The Gunpowder Plot

Fear of communist persuasion through the media, and further fear of the ignorant masses remaining oblivious to the danger presented by communism, pervaded American politics. Many politicians could remember all too well the effect of radical journalists (the muckrakers from years before) who touched the minds and hearts of the American citizenry with their words and insight. The message then had been socialism. Would it not be just as easy to use movies to convey the message of communism?

Sadly, this led to the ruination of many a career in the movie-making business, which was burgeoning at the time. Even in the cases where communist sympathizers were truly found, no harm was brought from their plans since they often would rather let the masses listen to the message of communism on their own. The House of Un-American Activities Committee showed how brutal and ignorant a force the government could be, almost like a cornered animal lashing out in desperation to destroy its foes. In the end, the HUAC only succeeded in destroying well-liked movie stars by branding them “communist”. Even celebrities who had been merely found as slightly suspicious were dropped from the public eye, as nativism showed its strength.

In the cases of Lillian Hellman and Edward Dmytryk, the choice was not between liberty or death: It was the choice between liberty and mediocrity, or betrayal and safety. In fact, liberties were widely stripped anyway: any semblance of a right to privacy was negligible, as if anyone ever came under suspicion of the government they easily rooted through their life, searching for some connection between them and communism, and even (in McCarthy’s case) fabricated a connection in an attempt for greater recognition.

The second liberty stripped from American citizens at the time of the second Red Scare was the freedom of assembly, though it was in a subtle way. If one should ever be or have been associated with a vaguely radical political party or area, they would go under suspicion of treason and have their privacy stripped away in the process. Thusly was freedom of speech impeded, as well. If one said or expressed any kind of sympathetic political view to communism, they would easily be branded a radical.

The case of Edward Dmytryk showed the typical dire straits that the citizen under suspicion would endure. Even as he watched, Dmytryk’s career was destroyed for his meer association with supposed communists, and his and his friends’ lives were laid bare for the government officials and public media to pick clean. The only choice for redemption, and it was a small chance that Edward would even glean safety from choosing it, was to betray more friends and make more endure what he would endure eventually either way.

So, as has been stated, the choices remained this: Choose liberty and tell the truth, or choose conformity and tell a lie, so that one could live on. Many were affronted with this choice, and varied from time to time from the latter to the former. However, the case of Lillian Hellman draws attention for its profound statement of defiance. By declaring her refusal of appearing in court, Lillian showed her disdain for the backhanded actions of the government in attempting to throw suspicion on Lillian and her friends, whoever they may have been. In the end, the results were varied in this case as well, but usually had little effect on those involved; if they were nativist, they would assume she was protecting communist radicals, if they were liberal and open-minded, they would see her as standing for her rights. McCarthyism dropped on America like a curse, and as it has been compared to the great witch hunts of Salem, it brought America down to its base levels of finger-pointing and blame-shifting.