Chapter VI: Front Matter (6)

Even in death a member may become a pawn to enhance the Party. The passing of a prominent comrade invariably is the occasion for a “state funeral.” The departed member is now a valuable showpiece and his passing is exploited to the fullest extent. On such occasions the deceased lies in state on the day of the funeral, with “mourners” passing the bier. A large, blown-up photograph of the deceased, draped in black, hangs at the rear of the stage. An honor guard of from two to four comrades stands at attention wearing red armbands.

There is seldom a religious quality to the music, eulogies, or the “mourners’” conduct. At the “state funeral” of Mother Ella Reeve Bloor in 1951 the “mourners” talked, laughed, and smoked.

The eulogies are numerous and recount the contributions made by the deceased to the Communist Party, to the advancement of socialism, and state how the Party can learn from the life of the departed. At Mother Bloor’s funeral in New York City, for example, Pettis Perry, a member of the National Committee, said:

This is not farewell to you, Mother Bloor. We pledge to follow
in your footsteps.... We will build your Party and our Party
and some day we will have a nation and a society built on the
brotherhood of man....

At the funeral of Peter V. Cacchione, an elected member of the New York City Council, nineteen speakers delivered eulogies. Gilbert Green, then chairman of the Party in Illinois, speaking for the National Committee, observed that the deceased fell in the struggle as “a soldier in the cause of human freedom,” and vowed that the remaining comrades would take “the banner from his hands.”

After such services a cortege of automobiles laden with mourners journeys from the funeral hall to the cemetery. As Mother Bloor was lowered into her grave at Harleigh Cemetery in Camden, New Jersey, Walter Lowenfels, then the Philadelphia correspondent of the _Daily Worker_, read Walt Whitman’s poem, “The Mystic Trumpeter.”

At the Cacchione interment Henry Winston, a member of the National Committee, delivered these parting words, “We are confident, as you were, dear Pete, in ultimate victory.... We will carry out your heritage.”

Through it all runs the hope, not of life everlasting, but of communism everlasting—if the members can be stirred up to work harder.

12.

_Making Communist Man_

In the last chapter we examined life in the Party—the constant hustle, collecting of dues, registration of members, holding of conferences, issuing of instructions.

These activities, however, have a meaning more sinister than just keeping the Party going, a meaning that we over-look at our peril. It is this: the Party is a vast workshop where the member is polished and shined, his impurities melted out, his loyalty to communism strengthened. He is made into _communist man_.

The revolution requires, as Lenin taught, that the fanatical believer be a man who, if so instructed, will give his life to the cause. He’s the paid functionary we met in the last chapter, the agitator and propaganda agent we’ll see in future pages. Without him communism would be just another “ism.”

This type of man doesn’t just grow; he must be created. To understand fully how this happens, we must now briefly examine the Party’s educational, press, literature, and cultural programs, its chief weapons of indoctrination.

Suppose one joined the Party. How would these techniques of regimentation affect the new member? We can best consider this question under several headings.

Back to School

One of the first things a new member does is to go to a school. He’ll receive his instructions soon after joining, probably from his club chairman. And as long as he stays in the Party, he’ll continue to go to school. Even the grizzled veterans go. There’s a diabolical reason behind this, which we’ll soon see.

Most people don’t think of the Communist Party as an educational institution. Yet year after year the Party operates a school system of vast proportions: theory schools; orientation schools; specialized schools in current events, history, economics, social problems; schools in Party techniques: how to collect dues, recruit new members, serve as a club chairman, be a better public speaker; and, of course, schools on revolutionary tactics and procedure. In recent years the Party has been extremely subtle in teaching its doctrines of revolution, always remembering federal laws such as the Smith Act, which prohibits advocating the overthrow of the United States government by force and violence.

Education, in the communist scheme, means indoctrination, imbuing the member with qualities desired by the Party. The pertinent question always is: How can the member be trained to serve the Party better?

Classes are held on all levels—local, state, regional, and national, varying in length from an hour to several weeks. For security reasons members meet in an isolated building, a home, or even in an automobile or a public park. The teacher is usually a paid functionary or someone from the county or state educational commission. Class consists of an extended lecture, perhaps for an hour or so, followed by discussion. As a general rule, no note-taking is allowed. The class over, each student leaves, careful not to attract attention.

After the beginning, or orientation, school (where members are soaked with Aesopian double talk) is over, the member is ready for a more advanced class. Never is he told at the outset that he is being changed into a Bolshevik, that his loyalty is being shifted to Soviet Russia, and that the American government must be overthrown. That would scare him away. The Party’s indoctrination process is slow and gradual. The member himself seldom realizes that bit by bit his precommunist training is being extracted and replaced by Party ideology.

Most important, he is grounded in love of the Party. This is a cardinal duty of the communist teacher.

... the cause of Communism is the greatest and most arduous
cause in the history of mankind.

* * * * *

To sacrifice one’s personal interests and even one’s life
without the slightest hesitation and even with a feeling of
happiness, for the cause of the Party ... is the highest
manifestation of Communist ethics.

* * * * *

The true Communist ... must feel that the Party does not owe
him a thing; it is he who owes everything ... to the Party.

Party schools make extensive use of study outlines and lesson aids supplied by national, state, and local educational commissions. They are written in a simple style and slanted to the average reader. Many contain suggested readings, illustrative examples, and review questions. Usually Mimeographed, they deal with all phases of the Party’s program. Sample titles are “Lenin and Our Party,” “World Significance of the Events in China,” “New Members Session and Introduction in the Communist Party,” and “Farmers in the Coalition.”

