This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Red Scare article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | Red Scare is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't know if there should be such specificity at the beginning of the article because it says later there has been more than one red scare in the U.S. And certainly there have been red scares in other countries. -- Daniel C. Boyer 17:42 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
I'm revising the article to make it clear that the term red scare contains a POV. One which really ought to be balanced with its opposite POV: namely, that Communists are a bunch of murderous thugs 1,000 times worse than the mafia.
Someone, please help make sure I don't accidentally over-state my case, in my current mood of zeal... -- Uncle Ed
After China admitted that Mao Tse-Tung had over 20 million civilians executed; and the New York Times admitted its Pulitzer-prize winning correspondent had covered up 6 million murders by Stalin in Ukraine; and the more recent genocide in Cambodia came to light, talk which dismissed communism as a screenwriter's fantasy diminished markedly.
Credit rightly accrued to Ronald Reagan for winning the Cold War and defeating communism in Europe.
I don't understand why it's a "mistake" to counterpose communism with the "Red Scare". I thought the POV of the Red Scare is that people were all bent out of shape over nothing -- that communism was "nothing to be scared of" -- a trumped up fear. I am balancing that POV with evidence that communism is indeed scary: murdering tens of millions of people is well-documented fact and shouldn't be deleted from the article.
I think the last two edits you made have been much better, Ed. Keep it up. :) DanKeshet 19:16, Nov 10, 2003 (UTC)
Re. "hysteria" I agree with Lance on this one. Google [1] returns more than 2,600 hits for the search "red scare" + hysteria. There is even a book, Red Scare: A Study in National Hysteria, 1919-1920 ISBN: 0070440751 which looks reasonably serious. I think there is a good case for stating it as a "hysteria." -- Viajero 20:54, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
"The term itself is arguably pejorative, belittling anti-communists by implying that their fears were overblown or hysterical."
I'm uncomfortable with this sentence. In both of the instances of "Red Scare" there was negligible communist threat to American society -- at least in proportion to the countless "Red Squads" that were organized with wide powers to suspend constitutional rights in order to investigate & arrest people thought to be helping the Soviet Union -- & who in too many cases were found to be either innocent of the charges, or guilty of nothing more than a lot of talk. -- llywrch 21:59, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I find it interesting that Red Scare is not linked to on moral panic. Woudl a link be POV or NPOV?
Addressing myself more to what MIRV wrote: distinguishing between the two -- American fear of a domestic communist overthrow, from the potential military threat of the Soviet Union would improve this article. The phenomenon of "Red Scare" also appears to be related to another American fear, the Yellow peril, which imagined imigrants from Japan, China & other Asian nations overrunning the businesses & properties of "respectable" Americans. (The warnings about Communism that I remember hearing always emphasized loss of property, free speech, religion, and promotion of "free love" -- similar to the threat of the "Yellow Peril.") For being the adopted home of so many nationalities, we Americans sure have our nasty xenophobic side. -- llywrch 19:36, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)
This article has nothing to do with the red scare, not about Soviet espionage which so far as it affected American communists or was participated in by them is a rather difficult area and needs to be addressed separately from this article which is in essence an article about an aspect of popular culture. Fred Bauder 00:30, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)
This article seems a shade POV. There were legitimate concerns during the "Red Scare" that are bieng glossed over here. TDC 01:48, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
172, add this to your action item memo: The Soviets lost the Cold War/. TDC 01:51, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Well, TDC, how about an nice article on Soviet espionage in the United States? Maybe a better title than that... Fred Bauder 03:05, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps ..................... TDC 03:34, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I removed the commentaries and personal essays. This is article on the Red Scares in the '20s and the '50s. The anti-Communism of key figures, such as Palmer, McCarthy, Hoover, etc. is relevant. Anti-Communism in 2004 is irrelevant. 172 05:55, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I removed this:
What is the evidence that this is indeed the intent? I understand that some people might perceive this to be the intent, which is why I did not touch the following sentence (which describes a criticism of people who use the term "red scare"). The second sentence does a fine job of providing an alternate view, but this sentence claims a motivation, a claim that is unsubstantiated. Slrubenstein
Fred and VV:
Stop making WP into a laughingstock. Before I removed the irrelevant personal commentaries, this article had mentioned Ann Coulter, but not Archangel, the IWW, Big Bill Haywood, the Espionage Act of 1917, the Sabotage Act of April 20, the Sedition Act of May 16, the Creel Committee on Public Information, etc. Warren Harding, who arguably quenched the first Red Scare, especially given the message sent by his pardon of Eugene Debs, wasn't mentioned either. The WWI-era Creel Committee on Public Information, e.g., is relevant in this article. But the off topic personal essays written by WP users in 2004 are not. I will continue to revert attempts to restore the text in question. I won't let you waste the time of readers seeking a brief, encyclopedic write up on the first Red Scare (1917-1921) and the one in early '50s. 172 18:37, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Your reasoning is based on the notion that people at that time had any reason to believe American Communists were different from or somehow disagreed with Stalin. We now know they were and did, but who knew then. At any rate we are talking about what people believed and above all feared. Not what was actually true. Keep in mind that many Americans of that period (and almost all Americans) of today had never met a Communist. Fred Bauder 19:30, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
No Fred, the question is whether American communists had any meaningful influence or had infiltrated American institutions on a scale that meritted paranoia, not how many people Stalin had killed.
