America this week marks the centennial of Ronald Reagan’s birth.
Born February 6, 1911, Reagan lived a remarkable life, with a
presidency of utmost consequence, winning, among other things, 44
states in 1980 and 49 in 1984, plus a Cold War against a truly Evil
Empire. Oh, yes, he also won a long battle — less recognized —
against progressives. It was a crucial battle — even less
understood — that began for Reagan, with fascinating twists, back
in Hollywood. The Reagan centennial is a golden opportunity to
consider what happened there and to draw lessons for what America
faces with progressives today.
In the 1980s, the progressives Reagan faced called
themselves “liberals.” In the 1940s, when Reagan first encountered
them, as a liberal himself, they weren’t shy about calling
themselves progressives. More telling, Reagan was shocked to find
that many of those spearheading “progressive” groups and causes
weren’t really progressives but were communists exploiting
progressives, their labels, and their organizations. Understanding
this is no mere historical curiosity; no, for Reagan, it was a
life-changing wake-up call, initiating a personal-political
transformation that, ultimately, and dramatically, led to the
presidency and victory in the Cold War. That path included Reagan
handing the progressives their biggest setback since the founding
of their movement — a setback they’re striving to “change” and
“reform” right now.
Before considering Reagan’s conversion, it’s key to
understand what was happening with Hollywood’s progressives in this
period. Many “progressives,” especially following the surge by
Communist Party USA (CPUSA) during the Great Depression, were
actually closet communists lifting the progressive label to dupe
progressives. This was done quite cynically and successfully,
whether ordered and orchestrated from CPUSA headquarters in New
York, from CPUSA’s branch office in Los Angeles, or from Comintern
headquarters in Moscow. It’s fascinating, and would be hilarious if
not so sad, that the Soviets even referred to Joe Stalin as a
progressive. The Soviet Ministry of Education framed Stalin as “the
great leader of the Soviet people and of all progressive
mankind.”
Similarly, in Washington, some self-proclaimed
“progressives” serving President Franklin Delano Roosevelt were
actually communists penetrating and influencing the administration:
Lauchlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, Harold Glasser, Alger Hiss.
Even FDR’s most trusted adviser, Harry Hopkins, may have been a
closet communist masquerading as a progressive. That’s the
conclusion of some experts who have dissected the Venona
transcripts.
The communist pilfering of the “progressive” label was
evident in a major Congressional report in December 1961, the most
in-depth investigation of communist front groups ever done. Titled,
“Guide to Subversive Organizations and Publications,” the
investigation went back to the early 20th century. Probably the
most popular title listing in the 994-page cumulative index is the
word “progressive.”
That brings me to Hollywood, where the exploitation of the
progressive label was especially rich, and where communists truly
desired to hijack the motion-picture industry. Progressives would
be central to that plan.
Consider the group, Progressive Citizens of America (PCA),
which was thoroughly penetrated. One liberal actor exploited was
the great Gene Kelly, a pleasant, patriotic American. Kelly was
enlisted as a progressive prop to stand in front of a giant
American flag and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. He rallied the
progressives in reverential renditions of “America.” In
one sorry display, the all-American boy was cast to provide the
introduction at PCA’s initial meeting in Los Angeles on February
11, 1947. The evening’s theme was established before Kelly spoke,
as a large screen flashed photographs of bombed Hiroshima, with
rolling footage of the dead and maimed. That evening, PCA board
members would be elected. On the ballot were secret hard-line
Hollywood communists like John Howard Lawson and Dalton Trumbo, as
well as non-communist liberals like Edward G. Robinson, Humphrey
Bogart, John Garfield, Gregory Peck, Lena Horne, and Melvyn
Douglas.
Take another sorry case, where Katharine Hepburn was the
opening speaker at a May 19, 1947 Progressive Party Rally at
Hollywood Legion Stadium. Draped in a long, flame-red dress, the
liberal New Englander read a speech scripted by Trumbo — and so
admired by People’s Daily World that it reprinted the
entire text.
This manipulation was old hat for the comrades, who found
no shortage of progressives to do the bidding of Stalin.