Amazing attention is shown to detail. In advanced classes members will have homework and examinations. As part of the instruction, classes often are given practical “field work.” Students in one Midwestern school were dismissed, divided into teams, and sent to industrial plants to distribute Party literature. That evening they reassembled to discuss their experiences and receive ideas on how better to do the job.

The longer one stays in the Party, the more specialized are the classes he attends. The goal, of course, is to be selected to attend a national leadership school. This means going to New York City or a Party camp and staying several weeks. Students probably will not know the true names of their fellow students; they’ll remember them as Sam (an alias), the man with the crooked arm, the redheaded girl who talked so much, the old man with the green shirt. That’s part of the Party’s security program.

The communist educational system is extremely practical: training members to do what the Party needs. Perhaps more Mimeograph operators are needed; then there’ll be a Mimeograph school. Maybe more dues secretaries are needed; then there’ll be a dues secretaries’ school. All the time, through training, the member is being pulled more closely under Party discipline.

Home Study

Another indoctrination technique is self- or home study. Going to school is important, but at best it can be for only an hour a day or several weeks a year. More study is needed to bind the member to the Party.

One Party directive puts it this way:

Every Communist must read and study the classics of our
literature, past and present. Everyone must rigorously enforce
the slogan, “One night a week for Marxist study.”

Communists may be busy or deeply involved in other Party work. But they must also carry on self-study or, as the communists call it, _ideological self-cultivation_ or _raising the ideological level of the member_. This means daily readings in the communist bible—the works of Marx, Engels, and Lenin. (Following Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin, the late dictator’s works were appreciably de-emphasized in Party study programs.) This is not something optional; it is an absolute requirement. To study the communist “masters,” says the Party, is to be made “perfect” as they were “perfect”—and incidentally to make members work harder selling papers, collecting dues, and handing out leaflets.

In the final analysis this communist education, like all phases of the Party’s program, is geared to _revolutionary action_. “It is for the Party and for the victory of the revolution that we study.” The Party isn’t training its members just for fun. Each one must be steeled, hardened, and purified of his capitalist “scum,” “filth,” and “dirt.” The new member was born and reared under capitalism and, in communist eyes, therefore he is infected with “selfishness,” “intrigue,” “class attitudes.” “Is it anything strange,” one communist writer asks, “that there are muddy stains on a person who crawls out of the mud...?”

These stains must be washed off. It’s a lifetime job. Non-Party or “capitalist” attitudes keep cropping out. Some have been inherited, others newly acquired from capitalist contamination. That’s why even old-time members keep attending school. It’s like cleaning a skillet that tarnishes. Constant scrubbing (more indoctrination) is needed to make and keep the member ideologically pure.

Communist education is constantly seeking to destroy the “remnants of bourgeois ideology,” the undigested lumps of independence not yet crushed by communist thought control. That is the gnawing fear of all communist regimes: that an undigested lump will be missed, that somewhere lying undetected is a member who has not been completely indoctrinated. This individual is a potential enemy who may someday rise against his masters.

The Party has a term, _political maturity_, to signify the member who has been so indoctrinated that, as a matter of sixth sense, he will always know the Party line.

Party Literature

The Party’s literature program (comprising newspapers, magazines, pamphlets, and books) is a companion to Party schools and self-study in helping to create communist man.

These publications, regardless of their form, tell but one story, the Party’s story. The member must believe no other. For this purpose the Party is operating a multihundred-thousand-dollar propaganda machine.

Inside the Party the refrain is constantly heard: Buy our literature. “Got a nickel, mister? Try this pamphlet.” “You don’t want to miss our paper.” “Here, subscribe to _Political Affairs_” (the Party’s monthly theoretical magazine). The pressure is terrific. Party-operated bookstores and newspaper carrier routes distribute a steady stream of Party literature, as do the clubs themselves.

“We probably circulate more literature per member of our organization by ten times,” one former Party leader said, “than any other organization in existence.”

The Party’s chief newspaper is the _Daily Worker_ (and its week-end edition, _The Worker_), published in New York City. On the West Coast it’s the _People’s World_ (a weekly published in San Francisco).

Don’t think of the _Daily Worker_ in terms of your own daily newspaper. It is strictly a propaganda organ. A tabloid with bold, black headlines, its “news” stories, editorials, book reviews, even its sports columns, are slanted to promote the Party’s views.

For example, _Daily Worker_ sports writer Lester Rodney, in his column “On the Scoreboard,” praises “the phenomenal and growing successes of the Soviet Union in the world of sports.” He says, “... the answer is socialism. If Russians were just so all-fired hot as Russians, where were all their champion teams and athletes under the Czar?”

In obvious glee Rodney writes: “So fellow sports lovers, this socialism deserves a little open-minded study, at least, that’s clear. (There’s a fine school over on Sixth Ave. and 16th St. where you can study it if you’re lucky enough to be a New Yorker.)” The Jefferson School of Social Science, a front school, was then located at this address.

And Rodney couldn’t miss the chance for another propaganda plug:

Just one more thing and really the most important for today
with all the “Soviet menace” hogwash. No matter what you may
or may not think of their socialism, it is self-evident that a
nation which loves to play and is turning out fine athletes in
increasing numbers and building more and more sports fields is
a nation which is thinking about peace and not war.

The _Daily Worker_ serves as a unifier of policy, an organizer of action, and a Party builder. It is a public document. Hence, don’t expect to find there Party secrets, such as the identities of underground officials or decisions of confidential meetings. However, for those who understand its double talk it provides a quick means to communicate the Party line. Moreover, it does not let the membership forget the identity of the Party’s enemies and sometimes its friends. Like a vast searchlight, it gives direction to members, wherever they may be.

