C r e t i n ( -JoUn 
ComMO rti S>VY\ • . -

A D M ( p ( p l l 

THREAT TO FREEDOM 
J O H N F. C R O N I N , S . S . 

W I T H S T U D Y - C L U B O U T L I N E 

" WHAT A R | THE FACTS ABOUT U.S. COMMUNISTS? 
! ™ . E P L A « N FACTS ABOUT SUBVERSION? 
S w°JiTSIô Ls~S°y,ET ECONOMIC W A R F A R E * S HnwLfrSrir/Jl^J O R G A N I Z A T I O N S D O I N G ? 
• HOW WIDESPREAD IS SOVIET ESPIONAGE7 • WHAT 
t I V L V S V ^ S ^ ^ U S" FOREIGN A I D ^ I 
T H E R E D A N G E R I N " S P E C I A L P L E A D I N G " ? 

« I P 





COMMUNISM: 
Threat to Freedom 

by 

JOHN F. CRONIN, S.S. 
Assistant Director 

Department of Social Action 

National Catholic Welfare Conference 

q p 
PAULIST PRESS 
(Paulist Fathers) 

1 8 0 Varick Street 
New York 14, N. Y. 



CONTENTS 
INTRODUCTION 

PART O N E : The World Scene 
3 

5 
The Cold War, 5—Communist Theory, 7—Communism 
in Russia, 10—Economic and Military Power, 12— 
World Communism, 14—Subversion, 16—Economic War-
fare, 18—The Soviet Bloc in Summary, 19 

Communist Party, U.S.A., 21—Front Organizations, 23— 
Marxism and Espionage, 25—The Climate Changes, 27— 
The Situation Today, 29—Fighting Subversion, 31—Frus-
tration and Fear, 33—Exploiters of Unrest, 36—Pleaders 
for Special Causes, 39—More Special Pleading, 42 

PART T H R E E : Our World-wide Struggle Against Communism 4 7 
The Strong Are Free, 47—Foreign Aid, 50—Psychological 
Warfare, 53—Economic Strength, 56—Moral Strength, 57 
—Internal Subversion, 61—Communism and Religion, 66 

FACTUAL MATERIAL ABOUT THE C O M M U N I S T PARTY, U.S.A. 7 0 
READING LISTS 7 1 

S T U D Y - C L U B O U T L I N E 7 5 

N I H I L O B S T A T : Harry A . Echle, Censor Deputatus 
I M P R I M A T U R : 8S Patrick A. O'Boyle, Archbishop of Washington 
January 3, 1962 

The Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur are official declarations that a 
book or pamphlet is free of doctrinal or moral error. No impli-
cation is contained therein that those who have granted the Nihil 
Obstat and Imprimatur agree with the contents, opinions or state-
ments expressed. 

Copyright © 1962 by 
The Missionary Society 
of St. Paul the Apostle 
in the State of New York. 
Manufactured in the 
United States of America by 
Paulist Press, New York, N. Y. 

PART T W O : Communism in the United States 21 

Deaefcfiflsr? 



Introduction 
Fifteen years ago the National Catholic Welfare Con-

ference published a pamphlet by the author under the title 
"Communism, A World Menace." When that study was 
written, the Soviet Union had not yet consolidated its con-
trol over several nations of Eastern Europe. China was 
still free. The Communist world did not have the atomic 
or hydrogen bomb. It had no large military missiles. The 
menace described in the earlier study, while real and 
ominous, was far less frightening than the present threat of 
Communist power. 

In the intervening period, important changes have taken 
place. The U.S.S.R. has shown scientific skill of the first 
order. The world impact of its policies has increased enor-
mously. Communism in China has taken a somewhat inde-
pendent road of development, marked by cruelties hardly 
surpassed by the worst excesses of the Stalin era in Russia. 
There are Communist tentacles in our own hemisphere. 
The danger of Marxist infiltration and even take-over in 
Latin America can scarcely be overstressed. 

Not all the changes have been for the worse. Since 
1947 many nations, including our own, have awakened 
to the reality of the Communist danger. While there are 
differences of opinion regarding the best ways to meet this 
threat, the blind self-delusion of the Forties is no longer 
common. After the Korean War, few persons of promi-
nence in the Western World doubted the enormity of the 
threat posed by world communism, although some well-
known writers have done damage by failing properly to 
assess the Communist threat. 

[ 3 ] 



Nevertheless, there is still a dangerous amount of con-| 
fusion in the free world, and specifically within our own! 
country. Two questions in particular are of exceptional! 
importance: Is the primary danger external, centered in I 
the Soviet Union, or is it internal, based on domestic sub-11 
version? The second question stems from the first: What! 
are the proper tactics to be used in meeting the threat of I 
communism? The aim of this study will be to give t h e | v 
facts, so that both questions may be answered intelligently, p 
Readers should particularly note that, while the Commu-1 p 
nist Party here is weak, its connections with the powerful | c 
world Communist movement multiplies its strength. | i 

F 
| i 
Ic 

i 
t 
( 
I 
c 

I 

( 
( 
i 

t 4 ] 



Part One 
The World Scene 

The Cold War 
Twenty years after the United States entered a world 

war to make the world safe for democracy and to destroy 
Nazi dictatorship, we find that about one-third of the peo-
Iples of the world are under Communist dictatorship. An-
other third of the world's population, concentrated mainly 
in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, are subject to intense 
pressures to join the Communist camp. Most of the nations 
in this second group take a position of neutralism in so-
called East-West controversies. 

Fortunately, strong industrial nations in North Amer-
ica, Europe, and Asia are opposed to communism. Many 
belong to one or another of the alliances, such as NATO 

lor SEATO, designed to protect the freedom of their peo-
Iples. So long as they remain united, they have the military 
land economic power needed to stave off Communist ag-
Igression. 

The conflict between the two strong opposing forces 
has been called the Cold War. It is accurately called war, 

I even total war, since Communist theory calls for world 
I conquest by various means, including military action, polit-
ical and economic pressures, and internal subversion within 
free nations. Yet it is a relatively cold war, since direct 
military action is not the main technique in current use by 
the Soviet Union. Here there seems to be an important 
difference in emphasis between the U.S.S.R. and its Chi-
nese ally. Chinese Communists not only put greater em-
phasis upon the necessity of war, but they appear to be 

[ 5 ] 



more willing to risk nuclear destruction by using warlike 
tactics. 

There are several special, even unique, features to the 
Communist threat that makes it different from other forms 
of aggression known to history. First, there is the fact that 
communism is a body of doctrine, an ideology, that has 
won millions to fanatical devotion to its cause. Because of 
this doctrine, and related techniques for winning power, 
the major Communist powers have secured adherents in 
almost every nation of the world. There are forty million 
Communists today, and eighty-six national Communist 
Parties. Thus, a country that is politically opposed to the 
Communist bloc has within its own borders thousands of 
potential or actual traitors. 

At the very time that this unique threat has appeared, 
there is worldwide unrest among the poorer nations, espe-
cially those recently released from colonial status. Com-
munists make a powerful appeal to this sector of mankind. 
They are expert in using discontent to further their ends. 
At the same time they propose the Communist model as 
ideally suited for rapid economic growth. 

A third feature of major importance is the military 
might of the Soviet bloc. It has large and well trained 
land armies. Its air power is formidable, even though the 
air forces of the West may surpass it. But the critical 
factor is its possession of a large arsenal of thermonuclear 
weapons, with powerful, accurate, and technically superior i 
missiles to deliver these weapons. While it would be in-
accurate to say that the threat of a nuclear war has para-
lyzed Western diplomacy, it has induced extreme caution, ! 
There is always the possibility that weaker allies may drift I 
to neutralism under the pressure of nuclear blackmail. 

[ 6 ] 



These points taken together paint a very somber pic-
ture. It will be helpful to assess them in greater detail, 
seeing the totality of the threat mounted against us. Only 
against such a background can we develop realistic meas-
ures for preserving and extending human freedom. 

Communist Theory 
Communism is an economic and political system based 

upon the theories of Karl Marx. It holds that society is 
basically materialistic. To the Communist, economic and 
not spiritual forces determine the destiny of man. These 
economic forces currently take the form of capitalism 
which, according to Marx, is essentially exploitive. It 
divides society into two classes, namely, the owners and 
the nonowning workers. Since the owners control the 
means of livelihood, they are the rulers of society. As 
such, they live upon the toil of the workers. In their mad 
struggle to amass wealth, they oppress the workers. But 
this oppression in turn unites the workers into a revolu-
tionary unit, resentful of their chains. Ultimately they will 
be driven to a desperate uprising. 

Marx considered this process as inevitable. It was 
founded on the laws of nature. It was as immutable as 
the chain reaction which unleashes the force of the atom 
bomb. Hence the Communist Party would ride on the 
wave of destiny. It would channel and direct forces which 
are bound to triumph. Its function would be to enlighten 
the workers, to prove to them that they are slaves, and to 
lead them to revolt. 

When they revolt, they will cast aside all the institu-
tions which capitalism used to oppress them. Among these 
will be religion and morality. Marx considered religion as 

[ 7 ] 



a drug, which was to deaden the agony of exploitation by 
promising a better world after death. As an instrument of 
oppression, religion must be fought by the Communist 
Party. 

In the light of this analysis, Communism was destined 
to be a world movement. Accordingly, the various parties 
which embraced Marxism united into a Socialist Inter-
national. In time, however, differences of opinion arose 
among the Socialists. The more moderate group retained 
the original name, while the extreme revolutionaries called 
themselves Communists. 

When the Communists seized power in Russia in 1917, 
Vladimir Lenin took over the leadership of the world 
movement. After his death, Joseph Stalin gradually rose 
to absolute power. Both of these leaders developed the 
theories of Marx in the light of modern conditions. They 
were particularly adept in the strategy and tactics of revo-
lution. The result was a blueprint for world conquest 
which was detailed and effective. 

Their writings made one important distinction which is 
necessary to an understanding of modern Communism. 
They distinguished between principles, strategy, and tac-
tics. The principles of Marx and Lenin are unchanging. 
They envision an unalterable opposition between capital-
ism and Communism. The conflict is essential and to the 
death. Only one can survive. 

Strategy, on the other hand, is a long-range plan which 
may lead but obliquely to the ultimate goal. Thus, on 
four important occasions, it was necessary to conciliate 
the capitalist world. From 1921 to 1928, the Soviet Union 
wanted a period of recuperation and consolidation. From 
1935 to 1939, it desired a united front against Fascism. 

[ 8 ] 



And from 1941 to 1945, it co-operated with capitalist 
powers against the Axis. Finally, shortly after Khrushchev 
assumed power in 1955, he launched a program for peace-
ful coexistence. These strategic moves were made because 
the needs of the Soviet Union were served by a period of 
relative peace. If it is correct that dissension exists between 
the Soviet Union and the Communist Party in China, this 
would mark a difference in strategy, not in principle. 

Tactics are short-range plans which can change rapidly. 
Thus, the Soviet Union can denounce nuclear testing as a 
crime against the human race. It will announce that, in 
the interests of peace and world health, it is suspending 
such tests. Yet, abruptly and with little effort at justifica-
tion, it will resume testing on a gigantic scale. As a gen-
eral rule, Communist Parties throughout the world blindly 
endorse these shifts in the Communist line. No matter 
how sharp be the changes, and how ridiculous a puppet 
Party may seem for following them, they normally close 
ranks and accept Soviet (or Chinese) leadership. 

It is very important to understand these distinctions 
so that we will be fully aware of the precise nature of the 
Communist threat at any given time. Many persons have 
been misled by wishful thinking into accepting temporary 
relaxations as signs that Communism has changed. It is 
always a good rule to judge by deeds, not by words, and 
by long-term policy, not by short-term changes. 

On the other hand, the diplomacy of the free world 
would be unwisely hampered, were we to adopt a policy 
of automatic opposition to every Soviet move. This would 
destroy all freedom of initiative, and make our policy 
merely a reverse image of Soviet or Chinese policy. There 
may be times when the interests of freedom may be served 

[ 9 ] 



by accepting a given proposal by Communist powers. The 
critical point is that we make such decisions in terms of 
the effect on human freedom, and not on the naive basis 
that Communist policy has made a permanent change for 
the better. And we must always keep in mind the long 
history of broken promises and treaties in past dealings 
with Communist powers. 

Communism i n Russia 
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is the first 

sizable nation to adopt communism as its form of govern-
ment and way of life. The Communists seized power in 
1917 amidst the turmoil of World War I in Russia. Their 
revolt was not against the Tsars, but against a social-
democratic government which had earlier overthrown the 
Tsarist regime. After fierce internal struggles, the Bol-
sheviks consolidated their rule and began to move toward 
a "socialist" society. (Contrary to our usage, they refer 
to their economic and political structure as socialism. The 
ruling Party and ideology are called Communist.) 

Three major aspects may be singled out in the Russian 
Communist revolution. They are: internal political poli-
cies; economic and military growth; and external efforts to 
spread communism throughout the world. For each of 
these points, we present a capsule history and a summary 
of the current situation. 

Although the Bolshevik Party had the military power 
to rule Russia, it faced many internal dissenters and foes. 
The principal opponents were the aristocracy, the Church, 
and the peasants. Each group was attacked savagely. 
Many were killed. Millions were sent to slave labor camps. 
Peasants were forced to give up their land and to join 

[ 10 ] 



either collective farms or state farms. A harsh ancl re-
pressive secret-police system spied on all the population. 
It had virtually unlimited powers of arrest, secret trial, 
and summary punishment. A pervasive campaign against 
religion and in favor of atheism was mounted throughout 
the U.S.S.R. 

While Lenin was ruthless in stamping out organized 
opposition to Communist policy, Stalin carried the con-
cept of the police state to a point of absolute terror. Mil-
lions were punished as traitors, whereas their actual crime 
was mere inefficiency, human error, or failure to foresee 
the winning side in Party disputes. After the death of 
Stalin, the power of the secret police was sharply curbed. 
Slave labor camps were dismantled. Although the Soviet 
citizen today does not enjoy freedom, he is much less likely 
than before to be subject to arbitrary arrest and imprison-
ment. 

Since the Soviet state exercises absolute control over 
education, radio, television, and the press, it is now able 
to hold power without overt police-state measures. It cur-
rently permits a limited freedom of religion, partly to 
project a better image in countries which it seeks to influ-
ence, and partly because it is convinced that its massive 
instruments for thought control can ultimately wipe out 
the faith of its people. 

