Good Night, and Good Luck. [Special Edition]

john,

ask ann coulter what she thinks of clooney, mccarthy, and murrow. ;)

eddie

And it's not just Ann, Eddie. In fact, it was a Democrat (Daniel Patrick Moynihan) who was the impetus in getting the "Venona Documents" released in 1995. (As you hopefully know, the Venona Project vindicates McCarthy's overall thesis, which is that there were Communist agents working for the U.S. government.)

Also, the books "Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America" and "In Denial: Historians, Communism & Espionage" (both written by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr) go into fascinating (fascinating to me, at least) detail about the whole thing.

P.S. I know I haven't posted here in a while, but DVDTown is on my Favorites list and I come here every day. Keep up the good, professional work, guys!

KenKong,

That isn't the issue.

Yes, there were Communists in the U.S. government, and there are Communists in the U.S. government today. However, what McCarthy did was shoot blindly and hope that he was fortuitously hitting targets. In the process, he destroyed the reputations of many people who WEREN'T Communists. He also destroyed the lives of Communists who were against the Soviet Union and loved this country. That's very different from actually knowing who were Communists that were plotting to overthrow the U.S. and handing the world to the Soviet Union on a platter.

Also, it's not a crime to be a Communist in the U.S. Advocating the violent overthrow of the government is a crime. You don't have to be a Communist to be guilty of that crime, and there have been non-Communist Americans who actually tried to overthrow the government.

Eddie

The Venona project no more "vindicates" McCarthy than the fact that the existence of a few Japanese spies in the 1940s justified FDR's internment of all Japanese-Americans on the West Coast.

Furthermore, even if the government was rife with Communist spies (there is no evidence for this), it wouldn't justify McCarthy's tactics. Even worse than his red-baiting (a favored pasttime by many politicians on both sides) was his contempt for truth. He targeted people based on innuendo, not evidence; convenience, not fact. When we make up our own reality and ignore annoying things such as the facts, we all lose. Watch "Point of Order!" if you want some examples of McCarthy at his most mendacious.

Evidence is all that matters, esp. years down the road when the revisionists inevitably show up and try to re-write history.

I just want to let you guys know that I'm not speaking on Ann Coulter's behalf here. She and other conservatives have made the Communist issue seem like a solely Republican issue. It's not, at least not where I'm coming from. Anyway, onto your rebuttal:

"That isn't the issue. Yes, there were Communists in the U.S. government, and there are Communists in the U.S. government today."
--Fine, but it isn't a problem anymore today because Russia is not our sworn enemy, as it was in the 40's and 50's. Having Communists (sympathizers, agents, etc.) in the government at that time would be like having al Qaeda operatives in the U.S. government today.

"However, what McCarthy did was shoot blindly and hope that he was fortuitously hitting targets. In the process, he destroyed the reputations of many people who WEREN'T Communists."
--I sympathize with where you're coming from a lot, because I used to feel that same way. But it is an undisputable fact that we now know that McCarthy did not name a single person a Communist who then later turned out not to be a Communist. And yes, McCarthy did "shoot blindly," such as when he said he had a list of 207 names, etc., but at least he tried to do something about a problem no one else was focusing on! There was corruption in the government! That is, and always will be, a problem that needs to be addressed.

"He also destroyed the lives of Communists who were against the Soviet Union and loved this country. That's very different from actually knowing who were Communists that were plotting to overthrow the U.S. and handing the world to the Soviet Union on a platter."
--I'm sorry it has to come to this, but I have to ask you to give me some concrete evidence. I know it sounds like I'm on the side of Ann Coulter and the neocons, but that is because they are the most vocal these days.

"Also, it's not a crime to be a Communist in the U.S."
--It astonishes me to think that you are perfectly okay with government corruption, especially during a time when Communist Russia was America's sworn enemy! Al Qaeda is our enemy today; would you be okay with sympathizers to al Qaeda working in our government?