Day after day the _Daily Worker_ drills a central theme into its readers: that life in the United States is terrible; that only in communist countries, especially in the Soviet Union, is life worth living at all.

The day’s news is scanned for some incident to distort and use to browbeat the United States. Any action of the American government is always, somehow or other, part of a conspiracy to engulf the world in World War III. One rat in a tenement house becomes an army of rats devouring thousands of people. Pick out every weakness, real or imaginary. Stir up dissension. Try to weaken morale.

After Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin, the _Daily Worker_ carried some criticism of Soviet Russia, for the most part pertaining to anti-Semitism and illegal arrests. Certain aspects of Russia’s intervention in Hungary were also criticized. Highly novel for the _Daily Worker_, this criticism apparently reflected the personal views of John Gates, the editor. Gates, of all the top Party leaders, appeared to have been most affected by Khrushchev’s revelations. He was severely attacked, however, by other Party officials, including William Z. Foster, and his resignation was demanded. Nevertheless, despite this limited criticism, the _Daily Worker_ remained loyal to the over-all aims of Soviet Russia and continues to belittle, mock, and criticize American life.

This loyalty to things Russian has caused the _Daily Worker_ to perform some interesting gymnastics. A good example was the famous “Doctors’ Plot,” early in 1953, just before Stalin’s death. Moscow reported the arrest of nine doctors charged with plotting to kill high-ranking Soviet officials. “Moscow Nips Plot to Kill Army Chiefs,” headlined _The Worker_ (January 18, 1953), obviously happy. Then the doctors were suddenly released. Back-flipped _The Worker_ with the greatest of ease: “The Case of the Soviet Doctors, How a Socialist State Protects Its Citizens” (April 12, 1953).

In March, 1953, _The Worker_ reported Stalin’s death. “STALIN: Man of Peace,” “The Cobbler’s Son Who Built a New World,” “‘His Name and His Work Will Endure Through the Ages,’” “Stalin—Architect of a Working People’s World.” In 1956 the headlines shifted: “Lenin’s Principles Abandoned by Stalin,” “Minorities Were Exiled and Mistreated,” “Says Stalin Unleashed Mass Terror 1936-1937.” One writer headed his column: “Stalin Wasn’t God—And We Weren’t Angels.”

Communists regard themselves as “apostles” of a new order living in “enemy-controlled” territory. Communists claim that the _Daily Worker_ cuts through the “capitalist press” and its smog of “lies,” “distortions,” and “fakes,” bringing “truthful information.” This is the highest principle of a “free press.”

The communist press, with its bigoted, perverted, single point of view, is a disturbing reality. It seeks the definite, systematic, and mass indoctrination of the minds of men to trust only the Party. Truth becomes what a group of men say it is.

Here’s an example of how “freedom of the press” works for the communists:

A Party leader hurried toward the building where a convention was being held. Just outside the door he paused. An individual was handing out leaflets urging the election of a slate opposed by the Party.

“That guy ought to be thrown out,” the Party boss remarked to a companion. “He’s nothing but a Trotskyite. He shouldn’t be allowed around here.”

Some time later the same two men were again attending a meeting. This time the _Daily Worker_ was being sold outside. The companion objected, saying this wasn’t a communist meeting.

“Uh,” retorted the Party member. “This is a free country. You can’t stop him from passing it out.”

No wonder communism can operate only in the glow of book burnings. No opposite view can be tolerated. “Down with non-party writers!” Lenin demanded.

As an example, after Browder’s “fall from power” in 1945, many of his books were burned. Shifts in the Party line also cause book burnings. One New England headquarters, caught in a Party shift, destroyed three barrels of literature. What is “true” today in the Party may not be “true” tomorrow.

Modern-day techniques of literature dissemination extend the tyranny of communist indoctrination. The Party wants mass readership. Always remember that the communists are practical, everyday agitators. Why publish something at a high price that few will buy? There are few fancy bindings, engravings, or pictures. Communist publishing firms have exploited the publication of pamphlet-form editions and paper-backed volumes, anything to gain circulation and spread the communist message.

Prices are now higher, but communist literature is today being sold for five, ten, twenty, twenty-five, and thirty-five cents. Even these prices are considered too high. “I do not consider a five-cent pamphlet mass literature. We have to go back to mass penny literature ...,” one Party leader commented. Amazing circulations have been achieved. Editions of Lenin’s _Imperialism_ and _State and Revolution_, totaling 100,000 copies each and costing ten cents a copy, were issued. Other pamphlets were printed in editions totaling 307,000; 275,000; 350,000; 440,000.

Everything possible has been done to make available in English the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin. A twelve-volume series of Lenin’s _Selected Works_, over 6000 pages, sells for twenty-five dollars. Marx’s _The Civil War in France_ is offered for a dollar and fifty cents (cloth); paper-bound, twenty-five cents. The most important writings of Lenin are made available in the “Little Lenin Library” (for Marx it’s the “Little Marx Library”), with prices ranging from five to ninety cents. Many foreign communist writings are also printed. During the period 1948-55, according to a report of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the writings of Lenin were more widely translated than the Bible, with Stalin’s writings ranking third. Mention should also be made of communist-shop leaflets, neighborhood papers, and throwaways that are placed on doorsteps, thrown into parked cars, or scattered in buildings. Generally Mimeographed, they represent an easy, cheap, and effective method of stirring up trouble.

The pressure is terrific—buy, buy, buy. Widely publicized campaigns to sell the _Daily Worker_ are regular features of Party life. The more communist material a member reads, the less time he has for reading “capitalist propaganda.”

