..~

;nJ;~ by & ./i ~W/Lj Q~!ican eZab 237ea4t ZO.dtkeet:J ;1Z.j

JOAN KENNEOY TA"flOR, ~DjTQH Volume II. No. ) VIEWS

\

WHO lu'lD WHAT IS THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIl1TY? . Early in 1961., newspapiers. magazines, radio and T~I brought The John Birch Society to the attention or the .Am~rican people. ifhe publicity was engendered by reports that H.obert Welch. the Soc:i.. ety's founder, had called ex-President Eisenho\-ler Ifa dedi­ cated,· conScious agent of the Comrr..unist conspiracy. U 'This he had done ina book­ length let.ter entiUed 11lu2ll!~1..!U (also known as 'rhe Black. Book). which was cir. culated privately but not prQclairn.c~d an official publicatJ..on of the John Birch Society.

Since that time the Society has been· the subject of much debate and cont.roversy. Sonle have called it a menaoe, others ineffectual, still others have praised it as the only effective illeans a.vaUable to tight cOllliTlunislll.

@ Metropolitan Young Republican Club 1965 iibatis The ~2!Pl PiFeR S2c,~et¥t Basically a political~etion gltOUP espousing Uright-wing" views ancl dedicated to exposing and combating Cfi)l1Ul1UniSll\ withi~ the United states" '!be John Biroh Society was founded (according to, the IMe .:~"k., the off:\.Cial operating II1anU.EU of the Society) in Indianapolis in December 19 by Robert Welch and eleven associates, .most ot whom today, by Welch's claim, are 'members of the CouncU. the top governing body of the Society. Welch bas never identified the "eleven associates" lllore specifically than that. Welch named the Society ~tter a u.s, Intelligence officer. John Birch. Who was kUled by Chinese Comm~tP-sts 10 days .~ter World War II had ended.

'rhe organiiational mechaAic, of the 30Qiflty as set up in Abe Blue &gk are as follows: The Society functions t,hrough srl1~ local chapters, usually of from 10 to 20 people. Each has a Cbal,terLe$der. apPo'-llted by headquarters in Belmont~ Ivlassa. chusetts. or appointed thro~gh officers ot t-he 30ciety, who have themselves been appointed by headquarters. The 4u.es are a ,Dq.nim.um of $24.00 per year fort men and $12.00 per year for women. The qhapter Le~4ers report to a paid staft' man with the title of Coordinator. tI'qe Blqe Book states: I(Above these Coordi~t~rs. in time, we shall have supervisors with the tank or title of il!lajor Coordinato~s; and. we sball further build ~he oJ':lanizational framework from the bottOlt1 up, as made neoGssary by sui'ficient membership. in order to keep strict and caretuloontrol on tr1bat every chapter 15 doi.ng. • ." It is not' certain 'rlhether these 11ajor Coord1.nators are now functioning.

The strength of the John Birch Society is unknown. One source (1962 Britannica Bo~ of toe Year) says: "Its membership was believed to be close to 60,000 and its annual income, about $1,500. GOO. If As noted '. in an,article in the ~ew, Jerk Times, (June 28, 1964). a repor', rUed with the ottice of the 11<1assachu.setts Attorney General, Edward W. Brooke. us"boW'ed the society had. ended 1963 with a deficit. ot $210,95;. 'the report, reqUired by law, sbowed gross incomeot $1.043,6.56 and expenses of $1,169.997 in 196). There also was a carry..over deficit of $84,612 trom 1962. II The §QQeqts QsaJ., One of the So~iety's goals, according to thewmue Book. is rtta get a mUlion members truly dedicated to the thirigs in l-lbich we believe. U In The Blue ]3001<, vzritten by Mr. Welcb'~. it is argu$d that communism 15 a world-Wide conspiracy to enslave mankindtthAt the great danger to America is not Soviet 11lilitary strength but SOviet innuenc,e on the internal functioning of our govennent; that our govern­ ment is controlled by Communists or their sympathizers (Welch uses the word "ComsympsI' tor these, people) j that our churches, schools. communication media and labor unions are rapidly being taken over by Communists. He sees big government as a threat and warns or the creeping socialism in our country, winch he sees as the first step toward cOl1W1unism. rhe purpose ot the Society is to combat these trends and stop the rising tide 0:£ collectivism. in our country. 'The Society would like "0 see the end otthe gradu­ ated income tax, withdratfal of the United States from the United l~ations, an

irhe society also publishes American Qpipion. formerly Imown as One Man I § QpinMln. llhich is, as its title' suggests, a magazine of political opirli.on. 'rh~ magazine employs a spectrurl1 of "conservativeU writers t-lh1ch includes officials 0:£ The John Birch 'Society as tiell as such prominent people as vlestbrook Pegler, ;raylor Cald't,rell and IJlartin Dies.

