night. He is knocking on doors, seeing prominent people, attending city council meetings.
I feel that John Doe has been wrongly arrested [or convicted, as the case may be]. I am compelled in the interests of justice to demand that he be released.
That is a typical testimonial to be sent to authorities and the press.
The technique of obtaining testimonials is always to start with a sympathizer, the kind who will authorize his name for any communist campaign. Some are so “controlled” that headquarters uses their names without consultation, even preparing their statements. Others are contacted on each occasion.
They next reach out for other prominent sympathizers. Officers of communist fronts make good signers. They usually have imposing “titles.” Next, branch out to the lukewarm, those who are on the fence; sometimes they will sign, other times they will not. If not, they must be sold. Finally come the unsuspecting noncommunists, with contact being made either in person or on the telephone.
“Mr. X, I’m So-and-So from the XYZ Committee to Save John Doe. I was just over at Mr. Y’s office. You know him, don’t you?”
“Yes,” will come the reply. That gets the interview off to a good start.
“This is a case I am sure will interest you. You are a lawyer and here is an individual who is the victim of injustice.... Have you heard about it?”
“No.” That’s good, the field is clear.
On and on. “Dr. F, Rev. O, etc., have given statements....”
The man signs. Another “innocent victim.” Did he know the communist identity of the solicitor? No. Did he know that the XYZ Committee to Save John Doe was a communist front? No. Did he realize that by making the statement he was aiding the communist movement? No.
For sincere, honest reasons of their own, entirely unrelated to communism, many individuals may support John Doe. This, of course, does not make them communists. To call them communists is an injustice, but it is not unjust to point out that the Party always seeks to exploit such personal convictions for partisan propaganda.
The cause of communism must be linked with as many elements in society as possible. Our fight for John Doe is your fight, the communists say to labor unions, Negro, professional, cultural, and nationality groups. Today he’s being “persecuted.” Tomorrow it’ll be your turn. Join with us and we’ll fight together.
... we Communists join with every other democratic-minded American, irrespective of views, in the common fight to preserve a common democratic heritage.
Deceptive: the communists are fighting for our “common democratic heritage”; real: to gain the support of noncommunist groups (even “... those who do not accept Socialism as a final aim”). As Lenin instructed, seize allies everywhere. Use them for the advantage of furthering communism.
Mass agitation is most effective in capturing the support of noncommunists. By securing even the temporary allegiance of an individual, as in a testimonial, the Party gains. In this way communist propaganda enters the orbit of that individual’s personal influence. “Why,” a friend will say after reading the testimonial, “if So-and-So endorses that organization [or issue], it must be OK.” The dupe becomes a communist thought-control relay station. That’s why communists are always eager to secure the support of doctors, clergymen, teachers, and other persons highly respected in their communities. The more widely known the person, the better.
Circulating petitions is another favorite communist technique for capturing noncommunist support.
A young woman stands on the sidewalk. A housewife, carrying a package, comes out of the grocery store.
“Pardon me,” the young woman says, approaching her. “Wouldn’t you like to help a young man win his freedom?”
The appeal is attractive. The housewife stops. “We have a petition to the governor asking for the release of John Doe. He’s sentenced to die....” The housewife looks at the petition. It contains nothing communist. There is no hammer or sickle or mention of Russia. It is just a statement that we the undersigned believe that John Doe should be released. “You can help a lot by signing....”
She signs and so do thousands of others. Party teams are everywhere, on street corners, at factory gates, in bus terminals. Sign here, please. Won’t you send a telegram or write a letter? Here’s a sample all fixed up. Just sign it. Would you like a leaflet? Won’t you call the governor’s office? Come to our rally tonight. Write a letter to the newspaper. Is your club meeting soon? Have it pass a resolution. Your pastor can help. Have him call a protest meeting.
The pressure is tabulated in thousands of letters, resolutions, and telegrams, ten, a hundred times the number of all Party members in the United States.
Agitation campaigns are of all types, local, state, and national:
—dealing with the high cost of living;
—against a rise in transit fares;
—opposing a bill in Congress or a state legislature;
—protesting the showing of a “Fascist” movie;
—urging amnesty for convicted Smith Act “victims”;
—demanding “peace”; “repeal the draft”; “more aid to schools”;
—protesting the arrival in town of some celebrity not liked by the Party.
Campaigns involving court cases as a general rule provide the most sustained agitation. These can be divided into various exploitation stages.
1. The arrest stage: the “victim” has been illegally arrested. The charges are “trumped up.”
2. The trial stage: “false evidence” is being used, the jury is “packed,” a fair trial is “impossible.”
3. The appeal stage (assuming that the defendant is found guilty): in most cases a guilty verdict serves the communist purpose best. Otherwise, little propaganda is left, except for a few self-congratulatory articles. The communists use every device, inside and outside the courtroom, to break down the American judicial system.
4. The clemency stage: this is probably best suited to agitation. The Party operates a whole series of tactics. Here are a few:
Mass meetings. Rallies. Demonstrations. Picket lines. These, also used in other exploitation stages, now become imbued with “gravity.” “John Doe Will Die in 2 Weeks. Wire the Governor. Demand His Release.” “Save My Boy, Please. He’s Innocent.” “Where’s America’s Conscience? This Man Has Been Framed.”
Sojourns. Treks. Pilgrimages. Motorcades. Encampments. The convergence on a selected spot, the state capital or Washington, D.C., of members and sympathizers from all over the country.
They arrive by train, battered old trucks, rented buses, hitchhiking. Get your tickets, meet at the station, don’t miss the Clemency Train. Day after day the Daily Worker pounds this theme. An operational headquarters is set up, usually under a fancy Aesopian name such as “Liberty House” or “Inspiration Center.”
This tactic—concentrated pressure—is reserved only for special occasions. Teams visit offices of legislators, officials of the government, and demand to see the governor or President. Make everyone think that “millions” are demanding clemency. A cascade of telegrams, letters, petitions, resolutions pours in, promoted by comrades back home. “The city was stirred today by the nation’s demand for clemency for John Doe....” writes the Party’s press agent. Probably 250 communists and their sympathizers were in town.
The hour of judicial decision or execution nears. The drama is heightened. “Prayer meetings” are held by communists, who do not believe in prayer. Then the super climax: a “vigil.” The comrades start a marching line, twenty-four hours around the clock, demanding “mercy,” “clemency.” One day, two days, five days, twelve days, the line moves back and forth in front of the governor’s mansion, or more dramatic, the White House. Placards read: “Mercy for John Doe.” “Mr. Governor, Don’t You Have a Heart?” Any testimonials secured from prominent individuals bob and weave in the marching line. Leaflets are handed out.
In two hours comes a new shift. Paraders walk silently, sometimes in single file, at other times two abreast, usually six to eight feet apart. This isn’t supposed to be a flamboyant affair, but sad and mournful, designed to capture the emotions. Death is near! “Clemency Now—Only 12 Hours Left.” “Can America Allow an Innocent Man to Die?”
The shift is over. The members whisk back to “Liberty House,” grab a bite to eat, hear a pep talk, then return for another “tour of duty.” Cots are available for sleep. In this way a few fanatical comrades can attract the attention of thousands. Over the week end other comrades, off from work, “flood” into a city and, in the flaming words of the Party press, march by the “thousands”—meaning probably 250 to 300. “There’s Still Time to Act. Send Telegrams, Letters to the Governor.” Mount the pressure. So long as John Doe is alive he must be exploited.
5. The imprisonment stage: the defendant becomes a showpiece. He is visited by his wife (called a “prison wife”) and his family, and delegations go to see him. Sentimental and heart-tearing accounts are written: “... as the train sped me northward, my eyes ached with unwept tears of loneliness.” “I heard [his] quiet voice. I looked into his calm eyes. But I noted too the tight lines of controlled grimness about his mouth and the narrowed tightness about his eyes.”
Birthday-card campaigns are initiated. Send John Doe a Christmas greeting. His picture is published. His “speeches” become “quotable scripture.” A nine-year-old son visits him... the child is shocked by the “watchtowers,” “gigantic searchlights,” “locked iron doors”... the visit is over... the little boy tells his mother, “After all, if Daddy didn’t have such good political ideas he wouldn’t be there in the first place.” (He is a Smith Act “victim.”)
The communist press will invariably superimpose its judgment on that of a jury and judge with a trumped-up charge that the homicide was justifiable, the evidence framed, or the witness had committed perjury. It will have a defense for the crime that would cause the person not familiar with the facts or the record of the trial to wonder. And the longer the lapse of time, the more real the trumped-up defense will sound to the uninformed. This might go on for years. For example, the Women’s Committee for Equal Justice was not disbanded until seven years after Rosa Lee Ingram and her two sons had been convicted and sentenced in a Georgia court for the slaying of a neighbor.
6. The post-imprisonment stage: most of the propaganda value is generally gone when this stage is reached. If the “victim” is dead, “memorial” services may occasionally be held or articles written.
The cycle has run. The campaign may be dropped at any moment, shifted to a new tack, used to buttress another approach. Another purpose, especially in espionage cases, is to make the “victim” think he is a “martyr” and believe that any cooperation with the American government, such as implicating others or giving vital information, would be a betrayal. Better to have him executed by the government for his crimes than to expose other communists.
These campaigns are designed to dramatize communists and their front representatives as “champions” of the masses. They foster the illusion that these individuals are progressive, enlightened, and humanitarian, acting in the best interests of the American people. “We stand for freedom when everybody else is not interested.” That is the illusion.
The real motive is to prepare both the Party and noncommunist society for revolutionary action. Members gain experience in mass work: the art of propaganda and agitation, organizing social discontent, guiding large numbers. Leadership, discipline, and organizational structure can be tested. Moreover, communists hope to make workers and the masses class-conscious, accepting the Party as their leader (in Party terms called radicalizing the masses). Sow seeds of discontent; weaken, divide, and neutralize anticommunist opposition; above all, undermine the American judicial process.
Law enforcement has long been a target of communist attack. As legal opposition crystallized, these Party attacks, especially on the FBI, prosecutive officials, and police, have mounted in intensity.
Lenin taught that it was essential for every “real people’s revolution” to destroy the “ready-made state machinery.” Wherever communists have been able to exercise any measure of control, their first step has been to hamstring and incapacitate law enforcement.
The communist performance in the Indian state of Kerala is a good illustration. Within a few months after a procommunist government came into control, “people’s action committees” were formed which began to usurp the functions of the law courts. Then the state police were handcuffed by orders to stand on the sidelines except when crimes such as murder, rape, arson, and assault occurred. Many communists were freed from jail, and public statements were issued that many penal institutions would be closed and their grounds turned into flower gardens. A noncommunist official of the Indian government reported a “complete breakdown of law and order.”
Experience over the years has demonstrated that every time communists are able to avert justice through technicalities, there is not only jubilation in Party circles but also increased urgings for more brazen Party action.
Day-to-day struggles are battle-hardening dress rehearsals for revolution. William Z. Foster boasted, “... capitalism will die sword in hand, fighting in vain to beat back the oncoming revolutionary proletariat.”
Often communists find it effective to carry out their agitation campaigns through organizations not generally recognized as procommunist. These can be either (1) old-time organizations which have been “infiltrated,” or (2) newly established communist fronts. The next two chapters will discuss these forms of communist campaigning.
16 — Infiltration
Infiltration is the method whereby Party members move into noncommunist organizations for the purpose of exercising influence for communism. If control is secured, the organization becomes a communist front. This chapter shows how infiltration works and what you can do about it.