Cultural Indoctrination

Even if a member faithfully went to school, studied at home, and read Party literature, he would still have spare time during which non-Party thoughts might seep in. That would never do.

Every facet of the member’s life, even when he plays the piano, sings, goes to a movie, sees a painting, or reads a book, must be saturated with communism. Art doesn’t exist for art’s sake. Art, as Lenin taught, is a weapon of the class struggle. “Culture” becomes an indoctrinal spray seeking to control every part of the member’s heart, mind, and soul.

The member is subjected to a barrage of Russian, satellite, and native communist “cultural” propaganda. There are art exhibits, folk dances, theater groups, nationality bazaars. Many of these are carried on through front groups and hence not labeled as communist. The _Daily Worker_ advertises Soviet movies, which are often shipped to Party units across the country. Short stories, novels, and poetry come in steady streams. Forums extol the virtue of Soviet life. Here, the communists say, is the new “people’s culture,” bringing the “real truth.”

The theme is always the same: Russia and communism represent a new world of “hope,” “promise,” and “achievement,” creating “communist man” in all his “remarkable spiritual qualities.” The United States is a “weak,” “decadent,” and “sick” country, dominated by vulgar tastes, thievery, and debauched living. No wonder, according to the _Daily Worker_, the Soviet soldier in World War II spent his time reading Shakespeare and Tolstoy while the “uncultured” GI read assorted inferior trash!

The member is urged to read Soviet literature and see the “glorious” communist “hero” working his heart out for the regime. This “hero”—usually just an ordinary, plain fellow (like the member)—can repair a blast furnace in one day instead of the usual six to eight weeks. Why? For the glory of communism. Another “hero” is sad and disheartened. He has bungled his factory job. He wasn’t doing his share. But a strong arm is around his shoulders, the arm of an experienced worker. He’ll show the worker “hero” how to break production records, for communism—when in real life he might be headed for a slave labor camp.

Day after day this propaganda is dinned into the member.

Children are included. The Party feels that the basic responsibility of indoctrinating the child lies with the communist parents. A member in Buffalo announced, for instance, that a class for children, aged five to seven, would be held in the basement of her home. Ironically, it was called “Sunday school” because it was held on Sunday. But, the member added, this school was not to teach “the word of God or in any way teach religion.” The instruction obviously would be directed to the fundamentals of Marxism.

Books are published for children. One, _Our Lenin_, is a story of Lenin’s life, translated and adapted “for American children.” In this an American worker is quoted: “‘It [the Soviet Union] will last forever, and we here will follow its example.’” It’s a steady diet of propaganda.

Suppose the member wants to write, paint, or compose music? He, too, must follow the Party line. His work must promote communism.

Some of the writings are very crude, but they get across the Party line. Here’s a poem that appeared in the _Daily Worker_ shortly after Stalin’s death, eulogizing the Soviet dictator:

He was melted in the open hearth of feudal czarist oppression
He was forged in the fire of revolution
His chemistry was the chemistry of struggle
And left him as pure as the hope of liberation of the working class
He was alloyed with large masses of the Soviet peoples and heaping
shovelfuls of international brotherhood with just the right
amount of love for humanity to finally make—
A man of steel....

An artist wants to paint a flock of birds in a tree. That’s silly, the Party says. There’s no communist message. Here’s how his idea can be improved.

Make one bird a white dove and, presto, you’re right in line with the communist “peace” offensive. Another improvement: Put a mean-looking capitalist “warmonger” under the tree taking aim at the peaceful dove.

Just the name of the picture often gives a communist twist. A drawing of a sleeping child, cuddling her baby bear, couldn’t be labeled “Slumber.” No propaganda there. “Too Hungry to Stay Awake” would be better, to show how people are starving in the United States. A young lady walking down the street smiling and confident isn’t “Girl on a Stroll” but “Battler for Peace.” The beauty and power of any work of art must be measured by “the degree to which it is permeated with the ideas of Communism.” This is the way, the communists say, that the masses can be directed.

The Party, in the final analysis, has an interpretation for the whole of human life. Nothing is untouched: science, psychology, sex, love, care of children, literature, history, the origin and end of life. Everything must be absorbed. Communism is a unitary, all-embracing, and absolute system.

Not only the present but also the past must be controlled. Communist writers have already reinterpreted American history, claiming that the Party is today the true inheritor of the traditions of 1776. They seek to associate themselves with such men as Paine, Jefferson, and Lincoln, whom they identify as “advanced fighters” for the ideals that the communists claim they now represent. For example, the _Daily Worker_ on Lincoln’s Birthday in 1953 said, “Lincoln’s heritage is carried forward mainly by the working class and its Marxist party.”

In literature they seek to pervert such writers as Walt Whitman and Mark Twain, claiming, for instance, that Whitman’s love of freedom is the story of their own aims. “... poet and prophet of a people’s democracy” was the _Daily Worker’s_ salute.

The Party conducts an annual pilgrimage to Whitman’s tomb in Harleigh Cemetery, Camden, New Jersey. Mother Bloor, the “old mother” of communism, made a fetish of her alleged friendship with Whitman.

Twain’s life, a _Worker_ article asserted, was an inspiration to fight against “imperialism and war.”

Carried to its logical conclusion, this attitude creates different holidays, customs, and habits for the communists. Christmas, for example, is exploited for propaganda purposes; it is a time to send out cards for “peace,” to urge amnesty for communists in jail, to appeal for funds. It holds no religious significance for Party members. A communist America would celebrate the birth of Karl Marx rather than the birth of Christendom.