\'lho is JohiiBiroh?

Joli.n Birch was a U.S. Intelligence officer during World \'lar II. He had gone to China originally as a Baptist, missionary, becarae a chaplain l-lith Chennault's Flying Tigers ar1d lias ind.ucted into the Army as a second lieutenalit. He later bec81uea captain. On a luission into China. he was killed by a Chinese Communist patrol. In . The ;Blue Book,'iJe1ch states: nyou t·Jill find that John Birch. a young .. fundamentalist Baptist preacher from I,iacon, Georgia" who did as much as any other one man. high or loti't to 'tiin our 'tiar and the Chinese 't"rar against 'l;he Japanese 'in China. ·'Was murde...ed by the Chinese Communists at the first opportunity a.fter the tfar because of the powe'r. £ul resistance he would have been able to inspire against them. YOU.l~ find. and I believe agree, "t,hat John Birch possessed in his o~m character !Wa!.. those noble traits and ideals whicb lIe should like to see become symbolized by The John Birch Society. n It should be 110ted that the CirCU111stances surrounding Birch's death are in dispute and this is Jeloh's version.

In a report and!dvertisement of the Society that appeared in Los Angeles (1962). it is stated: "His LBirCh t ff death lias knol-m and mourned aU over China, tor he had becom.e a symbol of Christianity, of true brotherhood and hur4Uity, and of the good­ ness and streng·eh or America. The cruel death of Captain Birch lfas a grim warning by the Hoed Chinese to all vrho would oppose their 20th century barbarism,. n It further st.ates: nIt is a testirl10DY tq the active Christian faith which John Birch preaChed that bis story is today known and that the symbol of his life. l-lhich the Conunw'lists tried to stalUP out. now guides the society that bea.rs his name. JI

vJho is aQ'bertl' 'Il~loh 1 According to his biography (~1ritten by '~lelch) ill The alue Book, ~'leloh was born December 1, 1899. on ~ tarnl in'l~orth Ca,rolina and raised as a southern Baptist ~. mentalist.· t'.Educated at Universit.y of HorthCarolina (four years). United States iJaval Academy (two years). Harvard tali' SChool (t't10 years),. and school of hard knocks (about forty years)." He 'tvent to the James O. Welch Co. t a successful candy manu­ fa;~turing company run by his brother. and staye~ untU 1957 when he rtgaveup most of his businessrespons1bilit1es..-and most of his income-.~n order to devote practically allot his tiJlle and energy to the anti"COl1L'Uunist causei ff - 5 - The Role or Re}.isipnin Abe :Birch SoSietZ ~t is significant that both Birch and vlelch are fundamentalists. 'This tact is one of the keys in understandingtbe actions. goals and reason--t'or-being ot The John Birch Society, Fundalllentalislil in the United states is a movel11ent in Protestantism that emphasizeES, as fundali1ental to Christial1ity, an absolute belief in the literal­ ness of -the Soriptures and Biblical miracles. The secular ideals or tundanlentalism are literalness. conscience, frugality, Pu.rity, indu.stry and single.mindedness. The fundaJ.llentalist has a sentimental picture of what religion, fa.m.Uy and society once represented and What they should· again represent. It is the fundamentalist who seeks to legislate against drinking, gambling, divorce and many other "vioes" which go against their moral beliets.