Infiltration is one of the oldest of communist tactics, advocated by Lenin and Stalin. For instance, listen to this exhortation by Georgi Dimitroff, General Secretary, before the Seventh World Congress of the Communist International:
Comrades, you remember the ancient tale of the capture of Troy. Troy was inaccessible to the armies attacking her, thanks to her impregnable walls. And the attacking army, after suffering many sacrifices, was unable to achieve victory until with the aid of the famous Trojan horse it managed to penetrate to the very heart of the enemy’s camp.
Homer’s famous story, Dimitroff said, must be applied to the twentieth century. “We... should not be shy about using the same tactics....” The Trojan horse has enabled the Party to wield an influence far in excess of its actual numbers.
For example, a community emergency occurred and assistance was badly needed in a stricken area. A labor union in Cleveland, Ohio, raised money to purchase food for distribution to the victims of this adversity in a small West Virginia town where families actually were in want for the necessities of life. The Communist Party organizer in Cleveland instructed a concealed Party member of the union that the truck driver was to deliver the food to a specified address in the stricken area in West Virginia where it would do the most “good.”
Here a noncommunist organization was paying the bill, thinking that it was doing a generous act of charity. Yet concealed communists within its ranks were subverting the generosity to communist ends. Since the Party had actual control over the distribution, who do you think got credit for the generosity?
Such incidents are frequent. Strikes have been called or settlements influenced by Party penetration within labor unions. Party manipulation has controlled the conventions of noncommunist organizations and determined the selection of officers. An idea originated in a Party office can, through this technique, be translated within days or hours into interviews with high government officials, into intensive agitation campaigns, or even, as has happened, into disruption of industrial production.
No wonder the Party desperately seeks to infiltrate labor unions, the government, civic and community groups, religious, professional, economic, and social organizations. It desires to make these organizations, in various ways, serve Party interests.
Party leaders spend much time and effort in studying infiltration strategy and tactics. A hasty, ill-advised, or poorly timed move might wipe out months of preparation. Should the objective be complete capture of the organization or the placing of a few key members? If the latter, where should the initial attack be delivered? Would it be better to place a member on the midnight or on the swing shift? Where can the greatest and most immediate gains be secured? A flexible strategy, adapted to current conditions, must be employed.
Communists have probably worked harder to infiltrate American labor unions than any other group. Since the days of Lenin, labor has been a favorite target. The Russian dictator was explicit:
It is necessary to... agree to any and every sacrifice, and even—if need be—to resort to all sorts of stratagems, manoeuvres and illegal methods, to evasion and subterfuges in order to penetrate the trade unions, to remain in them, and to carry on Communist work in them at all costs.
The statement is frank: Communists are not interested in the laboring man, higher wages, better working conditions, shorter hours. They want to get inside unions in order to agitate for communism.
An overwhelming majority of American labor-union members are honest, hard-working, loyal citizens. They detest communism. This has been proven time after time. Alerted to the presence of communists, they will cast them out. Most of the Party’s gains achieved prior to and during World War II in the labor movement have now been destroyed.
These defeats, however, have not halted the danger. “At least 90 per cent of all of our efforts,” one Party writer asserted, must be devoted to industrial workers. Drawing on years of experience, the Party is today attacking labor unions with renewed vigor. The best way to defeat this assault is to know communist tactics of action.
The first thing in labor-union infiltration tactics is to secure a foothold inside a union, through a single comrade or, better yet, two or three. Comrades then do everything possible to build up strength inside the organization, creating a shop club.
Members of shop clubs are expected to promote Party influence in all possible ways. Very important is the recruitment of new members. The Party’s influence depends on members, especially on their strategic placement in the union and in industry.
“How-to-recruit” suggestions, for example, are often supplied to shop comrades. One Party manual urges that members mix with the workers and cultivate friendships.
Especially must the Communist mingle with his fellow workers at noon time and participate in the general discussions and conversations that take place.
Always try to steer these discussions, the manual says, into “economic and political channels”—so as to provide the chance to insert communist propaganda. And don’t use technical Party terms. Learn to express “our Marxian line” in good “American slang.” Communism can best be sold in the everyday language of the prospect.
If the worker shows “interest” (the communists say if “he’s more advanced”), give him a Daily Worker or pamphlet to read. Then invite him to a meeting or “study group.”
Try to stay with him after working hours. “The majority of our Party members become Communists only after working hours, around 6 P.M.” For communists there is no such thing as an eight-hour day.
The over-all work of infiltration, especially of shop clubs, is coordinated by Party strategy caucuses; that is, Party-called meetings where the problems of infiltration are studied. They are generally held on an industry basis, such as the automobile, steel, railroad, mining, and electrical industries, with members employed in these fields attending.
Party caucuses operate on different levels. There will be, for example, local caucuses of Party members employed in a certain industry in a given area, such as the automobile or electrical industry in Detroit or Cleveland. Then there are state and national caucuses, with Party leaders being drawn from wider areas. Party labor directors are usually in charge. In the past, for instance, national “auto” caucuses were often held in Cleveland or Detroit, “steel” in Youngstown, “electrical” in Buffalo, and “mining” in Pittsburgh. Sometimes Party leaders in related unions, such as automobile and steel, are brought together in a general communist labor conference.
These caucuses are literally strategy-devising meetings, where problems and procedures are analyzed with X-ray precision. Noncommunists probably do not realize how carefully communists study “capitalist” companies, wage policies, personnel, etc. The objective always is: How can the company and the union be used to implement the Party line, as support for “peace,” the Smith Act “victims,” or some current Party “martyr”?
For an answer let’s look in on one Party caucus.
Leslie, from the northwestern part of the state, was reporting on what his shop club was doing, that is, soliciting signatures to a “peace” petition.
“We got seven hundred and four signatures in a little over three days last week.”
“Keep at it,” the organizer responded. “Get more signature campaigns going. Contact those people who have already signed. See if they are friendly and understand our position. If so, go a third time. (Maybe a recruit could be secured.) Encourage them to circulate a petition themselves.”
“At our plant,” another Party leader commented, “we started a committee to protect freedom of speech. It’s a good issue and we’ve had some fine response. I think we ought to soon rally some support for the Smith Act victims. I hope we can get some contributions too.”
“Fine,” the organizer added, “but always remember that we must stress our united-front campaign. We’ve got to show the workers in these right-wing [that is, anticommunist] unions that the Party stands for peace, higher wages, and better working conditions.
“What if most of the workers don’t agree with communism?” the organizer continued. “That doesn’t keep them from working with us. We’ve got to convince them that we must all work together, that we have common aims. Besides, it will help us organize the rank and file against the reactionary [anticommunist] leadership.”
The caucuses give guidance. This is how to agitate on Party issues: Issue petitions and resolutions, set up a “peace” stand outside the shop gate, start a front. Ideas are exchanged, weaknesses analyzed, tactical shifts worked out, all under supervision of Party headquarters.
Sometimes the caucuses manipulate special “deals” to enhance Party influence. The following case, which occurred in Cleveland, Ohio, is revealing:
“Howard,” the organizer said, addressing one of the older members, “you’ve got to give up your job as editor of the union’s newspaper.”
“Give up...,” the member said, surprised.
“Your time’s running out. You’re just about pegged as a communist. If you try to stay on another year, you’ll be thrown out. That’ll cause a rumpus and we’ll lose ground. Step out now.”
“OK,” the member replied, accepting the instruction. “I think I can get Elmer elected in my place. Dick may want it, but we’ve got to stop him.”
“Right you are,” the organizer said. “Dick is a vicious Red baiter. He’s a faker and reactionary. I’d rather have the paper discontinued than have him as editor.”
“Elmer isn’t known as a communist,” the member added. “Of course, if I support him it’ll tag him somewhat, but....”
“That’s our best approach, Howard,” the organizer said. “Submit your resignation tomorrow. You’ll catch Dick and his cronies off guard. Then push all you can for Elmer.”
What follows now is a case history which reveals the whole sinister process of infiltration. It concerns an organization that we shall call The 123 Group, typical of many trade-union, fraternal, civic, community, and nationality groups. It covers a six-year struggle for control between the Communist Party—working through a group of open and concealed members, sympathizers, and dupes—and a noncommunist opposition, at first unorganized, hitting wildly, but later to become all-powerful.
The 123 Group was an influential and respected noncommunist organization. Even partly to control its actions would be of great value to the Party.
The problem for communist headquarters was how best to attack. The obvious target, as in most organizations, was the officers. To control one officer, such as a president, secretary, or treasurer, is often worth ten, twenty, or fifty rank-and-file members. Everything must be done to prepare for the next elections in an effort to oust as many anticommunists as possible and replace them with pro-Party people or at least neutrals.
All officers of The 123 Group were bitterly anticommunist except one, the secretary. He would have loudly protested if called a Party member, and he wasn’t; but for many years he had maintained cordial contacts with Party officials. He was, in every respect, a sympathizer. He was popular and had a large personal following among the rank and file. For this reason the anticommunists had not been able to defeat him. Here was the obvious weak point.
“We’ve got to draw up an entire slate of candidates,” the Party organizer emphasized. “Let’s call it the ‘Reform Ticket.’ We must include a few reactionaries. That’ll hide our interest.” Then the frank admission: “We must not show our hand. We’ll run on a program acceptable to the right wing as much as possible. After we get in we’ll take control.”
The communist Trojan horse was jockeying for position. Maneuver often compensates for lack of numbers and organizational position. Deals, stratagems, and hypocrisy must be given free play.
The secretary-sympathizer agreed to run on the Reform Ticket. His name would lend prestige and give the ticket a capable career officer. Here was the first breakthrough. More deals, however, were necessary.
The chief problem now was the presidency. Whom to run? A known procommunist could not win. To support another anticommunist was unthinkable. The answer: an opportunist.
The right man was at hand, a noncommunist, personally ambitious, who disliked the current president. Lacking a dynamic personality, a “little backward,” as one Party official called him, he could be “guided.” He was just the man to head the ticket.
He was contacted. Run for president and you’ll receive “our” support. The communists, of course, didn’t openly identify themselves. The opportunist, however, probably suspected, but he didn’t care. That is the mark of an opportunist: his personal ambition is so great that it overrides every other consideration.
Now the other noncommunist candidates on the Reform Ticket must be chosen.
To communists there are different degrees of “foes.” A “60 per cent” foe is better “working material” than a “100 per cent” foe. Another may be appraised as a 40 or even 10 percenter. In drawing up the slate, find as many “low percenters” as possible. Also there is the practical factor, always to be remembered, of selecting candidates who can “pull” votes to the ticket.
These deals were made.
Then there was the task, after selection of the slate (which contained concealed communists along with noncommunists), of getting it elected.
This meant more strategy, manipulation, and deals. The communists could count on only a small minority of the vote—their own members and a few sympathizers. Their tactic lay in exploiting existing jealousies, conflicts, and dissatisfactions among the majority noncommunists. To catch the secret of communist infiltration tactics, we must understand how the Party, with great skill, is able to exploit, guide, and capitalize on the splits and lack of interest in noncommunist ranks. That’s how the Party is able to wield an influence far out of proportion to its numbers.
There was, of course, the usual share of communist deals. One technique, often used, is a deal with a noncommunist member of the group who is running for office in another organization in which the communists also have members. “Support our candidates here,” the deal goes, “and we’ll help you next week.” Then there is the communist who is a union official or company foreman who says to a noncommunist member of the group, “Maybe we can consider a promotion for you at the plant if....”
