Was Martin Luther King a commie?

[zigaretten]

Originally posted by tomndebb *
**
That the CPUSA was, basically, an organ of the Comintern and, after its demise, other propaganda sources from Moscow is no secret to anyone. I have seen numerous references to that fact from the WWII period when we were allies with the Soviets.*

Fine……but, I suspect that I can match you, reference for reference, with denials that the CPUSA was in any way under the influence of the Comintern. See, for instance, “Communism and Truth: A Reply to Sidney Hook;” written in Feb. 1953 by the openly communist historian Dr. Herbert Aptheker.

**

Ellen Schrecker, in her Many Are the Crimes, provides the context that several spies were recruited from the CPUSA (december’s favorite point)–but not that they took orders through the CPUSA. In fact, using the Venona Documents (the collection of cables exchanged between Moscow and the CPUSA that became public after the fall of the U.S.S.R.) and comparing them against the reality of the CPUSA actions and membership, she notes that the biggest problem that the CPUSA had was making some grand proclamation at the behest of Moscow, only to see an immediate drop-off in membership as people recognized it for the twisted propaganda it was. Ms. Schrecker found no evidence of the rank-and-file membership engaging in espionage.**

I have not read this book, so I won’t dispute your synopsis, but……

The Venona documents were not messages between Moscow and the CPUSA. They were diplomatic cables, many of which proved upon decoding to be cables between the U.S. branch of the KGB/GRU and Moscow. Some of them mention the CPUSA.

The question I’m interested in is not “did the majority of CPUSA members engage in espionage.” For me the key questions are “were the majority of people who engaged in espionage members of, or associated with; the CPUSA;” and “did the CPUSA leadership actively and willingly facilitate the espionage activities of the KGB/GRU.” (Other interesting questions would be “did the CPUSA leadership conspire in the murder of Trotsky” and “did the CPUSA leadership conspire to encourage Finnish-Americans to emigrate to the Soviet Union knowing that they would probably be executed upon arrival.”) I will happily grant you that the majority of CPUSA members were harmless little old ladies and poorly educated, poverty stricken laborers who would have been of little use to the Soviets.

**

Harvey Klehr, John Earl Haynes, and Kyrill M. Anderson took a different tack with their The Soviet World of American Communism. They seized on the Venona Documents as an opportunity to prove just how terrible the CPUSA had been. The result? They demonstrated that the CPUSA was almost wholly funded from Moscow (a point most rational people assumed was true since the 1930s although it was always denied by CPUSA leadership). What they did not find, however, was that the CPUSA was a fertile ground for spies and traitors. The spies who emerged from CPUSA were all people who had been in the movement in the early 1930s at the height of the Depression and the period of the rise of Fascism.**

“The Soviet World of American Communism” does not even mention the Venona documents. It deals with documents stored in the “Russian Center for the Preservation and Study of Documents of Recent History,” or the RTsKhIDNI as the authors like to call it. These are records from the Comintern and CPUSA through 1944 which the Russians temporarily made available (they are no longer available). The book clearly states that it is very limited in scope; that it is not concerned with questions of espionage and suggests that for information on the CPUSA and Soviet espionage the reader should refer to the book “The Secret World of American Communism” by Klehr, Haynes and Firsov. (Not very imaginative in the old title department, these guys.)

“The Secret World of American Communism” does make use of the Venona documents, as does “Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America” by Klehr and Haynes. But in both of these books the authors reach conclusions along the lines of “….Soviet Espionage was serious, that American Communists assisted the Soviets, and that several senior government officials had betrayed the United States” and “…the CPUSA had been intimately involved in Soviet espionage and that the leadership of the CPUSA not only knew about the espionage, but actively participated in it. This included Earl Browder, head of the party.”

**

(And, again, the spies were recruited from the CPUSA by the KGB and its predecessors, they were not CPUSA members taking orders through the CPUSA.) **

I do not find it insignificant that spies were recruited from the CPUSA. As for the fact that they did not take their “orders” through the CPUSA, well who claims that they did? As early as 1945 Elizabeth Bentley outlined the procedure; the KGB (or whoever) would recruit a potential agent who was usually noticed as a result of membership in or association with the CPUSA, the agent is told to sever all visible ties with the CPUSA because the Soviets weren’t idiots; and instructions were given either directly by the KGB or through “couriers” such as Bentley (who was originally recruited as a result of her membership in the CPUSA).