I am not going to get into an edit war with TDC. But I challenge the contention that there was ever "a large number communist spies and sympathisers [...] constantly working to bring the downfall of the United States" anywhere on US soil. This is POV, it is not factual and it is entirely irrelevant to the case. At least this way readers have a warning that they are encountering bull.
Diderot 20:21, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC).
There has been dozens of great books on the subject written over the course of the past 10+ years. Intervies with hundreds of KGB agents and thousands of letters, diaries, intel briefings etc.. are cited in these books. Pick one the fuck up before you revert my entry again. TDC 01:16, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
You are still going back to facts about Communists, not to facts about the political climate in the United States. The fear people felt is what is relevant. Fred Bauder 22:06, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
Fred and TDC,
Go back to the facts about Communists about Communists in the articles on the Communists. Here, go back to facts about the political climate in the United States. THIS IS AN ARTICLE ABOUT THE POLITICAL CLIMATE IN THE UNITED STATES IN THE POST-WWI PERIOD AND THE 1950S! Please, please, please try to stay on topic this time. The sentiment of your edits may be just, but this is an encyclopedia and we do have to properly contextualize the placement of coverage. BTW, Fred says the "fear people felt is what is relevant." But we can't go back inside the heads of dead people and call their thoughts just. For that, go back to primary sources and dig up direct quotes. Wikipedia has the hyperlinks and the search box at the top; from these resources users can find their way to related topics on the Communists. 172 02:57, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
TDC, there are a number of perfectly good pages on the history of the Soviet Union, of the Cold War and of internatinal relations at the time. If you're going to claim that among the causes of the Red Scares were things going on in the Soviet Union that had no direct impact on whether on not the hunt for communists in the US really was baseless, you're essentially saying that the cause of the Red Scares was that Americans are utter idiots.
This article is not about why people feared communism. It is all about why they went off on a baseless witchhunt for communists at home. That there was a climate of fear of commmunism is in the text as is. Either accept a disputed label or accept an alternative text, but stop behaving like a five year old. And my family fled Stalin too, so get off your high horse. Diderot 05:18, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Diderot,
(Re: "baseless witchhunt for communists at home") We have to be inclined to reserve judgments for purposes of writing this article. Calling something a "baseless witchhunt" is no more appropriate in this article than TDC attempting to vindicate anticommunists retrospectively in this article. You probably knew that already, but saying things like that on the talk page is going to provoke people and put them on the defensive, thus causing disputes here to solidify. 172 06:46, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
172, I notice you added this sentence, "However, public officials' encouragement of this climate of fear was a major contributing factor in red scares of the 1940s and 1950s". As I recall there was a great stir about Communist advances after the war, mostly regarding Eastern Europe and China. Brainwashing (by the Chinese of prisoners of war) was another idea that captured the public's interest. This was all over the newspapers and the radio. Public opinion was profoundly affected. Politicians seem to have just been reflecting public opinion (or exploiting an existing climate of fear). Since you ask us for evidence, how about some evidence that public official's encouragement actually ass had any independent effect. Fred Bauder 11:54, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
Diderot 08:10, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I'd like to make a major change in the article and restrict its coverage to only the 1919 and 1920s events. McCarthyism would be only briefly mentioned. I am the one who first started this article after reading a book, Red Scare which in fact covers only McCarthyism. I think I errored in creating an article with this title which in fact refers to the earlier period. Fred Bauder 15:17, May 3, 2004 (UTC)
4.34.166.104 removed the following text:
with the justfication that "Fidel Castro in Cuba, not just N. Korea, scares his people about the USA potentially invading. So has every communist country at some point." I think this is not correct (although may be the sentence should be rephrased). I grew up in the Soviet Union and the issue of US attack or invasion or anything was hardly ever brought up in school, on TV, in the papers. My father grew up in 1960s and the public was not told that an attack is immenent or anything. Yes, there definitely were some warnings, in a few decades in a country of several hundred million people there must have been some, but it was by no means widespread - it would have been very uncommon occurence. We were told that American economic system is bad (and now that our country is no longer communist, I am an adult and I can watch American films such as The Corporation I realise that we were told the truth all along :) ), but we were never told that we will be fighting America in a war. Just to make myself clear - it's obvious that the Party leaders and the military considered the threat of attack to be quite real, but that's their job and it's not really the subject of the article. I haven't been to Cuba yet, but I've read enough Castro's speeches and nowhere does he appear scaring his compatriots. Yes, the threat of an American invasion is very real (because it happened many times in the past), unlike the threat of a Soviet invasion, but the public is not kept in constant fear by duck and cover exercises. Neither was the public in Iraq for that matter - until the attack was imminent, Iraqis were not constantly brainwashed that the US will attack (judging from what little material I found written by Iraqis in English online). So that's why I am reverting the change for now. Paranoid 23:46, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I've grown up in Eastern Europe (in Hungary) and although I don't know about the propaganda mentioning any imminent attack by the "imperialists", but the fear of "counter-revolution", i.e. an uprising against the soviet-backed governments was real.
In Hungary we had a special militia set up after the uprising in 1956 called the "Munkásőrség" (= Workers' Guard) created exactly for the purpose of suppressing any further insurgencies. There were uprisings in East Germany (1953), Hungary (1956), Prague (1968) all suppressed by Soviet tanks.
In the 50s we had propaganda movies, where the bad guy was usually a saboteur, who tries to undermine the building of communism. In some countries, they were real. ( Bay of Pigs Invasion, Operation Mongoose).
I'm not saying, that we were scared with an American invasion at any point in time, but there was a sense of anxiety and preparation for war. The governments had to justify the existence of huge conscripted armies (2 years conscription was not uncommon), the gigantic Soviet bases all over Eastern Europe, the big air-raid shelters I remember playing in as a kid. What would you need those for if the "imperialists" wouldn't want to attack? (Of course, all the communist countries were peaceful and would only act in self defence.)
Maybe that's why a lot of people find that specific sentence misleading. It suggests that Americans scared themselves with the communist threat, meanwhile the population of communist countries lived relaxed and laid back, knowing that the West would never attack us. This is just not entirely true.
Nyenyec 05:50, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've added the Cleanup-verify note to this page. Despite all the discussion, some of the facts need sourcing and possibly even the POV needs attention (again). The comparison to lynchings of German-Americans is especially questionable and requires a source, and I'm not sure it's even appropriate here if true. Frankly, I don't understand the reference to the Mongols and the Hun at all.
Opusaug 04:12, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
i have been studing the red scare and i need more information. please add whatever you can. Thanks
DJ, what do Prof. Kornweibel's books and research have to do with the Red Scare? Were most of the blacks who were investigated members of the Communist Party, or so suspected? Opusaug 21:46, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The short answer is yes, the Red Scare specifically targeted African American "radicals". Kornweibel's books review BI's internal communications as their tactics evolve into the full blown Scare. The book on 1919 - 21 is especially relevant. The book on WWI shows the genesis of the mania that would culminate years later.