Another technique is to urge “benevolent neutrality” upon those noncommunists who are wavering and might vote for the current officers; that’s a good day for them to stay home or go fishing!
Result: The Reform Ticket won a complete victory. Now one-third of the officers, five Party members, were controlled by Party headquarters. The rest were virtual prisoners.
To infiltrate an organization is only a first step. It must be made to serve Party interests. There are many ways:
1. A proposal, promoted by the communists, was made that Henry G., both a member of The 123 Group and a secret communist, be sent as an official delegate to the National Convention of a communist-front organization. This group was painted in glowing terms as a fighter for human rights. No mention was made of communist control. Opponents objected, labeled it as a communist “outfit.” The vote was taken: motion passed, and the communist member went, expenses paid.
2. A concealed communist was running for public office. Motion was made that his candidacy be endorsed. Again another outcry from the opponents, but the motion passed.
3. “John Doe is a victim of injustice. We should pass a resolution to be sent to the governor demanding his freedom....” An anticommunist protested, “It’s not our business to be passing resolutions about such matters.” “A reactionary,” replies the spokesman for the communist line. “Aren’t you interested in justice?” Label your opponents as “Fascists,” “reactionaries,” “hardhearted.” The vote was taken: motion passed.
4. The communists had established a Party “front school.” Money was needed for expansion. One source: The 123 Group. Motion was made that a contribution be sent to the “school.” Passed. A tactic the communists like to use: Make noncommunists “share” the Party’s expenses.
5. Other ways: seize, if possible, the group’s bulletin or newspaper. Make it a Party mouthpiece, or at least attempt to silence or weaken its criticism. The instructions flow steadily from Party headquarters: start a letter-writing campaign, pass this foreign-policy resolution, contact a public official. The 123 Group becomes a masquerade for communist attack.
In one instance an official of The 123 Group (who was also a secret communist) was invited to testify before a congressional investigating committee about a certain economic development. What did he do? He went to the Party and asked for copies of the Daily Worker and other communist background material. Now he had the Party line!
Such victories are not always easily won. One requirement is a well-planned floor strategy for all club meetings. That’s the secret of many Party successes. First, as one Party leader expressed it, “we want our mob present.” No absences are allowed. Every Party vote is needed. If a motion is to be made, who will present it? When? Early in the evening while the crowd is large? Or much later when many of the delegates, but not the communists, have gone home? How should objections be handled? If concessions must be made, which ones?
Every move is planned.
If a communist is chairman, the task is easier. He can use many parliamentary devices such as not recognizing an opposition speaker, rushing votes, ruling opponents out of order. The communists, one member remarked, always had the meetings “so well in hand” in his organization that an “outsider” had no chance of even voicing opposition.
Numerous tricks can be used; for example the diamond formation, seating members in a diamond pattern. This gives the impression, during debate, that Party supporters are more numerous than they actually are. Another is the false opposition. Selected members make foolish, silly, and stupid objections to communist proposals. The purpose: to make the communists look even better.
Communist infighting is vicious and utterly devoid of moral principle.
For several years the Party controlled The 123 Group. Time after time, the organization consisting of hundreds of members was subverted for Party purposes.
Then troubles began to appear. Some sympathizers and opportunists grew restive. Noncommunist opposition increased.
Party counterattacks were launched.
The first problem was to hold the opportunist-president in line. Vanity is a weapon in the early stages. Do everything you can to “blow up” his ego. Raise his salary (the organization pays for it, not the Party). Give him a testimonial dinner. Send him as a delegate to a convention, preferably as far away as possible. The communist vice-president will run affairs until he returns.
Frequently, as time passes, opportunists and sympathizers become “big-headed.” They don’t do what they are told. “Jack J. is feeling the effects of power,” one Party leader complained. “He’s forgetting his old factional allies.” Now stronger measures must be applied. Remind him forcefully that it is communist support which keeps him in office. “Encircle the guy,” as one Party member recommended, meaning to make him even more dependent on the Party. Perhaps cut his salary. A little “smear” campaign might be effective.
If new alignments can be made, he might be dropped. If not, he’ll be subjected to even stronger pressure. Blackmail and threats are often part of communist tactics at this stage.
Finally, six years later, The 123 Group eliminated the communist infiltration after a long, tiring battle. Here were some of the basic points the noncommunist opposition had to keep everlastingly in mind:
1. Rally the majority noncommunist strength. The communists, usually a minority, capitalize on the lack of interest of noncommunists. One communist member was elected to office with only 3 per cent of the total eligible vote.
2. Remember that communism is always an evil, never a temporary good. Often communists give the impression of working for the best interests of the group. “What do you care whether we are communists?” one Party leader asked. “We’re trying to help you.” Another quipped: “Politics don’t matter. It’s the issues that count.” That’s wrong. Any conciliation, friendship, or trust placed in communism will sooner or later be exploited against democratic society.
3. Don’t underestimate communist ability. Many communists are extremely intelligent. One Party leader was described by an opponent as very capable, well versed in parliamentary procedure, and possessing an excellent command of English. To think of communists as mere rabble rousers and nuisances is to risk defeat.
4. Understand communist tactics. Learn how they, though numerically few, are able to exert a maximum influence. Deceit is one of their strongest weapons.
5. Stand up and be counted. Many noncommunists hesitate to speak up in meetings. They fear to be attacked by an acid-tongued Party spokesman. They may remember Mr. So-and-So. He opposed a communist proposal several weeks ago. Now look at him. He hasn’t slept a full night for weeks. Somebody is constantly calling him on the telephone. His relatives are pestered. It’s best, they think, just to stay away from meetings or, if there, remain silent. Others, irritated, bored, or simply “fed up” with communist tactics, walk out. Just what the communists want. They have a clear field. Speak your mind. Stand your ground. Don’t be afraid to defend American liberty.
6. Wage the fight in a democratic manner. Emotion should never replace reason as a weapon. To pursue extralegal methods is simply to injure your cause. Fight hard, but fight according to the rules.
When communists speak of their desire to advance the cause of labor, the question should always be asked: What is their objective? In August, 1957, streetcar and bus workers went on strike in Lodz, Poland. The workers were using this means to protest against the unfulfilled promises of the leaders of the Polish Communist government. The strike was soon brought to a halt through the use of some 3000 troops with fixed bayonets and police who fired tear gas into the milling mob.
While the communists were demonstrating their brutality and terroristic tactics against labor in Poland, American communists were giving another demonstration of how they habitually ignore the truth. William Z. Foster, as the elder statesman of the Communist Party in the United States, was saying:
One of the most striking phenomena of the capitalist world in recent years has been the enormous extension of the workers’ fight for democracy—among other phases, to defend their right to organize and strike.... World Socialism has enormously stimulated this struggle.
The answer is a simple one. The communists, once in control, crush every opponent, while, in coming to power, they promise everything to soften the opposition. This opposition will be “softened,” however, only if we allow infiltration to take place before our very eyes without knowing it for what it is.
17 — The Communist Front
The auditorium was packed. More than 1000 delegates and observers waved their arms enthusiastically, along with some 200 others who did not fill out registration forms to avoid leaving a record of their attendance. (The Daily Worker said they were in “... fear of intimidation.”) This was the founding convention of the National Negro Labor Council, a new organization dedicated to “equality,” “social progress,” and the upholding of “civil rights.” Speeches, resolutions, election of officers, everything ran smoothly. Two days later came adjournment. A new communist front had been born.
Delegates had come from all over the United States. They would now return to their home cities, start local chapters, enroll members, issue literature.
A master organizing hand was at work. One thousand individuals just didn’t arrive by accident.
The convention call was communist-inspired. For weeks in advance, local Party members had been arranging housing, running errands, securing finances.
The Council claimed that its purpose was to aid the Negro; however, the House Committee on Un-American Activities concluded that, “rather than helping the Negro worker, it has been a deterrent to him.”
The founding of the National Negro Labor Council was typical of many Party fronts created over the past generation.
Fronts probably represent the Party’s most successful tactic in capturing noncommunist support. Like mass agitation and infiltration, fronts espouse the deceptive Party line (hence the term “front”) while actually advancing the real Party line. In this way the Party is able to influence thousands of noncommunists, collect large sums of money, and reach the minds, pens, and tongues of many high-ranking and distinguished individuals. Moreover, fronts are excellent fields for Party recruitment.
A front is an organization which the communists openly or secretly control. The communists realize that they are not welcome in American society. Party influence, therefore, is transmitted, time after time, by a belt of concealed members, sympathizers, and dupes. Fronts become transmission belts between the Party and the noncommunist world. Earl Browder, when head of the Party, gave this definition: “Transmission belts mean having Communists work among the masses in the various organizations.”
Some may be newly created, or, as often happens, they may be old-line organizations captured by infiltration, like The 123 Group mentioned in the preceding chapter. They may operate nationally, regionally, or locally. Some are permanent organizations; others exist for only a day, a week, or a month.
The Party has operated hundreds of major fronts in practically every field of Party agitation: “peace,” civil rights, protection of the foreign-born, support for Smith Act “victims,” abolition of H-bomb tests, exploitation of nationality and minority groups. Some are based on specific appeal, to teachers, writers, lawyers, labor, women, youth. Many have national officers, local chapters, and substantial assets.
In addition, literally hundreds of minor fronts of all shapes, sizes, and types appear each year in everyday Party life. They serve a specific short-time purpose, then disappear. A few handbills, a rally, or a picket line, and a front has gone to work.
We must not think of fronts in terms of legitimate organizations. A few fronts collect dues, issue a newspaper, or sponsor organized activities, such as a sports program or cultural affairs. Most, however, exist only on paper. Their assets usually consist of a few office supplies, a secondhand Mimeograph machine, and a mailing list. The danger of a Party front rests not on its physical appearance or size but on its ability to deceive.
A few fronts may maintain separate headquarters, usually in a small room in an old building. Some operate from Party headquarters, a basement, or somebody’s home. Often they are found in clusters, one office serving as the headquarters for two, three, or a half-dozen fronts. The only difference is the wording of their names.
“Front schools,” where Marxist and related subjects were available for noncommunist students, have been most important to the communists over the years. In one such school it is estimated that over 100,000 individuals received instruction; in another, 75,000.
Every front, in its own way, is fighting the Party’s battles:
—sponsoring agitation campaigns;
—collecting money (fronts are one of the Party’s chief sources of income);
—supplying speakers for noncommunist organizations (it’s surprising the number of requests received by front groups, especially those sponsoring “peace” and “civil rights,” for speakers. A sympathizer or dupe who has prominence in the community, such as a lawyer or professor, will often be sent);
—issuing literature;
—sponsoring mass rallies;
—lobbying for or against legislative bills;
—influencing key individuals whom the Party could not otherwise reach;
—teaching Marxist doctrines.
During the recent period when most Party headquarters were closed because of a tactical shift to underground operations, fronts performed many functions for the Party. In Chapter 20, we shall see this aspect of fronts.
A single front can generate terrific communist pressure. Take this case, for example:
Time: shortly after lunch. Agnes G, executive secretary of the DEF Committee to Fight the High Cost of Living, is reading a letter.
Dan H enters the office. “It’s happened. The legislature just passed the Anticommunist Bill.”
This bill must be stopped.
As a first step Agnes dictates a letter to Professor Frank Y, a “good friend” at the university. “Issue a statement right away. This bill threatens freedom of speech. It must be vetoed.”
Then more letters are sent to teachers, clergymen, several lawyers. Contact is made with key Party members and sympathizers.
“The Anticommunist Bill has passed. Send telegrams to the governor, urging a veto. Start a petition circulating.”