This constant saturation with communism, through Party education, literature, the press, and “culture,” has had its effect in shaping communist man. A comrade writing in _Party Voice_, organ of the New York State Communist Party, frankly admitted what is happening:

I have no doubt that there are comrades in our movement who
have not read a single American book outside of progressive
literature in many moons but who can discuss in detail the
latest Soviet book or periodical from China. ... we have many
comrades who have been brought up on Soviet culture and who are
not familiar with the cultural life of our own people.

* * * * *

There are some comrades who never see an American film but
confine their movie-going to nothing but foreign films. There
are others who see only the decline and fall of American
culture but fail to see what is new and growing.

So far has the creation of communist man gone that, in some instances, Party members are embarrassed to salute the American flag. The _Party Voice_ comrade tells how embarrassed he felt as he hesitantly saluted the flag at a Memorial Day parade. “At times I looked up and down the street and hoped, inwardly, that none of my ‘left’ friends were looking at me.” So great is the erosion of patriotism that the author even poses this question: “Should Communists know the verses of the Star-Spangled Banner?”

This is how communism is working to promote an alien way of life in America. The whole story, however, is still not told. How are all these facets of Party life held together? What gives a ruthless uniformity to Party actions? We must now turn to a study of Party discipline, a system of terror that holds Party members in the grip of an unbelievable tyranny.

13.

_Communist Discipline_

In communist eyes the processes of education, the press, and “culture,” which we considered in the last chapter, are not enough for molding the revolutionary. Important as they are, they must be supplemented by _communist discipline_, a discipline that enforces uniformity, ensures Party supremacy, and files fanaticism to a sharp cutting edge.

Modern-day communism, in all its many ramifications, simply cannot be understood without a knowledge of communist discipline: how it is engendered, how it operates, how it tears out man’s soul and makes him a tool of the Party. The very core of communism is discipline. Without it communism would lose much of its momentum, terror, and striking power.

The Party’s constitution provides for disciplinary action. An elaborate “appeals” framework is provided whereby a series of “courts” is available to hear “charges,” with the National Convention being the “court” of final resort. Generally speaking, disciplinary problems are handled, on all levels of the Party, by Review and Control Commissions (often called Security Commissions). They serve as the “courts” to discipline any member who might be hostile to the Party.

These “courts” must not be confused with courts as we know them in the American judicial system. Run by hardened, old-time comrades, they are weapons of Party discipline. “Sentences” are meted out on the basis of expediency, not justice. Rules of evidence, the fair balancing of opinions, and the seeking of truth play no role. Communist discipline is a repugnant totalitarianism.

Here is the account of one victim of communist discipline. John Lautner had been a member of the Communist Party for more than twenty years. He had risen through the ranks until he was a member of the National Review Commission of the Communist Party; he headed the New York Review Commission, was security officer for the Party headquarters building, then at 35 East 12th Street, New York City. He considered himself a dedicated member of the Party.

One day in January, 1950, he was told to proceed to Cleveland, Ohio, to help in perfecting plans for the communist underground in Ohio. Upon arrival he was taken ostensibly to a Party meeting in the basement of a residence. There he was ordered to remove his clothes and for a period of several hours was subjected to the basest of indignities. He was told that he would not leave alive as six other communists, who Lautner said had “butcher knives,” “revolvers,” “rubber hoses,” and a “recording machine,” started questioning him about his knowledge of the underground, his army record, his relationship with Hungarian defectees, and his reports to federal agencies. He was accused of being an enemy agent, a spy, of hiring unreliable people to work in the Communist Party defense office, and protecting government “spies” in the Party. Actually, Lautner was innocent of these charges, and the Party’s injustice inured to the government’s benefit. Finally Lautner had the presence of mind to state that he had left at his hotel the name of one of the communist officials conducting the star-chamber proceedings. He was released and returned to New York, where he read in the _Daily Worker_ that he had been expelled from the Party as an enemy agent.

Lautner even filed an appeal of this expulsion order but never received an answer. Several months later he came to the FBI with his story for the first time and since has testified in several legal proceedings. Such is the way communist “justice” is dispensed in the United States.

In this connection we must distinguish between the discipline that communism can exact when it is in state control, as in Russia, Hungary, and China, and when it is not. Communists in the United States cannot exact the death penalty; they cannot operate slave labor camps; they cannot deport families to isolated areas. Yet the disciplinary actions of the Communist Party, USA, as we shall see in the “purge” of Earl Browder in 1945, show unmistakably that communists in this country think and would like to act in disciplinary matters precisely as do communists behind the Iron Curtain. Moreover, the stronger the Party in this country, the more able it has been to enforce its discipline. Every Party member should realize that, by working to strengthen the Communist Party, he is thereby giving the Party greater power to discipline him in the future. Today, at most he can be expelled and vilified, unless he is subjected to the treatment given John Lautner. We can readily conjecture, however, recalling the purge trials under Stalin, what could happen here if communism ever controlled our government.

Communist discipline is a part of the everyday life of the Party. It is not something that can be developed overnight or learned exclusively from a book. It comes gradually from attending schools, reading, and doing Party work. A “conscience of responsibility,” as one old-time member explained it, is created; a feeling that, whatever your personal desires and responsibilities, _the Party’s orders come first_; that every task is surrounded by a Party “halo of sanctity,” thereby becoming an emergency urgently demanding instant handling; that a “guilty” feeling arises if the member relaxes for a moment or doesn’t do the job assigned by the Party “boss.”

In the communist system, discipline means _conscious_ and _voluntary_ submission to the will of the Party. To obey Party instructions is regarded as a high ethical duty, to be undertaken joyously and willingly as an honor and privilege, never as bondage. Not to obey is unthinkable and a matter of personal shame and Party irresponsibility. This is the terrifying danger of communist discipline—that in the name of freedom, by appealing to the most noble qualities in man, the human being is pushed into deepest tyranny.

