COMMUNISTS IN A FREE SOCIETY
343
a little of the argument that our resistance to Soviet aggression should
wait upon the total decontamination of our own society), but it seems to
me that if even immaculate, straightforward liberals must argue
forever about "the appropriateness of specific actions"-that if they
can do no more than defend expediency, and then only in "particular
circumstances"-they will be effectively immobilized and will surely
lose out in the end: if not to Communism certainly to McCarthyism.
Mr. Barth approaches the problem in a way that is neither original
nor profound but that appears to me full of common sense. He begins
by assuming that no act which in any way penalizes men for their
opinions can ever be regarded as anything better than a necessary evil.
The need may justify the evil but cannot sanctify it. This much granted,
the question becomes, Which evils are necessary? "Espionage and
sabotage," he writes, "are the real dangers; subversion is a bugbear."
We have plenty to fear from Communist spying and, in the event of
war or near-war, from Communist wrecking, but we have little or
nothing to fear from Communist political agitation and propaganda.
Even if there were five or six times as many Communists and fellow–
travelers they would be powerless, in and of themselves, to do any
serious damage to the fabric of American society. They were unable
to do it when they were much stronger, and today, in spite of the
lamentable fact that not all Americans are as wise in the ways of
Communists as the editors of the
New Leader,
the country is pretty
well alerted. Communists are now all but powerless in the trade
unions; in the intellectual and educational world, they lead isolated,
ineffectual lives; and the handful who may still hold government jobs
must, in order to remain concealed, abandon all political activity.
Here and there in American life there may remain a few small islands
of Communist strength, but I fail to see how it can rationally be main–
tained that they meet any test of clear and present danger that would
justify putting in jeopardy any element of civil liberty. To combat
Communism in its political manifestations, no legal or governmental
assistance of any sort is needed, no loyalty oaths, no star-chamber
proceedings, no scoundrels like McCarthy, no lies, no euphemisms.
Espionage and sabotage are, of course, quite another matter. They
are real dangers, and they are likely to grow with time. Sabotage is
probably even more of a danger than espionage. In the event of war,
the old, preposterous figure in the Hearst cartoons-the Communist
fanatic planting a bomb in the heart of one of our large cities-would
be no joke or fantasy. To avert a danger of this sort is well worth
the calculated risk of a measure of freedom, and Mr. Barth is perfectly