All political power is reserved to the Communist Party. 
Only about two per cent of the population is permitted to 
join the Party. Since no other political party is permitted 
to exist, the only element of electoral choice is within the 
Communist Party. Even this choice is quite restricted, 
since its ruling Central Committee can impose its decrees 
on the lower bodies. Dictatorship under Khrushchev may 

[ 1 1 ] 



be less ruthless than under Stalin, but it is equally effective. 
Because the Kremlin seems assured of its internal con-

trol within the Soviet Union, it has permitted some degree 
of relaxation in regard to travel to and from the U.S.S.R. 
Tourists are welcomed, but frequent arrests for espionage 
make such tourism a somewhat hazardous occupation. 
Soviet citizens are permitted, in limited numbers, to go 
abroad as tourists. There are also exchange programs of 
students and specialists, although these are subject to many 
restrictions. 

It would be dangerous to assume that internal relaxa-
tion of terror within the Soviet Union indicates any yield-
ing to world opinion and a consequent lessening of the 
Communist threat. So long as the Kremlin rules immense 
military forces and pursues its aggressive diplomatic and 
subversive policies, the free world must be strong and alert. 
A one-party dictatorship can reverse its policies when it 
seems to be to the advantage of communism. 

Economic and Military Power 
From the beginning, the Soviet Union concentrated its 

resources on heavy industry and neglected "consumer 
goods. Its energies were channeled into the production of 
steel, oil, coal, electric power, aircraft, tractors, chemicals, 
and, more recently, nuclear fuels and missiles. It neg-
lected such elementary necessities as housing, furniture, 
clothing, and private transportation. The published rea-
sons for such a preference were the necessity of building 
a strong economic base, so that ultimately there would be 
abundance for the Soviet consumer. The actual reasons 
were more military than economic. 

When Germany invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, 
[ 12 ] 



Russian military strength was found to be much greater 
than had generally been realized. It is true that massive 
lend-lease helped the Soviets to survive. Nevertheless, their 
tanks, aircraft, and guns—all products of Soviet industry 
—turned out to be quite adequate in quality and quantity. 
More recently, their mastery of nuclear and missile tech-
nology shows the highest degree both of scientific knowl-
edge and technical skill. Even allowing for the aid given 
by captured German scientists, and Communist success 
through intelligence and espionage operations in obtaining 
secrets from advanced industrial nations, there is still evi-
dence of good technology and high industrial capacity. 

This point is important because many persons have 
criticized communism for the wrong reasons. They have 
opposed communism on economic grounds exclusively, 
and argued that a free economy is more productive than a 
slave economy. If economic arguments are used as the 
main weapon in the world struggle against communism, 
it is possible that such arguments may boomerang. Even 
today, Communists note the enormous Soviet gains made 
in the seventeen years since World War II, whereas the 
United States never suffered destruction of its main indus-
trial centers. (Of course, the gains in West Germany since 
1949 are much more impressive, although industrial de-
struction was greater.) 

These comments do not mean that we concede any 
superior economic efficiency to a centrally planned Com-
munist state. On the contrary, there is abundant docu-
mentation of the inefficiency of much Soviet planning. In 
particular, the collectivist system of agriculture has been 
a failure throughout the Communist bloc. Nevertheless, 
the inherent productivity of modern technology is so great 

[ 1 3 ] 



that any advanced industrial state can achieve a high level 
of living in spite of much waste. 

In the past, Soviet economic production has been fea-
tured by both disastrous failures and brilliant successes. 
Methods and techniques are constantly being revised in 
order to increase the rate of success and minimize the 
chance of failure. It would be dangerous complacency on 
our part to assume that the Soviet Union will never solve 
the agricultural problem. It would be even more hazardous 
to state that the repeated promises of higher living stand-
ards (the latest promise was released to the world in 
August, 1961) will never be fulfilled. We reject the Soviet 
economic system, even if it raises living standards; our 
essential battle is in terms of freedom. 

Certainly the economic base for Soviet military power 
is formidable. In terms of conventional warfare, it is the 
strongest military power in the world. Its missiles are more 
powerful than any achieved by the United States at this 
writing. It has a large arsenal of thermonuclear weapons. 
Since it is willing to use this power aggressively, within the 
context of the Cold War, it is inevitable that, the free 
world will be faced with many crises and constantly created 
tensions. 

World Communism 
The Soviet Union has used a wide variety of tactics in 

its attempt to make the world communist. These include: 
military conquest; diplomatic pressures; psychological war-
fare and internal subversion; and economic warfare. 

Direct or indirect military conquest brought Commu-
nist control to Latvia/ Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, East 
Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, Rumania, Czechoslovakia, 

[ 1 4 J 



Yugoslavia, Albania, China, North Korea, Noith Vietnam, 
and Laos. An internal revolution made Cuba Communist. 
The European nations in this list were either directly con-
quered by Soviet armies, or forced to yield their freedom 
under the pressure of Soviet occupying forces that tech-
nically were armies of liberation. Soviet aid reinforced 
Chinese Communists in conquering the Republic of China. 
Soviet and Chinese aid were involved in Korea, Vietnam, 
and Laos. 

Chinese communism has contributed an important mili-
tary weapon to the Communist world in the form of its 
techniques for guerrilla warfare. The methods developed 
by Mao Tse-tung in fighting the Japanese and the Chinese 
Nationalist forces were used by Castro in Cuba, and have 
also been used in Algeria, Vietnam, Laos, and the Congo. 
By these methods, "wars of liberation" can be fought as 
internal revolutions, once subversion and psychological 
warfare have prepared a suitable base. By these tech-
niques, Communist power can be expanded in a military 
fashion without external invasion. Under such conditions, 
they hope, neither the United States nor any of the alli-
ances against Communist power would be able to inter-
vene. 

Diplomatic pressure has been exercised on many 
fronts, often in combination with veiled military threats. 
For example, European NATO powers are told that they 
would be the first victims in a nuclear war, and not the 
United States. Every effort is made to create or exploit 
differences within the anti-Communist alliances. The Soviet 
Union has consistently tried to weaken the United Nations 
and to extend its veto power to the internal functioning of 
this organization. Its persistent aim is to drive anti-Com-

[ 1 5 ] 



munist nations into neutralism, and neutral nations into 
policies favoring the Soviet bloc. It is particularly adept 
at exploiting grievances based on political or economic 
colonialism in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. 

Communist tacticians have developed psychological 
warfare to a high degree. They create and lessen tensions 
in the attempt to wring the last possible concession in in-
ternational conferences. They have a worldwide propa-
ganda apparatus, using radio and the printed word to 
spread their message of hate and distortion. Communists 
also know the value of propaganda through action. They 
stir up riots, demonstrations, and other forms of agitation 
to spread their ideas and to confuse and intimidate their 
enemies. By appropriating such terms as "peace" and 
democracy," they pose as benefactors of mankind at the 

very time that they prepare warlike measures. A particu-
larly useful technique is the spreading of reports that they 
are willing to be reasonable and to make concessions, 
whereas their actual position has not changed at all. 

Racial discrimination in the United States has been 
consistently used by Communist propagandists. They claim 
that our democracy is little more than pretense. Negroes 
and the unemployed are portrayed as second-class citizens 
Our aid to other lands is distorted as American efforts for 
political domination. 

Subversion 
Closely connected with psychological warfare is the 

weakening of opponents through internal subversion. Local 
Communist Parties seek to foment discontent over eco-
nomic and social grievances. They parrot the Moscow-
directed attacks upon the United States and other free 

t 16 ] 



nations. So far as possible, they harass their governments 
with impossible demands for immediate and sweeping so-
cial changes. They are particularly obstructive when a 
government is seeking social reform, since any lessening 
of discontent would weaken their appeal. 

The danger of subversion is greatest in the developing 
nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In Latin 
America, for example, the contrast between extreme pov-
erty and great and ostentatious wealth offers fertile ground 
for Communist agitation. Land reform and a greater meas-
ure of social justice are desperately needed in many Latin 
nations to the South of us. A similar problem exists in the 
Near East. Frustrated intellectuals in these areas often turn 
Communist. Many of them are trained in the Soviet Union 
to become expert agitators and revolutionaries. Cuba af-
fords a clear example of their technique of seizing control 
of a revolution that was not broadly and openly Commu-
nist at the beginning. 

In much of Africa, Communists seek to train the future 
leaders of the new nations. They offer scholarships to 
Soviet universities. In addition, many nations of the Soviet 
bloc are willing to send technical experts to these coun-
tries. The U.S.S.R. itself has a fairly extensive program 
of loans and grants to developing nations. Moreover, both 
Russia and China argue that their rapid development from 
agrarian societies to industrial nations offers a pattern that 
will bring quick results in areas that impatiently seek their 
share of the world's wealth. 

Subversion in the more advanced industrial nations, 
such as France and Italy, is aimed more at influencing 
national policy than at revolution. The countries named 
above have extremely large Communist parties. Yet, so 

[ 1 7 ] 



long as these nations remain prosperous and politically 
strong, there seems to be little danger of a Communist 
takeover. However, as will be discussed later in connec-
tion with the United States, Communists can often influ-
ence policy even when they possess little direct political 
power. 

Economic Warfare 
The Soviet Union does not yet possess the resources 

to carry out economic warfare on a massive scale. Com-
munist China is even more handicapped in this regard. 
Nevertheless, they have used sizable resources in the ef-
fort to win friends and punish their enemies. If the Soviet 
Union can sustain a rapid rate of economic growth, there 
is every reason to believe that such activities will be in-
creased in the future. 

As was noted earlier, the Soviet Union and its satellites 
have made loans and grants to developing nations. They 
are willing to build steel mills, roads, airports, harbors or 
any facility that could develop prestige and influence for 
them. Soviet, Chinese, and satellite experts and techni-
cians have been made available to governments requesting 
their assistance. While the total of such efforts is consider-
ably less than the total effort of the Western World and 
the United Nations, it often happens that Communists are 
more successful in making political capital out of their ven-
tures. Where we are frequently content to let our deeds 
speak for themselves, they, aided by local Communists, 
obtain the maximum of publicity from lesser achievements! 

Since Communist nations exercise total state control of 
imports and exports they can use foreign trade as a polit-
ical weapon. Thus, they can buy the entire surplus cotton 

[ 18 ] 



crop of Egypt in return for their exports. Cubaii sugar 
can be purchased as payment for military exports to that 
nation. Pressures can be put upon Japan, which needs 
export markets, to tie in more closely with the Commu-
nist bloc. Canadian wheat saved China from the worst 
features of a famine caused by its disastrous policy of 
"farm communes." Canadian exports to Cuba have eased 
its economic difficulties. These same actions have weak-
ened somewhat the united front of free nations. 

It is possible for the Soviet Union to disrupt world com-
modity markets by dumping large quantities of raw mate-
rials at low prices. Surplus oil from the U.S.S.R. has de-
pressed an industry already plagued by problems of 
oversupply. Soviet shipments of various metals have oftett 
upset orderly marketing patterns. It is not clear that such 
exports were made with this end in view; it is also possible 
that Russia needed foreign exchange. But the possibilities 
for creating economic havoc by such tactics cannot be 
overlooked. 

The Soviet Bloc i n Summary 
The broad discussion of world communism emphasized 

the primary role of the Soviet Union. However, there are 
certain individual characteristics of various Communist 
nations that should be mentioned briefly. Communist 
China, for example, appears to be a junior partner rather 
than a satellite. It has not hesitated to challenge the 
Soviet on matters of policy and ideology. Often they ap-
pear to be rivals in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Once 
Peiping reaches the atomic age and achieves high indus-
trial capacity, there may be two Communist power centers. 
China's growth has sharply slowed in recent years because 

[ 1 9 ] 



of cruel and stupid agricultural policies and a general 
exhaustion of an overworked and underfed population. 
Apparently even the Soviet Union disapproves of the meth-
ods used to achieve communism in China. 

At this writing, two Communist nations are independ-
ent of the Soviet Union. These are Yugoslavia and Al-
bania. Cuba's position in the Communist world is not yet 
clear, since both Russian and Chinese influences are evi-
dent. The European satellites of the Soviet Union have 
little or no independence. They have been economically 
integrated with the Soviet. Russian armies keep their res-
tive peoples in subjection. Poland is probably the slowest 
to embrace total communism, since its leaders have not 
yet chosen to face all-out war with the Catholic Church, i 
The fact that Poland is so thoroughly Catholic has served 
to slow down efforts to wipe out religion. 

Smaller Communist nations in Asia thus far have re-
mained close to the Soviet Union, in spite of their physical 
nearness to China. Soviet planes airlifted supplies to Laos. 
North Korea and North Vietnam also seem to be within the 
Soviet bloc. Mongolia is likewise following Moscow's 
line. However, if China were to exercise a real challenge, 
these small nations could not resist its control. 

Differences and even disagreements within the Com-
munist world have little present significance in regard to 
the Cold War. If Communist China does differ from the 
Soviet Union on world policies, the heart of this disagree-
ment concerns the degree of toughness to be followed in 
dealing with capitalist nations. Apparently the Chinese 
want a harder policy, even if this means nuclear war. Both 
agree in wanting to impose communism on the world. They I 
differ only in methods for seeking this end. 

[ 20 ] 



Part Two 
Communism in the United States 

|Communist Party, U.S.A. 
The Communist Party in the United States dates from 

1919. During the forty-three years of its existence here, it 
has varied in strength and effectiveness. It was relatively 
weak and harmless during the period 1919-1935. For fif-
teen years, 1935-1950, it prospered both in terms of num-
bers and influence. After 1950, a sharp decline set in. At 
the present writing, it is fighting for its very existence be-
cause of refusal to register and supply the names of its 
members, as required by the Internal Security Act of 1950. 

At the beginning, the Communist Party here was an 
alien growth. Most of its early members were foreign-born. 
They carried to this country ideas and programs learned in 
the lands of their birth. Their programs were so obviously 
out of harmony with general American thinking that they 
had no real impact on our society. 

This condition changed in 1935, when the Comintern 
(a technically defunct organization representing world 
communism) ordered an abrupt change in strategy and 
tactics. Communists were ordered to soft-pedal their revo-
lutionary principles and to infiltrate general American 
society. The occasion for this change was Soviet fear of 
the rising power of Nazi Germany. It was considered more 
important to unite with other groups in fighting Fascism 
than to try to promote revolution in the United States. 

