McCarthyism

by Thomas C. Reeves

Book by

Genres: History

139 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 1973

About the author

A specialist in late 19th and 20th century American history, Thomas C. Reeves received his B.A. at Pacific Lutheran University, his M.A. at the University of Washington, and his Ph.D. in history at the University of California, Santa Barbara in 1966. After four years at the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, he went on to become a professor of history at the University of Wisconsin–Parkside, where he taught until his retirement in 2001.

Reviews

[Paul Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Rare do you find where an "ism" is named after someone even though that person didn't create the mood. Senator Joseph Raymond McCarthy of Wisconsin was just such a person. He didn't develop the environment of fear in the United States with his investigations into alleged Communist organizations and sympathizers. It was already there. He merely saw the opportunity to make a name for himself regardless of means or methods. Published in 1989, McCarthyism is a series of excerpts from books and articles, edited by Thomas C. Reeves. A prominent historian, Professor Reeves has written bios on McCarthy, John F. Kennedy and Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, among others. Professor (emeritus) Reeves has collected a series of excerpts from works by political commentators like William F. Buckley and political figures like George F. Keenan examining the controversial Senator. One of the excerpts is from the equally controversial Roy Cohn, who served as chief counsel on McCarthy's committee investigating Communism in the US Government. Cohn calls his old boss "a simple man" and "brave". I always thought McCarthy's moment in American history was a particularly scandalous time. In my opinion, he did more harm than good. To Professor Reeves' credit, the articles he includes in the book examine McCarthy as either a patriot or a fraud. It even includes an article by someone who described the experience of being called to McCarthy's Committee on allegations of being a Communist. Interesting observations. Some of the articles believe McCarthy simply latched on to the Red Menace investigation as a way to build a profile. He had no great passion for the issue except where it concerned his image. Given that his famous speech in February 1960 in Wheeling, West Virginia, where he claimed to have in his hand a list of 205 "known communists" in the US State department. It was a number that he would change depending on the situation. He never did present this list to anyone, although he claimed otherwise. More than six decades after his death, Joseph McCarthy is still a controversial figure with historians and researchers. In this way, McCarthy achieved his goal: he is a figure in American history. This book is worthwhile and recommended.

[J. Alfred · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a super interesting collection of essays on the McCarthy era of American politics. The most striking to me was the one by editor and journalist James Wechsler, an ex-and-anti-Communist with credentials as good as Whittaker Chambers's, except that he didn't have an Alger Hiss to expose, who recounts the shameless black-is-white style grilling he received from McCarthy himself in committee, where his actual anti-Communist writings are suspect because they would be good cover if he didn't want to be exposed as still a Communist agent-- an agent not involved in American government but in journalism-- that is, a place in which innocence is literally impossible to prove.
Let's take a moment and reflect on how good it is that we have George Orwells and Arthur Millers to make these things clear for us.
The most concerning thing for me is that this whole McCarthyism thing doesn't seem to be over with, at least as long as you consider it in its aspect of a populist far-right movement which seems to enjoy the attacking of leftist 'elites' merely for its own sake. Connected with that is my concern with the essay by William F. Buckley Jr, included in this book. He's supposed to be the father of the intellectual branch of modern day conservatism, and here you can find him saying such things as,

it is clear that [McCarthy] has been guilty of a number of exaggerations, some of them reckless; and perhaps some of them have unjustly damaged the persons concerned beyond the mere questioning of their loyalty. For these transgressions we have neither the desire to defend him nor the means to do so. Measured against the moral command that prescribes every witting divergence from the truth, they are reprehensible. It remains only to be said that McCarthy's record is nevertheless not only much better than his critics allege but, given his métier, extremely good.

(In other words, yes, he may have recklessly lied about many people in damaging ways, but we must remember, after all, that he's a liar--?)
(And by the way Mr Buckley, shouldn't that 'prescribe' be 'proscribe'?)
(Anyway, it looks like a really short jump from this kind of argument to the ones that say that anything is permissible so long as 'owning the libs' is the intended result, a short jump thence to hell)

[Christopher · Rating 2 out of 5]

Joe McCarthy is perhaps one of the most divisive politicians in American history. Either he was a crusader against communist infiltration or a demagogue who thirsted for attention and latched onto anti-communism as his bread and butter. Much ink has been spilt over him and McCarthyism and plenty more will be spilt in the future. This little book features a series of articles by numerous articles about the man, his politics, and where McCarthyism fall in the history of the American political tradition. It's interesting to have so many different approaches, but because of how dated this book is it is not worth most people's time. Heck, it may not be worth most historian's time either considering how old some of the scholarly articles are. Still, there are a couple of articles here that may interest a few people, particularly a first-hand account by a newspaper editor who had the misfortune of being grilled by Sen. McCarthy's committee during its heyday. Otherwise, I would recommend skipping over this one.