If somebody was advocating the violent overthrow of the US government to impose communism, I do see that as something the government should be concerned about.
I am troubled though about our government trying to figure out if a sitcom writer ever was a member of the communist party and to grill them under oath.
Should we have in the 90's, grilled every person who intellectually agreed with the militia movement? I am just wondering if the cure is greater than the disease? A limousine communist in Hollywood, who wanted the workers to unite, and was actually more of a socialist, than a hardcore commie, was probably being swept up in this. They may be wrong, wrong about politics, economics, ideology, but, so what? As long as they weren't spying for the Soviet Union, what business is it of the federal government if they wanted a Utopian world where everybody sang kumbaya while they shared all the wealth? It doesn't work that way, but I don't think it's a federal offense.
The times were different, and tough measures needed to be taken, against people who were fronting for the U.S.S.R., but I am a bit of a civil libertarian when there is no justification for abridging somebody's constitutional, and God Given right to believe something foolish.
First, I think we have to consider the HUAC in the context of the time. Communism worldwide was on quite a roll, the Soviets controlling Eastern Europe & getting both the atom & hydrogen bomb, China just going “Red”, etc. TV was just a new medium and unquestionable film just as much, if not more, an influence on the culture as it is today. In that context I can understand the fear of communist influence on the US.
If somebody was advocating the violent overthrow of the US government to impose communism, I do see that as something the government should be concerned about. I am troubled though about our government trying to figure out if a sitcom writer ever was a member of the communist party and to grill them under oath.
Agreed. The whole thing is troubling.
The times were different, and tough measures needed to be taken, against people who were fronting for the U.S.S.R., but I am a bit of a civil libertarian when there is no justification for abridging somebody's constitutional, and God Given right to believe something foolish.
Again I agree. But if ‘Hollywood’ would have stood up to the Committee, they could have called their bluff. As Steyn called it a ...moment of colossal Hollywood cowardice any obstacle.... had he chosen to, Wasserman and his talent agency could have broken the blacklist as decisively as he broke the studio system.
We, the people, and even ‘Hollywood’, ARE the government. WE are responsible for OUR government.
I’m just tired of the Hollywood-types blaming the government on one hand for a non-existent blacklist, and on the other hand sucking up to liberal politicians trying to make this country as socialistic as possible.
Bottom line; communism bad, communist in Hollywood bad, and the methods (HUAC) our government employed in the late ‘40s-early ’50s were troubling. And to the actors who feel they must be active in politics or on some crusade during their down time between movies; JUST SHUT UP.