Next, a bold step: Agnes places a telephone call to the governor.
“Mr. Governor, I’m speaking for the DEF Committee to Fight the High Cost of Living. We are disturbed about the passage of the Anticommunist Bill. We feel you should veto it. Would it be possible to have our representatives meet with you?”
The governor agrees. He wants to hear all points of view. The DEF Committee sounds like one of many groups interested in this legislation.
An appointment is made.
Pressure was being built up. The front could enter where the Party never dreamed of going. Three ministers, an attorney, and a newspaperman were contacted. Would they see the governor as part of the delegation?
“I want Larry R to go along,” Agnes says. “He’s not too bright a guy, but he’s easy and willing. I can tell him what to say. Besides, he’s from a very respectable organization.”
Nothing was said about the fact that this delegation was serving a communist purpose.
Every point had to be planned. “Be sure the right people do the talking.” About one fellow the Party organizer had commented, “Better have him stay quiet.” You never know, maybe a dupe will say something out of place.
How to talk to the governor? The delegation could act like “nice, little people,” but that wouldn’t be very impressive. Or it could be vaguely threatening. The latter suggestion was ruled out as too dangerous.
Not everything went according to plan. One minister refused to go. Agnes became angry. “It takes this kind of work,” she fumed, “to see what ministers are made of—dishwater.”
A wonderful guy, if you cooperate; if not, you’re a “bum.”
The delegation was dispatched, a delegation made up chiefly of noncommunists, yet fighting for communist aims, a delegation organized exclusively by a communist front. The DEF Committee was not interested in opposing the high cost of living. It was fighting for communism.
Fronts exist not in isolation but as part of a vast, interlaced front system. Communist pressure can be greatly increased by manipulating these organizations.
Take, for example, roof, or compound, fronts. Here a number of fronts, as in the nationality field, will form a super, over-all front such as the old American League Against War and Fascism, which at its peak claimed 7,500,000 members. Often the propaganda value is to show unity: all these organizations, representing many different nationalities, are working together for common aims.
Or consider the National Negro Labor Council, mentioned at the beginning of this chapter. This also was a roof, or compound, front created by already existing fronts. Let’s see how this works.
First, “delegates” must be “elected” to a “national founding convention.” Immediately, communist fronts across the nation “elect delegates,” and communist-controlled labor unions choose as their delegates those best suited for convention service.
At the convention all arrangements are made by Party leaders, including the selection of officers, the issuing of press releases, the passing of resolutions. This includes the actual running of the convention to ensure security. To illustrate, a newspaper reporter went to the convention. He had once been a Party member but had been expelled. On the first day of the convention one of the officials invited him outside and asked if he had been expelled. The reporter admitted that he had, and was ordered not to come back into the convention hall.
Hailed as representing “thousands of members,” the new organization is a front created out of fronts.
Another technique of manipulation is the continuing front. Here the same front is maintained by changing the name to meet current conditions. In 1940 the American Peace Mobilization was formed, urging mobilization for peace and no aid to Britain. In 1941, after Germany’s invasion of Russia, the name was changed to American People’s Mobilization, and the demands to all-out aid to Britain and a second front. This was the same group with a different name.
Again, on October 16, 1943, the Young Communist League was dissolved and the very next day the American Youth for Democracy was formed. Later the group was called Labor Youth League. All were designed to recruit young people for communism.
The continuing front is well suited for “victim” agitation cases; for example, the Committee to Save John Doe. This group, so active for Doe, had lapsed into disuse. A new “victim,” Richard Roe, was now at hand. Resurrect the old front!
That is exactly what happened. A communist arrived in town and contacted leaders of the old Committee to Save the Martinsville Seven. Where had it achieved the best results while agitating for the Seven? What were the problems? How could it best be used again?
A few days later the new front was already in action; the Committee to Save Albert Jackson, the same old faces under a new name. On Sunday morning its members were handing out leaflets in front of churches. In this instance Jackson was executed and the comrades turned to other fields.
Still another device is the satellite front, a cluster of minor fronts around a larger front. A new issue, like higher transit rates or the draining of a swamp, arises. The DEF Committee to Fight the High Cost of Living (the larger front) starts satellites, such as related committees in various sections of the city. Many of these satellites are paper organizations; however, they make a formidable showing to the uninformed.
These fronts are a vehicle for communist pressure. They are highly fissionable. From many comes one; from one come many. They can be cut, sliced, slivered, or compounded to fit any need. No wonder the Party makes so much use of them in mass agitation.
The campaign is launched, urging the veto of the Anticommunist Bill. Let’s see how the Party’s front system is brought into play.
Suddenly telegrams, letters, petitions pour in on the governor from all kinds of groups such as organizations protesting higher taxes; youth, women’s, union, and veterans’ organizations; free-speech groups; civil-rights organizations. To an uncritical eye it must seem that a wide stratum of population is interested in a veto of the anticommunist legislation. Then messages arrive from other countries (from international fronts), as if the whole world, “millions of people” as the communists like to say, is vitally interested in the bill.
Many noncommunists may oppose the legislation for a variety of reasons and express their opinions by letter, telegram, and petition. That, very emphatically, does not make them communists. They are only exercising their democratic privileges. What we are interested in here, however, is how the Communist Party, through its front system, can stimulate a vast and often effective propaganda barrage—a barrage which, within hours, can be turned off or shifted elsewhere.
Many times fronts appear bewildering in their variety; agitating on countless issues; based on different groups and occupations; and working in many ways. But actually their technique of formation is virtually identical.
Let’s look briefly inside a communist front and see how it operates. At the center is always the Party, organizing, manipulating, seeing that the right persons are in charge. Noncommunists might well ponder this comment by a Party organizer:
Experience has shown that most sponsors are unwilling to give of themselves sufficiently to stop the secretary from directing policy.
So true! The communists realize that if the secretary (or other key officer) is a communist (almost always a concealed member), the Party can dominate the organization. Let the letterhead glitter with noncommunist names: president, vice-president, members of the executive board. They serve as lightning rods, camouflaging the communist interest. To the sponsors, the prestige; to the communists, the power.
Around this communist core come layer after layer of noncommunists. As we have seen in Chapter 15, great emphasis is placed on attracting noncommunists, the more prominent the better, into communist propaganda work. These noncommunists, by allowing their names to be used as sponsors, giving testimonials, or appearing at front rallies, are aiding the Party. It cannot be emphasized too often how the communists attempt to exploit for strictly partisan purposes the legitimate interests of noncommunists in social and economic problems, world peace, civil rights, and so forth.
Most important to fronts are mailing lists containing the names of persons to whom literature can be sent. Perhaps you have received such propaganda in the mail and wondered whence it came. Party-front mailing lists are compiled in many ways—from telephone books, directories, membership rolls of infiltrated organizations (“loaned” by concealed members). Then the daily press is followed. Front headquarters may jot down the names of officers in noncommunist organizations. You never know. Someday they might “come in handy.”
Party fronts are aggressive. To wait for the noncommunist is wrong. Seek him out. “We must get into the neighborhoods more and into the home.” Through rallies, parades, picket lines, forums, debates, circulation of literature, fronts are constantly seeking public support. They operate on the main streets of America.
Another thing: The agitation is always practical. Talk about peace, jobs, and the price of milk, not Marx’s ideas of revolution. Link the struggle with “the fight for pork chops.”
Peace is an everyday issue and... should involve the housewife, the woman who has to wrestle with budgets in the hopeless struggle with taxes, high prices and a shrinking pay check.
In one instance, for example, a cookbook was issued by a front, a “dollar stretcher” containing low-priced menus. Here is the point. These recipes will help, somewhat. But, Mrs. Housewife, you can never hope for a stable economy (where prices are always low) until “peace” (Soviet style) is achieved.
That’s mixing propaganda with eggs and butter, sugar and salt.
Many times, trick “come-ons” are used. Consider communist-sponsored forums, for instance. Here are some Party-suggested topics:
—Are American marriages a failure?
—How to find an apartment.
—Should the voting age be reduced to eighteen years?
—Future of youth, what is it?
—Can heart disease be cured?
—Can cancer be cured or prevented?
—How to become a cultured person.
What have these to do with communism? Nothing. But they bring listeners within talking distance.
If one thing won’t work, maybe another will, such as a special celebration, in which a front sponsors an exhibit of “peace” literature or Russian photographs. Then there are round-robin letters, chain telephone calls, forums for high school science teachers. One front sold “Christmas seals.” Another was planning to put out a leaflet. “Fine,” commented an associate, “but be sure to add the inscription which appears on the Statue of Liberty. That’ll make it sound better.” Festivals and rallies, often featuring foreign “dignitaries,” attract hundreds, even thousands. Don’t forget to conduct polls on the street, always securing through partisan manipulation “proof” that the “people” support points advocated in the Party line.
Communist Parties around the world collaborate whenever it will advance their cause. Some years ago a women’s conference was convened in Paris, France, and out of it grew the Women’s International Democratic Federation.
Long before the Paris gathering the Communist Party went to work promoting delegations of American women. One hundred telegrams were sent out from Communist Party headquarters in New York City to leaders of various women’s organizations, announcing that they had been chosen as delegates and inviting them to attend a meeting at the home of the chairman of the committee. A temporary Committee on Cooperation with the International Women’s Conference came into being to make arrangements. An expediter was appointed to get passports, and a special rate of 495 dollars for a round trip by plane was secured. And so the ladies went to Paris, many without the slightest idea that the affair had been promoted by the Communist Party.
Out of the Women’s International Democratic Federation grew its American affiliate, the Congress of American Women. Shortly after the Congress had its first meeting, the National Committee of the Communist Party met in New York City. At this meeting one of its members discussed the importance of the Women’s International Democratic Federation to the Communist Party. This high Party official then stated that the Party did not then control the newly created Congress of American Women, and that the communists needed to “infiltrate it more.” The Congress has since been designated as a subversive organization by the Attorney General, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
Earlier in this chapter we spoke of international fronts. The following is an example:
An envelope was postmarked at Prague, Czechoslovakia, addressed to an American college. Inside was a printed letter signed by the Prorector and Secretary of Charles University, Prague, formerly renowned as a great European educational institution, now a communist propaganda front. The letter opened:
We send you the Proclamation of the Charles University against the use [by the United States] of the bacteriological warfare in Korea and urge you to express your views on the named Proclamation.
Enclosed was the “PROCLAMATION of the Academic Community of the Charles University....”
As you read the message, note the propaganda techniques employed:
1. The appeal prostitutes the reputation of a well-known university for propaganda purposes: “We, professors, lecturers and the other scientific workers of the Charles University in Prague, one of the oldest universities of the world....”
2. The appeal allegedly is based on humanitarian and scientific grounds: “With full responsibility to our human and scientific consciences we have considered the danger which threatens all of humanity through the crimes that are being committed by the American imperialist army.”
3. The appeal is directed to scientific teachers in universities. The idea is that an appeal from a member of one profession or occupation to another is more effective than random appeals. This device is often used, with Russian writers, artists, musicians addressing their “counterparts” in America: “We address ourselves to you, scientific workers of universities of all countries....”
4. The weight of scholarly backing is designed to influence opinion. (If scientists in this university say the charges are true, they must be true.) For example:
These facts prove that the armies of the American interventionists have repeatedly used bacteriological weapons.
From the American airplanes bombs were dropped containing different kind of insects, rats, etc., which were infected with plague, cholera and other epidemic diseases, and infected foodstuffs as well.