"Advocating the violent overthrow of the government is a crime. You don't have to be a Communist to be guilty of that crime, and there have been non-Communist Americans who actually tried to overthrow the government."
--But we're not talking about that, we're discussing Communists in the government, which there were.

kenkong77,

not all communists supported the soviet union. again, there were and there are communists who love america, just as there are people who were born in america who hate america (i.e. the american taliban).

shooting blindly is never justifiable, even if you are fortuitously right. what if you were wrong? you'd have hurt people for no reason or for the wrong reasons!!!

communism is not corruption. corruption is corruption. there are republicans, democrats, people on the right, people on the left, etc. who are corrupt. that has nothing to do with their political ideologies/affiliations/party memberships.

yes, we're talking about communism. however, again, believing in, adhering to, or following communism is not a legal, ethical, or moral crime. remember, the u.s. is against the idea of going after people for "thought crimes". we don't persecute based on beliefs, but we do prosecute injurious actions.

instead of masturbating over mccarthy, why don't you ask george w. bush why it's okay to let a company based in dubai control the operations of several key seaports on the american eastern seaboard? why don't you ask george w. bush and his buddies why we keep buying oil from countries who regulary mis-treat their citizens as well as classify women and people who don't worship in the state religion as second- or third-class non-entities?

eddie

kenkong,

Your analogy between Communists and Al Qaeda simply doesn't work. It is not illegal to be a Communist. It was never illegal to be a Communist. There was and is an active Communist party in America. Being a Communist WAS NOT the same thing as supporting the Soviet Union. It is a philosophy, an ideology, not citizenship in a specific nation.

A closer analogy would be whether or not we allow Muslims in American government. And we do. And I am entirely comfortable with that.

In addition this statement is simply wrong:


**But it is an undisputable fact that we now know that McCarthy did not name a single person a Communist who then later turned out not to be a Communist.**



You really shouldn't get your evidence from Ann Coulter. Ann believes firmly in the old adage: "Never let the facts stand in the way of a good story."


If you want to learn something about the blacklist and McCarthyism (separate but related topics since HUAC predates McCarthy), here is a short reading list:


"Fear on Trial" - John Henry Faulk

"Nightmare in Red" - Richard Fried

"Naming Names" - Victor Navasky

Also the film "Point of Order!" which I reviewed here is an excellent source.

Revisionists rely on the fact that new generations will have only a casual awareness of the facts. That's why we must preserve the facts, the truth, and not allow irrationality and outright dishonesty to rule.

"McCarthy did "shoot blindly," such as when he said he had a list of 207 names, etc., but at least he tried to do something about a problem no one else was focusing on!"

There is no problem so great, so situation so dire that it can't be made worse by poor planning.

By attacking the real problem of Russian spies in the manner he did, he made the situation worse. That's the clearest lesson you can learn from that chapter in history.

Eddie wrote:

"Not all communists supported the soviet union. again, there were and there are communists who love America, just as there are people who were born in America who hate America (i.e. the American Taliban)."
I am aware of this. But I personally would not want to have members of the American Taliban working for the U.S. government right now. Maybe that's a bigoted position, but I think it's okay to be a little politically incorrect if lives can potentially be saved. Bill Maher once said, in a riff on racial profiling, that being color blind is good, but "at the end of the day, 'blind' does mean you can't see." I agree with that sentiment.

"Shooting blindly is never justifiable, even if you are fortuitously right. What if you were wrong? You'd have hurt people for no reason or for the wrong reasons!!!"
I agree, but McCarthy never hurt anybody who was not a Communist sympathizer. All of the people he named who were "innocent" have turned out to be guilty of exactly what he said they were guilty of!

"Communism is not corruption. Corruption is corruption. There are republicans, democrats, people on the right, people on the left, etc. who are corrupt. That has nothing to do with their political ideologies/affiliations/party memberships."
I dispute none of this, but this is irrelevant.

"yes, we're talking about communism. however, again, believing in, adhering to, or following communism is not a legal, ethical, or moral crime. remember, the u.s. is against the idea of going after people for "thought crimes". we don't persecute based on beliefs, but we do prosecute injurious actions."
First of all, we unfortunately DO prosecute "thought crimes": hate crimes legislation was passed years ago. But again, this is different from the McCarthy issue. McCarthy was going after people who were Communists working for the U.S. government. He saw a conflict of interest in having Communists work for a country that had at the time Russia as its sworn enemy.