A number of historical circumstances combined to 
make this new move enormously successful. The United 
States was in the midst of its most serious economic de-

[ 21 ] 



pression, so that many persons were questioning the ability 
of capitalism to survive. Communist ideas were examined, 
and often welcomed, in academic circles. In reaction to 
the depression, the New Deal brought to Washington many 
persons of a liberal, experimental point of view. Since this 
group was strongly opposed to Nazism and Fascism, quite 
a few of them welcomed assistance from any quarter, in-
cluding the newly "respectable" Communists. 

At the same time, the Congress of Industrial Organiza-
tions (C.I.O.) was seeking help in organizing mass-pro-
duction workers. Its leaders did not reject assistance from 
trained Communist organizers. The peace aspect of the 
Communist line appealed to many churchmen and pacifists 
When the Soviet Union and the United States were allied 
against the Axis during World War II, certain government 
circles used every opportunity to glorify Russia and even 
communism itself. 

While the Communist Party, U.S.A., in 1935 was 
small, it was well trained and steeped in the conspiratorial 
tactics of Lenin and Stalin. Its main activities were directed 
along three lines: increase in its own membership; infil-
tration of sources of power and prestige; and enhanced 
public influence through the front-organization technique. 

For membership, it appealed to the idealistic, the embit-
tered, and the disillusioned. To the idealist, it stressed the 
Marxist promise of a world of peace and plenty, obtained 
by a centrally planned economy. Those embittered by un-
employment, racial or religious discrimination, or harsh 
treatment from employers were promised a chance to cru-
sade for justice. The disillusioned could look forward to 
radical changes that would give them a new chance for 
success in life. 

[ 2 2 ] 



These Communists and their fellow travelers (Marxists 
I w h o were not Party members) sought to infiltrate into 

I groups and organizations that would give them real power. The most important of these included: the federal govern-ment; the labor movement; schools, universities, research 
groups, and learned societies; the press and the motion 
picture industry; groups seeking racial reform; youth or-
ganizations; the Churches; the unemployed; and consumer 
organizations. 

The success of this infiltration tactic was great during 
the period 1935-1950. Communists and fellow travelers 
secured important and influential government positions. 
They were a strong power in the C.I.O. wing of the labor 
movement. Some were in a position to influence policy in 
important newspapers. Two well-known research groups 
in the foreign-affairs area were heavily infiltrated. Com-
munists often secured positions in schools, colleges, and 
universities. The combined result of these maneuvers was 

I a considerable power to influence American public opinion 
I, and governmental policy. Partly as a result of this power, 

Stalin secured important concessions from our government 
during and after World War II. 

Front Organizations 
Another very successful tactic was the formation of 

thousands of Communist front organizations. A Commu-
nist front is a group whose public purpose is some respec-

I table aim, often in the field of social reform, peace, and 
I civil rights. Its membership, including most of the board 

of directors, is non-Communist. But the controlling officers 
are concealed Communists. They direct the activities of 
the group toward Communist ends, since the board of di-

[ 2 3 ] 



rectors usually includes busy persons, willing to give their 
names but not their time. 

Communist fronts were well designed to push con-
cealed Communist programs, obtain funds for Party pur-
poses, give respectability to Communist causes, and secure 
mailing lists for future front groups. Hundreds of such 
national groups, and thousands of local fronts, have been 
uncovered by legislative investigating committees, both 
national and state. Their interests coincided with almost 
every area of public concern: foreign policy, use of atomic 
energy, racial justice, civil rights, youth problems, con-
sumer problems, legal concerns, and issues that appeal to 
churchmen. 

Persons who belonged to such organizations are gen-
erally classed as dupes. The fact of membership by itself 
does not indicate sympathy with communism, since Com-
munist control was effectively concealed. Even membership 
maintained after exposure of Communist control may not 
necessarily indicate Communist sympathies. Legislative 
committees investigating communism have been under such 
sharp attacks from Communist and even non-Communist 
sources that their listings were often considered of doubt-
ful value. In fact, these exposures were in general both 
accurate and useful. But, in the climate of the period under 
discussion, this fact was not always appreciated. 

The analysis just given is of the highest importance in 
terms of current discussions of Communist infiltration in 
the United States. For example, the frequently made 
charge that 7,000 Protestant ministers are either members 
of the Communist Party or sympathizers with the Party is 
based largely on lists of clergy who were duped into 
joining concealed Communist fronts. Many also signed 

[ 2 4 ] 



petitions distributed by such groups. Most of these fronts 
played on the pacifist or civil-rights sympathies of the 
clergy. 

If the disseminators of such charges were asked to list 
fifty living Protestant ordained ministers who at any time 
belonged to the Communist Party, they could not do so 
without committing libel. They would be hard pressed to 
name 200 living clergy who are or have been Communist 
sympathizers in the correct use of the term. The horren-
dous list of 7,000 dissolves mostly into a list of unwary 
persons who signed without realizing the true nature of 
the organization that appealed to them. On the other hand, 
it is a matter of history that confused thinking by well-
meaning pacifists contributed to a hesitant posture in the 
face of Soviet aggression. Hence we may question the 
judgment of such persons without necessarily impugning 
their loyalty. 

Marxism and Espionage 
Two other major points need to be noted about com-

munism in the United States. The first is that we have 
always had some Marxists who are not members of the 
Communist Party or subject to its discipline. Some of 
these are former Communists who left the Party, either 
voluntarily or through expulsion. Some are members of 
other left-wing organizations, ranging from Social Demo-
crats and Socialists to some Marxist groups that are even 
more militant than the Communist Party, U.S.A. Most of 
these organizations have little influence today. However, 
the widespread defections from the Communist Party dur-
ing the last decade have furnished increased membership 
to these other so-called proletarian groups. In spite of some 

[ 2 5 ] 



growth, they offer no threat to American security, since 
they are divorced from the international Communist move-
ment headed by Moscow and Peiping. 

Espionage in the interests of the Soviet Union and its 
satellites has always been an important feature of interna-
tional Communist activity. There are about 300,000 Com-
munist espionage agents in the world, and we are sure 
that the United States has its share. As a general rule, es-
pionage operations are governmental functions, not Party 
activities. The Soviet Union, through its Embassy, consu-
lates, its U.N. delegation, and corresponding officials of 
the satellite nations, has been the primary guiding force 
behind intelligence operations. It normally operates di-
rectly rather than through the Communist Party, U.S.A. 
This is done for security reasons, and not because Com-
munists would be unwilling to spy for the Soviet Union. 

Individual Communists may be recruited by Soviet or 
satellite intelligence agents. But such agents have been 
often successful in recruiting those who are not Party mem-
bers, perhaps not even Marxists. There were scientists 
who gave secret information to Communist agents because 
they felt this would help the cause of world peace. Spies 
may be secured through the use of blackmail. This may 
involve personal moral fault in the individual concerned, 
or it may come from threats against relatives behind the 
Iron Curtain. Another technique is the simple one of try-
ing to buy secret information from those who possess it. 

Because of the danger of espionage, it is essential to 
prevent Communists from obtaining access to classified 
information, either through government jobs or through 
employment in private industry that handles contracts in-
volving secret work. The security clearance system used to 

t 26 ] 



keep Communists out of such positions has been quite 
effective since it was introduced in 1949 and perfected in 
1951. Other types of security risks, such as persons sub-
ject to blackmail, are often more difficult to detect. Only 
continual vigilance on the part of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, the U. S. Civil Service Commission, and 
other security agencies, can protect our country from 
espionage. 

In the period under discussion, Soviet espionage ac-
tivities were widespread and often quite effective. Secret 
and even top-secret information was secured about such 
vital points as high government policy, atomic-energy oper-
ations, and electronic equipment. Because of the artificially 
fostered climate of opinion during World War II, there 
were few arrests for Communist espionage. This, of course, 
was not the fault of our own intelligence agencies. Arrest 
and prosecution were blocked by policy decisions at higher 
levels. 

The Climate Changes 
After World War II, the illusions about the Soviet 

Union and the Communist Party, U.S.A., were slow to 
vanish. Two main series of events brought deluded Amer-
icans to their senses. The first was the dramatic series of 
hearings conducted by the House Committee on Un-Amer-
ican Activities and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary 
during and after 1948. The high point of these hearings 
was the Hiss case. But the total picture of Soviet espionage 
and Communist infiltration both shocked and educated the 
American public. By the time of the Korean War, a well 
documented and comprehensive picture had been presented 
by our legislative committees. 

[ 2 7 ] 



The second series of events involved the Soviet Union 
and its utterly callous seizure of control in many nations 
occupied by Soviet troops during and after World War II. 
Russian threats against Iran and Greece brought the Tru-
man Doctrine. The danger to Western Europe inspired 
the Marshall Plan and NATO. The forcing of communism 
upon Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, 
Rumania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Albania revolted the 
conscience of the world. Yet the awakening was slow and 
painful. At this time the United States still possessed a 
monopoly of atomic weapons. It had been warned by 
Winston Churchill, in his famous speech at Fulton, 
Missouri, that a radical change of policy was necessary. 
In fact, the change was gradual. Only the invasion of 
South Korea, and the commitment of American troops to 
its defense, finally solidified American opinion. 

As this change was taking place, aroused Americans 
acted to remove the danger of Communist infiltration in 
areas of public importance. Communists were removed 
from government posts, first slowly, and then systematically 
as a result of the federal loyalty programs. Communist 
unions were expelled from the C.I.O. Communist writers 
and actors in Hollywood were no longer in demand. News-
papers, research groups, and schools began to clean house. 
Front organizations found it difficult to find dupes. The 
Communist movement was thoroughly discredited in the 
American mind. 

Membership in the Communist Party, which had been 
80,000 at its peak, fell off sharply. Later in the 1950's 
the Party was rocked by violent internal dissension caused 
by Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin's crimes. We even 
had the spectacle of the Daily Worker denouncing Soviet 

[ 28 ] 



betrayal over a period of months, until finally two of its 
editors were expelled from the Party. Thousands of dis-
illusioned members left the Party during this period. By 
the 1960's, it reached its lowest ebb in terms of member-
ship, finances, and influence on American opinion and 
policy. 

The Situation Today 
By early 1962, the Communist Party, U.S.A. has been 

drastically weakened. It has lost members by the thou-
sands and finds it extremely difficult to recruit new mem-
bers. The basic reason for this change is widespread 
American disillusionment with communism as practiced 
in the Soviet Union, China, and the satellites. Russia in 
particular seems to have a genius for alienating American 
public opinion. Many in the United States were hoping 
for a favorable change in Soviet policy after the death of 
Stalin. The program for peaceful coexistence, proposed 
by Stalin's successors, might have won adherents among 
many who were wearied of the Cold War. There were 
strong defenders of the Russian position on nuclear test-
ing. Liberalizing trends in Soviet policy, such as the cul-
tural-exchange program, were welcomed in many circles. 

But each advance secured by a less belligerent Soviet 
strategy was soon nullified by actions that belied honeyed 
words. The East German and Hungarian rebellions were put 
down by brutal force. For a time, it seemed that this pat-
tern might have been repeated in Poland. Tibet was in-
vaded by Chinese armies. Indian border territory was 
occupied by force. Laos was subverted. The Berlin wall 
was erected. A fifty-megaton nuclear bomb was exploded 
after Soviets cynically resumed nuclear testing. Further 

[ 2 9 ] 



revelations were made of the tyrannical injustice of the 
Stalin era. 

A posture of arrogant defiance of world opinion and 
the rattling of nuclear bombs might be calculated to drive 
weak nations into appeasement. But it made enormously 
difficult any attempt by the Communist Party in the United 
States to win new members or to influence public opinion. 
While Americans are patient people, they do not like to be 
bullied or pushed around. There is no division of opinion 
in the United States in regard to defending our freedom 
against any form of Communist aggression that threatens 
this liberty. Americans may differ in regard to specific 
tactics to be used in the struggle for freedom; they do not 
differ in regard to the ultimate goal. If there are many 
among us who "would rather be Red than dead," they have 
not been vocal in expressing their opinions. 

Consequently the Communist Party here is down to a 
few thousand members. Its limited finances are being 
drained by prosecution under the Internal Security Act of 
1950. Communists no longer have positions of power and 
influence in government, the labor movement, the aca-
demic world, or any of the other areas which they influ-
enced so strongly in the 1940's. Our loyalty and security 
programs have been effective in screening them from 
government positions. Only three small unions are con-
sidered to be under Communist domination. 

The Communists that remain are by no means inactive. 
When trouble spots appear in our land, they try to exploit 
the difficulties for their own purposes. They seek to 
penetrate groups that are fighting for racial justice, civil 
liberties, or an end to nuclear testing. An occasional Com-
munist will secure an invitation to address a student group. 

[ 3 0 ] 



[They will raise the banner of civil liberties in fighting for 
their members or against the House Committee. They will 
issue a few publications, as well as The Worker in Sunday 
and Midweek editions. 

But compared with their activities and influence twenty 
years ago, Communists today are weak and impotent. For 
every dollar they can spend today in the United States, 
hundreds of dollars are spent by groups that are directly 
and openly opposed to them. If they can gather a hundred 

¡persons at one of their propaganda meetings, they are 
[doing their best. By contrast, tens of thousands of Ameri-
c a n s have attended schools and meetings in which the 
•Communist Party is denounced. No columnist nor editori-
lalist in a general American newspaper of any circulation 
¡advocates communism. But many widely read columnists 
land editorialists regularly attack communism. 

In spite of the clearly evident weakness of the Commu-
Inist Party, U.S.A., there is more concern about internal 
¡subversion in the United States today than at any time 
¡during the last forty years. Even the Hiss case and the 
(sensational revelations by legislative committees during 
[the years 1948-1950 did not arouse an organized public 
I reaction remotely comparable to that evident in 1962. The 
¡views about internal subversion widely expressed today 
I would have been understandable, if somewhat exaggerated, 
I in 1948. But why such a furor at a time when the Com-
I munist Party is at its weakest? This point deserves con-
I sideration at some length. 

I Fighting Subversion 
In the 1930's only a few scattered voices were raised 

I here in effective protests against communism. These were 
[ 3 1 ] 



mostly Catholic, especially during and after the civil war I 
in Spain. Veterans' organizations were also vocal in re- H 
gard to Communist subversion. With the advent of the { 
House Committee on Un-American Activities, the issue of I 
subversion was more widely discussed. During the 1940's, f 
a few hardy souls denounced communism at a time when P] 
Russia was our ally in World War II. But the majority of r 
vocal Americans avoided this topic during the war. 

