OCR Text |
Show Page 6 The Utah Independent The Paper That Dares To Take A Stand August 21, 1975 Continued from page protest draft laws. In October of 1917, an AnarchistSocialist named Roger Baldwin was the director of the Civil U. Con Game 1 Liberties Bureau and reorganized the group as the National Civil Liberties Bureau. Baldwin was thrown in jail for a year, but resumed his duties in 1919. The next year the N.C.L.B. became the American Civil- Liberties Union. The original National Committee of the A.C:L.U. contained such worthies as Elizabeth Gurley Flynn and William Z. Foster, both later chairmen of the Communist Party; radical Communist Scott Nearing; Socialist Party chairman Norman Thomas; and, others of a similarly crimson hue. In 1920, Roger Baldwin was Director of the A.C.L.U., Harry F. Ward was Chairman, and Louis Budenz was Publicity Director. Dr. Ward was a longtime professor of Christian ethics at Union Theological Seminary and was exposed as a secret member of the Communist Party. Budenz was a top official of the Communist Party, but later renounced Communism and vigorously opposed the movement. It was Roger Baldwin who made the A.C.L:U. what it is today. Baldwin ran the show from 1920 until 1950, when he retired as potentate to become chief advisor. What is his philosophy, and what motivated him throughout his thirty years as boss of the American Civil Liberties Union? The best source for an answer to that is the man himself. In 1935, A.C.L.U. Director Baldwin clearly stated his objective as follows: I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the Staie itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. There is no evidence that he ever deviated from that purpose. On the contrary, a look at the history of the A.C.L.U. indicates that Roger Baldwin and his followers have consistently used the organization to achieve the goals of Communism in our country. In a cursory check of the A.C.L.U. Board and National Committee members elected since 1920, American Opinion magazine found in the Reports of investigating Committees of the Congress that almost 80 percent of them had affiliated themselves with Communist activities over the years. Breaking down their Red affiliations, of the original A.C.L.U. Board of Directors, 36 had affiliated with a total of 672 officially cited Communist Fronts. Of the A.C.L.U. officials elected in the 1920s, all but one of the 14 had Red Front citations, with the total amounting to 101. In the 1930s, 30 of the 32 elected firebrands amassed a total of 422 Communist Front citations. Of those chosen as officials in the 1940s, 24 of the 34 had joined 296 Red operations. Those elected in the 1950s racked up a total of at least 52 such citations, while those chosen for top spots in the 1960s had attained at least 67 Communist Front citations prior to - 1941. Twenty-on- e miscellaneous A.C.L.U. local officials around the country were also checked by American Opinion and found to have amassed a total of at least 204 Communist affiliations bringing the grand total for 206 leading members of the A.C.L.U. to the incredible sum of 1,754 officially cited Communist Front affiliations. Investigative Committees at both the state and national levels have repeatedly issued official reports warning of A.C.L.U. radicalism. As early as 1920, for example, a Joint Committee of the New York State Legislature took the testimony of many witnesses, in cluding Roger Baldwin, and reported: The American Civil Liberties Union in the last analysis is a supporter of all subversive movements; and its propaganda is detrimental to the interests of the state. It attempts not only to protect crime, but to encourage attacks upon our institutions in every form. A September 1923 Report of the United Mine Workers of America warned: Active among the intellectual classes of the country and posing as a champion of the liberties of speech, press, and assembly, is the American Civil Liberties Union, at New York. This organization is working in harmony and unity with the . Communist superstructure in Amera nationwide . conducting ica of Bolshe- for liberation the campaign vik agents and disloyal agitators who have been convicted under the wartime laws or the syndicalist laws of or different States for revolutionary activities. On January 17, 1931, the Special House Committee to Investigate Communist Activities in the United States reported: The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the Communist movement in the United States and fully 90 percent of its efforts are on behalf of Communists who have come into conflict with the law. It claims to stand for free speech, free press and free assembly but, it is quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is to attempt to protect the Communists in their advocacy of force and violence to overthrow the government, replacing the American flag by a red flag and erecting a Soviet government in place of the Republican form of government guaranteed to each state by the Federal Constitution. A Navy Intelligence report read into the Congressional Record on September 10, 1935, cited: a) American Civil Liberties Union. This organization is too well known to need description. The larger part of the work carried on by it and its various branches does undoubtedly materially aid Communist objectives . . . . In 1938, the Special House Committee on Activities reported: Not only does the American Civil Liberties Union admit its open defense of Communists . . . but it also admits that it has loaned considerable money to the International Labor Defense, a Communist movement, which is a branch of the Red International Aid of Russia. It also admits having lost $40,000 in bails which it surrendered in the Gastonia riot cases after the Communists involved had escaped to Russia. Only a short time ago the Union received a refund for bails which it had furnished for the Bridgman Michigan Communists. The trial was abandoned by the government because of the death of the main witness in the case. The Union likewise admits that it has received funds from the Communist Garland Fund. A 1943 Report of the California g Committee on Activities formally concluded: The American Civil Liberties Union may be definitely classed as a ComAt least ninety munist front percent of its efforts are expended on behalf of Communists who come into conflict with the law. .... .. tax-exem- pt un-patriot- ic Un-Americ- an Un-Americ- an Fact-Findin- .... The Present Times change, however, and it is reasonable to ask whether the A.C.L.U. has mellowed in its old age. The answer is that it has not. If anything, the American Civil Liberties Union has become more militant. Not content with coming to the aid of Communists and