Cretin ( -JoUn ComMO rti S>VY\ • . - A D M ( p ( p l l THREAT TO FREEDOM JOHN F. CRONIN, S.S. WITH S T U D Y - C L U B OUTLINE " 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 WARFARE* S HnwLfrSrir/Jl^J ORGANIZATIONS DOING? • 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 IN " S P E C I A L P L E A D I N G " ? «IP 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) 180 Varick Street New York 14, N. Y. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PART ONE : 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 THREE : 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 COMMUNIST PARTY, U.S.A. 7 0 READING LISTS 7 1 STUDY-CLUB OUTLINE 7 5 NIHIL OBSTAT : Harry A . Echle, Censor Deputatus IMPRIMATUR: 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 TWO: 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 the | 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 in 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 [ 11 ] 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 [ 13 ] 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, [ 14 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- [ 15 ] 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 in 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 [ 19 ] 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. [ 22 ] These Communists and their fellow travelers (Marxists Iwho 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- [ 23 ] 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 [ 25 ] 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. [ 27 ] 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 [ 29 ] 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. [ 30 ] [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- cans 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 [ 31 ] 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 [ 32 ] 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, [ 33 ] 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 [34] 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. [ 35 ] 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 [ 36 ] 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. [ 37 ] 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 [ 38 ] 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 for 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- [40] 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 The 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 [ 51 ] 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 [ 52 ] 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. [ 57 ] 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 [ 58 ] 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 [ 59 ] 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. [ 61 ] 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 [ 62 ] 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. [66] 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. [ 67 ] 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 [ 68 ] 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 69 ] FACTUAL MATERIAL ABOUT THE 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 OF 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. [ 71 ] 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 [ 73 ] 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 75 ] 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. [ 78 ] 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 79 ] 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? [80] 51 » MAR SWT NO HOLDINGS IN IN[) - FOR HOLDINGS ENTER dh DEPRESS DISPLAY RECD SEND OCLCs 10689587 Ree s t a t * n E n t r d : 84050-4 U s e d : 870210 ~ Typet a B ib l v l * m Govt pub? Lang» eng Source» d I l l u s * ReorT Ene l v l : K Conf Dubs 0 C t r y : nyu Dat t p : s M/F /B: 00 ätk I Indxs 0 Mod r e c s F e s t s c h r s 0 C o n t : b 1 Desct I n t l v l : D a t e s : 1962 . " , 0 ] 0 m 2 040 VXI c VXI 3 0 92 3 3 5 . 43 b C 947 F 4 090 " F^ II " ~~ ~~ ' £ 5 0 49 INDIJ I 6 100 10 C r o n i n , John F r a n c i s , d 1908- : ; . 7 245 10 Communisms t h r e a t t o f r e e d o m . m 8 260 0 New York , b P a u l i s t P r e s s c [ 1 9 6 2 ] 9 300 80 p . c 19 cm. [ :~T0 504 I n c l ü d e s b i b l i o g r a p h y . A 11 650 0 Communism. 1 2 650 0 Communism z U n i t e d S t a t e s .