Communist “courts” seek out those who do not “knuckle under” to communist discipline. If a mistake is made from bad judgment, a lapse of memory, or lack of knowledge, that is one thing. This can be corrected by more “education.” But if the member persists in error, that is, doesn’t follow undeviatingly the Party line, he must be “flayed without mercy.” “... an organization of real revolutionaries,” says Lenin, “will stop at nothing to rid itself of an undesirable member.”

Members may be disciplined for many reasons. One of the most serious is being a _deviationist_, that is, differing from the Party line. This charge has led to wholesale purges in the past, including the ousting of such leaders as Lovestone, Gitlow, Browder, and literally hundreds of lesser members.

The Party claims to be an “advanced” element, teaching the noncommunist masses the “glories” of socialism. As leaders, communists must be “in front” of the less informed yet not too far ahead to be out of sight. Just where to be at any given time is decided by the Party inner clique. Anyone disagreeing is a deviationist, guilty of either _left-wing sectarianism_ or _right-wing opportunism_.

Some individuals, the communists say, may stray too far to the left. They want the Party to be more militant, to hurry up the revolution. They rush on ahead, forgetting to guide the noncommunists. That’s wrong, says the Party. Such an attitude would isolate the Party, make it an ineffectual sect. These individuals are guilty of left-wing sectarianism. They must turn around and come back.

On the other hand, many members lag behind the correct position. They disregard the Party’s role as an “advanced teacher” and allow it to work too closely with capitalism. They are right-wing opportunists, equally as guilty as left-wing sectarians. They had better rid themselves of this “capitalist complex” and catch up.

These terms sound massive. To communists, however, they are everyday expressions. Time after time in Party meetings the charge will be heard, “He’s an opportunist,” or, “He’s a left-wing sectarian.” To the communists that’s like calling a man a thief or coward.

You can well imagine how these “errors” are corrected. Disciplinary scythes can cut down anyone disliked by the leadership. If you want to get rid of a comrade, accuse him of left-wing sectarianism or right-wing opportunism. He’ll probably then be hauled into Party “court.” Disciplinary vogues sweep the Party: for a while, left-wing sectarianism becomes popular, then right-wing opportunism. After Browder’s removal in 1945 as a right-wing opportunist (also called _revisionist_), the style was to criticize opportunism. Since the Geneva Conference of 1955 the fashion has been to attack left-wing sectarianism.

Another serious error is _chauvinism_, applied to a member who supposedly thinks himself superior to others.

Any member can bring charges, no matter how silly, trivial, and stupid. That’s a communist technique: always keep members in fear. Never must a comrade become secure, complacent, or unconcerned. He must constantly be worrying about “what’s coming next.” This prevents the entrenchment of Party bureaucrats and the formation of cliques; it makes discipline easier to impose.

Perhaps, in his Party work or in his personal affairs, a member has given more attention to Mr. A than to Mr. B. If Mr. B’s feelings have been hurt, he may bring formal charges. In one instance, a group of Party comrades made plans to hold a picnic, then invited two additional comrades. The two declined, saying that by being asked at the last minute they had been slighted. Result: they planned to bring charges of chauvinism.

There are different types of chauvinism. _White chauvinism_, for example, means that a white comrade, through word or deed, has “slighted” or shown that he feels himself better than a Negro comrade. If the reverse is true—that a Negro member considers himself superior to a white comrade—this leads to the error of _inverted white chauvinism_ or _Negro nationalism_. Then there is _male chauvinism_, also called _male supremacism_, when men comrades “look down on” the position of women. In one instance a man was accused of disapproving of his wife’s smoking. He was a male supremacist. If a woman thinks she is superior to a man, that’s _commandism_.

Still another cause for disciplinary action is the charge of being an _informer_. Ever since 1949, when FBI informants testified at the first New York Smith Act trial, communists have been terrified of informers. They go all-out to catch “spies.” Member after member, completely innocent of the Party’s charges, has been expelled. “If you have to kick ten guys out to get the right one,” a comrade explained, “that’s the way to do it.” In one instance Party officials without any authority searched the home of a member “under suspicion.” In another instance an anonymous letter was received at national headquarters charging, among other things, that a high Party official was “a big bag of wind.” The Party instantly collected typewriting samples, hoping to catch the culprit.

The Party, as part of its disciplinary program, encourages what is called self-criticism. The communists point to this technique as proof of the democratic nature of their Party. Actually, however, self-criticism plays into the hands of the ruling clique, enabling it to detect discontent and criticism of its leadership. It becomes an effective disciplinary technique to keep the membership in submission.

Members are encouraged to criticize themselves and others. A well-established Party admonition is: “Test your work against Marxist-Leninist principles. Is anything wrong? Why did the registration program fall short? Are the officers of the club doing their duties properly? Why weren’t more pamphlets sold?” The membership is expected to bewail its errors, to say, “We were wrong. Have mercy on us. We will do better.” They prostrate themselves before Party bosses. For those who don’t “confess,” there are others to point out their errors. What else could be asked?

When a comrade confesses, the communist custom is for other members to heap abuse on him, often in the most sarcastic and sneering manner. “You’re a deviationist.” “You’re a chauvinist!” The idea is to drive the member to the lowest depths of humiliation.

When Earl Browder was deposed in 1945, a national officer suggested that he be given a job scrubbing floors at national headquarters. Browder later told the Yonkers, New York, communist club, “If there had been any evidence that there existed a real need for my services in this capacity, I would gladly have given them.”