"instead of masturbating over mccarthy, why don't you ask george w. bush why it's okay to let a company based in dubai control the operations of several key seaports on the american eastern seaboard? why don't you ask george w. bush and his buddies why we keep buying oil from countries who regulary mis-treat their citizens as well as classify women and people who don't worship in the state religion as second- or third-class non-entities?"
Eddie, I thought I had stated this earlier that my defense of McCarthy did not in any way mean that I support George W. Bush. It is a common misconception among people these days that anyone who defends a "right-wing" position is automatically right-wing on every other issue. And even if I did support Bush, what do any of these questions you asked have to do with anything? We're talking about McCarthy, and you at least appear to be distracting from the issue at hand.

Christopher wrote:

"The Venona project no more 'vindicates' McCarthy than the fact that the existence of a few Japanese spies in the 1940s justified FDR's internment of all Japanese-Americans on the West Coast."
???No, because every single person named by McCarthy was a Communist. All his charges were correct. That he had "207" or "57" or whatever new number they come up with, names on his list has been neither proved nor disproved, and to assume one way or the other is intellectually dishonest.

"Furthermore, even if the government was rife with Communist spies (there is no evidence for this), it wouldn't justify McCarthy's tactics."
???But there IS evidence for this, and that same evidence is the basis for any and all defenses of McCarthy!

"Even worse than his red-baiting (a favored pasttime by many politicians on both sides) was his contempt for truth."
???It just so turns out he was correct.

"He targeted people based on innuendo, not evidence; convenience, not fact. When we make up our own reality and ignore annoying things such as the facts, we all lose."
???The facts are different from what you have been told is reality. The Venona Project was released on July 11, 1995 with the invaluable aid of Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. You are still stuck on July 10.

"Watch "Point of Order!" if you want some examples of McCarthy at his most mendacious."
???Point of Order! is a biased film that shows only 88 minutes worth of footage, culled from over 180 HOURS of footage of the Army-McCarthy hearings, when Joe McCarthy was on trial and being investigated. If you read Ann Coulter's account of the hearings, it's very revealing. Coulter's writing on McCarthy is the only time I'll ever recommend Ann Coulter to you.

"Evidence is all that matters, esp. years down the road when the revisionists inevitably show up and try to re-write history."
???History already HAS been rewritten, and it is in your favor. To complain about it is like complaining that your team won the ballgame.

Christopher wrote:

"KenKong, your analogy between Communists and Al Qaeda simply doesn't work. It is not illegal to be a Communist. It was never illegal to be a Communist. There was and is an active Communist party in America. Being a Communist WAS NOT the same thing as supporting the Soviet Union. It is a philosophy, an ideology, not citizenship in a specific nation."
???Communism was the ideology of our sworn enemy (Russia) at the time. The Venona Project has proven that there were hundreds of Soviet spies working for the U.S. government at that time. Do you support their employment?

"A closer analogy would be whether or not we allow Muslims in American government. And we do. And I am entirely comfortable with that."
???I disagree with that analogy. A better one would be "Should we allow Muslim EXTREMISTS" to be working in the U.S. government.

"In addition this statement is simply wrong: 'But it is an undisputable fact that we now know that McCarthy did not name a single person a Communist who then later turned out not to be a Communist.'"
???In fact it is not wrong, but to the contrary completely accurate and factual.

"You really shouldn't get your evidence from Ann Coulter. Ann believes firmly in the old adage: 'Never let the facts stand in the way of a good story.'"
???You are confusing my defense of McCarthy with a defense of Ann Coulter. I have tried to distinguish the two from each other, pointing to books that I own by other, more informed historians, but you still insist on pegging me as an Ann Coulter fanatic. Like I've said, Coulter's writing on McCarthy is accurate, and I will not recommend any of her writing besides those passages to you.