At the end of the war, the pattern of Soviet perfidy t 
was clear. The evidence of both domestic subversion and L 
plans for world conquest was overwhelming. Nevertheless, L 
those who sought to awaken a slumbering America faced L 
an uphill struggle. "Red-baiting" was not a popular occu- L 
pation. Before the Hiss hearings, a few publications tried L 
to tell the truth. The United States Chamber of Commerce t 
issued a series of pamphlets on communism. But indiffer- C 
ence and even hostility greeted many such efforts. The [_ 
legislative hearings of 1948-1950, Communist conquests L 
in Europe and Asia, and the Korean War brought about [ 
a decisive change in both public opinion and official p 
American policy. By the end of 1950, most of the illusions I 
concerning communism, both domestic and worldwide, [ 
had vanished from the general American scene. The Com- L( 
munist Party here was fighting, and losing, a holding L, 
operation. fr 

Yet, in the 1960's, strong reaction against domestic 
communism is sweeping the land. Well financed and well L 
attended crusades, which would have been manna from L 
heaven in 1946, are increasingly evident. Speakers and 
writers for such groups are vigorously fighting problems L 
that were mostly solved by 1950, and neglecting the far L 
greater dangers of Communist subversion in Asia, Africa, L 

[ 3 2 ] 



and Latin America, and the general world Communist 
offensive described earlier. 

For example, one group in November, 1961, described 
American national life in these terms: The Communists 
own the top. They have considerable strength in the 
middle. They are just now beginning to achieve an appre-
ciable amount of direct control throughout the whole base. 
In other statements, Presidents of the United States and 
Justices of our Supreme Court have been labeled Com-
munist. Our State Department is alleged to be thoroughly 
infiltrated by the Party. A respected university has lost 
considerable endowment funds because of allegations of 
communism in the faculty. In many parts of the country, 
hysteria and suspicion are becoming increasingly evident. 
A virulent form of disunity is weakening us in the world 
struggle against communism, and performing this disservice 
in the name of militant anti-communism. Many Ameri-
cans are confused and bewildered by the whole trend. 

Frustration and Fear 
It is easy to dismiss such events by name-calling. But 

such an approach is unfair to millions of Americans who 
desperately want to do something about communism. They 
have been misled by false prophets, but these ordinary 
Americans are not extremists or crackpots. 

Their basic problem is frustration and even fear. They 
have seen the Soviet Union apparently gaining in its 
Struggle to communize the world. The shock to our 
national ego when the U.S.S.R. launched its first Sputniks 
in 1957, orbited two spacemen in 1961, and continued to 
exceed the United States in the power of its missiles, was 
considerable. For the first time since the War of 1812, 

[ 3 3 ] 



we face the possibility of military defeat. The fact that 
we can debate whether Russia or the United States is 
stronger militarily is in itself humiliating. We have been 
matched in armed power by a nation hardly forty years 
away from a primitive agricultural society. As a nation 
we no longer command the prestige that was ours in 1945, 
when we emerged from World War II as the undisputed 
economic, military, and political leader of the world. 

In the interval we fought a stalemated war in Korea, 
not using our nuclear weapons to ensure a decisive victory. 
We saw the French driven out of Viet Nam and the country 
divided. We felt unable to act when the East Germans 
revolted in 1955 and the Hungarians arose in 1956. We 
failed disastrously in our attempt to drive a Communist 
regime from Cuba. Our patience has been worn thin by 
fruitless rounds of conferences with Communist powers. 
Many feel that the United Nations has been ineffective; 
some even assert that the Communists use its powers more 
effectively than we do. Our NATO allies have not col 
operated in building up ground forces in Europe, and ouij 
own commitments are inadequate. We have fallen bacM 
upon a nuclear deterrent, yet at the same time the consid-
eration of the consequences of an all-out atomic war has! 
made us reluctant to use this deterrent. Foreign aid, used! 
as a means of winning friends, has often failed in this aim, 
Not only have we lost friends, but our apparent weakness 
has cost us the respect of many nations. 

While we seem to have been fighting a losing battle 
in the Cold War, nevertheless the costs of this war remain 
high. Federal taxes are not much below wartime levels 
Population growth and the move to the suburbs hava 
caused enormous increases in state and local taxes. Mam 

[ 3 4 ] 



persons see an apparently irreversible trend toward in-
creased federal power. Political changes seem to make 
no difference in this trend. Added to all these tensions 
are two severe internal problems: the strains caused by 
racial desegregation and by increased crime and delin-
quency. Our educational system has been under sharp 
attack and has been unfavorably compared with that of 
the U.S.S.R. Supreme Court decisions in the civil-rights 
fields appear to have hampered the states in fighting crime, 
subversion, and commercialized smut. We seem to be 
moving toward moral decay at a time when utmost strength 
and resolution are needed. 

It is understandable, under these circumstances, that 
many citizens feel betrayed and strongly desire to strike 
back against those who failed their country. Since there 
is evidence that softness toward communism affected the 
original decisions whose fruits plague us today (Yalta 
and Potsdam agreements; inaction when East European 
nations were forced into the Communist orbit; a passive 
policy while China was going Communist; failure to attack 
Chinese bases in the Korean war; and possibly our slow-
ness in developing missiles), it is easy to believe that the 
same influences have been at work during the 1950's and 
1960's. Hence millions of Americans were ready to believe 
those who assert continuing Communist domination of 
government and agencies that mold public opinion. Since, 
apparently, we are unable or unwilling to strike back 
against our enemies abroad, at least we should root out 
subversion here at home. Such reasoning has been ex-
ploited by the so-called extremists of the right. 

[ 3 5 ] 



Exploiters of Unrest 
Of the groups that moved in to capitalize on this basic 

discontent, some have been active for years. Others have 
been organized within the past four years. But the strong 
response to their appeals is definitely a new development 
on the American scene. Before 1960, most anti-Commu-
nist organizations, extremist or otherwise, had little popular 
following. Unless they were subsidized by wealthy bene-
factors, they were engaged in a constant struggle to survive. 

We call an organization extremist when it presents an 
inaccurate and distorted view of the Communist threat. 
Any of the following points indicate a false picture of the 
actual situation. (1) Wild exaggeration of the number 
of Communists and their sympathizers and their present 
influence in the United States; (2) Charges that a Com-
munist take-over here is a current threat; (3) Connecting 
the Communist menace with unpopular social philosophies 
or movements; and (4) Using the reaction against com-
munism to attack groups not favored by the organization 
involved. All of these points deserve detailed treatment. 

We have noted earlier the current weakness of the 
Communist Party in the United States and the real Com-
munist threat elsewhere. Those who would have Americans 
concentrate on a minor threat of domestic subversion and 
ignore subversion and Communist pressures in Europe, 
Asia, Africa, and Latin America, are misleading the Amer-
ican people. Whatever their motives, they are effectively 
aiding the Communist cause. 

They are most effective when they can quote "experts" 
to bolster their cause. In some cases, the experts are really 
informed. For example, passages from J. Edgar Hoover's 
writings and statements are frequently used. Yet they 

[ 3 6 ] 



ignore more recent statements from the same source warn-
ing against inaccurate and exaggerated charges, vigilant-
ism, and stirring up national disunity by misuse of the 
Communist issue. 

Many nongovernmental "experts" make extensive use 
of Communist-front connections of the individual attacked. 
They do not tell their readers or listeners that Communist 
fronts attracted innocent persons who did not know what 
they were joining. Nor do they note the fact that most of 
these connections antedate 1950, and were made in a com-
pletely different climate of opinion. As we stated before, 
few persons are qualified to evaluate such information. Thé 
general public is well advised to disregard charges unless 
they prove current or quite recent active affiliation with 
the Communist Party or with programs exclusively held 
by the Communist Party. 

There are three types of "experts" whose credentials 
should be scrutinized with care. They are former agents 
of the F.B.I., former informants for the F.B.I., and persons 
who have had first-hand contact with the Communist 
Party, either as members or victims. 

The F.B.I, did not attack the Communist problem 
systematically until 1939. Agents who served before that 
time had no extensive training in the problem. Many 
agents who worked for the Bureau after 1939 concentrated 
on law-enforcement activities and had no particular experi-
ence with the Communist desks in the Bureau. Even men 
who work on subversive problems may be doing routine 
security checks and have little opportunity to see the total 

I picture. Hence, unless a former agent was a high-ranking 
I specialist in subversion, he has no outstanding authority 

as an expert, at least on the basis of his F.B.I, experience. 
[ 3 7 ] 



F.B.I, informants (often falsely called F.B.I, agents) 
are usually former or present Communist Party members 
who served as informants for the F.B.I. The value of theii 
information varies in terms of their position within the 
Party and also in terms of the time when they left the 
Party and were cut off from first-hand sources of informa-
tion. An informant, or former member who defected, who 
was an obscure Party member in a small section or cell 
would have little information on secret top-level Commu-
nist activities. An informant or defector who left the Party 
before 1955 would not be particularly expert on its current 
status. 

These comments on informants or defectors refer only 
to first-hand current information. There are former Com-
munists on investigating committees and other government 
agencies who have devoted their whole lives to the study 
of communism and who fully qualify as experts. Others 
in private life have kept up their studies and can speak with 
authority. But a non-Communist with equal intelligence 
and diligence can become equally expert. 

Those who have been victims of Communist persecu-
tion, either at home or abroad, often suffer deep scars 
from the experience. Contact with the hatred and vicious-
ness of communism is an unforgettable experience. But 
most of this experience is in a limited area and does not 
make the victim an expert in every phase of the Commu-
nist problem. 

At times these "experts" have given their views before 
Congressional investigating committees. Some persons 
assume that such appearances constitute an endorsement 
by the committees of the views in question. Actually 
statements of this type, or even private views expressed 

[ 3 8 ] 



by Congressmen or Senators on such committees, do not 
have the authority of the committees. Only formal state-
ments of the committees as such bear this authority. 

In the appendix to this study, reference will be made 
to selected sources of information that are considered 
reliable at the time this is written. This does not exclude 
other sources, but those who use them would be wise to 
make a careful check on their value. 

One point that frequently crops up in discussions of 
J communism is the allegation that, because a small group 
t of trained Communists seized power in Russia and Cuba, 

the Communist Party here poses a similar present danger, 
y This argument ignores the fact that the political and social 

situations were entirely different in these uprisings. Both 
t countries lacked democratic traditions. In both cases, the 
y people had risen to overthrow an unpopular government, 
s Each time the Communists outmaneuvered the unskilled 
h rank-and-file of the original revolution. If this argument 
e were valid in all situations, then France and Italy (both 

with very large Communist Parties) would have been 
taken over long ago. Yet, so long as they maintain internal 
stability, no one expects a Communist takeover in either 
country. Likewise, so long as America remains prosperous 

1 and united, there is no danger of Communist seizure of 
lt power here. 

Pleaders f o r Special Causes 
Many of the more vocal anti-Communist groups have 

6 connected communism with social philosophies they find 
\ unpopular. Many, for example, use the argument ex-
' pressed by a former high government official in late 1961. 
\ It runs this way: Liberalism (or the Fair Deal or the New 

[ 3 9 ] 



Frontier) is the same as the welfare state. The welfare! 
state is socialism. And the Communists say that they arel 
socialists. Hence liberalism is communism. 

Actually this statement is bad logic and worse history. 
As logic, it would make the Encyclical of Pope John 
XXIII, Mater et Magistra, (Christianity and Social Prog-
ress), a defense of communism. The Encyclical advocates 
or does not reprove many specific items rejected by extrem-
ist groups (the use of the income tax to equalize burdens, 
aid to undeveloped nations, government action to smooth 
out economic changes, social insurance, aid to agriculture, 
housing subsidies, etc.). 

Since both liberalism and the welfare state have such 
loose definitions, there is no point of arguing with a person 
who equates the two. Socialism, on the other hand, can be 
more precisely defined. In general, it has advocated gov-
ernment ownership of the means of production. The Com-
munist wing of the Socialist movement proposed violent 
seizure of power and property and almost total ownership 
of private property by the state. The more moderate 
Socialists generally advocated a more limited form of public 
ownership. This was to be achieved by democratic proc-
esses. Of this trend, Pope Pius XI said in 1931: 

One might say that, terrified by its own principles 
and by the conclusions drawn therefrom by commu-
nism, socialism inclines toward and in a certain 
measure approaches the truths which Christian tradi-
tion has always held sacred; for it cannot be denied 
that its demands at times come very near those that 
Christian reformers of society justly insist upon. 

If the foregoing happens, it can come even to the 
point that imperceptibly these ideas of the more mod-

[ 4 0 ] 



erate socialism will no longer differ from the desires 
and demands of those who are striving to remold 
human society on the basis of Christian principles. 
(Quadragesimo Anno, Nos. 113-114). 
Thus, the socialism of the Communist world and the 

socialism of the free world are entirely different terms. 
(The same is true of other terms used by the Communists, 
such as democracy, peace, and peaceful coexistence.) 
Many Socialist Parties are violently anti-Communist. Many 
nations with a socialist or welfare-state tinge, such as the 
United Kingdom and the Scandinavian countries, do not 
have large Communist Parties. 

It is true that some liberals and Socialists have used 
double standards in judging dictatorships. They have been 
harsher in denouncing Nazi and Fascist dictatorships than 
in denouncing the Communist type. They have applied 
one standard of civil liberties toward Communist groups 
and a much harsher standard toward so-called American 
fascists. On the other hand there are conservatives who 
have erred in an opposite direction. It would be wrong 
to stigmatize all liberals or all conservatives for the errors 
of some in their midst. 

Actually, the misuse of former Communist-front asso-
ciations may drive some liberals into "anti-anticommun-
ism." They live in fear lest mistakes in judgment (or even 
actual Communist associations, long since repudiated) 
made years ago in a different climate of opinion, may be 
brought up today and used to cost them their jobs and 
their reputation. Much of the opposition to Congressional 
committees investigating communism stems, perhaps sub-
consciously, from such fears. If such committees made 
crystal clear that they are concerned only with present 

[ 4 1 ] 



Communist activities and present pattern of conduct, much I 
of the liberal opposition to their work would vanish. 

More Special Pleading 
The violent and bitter struggle for racial equality in I 

the United States has often prompted charges that Com-
munists were behind these activities. Those militant in 
fighting for civil rights have had former Communist-front 
connections unearthed and misused against them. The 
targets most frequently hit were the NAACP and CORE. 

Actually, it is an amazing fact that the Communists 
have had such little success among the Negroes. In theory, I 
an embittered and oppressed people would be fertile ground I 
for Communist recruiting. In fact, Negro leaders and the I 
overwhelming majority of Negro people have rejected 
Communist influence and have insisted that they are true 
Americans. Even Negro extremists, such as Muslims, 
have not accepted Communist leadership. Whenever Com-
munist influence is detected by NAACP or CORE, it is 
promptly removed. 

