American Intellectuals in the American-Soviet Friendship Movement
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Alone Together: American Intellectuals in the American-Soviet Friendship Movement A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by David Byron Wagner June 2016 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Brian D. Lloyd, Chairperson Dr. Molly McGarry Dr. Kiril Tomoff Copyright by David Byron Wagner 2016 The Dissertation of David Byron Wagner is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgements Above all, I am indebted to Brian Lloyd, my dissertation advisor, who was so important in helping me to clarify my intentions and arguments in this work. Brian has been an inspired editor, collaborator, and critic. I am enormously grateful and hope he is pleased with the result. I also appreciate the hard work and insightful suggestions of my additional readers Molly McGarry and Kiril Tomoff. Thanks also to Catherine Gudis and John Ganim, who served on my PhD oral exam committee. You are all fantastic. Most of the research for this project was conducted at the Tamiment Library at New York University, which has my thanks for providing access to several collections necessary for this project. I did further research at San Diego State University, the Motion Picture Association of America’s Mary Pickford Center, and Columbia University. I am appreciative of all of the help offered me by archivists in all of these institutions. Special thanks goes to Tamiment archivist Bonnie Gordon, who pointed me toward Morford’s biographical manuscripts in the Abbott Simon Papers, which more or less tied all of the rest of the evidence together. Also, I want to acknowledge the generosity of Donald Simpson at Abilene Christian University, who scanned what may be the sole remaining copy of Corliss Lamont’s “Why I Am Not a Communist” for me specifically, free of charge. I also thank all of the individuals who offered me their support in navigating the world of American-Soviet friendship. Skye Moody, who interviewed Richard Morford in extraordinary depth in the 1980s, was remarkably receptive to discussion about a project she had not likely given much thought to in some thirty years. She was generous with her iv time and thoughtful in her answers to my many questions. Thanks, Skye. I also want to highlight the encouragement offered by Beth K. Lamont, Tracy Strong, and Joseph Hancock. My family, particularly my parents, were a warm and consistent source of support during the research and writing of this dissertation, whether at a distance of two-thousand miles in the first two years of my research and writing, or at just a couple blocks in the last few months. My wife Tiffany was the MVP of this entire project (as she is in every part of my life). Tiffany patiently endured my endless ruminations upon this topic, as well as my absence during the research process. She also served as a constant source of encouragement, a sounding board, and an occasional editor. Thank you so, so much. I am also grateful to my gentleman cats Fez and Sandal, who have graced me with their distinguished company in this long and lonely process. With a heavy heart, I close by giving thanks to my beloved dog Precious, who did not survive the writing of this dissertation but whose life and love were integral to its completion. v For Precious, You are missed. vi ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Alone Together: American Intellectuals in the American-Soviet Friendship Movement by David Byron Wagner Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Program in History University of California, Riverside, June 2016 Brian D. Lloyd, Chairperson American intellectuals who participated in American-Soviet friendship groups between the 1920s and 1980s are often classified as “fellow travelers” in the literature of the American Left. Scholars have deemed the American-Soviet friendship organizations – most prominently the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship (NCASF) – “Communist-fronts,” a phrase used to designate groups that pretended to be loyal to American institutions but in fact served Soviet purposes. In the tradition of Denning’s work on the Popular Front and Isserman’s on the American Communist Party, this dissertation complicates our understanding of the American-Soviet friendship movement and its leaders. By examining the influences and careers of four leaders of the movement – Corliss Lamont, Richard Morford, Rockwell Kent, and Harry Steinmetz – this dissertation proves that the intellectuals and reformers drawn to the American-Soviet friendship movement pursued ideas and ideals that were current at the time – pacifism, pragmatism, techno-utopianism, humanism, progressive education, artistic realism – but did so in a manner that gave the cause of American-Soviet friendship a unique flavor that distinguished it from the Popular Front and Communist Party. The friendship movement vii supplied an environment in which to explore alternative visions of social progress and human justice, and it was ultimately the leadership’s commitment to these alternative visions – rather than loyalty to the Soviet Union or communism in general – that shaped the careers of those who proposed to lead that movement. viii Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: The Origins and Structure of American-Soviet Friendship in the United States .......... 19 Chapter 2: Tough Love – American-Soviet Friendship in the Cold War ......................................... 93 Chapter 3: Corliss Lamont – A Pragmatist in Utopian Clothing ................................................... 182 Chapter 4: Richard Morford – Facing the Social Imperatives of the Gospel ............................... 271 Chapter 5: Rockwell Kent: A Man Out of Time ............................................................................ 365 Chapter 6: Harry Steinmetz: Collectivist Seeks Collective ........................................................... 465 Epilogue and Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 561 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 597 Appendix: Table of Abbreviations ................................................................................................ 625 ix Introduction In February 2014, the Soviet Union annexed the Crimean Peninsula from its neighbor, Ukraine. Russian president Vladimir Putin claimed this was a necessary action due to American meddling in Ukrainian politics designed to remove Ukraine from the Russian sphere of influence.1 An affront to what was perceived by the West to be an advantageous and stable international order, Russia’s actions inspired fiery rhetoric across the ocean from the United States. U.S. President Barack Obama called for economic sanctions against Russia, seemingly signaling the renewal of a one-hundred- year-old conflict between Russians and Americans.2 It is beginning to seem that the period of friendly relations between the United States and Russia in the 1990s and early 2000s was an aberration. Normalcy for these two countries has in the last century, instead, meant antagonism. The Ukrainian crisis is part of that history. One of Putin’s motivations has been to restore Russian dominance of Eastern Europe, which leaders in the U.S. and the rest of the West were more than happy to see collapse with the Soviet Union in 1991. Americans and Russian citizens have no doubt made the connection to the original Cold War as well, as they have again adopted the attitudes of that era. A 2014 poll showed that 72% of Americans possessed a negative 1 Joshua Tucker, “What Is Motivating Putin?,” The Washington Post, March 18, 2014, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/03/18/what-is-motivating-putin/. 2 Peter Baker, “Obama Signals Support for New U.S. Sanctions to Pressure Russian Economy,” The New York Times, December 16, 2014, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/world/europe/obama-signing-russia- ukraine-sanctions-bill.html. 1 view of Russia.3 Russian attitudes toward America are little better. Russian prime minister Dmitri Medvedev asserted, “One could go as far as to say we have slid back into a new Cold War.”4 As the United States and Russia drift into their familiar position as rivals, it is worth thinking about how we got here and what could have been. The original Cold War which birthed this pattern, we must remember, was not inevitable. The United States and Soviet Union could have been friends rather than enemies. The benefits of friendship after World War II have been incalculable, whether in an economic, cultural, or ideological sense. Both the United States and Soviet Union were, after all, the dominant military, economic, and cultural entities in their respective hemispheres. They had an unprecedented opportunity to make a break with a Western European heritage that had nearly destroyed the world in World War II. Each nation was often perceived (rightly or wrongly) as an outsider from the old international order, separate from the thoroughly discredited European imperial system which dominated international relations, markets, and culture in the 19th century. The sheer degree of power divided between the United States and Soviet Union, much of it acquired at Western Europe’s expense, could have meant real possibilities for an alternative