This scenario was confirmed by former communists like Whittaker Chambers, Greg Silvermaster, Louis Budenz and Borris Morros. Now a few years ago it was fashionable to dismiss these people as “unreliable” or worse, but you have to admit that many of the people they implicated fled the country while others eventually confessed to espionage activities. And their statements have been confirmed by the Venona documents.

**

……no one actually betrayed our country on the orders of the CPUSA. **

If the CPUSA was knowingly and willingly aiding an organization that did give “orders” (I prefer “instructions” or “encouragement”) to betray our country then the above seems to me to be trivial.

**

Given the overt slander that was imposed on any Communist association……**

I am more than willing to admit that any number of people were unfairly tarred with a very wide brush during the years in question (which I won’t try to define too clearly). But can I get you to concede that this “overt slander” was in response to a very unique set of circumstances in this country?

At the risk of invoking Godwin, other than the communists the only political party in this countries history to openly associate itself with a foreign government, that I am aware of, was the German-American Bund. And they didn’t last long.

Never, before or since, has the government been infiltrated to such an incredible extent:

• A senior White House aide to the President.
• The chief of the State Departments Office of Special Political
  Affairs.
• The head of the State Departments Division of American Republics who was also the Secretary of States personal advisor for Latin America.
• An Assistant Secretary of the Treasury and director of the IMF.
• The chief of the Aviation Section of the War Production Board.
• A senior aide to the chief of the OSS (equivalent of the CIA).
• Many others, I can make the list a lot longer if anyone really cares.

Apologies for being so long winded.

[tomndebb]

Well, this corner of the discussion began when december noted that he was shocked (Shocked! I tell you!) that Pete Seeger “admitted” late in life that he had been a Communist and further claimed that Seeger and anyone else in the CPUSA were “taking orders” from Stalin in a move to take over the world.

The facts are that Seeger had acknowledged his association with the Communists two years prior to december’s concert and it is my contention that members of the CPUSA were not “taking orders” from Moscow.

That the CPUSA took money and propaganda directions from Moscow is absolutely true. (And I didn’t know anyone in the 1960s who believed Aptheker’s denials regarding the Comintern. That is one of the reasons I find this conspiracy stuff so bizarre: the CPUSA was so transparently involved with Moscow that the idea that they could carry out covert programs of espionage seems, at best, bizarre.)

As to the overt slander: I would argue that that was the cause of the later penetration of the government and the reason that the CPUSA was such a fertile ground for the recruiting of spies. In the 1930s when the anarchists were still around (but losing ground) and the Fascists and Communists and Socialists were all fighting for the hearts and minds of the people, the various government agencies and sources of popular media decided that Communism had to be fought at all costs. (Generally, when they wanted to brand a Socialist or Anarchist as evil, they simply labeled them a Communist in the press.) Lots of people toyed with each of those movements at one time or another during the '30s, but it was the ones who toyed with Communism who were targeted for direct lies and restrictive government regulations. Given that scenario, where a person working for idealist principles finds themselves lied about in the government and media, they are rather more likely to come to believe that the government is inherently corrupt and are more open to suggestions that they fight back.

Note, again, that nearly every Soviet recruit from the CPUSA was recruited from membership in the 1930s. (I’m still looking for a Soviet agent who became a member of the CPUSA subsequent to 1941.) The Fascists–who were not targeted for persecution–were able to recruit far fewer spies. I am certain that the influx of cash from Moscow made such recruitment more likely. That, however, is still a far cry from the absurd notion that every member of CPUSA was “taking orders” from Joe Stalin.

It is also a different notion than that every follower of the Communist movement understood or believed that it would inevitably lead to totalitariansim and that they approved of that movement. What we generally find among “retired” Communists is that they did not believe the anti-Soviet propaganda and felt that a Communist democracy could be created. Defections were highest when the totalitarian nature of the Soviet Union were most starkly revealed.