Members often work themselves into a state of frenzy, tearing apart their best friends. Sometimes self-criticism becomes contagious, with Party sections and committees confessing en masse.

Tongues are sharp, but comrades soon learn whom to criticize. To attack a fellow comrade, especially one you don’t like, is the thing to do. In attacking the club chairman the comrade had better take things a little slowly. If he is a friend of the chairman’s superior and thinks he can get the chairman’s job, then it’s proper. If not, he should be content with self-criticism. Good Party manners would say “no” to disparaging a state or national leader, unless one was assigned as a “hatchet man” for another top official. Communist criticism flows more safely downward than upward.

Criticism is encouraged—but it must be of the right kind. An organizer isn’t doing his job. To criticize him is proper; that’s _constructive criticism_, designed to make the Party stronger. “But this criticism,” one high official said, “must never depart from the line of the Party....”

That’s the crux: Criticism must be limited to how the Party line can best be advanced. Anything else is _destructive criticism_. It’s like a house full of furniture. A comrade is permitted to discuss how the furniture can be arranged, whether the blue chair should be in the front room or the bedroom. But as soon as he questions the size of the house, whether a new room should be added, or the entire house destroyed and rebuilt, well, that’s too much. The Party line must not be questioned.

Some members learn the hard way. They push criticism too far and are quickly put in place.

John was highly regarded as a club chairman. He was aggressive and a hard worker. Promotion was his reward. He was sent by the National Committee to another city as a section organizer. Soon things began to hum. He reorganized some clubs. He shifted other Party activities. He was putting his ideas to work.

Then he went one step too far. He suggested that the state organization, headed by his superior, could be improved. John should have known better. An organizer can work out new schemes to sell the _Daily Worker_, to recruit members, and to reshuffle clubs; in fact, that is Party initiative. But he doesn’t criticize state chairmen and, as John did in this instance, threaten to take up the matter directly with national headquarters.

John quickly became the fellow who “went up fast, down faster.” State headquarters, in a special report, severely criticized him and recommended additional Party training. The result: He was recalled and assigned to an insignificant desk job. He had to learn his lesson.

Destructive criticism may lead to _factionalism_, which, in Party eyes, is open rebellion. A member holds a critical opinion. Others agree and soon a faction, or group hostile to the Party line, is formed. Every resource of the Party is mobilized to destroy it.

For a show of democracy, the Party’s constitution says:

Every officer and member shall have the right to express a
dissenting opinion on any matter of Party policy with respect
to which a decision has been made by majority vote of the
appropriate Party committee or convention, _provided that such
dissenting officer or member does not engage in factional or
other activity which hinders or impedes the execution of such
policy_. [Emphasis supplied.]

In other words, in practice any criticism that “hinders” the Party line is called factionalism and is forbidden.

Often, factionalism becomes so pronounced that an entire group is expelled. The Communist Party, with its unreasonable discipline and rigid structure, is peculiarly susceptible to factionalism. There are in America today a number of Marxist factions (called _splinters_), each small in number and with varying degrees of hostility to the Communist Party.

Noncommunists will have difficulty in understanding the utter inhumanity of communist discipline. It is a discipline that pervades every facet of life, drives wedges between husband and wife, and separates families. The best friends today, because of a Party action, may become the bitterest enemies tomorrow.

A Party member heard that her husband, a high-ranking functionary, had just been expelled. The shock was terrific.

He claimed that he was innocent. “I didn’t do anything,” he stated. And he was right. The charges were completely false. But she refused to believe. She double-checked with Party headquarters. They said he was guilty. The more she thought about it, the angrier she became. Her eyes grew bitter and her mouth curled with scorn. Finally her decision was made.

“Get out of this house,” she ordered. “I don’t want you around. You’re a traitor. Now, OUT!”

Without hesitation she accepted the Party’s version, refusing to believe her own husband. The wedge of Party discipline had conquered. The husband was driven away from his own home and his own child. Loyalty to the Party supersedes all emotions of love and mercy and justice.

In California the parents of a young lady were Party members. Both had held high offices in their section. They objected to their daughter’s staying out with another Party member until four and five o’clock in the morning, and claimed it was injuring her health and her progress in school. The daughter’s boy friend complained to a Party functionary that he was being discriminated against because he was a Negro. The girl’s mother, a former section chairman, defended her action. The daughter then took the floor and charged her parents with chauvinism. They were expelled and the daughter then married the complainant.

The Party’s constitution provides a number of specific penalties of increasing severity, including expulsion.

The mildest Party penalty is _reprimand_, usually designed to assist Party members in correcting their mistakes. This may take the form of _private censure_, such as, “You had better be on time in the future,” or, “Your work wasn’t well organized.” Somewhat more severe is _public censure_, whereby through written notice or public announcement a comrade is reprimanded. In this way others know of the Party’s disapproval.

Then there is _probation_. This may involve a shift from one type of work to another or an assignment to special tasks. If the offender is a paid Party official, he may be demoted (for example, from a state office to a minor position) or transferred to another city. Next is _suspension_, usually for a specific length of time. This amounts to a temporary relief of assignments. The most severe penalty, next to expulsion, is _removal from office_. In such instances the comrade may be stripped of all Party assignments and demoted to being a mere rank-and-filer. This is a hard jolt, especially with the whole Party watching. These acts are object lessons to the membership. “Comrade, be careful. Don’t you do the same.” Fear plays an important role in communist discipline.

The most drastic penalty, of course, is _expulsion_, and thousands of case examples, even of the highest leaders, form mute evidence.

