Lincoln Brigade. Here on the front lines he was wounded and to this day
bears the effects of the injury. This impetuous decision, taken against
the advice of his family, represented a contribution of the Communist
Party of the United States to international communism. Karl’s idealistic
fervor against fascism and injustice was translated into shot and powder
for the furtherance of communist aims.
Many thousands of Americans joined the communist movement during these
early days of the fight against fascism. The hardships of depression days
contributed to the deceptive appeals of communism. These men and women,
seeking solutions, thought incorrectly that the panacea lay in communism.
They labored under the illusion that the Party and Soviet Russia
represented a better democracy. As one disillusioned member was later
to complain, “At this time the Communist apologists stressed idealistic
goals, and bragged of a growing democracy in Russia.”
Many individuals have joined the Party in the vain hope of improving
social conditions, gaining better housing, or achieving better relations
between the races.
Ralph was typical of many. He was a Negro, proud of his race and eager to
help better its status in America. While in school he prepared a thesis
on this subject. Wanting to secure various opinions, he asked several
friends to read his manuscript. One of these, a fellow student, remarked
after reading the paper that Ralph’s approach had been very naïve and
that further study should be undertaken. Thereupon he furnished Ralph
with information about Karl Marx and the communist viewpoint.
The communist position appealed to Ralph. Here was an organization that
claimed that it was working zealously for the betterment of the Negro.
The propaganda appeals seemed to point the direction that Ralph should
take. He succumbed and joined the Communist Party. He was to learn that
the Party has no sincere concern for the Negro but was and is using
deceptive propaganda appeals to advance the communist cause.
The very same communist tactic applies in the field of labor unions.
Edward was an active member of his union. In the early 1940’s he was
recruited into the Communist Party and assigned to a club in the
industrial section of the Party. Why had he joined? “When I joined the
Communist Party I believed that I was joining a political party that
would benefit the workingman.” Three years later he dropped out of the
Party; it was _not_ for the workingman. Rather it aimed at killing
individual rights, making unions subservient to Party orders, and using
union strength, influence, and finances to further communist goals.
The Party today is still busily at work trying to infiltrate unions.
Historically, communists, including Lenin, have taught that communists
must infiltrate unions. Every union member must realize that the
communist interest in labor organizations is insincere. Past communist
appeals have been recognized as false by patriotic union leaders
themselves. Today’s communist appeal is no less false or dangerous than
those of previous years. Our knowledge of how the Party operated in the
past is one of our best weapons in defeating its techniques today.
The list of specific reasons for joining the Party, growing out of a
desire to improve our nation, would be long. One woman was interested in
social problems, such as slum clearance and better housing. Communists
claimed to favor the same things as she. She believed and joined. Another
individual, as a young minister, saw many injustices in a Northern
state. Still another, arriving home from overseas, felt that the war had
not accomplished any semblance of peace; he was displeased with American
policy. He walked into Party headquarters on his own initiative and
signed up.
Over the years thousands of Americans have entered the doors of
communism. The turnover of Party membership has been great. Besides
those motivated from idealistic reasons, there have been curiosity- and
adventure-seekers, opportunists, disgruntled misfits, and power-hungry
personalities. Some of these have consciously sought out the Party;
others have just drifted into it. Many were youngsters, wanting to dance
and sing. Some wanted social companionship. In others, sexual appeal
played a role.
The Party, falsely representing itself as the final answer to _all_ of
society’s problems, economic, social, political, and religious, makes
ready use of the various hopes, fears, and aspirations of recruits.
This dynamic deceit of communist action provides an immediate channel
for energy and enthusiasm. Within hours a recruit will be handing out
leaflets or running errands. He gets the feeling of being in action _now_
and not having to wait to participate in the fight for what he conceives
to be a better world. Many recruits to the Party, when asked later why
they didn’t offer their talents to legitimate organizations concerned
with reform, said such groups were “too slow.” In the Party they found
that “immediacy” which so satisfied them.