The longer answer is that the repression worsened in the Red Scare, but wasn't new. The Bureau of Investigation I didn't just launch into the Red Scare without preparation. The BI was set up in 1909 to investigate anti-trust cases. In the run up to WWI, it began investigating people who opposed the war, or were insufficiently patriotic. Targets of the investigation included African American socialists and unionists, but also religious pacifists, people who agitated against lynching or wanted to solve problems in the US before going to war. After the war ended, the charges used to justify the investigations changed. Dissidents were assumed to be influenced by Bolsheviks rather than Germans. Internal memos quoted by Kornweibel show agents brushing off complaints about lynching. Some African Americans did join the incipient Communist party. See the entry on the African Blood Brotherhood for an example. BI documents show they took this as proof of the conspiracies investigators had alleged all along. The WWI book is pretty readable, if you can find it. The Red Scare book is more academic. DJ Silverfish 22:08, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that the page was being used to promote some secondary sources of undirectly related material. They may be useful on another article or in proper context. My edits are concerned with fixing this. Does anyone have any comments?
i was looking for more detail info on the movie stars and public figures that were affected by the red scare or a movie that was made about certain actors i would also like to find a website that tells about the positive things and improvements for the intertainment business if you know about the 20's era of movies and recommend any inparticular please comment on the wikipedia site.
Right in the beginning of the article it is written that "Both periods were characterized by the suspicion of widespread civil-service infiltration ..." but nowhere in that phrase, or introduction, does it specify who had these suspicions, and if they were generalized in american society, or the majority, or the minority, etc. The fact that in both time periods the labour movement in the US was very much active, and that the Red Scare suspicions where directed at their organizations, at least these would not have reasons to believe in these suspicions, moreover the fact that they were pratically crushed (in the 1920's) using that pretext. I would recommend the book A People's History of the United States, and a rationalization of these events (for example, knowing where those suspicions came from, as they didn't pop-up by themselves).
I attempted to rewrite the lede to be more neutral, and to include citations. It currently reads like an undergrad politics essay. There is no citation offered for the claim that a red scare is a form of right-wing propaganda. Whilst, theoretically, propaganda can give rise to a red scare, I can find no resources which claim that this is the defining feature of the phenomenon.
I intend to restore my changes, unless there is a good reason not to. Riposte97 ( talk) 07:36, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
relating to subversion of a nation or community by communists, socialists, or other leftist ideologies.conforms with WP:NPOV? A cherry-picked source does not make it that. Kleuske ( talk) 08:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Red Scare, period of public fear and anxiety over the supposed rise of communist or socialist ideologies in a noncommunist state. The term is generally used to describe two such periods in the United States. The first occurred from 1917 to 1920, amid an increase in organized labour movements, immigration, urbanization, and industrialization. The second period, also called McCarthyism after U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy, took place from roughly 1947 to 1954.But then again, a dictionary isn't exactly a source for history and one specifically geared towards the US military is less than neutral on the subject.
I recognise that this is potentially a politically contentious topic. To avoid an edit war, I'd request that we reach consensus here before making further revisions.I actually agree. Why don't you stick to that? Kleuske ( talk) 11:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
I have only skimmed through this wall of text, trying to get the main points.
Decisions on Wikipedia are primarily made by consensus, which is accepted as the best method to achieve Wikipedia's goals, i.e., the five pillars.You clearly do not have consensus, and yet, have inserted your preferred version once more.
The fact that right-wing propaganda has been a particular feature of American red scares, particularly McCarthyism, does not mean that all red scares are a function of RWP. This page is not intended to describe only American history.Both red scares are specifically U.S. history and the article does not mention anything but U.S. history.
In my view, it is so unimpeachable a description of the phenomenon as to be almost tautological.Your view is not generally accepted. The phraseology is not neutral, presents (your) opinions as fact.
You have now reverted various rewrites a total of five times.You have tried to push your POV into the article five times, while I have restored the status quo, the combined effort of many editors. You propose the change, you have to gain consensus for that change.
Although your actions are consistent with those of someone with a political axe to grind, I will assume you are acting in good faithand
you are obviously a competent editor elsewhereI resent these veiled insults.
I have added a section about the red scare in Australia (approx. 1920-1956). However, I am sure that many countries must have experienced red scares in a similar vein during the interwar period/cold war. If anyone is aware of examples, please feel free to add them. Riposte97 ( talk) 04:32, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Once more, what about the word "quote" [1] do you not understand? Truly curious. The abobe are not quotes, theyr a collection of websites you expect me to go through, finding none of them actually supports your claims, while you try to edit-war your POV into the article. You've pulled that trick before and I'm not falling for it again. Kleuske ( talk) 14:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
As to your "good will gestures", stick those where the sun don't shine. You do know that a slow-mo edit war is also prohibited, right. You trying to edit-war your WP:SYNTH into the article is getting tiresome. I think I said that before, but it bears repeating. Flat-out fibbing about sources does not elevate your credibility. Kleuske ( talk) 14:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
References
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Red Scare article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | Red Scare is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't know if there should be such specificity at the beginning of the article because it says later there has been more than one red scare in the U.S. And certainly there have been red scares in other countries. -- Daniel C. Boyer 17:42 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
I'm revising the article to make it clear that the term red scare contains a POV. One which really ought to be balanced with its opposite POV: namely, that Communists are a bunch of murderous thugs 1,000 times worse than the mafia.