... we are ashamed to think of those American members of medical science who have committed themselves to the preparation of these repulsive crimes.
5. Action is recommended: “We urge you to refuse to place your scientific knowledge at the service of mass extermination of mankind.... Protest not only in your activity as teachers and in your work in the scientific press, but with your governments as well!”
The proclamation is designed to make a lie believable, to paint the United States as a murderer and the Soviet Union as a protector of peace, thanks to a dignified and “respectable” front.
Most of this communist propaganda would be laughable except for its deadly seriousness. The Party is not kidding. This is live ammunition designed to capture, maim, and kill. To regard communist fronts and their propaganda as foolishness is to risk our freedom.
Examine the communist attitude toward parades, for example. Most people think of parades as a time of interest and commemoration. Not the communists. Parades are weapons of propaganda, another form of front.
Listen to these Party instructions, for example, concerning parades, issued by the old Central Committee of the Party before it was abolished:
The marchers must be well mannered. Walk in rhythm. Don’t be “a line of stragglers shuffling along like a tired and discouraged army in retreat.”
The result is that the value of the demonstration as a means of impressing and winning over or neutralizing hostile people along the line of march is lost.
Here are a few things that should be remembered:
Every two or three hundred marchers should be led by a band, a bugle or fife and drum corps. We need scores of bands, with plenty of brass instruments.
Banners and placards! Do not be “stingy with the length of sticks.” Cut out the fancy lettering. It is difficult to read.
Use good English. “Some slogans are so bad grammatically, that people are amused at seeing them.” The fewer the words the better. Don’t just “slap” slogans on cardboard. Make sure they are “politically correct.”
More advice: carry placards “on a slight angle, with wording facing the sidewalks.” Scatter them through the parade; avoid bunching. Streamers: too much pulling causes ripping; not enough causes folding.
A favorite field for communist fronts is the election campaign for public office. Running communist candidates for city council, mayor, governor, even for the presidency of the United States, is an old Party habit. Never has the Party, running under its own name, been able to secure many votes. In instances where Party candidates have run under their own colors, their defeats have almost invariably been disastrous. Party candidates have run five times (1924 through 1940) for the presidency of the United States and in 1932 achieved their highest percentage of the total vote cast—a mere 0.3 per cent, or 102,991 out of almost 40,000,000 votes cast. Three times the percentage was 0.1, and once, 0.2. In instances, however, where the Party has maneuvered political alliances, it has achieved more success, as shown by the election of Benjamin J. Davis, Jr., and Peter Cacchione, both well-known communists, to the City Council of New York City in the 1940’s. Yet these campaigns give training in agitation and enable the Party to smear rivals, scream its propaganda, and cause unrest.
Party candidates also frequently run in concealed capacities. Board-of-education campaigns are well suited to communist exploitation. Usually running as independents, Party candidates can conceal their true affiliations. Moreover, national and international issues that would betray their basic sentiments, such as the Russian intervention in Hungary, are not likely to arise. In such campaigns Party-sponsored candidates are invited to parent-teacher meetings, community centers, public forums, to participate in radio debates (when the time is donated), and speak in the homes of private citizens. “The Citizens (or Independent) Committee for ——” takes the candidate where, as a communist, he could never dream of going. The Party, behind the scenes, works overtime stuffing propaganda into envelopes, passing out cards, drumming up enthusiasm.
The results are often amazing. William Z. Foster in one of his books boasts that in Cleveland, Ohio, “A. Krchmarek, Communist candidate for the school board, received 64,213 votes,” while in California, “the well-known Communist, Bernadette Doyle, polled the big total of 613,670 votes on a nonpartisan ticket as candidate for Superintendent of Public Schools.” Krchmarek and Doyle both ran on independent, nonpartisan tickets and were not identified on the ballot as communists. In another instance a Party member, also running in a concealed capacity, failed by only a few votes to be elected a city official. He was supported by two anticommunist newspapers that had no way of knowing his Party background.
This is the communist-front movement. Its strength rests on deceit and its ability to attract the support of noncommunists.
Fronts, however, can be detected. You, as an alert citizen, can do much to weaken their influence. Here are a few tests:
1. Does the organization espouse the cause of Soviet Russia? Does it shift when the Party line shifts?
2. Does the organization feature as speakers at its meetings known communists or sympathizers?
3. Does the organization sponsor causes, campaigns, literature, petitions, or other activities sponsored by the Party or other front organizations?
4. Is the organization used as a sounding board by, or is it endorsed by, communist-controlled labor unions?
5. Does its literature follow the communist line or is it printed by the communist press?
6. Does the organization receive consistent favorable mention in communist publications?
7. Does the organization represent itself to be nonpartisan, yet engage in political activities and consistently advocate causes favored by the communists? Does it denounce both fascists and communists?
8. Does the organization denounce American foreign policy while always lauding Soviet policy?
9. Does the organization utilize communist double talk by referring to Soviet-dominated countries as democracies, complaining that the United States is imperialistic, and constantly denouncing monopoly-capital?
10. Have outstanding leaders in public life openly renounced affiliation with the organization?
11. Does the organization, if espousing liberal, progressive causes, attract well-known, honest, patriotic liberals, or does it denounce well-known liberals?
12. Does the organization consistently consider matters not directly related to its avowed purposes and objectives?
These are some ways, direct and indirect, of the above-ground Communist Party, which is working against all of us. But this is only one arm of a gigantic pincer. The other is underground.
18 — Communism and Minorities
The Communist Party from its very inception has held itself out as the “vanguard of the working class,” and as such has sought to assume the role of protector and champion of minorities. It directs special attention, among others, to Negroes and nationality groups. Actually the vast majority of Negroes and members of foreign-language groups have rejected communism for what it is: a heartless, totalitarian way of life which completely disregards the dignity of man.
In the case of the Negro minority the Comintern began in 1928 to lay down a specific Party line for the guidance of comrades in the United States. According to Comintern instructions, Negroes were to be considered as an “oppressed race.” The Party was told to carry on a struggle “for equal rights,” but “in the South... the main Communist slogan must be: The Right of Self-Determination of the Negroes in the Black Belt.”
Communist leaders, faithfully following Moscow’s instructions, promptly started a campaign of agitation. In nominating James W. Ford, a Negro, to run for Vice-President of the United States on the Communist Party ticket in 1932, with presidential candidate William Z. Foster, C. A. Hathaway, then a member of the Party’s Election Campaign National Committee, reiterated instructions received in a 1930 Comintern resolution:
In the first place, our demand is that the land of the Southern white landlords... be confiscated and turned over to the Negroes....
Secondly, we propose to break up the present artificial state boundaries... and to establish the state unity of the territory known as the “Black Belt,” where the Negroes constitute the overwhelming majority of the population.
Thirdly, in this territory, we demand that the Negroes be given the complete right of self-determination; the right to set up their own government in this territory and the right to separate, if they wish, from the United States.
Hence, “equal rights” and “self-determination” in the Black Belt became the Party’s chief slogans for Negroes. By “self-determination” the Party meant what Stalin had said: “... the right of the oppressed peoples of the dependent countries and colonies to complete secession, as the right of nations to independent existence as states.”
As for the “Black Belt,” or as one article termed it, the “new Negro Republic,” the communists have given various descriptions. In 1948 they described the Belt as extending through twelve Southern states: “Heading down from its eastern point in Virginia’s tidewater section, it cuts a strip through North Carolina, embraces nearly all of South Carolina, cuts into Florida, passes through lower and central Georgia and Alabama, engulfs Mississippi and the Louisiana Delta, wedges into eastern Texas and Southwest Tennessee, and has its western anchor in southern Arkansas.”
By 1952 the communist concept of the Black Belt had been narrowed to “at least five Southeastern states, with port outlets at Charleston on the Atlantic and Mobile on the Gulf, encompassing the bulk of Mississippi, and a good section of South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama.”
As we know from cumulative evidence, the Party’s position toward Negroes is determined not by concern for their welfare but obedience to Soviet foreign policy. As World War II approached, for example, the Party switched its tactics regarding “self-determination” in the Black Belt. Instead of calling for the immediate and revolutionary overthrow of white landlords, as the Comintern had originally instructed, the Party now switched these demands to a purely theoretical and propaganda level: “... It is clear that the Negro masses are not yet ready to carry through the revolution which would make possible the right to self-determination.” Why the shift? To satisfy the Party’s united-front program, which demanded that the Party work harmoniously with other groups to strengthen the Soviet Union.
The World War II period found the Party cynically abandoning any alleged struggle for Negro rights. The aim was to help not Negroes but Moscow. “When we fought for the right of Negro workers to enter industries we often fought for such jobs mainly in the interest of the war effort.” Earl Browder in 1945 admitted that as early as 1942 the Party had adopted the theory that “... the struggle for Negro rights must be postponed until after the war....” The Negro, in communist eyes, was a mere pawn, to be manipulated for the attainment of Party aims.
It became obvious that the Party, despite great efforts, had failed to win over even a significant minority of Negroes. Negroes resented the Party’s severe criticism of Negro clergymen who had been vigorously denouncing communism. Earlier the Party had been unable adequately to justify Russia’s aid to Italy in its invasion of Ethiopia. American Negroes had realized that the Party was a fraud and a deception and that it was willing to betray the Negro to better serve Soviet Russia.
In early 1956 the Party decided to modify its advocacy of “self-determination,” realizing that Negro opposition to communism was growing. In making this change, communists said they would still consider the Negroes as constituting a national as well as a racial minority.
Eugene Dennis, resuming his old post as General Secretary of the Communist Party (in 1956) after serving a prison term for violation of the Smith Act, said:
In re-appraising our position on self-determination in the Black Belt, our Party should emphasize, as never before, that the struggle for Negro rights and freedom, north and south of the Mason-Dixon line, has emerged as a general, national democratic task, upon the solution of which depends the democratic and social advance of the whole nation, particularly of the workers and farmers.
The Party’s claim that it is working for Negro rights is a deception and a fraud. The Party’s sole interest, as most American Negroes know, is to hoodwink the Negro, to exploit him and use him as a tool to build a communist America.
The Party has made vigorous efforts to infiltrate the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). This organization in 1950 authorized its board of directors to revoke the charter of any chapter found to be communist-controlled. Nevertheless the Party has tried various infiltration tactics:
—In Philadelphia, the Party secured NAACP applications and instructed Party members to join.
—In Louisiana, the Party’s District Organizer instructed all Negro Party members to join the NAACP and urge the creation of a youth organization, and to form committees to encourage Negroes to register to vote.
—In Gary, Indiana, a Party member, also an NAACP member, promoted the signing of petitions to pass a city ordinance.
—In Cincinnati, a Party Organizer instructed that Party members call the NAACP and urge the holding of a city-wide mass meeting. When calling, they should claim to be members of the NAACP.
The NAACP’s national leadership has vigorously denounced communist attempts at infiltration. In 1956, when the NAACP and other organizations sponsored a National Conference on Civil Rights in Washington, the Party attempted to “move in,” and started promoting the conference. The NAACP countered by screening the delegates.
Similarly, in 1957, in the Prayer Pilgrimage for Freedom in Washington, the Party again attempted to move in and tried to exploit the pilgrimage as a rallying point for unity. NAACP leaders publicly told the communists that they were not welcome, and steps were taken to keep them off the platform. One outstanding Negro leader even tried to cancel the pilgrimage to prevent communists from propagandizing the event. Concerning Paul Robeson, who has long fronted for the communists, he stated: “... the boat is waiting to take him to Russia....” He added that he would raise the necessary funds to defray expenses. In Philadelphia, a Negro clergyman told the Baptist Ministers Conference that the Negro people did not want the communists interfering with their problems.