Then, in working in the Party, the recruit is promised a “belongingness,”
a feeling of comradeship that can be won only in day-to-day battles
for the greatest of causes. The member is told that he is part of a
world-wide movement based on the most “enlightened,” “advanced,” and
“scientific” principles. Unfortunately the Party has been able to
generate great enthusiasm through this teaching. One member told the
FBI that the slogan, “vanguard of the working class,” had appealed to
him. He felt that not only was he contributing his own talents to the
cause but he was “leading,” “educating,” and “guiding” others. “I think
this activity was satisfying something in me,” another stated. Such an
approach often deceives recruits, especially those of an egotistical
nature, who appreciate the prospect of achieving personal “power” inside
the Party structure where the chief qualification for advancement is not
ability, education, or talent but loyalty to the Party. One high Party
leader whose authority over Party disciplinary matters extended across
half a continent was in ordinary life a day laborer. The flattering of
his ego from his Party position can well be imagined.
In particular the communists have made an appeal to the so-called
intellectual. The seduction of many intellectuals over the years by the
Party stands as a disgrace. Thinking men and women, trained to analyze
critically, all too often have been duped.
Our experience has shown that members joining the Party for idealistic
reasons are more likely to stay in the movement than those not so
motivated. Of course, this is not always true. Though joining the Party
in a sincere attempt to better society, a member may quickly become
disillusioned. However, time after time members who join for curiosity,
for social reasons, or for sexual pleasure soon drift out. They are
usually not the material from which hard-core communists are made. Here
is an example:
Gladys was a college girl, rather gay, not too serious, with a great
deal of leisure. She attended some Marxist study groups. Here Russia
and communism were painted in rosy colors. After several meetings she
was invited to join the Party. She accepted, 80 per cent, she said, out
of curiosity and partly because she felt that if the communists could
achieve a “peaceful” world about which they talked, it would be a “nice
thing.” Other reasons Gladys gave for joining: to have something to
do and to alleviate “boredom.” She described Party literature as more
amusing than educational. Needless to say, she did not stay in the
movement. Even Party officials, in her opinion, never seemed to trust her.
A sad group of recruits are simply the twisted, mixed-up neurotics.
Perhaps as sons and daughters of well-to-do parents they harbor a “guilt
complex” about the very privileges that America has given them. Or,
because of some setback in life, they are angry at society and turn to
communism as a way to “get even.”
Let’s look at Larry, a communist in a Midwestern state. Ever since youth,
he had felt a “persecution complex.” Everywhere he looked he seemed to
see despair and strife. The whole of society, he concluded, was strictly
a dog-eat-dog affair, with life being divided between the have’s and
the have-not’s. Such an attitude was intensified by an “artistic” and
“sensitive” temperament. Seeing these “injustices,” he felt compelled to
help the “persecuted.” At first he became just a “reformer”; then, after
reading Marxist literature, he joined the Party. Twisted, distorted, and
maladjusted, he is today even more confused. He found that the Party only
exploited his neurotic condition to make use of his services.
The techniques of actual recruitment vary. In most instances
indoctrination comes slowly. A fellow union member, worker, or
associate who is a Party member will “work” on the prospect. First come
conversations about mutual interests such as union activities. Deftly
the communist slant will be emphasized. Perhaps then will come communist
literature or an invitation to a “study group.” Step by step the recruit
becomes enmeshed in the Party’s efficient recruitment apparatus.
A former member told how she first became acquainted with communism,
which she was later to reject. She was living a lonely life in a
boardinghouse. She noticed that some of her neighbors had many friends
who laughed and chattered gaily. Apparently they had common interests
that drew them together. One night she heard the muffled overtones of
what sounded like a meeting next door: “Overcome by my growing curiosity
about them, I snooped as no lady should. I sat on the bed and pressed
my ear against the plaster wall. As their subdued voices rose and fell,
I caught words and snatches. I don’t know now what I heard, or what
could have convinced me in my great ignorance of that time. But before
the meeting adjourned, I believed my jolly neighbors were Communists,
and that I was listening to a secret meeting of a Communist cell of
Government workers! They did not look as Communists were pictured, and
they were not plotting bomb-throwing or assassination, but some much
duller discussion with long words.” In her loneliness this woman joined
the Communist Party but found neither “happiness” nor a “sense of
direction”—only bitter disappointments.