Alas, into this waded an actor named Ronald Reagan,
mid-30s, politically passionate. As a committed FDR liberal, Reagan
was susceptible to the conniving of communists. He was targeted
immediately after World War II, a quick victim of several
front-groups. He was very “naïve,” Reagan admitted later, “blindly
and busily” joining “every organization I could find that would
guarantee to save the world.” He was “an active” but unwitting
participant “in what now and then turned out to be communist
causes.” The deceived Reagan assumed these folks were “liberals,
and being liberals ourselves, [we] bedded down with
them.”
Most redeeming about Ronald Reagan is that when he
learned, he really learned. By October 1947, he was testifying
before Congress on communist infiltration. Later still, he would
explain: “The communist plan for Hollywood was remarkably simple.
It was merely to take over the motion picture business … [as] a
grand world-wide propaganda base.” Before TV and mass production of
foreign films, said Reagan, American movies dominated 95% of the
world’s screens, with an audience of “500,000,000 souls” around the
globe. “Takeover of this enormous plant and its gradual
transformation into a communist gristmill was a grandiose idea. It
would have been a magnificent coup for our enemies.”
In Reagan’s view, those were the stakes, prodded by a
“master scheme” to “line up big-name dupes to collect money and
create prestige.” Progressives were central to the plan. Even at
the height of party membership, CPUSA never had more than about
100,000 members; it couldn’t advance without
progressives.
Americans needed to wake up, as had Reagan.
Of course, the rest is history. Reagan began a historic
march to the presidency that, by the 1980s, threatened to squash
the progressive long march that preceded him. He had splendid
success, but one thing about progressives — which Reagan
understood — is their patient ability to work slowly,
incrementally, with victories not necessarily at the ballot box but
in other influential facets of American life, like education. They
waited and waited, until, in November 2008, enough oblivious
Americans, especially moderates and independents, were duped like
Reagan once had been — and voted into office a
progressive-in-chief campaigning under the banner of “change.” Some
things never change.
We must learn what Ronald Reagan learned: The progressive
left isn’t going away, ever-awaiting the next step in the
evolutionary chain. It’s an ebb and flow, but always creeping
toward centralization; or, what Reagan called “creeping socialism.”
We must awaken, providing progressives with more setbacks. Most of
all, we must not to be fooled, misled, duped, certainly not more
than once. Ronald Reagan’s life, and path, is a history and life
lesson for all of us.
Tomas| 2.4.11 @ 7:07AM
The Left surely wasn't happy with Reagan's conservatism, especially where it shone a light on its agenda, its hypocrisy.
Their hatred stemmed from the fact that Reagan used to be one of them. His conversion is viewed - and touted - as an abandonment of "realistic" principles.
Facing Reagan's unwavering popularity, they have no choice but to cast their failed hero - O - as a student of Reagan's political beliefs.
-
Alan Brooks| 2.4.11 @ 8:47AM
"Oh, yes, he also won a long battle -- less recognized -- against progressives."
Yet today corporations don't conserve anything. So progressives were beaten, but nothing more.
simon templar| 2.6.11 @ 7:17PM
Blah, Blah, Blah, corportations bad, liberals good..it's getting old and rather dull and stupid..Alan!
Oldefarte| 2.7.11 @ 12:18PM
Wrong [Yet today corporations don't conserve anything] !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Louis Jenkins| 2.4.11 @ 9:12AM
Nothing worse than a reformed progressive. Wish the man could be brought back from death. None-the-less, many of us have learned, and must carry the mantle.
Anthony| 2.4.11 @ 10:10AM
Norman Thomas, the devout socialist, famously boasted that all the goals of Communism would be achieved in America under the banner of progressiveism.
Never a shortage of willing dupes in America, as witnessed by some on the left who post here.
Reagan won the battle, but the war rages on. Looks like the Battle of the Bulge is coming. Gear up, it's gonna be nasty. As Obozo said, if they bring a knife, we bring a gun. Yep, couldn't say it any better myself.
jon | 2.4.11 @ 10:47AM
Presidents can seldom, if ever, walk in and simply implement their pure agenda. There are too many moving parts for that, by design.