Someone, please help make sure I don't accidentally over-state my case, in my current mood of zeal... -- Uncle Ed
After China admitted that Mao Tse-Tung had over 20 million civilians executed; and the New York Times admitted its Pulitzer-prize winning correspondent had covered up 6 million murders by Stalin in Ukraine; and the more recent genocide in Cambodia came to light, talk which dismissed communism as a screenwriter's fantasy diminished markedly.
Credit rightly accrued to Ronald Reagan for winning the Cold War and defeating communism in Europe.
I don't understand why it's a "mistake" to counterpose communism with the "Red Scare". I thought the POV of the Red Scare is that people were all bent out of shape over nothing -- that communism was "nothing to be scared of" -- a trumped up fear. I am balancing that POV with evidence that communism is indeed scary: murdering tens of millions of people is well-documented fact and shouldn't be deleted from the article.
I think the last two edits you made have been much better, Ed. Keep it up. :) DanKeshet 19:16, Nov 10, 2003 (UTC)
Re. "hysteria" I agree with Lance on this one. Google [1] returns more than 2,600 hits for the search "red scare" + hysteria. There is even a book, Red Scare: A Study in National Hysteria, 1919-1920 ISBN: 0070440751 which looks reasonably serious. I think there is a good case for stating it as a "hysteria." -- Viajero 20:54, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
"The term itself is arguably pejorative, belittling anti-communists by implying that their fears were overblown or hysterical."
I'm uncomfortable with this sentence. In both of the instances of "Red Scare" there was negligible communist threat to American society -- at least in proportion to the countless "Red Squads" that were organized with wide powers to suspend constitutional rights in order to investigate & arrest people thought to be helping the Soviet Union -- & who in too many cases were found to be either innocent of the charges, or guilty of nothing more than a lot of talk. -- llywrch 21:59, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I find it interesting that Red Scare is not linked to on moral panic. Woudl a link be POV or NPOV?
Addressing myself more to what MIRV wrote: distinguishing between the two -- American fear of a domestic communist overthrow, from the potential military threat of the Soviet Union would improve this article. The phenomenon of "Red Scare" also appears to be related to another American fear, the Yellow peril, which imagined imigrants from Japan, China & other Asian nations overrunning the businesses & properties of "respectable" Americans. (The warnings about Communism that I remember hearing always emphasized loss of property, free speech, religion, and promotion of "free love" -- similar to the threat of the "Yellow Peril.") For being the adopted home of so many nationalities, we Americans sure have our nasty xenophobic side. -- llywrch 19:36, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)
This article has nothing to do with the red scare, not about Soviet espionage which so far as it affected American communists or was participated in by them is a rather difficult area and needs to be addressed separately from this article which is in essence an article about an aspect of popular culture. Fred Bauder 00:30, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)
This article seems a shade POV. There were legitimate concerns during the "Red Scare" that are bieng glossed over here. TDC 01:48, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
172, add this to your action item memo: The Soviets lost the Cold War/. TDC 01:51, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Well, TDC, how about an nice article on Soviet espionage in the United States? Maybe a better title than that... Fred Bauder 03:05, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps ..................... TDC 03:34, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I removed the commentaries and personal essays. This is article on the Red Scares in the '20s and the '50s. The anti-Communism of key figures, such as Palmer, McCarthy, Hoover, etc. is relevant. Anti-Communism in 2004 is irrelevant. 172 05:55, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I removed this:
What is the evidence that this is indeed the intent? I understand that some people might perceive this to be the intent, which is why I did not touch the following sentence (which describes a criticism of people who use the term "red scare"). The second sentence does a fine job of providing an alternate view, but this sentence claims a motivation, a claim that is unsubstantiated. Slrubenstein
Fred and VV:
Stop making WP into a laughingstock. Before I removed the irrelevant personal commentaries, this article had mentioned Ann Coulter, but not Archangel, the IWW, Big Bill Haywood, the Espionage Act of 1917, the Sabotage Act of April 20, the Sedition Act of May 16, the Creel Committee on Public Information, etc. Warren Harding, who arguably quenched the first Red Scare, especially given the message sent by his pardon of Eugene Debs, wasn't mentioned either. The WWI-era Creel Committee on Public Information, e.g., is relevant in this article. But the off topic personal essays written by WP users in 2004 are not. I will continue to revert attempts to restore the text in question. I won't let you waste the time of readers seeking a brief, encyclopedic write up on the first Red Scare (1917-1921) and the one in early '50s. 172 18:37, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Your reasoning is based on the notion that people at that time had any reason to believe American Communists were different from or somehow disagreed with Stalin. We now know they were and did, but who knew then. At any rate we are talking about what people believed and above all feared. Not what was actually true. Keep in mind that many Americans of that period (and almost all Americans) of today had never met a Communist. Fred Bauder 19:30, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
No Fred, the question is whether American communists had any meaningful influence or had infiltrated American institutions on a scale that meritted paranoia, not how many people Stalin had killed.