Protestant Churches, especially the National Council 
of Churches, have also been a target for attack. Here also 
the front-organization technique is used. The World Coun-
cil of Churches has been under fire for admission of 
Churches from Communist countries. Behind these attacks 
one usually finds opposition to the "social gospel" or to 
alleged modernist trends in organized Protestantism. 

We noted earlier that a sizable number of Protestant 
ministers had been duped into joining Communist fronts, 
especially those dealing with peace and with civil rights. 
These activities reflected the confused climate of the 1930's 
and 1940's. Communist influence among the Protestant 
t 4 2 ] 



I clergy today is virtually nonexistent. At the same time, 
I all persons should be cautious in checking pacifist and 
I civil-rights causes, when there may be reason to suspect 
I Communist inspiration. These should be solid reasons, of 
I course, and not merely any personal dislike of the position 

advocated. 
Some anti-Communist sources are also anti-Semitic 

These groups are small and have little influence except 
I among bigots. The organized Jewish community in the 
I United States is strongly opposed to communism. Quite 

apart from their American loyalty, they know that Jews 
are persecuted in Russia and that the Soviets have con-
sistently opposed the state of Israel. 

Groups opposed to the United Nations often use 
alleged Communist infiltration or even control as a weapon 
in attacking this organization. Some object to the inclusion 
of Communist nations as members. There is widespread 
American opposition to the granting of China's seat in 
the U.N. to the Peiping government. Charges have been 
levied that U.N. related organizations, such as UNESCO 
and UNICEF, have followed Communist lines. 

Some of these opponents are basically isolationist and 

I use the Communist charge as a handy weapon. Catholics who deny our international responsibilities do so in the face 
of repeated papal assertions of our moral obligation to 
seek world order, world prosperity, and world peace. 

Others may argue that Communist vetoes and other 
obstructionist tactics, plus the double standard of morality 
used by some neutralist nations, may spell the end of the 
U.N. as an effective agency for world order and peace. It 
may end up as merely an international debating society. 
If such were to happen, the result would not stem from 

[ 4 3 ] 



Communist control of the U.N., but rather from their I 
desire to reduce it to impotence. It is obvious that, if the I 
Communists had control over this body, they would be I 
more anxious to extend its powers rather than the reverse. I 

The labor movement, and certain labor leaders, have I 
also been the targets of special pleaders. Yet the C.I.O. I 
wing of the labor movement expelled its Communist unions I 
well before the general public became excited about the I 
problem. Both wings have been working for years to fight I 
for free labor unions, and against Communist unions, in I 
Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This effort also 
long antedated any general public interest in the problem. 

Educators have been attacked on two main grounds. 
One charge centers around the failure of progressive and 
permissive educational systems to give adequate discipline 
and instruction. The second involves liberal views in 
social-science textbooks. These are labeled Communist in 
accord with the formula mentioned earlier. We will not 
attempt to defend inadequate teaching methods or to 
endorse all textbooks sight unseen. But we have seen no 
evidence of Communist influence in the progressive sys-
tem of education. Nor do we accept the formula that 
"liberal" automatically equals "Communist." 

Offenses charged to Communist infiltration also include I 
fluoridation of water, promoting mental health, and organ- I 
ized peddling of smut. Yet our organized dental profes- I 
sion supports fluoridation of water. The medical profession I 
endorses sound mental-health programs. And organized I 
pornography is a commercial venture, with no proven link I 
to the Communist Party. 

The menace of Communist expansion is much too real I 
and much too world-wide for the American people to tol- I 

[ 4 4 ] 



erate and support distortions such as those outlined above. 
Simple honesty and respect for the truth should be ade-
quate reasons for avoiding these errors. But they are more 
than dishonest, they are also divisive. They sow distrust 
in our nation at a time when national unity is imperative. 
They weaken our democracy by spreading suspicions of 
treason in government and asking Americans to use Com-
munist tactics against fellow Americans. If carried far 
enough, these movements would paralyze American diplo-
macy. When every discussion with the Communist powers 
is considered a sign of weakness or even treason, then we 
are left with only two stark alternatives: surrender or war. 
Surely our common sense should tell us that we should 
seek some middle course between these extremes. 

A mature and strong people has the inner strength to 
live with occasional frustration and failure. It does not 
cry disloyalty every time its will is thwarted. When honest 
mistakes of judgment are made, it seeks to correct them 
through the democratic process. Temper tantrums result-
ing from frustrations are not welcomed even in young 
children. In adults, they are signs of serious immaturity. 
There is much to be done to combat the menace of world 
communism. It is time for Americans to close ranks and 
to fight the real enemy on the real battleground with real 
weapons. If we fail in this, we shall be so weakened inter-
nally that Communist conquest will be inevitable. 

In this context, the message by J. Edgar Hoover, Di-
rector of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, sent to law 
enforcement officials on April 1, 1961, is worth quoting. 

"There exists today in our land a vital 'rift' which 
the communists are exploiting. Unfortunately, this 
involves certain people across the country who engage 

[ 4 5 ] 



in reckless charges against one another. The label of 
'communist' is too often indiscriminately attached to 
those whose views differ from the majority. Those 
whose lives are not led according to what one segment 
of society might decree to be the 'norm' are too fre-
quently challenged as 'Reds.' 

"Attributing every adversity to communism is not 
only irrational, but contributes to hysteria and fosters 
groundless fears. Communism is, indeed, our para-
mount adversary, and it leans on its credo of invinci-
bility and a concept of historical inevitability to ac-
complish its ends. The way to fight it is to study it, 
understand it, and discover what can be done about 
it. This cannot be achieved by dawdling at the spring 
of knowledge; it can only be accomplished by dipping 
deeply into thoughtful, reliable, and authoritative 
sources of information. 

"The job of curtailing and containing communism 
is one for legally constituted authorities with the stead-
fast co-operation of every loyal citizen. This is neither 
the time for inaction nor vigilante action. We must 
unite as a people, we must understand our basic 
American heritage under law, and we must face the 
communist menace with deliberation, quiet courage, 
and knowledge. These are the qualities which com-
munism shrinks from—these are the qualities against 
which communism can never succeed." 

t 4 6 ] 



Part Three 
Our World-wide Struggle Against 

Communism 
T h e Strong Are Free 

It is evident from the analysis given above that the 
basic threat of communism is external, not internal. We 
have much to fear from the armed might of the Soviet 
Union and its satellites. Communist subversion, in all its 
serious forms, is a real danger in Asia, Africa, and Latin 
America. The danger from Communist subversion in the 
United States itself is small, compared with the external 
threat. This does not mean that the Communist Party 
here has lost its skill and dedication. The entire difference 
springs from changed climate of opinion. Since 1950, 
public opinion here has been thoroughly unfavorable for 
Communist schemes. Unfortunately, in many other areas 
of the world, Communist agitators find more suitable 
conditions for their work. 

Against the military threat of the Soviet empire, we 
must remain militarily strong. First of all, this means that 
our missiles, our nuclear weapons, and our conventional 
army, navy, and air force must be adequate for our needs. 
In addition to our own strength, we need the bases and 
the armed assistance of our allies throughout the world. 
We must have the diplomatic skill to keep our alliances in 
good working order. And we must have the patience and 
maturity to accept and live with the frustrations and fail-
ures that necessarily accompany a complex set of alliances. 

Even though the United States is the strongest nation 
in the free world, it does not follow that we can always 

[ 4 7 ] 



have our own way in NATO, SEATO, CENTO, and OAS. 
It would be arrogant on our part to assume that we are 
always right. Even when our intentions are good, others 
may quarrel with our means for carrying them out. Dis-
cusions and negotiations with allies take time and may pre-
vent decisive action. But without our allies, we would be 
isolated in a world that was either neutralist or Communist. 

If an isolationist policy on our part were to force West-
ern Europe and Japan first into neutralism and then more 
and more into the Communist orbit, we could be defeated 
by economic attrition without a shot being fired. While 
we are strong in terms of natural resources, we are not 
self-sufficient. We must import many raw materials that 
are vital both to our economic health and our military 
strength. Going it alone would force us into an inevitable 
choice: nuclear war with the Soviet Union, this time with-
out allies or foreign bases, or surrender as a result of 
starvation of essential industries for indispensable raw 
materials. 

Given the need for keeping and strengthening our alli-
ances, Americans must be prepared to pay the necessary 
price in terms of certain limitations on our freedom of 
action. This does not mean that we must always follow 
the pace of the most timid and the most uncertain. There 
may be times when forthright and independent action may 
be welcomed privately, while it is being deplored publicly. 
Perhaps the United States has tried too hard to be liked, 
and not hard enough to be respected. We can and should 
debate our foreign policy. It is our democratic right to 
disagree with our elected and appointed officials. The 
more informed and articulate our views, the more we help 
to clarify policy. 

[ 4 8 ] 



But differences should be expressed within the frame-
work of democratic ideals. This means that we argue on 
the basis of facts, and not indulge in irresponsible name 
calling. Simple morality compels us to assume the loyalty 

I and patriotism of our officials, unless there is clear and 
I compelling evidence to the contrary. Differences of opinion 
I must be discussed as such, and not in the context of 
I charges of treason. Even blunders and tragic mistakes in 
I our policies can be made honestly. Those who dismiss, 
I without proof, whole areas of our government as Com-

munist-controlled are not only spreading baseless calum-
nies, but they are also abdicating their duties as citizens. 
The necessary and much more difficult task of rational 
debate is bypassed in a torrent of angry charges. 

It is not "softness" to try to avoid thermonuclear war. 
Pope John XXIII strongly urged, in his Christmas message 
of 1961, that the nations of the world avoid the use of 
force: 

"We appeal to the rulers of nations, who today 
hold in their hands the fate of mankind. You also are 
men, fragile and mortal. Upon you are the anxious 
eyes of your fellow men, who are first your brothers 
before they are your subjects. With the authority 
which We have received from Jesus Christ, We say: 
Shun all thought of force; think of the tragedy of 
initiating a chain reaction of acts, decisions and re-
sentments that could erupt into rash and irreparable 
deeds. You have received great powers not to destroy 
but to build, not to divide but to unite, not to cause 
tears to be shed but to provide employment and secu-
rity." 

The impatient citizen who wants to "do something" 
against communism, and do it quickly and decisively, must 

t 4 9 ] 



learn to comprehend the modern world more accurately. 
The truth of the matter is that there is very little that the 
average citizen can do about communism, if his only con-
cern is to root out traitors in our midst. It is a pathetic 
misdirection of energy when citizens study communism 
only in terms of internal subversion. Many of them may 
be in areas several hundred miles removed from the near-
est Communist Party member. The spotting and exposure 
of Communist individuals is a work for experts, not for 
amateurs. These comments, however, are not meant in any 
way to discourage sound and careful study of the Commu-
nist movement. In fact, it would be well if our colleges 
and universities were- to increase such sound study, and 
thus discourage inaccurate and extremist views. 

Later we will note the proper place in our life for a 
study of internal subversion. But, for the moment, we 
must state that the overwhelming portion of our national 
struggle against communism must be carried on outside 
our borders. The prime agency in this struggle is our na-
tional government. Accordingly, the average citizen can 
participate in this activity directly only to the point that 
he can help strengthen our military might, clarify our for-
eign policy, or participate in some program outside our 
borders. There are other, and highly important, ways in 
which all of us can help indirectly. These points will be 
considered shortly. 

Foreign Aid 
One of the more controversial programs in our national 

struggle against communism is our world-wide effort at for 
eign aid. In the past, much of this has been militaiy aid, 
given primarily to nations in Europe and Asia to help them 

I s o ] 



in the common defense against Communist aggression. A 
lesser amount has been economic aid to developing na-
tions, often supplied on the grounds that we will thus win 
friends and potential allies in the Cold War. The most 
successful of these plans was the Marshall Plan, which 
helped Europe rebuild after World War II. A small num-
ber of other projects have been plagued by inefficiency, 
waste, and corruption. 

Few elements of American foreign policy have been 
more debated than its foreign-aid program. Such debate 
can be healthy, provided it is rational and not merely an 
emotional reaction to individual instances of failure or 
abuse. Some principles for discussion are suggested in the 
paragraphs to follow. 

In principle, few Americans will quarrel with the idea 
of military aid to nations that are ready and willing to de-
fend themselves against communism. In most instances, 
the alternative to such aid would be to force us to make a 
choice between letting the Communists pick off border 
nations, one by one, or sending American troops to their 
defense. The United States might also serve notice that, 
in the event of such attacks, it would attack the nation 
causing the trouble. But the Communist world can bypass 
this threat by avoiding open intervention and using sub-
version and guerrilla warfare. 

If we accept the principle that such aid is useful, then 
debate within our country could center upon the wisdom of 
individual commitments or the wisdom and imagination we 
used in giving aid. But failures in any given case can and 
must be expected. To indict a necessary program because 
it failed in some areas is not sound policy. 

We can debate the wisdom of giving aid to specific 
[ 5 1 ] 



nations. When Yugoslavia broke with Stalin in 1948, there 
seemed to be some value in helping preserve its independ-
ence. These premises can and should be re-examined I 
regularly in terms of the interests of the free world. The 
same policy should apply to aid to Poland, which seemed 
in 1955 to be gaining some measure of independence from 
the Soviet Union. What may have been a reasonable gam-
ble at one time may not longer appear wise some years 
later. 

As for assistance to developing nations, we might well 
heed the words of Pope John XXIII. In the Encyclical 
"Christianity and Social Progress" (Mater et Magistra), 
the Pope made two points clear; wealthier nations have a 
moral obligation to help those in the process of develop-
ment; and this help must not take the form of a new 
colonialism. In other words, we should have moral as well 
as political reasons for such help. It should not be merely 
a bribe to win these peoples to our side in the Cold War. 

What the Holy Father proposed on moral grounds can 
readily be defended in terms of sound American foreign 
policy. People in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, who 
patiently endured poverty and privation in the past, are no 
longer content to remain in misery. They are eager to 
have their share of the good life enjoyed by other peoples 
in Europe and North America. The Communist world is 
willing to train their leaders and to help develop their 
economies along Communist patterns. We have our chance 
to assist and guide them in patterns that harmonize with 
freedom and respect for human dignity. 