Although Vlelch says in The Slue Boo~ that he broke vlith Uth~ intellect1:tally restricting bonds of the unusually narrow Southern Baptist fundanientalism. l.n which I was raised. more than forty years ago," he has kept the ideals o£,t'undamentalism, if not the religious aspects of it,:.WWlcb is a eulturalreslllt of fundamentalism. He states 1 "As a result of its Li:undamentalism'i] teachings, I saw myself as t,he inheritor of all the labor al'ld sacrifice that, had gone before l118. D1 men tmo bad. used 'this God-given 'upl'lard reach.' They had used it to provide the mor~ codes, ~he humane traditions, the accumulation or knowledge. and the rr18.terial cdmtorts.to make so fortunate an heir ot so many ages•••• ft He assures his followers that he respects all religious beliefs: "The true fundamentalists ill our midst, ~1hether C~tholiCSt Protes'tants or Jews. are the moral salt of the earth.. •• And nothing Isaynoti', nor any of the plans I outline ~ tomorrow, is intended to question, lfleakel1. or disturb any fu.ndamentalist faith in the slightest; or to discount one iota its tremendous 't'1orth as a core of strengtb for all that we might hope to do."

He decries the tact that the numbers of fundamentalists are dwiDiling. and 'tfarns that "tully' one.third of the services in at least the Protestant ohurches of Amertca are helping that tt'end. For the ministers themselves are not ttue believers••••"

~leJ.cb sees this trend as ominous. "For not only is this loss of reintorcing faith in the cement ot our morals a weakness in itsel.f of imm.ense signi..ficanco, but like all of our 1'1ea.knesses it has been pounced Up011 by the COl1hl1unists, and used and made worse by them ldth great sltUl and detennination tor their Olill purposes." Iro v/elch.,collectiV1sm and communism are threats to his fundamentalist faith. In order tocolllbat these threats he formedI'he ,John Birch Society. rhe combination of John Birch's fundamentalist faith and his death at the hands ot CODJluunists fit well into 1'Jelch J s plans tor an anti.COn1lilunist. fundamentalist political action grolYJ. A MetheS0J,og;y tor Anta,-COllW'lN:Sl11

~'lelch summoned his eleven associates in 19.58 to Indianapolis and presented. a two-day seminar on the dangers of communism and the importance or a return to faith. The main bod~ of this semina.r is what C()hs~itU~'.,a't;'rtB•..£90k. This 18 where he introduced h1S theory of a Communist oonsp1rac14Our immediate and most urgent anxiety, of course, 18 the threat of the Coml1l'Llni~t conspiracy_ II He admits that there 1s no eas1 solut1on: "Communism is not, like a po~on to which you s1mply find the antidote•.•• .,There has· been 'bri lJ:1ant control and ooordination, 'by oentral authorit1;:' ,0£ the efforts or m1llio~ ot men••• ,As a result or this forty years of cumulative effort, the conspiracy is now 1ncred1bll well organUed. It 15 so well finanb,c1 that 11; has b1ll1onS ot cloUars annually just to spend on propaganda••••This octopus 1s 80 large ~at. its tentacles now reach into all o£ the legislative halls~ ,all of the union labor ..meetings. a ,majority of the religious . gatheri.ngs. and mO'st ot the schools 2£ ;!Cbf whple wgrMd. tt (ItaliC's his.)

Who 18 the ttcenthL authority"? :Who h__, "so wa1l t1nancedlt itt lIow doe. 'Welch justify 'th1s 01&1111 of a giganti0 consP~acy? vlelch relies heavily on bi*torleal data, _the chain of the Communists I viCtories in the past torty.l..odd years. He points to the strategy of Len1n for vio~ld conquest-.ltLenin died 111 1924-," Wites welch. "But. before he d1ed he had laid down tor bis· followers a strawgy of this conquest. It~s. we should readi.l.1adm1t, brUl1ant,tarseeing. reaUst1c and majestically simple. It has been' paraphrased and swrmarized as toUows: 'First .e w1ll take East Europe. Next, the masses of Asia. Then we wUl c1t-Qle that last bastion ot capitalism, the United Sta.tes ot America. We shall not have to attack; it w1l1 tall like overripe fruit 1l1tO our hand. t To make doubly clear what he meant and hoW firmly he ~eant it, With regard to tak1ng Asia ahead of Western lllrope. and then using Asia. as a stepping stone and base from wb1ch to conquer western Pbrope and the rest of the world, the strategy was also stated. that, tor the Communists, the road to Paris lq through Peld.ng and Calcutta. ,. To., you oan see blOw that road to Paris 1s leading back from. Pekin, throush Caloutta, Cairo. Damascus, Bagdad, and Algiers. n Thus armed With _ points: 1) that the Communists are masters of strategy, and 2) that they have been consistentJ.y w.inn1ng--vle].ch buildS h1s conspirac1 theory. How else. can these events be explained?