One of the most effective anticommunist measures I have heard of is the following: The NAACP had a meeting in Norfolk, Virginia, presided over by a clergyman. The minister opened the meeting with the simple statement that if any members of the Communist Party were present they would be excused. Silence ensued, with no person leaving. Then the chairman, starting with the front row, asked each individual if he were a communist. All entered denials until he got to the back of the room, where the state organizer for the Communist Party was sitting with a white woman. When asked the question, he tried to evade, but the minister pinned him down. The state organizer then stated that he did not think it was proper to ask such a question. The minister calmly replied, “You are excused,” and the couple left.
The Communist Party has stated: “The Negro race must understand that capitalism means racial oppression and Communism means social and racial equality.” Many Negroes, however, have learned by bitter experience how fraudulent and deceitful communists are. For example, Richard Wright, the Negro novelist, tells in the book, The God That Failed, why he rebelled against communist thought control. In describing how at the time he left the Party he was assaulted on a Chicago street, he wrote, “I could not quite believe what had happened, even though my hands were smarting and bleeding. I had suffered a public, physical assault by two white Communists with black Communists looking on.”
In Buffalo, New York, at a Party meeting, a Negro comrade stated that many Negroes felt they were joining a union when they were recruited into the Party. The comrade, however, was stopped at this point and not permitted to speak further. In many cases Negroes have been recruited by deceptive methods with the hope that once in the Party they would be converted to communism. In one New York State club the functionary learned that thirty members thought they were joining a union rather than the Communist Party. The matter was investigated, and it turned out that a Negro woman had become overly enthusiastic in a membership drive. She had not fully explained the nature of the organization being joined.
In San Francisco, Party functionaries were concerned about a club where Negro members predominated, although the club was actually controlled by white members. It was ordered that the role of the white members be decreased. The functionaries also instructed that the club be carefully watched to prevent scandals, and warned that, while scandals must be prevented, care should be exercised not to convey the impression that white girls should not mix socially with Negroes or vice versa. Some of the Negro wives were becoming suspicious, as it seemed they were being pushed into the background after their husbands joined the Party.
The Communist Party, while preaching “equality,” still differentiates between races. For example, in the 1957 convention of the Party, an accurate record of the delegates was kept. The breakdown was as follows: 209 males, 78 females; 54 Negroes, 2 Mexicans, and 1 Puerto Rican. The hypocrisy of the Party was clearly shown when it required each delegate to register his race, although for years the Party publicly has campaigned to have the blank for “race” removed from all questionnaires.
Communist leaders have been complaining bitterly about the turnover of Negro members and of the Party’s inability to indoctrinate any large number of Negroes. Information we have received follows a regular pattern: Negroes are rejecting communism.
A Negro in the Midwest became interested in the Party because it claimed that Negroes were treated as equals. Later he was unjustly accused of consorting with a white non-Party member. He quit.
A Negro in Illinois started going to Party social functions and became impressed with communist talk of “equality.” But when he attended more advanced meetings and heard the United States constantly denounced, he came to the conclusion that the communists were under the domination of Russia. He left the Party.
A Negro woman, recruited in Chicago, was rapidly promoted by the Party. Then she noticed an incident involving a Negro man who got into difficulties on his job, but the Party refused to support him. She concluded that the Party was interested in neither trade unionism nor the welfare of Negroes. She quit.
A Negro in New York joined the Party because he felt it was championing his race. After a period of Marxist instruction, he was told to secure a job with a work gang at a pier and to recruit other Negroes into the Party. He came to the conclusion that the Party was not interested in him as a Negro but only as a tool to recruit other Negroes. He quit.
A New England Negro also became interested in the Party when he learned of its alleged interest in helping his race. But upon becoming a member he discovered that the Party’s interest was strictly vocal, and nothing concrete was done to help Negroes. Moreover, he disliked the Party’s denunciation of God and religion. He quit.
As early as 1922 the Comintern approved a subsidy of 300,000 dollars for propaganda among American Negroes. In 1925 the Soviets requested that a group of Negroes be selected to come to Russia for training in propaganda work. A dozen were recruited. One of these, returning to the United States three years later, brought with him a draft for 75,000 dollars to help pay for propaganda work among his race.
One Negro later was designated to attend the Lenin School, and his experience there further unmasked communist hypocrisy and the Party’s true feelings toward the Negro. He went to Russia with a delegation of students to enter the Lenin School. This young Negro, as he has since related, then “believed that through Communism a better and fairer world could be developed for all mankind.”
He was troubled, however, by the communist position in urging Negro “self-determination” and the implications of a “buffer” state in this country being carved out of the so-called “Black Belt.” Almost immediately after his arrival in Russia he “was told long stories of political persecution” by the Negroes attending the Lenin School. He was slow to give credence to these stories until he saw for himself: “I found that Negroes were special objects of political exploitation. The sacrifices and dirty work planned for the American Negro Communists as spearheads for communizing the United States made it obvious that we were considered only as pawns in a game where others would get the prize.”
Becoming more outspoken and cynical about the communist program for Negroes, he became the target of a slander campaign inside the Lenin School. Finally this young American Negro was charged and tried before a court-martial. He was guilty of disaffection. A few students, sympathizing with his position, made a bold decision to report their grievances to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Then things began to happen. Classes in the American Section of the school were suspended. Some of the instructors were disciplined.
The young Negro explained that the Comintern ordered Earl Browder, then Secretary of the Communist Party in the United States, to Moscow immediately. Browder arrived and sought to smooth things over. Eventually the young Negro returned to the United States, working for a while as a Party functionary in Detroit. One of his last jobs was to make preparations for the founding of the National Negro Congress. Then he quit because he could no longer give aid to the communists “concentrating on their most helpless, and whom they think to be, their most gullible victims: the Negro.”
The communists have created numerous fronts over the years in attempts to attract Negroes. Once a front is discredited, it is allowed to die and a new one created.
The American Negro Labor Congress came into being in 1925, and in 1930 its name was changed to the League of Struggle for Negro Rights. Within six years it had ceased to exist.
In 1935 the National Negro Congress was launched in Washington, D.C., its chief purpose being to protect Negro rights. It started out as noncommunist, and James W. Ford complained in 1936 that although “The National Negro Congress did not adopt a Communist program... we Communists stand one hundred per cent behind it in its efforts to unite the Negro people....”
By 1940 communists had infiltrated the National Negro Congress to such an extent that when its president, A. Philip Randolph, “warned the Congress to stick to its principle and remain nonpartisan...” the communists staged a demonstration and walked out, leaving only a third of the audience to finish hearing Randolph. This 1940 convention of the National Negro Congress passed a resolution condemning the war as “imperialist,” and drew from a communist writer the observation that the congress had “only acted in accord with the fundamental interests of the Negro people.”
In 1947 the National Negro Congress merged with the Civil Rights Congress, an out-and-out communist front which has recently dissolved.
The old International Labor Defense (ILD) also tried to influence the American Negro, and came into conflict with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People as a result of the ILD’s communist tactics in converting the Scottsboro (Alabama) Case into a vehicle for communist propaganda. In this case nine Negro boys were indicted in 1931 on charges of having raped two white girls.
After the Scottsboro boys were first convicted, the NAACP charged that the defense “fell considerably short of perfection,” and then retained the late famed Chicago criminal lawyer, Clarence Darrow, to represent the boys. In 1931 the late Walter White, then head of the NAACP, said the Daily Worker accused another defense attorney, Stephen R. Roddy, “... of being a member of the Ku Klux Klan, of having conspired with the prosecution to electrocute the nine boys, of having been the inmate of an insane asylum.” According to White, the communists also charged the NAACP “as being ‘in league with the lyncher-bosses of the South,’ as plotters to ‘murder the Scottsboro martyrs,’ as sycophantic ‘tools of the capitalists.’” The NAACP withdrew from the case, recognizing that the Communist Party was interested only in promoting “Red Fascism” in America.
George S. Schuyler, an editor of the Pittsburgh Courier, reflected the consensus of American Negroes when he concluded, “... The record shows that where and when the Communists seemed to be fighting for Negro rights, their object was simply to strengthen the hand of Russia.”
In similar fashion the Communist Party has long considered foreign-language groups in the United States fertile fields for infiltration. Since many of the early comrades were foreign-born, agitation among national groups became a natural outlet for Party activity. In recent years the Nationality Groups Commission has coordinated agitation in this field.
The Party has attempted to use national groups, among other things, to exert pressure for changes in American foreign policy. Pressure campaigns are organized, petitions circulated, testimonials secured, hoping to make the government believe that a national group, such as the Italians, Hungarians, or Slovaks, supports the line desired by the Party. Party-controlled newspapers grind out accompanying propaganda.
Party fronts have been particularly active among national groups. The communists always make strenuous efforts to infiltrate and capture fraternal insurance societies serving national groups. As we have seen, such tactics give the Party a ready base, along with somebody else’s money, for further agitation. The Party, moreover, always likes to pose as the “protector” of national cultures. Hence, it often sponsors nationality bazaars, picnics, and dances, where costumes from native lands are worn and native music is played. After the Soviet conquest of Eastern Europe, however, the Party had increasing difficulty trying to peddle the “glories” of communism. Too much information was received from the old homelands describing true conditions behind the Iron Curtain.
Minority groups, like other patriotic organizations, have realized that no communist-created Utopia can compete with the American way of life. The ability of the communists to propagate their false doctrines is a challenge to our educational process. We need to counter communism by making the hopes and aspirations of the American ideal a reality for all to enjoy.
19 — The Communist Attack on Judaism
The communist propaganda machine with its tactics of infiltration and division has long fostered the false claim of widespread influence in the Jewish communities of America. One of the most malicious myths that has developed in the United States is that persons of the Jewish faith and communists have something in common. The people who gave the world the concept of our monotheistic God and the Ten Commandments cannot remain Jews and follow the atheism of Karl Marx and the deceit of the communist movement.
It is a matter of record that numerous Communist Party leaders call themselves Jews and claim a Jewish origin. This does not, however, make them Jews, any more than William Z. Foster’s Catholic background and Earl Browder’s Protestant background give them any standing in present-day Catholic and Protestant communities in the United States.
One highly placed Party leader recently pointed out that it was necessary for communists working in Jewish groups to represent themselves as Jews. This, of course, is a tactical maneuver. Such a technique, the leader urged, “can be duplicated.”
Typical of communist claims which have led to the false myth indicating that Jews have an affinity for communism are the remarks of Paul Novick, the editor of the Morning Freiheit, a communist paper published in Yiddish in New York City. Novick said: “The development of Yiddish literature in the United States went hand-in-hand with the growth of the Socialist movement at the beginning of this century and of the Communist Party after the October Revolution.” On the same occasion Novick then went on to brand the followers of Judaism for “... degeneration sown among the Jews by reaction....” and then condemned their opposition to “... the progressive movement, against the Soviet Union and against Communism....” Novick revealed his true loyalties in December, 1956, in an article in the Morning Freiheit after the display of Soviet brutality in Hungary with the apology that there was an anti-Semitic and fascist element in the Hungarian uprising, and insisted that, “... we must not only approve the Soviet actions in Hungary, but really appreciate it!”