We would be foolish if we were to expect that this task 
will be simple and easy. Mistakes will be made on both 
sides. We will often need to fight against suspicion and 

[ 5 2 ] 



distrust based on former colonialist regimes. It will take 
skill to find a suitable pattern of help. We now realize 
that loans are better than grants in most instances. We 
have learned much in the way of technical assistance. We 
are experimenting with our Peace Corps. We have not 
ironed out all our difficulties in regard to giving scholar-
ships to promising students from these areas. The whole 
task is complex and difficult. But here is one of the prime 
battle areas in the fight against Communist subversion. If 
we lose this struggle, hundreds of millions of people, and 
valuable sources of raw materials for world trade, could 
be swept into the Communist empire. 

Psychological Warfare 
Undoubtedly one of the most difficult areas in the 

struggle against communism is the war for men's minds. 
On the surface, one would expect otherwise. We stand 
for freedom, they stand for tyranny. We seek peace, they 
preach war. Our economic system is successful, their fail-
ures have often been on a grand scale. Religion finds a 
hospitable home on our shores, they are militantly atheist. 
Given these facts, it would seem a simple matter for us to 
argue that, in every essential point, our political, economic, 
and social system is superior to that of any Communist 
nation. 

But there is often a wide difference between facts, and 
how people see facts. In every country that is a battle-
ground in the ideological war, Communists are busy dis-
torting the picture in two ways. They blacken our record; 
they whitewash their own. For example, they claim that 
freedom is the lot only of the privileged few in our coun-

[ 5 3 ] 



try. They cite the unemployed, the Negroes deprived of 
their right to vote or other basic rights, and the corrup-
tion in our political life as indicating that our freedom is 
for the few. Again, Mr. Khrushchev preaches disarma-
ment on impractical terms. When we reject his projects, 
we are portrayed as warmongers. 

The fact that we have poverty and hunger in our midst 
is used to discredit our economic system. Moreover, the 
Communist world asserts that it is growing at a rate far 
faster than our own. Our profession of religion is not 
always accepted elsewhere. We have full churches, but 
many of them are segregated. Our racial tensions have 
been worth billions of rubles to Moscow in terms of psy-
chological warfare against us. The blatant sensuality in 
many of our exports of motion pictures and TV films gives 
a portrait of American life that is most offensive to many 
peoples. They can hardly reconcile this picture with a 
nation that is moral and God-fearing. 

While the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe 
endeavor to portray our life more accurately, we spend 
proportionately far less than does the Communist world 
for propaganda. They have native Communist parties to 
assist in their work. We have been sparing in giving schol-
arships for potential leaders of Asia, Africa, and Latin 
America, who might study in the free world and learn its 
values. When foreign students come here, they often are 
left alone and become lonely and embittered. If they are 
from a colored race, they may meet racial discrimination 
and return home convinced that our idealism is but empty 
words. Several African leaders who are currently anti-
American developed these feelings while studying here. 

[ 5 4 ] 



Catholic missionaries in Africa have been pleading 
with their fellow Catholics here to do their share to help 
train the leaders of the world's most rapidly changing 
Continent. Many schools and universities have offered tui-
tion scholarships, but most of the students need full schol-
arships and opportunities to work during vacations. They 
want to be welcomed into our homes and see our life 
first-hand. Often they seek an opportunity to explain to 
Americans their customs, ideals, and aspirations. Under 
present circumstances, many have become embittered and 
some have given up the Faith. 

Those who want to do something here at home to fight 
communism could help raise funds for scholarships for 
students in mission schools in Africa or poor students from 
Latin America or Asia. They might co-operate with a 
local school or university in offering social and job oppor-
tunities for such students. The Soviets have a university 
that will give students from developing nations full schol-
arships. They are not laggard in training the leaders of 
tomorrow in these emerging areas of the world. 

Vigorous action to restore the moral tone of American 
life can also help a great deal in this struggle for men's 
minds. The quality of American films is determined by the 
box office at the theater and the knobs on the television 
set. Letters to sponsoring firms can inform them of our 
opinion of the product that sells their products. 

Activities of this nature may be slow in producing fruit, 
but they are real and vital programs for fighting commu-
nism. They will show that our culture is not immoral and 
decadent, and that we can offer example that other nations 
will be proud to follow. 

[ 5 5 ] 



Economic Strength 
Since the military and foreign-aid programs of the 

United States necessarily impose a very heavy financial 
burden on the American people, it is necessary that we 
should have a strong economic base for freedom. As a 
matter of principle, few persons would dispute this need. 
In practice, there are wide differences on the methods for 
achieving industrial strength. Liberals and conservatives, 
Democrats and Republicans, each have their own formula 
for a strong America. 

Rational debate on these differences of view can be 
healthy, especially when there is a direct discussion of 
these various positions. On the other hand, national unity 
suffers when we draw off in warring camps, hurling charges 
against one another, with little real discussion of our dif-
ferences. Even worse is the accusation of disloyalty when 
this is based merely on differing social and economic posi-
tions. If we are sure of our position, whether this be liberal 
or conservative, or some in-between position, we ought to 
be able to present our views courteously to those who dis-
agree with us. Often we may be able to find areas of 
agreement and to narrow points of controversy. 

Community forums that present differing opinions can 
thus be a great help to an informed citizenry. It is often 
helpful to have representatives of these diverse positions 
on the platform at the same time, so that each side can 
direct questions at the other. Meetings that try to "con-
vert the converted" are less useful, since they often involve 
indoctrination rather than discussion. 

The fact that so many important economic decisions 
are made at a national level does not mean that fruitful 
local discussion cannot be held. If, for example, each 

[ 5 6 ] 



community made a sincere effort to lessen labor-manage-
ment tensions and to bring about a spirit of partnership in 
our factories and offices, the ultimate effect of such meas-
ures would soon be noted at national levels. 

Even matters that can only be decided by Congress 
may be made more clear by local study and discussion. 
For example, the great national debate on foreign trade 
and our position in relation to the European Common 
Market must be ultimately resolved in the halls of Con-
gress. But an informed public opinion could help our legis-
lators. At the least, we could try to see the problem in 
terms of long-range national interest, and not merely from 
the perspective of particular firms that will be affected by a 
change in our levels of imports and exports. 

Most Americans see the necessity for making our eco-
nomic system stronger and more vigorous. If it grows 
rapidly, we shall not only be better able to bear the neces-
sary burdens of the Cold War, but we will also be spared 
the internal tensions that stem from prolonged and heavy 
unemployment. Surely, then, it is sensible to seek agree-
ment on means to secure these ends, as well as agreement 
on the objectives themselves. 

Moral Strength 
In the struggle against world communism, one of our 

greatest assets is the unity of a free people, dedicated to 
the great ideals of our Founding Fathers. Anything that 
weakens and corrupts us impairs our position as a leader 
in the free world. The Catholic Bishops of the United 
States devoted their 1961 statement to the problem of our 
moral weakness. 

[ 5 7 ] 



Each community can be vigilant in regard to local 
manifestations of corruption and decadence. We might 
start first on the political level. Is our local government 
honest and representative? If there is corruption, what is 
behind it and what can be done about it? Are we doing 
our duties as citizens? Do we participate in civic corrup-
tion by offering bribes or seeking illegal favors? Do we 
make public office attractive to citizens of high ideals? 
The cynical view that politics is an ugly business is only a 
confession of our failure to make democracy work. 

The Bishops mentioned corruption in the world of 
business and labor. Both of these conditions have made 
headlines in recent years. There have been complaints 
that integrity is no longer valued, that people seek to 
project an "image" rather than seek to go ahead on their 
merits, and that the "organization man" surrenders his 
moral principles to the body that employs him. To the 
extent that these charges are true, and unfortunately they 
can often be substantially documented, we have a real 
challenge before us. Internal corruption can weaken a 
nation against a foreign aggressor. Subversion of our 
moral ideals is more dangerous to the United States than 
the relatively ineffective current subversion by the Com-
munist Party here. 

The decline in family morality shows particularly in 
the rise of divorce and delinquency. But these unfortunate 
trends are symptoms of a deeper disease: the cult of pleas-
ure, the unwillingness to take responsibility, and an all-
pervasive selfishness. When children receive little love and 
less discipline in the home, and when they are bribed with 
television, movie money, and even cars to keep them from 
intruding on the parents' time, it is not surprising that they 

[ 5 8 ] 



become unhappy and delinquent. When they are pushed 
into marriage before they are mature enough to realize its 
obligations, and when marriage itself is portrayed falsely 
in print and on motion-picture and television screens, we 
can only expect a rise in family instability. 

We have too often failed to face the real and pressing 
problem of race relations in a mature and responsible man-
ner. What should be primarily a matter of moral respon-
sibility and Christian love of neighbor has been permitted 
to degenerate into legal struggles and battles of pressure 
groups. Catholics particularly should ask if they have read 
and are trying to implement the 1958 statement of our 
bishops on "Discrimination and the Christian Conscience." 
If the energy devoted to study of internal subversion were 
poured into interracial councils or human-relations com-
mittees, the racial problem could be solved to a large de-
gree before the end of this decade. 

Had the Communists deliberately set out to weaken 
America internally, they might well have concentrated on 
promoting the evils just outlined. They would have sought 
to make us corrupt, soft, luxury-loving, lazy, suspicious 
of one another, bigoted, and self-seeking. Instead we have 
done all this for them, without the expenditure of a single 
cent on their part. 

For the average citizen who asks: What can I do to 
fight communism? the answer might well be: Devote all 
your strength and energy, in concert with your fellow 
Americans, to building national unity and moral strength. 
Practice your religion, and make it a vital force in your 
community. Even in dealing with moral evils, concentrate 
less on denunciation and more on giving leadership and 
example. Be a man of integrity in your work. Make your 

[ 5 9 ] 



family outstanding by the quality of parental love and 
discipline you show. Unite with your neighbors for a high 
moral standard in your community. Work for racial jus-
tice and harmony. Do your part to make this a better and 
stronger nation, and we shall not fear what the Commu-
nists plot and scheme against us. 

Above all, we must have a broader vision of world 
needs. In the words of the American bishops, in their 
November, 1961, Statement on "Unchanging Duty in a 
Changing World": 

"Our moral responsibility, however, transcends 
the limited circle of our individual lives and the con-
fining borders of our country. Our interests and our 
obligations are world-wide—indeed our horizons are 
no longer confined to this earth, they have been pro-
jected into the uncharted seas of space. . . . The 
emerging peoples have needs that go deeper than the 
requirements for more material help. They want more 
positive evidence of our understanding. They seek 
a recognition of their dignity, both individual and 
national. They crave the knowledge and technical 
skill which will enable them to help themselves. They 
need the vision which comes from faith, and the en-
couragement that comes from hope. They must have 
spiritual ideals and spiritual leadership. . . . Mean-
while, we must be willing to open our hearts and our 
homes to those who come to our shores; to make 
room for them in our schools and universities; even 
to send our own sons to their lands to assist them. 
All these things we must do, not as mere counter-
moves against communism, but for their essential 
Tightness, as expressions of our highest principles: 
love of God and love of neighbor." 

[ 6 0 ] 



Internal Subversion 
The treatment thus far has warned against a dispropor-

tionate concern about the danger of internal subversion, 
to the neglect of the far greater danger of world commu-
nism. It is appropriate now to examine what we can do to 
become and remain alert to any dangers posed by the 
Communist Party, U.S.A., together with its fellow travelers 
and dupes. 

In any combat, one of the first rules is to know your 
enemy. There are excellent books, listed later, that give 
information on the techniques of subversion and past oper-
ations of the Communist Party here. These techniques 
indicate how the Party will try to operate in the future, 
to the extent that its members, funds, and the climate of 
opinion permit. 

For accurate information on current Communist ac-
tivities, the safest source is found in the reports and hear-
ings of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities. They have 
the staff resources and the legal power to compel testi-
mony, facilities not available to private organizations. 
The Federal Bureau of Investigation, of course, is well 
informed on Communist operations, but this information 
is not available to the public. 

Apart from specific current details, it is important to 
know the "Party Line," the stands of the Communist Party 
on important public issues. The fact that an individual 

[ or an organization follows this "Line," on one or two 
points does not of necessity indicate subversion. But total 
adoption of the Party Line by any source should call for 
extreme caution in dealing with this source. 

[ 6 1 ] 



J. Edgar Hoover cautions against inaccurate use of 
the Party Line. 

"Knowing what communism is and how it oper-
ates will also help us to avoid the danger of confusing 
communism with legitimate dissent on controversial 
issues. Communism feeds on social ferment. On both 
the local and national levels, the Communist Party, 
U. S. A., is continually exploiting social, economic, and 
political grievances for its own tactical purposes. 
For this reason, the 'Party Line' will frequently coin-
cide with the views of many non-communists on spe-
cific issues. We must not, therefore, indiscriminately 
label as communists those whose opinions on a par-
ticular question may, on occasion, parallel the official 
Party position. We must also guard against the tend-
ency to characterize as communists those who merely 
disagree with us or who advocate unorthodox or un-
popular beliefs." ("Communist Illusion and Demo-
cratic Reality," December, 1959, p. 5, Department of 
Justice, Washington 25, D. C.) 

The main aspects of the Party Line can be seen in the 
following summary. 

The Communist Party Favors: 

U. S. recognition of Red China and the U.N. seating of 
Red China in place of Nationalist China 
The stopping of U.S. nuclear tests and the banning of all 
weapons, including atomic, without adequate inspection 
Recognition of the East German government as a legal 
government 
The dropping of all trade restrictions with Communist 
nations 

[ 6 2 ] 



Surrender of U.S. overseas bases 
A three-headed control of the U.N., with Communist, neu-
tral, and non-Communist nations having equal powers, 
including the veto of all decisions 
Abolition of the House Committee on Un-American Ac-
tivities and the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee 
Repeal of all legal restrictions on the Communist Party, 
and the freeing of all prisoners jailed under these laws 
No intervention in Cuban affairs and the giving of a free 
hand to the Cuban government 

The Communist Party Opposes: 
Fallout shelters, since they lessen opposition to possible 
nuclear war 
American alliances, such as NATO, SEATO, CENTO, 
and OAS 
The Nationalist Government of China 
Colonialism in Asia and Africa 
The Peace Corps 
American foreign-aid programs as "colonialist" 
American military build-up 
Peaceful and nonviolent solutions of our racial problem 
The Federal Bureau of Investigation and private anti-
Communist groups 
The Central Intelligence Agency 

The present concentration of the Communist Party is 
on civil rights and peace. They use the civil-rights theme 
against any restrictions or regulations that hamper their 
activities. These include laws against subversion, con-

[ 6 3 ] 



gressional investigations, and restriction of their rights to 
speak. The peace theme takes advantage of reactions to 
nuclear testing, extreme pacifism (Better Red than Dead), 
and the real fear of a war that would destroy civilization. 