other radicals in conflict with the law, it now actively attacks laws with which its leaders disagree. In an analysis of the A.C.L.U. in Barrons for August 26, 1968, columnist Shirley Scheibla observed that although it claims to be for the preservation of human liberty, Careful study of ACLU cases . . . reveals that nearly all the causes it has taken up tend to weaken law and order and the ability of society to defend itself. Some landmark cases give Communists more freedom to destroy the nation from within. Those involving the draft erode the states ability to defend itself against armed attack. Other significant ACLU cases diminish the authority of schools and police and the influence of religion. Such A.C.L.U. activities were given a big boost in 1967, when its affiliated Roger Baldwin Foundation was given status. Mark Van Doren, whose officially cited Communist Fronts would more than All this page, reported as follows in an A.C.L.U. fund appeal in October of that year: A new beginning has been made possible by the recent U.S. Treasury Department ruling that much of ACLUs traditional work and all of the new plans to secure the rights of our poor merit tax deductibility. For the first time, potentially large sums of money are available to the civil liberties struggle. And A.C.L.U. has continued actively to follow the Communist Line. Indeed, it appears that in many instances it has served as the legal vanguard of the Communist cause, swiftly moving areas lawyers into marked for agitation their objective being to set up complex legal defenses around those who would soon become involved in violation of the nations laws. For instance, in the A.C.L.U.s 36th Annual Report, covering the period from July 1, 1955, to June 30, 1956, Executive Director Patrick Malin (a member of the conspiratorial Council on Foreign Relations, by the way) said he would seek to broaden our organ ization in the South in order to provide new support for the national campaign a few against discrimination target areas can be seen. High on the list is Civil Rights legislation. The lawyers of the A.C.L.U. preceded the radical agitators to make their work . pre-determin- ed -- .... possible. There is no radical issue which has escaped the ministrations of the A.C.L.U. lawyers. They have become active in recent years, for instance, in pushing for the liberation of students in our schools. In October of 1970 these defenders of civil liberties sponsored a Students Rights Conference for high school students at Rutgers University. Chief agitator at the conference was Alan Levine, boss of the New York A.C.L.U.s Students Rights Project. Levine told the assembled youngsters: Oppressive institutions give you no right at all to say why you go there, how long you go there, and. what you do while youre there. He urged them to demand control of their schools and declared: Indeed, you cannot exercise the rights the courts have told you you have without disrupting the system. The message was clear: Tear the schools apart to get what you want and we will see that you are not punished by the law. Ask the people of South Boston if students are getting the message. The A.C.L.U. says it is now equally concerned with the constitutional rights of prisoners. Two of the most active lawyers in its National Prisoner Project are Philip Hirschkop and al anti-aborti- on Continued oif page 1 1 (Jon liame," are available at 13Lach; copies, 11c each; 1,000 or more each. Order from The Review Of The New., Belmont, Maaaachuaetla 02178 iqq 9C 7.,. rnoo- Herman Schwartz. In the March 1973 issue of the A.C.L.U. newspaper Civil Liberties , they discussed their work candidly. The goals of the National Prisoner Project are cited as follows: First, getting people out. Next, protection of prisoners First Amendment faactivities. Next, reform of pre-tricilities. Lawyers Hirschkop and Schwartz believe that prisoners, like students, should be given control of the institutions they inhabit. And what is the objective of these A.C.L.U. reformers? As they explain it: The ultimate goal of the prison reform movement is to end imprisonment as we know it today. But that goal is distant. The Prison Projects intermediate goal, therefore, is to end imprisonment now for as many inmates as possible by reforming sentencing, bail and parole procedures and to make imprisonment as tolerable as possible for the others. It is all too clear that the idea is to turn the prisons over to the inmates and put as many convicts as possible back on the streets by wrecking present safeguards. We should note in passing that A.C.L.U. lawyer Philip Hirschkop is listed as a member of the National Lawyers Guild, officially cited as the foremost legal bulwark of the Communist Party. Women have also been targeted for protection by the A.C.L.U. The headline of the February 1972 issue of Civil Liberties declares: .Priority Program for 1972, The ACLU and Womens Rights. Suzanne Post of the A.C.L.U. Board wrote: A womans very personality is violated by laws denying her control of her own body. She contended that laws constitute cruel and unusual punishment by forcing a woman to carry an unwanted child for nine months. The A.C.L.U. quickly set up the Womens Rights Project, and began to fight for the civil right of expectant mothers everywhere to kill their babies through abortion. Indicative of A.C.L.U.s hypocrisy is the fact that while it condones slaughter of the unborn, it opposes capital punishment. In July of 1973 the A.C.L.U. informed its members that it was going to serve as a nucleus for those fighting efforts at the state level to circumvent the Supreme Courts abolition of the death penalty. To this end it set up a Death Penalty Project. Like the Communists, the A.C.L.U. is also in favor of gun control. Typical is the position of The Docket ,' official publication of the A.C.L.U. in Massachusetts. The issue for April 1974 reports: CLUM Civil Liberties Union Massachusetts favors all bills that seek to control ownership of guns. When firearms are widely owned, there is a threat to free expression of ideas. Forgive us if the logic of that last sentence escapes us. Another issue of The Docket reported that C.L.U.M. had voted to endorse the United Farm Workers Union and Cesar Chavez in the. nationwide secondary boycott of iceberg lettuce picked by a rival union. Through some twisted reasoning, the Chavez boycott and his efforts to force farm workers into his union became a grave constitutional question. And, said The Docket editorialist in all seriousness, Good salads dont need to contain iceberg lettuce, anyway. Boston or native lettuce, romaine, escarole, endive, chicory, kale, and spinach make excellent salad base and are not included in the boycott. |