@Herr KaLeun: thanks for the correction and the link. Using the link you provided, I found the following quote from Franklin:
Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins.
The earlier quote was misattributed, and I’m glad you brought that to my attention. But the distinction between democracy and liberty stands. Democracy without liberty is tyranny.
Der Kuenstler:
The history most of us have been exposed to was written by the victors.
That’s certainly true! After any war, it’s normal for the victors to present themselves in a far more favorable light than the one used for the vanquished. There’s certainly a lot of that going on in terms of WWII history. But a standard-issue description of WWII (from the Allied perspective) contains a far greater level of bias than one would typically encounter in a “victors’ narrative” description of some other war. (Such as the Napoleonic wars or the Seven Years War.)
During the Spanish Civil War, the communists broke new ground through their utter departure from the truth. If their propaganda effort required them to fabricate an imaginary battle, they would. They were also willing to deny actual battles which had really happened. George Orwell was himself a socialist, but he was shocked by the dishonesty shown by the Spanish Communists. In his book 1984 the government abrogated for itself the right to declare that black was white, up was down, and so on. That was based on what Orwell had seen the Spanish Communists do during their civil war.
Under Joseph Stalin, the Soviet Union engaged in a massive effort to penetrate major foreign governments. That effort achieved considerable success in Western Democracies. Communist influence in FDR’s administration was greater than the mere number of Soviet agents might suggest. If (for example) communist and anti-communist elements of FDR’s administration disagreed with each other’s policy recommendations, FDR typically chose the communists’ advice. The more important the matter under discussion, the more likely FDR was to be guided by the advice of men who owed their loyalty and allegiance to Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union.
Nor was communist influence limited to the American government. While most members of the media were not necessarily Soviet agents, they were nonetheless extremely sympathetic to the Soviet perspective. Witness The New York Times’ efforts to deny the Ukrainian famine (7 million murdered, including 3 million children). Even though the Soviet agents in the American government and media were greatly outnumbered by non-agents, many non-agents created a pro-Soviet echo chamber. In that environment concepts such as “objective truth” went out the window. A Soviet agent could make a recommendation or factual assertion, and have it echoed by any number of people in powerful positions. Even many reasonable people fully or partially believed the Soviet-inspired propaganda being recklessly thrown around.
People were being whipped into a frenzy, so that the United States would get involved in the war. Even before the Pearl Harbor attacks, FDR was able to launch an undeclared war against Germany in the Atlantic. Captains of American warships were told to shoot German submarines on sight. They were also told to accuse the Germans of having fired the first shot.
Imagine a fanatical religious cult. Its leaders and core followers are deeply familiar with its teachings. The members of this cult decide to create a large event, open to the general public. The outsiders who join the event are not members of the cult. They have not accepted, and may not even be aware of, many of that cult’s core teachings. But neither have they rejected those teachings! On the contrary, this particular batch of outsiders has a very favorable view of the cult, are predisposed in its favor, and are very open to learning more. On the other hand, they hate anyone who opposes the cult. And they are getting caught up in the excitement of the event the cult is putting on.
During the 1930s and '40s, a relatively small minority of the American government and media were outright members of this cult (Marxism). Most members of the media and government could be described in the same terms I’ve used for the “outsiders” described above. They got caught up in the spirit of things. They believed it was perfectly okay to lie, as long as the lie in question was directed against Hitler, or helped move the U.S. closer to war. These outsiders were told–and genuinely believed–that WWII was a war between evil (Nazi Germany) and good (the Soviet Union).
The Marxists who created the Antiracism religion did not necessarily intend for that religion to be permanent. The long-term goal of Soviet foreign policy had always been world conquest. Because the United States was too strong to be conquered by military means, it had to be destroyed from within. It was for that reason that the Soviets involved themselves so heavily in internal American affairs. The Soviets propped up and supported various American political movements: radical feminism, a pro-crime movement, an effort to abolish traditional morality, attacks against religion (especially Christianity). Their sponsorship of Antiracism was just another thing on the list.
Suppose Mr. Smith slips a little arsenic into Mr. Jones’ food each day. The arsenic dosage Mr. Jones receives over any given day, month, or even year, will not necessarily be enough to kill him. However, Mr. Smith knows that arsenic builds up over time, and that eventually his efforts will be fatal to Mr. Jones. I would argue that Mr. Smith is in the process of murdering Mr. Jones. I would also argue that the Soviet Union went to war against the United States during the 1920s, and remained in a constant state of war against us until the fall of the Soviet Union. I would further argue that under the FDR/Truman administrations, the Soviets successfully used their (very considerable) influence in the United States to turn one of their intended victims (us) against another intended victim (Nazi Germany).
