Considering that politicians tend to propose bills that punish their own sins, is it likely that Joseph McCarthy was in with the Russians? Have they been messing with US Politics for far longer than we have suspected? Have they really supported the Republicans and misled us all by smearing the Democratic party as Commie sympathizers? After all, the So-called Communists never practiced Communism. They gave the best stuff to themselves and impoverished everybody else. Reminds me of the worst Republicans.

Views: 199

Comment by Jonathan Wolfman on March 4, 2017 at 9:56am

As to McC, it's an intriguing thought yet there's no evidence of which I'm aware to support it. 

Consider, too, that the artists, actors, directors, writers and politicians who were purged and blacklisted (some of whom committed suicide)  were those whose tolerance of and/or affinity for the Left would have, I'd think, had they stayed in their positions, pleased the Soviets. 

So the question would be what had the Soviets to gain w McC as a poppet?

In the current situation, both Putin and Trump are authoritarians, if not fascists, tho in the early 50s, I can think of few ideological links betw Stalin and his immediate successors and Eisenhower.

Comment by Lois Wickstrom on March 4, 2017 at 10:03am

Jonathan, since the so-called Communists were not lefties, but in fact were trying to enrich themselves, they had no interest in the American Left, except as a way to try to elect Republicans.  I had a conversation with a true-believer registered American Communist in the early 70's.  He mentioned the years in which the American Communist Party put up a candidate for President and when they did not. It certainly looked as if they were using the Left to pull votes from the Democratic Party in years when they wanted the Republican to win.  I think the confusion between Left and Communist is of Russia's making.  Russia is not now, nor has it ever been, Communist.

Comment by JMac1949 Today on March 4, 2017 at 10:13am

Just goes to show that human greed and hypocrisy knows no borders.  R&L

Comment by Jonathan Wolfman on March 4, 2017 at 10:18am

Well, yes, no nation has been able to live out Marx's ideal. There are numbers of successful democratic-socialist nations, to one or another degree.

I truly have heard of no evidence for McC as a stooge, a set-up, and I fail to see the potential gains to Stalinism and to Stalin himself, nor to Kruschev (Soviet Premier from 1953 when Stalin died). 

While I certainly agree w you that the Soviet Politburo was hardly ever peopled by ideologically true leftist Communists (in the ways you mean it here), I also fail to understand (tho I'm open to substantive evidence to the contrary, of course) how destroying America's writers etc....who expressed tolerance for Russian policies, especially its foreign policies at that time

 --and the victims of Mcc certainly did, most of them -- I don't seehow their destruction could have been in the Soviet Union's interest, absent further historical explanation.

Comment by Jonathan Wolfman on March 4, 2017 at 10:33am

After a brief (admittedly brief) search, I can find no pieces alleging, let alone providing evidence for the idea that McC was a Soviet plant, agent, stooge, etc. 

What I do find are the thousands of two main kinds of Mcc pieces:  a)  the standard histories which say he was a right-wing extremist and a drunk who died in deserved disgrace at age 48   and    b)  the newer analyses that say he died in undeserved disgrace, that he named the communists among us, that he was unfairly investigated and condemned, that everyone he named as red was a bona-fide card-carrying...etc.

I cannot find a third stream of thought, tho I'll continue to look bc this does intrigue me, and for that I thank you heartily.

Comment by Safe Bet's Amy on March 4, 2017 at 10:38am

Seeing as how the US has attempted/succeeded in regime change in other countries 72 times since WWII and has "interfered" in dozens of other foreign elections, I think we are being seriously hypocritical to take umbrage over somebody doing it to us.

BTW, any guesses as to which party was in charge for the majority of those foreign "meddlings"?

Comment by Myriad on March 4, 2017 at 10:38am

I read somewhere, forget now in the maelstrom, that indeed the Russians wormed their way in many years ago... can't find it now, but an idea that's likely to surface again with some background...

Comment by Jonathan Wolfman on March 4, 2017 at 11:01am

Of course it's true what Amy says as to those 72 iterations. No one vaguely decent excuses it.

The more compelling question is

          Does that suggest we are required to shut up, as Mr Bannon has ordered the press to do, when a traditionally antagonistic power may well have installed a poppet as our president? 

If bad actions by the US require us now to "shut up" abt this current coup require us to 'just take it', or just to laugh it off, or do xxxx yrs of penance ...  before we do something abt it....tell us, how many years must we shut up before trying to regain our nation (w all its faults)?

Comment by Lois Wickstrom on March 4, 2017 at 11:38am

I don't think artists were the main target. Unions were the main target. Anything that seemed to take money from the wealthy. I suspect that going after artists came about by accident, but it made headlines. And people became afraid to say things that might be considered "Communist."  Much like our current President, anything for a headline, anything to keep people afraid.  McCarthy also went after sex offenders, and teachers.

Comment by Safe Bet's Amy on March 4, 2017 at 11:46am

Nobody said a thing about shutting up or "just take it".  That said, the constant (and deserved) demonizing of the Republicans, while at the same time giving Democrats a pass (or worse case a slap on the hand, followed by a partisan wink, for doing MUCH worse) is getting ridiculous.  Proposing to STOP doing the same insanity over and over and over expecting different results is not giving up or giving in.  It is called "enough of this stupid crap!

As a friend of mine recently put it,

"It's a shakedown. Seriously. Party politics is a shakedown. Democrats thought GW Bush was the worst president in US history. Until Obama continued most of the Bush administration policies.

Then they used Trump as the boogie man to scare us into voting for Hillary, who was even more like Bush than Obama (who was a lot like Bush).

Even though that tactic failed, they're still using him and the Russians as the boogie men and now the Democrats are out in the open about embracing GW Bush. [the bestest buddy of Salman Al Saud who is in turn is the poster child of Wahhabism and who is covertly invading Syria and overtly  invading Yemen].

They're trying to position themselves to run another Bush type of candidate in the next election by comparing Bush favorably with whatever Democrat they want to run, because, hey... anyone's better than Trump [and the oh so evil Russians], right?"

Comment

You need to be a member of Our Salon to add comments!

Join Our Salon

NEW BLOG POSTS

I’m Not A Buddhist

Posted by Robert B. James on June 18, 2019 at 7:42am 0 Comments

2 Questions for Kosh and Jon

Posted by Ron Powell on June 18, 2019 at 2:30am 2 Comments

Greeting of the Day

Posted by Ron Powell on June 16, 2019 at 10:08am 0 Comments

Go Big or Go Home

Posted by Ron Powell on June 16, 2019 at 9:30am 2 Comments

Waiting And Seeing

Posted by Robert B. James on June 16, 2019 at 7:29am 1 Comment

Leaving the Purple House

Posted by J.P. Hart on June 15, 2019 at 9:30pm 2 Comments

As Luck Would Have It

Posted by Robert B. James on June 15, 2019 at 3:04pm 3 Comments

© 2019   Created by lorianne.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service