"If you want to learn something about the blacklist and McCarthyism (separate but related topics since HUAC predates McCarthy), here is a short reading list: "Fear on Trial" - John Henry Faulk, "Nightmare in Red" - Richard Fried, "Naming Names" - Victor Navasky. Also the film "Point of Order!" which I reviewed here is an excellent source."
???Name me one person named by McCarthy who was innocent of what he said they were guilty of. One. And by the way, Point of Order! is not a reliable (or excellent, for that matter) source, as I have written above.

"Revisionists rely on the fact that new generations will have only a casual awareness of the facts. That's why we must preserve the facts, the truth, and not allow irrationality and outright dishonesty to rule."
???Your sanctimoniousness is genuinely felt, but completely irrelevant to anything we are discussing here. You are very misinformed, I am sorry to say.

P.S. I am sorry to have to do this, because I really like DVDTown and think you guys do a great job otherwise. I visit the site every day, and really don't want this conversation to cause any bad feelings around here.???Ken

Ken,

Thank you for your comments and responses. Although I am the last person who would defend the bullying (and in my opinion un-American) tactics of Senator McCarthy, on behalf of the site we welcome healthy and civilized debate. I hope there are no hard feelings on anybody's part.

John

kenkong77,

our allies in western europe became socialist republics during the 1950s. yet, we didn't declare war on england, france, germany, norway, sweden, spain, portugal, etc.

you're confusing communism with soviet infiltration. again, not all communists were soviet sympathizers.

also, your equating of communists with the taliban is egregiously wrong. the taliban's mission is to destroy the american way of life. communism does not advocate destroying america. the soviets wanted to destroy the american way of life, but the soviets did not speak for all communists. do you know that china, albania, yugoslavia, and other communist countries broke off ties with the soviet union? (besides, i didn't write that i would be okay with letting a taliban work in the american government.)

clearly, you don't understand a lot of concepts and terms.

eddie

"our allies in western europe became socialist republics during the 1950s. yet, we didn't declare war on england, france, germany, norway, sweden, spain, portugal, etc."
That's besides the point. The fact is that Russia was our sworn enemy at the time.

"you're confusing communism with soviet infiltration. again, not all communists were soviet sympathizers."
The vast majority of those working in the U.S. government were.

"also, your equating of communists with the taliban is egregiously wrong. the taliban's mission is to destroy the american way of life. communism does not advocate destroying america. the soviets wanted to destroy the american way of life, but the soviets did not speak for all communists. do you know that china, albania, yugoslavia, and other communist countries broke off ties with the soviet union? (besides, i didn't write that i would be okay with letting a taliban work in the american government.)"
The communists McCarthy was talking about were in the government and were members of the American Communist Party, an association proven to be directly linked to the Soviets.

"clearly, you don't understand a lot of concepts and terms."
I would rather view it as a difference of opinion, but you're certainly allowed to feel that way.

"Ken,

Thank you for your comments and responses. Although I am the last person who would defend the bullying (and in my opinion un-American) tactics of Senator McCarthy, on behalf of the site we welcome healthy and civilized debate. I hope there are no hard feelings on anybody's part.

John"

--I hope so too. I'm not doing this to start a big fight, just a conversation. Thank you for your comments, and for such a great site.

kenkong77,

i don't share my colleague john puccio's sentiments. i think that you're a fool.

you realize that the u.s.'s problems were with the soviets. you realize that there were communist/socialist countries that were not aligned with the soviets. you realize that there were/are socialist countries who are america's allies. yet, you're okay with mccarthy's witch hunt, which was directed at ALL communists/socialists.

you make no sense and are blindly defending someone who made unfounded attacks on people. you yourself wrote that it hasn't been proven/dis-proven if everyone on mccarthy's lists were communists or people interested in destroying america. therefore, the fact of the matter is that we don't know anything other than that mccarthy's accusations were made without due process of law or logic.

eddie

p.s. prosecuting hate crimes is not the same as prosecuting "thought crimes". it is not illegal to have racist/sexist/etc. opinions as long as you don't harm another person's quality of life. the prosecution of hate crimes involves physical attacks, discrimination at work or in public venues, etc.

please understand fine differences before you make sweeping statements.