The groups in the United States that should be most 
alert against attempted Communist infiltration are youth 
groups, organizations for racial justice, those who cam-
paign for peace, and defenders of civil liberties. In the 
youth field, for example, Communist agitators played a 
large part in stirring up trouble at the House Committee 
Hearings in San Francisco in May, 1960. Communists are 
seeking to infiltrate student organizations and to obtain 
opportunities to address student groups in colleges and uni-
versities. Likewise, Communists are trying to penetrate 
organizations that are fighting for Negro rights. They 
attempt to capitalize upon fear of war and to persuade 
Americans that it is only our militarism that prevents 
peaceful coexistence. The civil-rights theme will be used 
more intensively than ever in the effort to prevent effective 
prosecution under the Internal Security Act of 1950. 

As the public activities of the Communist Party, U.S.A. 
become more and more circumscribed, the Party will try 
increasingly to use non-Communists for Party purposes. 
A prominent business man, who is not a Communist, may 
push Communist causes. Or an internationally known 
scientist may unwisely emphasize the dangers of fallout 
from atomic testing, overlooking the far greater danger 
of insulficient preparedness. Some persons may unwit-
tingly follow Communist inspiration in their struggles for 
civil rights. We can and should be vigilant in regard to 
such matters, but also be sure of our facts before we allege 
even unconscious adherence to the Communist line. 
t 6 4 ] 



The fact that Communist efforts are directed toward 
certain goals does not mean that we must be automatically 
suspicious of those who work in these fields. It is good 
that our young people are interested in social and political 
problems. The more intelligent their interest, the less dan-
ger that any Communist group will mislead them. Like-
wise effective racial reform is not only a matter of Chris-
tian justice and charity, but it also removes a prime source 
of Communist propaganda throughout the world. Issues 
connected with nuclear warfare and peace must be debated 
to create an informed public opinion. Our civil rights and 
liberties must be protected. 

Earlier we suggested that our schools, colleges, and 
universities promote a sound and factual study of com-
munism. The Communist bloc is the greatest threat to 
world peace and freedom. Certainly the academic world 
is not doing its full duty if it neglects such a vital sphere 
of contemporary history. If scientific and accurate infor-
mation is not available, then the field will be left to the 
uninformed and the emotionally unstable. 

We can and should be alert against Communist propa-
ganda and infiltration. But vigilance should not deteriorate 
into hysteria or unreasoned fear. We must be most care-
ful in labeling individuals or groups as subversive or in-
filtrated. Even when a reputable group has been infiltrated 
in the past, we must give it the opportunity to prove itself 
once it has cast out its Communist fringe. For example, 

I the Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy was shown evi-
dences of Communist infiltration. It acted promptly to 
clear its name. There are other groups in the United 
States that have quietly changed policies and personnel in 
the effort to present an objective picture of world events. 

t 6 5 ] 



They should not be stigmatized today for mistakes made 
over a decade ago and subsequently corrected. In all 
such cases, the important question to raise when subver-
sion is alleged is: Is the information based on current facts, 
or is it merely a digging up of old positions subsequently 
disavowed? 

In the present climate of opinion, there is little danger 
that the Communist Party will achieve its goal of influenc-
ing American public thinking toward Soviet goals. It will 
not be able to shape the policy of our government. So long 
as we are alert and informed in carrying out our duties as 
citizens, our nation is safe from internal subversion. 

Communism and Religion 
All who believe in God should reject atheistic commu-

nism. Communism is totally opposed to all religion, even 
though Communist leaders may compromise with a Church 
for tactical reasons. This opposition was expressed elo-
quently and prophetically by Pope Pius XI, in his En-
cyclical "On Atheistic Communism," issued in 1937. 
Time has not dimmed the value of this document. It can 
and should be read today, not only for the enduring prin-
ciples it enunciates, but also for its keen insight into all 
phases of communism. 

But the fact that our struggle against communism is 
also a struggle for God's cause should not lead us to false 
conclusions about our motives. Nations may oppose com-
munism for political and economic reasons. Individuals 
may be concerned about their personal security or about 
the economic system that has made them prosperous. Many 
may indeed be strongly anti-Communist, but not in any 
real sense because communism is atheistic. 

[ 6 6 ] 



If our culture, for example, becomes increasingly mate-
I rialistic, secularistic, and sensual, we may still have sound 

personal and political reasons for opposing communism. 
I But this struggle is for our cause, not necessarily God's 

cause. These points are noted because many religious souls 
may wonder why God permits the monstrous evil of com-
munism to survive. The problem of evil is far too difficult 
to be discussed in this short space. But we can note that 
the non-Communist world also has its share of sin. Long 
years of colonial exploitation, racial injustice, and general 
indifference to the poverty and misery of millions help feed 
the fires of communism today. These evils are exploited 
by communism, but they were not created by it. 

Many Catholics who are highly agitated by the Com-
munist problem seem much less anxious to implement 
papal programs for peace, or the Bishops' statement on 
Discrimination and the Christian Conscience, or the 
teaching of "Christianity and Social Progress" (Mater 
et Magistra). Yet these documents call for moral reforms 
that will truly enable us to exercise real world leadership 
and to win the war for men's minds. 

Even our prayers for peace and freedom from com-
munism may not always be in accord with the teachings of 
the Gospel and the Church. Our Lord often conjoined the 
idea of prayer and penance. The message of Fatima was 
one of penance. Pope Pius XI stated: "The evil which 

; today torments humanity can be conquered only by a 
world-wide holy crusade of prayer and penance" (On Athe-
istic Communism, No. 59). It is helpful to read the Old 
Testament lessons in the daily Masses of the Lenten sea-
son. In these readings, God makes clear that He rejects 
our prayers and offerings, if these are mere external forms. 

[ 6 7 ] 



First we must practice justice and charity toward our 
neighbor, and then our prayers will be heard. Prayer must 
be the expression of sacrificial and penitent love, expressing 
the reverence and contrition in our hearts. 

In this connection, it is particularly important to look 
into our hearts to see if our rejection of communism has 
filled our hearts with hatred. We can and should despise 
the evil that is communism and the evil deeds it inspires. 
The hatred and cruelty spawned by this system should fill 
us with revulsion. Because Communists deny God, it is 
not surprising that they should at the same time deny the 
basic rights of their fellow men. They respect only power, 
and consider kindness and forgiveness a sign of weakness. 

To preserve our freedom and our Faith, we must resist 
to the death the attempt of Communists to conquer the 
world. Since they are deceitful, we must be vigilant. Yet, 
at the same time, we must be aware of the danger involved 
in exclusive preoccupation with evil. Unless we are care-
ful, our hearts can be filled with hatred. We can use the 
excuse that we are "fighting fire with fire," and adopt 
Communist methods in our struggle against them. Karl 
Stern, in The Third Revolution (Harcourt Brace & World, 
Inc.) expresses well the harm that can come to our souls 
if they are pervaded with hatred and distrust: 

"Today, while we are facing the evil of commu-
nism, vigilance is more necessary than at any other 
time. Everybody agrees about that. But vigilance 
has a tendency to open, in a subtle and imperceptible 
way, frontiers in the human soul which had better be 
forever closed. Vigilance in the face of evil may give 
rise to preoccupation with evil. And, as the Fathers 
of the Church taught, if we are unduly preoccupied 

[ 6 8 ] 



by evil, we become evil. There is danger in giving 
more thought to the things we are against than the 
things we are for. It is easier to have distrust than to 
have faith. The story of the early Church shows 
clearly that it is the positive in faith which conquers 
the world." 

"Today, when Communists and secret Commu-
nist machinations present an objective danger, we 
face a great pitfall. It is not a question of paranoia 
in the clinical sense. It is an imponderable something 
which happens to a Community of Faith. We have 
our nose to the ground to ferret out the scent of the 
adversary; we have our ears to the ground to hear 
the distant rumbling; before we know it, something 
decisive has happened to us. We are no longer up-
right. Our gaze is no longer fixed on God and Man 
in charity." 

Difficult as the task may be, we are called to follow the 
example of our Savior, who said on the Cross: "Father, 
forgive them, they know not what they do." He told us to 
forgive our enemies and to pray for our persecutors. 
Undoubtedly this is one of the hardest counsel to be 
found in the Gospels. But it is a sure test of the quality 
of our struggle against communism. If our efforts against 
this evil are poisoning us with hatred and widespread dis-
trust, if we believe every charge against individuals and 
organizations without giving the accused the right to be 
heard in self-defense, and if our only concern is to tear 
down and not to build up, then we have suffered spir-
itually. Our attitudes, methods, and activities tend to re-
semble those of our opponents. In fighting for the faith, 
we have lost charity. In defending our freedoms, we have 
ceased to be free men. 

t 6 9 ] 



FACTUAL MATERIAL ABOUT T H E COMMUNIST 
PARTY, U.S.A. 

Approximate number of Party members in 1962: 10,000. 
Areas of Party concentration: New York, Los Angeles, 
Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit. 
Party publications of national or regional circulation: The 
Worker, Peoples World, Political Affairs, Mainstream, New 
Horizons for Youth. 

SOURCES O F INFORMATION ABOUT 
COMMUNISM 

Reports, House Committee on Un-American Activities 
Reports, Senate Internal Security Subcommittee 
Meetings and publications of the Institute for American 
Strategy, 140 South Dearborn St., Chicago 3, Illinois 
Publications, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and 
Peace, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. This is 
primarily a unique research library on communism and 
related topics, but it is sponsoring some basic publications 
on Communist revolutionary activities. 
Freedoms Facts Against Communism, a monthly bulletin 
of the All-American Conference to Combat Communism, 
917 15th Street, N.W., Washington 5, D. C. (Subscrip-
tion: $3.00 a year) 
The New Leader, biweekly liberal publication, often carry-
ing excellent articles on communism. Seven East 15th 
Street, New York 3, N. Y. (Subscription: $6.00 a year) 

[ 7 0 ] 



Reading Lists 
Some Basic Titles 
Chambre, Henri, Christianity and Communism (New York: Haw-
thorn Books, 1960). A valuable Catholic statement, from a lead-
ing French authority on communism; in the Twentieth Century 
Encyclopedia of Catholicism, section on "The Church in the Mod-
ern World." 
Colegrove, Kenneth, Democracy Versus Communism (Van Nos-
trand, 1957). Textbook written especially for the high school 
student. It portrays differences in terms of human experiences and 
forcefully outlines the unique advantages of democracy. 
D'Arcy, Martin C., Communism and Christianity (New York: 
Devin-Adair Co., 1957). Sensible treatment by a well-known 
Catholic theologian. 
Djilas, M., The New Class (New York: Praeger, 1957). Masterful 
dissection of communism, showing that its failures are inherent in 
the system. 
Gaiter, A., The Red Book of the Persecuted Church (West-
minster, Md.: Newman, 1957). A complete study, country by 
country, of the Communist war on religion. Essential documenta-
tion for any extended discussion of this persecution. 
Hoover, J. Edgar, Masters of Deceit (New York: Holt and Com-
pany, 1958). This book by the FBI Director is a valuable primer 
on communism, what goes on underground, how discipline is en-
forced, and why this is no time for complacency. 
Hunt, R. N. Carew, The Theory and Practice of Communism 
(New York: Macmillan, 1957). Deals with the basis of Com-
munist theory; the rise of the European labor movement in the 
nineteenth century, and relates Marxist principles to the changing 
conditions of the twentieth century. 
Kulski, W. W., The Soviet Regime (Syracuse: Syracuse University 
Press, 1959). A standard reference work on the USSR and on 
communism in practice. 
Overstreet, Harry and Bonaro, What We Must Know About Com-
munism (New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 1958). A study 
of the character of the Communist menace, what is at stake, and 
what needs to be done. 

[ 7 1 ] 



Communist Subversion 
Bouscaren, A. F., A Guide to Anti-Communist Action (Chicago: 
Regnery, 1958). Suggested techniques for handling both external 
and internal Communist threats. Seven chapters were written by 
well-known experts other than the author. 
Budenz, Louis, The Techniques of Communism (Chicago: Reg-
nery, 1954). A former American Communist analyzes Communist 
methods of subverting a nation. Budenz examines, among other 
things, Communist training of infiltrators, the role of the press, 
infiltrating education and government agencies, and the use of 
minority groups. 
Burnham, J., The Web of Subversion (New York: John Day, 
1954). The story of Communist penetration into our government, 
based on Senate hearings. 
Selznick, P., The Organizational Weapon (New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1952). Emphasizes seizure of power at all levels as a basic 
tactic of communism. An unusually valuable work. 

Communism in the United States 
Glaser, Nathan, The Social Basis of American Communism (New 
York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961). What type of recruits 
does the Communist Party find in the United States? What is its 
influence among minority groups? These and related questions 
are answered carefully by a well known sociologist. 
Iversen, Robert, The Communists and the Schools (New York: 
Harcourt, Brace & World, 1959). 
Rossiter, Clinton L., Marxism: The View from America (New 
York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1960). A critical study of Marx-
ist teachings about man, society, government, and history from the 
vantage point of American democracy. The work of an able politi-
cal scientist. 
Roy, Ralph Lord, Communism and the Churches (New York: 
Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1960). A critical study of the charges 
and countercharges in connection with alleged Communist infil-
tration of the Churches. 
Shannon, David A., The Decline of American Communism; A His-
tory of the Communist Party of the United States Since 1945 (New 
York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1959). 

[ 7 2 ] 



The Soviet Union 
Bauer, Raymond, et al., How the Soviet System Works (Vintage 
Russian Library, 1960). An assessment of the social and psycho-
logical strengths and weaknesses of the Soviet system based on 
hundreds of interviews with refugees from the Soviet Union. 
Counts, G. S., The Challenge of Soviet Education (New York: 
McGraw-Hill, 1957). Critical survey of strength and weakness of 
Soviet education. 
Dallin, David J., The Changing World of Soviet Russia (New 
Haven: Yale University Press, 1956). A survey of Soviet history 
in three parts: Social Revolution in Russia; The Soviet System; 
and Foreign Policy. 
Schwartz, H., Russia's Soviet Economy (New York: Prentice-Hall, 
1954). An objective and scholarly analysis of industry, agriculture, 
and finance in the Soviet Union, supplemented by the historical 
background of the Russian economy. 