The widely read Jewish newspaper, Jewish Daily Forward, on February 16, 1957, effectively identified Novick in a story captioned “Editor of Communist ‘Freiheit’ Is Bitter Enemy of the Jewish People.” Here it was asserted that after the Hitler-Stalin pact the Freiheit justified and praised it, which caused writers to leave and Novick made sure that those who remained wrote without error following the pro-Hitler line. The newspaper further revealed that Novick had gone out of his way to prove that the communist dictators in Czechoslovakia were correct in arresting Rudolph Slansky (and thirteen former communist leaders, eleven of whom were Jews) and that the arrested Moscow Jewish doctors were involved in a conspiracy to poison Stalin. The Jewish Daily Forward article flatly said that “anti-Semitic poison just poured out” of Novick.
One Party member, after having been in the Party for twenty-five years and having held high Party offices, explained to our agents that when he joined the Party he had renounced the existence of God, that he had tried to impose on others his atheistic views, and that he was “not a religious Jew.” He flatly said that most Party members he knew who claimed to be Jews did not follow their religion; they did not attend the synagogue, although they did not work on religious holidays; and the comrades who claimed to be Jews took no part in organized Jewish religious activities.
Some of the most effective opposition to communism in the United States has come from Jewish organizations such as B’nai B’rith, the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish League Against Communism, the Anti-Defamation League, and a host of other Jewish groups.
The reasons for the extensive activities of the Communist Party in seeking to infiltrate and make extravagant claims for its work in some Jewish organizations and those of other minority groups are readily apparent. In the Soviet Union, the proving ground for Marxism-Leninism, communists are confronted with a minority problem of staggering proportions. Only 58 per cent of the population in the Soviet Union is Russian whereas 42 per cent is non-Russian and consists of 168 national minorities.
The Bolsheviks prior to 1917 sought to win support from minorities by defending their rights and developing such propaganda come-ons as “self-determination of nations,” “national cultural autonomy,” and so on. Once in power, the communists soon forgot their promises but continued to pay lip service to minority rights. The Soviet Union still retains the “legal fiction” that it is a voluntary federation of union republics, each of which is free to secede if it wishes. In fact, Article 17 of the Soviet Constitution of 1936 states, “The right freely to secede from the USSR is reserved to each constituent republic.” No “republic,” however, has ever tried to secede, and the possibility is remote indeed, as long as the Red army responds to the will of the dictators in the Kremlin as it did in Hungary.
A more important reason for communist interest in minorities in the United States is, of course, the opportunities they provide for exploitation and propaganda. The large number of communist fronts using the word “Jewish,” as well as publications that the communists dominate, is for the obvious purpose of conveying a false impression of strength among those who embrace the Jewish faith. This also accounts in part for the literary interest communists devote to the problems of Jews. Prior to issuing the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx, the atheist, wrote a treatise called, “On the Jewish Question” which sets forth his views regarding Judaism and Jewish culture.
From that time to this in dealing with those of the Jewish faith, the communists invariably do so in terms of discussing “the Jewish question.” In fact, by this propaganda technique the communists deliberately try to make the Jews a “problem,” which is denied by the record of good citizenship and civic responsibility of adherents of Judaism in the United States. As an example: The American Jewish League Against Communism stated as early as 1948 that “Soviet Russia’s million and a half Jews are the forgotten people of the world.” The League lists among its proudest achievements that “... it was the first American organization to expose and document the communist anti-Jewish policies.”
A true follower of the Jewish faith, like those of other religions, cannot embrace communism. Marxism-Leninism is irrevocably opposed to all religious beliefs and all forms of worship, whether they be Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or Moslem. One of Lenin’s basic teachings is, “We must combat religion—this is the A.B.C. of all materialism, and consequently of Marxism.... The Marxist must be a materialist, i.e., an enemy of religion....”
In theory and practice the communists make no distinction among any of the world’s greater religions, as the leading Soviet crusader against religion, E. Yaroslavsky, makes clear:
... the priests of every cult have their own way of deluding the masses: the Jewish rabbi, the Roman Catholic priest, the Russian Orthodox priest, the Mohammedan mullah, the Evangelist, Baptist and other ministers of religion, each has his own way of fooling the people.... As to differences between one religion and another, they are of little, if any, consequence....
If there was ever any doubt that the communists were even lukewarm toward the Jewish faith, it was resolved by Yaroslavsky, onetime head of the League of Militant Atheists in the Soviet Union, who said:
The Jewish synagogues were not granted any privileges whatsoever by the Russian state, but they were fully supported by the Jewish bourgeoisie. The Jewish rabbinate, like its sister priestcrafts, drew close to the side of the rich because the Jewish church had also incorporated in its credo the justification of the existence of exploiting classes in society....
Karl Marx described Judaism as “anti-social” and an expression of Jewish “egoism.” Marx, better than any other communist leader, illustrates the gulf between Jewish tradition and communism. He could not be loyal to both, so in accepting the communist ideal, he was not content to reject Jewish tradition; he had to malign it and seek to destroy it with such bitterness as: “Money is the jealous God of Israel, by the side of which no other god may exist.... Exchange is the Jew’s real God.”
The unrestrained emotional outbursts of Hitler against the Jews were reminiscent of the Marxian tirades against Judaism.
The Marxian denunciation of Judaism is not limited to invective. From the earliest days when communism came to power in the Soviet Union, communists have conducted a systematic campaign to cripple and destroy organized Judaism. On January 23, 1918, the Soviets issued a sweeping decree “On the Separation of the Church from the State, and of the School from the Church.” All church property was nationalized; churches were denied rights of legal recourse; the teaching of religion was banned in public and private schools; the right of people to attend religious services on workdays was revoked; and records of births, marriages, and deaths were taken from the churches and put under the exclusive control of civil authorities.
While religious services were still allowed, the clergy was reduced to the status of second-class citizenship; a campaign of terror was launched leading to the arrest and imprisonment or execution of priests, rabbis, ministers, and other church leaders on such vague charges as “counter-revolutionary activity” or “crimes against the people.” Physical destruction of church property was conveniently explained as the “spontaneous” acts of “aroused” peasants and workers to conceal the real perpetrators, Soviet officialdom.
The main target, of course, was the Orthodox Church, which had long been the state church of Russia; but all other faiths suffered, including that of the Jews. The reports of refugees as compiled by Wladyslaw Kania in the book, Bolshevism and Religion, published by the Polish Library in New York City in 1946, prove the hypocrisy of the Soviet claim of minority protection with accounts as follows:
The Jews are morally persecuted, the young Jewish population is being brought up in un-religious ways....
The Jews in Russia are living only on the memories of the happy past....
... during the Jewish feast Purim... the Jews, Soviet citizens, assembled for evening prayer. One of the neighbors reported them to the NKVD. The premises were raided and the host arrested and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment.
The rabbis have been deported; “kosher” meat, etc., though promised, does not exist.... The synagogues and houses of worship have been closed....
General Walter Bedell Smith, after his three years as Ambassador to the Soviet Union, reported that in June, 1948, about thirty churches were open in Moscow, which included one Jewish synagogue for an estimated 300,000 Jews. During World War II General Smith reported, “But two religions—the Jewish and the Roman Catholic—did not gain even temporary benefits from the wartime policy of greater religious tolerance; in fact, on balance, it is probably safe to say that attacks upon them have been stepped up rather than relaxed in recent years.”
Communist reports on the state of Jews in the Soviet Union make little reference to Judaism as practiced. For example, the forty-seven-page communist propaganda pamphlet, written by Paul Novick and J. M. Budish, entitled Jews in the Soviet Union, makes only this single reference to Judaism:
Then, there are Jewish religious activities. I visited the main synagogue in Moscow during Yom Kippur. It was over-crowded, with people outside listening to the cantor through loud speakers.... I visited synagogues in Kiev, Vilna, Berditchev, Zhytomir. There are about 300 organized religious communities in the U.S.S.R....
The accuracy of this report is highly questionable, bearing in mind the cold, systematic communist program of extinguishing religion. Among the tactics employed by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has been the liquidation of the traditional Jewish school system, including the primary school (Hedder), the secondary schools (the Talmud Torah), and the rabbinical school (the Jeshiva). Thus, when the present generation of Soviet Jews passes on, there will be no more rabbis.
This attack on Judaism becomes apparent when the role of the rabbi is considered. He is not merely a preacher; he is the teacher of Jewish moral law, the ritualistic laws governing the home, family, and individual; he presides at such religious ceremonies as the marriage, sits in ritualistic courts and supervises circumcisions and the preparation of kosher meat. Hence, in abolishing the rabbinical schools, the Soviets are gradually seeking the extinction of Judaism without a pogrom. Judaism cannot exist unless Hebrew is taught so that rabbis can study the Torah and Talmud in the original language in which they were written.
Communist practice and communist theory are in direct conflict. Communism, as we have seen, is essentially an international class movement and therefore regards national loyalty, other than communist loyalty, as a potential menace. The communists use “national rights” as a propaganda device and support national movements only when it serves the interests of the Soviet regime.
The communist propaganda line directed to Jewish people follows three general themes:
1. The Soviet Union offers the Jewish people complete freedom. As one apologist put it: “There is one spot on the earth where the Jewish people are not under increasing pressure, one spot where the Jews have full equality.... That is the socialist Soviet Union.”
2. The Soviets have created a national homeland for Russian Jews in the Jewish autonomous region of Birobidzhan (or Birobidjan), where they claim Jewish culture is flourishing.
3. In World War II the U.S.S.R. saved thousands of Jews from certain death from the Nazis.
Standing by themselves, these claims admittedly make an impressive appeal. If true, they would even justify the extravagant claim of Alexander Bittelman, who recently was released from prison upon completing a federal sentence for conspiring to advocate the overthrow of the government of the United States by force and violence. Bittelman, long one of the chief interpreters of communism to the Jewish people, has described the Soviet Union as the “saviour of the Jewish people.” The record, however, demolishes this propaganda line as a collection of half-truths, exaggerations, and outright deceptions.
At best, Soviet tolerance toward Jewish culture was never anything more than a temporary political tactic. And even then the Soviet claims were contemporaneous with the 1917 revolution, when the communists were seeking support from all quarters. Stalin’s Marxism and the National Question, the acknowledged communist classic on the subject, though consisting of 222 pages, contains only twenty pages written after 1927, with the most important single part having been written in 1913. By the late 1930’s alleged concessions to the cultures of the various minority groups gave way to a policy of forcible denationalization rivaling the brutal “Russification” tactics of the Czars.
To illustrate: In 1917 there were a total of forty-nine Yiddish or Hebrew newspapers in the Soviet Union. By 1921 these had increased to sixty-two; but no less than fifty were communist-controlled, while the forty-nine not under communist control in 1917 had dwindled to twelve in 1921.
Jewish literature suffered a similar fate. From 1928 to 1933 books published in Yiddish rose from 238 to 668, but there was a marked decline in books dealing with Jewish history and tradition. In 1932 there were thirty-six books in Yiddish classified as history—of these, sixteen were memoirs chiefly of old Bolsheviks; six were studies on the Communist International; six dealt with the revolution and history of the Communist Party; five consisted of speeches of Stalin and other communist leaders; and only three actually dealt with matters pertaining to Jewish culture. These related to the labor movement and were an attempt to rewrite history to conform with Marxist-Leninist doctrine.
The Soviet purge trials of 1936-37 should have made clear to the world the communist objective mercilessly to crush the leadership of any minority groups whose cultural resurgence conflicted with the advance of Marxism-Leninism. To cite an example: of the ten representatives of minority groups who served on the draft committee for the 1936 Soviet constitution, only one was alive at the end of 1937. The other nine were branded as “spies,” “enemies of the people,” and were shot, committed suicide, or had disappeared.
