Accusations that George Seldes was a communist began to circulate after he returned from reporting the Spanish Civil War and declared himself a supporter of the Popular Front, an ideologically diverse coalition that applauded Soviet Russia for stemming the âFascist advanceâ in Spain.1 These rumours increased after the launch of his newsletter In Fact and in December 1940 the FBI advised President Roosevelt that Seldesâ weekly publication was a communist front. The allegation was repeated in a 1943 article in the American Mercury by Frederick Woltman, who also reported that In Fact drew its material from the labour press. The following year in March 1944 Republican Senator Martin Dies of the Committee of Un-American Activity joined the fray and entered into the Congressional Record his view that Seldes was a communist. Over the next few years Seldesâ former employer the Chicago Tribune, PM journalist James Wechsler, columnists George Sokolsky and Eugene Lyons, and broadcaster Fulton Lewis Jnr. all claimed that In Fact followed the communist party line and some even considered him a Soviet spy.2 In 1947 Seldesâ newsletter was described as ânothing more than a propaganda organ disguised as a legitimate vehicle for criticismâ3 and in January 13, 1948 in the House of Representatives Republican Clare Hoffman called Seldes as âa vicious, lying tool of the communists.â The allegations infuriated Seldes who vigorously claimed that although he was pro-labour and a member of the United Front, he was not a communist. Seeking to stem the libellous statements, he took legal advice, but there was little he could afford to do. Legally defending himself was expensive, so he had to content himself with writing individually to everyone who called him a communist and demanding a retraction.
The allegations that Seldesâ newsletter followed the communist party line became more frequent with the onset of the Cold War, a geopolitical struggle that Seldes claimed was manufactured by conservatives as a way of killing off the progressive, pro-labour, domestic agenda. The growing suspicion of Russia, however, recast Seldesâ criticisms of the commercial press and big business as unpatriotic and an effort to further the communist cause in America by fostering internal disharmony. Seldes initially disregarded these concerns and he continued to attack the forces of reaction. Subscriptions for his newsletter, however, declined and Seldes was offered money by several subscribers to send their copy of In Fact in a brown paper envelope. Rumours that subscribers to In Fact were under surveillance by the FBI saw subscriptions drop by two-thirds and by 1950 the publication was no longer financially viable.
The climate of fear produced by the Cold War, however, continued to escalate. The Sovietâs testing of nuclear weapons, the success of the communist regime in China and the outbreak of the Korean War kept tensions simmering. Left and liberal allegiances were no longer considered as merely dissenting or idealistic views but were cast as treasonous, and as conservatives looked for targets to substantiate fears that communism was alive in America their gaze came to rest on Seldes. In 1953 the 63-year-old independent publisher and press critic was subpoenaed to appear before an executive session of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee of Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations.4 Chaired by Senator Joseph McCarthy, the committee was tasked with investigating wasteful government practices. The Republican senator from Wisconsin, however, used the committee to investigate communist activity in the State Departmentâs International Information Administration Service (IIAS), which was responsible for overseas library collections. These libraries had made a decision in 1952 to adopt a policy of balanced presentation in their collections in order to show the diversity and freedom of opinions in America. Several books in these collections, however, had subsequently been deemed communist propaganda and McCarthy sought to use the committee to identify pro-communist authors.
Seldesâ appearance before the senate committee on July 1, 1953, saw him join the ranks of an estimated 10,000 mostly liberal American journalists, writers, artists, teachers, unionists and civil servants who had been called to defend themselves during a period that has come to be known as the Second Red Scare (1950â1956). Prompted by fears that the global spread of communism posed a threat to Americaâs national security, the Red Scare was a United States government-endorsed domestic response to anxieties that the Soviet Unionâthrough the American Communist Party and other United Front organizationsâhad infiltrated the government, schools, trade unions and cultural institutions and was working to overthrow democracy. Strategically, the Red Scare was also a campaign originally designed to âscare the hell out of the countryâ in order to obtain support for the nationâs financial commitment to the European recovery programmes.5 The scare began with Trumanâs Loyalty Program, which came into effect on March 21, 1947. The programme was established to investigate allegations of disloyalty and subversion, and Storrs (2013) documents the âviolation of civil liberties and destruction of careersâ as five million federal workers were screened.6 Many of these workers had been supporters of the New Deal measures and had been drawn to public service through a desire to ameliorate social issues exposed by the Depression. More than 25,000 employees were investigated and 2700 were dismissed.7 Several of Seldesâ subscribers wrote to him in the late 1940s and early 1950s relating their experiences of being investigated, in part, due to their subscription to In Fact. Seldes himself was initially denied a US passport in 1955 based on continuing suspicions that he posed a security risk.
Those suspected of being communists were subpoenaed to appear before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). These senate hearings were inquisitionsâoften publicâdesigned to force respondents into admitting their association with the Communist Party. In many instances, drawing upon information supplied by the FBI, the committee members questioned respondents about their âreading habits,â âvoting patterns,â memberships and political opinions.8 Anyone with even the slightest association with any politically progressive, liberal or civil rights group or cause was viewed with suspicion. An appearance before the committee could destroy reputations, end careers and lead to expulsion from the country. Rumour, opinion and anonymous unsubstantiated allegations were sufficient to raise doubts about a citizenâs loyalty, yet the courts refused to adjudicate in favour of those seeking legal remedies for defamation and infringement of civil rights. Indeed, anyone who pled the first or fifth amendments before the committee was automatically treated as a communist.9 Failure to respond to the committeeâs subpoenas saw hundreds of individuals charged with contempt of congress, and subsequent criminal proceedings incarcerated dozens of these defendants. The names of suspects were widely circulated in the media and in publications like Red Channels, a list that served as the basis for the blacklisting of citizens. Defendants were asked to implicate family, friends and colleagues, and a climate of fear, suspicion and distrust emerged. The language of the hearings was adversarial, guilt was presumed and the whole purpose of the show trials was to promote McCarthyâs public image as a crusader against communism.10
During this period no one was immune from attack and after the Sovietâs tested the atomic bomb in 1949 there was a belief that there had been treason at the highest levels of government. Indeed, the late President Roosevelt, was criticized by the Director of the Manhatten Project General Leslie R. Groves for insufficiently vetting scientists who has subsequently passed on crucial information to the Soviets. Politicians also described Albert Einstein as a communist and called for his deportation, and the national commander of the American Legion claimed that many senior officials were the enemies of the American way of life.11 By 1950 anti-communism campaigns were led by a range of organizations including the American Legion, the Catholic Church and the Hearst and Scripps Howard newspaper chains. The tactics of these campaigns included publicly denouncing individuals as communist, and the routine characterization of labour as red or communist. The American Legion, under the guise of patriotism and protecting the nation from internal enemies, organized its members to write letters to radio and television stations demanding that sponsors and advertisers fire those suspected of being communist.
The shift in political climate was unfortunate for George Seldes, who, while never a member of the American Communist Party, had been characterized as a fellow traveller largely because he had been uncritical of Soviet Russia, even during the Soviet trials of 1936â1939. This support stemmed from Seldesâ belief that the communists had disinterestedly supported the Republicans in S...