World Communism 
Alexander, R. J., Communism in Latin America (New Brunswick, 
N. J.: Rutgers University Press, 1957). Excellent study of trends 
of communism in the nations of Latin America. 
Brimmell, J. H., Communism in Southeast Asia; A Political Analy-
sis (New York: Oxford University Press, 1959). An able study 
for the Royal Institute of International Affairs. 
Che Guevara on Guerilla Warfare, (New York: Praeger, 1961). 
Methods used in the communization of Cuba. 
Hempstone, Smith, Africa, Angry Young Giant (New York: 
Praeger, 1961). Describes the leaders and policies in twenty-six 
countries. 
Mao Tse-tung on Guerilla Warfare, (New York, Praeger, 1961). 
This is considered one of the classic treatments on the subject so 
vital today. 
Seton-Watson, Hugh, Neither War Nor Peace; The Struggle for 
Power in the Postwar World (New York: Praeger, 1960). A 
broader look, by continents, at revolution, totalitarianism, imperi-
alism, in which communism plays an important role. 
Strausz-Hupe, Robert, et al, A Forward Strategy for America 
(New York: Harper, 1961). A prescriptive treatment of the 

[ 7 3 ] 



problems posed in Protracted Conflict. Addressed to the necessi-
ties which urge upon the United States a strategy beyond survival, 
and in the book the general concepts for such a strategy are set 
forth. 
Strausz-Hupe, Robert, et al. Protracted Conflict (New York: 
Harper, 1959). Analyzes Communist strategy, examines the prin-
ciples guiding Communist conflict management, and discusses the 
techniques and stratagems of the Cold War. 
Tanham, George K., Revolutionary Warfare (New York: Praeger, 
1961). Shows how Vietminh battled successfully against the 
French in Indochina. 
"The Technique of Soviet Propaganda," Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1960). 
One of the most popular and valuable of the studies of this sub-
committee. 
Tang, P. S. H., Communist China Today: Domestic and Foreign 
Policies (New York: Praeger, 1957-1958). Factual, unemotional 
analysis of Chinese Communist leadership, politics, propaganda, 
social policies, and governmental machinery. Volume II contains 
documents pertinent to this thesis. 

Biographical and Fiction 
Chambers, Whittaker, Witness (New York: Random House, 1952). 
This is the autobiography of the former American Communist 
who was instrumental in exposing Alger Hiss. 
Fast, H., The Naked God (New York: Praeger, 1957). World-
renowned writer explains why he left the Communist Party. 
Hicks, G., Where We Came Out (New York: Viking, 1954). 
Should be read in conjunction with Witness, since both books 
cover the same period, but with different emphasis and interpre-
tation. 
Orwell, G., Nineteeen Eighty-Four (New York: Harcourt, 1949). 
The impact of statism on human personality is discussed in novel 
form. 
Orwell, G., Animal Farm (New York: Harcourt, 1946). Satire 
describing the transformation of communism into an exploitive 
system, in terms of a fable of animal life. A highly superior 
treatment. 

[ 7 4 ] 



Study-Club Outline 

PART ONE 
The World Scene 

The Cold War: Today a third of the world's population lives 
under Communist rule. The Communist threat is unique in history. 
The danger it presents is universal, and its claims on men are 
total. With alternate threats and blandishments, it has succeeded 
in alerting the whole of the free world. 

Communist Theory: Communism is an economic and political 
system, based on the theories of Marx, that derives unity and im-
petus from a radically materialistic conception of life. Its prime 
enemy, at the economic level, is "capitalism" which—as the Com-
munists affirm—will ultimately crumble before the united action 
of the workers. Russia was the first country to adopt the Com-
munist creed and system. The theories of Marx, while dogmatically 
adhered to, are variously interpreted and applied. This flexibility 
has taught us to be on our guard. 

Communism in Russia: Russia developed its heavy industries 
from the start, thus ensuring a strong economic base, and making 
possible its military preparedness. Since the last war the Soviets 
have shown themselves to be masters of modern military and 
nuclear techniques. Economic achievement in Russia, however, 
do not in any way invalidate our deeper objections to the system. 

World Communism: The Communists adapt their tactics to the 
country to be subjected. Military warfare, diplomatic pressure, 
internal revolution or guerrilla tactics, economic and technical aid, 
are combined or employed separately. Particularly to be noted is 
their use of psychological warfare. With an uncanny intuition of 
men's susceptibilities, Communists everywhere seek to provoke the 
crisis for which they then supply their own false remedy. 

t 7 5 ] 



Subversion: Leading promoters of this invisible warfare are 
local Communist parties. These foment social and economic dis-
content internally, while Russia or China simultaneously offer rapid 
solutions patterned on their own systems. In countries which are 
more industrially advanced, attempts are made to influence over-all 
national policies. 

Economic Warfare: Notwithstanding the greater volume of aid 
granted to other countries by the West, the Communists have suc-
ceeded in utilizing grants and loans as instruments of political 
propaganda. Such tactics are naturally facilitated in countries where 
the economy is entirely in the hands if the state. 

The Soviet Bloc in Summary: There are different shades of 
opinion within the Communist world regarding policy and inter-
pretation of ideology. The greatest rift is between Russia and 
China, with Yugoslavia and Albania taking sides. The significance 
of these differences, however, should not be overestimated. 

Study Questions 

1. What is the "Cold War" and who are the chief protagonists 
in it? 

2. Why is the Communist threat a unique form of aggression? 
3. Why is it necessary to distinguish between Communist strat-

egy and tactics? 
4. What is the function of the Communist Party within Russia 

today? 
5. Would you promote mainly economic and military arguments 

in the struggle against communism? 
6. What different methods do the Communists employ in tak-

ing over a country? Give examples. 
7. What is "psychological warfare"? 
8. What is the local Communist Party's usual role in a coun-

try? 
9. Explain how the Communists use foreign trade as a political 

weapon. 
10. What main differences of policy exist within the Com-

munist world? 
[ 7 6 ] 



PART TWO 

Communism in the United States 
Communist Party U. S. A.: Founded in 1919, its period of 

"prosperity" was from 1935 to 1950, when it succeeded to some 
extent in infiltrating American society. Since 1950 it has rapidly 
declined, and is now fighting for its very existence. 

Front Organizations: Especially successful were the Communist 
"front" organizations that concealed Communist programs under 
apparently respectable aims. Participation in such "fronts" does 
not prove Communist sympathies or, even less, actual membership 
in the Communist Party. 

Marxism and Espionage: This is an important feature of inter-
national Communist activities. It is operated mostly through gov-
ernment agencies—embassies, consulates, U.N. delegations—and 
not through party members. It calls for constant vigilance on the 
part of all our security agencies. 

The Climate Changes: After World War II people became more 
aware of the true nature of communism. Events such as the Hiss 
case, the Soviet occupation of certain countries, and the invasion 
of Korea, helped destroy many illusions. 

The Situation Today: By 1962, in spite of recent Russian liberal-
izing moods, disillusionment with communism was deep and wide-
spread. The brutal stifling of the East German and Hungarian 
revolutions, the continuation of nuclear test explosions, and the 
construction of the Berlin wall, have all served to rally the Amer-
ican people in the defense of its liberties. In view of this and of 
the fact that the Communist Party in the United States has now 
shrunk almost to impotency, it is surprising to observe the present 
high degree of concern about internal subversion. 

Fighting Subversion: In violently agitating against domestic sub-
version today, we are fighting problems that were largely solved by 
1950. The result is a virulent form of disunity at home that is 
dangerously weakening the nation. 

Frustration and Fear: Many, alarmed by the advance of com-
munism, would like somehow to take the initiative. A sense of 
betrayal leads them to locate the danger where it does not exist 
Such feelings are exploited by the extreme-right groups. 

[ 7 7 ] 



Exploiters of Unrest: Since 1960 these groups seem to have 
exercised an increasing appeal. Their activities cause hysteria and 
confusion regarding the whole Communist issue. We should realize 
that the dangers they speak of are minimal compared to the grave 
threat of communism elsewhere in the world. 

Pleaders for Special Causes: Certain anti-Communists identify 
communism with whatever ideas they happen to dislike. Yet we 
must clearly distinguish, for instance, between the word "socialism" 
as used by the Communists, and the kind of social progress which 
would—as Pius XI pointed out—practically satisfy the demands 
of Christianity in the social field. 

More Special Pleading: We must not allow such distortions of 
the truth to divide us. The struggle for racial equality, for example, 
is not mainly promoted by the Communists; nor is Communist 
influence in any way significant among the Protestant Churches, 
the Jews, labor leaders or in the field of education. We must learn 
to "fight the real enemy on the real battleground with real weapons." 

Study Questions 

1. What was the impact of the Communist Party in the U. S. A. 
in the period 1935-50? 

2. What are the "front" organizations? 
3. How does the Soviet Union normally operate its espionage 

work? 
4. In what ways did the attitude of Americans to communism 

alter radically after the last war? 
5. Is the Communist Party strong in the U. S. A. today? 
6. How do you explain present concern about subversion in 

this country? 
7. How far is this concern justified? Is it in some respects "a 

dangerous and weakening form of hysteria"? 
8. What are the characteristics of the groups that have moved 

in to capitalize on this basic discontent? 
9. Is there any real difference between the welfare state, social-

ism and communism? 
10. Name some current distortions and false accusations regard-

ing communism in the U. S. A. today. 

[ 7 8 ] 



PART THREE 

Our World-wide Struggle Against Communism 
The Strong Are Free: We must, then, be militarily strong, main-

tain our alliances, and even learn to put up with frustration and 
failure. Certain limitations on our freedom of action as a nation 
will be necessary; we cannot succeed without the collaboration of 
other nations. We must be able to debate the great issues of 
national policy without indulging in mutual charges of treason. 

Foreign Aid: Our foreign-aid program has been under attack. 
Few would disagree with military aid as such. We must, however, 
study closely the wisdom of aid in particular circumstances, and 
regularly re-examine our policy. We would do well to read the 
section on aid to underdeveloped nations in the Encyclical Christian-
ity and Social Progress of Pope John XXIII. 

Psychological Warfare: Today the ideological war is operative in 
every nation. The Communists constantly present a distorted pic-
ture of our way of life, blackening our record and whitewashing 
their own. We spend much less than they do on propaganda, and 
often fail to make use of our opportunities. 

Economic Strength: We need to be economically strong in order 
to maintain our military and foreign-aid programs. In this re-
spect we should encourage local discussions on these topics, while 
safeguarding over-all national unity. 

Moral Strength: Our unity as a people and our dedication to 
an ideal are our greatest assets in this struggle. We should con-
centrate our energies on doing away with corruption in politics, 
business and labor, on raising family morality, and on putting an 
end to delinquency and racial inequalities. By being less selfish 
and pleasure-seeking, and by concentrating less on denunciation and 
more on example, the ordinary citizen can actively contribute to 
building moral unity and strength. Above all we must make re-
ligion a vital force in society, remembering that it is the love of 
God and neighbor that should motivate the pursuit of our obliga-
tions both at home and throughout the world. 

Internal Subversion: Insofar as it is real, the problem must be 
tackled. First of all we should know our enemy. Certain books 
and official documents can help. It is useful also to know the 
party line (see summary). At the same time we must remember 

t 7 9 ] 



that effective social reform is a matter of Christian justice and 
charity, and that important issues, such as nuclear war or civil 
rights, must be publicly discussed. 

Communism and Religion: Communism is intrinsically opposed 
to all religion. (See Pope Pius XI's On Atheistic Communism, 
1937.) In a sense it is God's cause that we are defending. But we 
should examine our motives in order to make sure that we are 
not really simply protecting our private interests, and that our chief 
objection to communism is the fact that it is atheistic. As Catholics 
we should strive to implement the social teaching of the popes and 
our bishops, while bearing in mind that the non-Communist world 
has its large share of sin too. Our prayers must be accompanied 
with justice and an operative charity toward our neighbor. The 
great danger is that we shall be too exclusively preoccupied with 
evil, and that our hearts will be gradually filled with hatred for 
certain persons or nations. It is only a positive faith that can 
conquer the world. We must pray for our enemies as our Lord 
did on the cross. Unless we are united in charity we shall not 
even succeed in preserving our freedoms. 

Study Questions 

1. Is the basic threat of communism mainly internal or ex-
ternal? 

2. What factors are involved in granting military or economic 
aid to other nations? What is the Pope's view on this? 

3. What particular weaknesses in our society does Communist 
psychological warfare thrive on? 

4. How can we promote the economic unity and strength so 
necessary for us at this moment? 

5. What can the average citizen do to increase our national 
moral strength? 

6. What should be the basic driving motive in our growing sense 
of responsibility for others, at home and abroad? 

7. Name some aspects of the present Communist Party Line in 
this country. 

8. Is communism essentially incompatible with religion? 
9. What should we do about the teaching of the Pope and our 

bishops on racial, moral and social questions? 
10. Should we love Communists? 

[ 8 0 ] 51 





» MAR SWT 
NO HOLDINGS IN IN[) - FOR HOLDINGS ENTER dh DEPRESS DISPLAY RECD SEND 

OCLCs 1 0 6 8 9 5 8 7 Ree s t a t * n E n t r d : 84050-4 U s e d : 8 7 0 2 1 0 
~ T y p e t a B i b l v l * m G o v t p u b ? Lang» e n g S o u r c e » d I l l u s * 

R e o r T Ene l v l : K Conf Dubs 0 C t r y : n y u D a t t p : s M / F / B : 00 
ätk I I n d x s 0 Mod r e c s F e s t s c h r s 0 C o n t : b 

1 D e s c t I n t l v l : D a t e s : 1 9 6 2 . 
" , 0 ] 0 

m 2 0 4 0 VXI c VXI 
3 0 92 3 3 5 . 43 b C 9 4 7 

F 4 0 9 0 " F ^ II " ~~ ~~ ' 
£ 5 0 49 INDIJ 

I 6 100 10 C r o n i n , J o h n F r a n c i s , d 1 9 0 8 - : ; . 
7 2 4 5 10 Communisms t h r e a t t o f r e e d o m . 

m 8 2 6 0 0 New Y o r k , b P a u l i s t P r e s s c [ 1 9 6 2 ] 
9 3 0 0 8 0 p . c 19 cm. 

[ :~T0 5 0 4 I n c l ü d e s b i b l i o g r a p h y . 
A 11 6 5 0 0 Communism. 

1 2 6 5 0 0 Communism z U n i t e d S t a t e s .