And that is Weloh'. logic. He has no addiUonal proof to support b1. tb8Or1--even 1.£ true.;1nstead he uses 1Muendo, name-call1ng. and downright equ:Lvocation about people and events., ibis 18 hissubstltute for objective evidence. To further support his cas., Welch publ1shes as _rJ,2&n gp_B Ssot'tr9~rd each year., which -estimates the degree or Communist 1nfluenceor control over the ecanom1c and political affairs of almost a1l of the nations ot the world. The,e .tatistici have been "compUed from information and opin1on suppl.1ed us by expert -7- scholars and analysts on six cont1nents. II Each percentage has a latitude of 20 points. Thus the United States (in 1964) is 50-70 per cent controlled "by- CoJTl1l\Ul1st influence; Australia 2O.LJO;~vest Germany 40-60; Hungary is a .nat 100 per cent. as is Poland, Romania, and the SoViet Union. liow these statistics are "measuredu is ValUe. "The total extent of Communist control or influence over al\V country. however, is due to the impact ot all Communist pressures. direot and indirect, visible and undercover, working together. In most cases. of course, that total cannot be measured with any exactness. But we believe the appraisals given below to be oonservative•.••• II What do these percentages mean? Or can they be taken to mean anyth1ngt 'Who are the "experts 111 How is the ltmeasur1ngn done? To J'measure" s0111ethi,ng implies some standard, some teohnique ot acouracy. None-is offered. ;m:\slIb~ Jobn BH:sb Socie:!tZ Attaoke4l One of the attacks that is repeatedly made bY' critics of the Society 18 that it 1s an authoritarian organization. The Society is set up as a ntonolitbic bodr. s1iNctured from the top down. l-lr. '~velch states 1n IDe S6ue Bosak, nA. republ~can tom of goverment or of organization has many attractions and advantages, under certain favorable conditions. But under less happy ciroUJ.llstances 1t lends itself . too. readll:r to in1'Utration, distortion and disruptio"n•• *• 7be John Birch Society will operate under cOlnpletely authoritative control at all levels. 7he fear of tyrannical oppression of individuals, and other argt'L.'1lents against the authoritative structure in the form of governments, have little bearing on the case of a volun­ tary association. where the authoritativa pov1er cal1 be exeroised and enforced only by persuasion~II In a footnote to this seotion of !b£ g~. ~,pJs" l-1r.· 'Vlelch adds that the rtlOnolithic structure of the Society has been attaoked by lithe Liberals. n He emphasizes that this structure ttis purely tor the sake of e££i;c;i:enc¥'. etfectiye,. ness•• and i~eadfastness of purpose with1n the Society itselt...from which anybo~ can resiil1t with our good w:Ul and good wishes. at the drop ot a hat, n Thi.s 18 a good example ot l~ir.. lielchls faoulty tor being ambiguous. In a paragraph which clearlY" refers to the policy-making ot a voluntary "group," why does he use the phrase "a republican torm ot &oyerment"? (Italics mine.) Similarly, in TV interviews he has allowed reporters to interl'Upt him after he has stated his dislike tor "democracy" l-lithout insisti.ng upon stating that the alternat1ve he proposes is a republic., not a dictatorship. " The statement that Eisenhower 1s 'fa ded.1cated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy" i..s. otten. attributed to .the B1rch SOciety. and used as an attacle aga1nst them. This statement was made inihe fsi~:waCdan, which 1:t nOt an otticial publi­ cation of the Society-but a private 'book-length letter m-itten by Welch to some of his friends. vlelch states in the Prologue to the book: lilt is worth repeating that neither The John Birch Society nor its members have ever had any connection with ~e ~t1c. in B'l'q l'l'q. e:lO:ept to be the v1ctims or smears a1med at them beoau$8 ~. it. . The tounders ot the SocietY' having disavowed the document, the COUNCIL ot the SocietY' long ago officially made it clear that this was a purely personal prop­ erty and problem of rrty' own. wi.til li'hich they wanted nothing whatsoever to Uo in a:trf way." In other words. The John Birch Society did not call Eisenhower Ita Commun1st"; RObert Welch did. The distinction 18 a tine one. but one would have to agree that there·.·· is a distinction. \~at can be criticized, and what is the s1JnUaritY between the ·Society·s official publication. IDemus i!gok. and Walch's private letter, TJ1e f2J,i-t.a.c1an, 18 Welch's approach tD 'tactual eviclence.