But what a President can do is wake up every day and fearlessly and convincingly explain their philosophy and their plan. That is what made Reagan great. He clarified conservatism to so many who thought they were liberal (Reagan Democrats).
Whether or not Palin is the brightest or sharpest, she's fearless, and that is why she succeeds. Many conservatives talk about Reagan, but few have his guts. But I don't think it's too late to learn the lesson.
Jon
www.gutfeelingbook.com
MarkR| 2.4.11 @ 1:17PM
Reagan was no fly by night actor who got lucky! That is a leftist mantra to steele against his accomplishments. I laughed so hard when I first heard of all the letters/ audiotapes and corrsespondence which was uncovered after Reagan left office and published after his death- why? Because I used to listen to him in 1970's after he left the governorship in California in 74-75. I had heard his intellect in action and knew this man was as bright as anyone. The fact the left is a johnnycomelately to this is no surprise. However, they seek not to inform but to coopt.--The left is not about idea(S) except one- and that is power-brute power to take away the private enterprise and success-failure ethic of American life. They want equality of results with the resulting equality of control over people and institutions to dictate that result. The old USSR was an example of the derangment of leftist philosophy taken to its logic end result- and that is an enslavement to government whilest the New Class becomes ever richer and powerful (ie- now government workers and their increased pay and benefits at the expense of taxpayers) and propagates the lie that the RICH are the real enemy while the people need the government to protect them from these evildoers. This occurs while the New Class and government employees actually become that rich caste. Its a fallacious and destroying philosophy which plays on envy and victimhood and appeals to the lowest forms of human weakness. Reagan saw through all this and for that the left truly STILL hates him as they try and co-opt him.
Stormzeye| 2.4.11 @ 5:51PM
Though I loved most of what Reagan stood for and the forthrightness of his convictions regarding the exceptional nature of the American people and their unique ability to govern themselves, I will never forgive him for failing to retaliate against Hizbollah for killing more than 200 of our Marines in Beirut. He never should have withdrawn from Lebanon after this attack and should have laid waste to the Bekaa Valley for this horrific act of war. It was a significant blot on his foreign policy record and a contributor to our current prolem with Islamic jihadism.
Ken (Old Texican)| 2.5.11 @ 12:27PM
Stormeyes
I was frustrated too ie Lebanon. I learned later that there were a lot of Russians in Syria at that time.
RR had a lot on his plate.
YOU SAID WHAT?| 2.6.11 @ 11:04AM
Stormzeye, didn't the New Jersey lob shells into Beirut indiscriminately on Reagan's orders?
Stormzeye| 2.6.11 @ 2:51PM
Here is a link to a decent recounting of the events surrounding the Beirut attack. The USS New Jersey lobbed 300 shells to cover the retreat but hit only Druze and Syrian targets. Hardly a clear response and no where near what should have been done by Reagan and Weinberger. Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1.....etaliation
Oldefarte| 2.4.11 @ 8:46PM
The Hollywood liberalism of Reagan's era was/is nothing to compare with their socialistic bent of today, since then, the studio system was controlled by owners truely in the capitalistic mold. Today, the hollywood studio system has been replaced by the indendent movie producers who monopolistically control their income and who are actively and adamently liberal. All Hollywood players [actors, directors, etc] must out of necessity tow the radical liberal line, or their careers will be non-existent at best. Conservative players are banned and black-balled in this liberal environment, in a threatening manner. A conservative wishing to enter the movie or television industry had better either do an attitude adjustment or find alternative employment far from the California boundaries!!!!!!
Alan Brooks| 2.5.11 @ 1:12AM
"must out of necessity tow"
Toe the line, not "tow". In the Services for instance, a Serviceman toes the line at attention, etc.
ATTEN-SHUN!, Oldefarte.
Oldefarte| 2.7.11 @ 12:16PM
Correct, oh word terrorist!!!!!!!
simon templar| 2.6.11 @ 7:19PM
Mr. Kengor..excellent and interesting article..thank you.
العاب بنات | 4.11.12 @ 4:22PM
thanx
العاب بنات | 4.11.12 @ 4:22PM
thankx