Party fronts offer excellent means of recruitment. Be assured that every
noncommunist who actively participates in a front is under the Party’s
close scrutiny. Sometimes, of course, as we have seen, an individual is
more useful to the Party by remaining a nonmember, a sympathizer, or a
fellow traveler. At other times, if the prospect seems to offer a fertile
field of recruitment, pressure is applied. Thousands of Party members
were recruited through the many fronts operating in the 1930’s and 1940’s.
Of special interest to the Party are young people. The Party’s youth
organizations, such as the Young Communist League and its successors, are
largely recruiters of young people for communism. Many Party-sponsored
activities—dances, parties, and picnics—are aimed to win the allegiance
of boys and girls. Time after time members join as teen-agers—the age at
which the Party would like to capture minds.
Many Party members have been recruited from communist homes, the children
of Party members. In America today many hundreds of children, growing up
in communist homes, are captives of this alien ideology. These youngsters
are taught from the earliest years that God does not exist. One communist
mother in a Northern state taught her children that God was not real.
She said that it was fun to watch Superman on TV but that a person must
recognize that he doesn’t actually exist. It’s the same way, she said,
with God. In another city a communist father noticed a religious program
on the family television set. He uttered a derogatory remark and turned
off the program with the exclamation, “I’m a Marxist.”
Party parents provide special Marxist instruction for their children. One
father would sit down with his youngsters and discuss items appearing in
the _Daily Worker_; another gave regular quizzes on Marxist literature;
still another lectured on Marxist economics every morning at the
breakfast table. When the child grows up, he is given Party tasks:
distributing literature, taking up collections at rallies, walking in
picket lines. He begins to get the “feel” of Party life. In one instance
a communist family gathered around a table and spent an hour or two
in Party self-criticism and promising to do better. Party morality is
constantly being inculcated in these youthful minds, a belief that
whatever helps the Party is good, whatever hinders it is immoral. In one
instance a communist father denounced a federal law that restricted the
activities of the Party. His teen-age son, confused by the statement,
pointed out that the Act was part of the law of the land. “Son,” the
father replied, “if a law is bad, you do not have to obey it.”
No wonder many hundreds of recruits spring from communist homes as
devotees of Marxism-Leninism.
Our experience has shown that reasons for joining the Party are many,
varied, and complicated. Each individual has his own personal problems,
hopes, and aspirations. Any attempt to apply generalized, ready-made
stereotypes is to leave the problem unsolved. Moreover, we must try
to see the _total man_; that is, all the forces, events, ideas, and
motivations that brought about his tragic decision. For that reason each
member deserves careful study. In the next chapter I shall discuss the
reasons why members leave the Party. Here again we must understand each
member as a human being, as an individual, always remembering that even
though still a bigoted devotee he is convertible. Any thinking Party
member will soon recognize the basic contradictions of communism.
We should be alert to help any communist back on the road to good
American citizenship as soon as he shows the slightest indication that he
is disillusioned with what he has found inside Party circles.
What lesson can we as a society learn from the Party’s methods of
recruitment? Most important, I think, is to realize that the Communist
Party is attempting to exploit the rise of materialism, irreligion, and
lack of faith in our society. In an era when moral standards have been
lowered, when family life has been disrupted, when crime and juvenile
delinquency rates are high, communists have tried to set forth a
goal—dressed in attractive phrases—that would captivate the longings
and hopes of men and women. They have, in truth, tried to “steal” the
nobility, the fervor, the enthusiasm of a free government under God.
9.