'1beSoc1ety has. been accused of anti-5emiti.am. '!hey reject this charge emphatically as .. being completely unjust1tied. In all of the Society's l1te~ture 'Which tMs r~~er could obta1r1. there is no hint of anti.Semitism, It is. of course, possible tna~I some Society members coUld be so prejUdiced, but it is ~ an oti'1c1al .position ot'"b1ther Welch or The John Birch Society. In. fact,Weloh says in a booklet pUb­ lis~ed by the Society entitled uThe Neutralize1's, n that the charge against tbeSociety is,QoD1lm.U11st-'inspired to 1reaken. destroy, and neutralize the Sooiety~ E\ren George I4ncoln Roolafell. speaking of a planned rally in Washington on JULy 4, 1964, (if.! arJs.}i!£!l~~t June· 27, 196Lr) said; "All the R1ght-w1ng groups eXcept The JobD Birch Society l4il1 13e there. Tbe Birch SocietY' won't have &1\Vthing to do with us. ihey love JetfS and we don't."

The Society has also been acoused ot being anti-Negro. None of its official policies suppor't this accusation. The Society seems to be IGaking an attempt to change its image, largely due to the eftorts ot John Rous.sa1.ot, tormer Congresaman trOlTl CaJ.1forn1a, now Western Director and Public Relations Director ot the Society_ 1hey have, according to an article 1n the new York HeralJi"Tr1bune on JUly 1.). 1964, set up an annual scholarship award of $1,000 for a "deserting' l~egro student, boy or girl, prepared to enter college. at

Qpnclusion

~1any of these attacl(s may be traced to the tact that \~elch does seem to make b1mselt misunderstood at times; others are unfair. But since the Society 1s a ''monolith,'' and its pol~y starts at the top with Bobert '1velch. Ultimately it Will properly be judged by how incisive. appropriate and reasonedMr~ \-lelchts approach to politics is. ~ this respect~ even to those who, have sympathy with many of his aims. he does at times seem to underm1ne by bis approach the very goal he seeks to reach...the awakening at 1;he American people to the perU. of our tGreign and domes­ tic polioies.

--E1enore Bodd1 ·' '

• ~ at ,•. 1

• 9 • ' REVIEWS HOW NOT TO t-mITE A BOOK' .

The Polit1piiP, by Robert Welch. Publish~d priv~tely:. Belmont. Hassacnusetts. 1963. ' ., :' .:....~.....:~~: . _.:

lbe PoJ.UiciAA is an examination of the career .of':Dwight D. Eisenhower in the light of the authorts desire to show that E1senhol4'er'S choioes and decisions con­ si.stently aided the Communist cause. How does The ~..2~iti.,ci!n attempt to dEmonstrate this? Primarity by listing detaU after detaiJ. of policy decisions, recognitions of tore~gn regimes, political appointments and associations and l.egislat1ve proposals, all of which Eisenhower was either directly or- indirectly involved with. and all of which. in the eyes ot Nr.• -vJelch. can best be explail1ed by assuming that they were Communist ..inspired.

But hOll does Ur. Welch attempt to prov~ that these decisions, recognitions, appomtme.ots, etc., w1th wh1.ch 1\1r. Eisenho't°;Ter was assoc1a-t;,ec4 were Communist-1nsp1red.? . In several ways. aU of which. unfortunately for i\ir. \'Jelch, can be shown to embody errors otargwnentation or logic. First of all. the over..all approach of the entire book is what one might call proof by enumerat1pn. That is. there is no single incident in The f9••ttician which Mr. \ielch cJ.a1ms can only be expJ.ained by the supposition that 1·1r. E1senhower l.s a Communist agent. although such is indeed the oonclusion tha:t;. J.ltIr. Welch has come to. The book is full ot disclaimers on this point:., .,' ''It is true that a conclusion that Eisenhower was a willi11g tool. or thp Communists,. based on that campaign aJ.o~e. would have been utterly unjustiti~d. It is true. of course, that there is nothing, in \hU whole chapter ~lhi-ch proves any' such oonclusion, and l-lhich cannot be expla.ined in other ways. But it is also t~~ that it his being a politician owned by the C01111'l1unists is accepted as a working hypothesis. then ~YYnhim in the lthola chapter is completely covered, and made imme