My comment that Gus Hall was a “good” American may be less accurate in light of the stuff I’ve turned up in the last day or so–I had remembered his WWII activities and some of his pronouncement late in life that were staunchly pro-American (if tilted off the scale of reality with his slavish devotion to Marxism).

[december]

*Originally posted by tomndebb *
**Well, this corner of the discussion began when december noted that he was shocked (Shocked! I tell you!) that Pete Seeger “admitted” late in life that he had been a Communist and further claimed that Seeger and anyone else in the CPUSA were “taking orders” from Stalin in a move to take over the world.

The facts are that Seeger had acknowledged his association with the Communists two years prior to december’s concert and it is my contention that members of the CPUSA were not “taking orders” from Moscow.**

It’s time to clear this point up. I was an enormous Pete Seeger fan during the late 1950’s. I absutely did not know that he was then a member of the Communist Party.

Note the tricky wording above. tomndebb says Seeger “acknowledged his association with the Communists.” What does that phrase mean? Does it mean he admitted to being a fellow traveler or that he admittied to once having been one? (The latter is what I recall.)

I certainly do not think he acknowledged his membership in the Party at that time. If he did, then I was even more of a dupe than I thought.

tomndebb or zigaretten – can you clear this up? What did he acknowledge and when did he acknowledge it?

[Captain_Amazing]

Well, here was Seeger’s testimony in front of HUAC. This might help, even though Seeger wasn’t all that responsive.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JimCapaldi/HUAC.htm

[tomndebb]

Ah HA! So he did not admit being a member of the Party before Congress. I must have been thinking of the 1952 testimony in which he was identified as a Communist by another person.
Certainly, by 1964, when I became aware of him, I was informed of his earlier CPUSA membership, so it does not seem to have been a big secret prior to his later biography.

[Shodan]

*Originally posted by rjung *
**
I’ll try not to, but they make it too easy. Unless you want to convince me that the Willie Horton commercials were produced only because the GOP party leadership liked the sound of the name. **

How about if I convince you that the first Willie Horton commercials were produced by Al Gore?

Cite.

Let’s see - if the Willie Horton commercials were racist, and Al Gore was a Democrat, what does that make Al Gore?

Regards,
Shodan

[tomndebb]

From Shodan’s citation:

As your article indicates, it was Al Gore who first raised the issue of then-Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis’ weekend furlough program that eventually would be used against him by George Bush via the now infamous Willie Horton commercials. These commercials played upon White America’s perceptions, stereotypes and fears of violent Black crime. As your article notes, it was from Gore that the Bush campaign got the idea to use Willie Horton against Dukakis.

It said that Gore attacked the Massachusetts furlough program. Is there any evidence that he did so by focusing on black participants, particularly Wille Horton?

Gore’s back-and-forth tightrope walk of attempting to appeal to the Reagan Democrats while not too seriously damaging the Democratic Party’s appeal to blacks has been pretty well documented. Whether that was realpolitik, cynical manipulation, or a genuine desire to support conflicting interests I’ll let others argue. However, the referenced article first says that Gore raised the issue, then concludes that Gore is responsible for Bush using Willie Horton, but it is not clear (from this article) that Gore actually introduced Willie Horton, specifically, as a campaign issue (or that he did so by plastering a large photo of a surly black man across his campaign adds as the Bush campaign eventually did).

Do we have a bit more information regarding the actual events?

[Captain_Amazing]

*Originally posted by tomndebb *
**
Do we have a bit more information regarding the actual events? **

Gore brought up Horton in a primary debate criticizing the furlough program, but he didn’t mention Horton’s race…just that he had committed the crimes while on the furlough program.

[zigaretten]

*Originally posted by december *
**
tomndebb or zigaretten – can you clear this up? What did he acknowledge and when did he acknowledge it? **

As far as I Know…On April 7, 1988 an ad appeared in the communist newspaper the “People’s Daily World” which was one of a series of ads designed to raise their circulation. This ad featured a photo of Mr. Seeger with a caption which included the words “It’s about 35 years since as a card-carrying member of the Communist Party, I read the Worker almost daily…”

Obviously, if anyone can come up with anything earlier than this, then I will stand corrected.

Note: I am not arguing that it wasn’t common knowledge before this. In the 60s I was more interested in Batmans politics than Pete Seegers.

Ron