_Why People Break with Communism_
Just as important as knowing why people join the Communist Party is
understanding why they leave. Here again, by recognizing the influences
that cause them to reject this alien doctrine, we can do much to defeat
the communist conspiracy.
Always we must keep in mind that communists, even hard-core members,
potentially can be converted. To the individual who asserts, “Once a
communist, always a communist,” I say: “No. Every communist can be made
to see the errors of his way. He must not be despised, belittled, or
rejected as hopelessly lost. He can redeem himself by actively taking a
stand for freedom. Every patriotic American must do what he can to bring
these persons to see the truth. The ex-communist is today one of our most
potent weapons against communism.”
On September 9, 1957, the _Daily Worker_ published a story which stated:
“Joseph Clark has resigned from the Daily Worker, of which he was foreign
editor, and from membership in the Communist Party.”
Clark was a Party member for twenty-eight years, always known as an
ardent one. When Stalin died, Clark was his paper’s correspondent in
Moscow. Yet, by his own current processes of thinking he saw the futility
of the Party.
Howard Fast, well-known communist author, was mentioned in the last
chapter. After years of Party membership and thousands of words of
communist propaganda, he quit. The revelations of Khrushchev about
Stalin’s murderous regime were too much. “The dimensions of this horror
were not only beyond anything we could have dreamed of ... I was filled
with loathing and disgust.”
On the West Coast Barbara Hartle, because of her fiery energy and zeal,
was recognized in Party circles as the outstanding woman communist in
the Pacific Northwest. So active was she in Party circles that she was
indicted, tried, and convicted under the Smith Act. But she, too, became
disillusioned. Like Louis Budenz, Bella Dodd, Howard Fast, and Joseph
Clark, she added her name to the growing list of communists who have
said, “We’ve had enough. We’re quitting.”
To understand why members break with the Party, let’s examine the case
of Barbara Hartle, who exemplifies the anguish of a Party official
desperately seeking her way to freedom. Her experiences may enable
members still in the Party to look into their own hearts. Are they being
beset by the same doubts? Why have these doubts arisen? What is working
to increase or to quell them?
On the other hand, Barbara Hartle’s story will give the patriotic citizen
an appreciation of the anguish experienced by Party members on their
journey to freedom. He can learn to be understanding, patient, and
helpful. He will see, for instance, how a sympathetic citizen helped
Barbara free herself from communist entanglement.
On March 12, 1954, Barbara Hartle walked into the Seattle office of the
FBI. She didn’t need to identify herself. The previous October she, along
with four other top Party leaders, had been convicted in Seattle under
the Smith Act.
Barbara Hartle told her story: She had been graduated in 1929, Phi Beta
Kappa, from Washington State College, majoring in English; then she
went to Spokane, trying to find a job. Those were depression days and
her story is all too typical. Hoping for a “better world,” she began
to read Karl Marx. Deeply impressed, she joined the Socialist, then
the Communist, Party. Her rise was rapid. Later she was transferred to
Seattle where she occupied some of the highest Party positions in the
Washington State organization. “I’ll go to jail if I must,” she once
declared, “but I’ll remain a communist.”
One day in 1945 Barbara Hartle sat writing an article for the communist
press. Earl Browder was on his way out as head of the communist movement.
By force of habit she defended him. But Party experience taught
otherwise. Foster was now the “boss.” Confused by the sudden Party shift,
she tore up the article.
Later, back on the Party line, she wrote another article supporting
Foster. But something had happened. Out of this confusion, this “great
surprise,” as she termed it, of the Party switch, she seemed suddenly to
have seen something new—that the Party was not what it claimed to be, but
a fraudulent deception. To Barbara Hartle, as to many communists, doubt
had come, an indication that the breath of freedom was still alive in her.
As in many such cases, this confusion and doubt quickly disappeared,
swallowed up in the rush of Party life. In 1939 she had become disturbed
by the Party’s position on the Hitler-Stalin pact, but this also had
passed. She soon became the same fanatical Barbara Hartle, attending
meetings, issuing orders, making speeches.