'Ibis last quotation expresses the core of the mistake in this approach. No matter bow many times you add up zeroes,the result 1s stUl zero. i1r. Welch is cla1m1ng that he has shown that one incident in Eisenhower's life has many explanations, of which the explanation that Eisenhower is a Communist seems to him to be one. Perhaps, he says, it doesn't seem a li1<:e1jr explanation to you now. but wait until I show you ten thousand s1Io.llar incidents i But it there is no reason to accept the accusation here. why should it be more impressive \'lhen it is repeated ten thousand times? Let me repeat..-each individual incident reported by litr. 'L'lelch is 1noonclus1ve--that is, he has never succeeded in maldng a logically necessary connection betNleen Dwight D.,: Eisenhower and Communism. I~ir. 'vlelch may claim that that is in the very nature of ,., ,,\ the Communist conspiracy-..it is secret, and. hides all logically necessary c011Qe~ns.·"·J,::' But if the assertions that 11r. lilelch is making are not logically·neC;essa,ry.tben"':" they are fallacious. There is no other choice. Let us see some of the·ways th;l,t,'th1s is so. " ',,'

In logic, a taUacy is a characteristic torm of statem.ent 1ft which the conclusion does not follow from the premises. To begin with, the overall mistake Wb1ch we began by discussing, the attempt to prove by el'1\bl1eration, is what lUght be called the indue­ t1ve tallaoy, That 1s. it takes a list ot correlations (These incidents all occurred, and Eisenho't'1er was there) and claims that theretore some causal relationsbip exists between the two parts of each correlation. ThE"'- famous example of this fallacy \lh1ch is given in statistic books is that ot the. person l1ho notices that crickets always chi..rp before it rains, and concludes from this that rainstorms are caused by tbe chirping of crickets. Ho list or correlations~ no matter hOlf long" shows cause. Cause is demonstrated by sllO'Wing a logical necessity in each specific correlation 1n the list. \ But most ot the incidel'lts \ihich 11r. \velch cites as suspicious are of a part~,~ torm,a torm which does not establish the existence ota neoessary connect1o~ between Mr. Eisenhower and pro.Communist activ,ities. The form is this: AU Co~s,ts want such and such; ~ir. Eisenl10\rer wants such and such; therefore rflr. E1s~o\t,er is, a Communist. 'Ibis is called i.n logic the fallacy ot the ung;str&\qut;ed,ltadm. Because all A is Bt and because C is B. it.does not and cannot £01101'1 that C isA. ,The error is as gross as if one said, All fathers beat their children; my lllOther beat her children; therefore my mother :i.s a father. Consider the nature;ot things that could. bo said: Jill Communists want to stay alive; Eisenhower wants to stay alive; therefore Eisenhower is a Communist. Then ask.: Are the premises truel Yes. Ibes the conolusion therefore follow? It emphatioallY' does not,. Another common fallacy is called the fallacy ot assert. the 2ill!!l9uent. In this. one says, All A is B, therefore all B is A. This is the· tallaq ,11r. Welch is guUty of when he tries to convict r4r. Eisenhower because he has been supported by people whom Ivlr. vlelch ttnds dubious. 1;Jhat he is saY'in8i8:: Col1lDJW11sts support ... 11.

Eisenhower, therefore Ei$enhower su.pports CollmUn1sts. This same argument was used