I am not going to get into an edit war with TDC. But I challenge the contention that there was ever "a large number communist spies and sympathisers [...] constantly working to bring the downfall of the United States" anywhere on US soil. This is POV, it is not factual and it is entirely irrelevant to the case. At least this way readers have a warning that they are encountering bull.
Diderot 20:21, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC).
There has been dozens of great books on the subject written over the course of the past 10+ years. Intervies with hundreds of KGB agents and thousands of letters, diaries, intel briefings etc.. are cited in these books. Pick one the fuck up before you revert my entry again. TDC 01:16, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
You are still going back to facts about Communists, not to facts about the political climate in the United States. The fear people felt is what is relevant. Fred Bauder 22:06, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
Fred and TDC,
Go back to the facts about Communists about Communists in the articles on the Communists. Here, go back to facts about the political climate in the United States. THIS IS AN ARTICLE ABOUT THE POLITICAL CLIMATE IN THE UNITED STATES IN THE POST-WWI PERIOD AND THE 1950S! Please, please, please try to stay on topic this time. The sentiment of your edits may be just, but this is an encyclopedia and we do have to properly contextualize the placement of coverage. BTW, Fred says the "fear people felt is what is relevant." But we can't go back inside the heads of dead people and call their thoughts just. For that, go back to primary sources and dig up direct quotes. Wikipedia has the hyperlinks and the search box at the top; from these resources users can find their way to related topics on the Communists. 172 02:57, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
TDC, there are a number of perfectly good pages on the history of the Soviet Union, of the Cold War and of internatinal relations at the time. If you're going to claim that among the causes of the Red Scares were things going on in the Soviet Union that had no direct impact on whether on not the hunt for communists in the US really was baseless, you're essentially saying that the cause of the Red Scares was that Americans are utter idiots.
This article is not about why people feared communism. It is all about why they went off on a baseless witchhunt for communists at home. That there was a climate of fear of commmunism is in the text as is. Either accept a disputed label or accept an alternative text, but stop behaving like a five year old. And my family fled Stalin too, so get off your high horse. Diderot 05:18, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Diderot,
(Re: "baseless witchhunt for communists at home") We have to be inclined to reserve judgments for purposes of writing this article. Calling something a "baseless witchhunt" is no more appropriate in this article than TDC attempting to vindicate anticommunists retrospectively in this article. You probably knew that already, but saying things like that on the talk page is going to provoke people and put them on the defensive, thus causing disputes here to solidify. 172 06:46, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
172, I notice you added this sentence, "However, public officials' encouragement of this climate of fear was a major contributing factor in red scares of the 1940s and 1950s". As I recall there was a great stir about Communist advances after the war, mostly regarding Eastern Europe and China. Brainwashing (by the Chinese of prisoners of war) was another idea that captured the public's interest. This was all over the newspapers and the radio. Public opinion was profoundly affected. Politicians seem to have just been reflecting public opinion (or exploiting an existing climate of fear). Since you ask us for evidence, how about some evidence that public official's encouragement actually ass had any independent effect. Fred Bauder 11:54, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
Diderot 08:10, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I'd like to make a major change in the article and restrict its coverage to only the 1919 and 1920s events. McCarthyism would be only briefly mentioned. I am the one who first started this article after reading a book, Red Scare which in fact covers only McCarthyism. I think I errored in creating an article with this title which in fact refers to the earlier period. Fred Bauder 15:17, May 3, 2004 (UTC)
4.34.166.104 removed the following text:
with the justfication that "Fidel Castro in Cuba, not just N. Korea, scares his people about the USA potentially invading. So has every communist country at some point." I think this is not correct (although may be the sentence should be rephrased). I grew up in the Soviet Union and the issue of US attack or invasion or anything was hardly ever brought up in school, on TV, in the papers. My father grew up in 1960s and the public was not told that an attack is immenent or anything. Yes, there definitely were some warnings, in a few decades in a country of several hundred million people there must have been some, but it was by no means widespread - it would have been very uncommon occurence. We were told that American economic system is bad (and now that our country is no longer communist, I am an adult and I can watch American films such as The Corporation I realise that we were told the truth all along :) ), but we were never told that we will be fighting America in a war. Just to make myself clear - it's obvious that the Party leaders and the military considered the threat of attack to be quite real, but that's their job and it's not really the subject of the article. I haven't been to Cuba yet, but I've read enough Castro's speeches and nowhere does he appear scaring his compatriots. Yes, the threat of an American invasion is very real (because it happened many times in the past), unlike the threat of a Soviet invasion, but the public is not kept in constant fear by duck and cover exercises. Neither was the public in Iraq for that matter - until the attack was imminent, Iraqis were not constantly brainwashed that the US will attack (judging from what little material I found written by Iraqis in English online). So that's why I am reverting the change for now. Paranoid 23:46, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I've grown up in Eastern Europe (in Hungary) and although I don't know about the propaganda mentioning any imminent attack by the "imperialists", but the fear of "counter-revolution", i.e. an uprising against the soviet-backed governments was real.
In Hungary we had a special militia set up after the uprising in 1956 called the "Munkásőrség" (= Workers' Guard) created exactly for the purpose of suppressing any further insurgencies. There were uprisings in East Germany (1953), Hungary (1956), Prague (1968) all suppressed by Soviet tanks.
In the 50s we had propaganda movies, where the bad guy was usually a saboteur, who tries to undermine the building of communism. In some countries, they were real. ( Bay of Pigs Invasion, Operation Mongoose).
I'm not saying, that we were scared with an American invasion at any point in time, but there was a sense of anxiety and preparation for war. The governments had to justify the existence of huge conscripted armies (2 years conscription was not uncommon), the gigantic Soviet bases all over Eastern Europe, the big air-raid shelters I remember playing in as a kid. What would you need those for if the "imperialists" wouldn't want to attack? (Of course, all the communist countries were peaceful and would only act in self defence.)
Maybe that's why a lot of people find that specific sentence misleading. It suggests that Americans scared themselves with the communist threat, meanwhile the population of communist countries lived relaxed and laid back, knowing that the West would never attack us. This is just not entirely true.
Nyenyec 05:50, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've added the Cleanup-verify note to this page. Despite all the discussion, some of the facts need sourcing and possibly even the POV needs attention (again). The comparison to lynchings of German-Americans is especially questionable and requires a source, and I'm not sure it's even appropriate here if true. Frankly, I don't understand the reference to the Mongols and the Hun at all.
Opusaug 04:12, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
i have been studing the red scare and i need more information. please add whatever you can. Thanks
DJ, what do Prof. Kornweibel's books and research have to do with the Red Scare? Were most of the blacks who were investigated members of the Communist Party, or so suspected? Opusaug 21:46, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The short answer is yes, the Red Scare specifically targeted African American "radicals". Kornweibel's books review BI's internal communications as their tactics evolve into the full blown Scare. The book on 1919 - 21 is especially relevant. The book on WWI shows the genesis of the mania that would culminate years later.