The sad fate of the Jewish school system in the Ukraine proves the lie to the Soviet propaganda claim of furthering Jewish culture. In 1925, government reports reflected a total of 39,474 students in the Ukrainian schools where Yiddish was the language of instruction. In 1931 the number of such students reached its peak of 90,000. By 1940 this figure had declined to 50,000, and the Jewish schools were completely suppressed when the Nazis took over the Ukraine in World War II. Since the war the efforts of Jewish educators to have the Soviet government construct new schools have apparently failed.
One of the most crippling communist attacks on Jewish culture has been prohibition of the use of Hebrew, the traditional language of Judaism. As a tactic the Soviets launched a program of “compulsory Yiddishizing” to destroy the influence of Hebrew among Russian Jews. Yiddish is a jargon based on a German dialect. It is unrelated to Hebrew. Many Jews, particularly Asiatic and Mediterranean Jews, do not know it at all. A similar program of suppression of Jewish institutions shifted to the satellites after World War II, where Jewish schools were abolished, Jewish organizations banned, and even athletic clubs bearing Jewish names were forced to change their names on twenty-four-hour notice.
The second propaganda claim of the Soviets in establishing the Jewish homeland of Birobidzhan should be closely analyzed. Solomon M. Schwarz, in his exhaustive study, The Jews in the Soviet Union, exposes the Soviet propaganda for the falsehood that it is. The so-called Jewish homeland was set up at a time when the threat of Japanese and Chinese invasion of the U.S.S.R.’s Far Eastern frontier was not idle. Thus, the Jewish homeland was conceived as a means of populating the vast spaces in the Far East of Russia, and also provided a convenient place to settle Jews not wanted in other parts of Russia.
By 1933 the Soviets envisioned a population of 60,000 Jews in Birobidzhan. During its first six years 19,635 Jews arrived, while 11,450 left, leaving a net gain of only 8185. By 1939, after eleven years, the Soviet Jewish homeland could claim no more than 30,000 Jews and by 1951 around 40,000 which was a small community surrounded by Asiatic peoples completely separated from the mainstream of Jewish life. Furthermore, it is in the maritime provinces of Siberia, where the climate is unsuitable for those accustomed to European life.
The third communist propaganda claim, that of rescuing Jews from Nazi extinction, is also a deception. In the first place, for two years prior to the Nazi invasion of Russia, when Moscow was allied with Berlin, there is no record of any Soviet protest against the Nazi slaughter of Jews, so far as is known. The good-neighbor policy between the communists and the Nazis, initiated by the Stalin-Hitler pact, is clearly established by the following report sent by the German Ambassador to Moscow to the German Foreign Office, where it came to light after the war: “... The Soviet Government is doing everything to change the attitude of the population here toward Germany. The press is as though it had been transformed....”
Later the Foreign Office was advised that:
... the Soviet Government has always previously been able in a masterly fashion to influence the attitude of the population in the direction which it has desired, and it is not being sparing this time either of the necessary propaganda.
Then, too, the silence of the Soviet leaders on the outbreaks of Nazi anti-Semitism completely misled Eastern European Jews as to the real character of the Nazi threat and hence, some 2,000,000 Russian and Eastern European Jews made no attempt to escape the Nazis during the early months of the German invasion of Russia. And even after the Nazi onslaught, there was a shocking failure on the part of the Soviets to reveal Nazi atrocities against the Jews.
For example, the Soviet government in 1942 condemned the “bloodthirsty, criminal plans of the fascists” aimed at exterminating Russians, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, and “other peoples” of the Soviet Union, with no direct reference to the Jews. As late as 1945 the Soviets in a report on the German concentration camp at Auschwitz (Oswiecim), where more than 4,000,000 persons were exterminated, did not even use the word “Jew,” although they constituted the majority of those whose lives were so brutally taken.
Not only did the communists in the Soviet Union fail to make any special effort to save Jewish people during the war, they showed no concern over their fate.
If further evidence is necessary to prove the falsity of communist propaganda directed toward the Jewish people, it is only necessary to look at the communist campaigns against Zionism. The communist propagandist, Paul Novick, reflected the communist line both in the Soviet Union and the United States when he wrote:
Ever since its inception Zionism has been an instrument of the Jewish bourgeoisie to hamper the struggle of the Jewish masses... a means of diverting the attention of the Jewish workers from the class struggle and of keeping them separated from the progressive forces of other nationalities....
In the Soviet Union, Zionism is ruthlessly suppressed. In the United States communists have a more complex problem and avoid direct public attacks on the Zionist movement, so as not to alienate that large section of Jewish people who favor Zionism. The communist attacks are more subtle and are directed essentially at individual Zionist leaders. The aim, of course, is to discredit the Zionist movement without antagonizing its rank-and-file members. The Party line changes from time to time when it is expedient, but the communist objective of eventually destroying Zionist influence among the Jewish people, without alienating its rank-and-file members, has never changed.
Khrushchev more recently reiterated the Party line against the Zionist movement when he was asked what the Soviet Union would do if the Zionists settled in Soviet territory and demanded a state of their own. He replied with communist contempt, “We have thrown them out of our country.”
Communist Party leaders in the United States exhibited some concern over the Soviet campaign against Jews which was brought to light by an anti-Zionist article in Pravda on September 21, 1948, by Ilya Ehrenburg, which referred to the state of Israel as a “bourgeois country.” This article declared that in Russia there was no artificial division between Jews and their Russian comrades but that Jews led lives in common with other peoples of Russia. The proper solution to the “Jewish problem,” according to Ehrenburg’s article, is the abolishment of “nationalism” among Jews and the integration of Jews into the existing society rather than their having a distinct life apart from other people.
It is known that when the information in the Ehrenburg article reached the United States, there were considerable concern and confusion in the offices of the Morning Freiheit as to whether the article represented a fixed Soviet policy. The fact that Pravda is under Soviet Communist Party control causes Party leaders in this country to give careful consideration to anything it publishes. The matter was resolved by directing an inquiry to Itzik Feffer, a friend of Stalin in Moscow, to secure the correct Soviet line on the Jewish question. The report came back to the United States that Ehrenburg merely was reflecting his own ideas, along with some of the younger communists of Jewish origin, and did not represent the correct policy of the Soviet Union. The then foreign editor of the Morning Freiheit, Moise Katz, in an article appearing in the January, 1949, issue of Yiddishe Kultur criticized the ideas appearing in the Ehrenburg article.
Events, however, were to prove the correctness of Ehrenburg’s statements, which became the fixed policy of the Soviet Union, and the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee, of which Itzik Feffer was a member, was abolished. In the meantime the National Committee of the Communist Party intervened and, according to reports, straightened out the Morning Freiheit on the new Soviet line. A letter of apology over the signature of Moise Katz then appeared in the Freiheit on March 29, 1949. This incident was discussed in communist circles and the word leaked out that three writers were discharged from the Freiheit for “bourgeois nationalism.”
When Khrushchev denounced Stalin at the Twentieth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in Moscow in February, 1956, news of the long-pent-up acts of oppression against Jews in the Soviet Union began to leak out. It is, of course, significant that Khrushchev made no mention of the mistreatment of the Jews in his exposure of Stalin, whom he had so loyally served over the years.
Within a few weeks, as noted in Chapter 3, the disclosures of anti-Semitism came in the Warsaw, Poland, Yiddish-language communist newspaper Folks-Shtimme on April 4, 1956, regarding the Soviet purges of Jewish leaders and culture under Stalin. Later, on April 13, 1956, the Daily Worker expressed regrets and then admitted “... we were too prone to accept the explanation of why Jewish culture had disappeared in the Soviet Union in the late 1940s.” With the agility of “whirling dervishes” the communists then sought to develop a justification for the Soviet communist leaders’ action.
World public opinion over the Soviet communist leaders’ injustices mounted and as Khrushchev turned on the “smiles” and started visiting other countries, he was confronted with the accusation of anti-Semitism in Russia.
In England, Khrushchev characterized “anti-Semitism” as “nonsense” to which he would not listen. To a French delegation he protested that he was not anti-Semitic but that the Yiddish language is fading away in Russia as the Jews in the Soviet Union are learning to speak Russian. A new low in deception was reached when Khrushchev claimed that, in the early years of the revolution, “Jews occupied a disproportionately large number of high Soviet positions because the country had few trained people.” He then asserted that the Kremlin had received protests from “the various Soviet Republics that too many Jews held desirable positions.” The New York Times story on June 10, 1956, then reported that Khrushchev “... reportedly pressed Lazar M. Kaganovich, only high-ranking Soviet leader of Jewish origin, to confirm his statements, which Mr. Kaganovich finally did, saying one word, ‘correct’....” And now there are no top communist leaders in the Kremlin of Jewish origin since Khrushchev ousted and denounced Kaganovich last summer.
The president of B’nai B’rith, Philip M. Klutznick, answered the communist propaganda claims when he made the factual observation that only in Soviet Russia and its satellites is “Jewish life languishing and approaching extinction.”
The Communist Party of the United States at its February, 1957, convention sought to hoodwink the American public by a series of statements to the press of how it had declared its independence from Moscow. This deceit was established in no unmistakable terms by the handling of a resolution dealing with anti-Semitism in Russia. The resolution was submitted by Professor Morris U. Schappes in typical communist language: “Resolution: On Jewish question, some aspects.”
The resolution stated: “This matter concerns us as Communists in a country which includes 5,000,000 Jews.” It then points out,
Since the Jewish question is international in scope, we communists must be alert to the problem and its world-wide aspects. The Jewish question is a specific question that requires specific attention.... The liquidation of the outstanding Yiddish writers and Jewish communal and political leaders, and the snuffing out of organized Jewish cultural life have been known for some time....
He, of course, was referring to anti-Semitism in Russia.
The resolution called for the creation of a Jewish Commission, a return to Leninist policy, and a request “... to make this subject one for fraternal discussion with the Communist Party in the Soviet Union,” which, of course, negates the view of independence of the communists in the United States.
The resolution was soft-pedaled and disposed of, as was a similar resolution dealing with Soviet terrorism in Hungary, by being referred to the National Committee of the Party. Pravda, on February 16, 1957, had this to say: “The 16th Convention of the Communist Party, USA, confirmed the loyalty of the American communists to the principles of Marxism-Leninism....”
Party leaders, however, in the face of the overwhelming evidence of communist hate for the followers of Moses, still are attempting to deceive unsuspecting persons of Jewish origin and, as this is being written, communist tacticians are at work on a program of infiltrating Jewish groups by seeking for the answers to such questions as:
—How to avoid the extremes of negating Israel and of accepting its actions uncritically.
—How to work in religious groups while keeping ourselves and our children free of the religious doctrine of these groups.
—How to avoid the extremes of taking on all issues and avoiding all issues.
—How to balance Jewish work with our interests as Marxists in general trade union, minorities and people’s movements.
The vigilant and patriotic members of Jewish organizations have demonstrated their alertness to counteract the infiltration tactics in Jewish institutions by communists who were born Jews. Where communist infiltration tactics have succeeded in Jewish organizations, it has been because of a failure on the part of leaders and members alike to be vigilant and thwart the communist tactic of infiltration into the Jewish community just as it has sought to infiltrate every other organization.
A Pravda editorial on July 6, 1956, should remove all doubts as to the antipathy of communism to those who worship God regardless of their faith:
As for our country the Communist Party has been and will be the only master of the minds, and thoughts, the spokesman, leader and organizer of the people in their entire struggle for communism.