Once the communists turn on a comrade, the treatment is complete. For example:

Earl Browder, onetime General Secretary, was expelled in February, 1946, for

... developing factional activity and for betraying the
principles of Marxism-Leninism and deserting to the side of the
class enemy—American monopoly capital.

Sam Donchin, Associate Editor, _Daily Worker_, until shifted to leadership position on the Party’s Education Commission, was also expelled. The _Daily Worker_ on March 12, 1951, in announcing his expulsion, said, “Donchin was expelled for factionalism, anti-Party activities, hostility to the line of the Party and to the Party leadership, and white chauvinism.”

The announcement continued: “Donchin tried to cover up his factionalism in the name of criticism and self-criticism in the Party. He demagogically tried to identify criticism and self-criticism in the ranks of the Party with a right to carry on factional conduct in the Party.”

Once a former member breaks with the Party and testifies or makes a public statement, he can expect a merciless campaign of vilification. On April 10, 1952, the well-known stage and screen director, Elia Kazan, appeared before the House Committee on Un-American Activities and testified that he had been in the Party for a year and a half in the 1930’s and quit because of the regimentation and thought control that had been directed at him. Two days later he took a paid advertisement in the New York _Times_ explaining his reasons. _Daily Worker_ writer Samuel Sillen on April 17, 1952, gave Mr. Kazan the full treatment with such vitriolic words as:

We have seen a lot of belly-crawling in this time of the toad,
but nothing has quite equaled last week’s command-performance
by Hollywood director Elia Kazan.... Not even in Hitler days
did renegade intellectuals sink so low.... Kazan is not content
with being a toad. He must also be a philosopher of toadyism.

Communist discipline, however, is not blind or without a deceitful purpose. Individuals should not be expelled impulsively but should be shown the error of their ways. Only when he is deemed “unimprovable” is a member to be ousted. For this reason offenders are often compelled to perform special “disciplinary chores” to “earn their way back,” to show through hard work, devotion, and acknowledging the supremacy of the Party that they should be readmitted to favor. In a Northern city, for example, an official in disfavor was placed in charge of arranging a mass meeting. He had to “prove” himself by doing the most menial tasks—running errands, selling tickets, recruiting ushers—he who used to be a keynoter himself. In most instances the more menial the task, the better. In Party eyes, a member who has gone through this self-abasement becomes a better comrade because of it. All thought of resistance is pounded out and he becomes a viable Party tool. He can be reprimanded, criticized, treated in a brutally unfair manner, yet he’ll keep on working. Lash him, and he’ll clench his teeth tighter. That’s the true revolutionary, in communist eyes.

The key is always acknowledging the supremacy of the Party. Hence, one of the fastest ways “back” is to acknowledge it quickly and completely.

In a Midwestern section an old-time organizer was accused of conduct detrimental to the Party. In a report read at an executive committee meeting he admitted his error. His conduct had been atrocious. Everything charged was true. He should have known better. He was ready to accept punishment. He even suggested his own removal as organizer. This attitude was exactly what the Party wanted. The state office did not relieve the organizer, though cautioning him that if his conduct were repeated, more severe action would be taken. The result: public (and mild) reprimand, not suspension or removal from office.

This explains why, in some instances, severe errors receive minor penalties, whereas small mistakes result in expulsion. The test is often not what a member did wrong but his attitude after the error was committed. If the member is willing to admit his mistake, real or fictitious, accept punishment gladly, and still maintain absolute faith in the leadership, he will probably soon be restored to favor. If he tries, however, to defend himself in the light of the evidence, he must be dealt with harshly. On one occasion a member involved in domestic difficulties replied “none of your business” to an inquiry by the Party. He wasn’t long in good standing. In Party language, he showed no “political capabilities,” meaning he was not amenable to discipline.

The Communist Party has a systematic campaign of creating hatred against the expelled member. It is not enough just to expel him; he must be vilified, blackened, and made to appear the scum of the earth.

These individuals become “spies,” “stool pigeons,” “rats,” “Trotskyites,” “renegades,” and “degenerates.” To communists, ordinary curse words have no meaning. They have a vocabulary all their own. Hence, “opportunist,” “deviationist,” and “anti-Party” are their choicest terms of defamation, of characterizing a person as being the meanest, foulest, most black-hearted derelict imaginable.

The higher in Party leadership the ousted member has risen, the greater must be the efforts to defame him. For example, Robert Wood, the Party’s onetime Eastern railroad organizer, was expelled with an explosive statement in the _Daily Worker_ on March 23, 1951, which said:

... various violations of Party discipline, for panic in the
face of the fire of the class enemy, for acts endangering the
Party, for issuing instructions in the name of the Party which
were unauthorized and false, for acts of white chauvinism, and
for conduct unbecoming and inconsistent with his post of Party
leadership.

From the campaign of vilification there arises a fantastically bitter element of communist discipline and hatred. Every man, woman, and child in the membership must be mobilized against the accused. One Party manual, written by a top leader, recommended:

1. Photograph the spy, and print his picture in the _Daily
Worker_ and in leaflets and stickers....

2. Organize systematic agitation among the workers where the
spy was discovered.

3. Mobilize the children and women in the block in the part of
town where the stool pigeon lives to make his life miserable;
let them picket the store where his wife purchases groceries
and other necessities; let the children in the street shout
after him or after any member of his family that they are
spies, rats, stool pigeons.

4. Chalk his home with the slogan: “So-and-So who lives here
is a spy.” Let the children boycott his children or child;
organize the children not to talk to his children, etc.

This represents the utter depths of depravity, hate, and inhuman venom to which the Party will descend in order to wreak vengeance on an expelled member.