The longer answer is that the repression worsened in the Red Scare, but wasn't new. The Bureau of Investigation I didn't just launch into the Red Scare without preparation. The BI was set up in 1909 to investigate anti-trust cases. In the run up to WWI, it began investigating people who opposed the war, or were insufficiently patriotic. Targets of the investigation included African American socialists and unionists, but also religious pacifists, people who agitated against lynching or wanted to solve problems in the US before going to war. After the war ended, the charges used to justify the investigations changed. Dissidents were assumed to be influenced by Bolsheviks rather than Germans. Internal memos quoted by Kornweibel show agents brushing off complaints about lynching. Some African Americans did join the incipient Communist party. See the entry on the African Blood Brotherhood for an example. BI documents show they took this as proof of the conspiracies investigators had alleged all along. The WWI book is pretty readable, if you can find it. The Red Scare book is more academic. DJ Silverfish 22:08, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that the page was being used to promote some secondary sources of undirectly related material. They may be useful on another article or in proper context. My edits are concerned with fixing this. Does anyone have any comments?
i was looking for more detail info on the movie stars and public figures that were affected by the red scare or a movie that was made about certain actors i would also like to find a website that tells about the positive things and improvements for the intertainment business if you know about the 20's era of movies and recommend any inparticular please comment on the wikipedia site.
Right in the beginning of the article it is written that "Both periods were characterized by the suspicion of widespread civil-service infiltration ..." but nowhere in that phrase, or introduction, does it specify who had these suspicions, and if they were generalized in american society, or the majority, or the minority, etc. The fact that in both time periods the labour movement in the US was very much active, and that the Red Scare suspicions where directed at their organizations, at least these would not have reasons to believe in these suspicions, moreover the fact that they were pratically crushed (in the 1920's) using that pretext. I would recommend the book A People's History of the United States, and a rationalization of these events (for example, knowing where those suspicions came from, as they didn't pop-up by themselves).
I attempted to rewrite the lede to be more neutral, and to include citations. It currently reads like an undergrad politics essay. There is no citation offered for the claim that a red scare is a form of right-wing propaganda. Whilst, theoretically, propaganda can give rise to a red scare, I can find no resources which claim that this is the defining feature of the phenomenon.
I intend to restore my changes, unless there is a good reason not to. Riposte97 ( talk) 07:36, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
relating to subversion of a nation or community by communists, socialists, or other leftist ideologies.conforms with WP:NPOV? A cherry-picked source does not make it that. Kleuske ( talk) 08:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Red Scare, period of public fear and anxiety over the supposed rise of communist or socialist ideologies in a noncommunist state. The term is generally used to describe two such periods in the United States. The first occurred from 1917 to 1920, amid an increase in organized labour movements, immigration, urbanization, and industrialization. The second period, also called McCarthyism after U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy, took place from roughly 1947 to 1954.But then again, a dictionary isn't exactly a source for history and one specifically geared towards the US military is less than neutral on the subject.
I recognise that this is potentially a politically contentious topic. To avoid an edit war, I'd request that we reach consensus here before making further revisions.I actually agree. Why don't you stick to that? Kleuske ( talk) 11:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
I have only skimmed through this wall of text, trying to get the main points.
Decisions on Wikipedia are primarily made by consensus, which is accepted as the best method to achieve Wikipedia's goals, i.e., the five pillars.You clearly do not have consensus, and yet, have inserted your preferred version once more.
The fact that right-wing propaganda has been a particular feature of American red scares, particularly McCarthyism, does not mean that all red scares are a function of RWP. This page is not intended to describe only American history.Both red scares are specifically U.S. history and the article does not mention anything but U.S. history.
In my view, it is so unimpeachable a description of the phenomenon as to be almost tautological.Your view is not generally accepted. The phraseology is not neutral, presents (your) opinions as fact.
You have now reverted various rewrites a total of five times.You have tried to push your POV into the article five times, while I have restored the status quo, the combined effort of many editors. You propose the change, you have to gain consensus for that change.
Although your actions are consistent with those of someone with a political axe to grind, I will assume you are acting in good faithand
you are obviously a competent editor elsewhereI resent these veiled insults.
I have added a section about the red scare in Australia (approx. 1920-1956). However, I am sure that many countries must have experienced red scares in a similar vein during the interwar period/cold war. If anyone is aware of examples, please feel free to add them. Riposte97 ( talk) 04:32, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Once more, what about the word "quote" [1] do you not understand? Truly curious. The abobe are not quotes, theyr a collection of websites you expect me to go through, finding none of them actually supports your claims, while you try to edit-war your POV into the article. You've pulled that trick before and I'm not falling for it again. Kleuske ( talk) 14:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
As to your "good will gestures", stick those where the sun don't shine. You do know that a slow-mo edit war is also prohibited, right. You trying to edit-war your WP:SYNTH into the article is getting tiresome. I think I said that before, but it bears repeating. Flat-out fibbing about sources does not elevate your credibility. Kleuske ( talk) 14:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
References