Yet these doubts were to be followed by other doubts. Now she began, as
she later explained, to become conscious of certain features of Party
life that she had not previously noticed. She listed some of them:
1. The constant factional struggle for leadership.
2. The hand-picking of leaders from the top.
3. The arbitrary handling of funds by some of the top officials.
4. Finding the “self-criticism” of leaders to be mere “empty
promises.”
5. The “furious resistance” of Party leaders to criticism or
guidance offered by rank-and-file members.
6. The expulsion of members by “rigged trials.”
Like a searchlight, these doubts began to search out other doubts,
inconsistencies, and contradictions. The fissure of doubt was widening.
Now Barbara was to experience a phenomenon that affects every Party
member trying to break the communist spell: _the counterattack of the
unconscious Party discipline_.
Doubts would suddenly arise, then disappear. They would arise again but
again disappear. When she seemed to want to slow up in her Party work,
her old enthusiasm would return. She found, as she later explained,
that her “process of mental reorientation was impeded by the study and
teaching of Marxist-Leninist works, which is the Communist Party’s
antidote for such an eventuality.”
Over a long period and through a slow process of constant
discussion, schools, and self study the Communist Party builds
a conscience of responsibility upon which it then relies to
keep a member functioning, even though any real desire to do so
has passed.
That’s why the Party keeps stressing Marxist-Leninist education: Party
schools, reading the communist press, self-study. It builds up a
discipline that automatically attacks doubts, rationalizes contradictions
inside the Party structure, and guides every decision in the Party’s
favor.
Then, in mid-1950, an important event occurred for Barbara Hartle. She
received instructions to attend a secret meeting in Woodland Park,
Seattle. There she was told to change her name, leave Seattle, and enter
the Party’s underground. For the next two years she lived under assumed
names in various Washington State and Oregon cities.
The unending hustle and bustle of everyday Party activity ceased. As she
sat in a lonely room or stood on a dark street corner waiting for an
underground meeting, she now had time to think. Suddenly all the doubts
that had been slowly accumulating came together. At the same time the
restraining influences of Party discipline became weaker.
A more rapid disillusionment on my part took place when I left
the active Communist Party upon leaving Seattle to enter the
Communist Party underground movement. Without direct day to day
pressure, with less reading of Marxist-Leninist works and with
increased reading of other material, and through coming into
contact with average people my mental processes were hastened.
The culmination of this process was my decision to leave the
Communist Party and to live my own life.
She became convinced that the Communist Party was an evil; that it did
not represent a way to better social or economic conditions; that it was
a fraud and a deception.
I never realized that this discipline and this mental and
physical domination of the Communist Party over its members is
necessary to it in order to continue its double life of posing
as one thing and being another. I had never before realized
that the many unsolved problems I had noted while still a
Communist Party member were products of this double existence.
It was one thing, however, to break intellectually with the Party,
another to break openly. That was now to be Barbara Hartle’s anguish and
the anguish of so many members still in the Party today.
Barbara was living in a no-man’s land: she had broken with the world of
tyranny yet was held by the power that had robbed her of freedom. The
indecision began to tear her apart. She was spiritually sick. At first
she kept saying to herself and the Party, “I’ll be all right. Just give
me a little time. I’ll work this out.” She just couldn’t realize that
these doubts were permanent signs of a new life, not temporary confusions
in an old allegiance. Merely to drift away quietly wasn’t possible. The
Party wouldn’t allow that. The only way was to redeem herself by walking
boldly forward.
This she did in March, 1954. And here is what a sympathetic citizen
can do to help. Mr. Traynor Hansen, a reporter for the Seattle
_Post-Intelligencer_, had covered the 1953 Seattle Smith Act trial. He
noticed, as did others, that Barbara Hartle lacked the fiery disposition
of the other defendants. Later, while on bond, she had long visits with
him. It was his counsel that she go to the FBI since it would have been
improper under the circumstances for us to go to her.