What you might call a compound use of both these fallacies appears 10 the following exam.ple: "Somewhat less substantive but equally reve.aling was the well­ publicized visit and homage Eisenhotrer paid to Professor John .Dewey, the founder of 'progressive educationI in this country. and the idol of every Communist and pink in the educational world. II (page 101) Notice that the assumption 18 not only Communists like Dewey therefore Dewey likes CommwUsts (A is B therefore B 18 A). but alSO.. COl'9J.l1Unist.s like Dewey; as.·enhower likes Dawey-a there£Ore El$,enbower .Ulces Communists ~undist,ribu.ted midaLe}. . In order not to seem to take an example untairJ.y out of context, IW1ll preface a citation ot the fallacy ot !9uivocat}.ol! (using one l'rord in two d1t'terent ways) by a brief introduction. IJIr. vlelcll is discu.ssing the fact that 1n 1958 Pre8icient EUenholfer sent a personal message llhich congratulated the Little Red Schoolhouse on the occasion of its twenty-fifth anniversary. litr. vlelch lists his objections to the school. its director and his ~1ife, and asserts that·5 people lmo have been assooiatedWith the school (whom he names) have pro...comunist records. H~ then concludes bis case with this splendid example of the fallacy ot equ1vocation: "As the VF\fts Guar4post pointed out, a congratulatory message tr0111 the President or the Un1ted States is a prize eagerly sought after by many institutions. BIt. to the best of our knol'dedge, no other prtvate school in the country has ever received this kind of blessing from Eisenhower. He singled out .one whioh carries the word Ired. I· as a brazenly revealing part of its name, on wh1ch to bestow such a prize." (page 202) There are other errors 'tJhich !vIr. lJelch commits in Ibe pp,aa~ician which cannot be dignified by the name of fallacy. because they" consist ot substituting solle other fQrm of statement tor any attempt at proof. Consider the following: "For 'WhUe this is certain1.y not the place to go 1nto a hundred pa.ges, to shoW that George Marshall always conducted the A111erican side of the war tor the benefitot the Kremlin, to the veX7 best of his abUity• or into a thousand pages of other details and 'circumstances to show all he accomplished for the Kremlin in they-ears following the war. it is necessary to enter the conclusion to which, those pages would lead. I clefy MYbo51!. who is not a COmmunist himself, to read aU of the known facts about his career and not decide that since at least some time in the 1930's George Catlett lIarshall has been a conscious, del1berate. dediCated agent of the Soviet conspiracy. There is, 10 my opinion. simply no·· escape from such overwhelming evidence~ II (page 15)

\1/hat is being dohe here? It 11 inlportant to lwtr. \ieloh in the development of his book to be able to Shaltl tha.t from the start ot his career. DNight 1). Eisenhower has had some sort o£ Communi.st association. But for man.v yec. Iir. lUlsenhower was • 12.

an army man. and therefore non-political. However, Mr. \'Ielch has dec1ded that General. MarshaU,who sponsored Eisenhower in his rise within the arl1'J1'. was a Commun1st himself, so the tact ot his association With Asenhower can be used. against Eisenhower. HOlt 'ttUl be establish this vital link tor the reader? By asserting that he has evidence at home, and that the reader 1s a Communist 1the doesn 1t agree. This unhappy mixture of assertion and intimidation 18 not equally strong throughout the book. but assertion is use(1 to provide !(ey links in lwtr. ~ielch t s "case. 11 "For many reasons and after a lot of study. I personalll believe nales to be a Communist agent 1ibo has had one clearly defined role to play; namely, always to say tberight things and al'tlayS to do the wrong ones. tt (page 223) Or aga1:n, "The American people have not waked up to the clear evidence that Harry Hopk1ns, instead of being the fwnb11ng halt-myst1cal dogooder tor which they took h1m. liaS one of the most· successful Communist agents the Kremlin has ever found already planted in the American goverment. and then developed to supreme top-level u$efulness. It (pages 2.17-218)

And this is not the end. l-tr. vle1.ch also is ,dlling to cite UDident1.tied sources. IIOnce. in a small ,group. I asked a good friend of mine and prominent American, ..lhose name at least is 't'rell known to every reader o! th1s doCUDlent but • Who bas never held an.v pali-tical office, what he thought of D.1llea. At'"ter a moment of hesitation he replied. 80 "that everybod-V could hear: "I think John Foster I)ulles is a sanct1monious psaJ.m-sing1ng hWoor1t1cal son ota b1wh. and I know him very 1'leU." (page 224) Bu.t the citation ot unidentified sources.. also known as rumor, is an improper torm ot argumentat1on. The reader may notice•.1n .the exampJ.e just g1ven, that the content o£ the rumor 18 an assert~ont a torm ot error already discussed, and that the statement inci.dent,aJ.J.y emp10ys inveetive. and 111 the implication that if' a 1~1ell kno,m" PQrson holds such a view so should the reader, it is also intimidatory,

These tetT. examples are not intended to provide either an exhaustive list of the errors 1nlog1c and in argumentation which are· cor.m1tted in 1118 PpJ.ita,clAAt or an eValuation of aU of the incidents lihich l\Ir.t'1elch reports. They are intended to Ulustrate the !s1m! of sem1.plausible but unwarranted. structure 1Ib1ch oan be erected 'by an author who 1s passionately attacbed to his thesis but has 110. conclustve eVidence to present.

Am I s~g that ther.are no incidents 1n the career of I),Jight D. Eisenhower. as a general or as a policy-maker, with 'Which I would disagree? Most emphaticSJ.1y I. am not~ There are l11al1Y' inpidents cited. by iwIr. vJelch which in my opinion repre­ sented disastrous mistakes t particularly 1n the field of foreign policy over the last th1rty-odd years, lieU then, the reader may say, perhaps tbe book bas §S value. even if' it doesn't prove its central thesis. Although at least eleven out of t,~e .•1.ghteen chapters in the bool( end 'tlith some tom of asser't1.on that the 8imp1eat fhcplanation of Eisehhower's actions is that he is a conscious Oommunist • 13 • 81DlPathizer. Welch Himself claims in the ~rologue to the ~kl "I had specifically stated in the doCWl1f)nt itself that I had no quarrel with those, who attributed the Communist.a1ding actiOns of 1!asenho'trer simply to politioal opportunism. There were some readers, indeed, who insisted and stUl insist that as.nhower was s1mply too naive to khow'What he "Tas doing; and that the Whole 1ncrecti.ble oourse ol the history- in l-m1ch he had played so vital a part had been due to stupidity. And whUe many of those who read The PQli.t!cHA did come reluctantly to the same conclusion as my own, this personal opinion l'laS still a minor part or the letter. If (Prologue page x1i) ·v/ell. the reader may say, haanft~lelch gathered together some good anti-Oommun1st material anyway?

But a responsible argulllent stands or talls by its central thes1s. It indeed attertielch has finished his 294 page. of argument, and oompUed 15 paces ot footnotes and read all the t1tJ.es mentioned. in h1s enormous bibl1ography-.it atter allot that intensive exantLnation of his thesls>Yu-. \ielch oons1dered \hat he had not Proved it, that it 1ta8 a minor part of h1s,book and a "personal op1n:1on. II on 'mat grounds can he poss1bly justify mak1ns such an attack on the reputation of another human being? Does he by any ¢hanc~ think that the ditterences between a traitor and a man Who is Ul.adv1sed or wrong are not 1m.portantl ..... ~enrth1ng 111 thi.. book was selected l-lith respect to the .central ~dea~ ... an4 neoe.sar~ so. Mr. lielch couldn't, after aU, reproduce aU th.·1ntormatiOn available about all the inc1dents he mentioned., But since his Qrgan1zation of th18 b1shl1" Selected. material can be shOtm·to 'be of such a nature that nothing logically foUows any­ thing else. then even it !JJ:. of his material is accurate as tar as it goes (and remember that much of it is asserted without substantiation) it has no value. And becauseo£ the nature of the thesi.s, the book is worse than va1ue1.ess. It 1. unjust. There are many excellent books that oriticize various aspects of our public policy. There are many excellent books on the COD1ll1W1ist conspiracy, and on the nature of Communist strategy and organ1zation. i'Iany of thef;e excellent books are listed in lwir. \-lelch's extensive bibliography. He ha~ added nothing to them.

But DIe Psy.1j,;ic1!n is an example of the rule that expending a great deal. of -Itt 18 no &'U\l'utee of aoCOlr1pl1shi.ng &n1tbing.. .It attempts to substantiate its claim by' catalogu1ng and footnoting a great deal of recent history. by inter­ spersing these footnoted items in the catalogue With assertion and rumor, anel by stringing the whole thing together 111 var10ua logically untenable ways. I would 11ke to make. one th1ng clear-..I am not defending Dl-l1ght D. Eisenhower from the oharge ot being either a w1tt1ng or an unw:i.tt1ng acent of C01Ql1lUn1sm. Under our concept of justice. I don't need to. He has not been responsibly accused. --Joan l(enned;v Taylor

• * * • •