Immersed In Red

by Mike Shotwell

  So many of these names were those of intimates or closely associated Communist Party functionaries of my mother and Orville, all of them working so assiduously toward the dissolution of the US government, and each of them ardent Stalinists promoting domination by Moscow.

  Chambers carried on his espionage activities from 1932 until 1938. During that period Stalin’s Great Terror was underway and Chambers became frightened, fearing for his life, and with good reason. Others around him who had become disillusioned were “invited” back to Moscow and were purged. He ignored several orders to travel to Moscow. Not surprisingly, his communist faith was weakening. He began concealing clandestine documents as a way of hopefully preventing the Soviets from assassinating him and his family. And one day in 1938, he went to work and then vanished, taking his family into hiding, the stolen documents having been concealed and safeguarded with relatives. After a year in hiding, which included living in his car and frequent moves, he was able to resurface, and later became an editor at Time magazine.

  Nine years later, in 1948, Chambers was called to testify before the HCUAA where he gave up the names of those who were part of the underground “Ware Group,” including Alger Hiss, one of the most prominent of the New Dealers, and a man who had presided over the United Nations Charter Conference. The furor and backlash of the leftist community was momentous. It created serious questioning of the government infiltration at all levels.

  While the statute of limitations had run out to try Hiss on espionage charges, he nonetheless was tried for perjury. Chambers’ testimony was crucial and damning, and Hiss was found guilty, for which he served a substantial sentence in the penitentiary. Although he professed his innocence to his deathbed, Hiss’s espionage activities have since been proven beyond any doubt through the released Soviet and US Army documentation. Chambers’ testimony, at the time vociferously ridiculed by the left as lies, has been found to be highly accurate.

  Chambers was a tragic, but truly great man. He was courageous, kind, eloquent, and a brilliant word-crafter. His book, Witness, has been considered one of the outstanding autobiographical works of the twentieth century. Not only that, but it also served as a warning about the dangers of communism. He died of a heart attack in 1961 at the age of 60. In 1984, President Ronald Reagan posthumously awarded Chambers the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his contribution to “the century’s epic struggle between freedom and totalitarianism.” In 1988, Interior Secretary Donald P. Hodel granted national landmark status to the Pipe Creek Farm where Chambers lived. In 2001, members of the Bush Administration held a ceremony to commemorate the hundredth anniversary of Chambers’ birth. Speakers included Chambers’ close friend, William F. Buckley, Jr.

  * * *

  CHAPTER 13

  MARXISM AND THE CULT OF PERSONALITY

  Marxist and communist ideology as a religion is a fact that is often overlooked, but the power of which should not be minimized. The faithful and even blind devotion, particularly in regard to Stalin, exhibited by Orville and his fellow travelers was further made manifest, and perpetuated, by the “cult of personality” so purposefully cultivated by China, Russia and other totalitarian regimes.

  In China, the epitome of communism as a religion was Mao’s Little Red Book, which became the bible of the bloody and inhuman Cultural Revolution. It contained Mao’s philosophical interpretation of The Communist Manifesto, with quotes defining Maoism, known as a form of Stalinism. These pronouncements gave authority for the death by purges, starvation, and executions of some 30 million innocents in the decade between 1966 and 1976.

  Included in the genocide were those arbitrarily designated as “enemies of the state,” including university professors, statesmen, artists, writers, and others; simply put, anyone who did not agree with Mao fell into this category. They were publicly humiliated and murdered, many by marauding, club-wielding youths fervently seeking to “cleanse” their society of “bourgeois revisionists.”

  As Mao’s rule progressed following the Cultural Revolution, owning and carrying the book at all times became an unofficial requirement for every Chinese citizen. During this turbulent and frightening time, violating this unofficial rule would have been seen as a sign of divergence from Mao’s leadership, which could lead to ostracism or even death.

  Studying the book was mandatory in order to advance in college, the military, the bureaucracy, the science community, and most other fields.

  At public gatherings, military exhibitions, workers’ rallies, et cetera, adherents would wave The Little Red Book over their heads in ecstasy, showing joy, and chanting ritual slogans, along with cries of condemnation to enemies of the state. Photos of such gatherings, which show such religious devotion, are chilling.

  The Little Red Book became so holy that for some possession of the book itself became a psychological burden; it couldn’t be disposed of, and if it became inadvertently stained or soiled, it likely would have caused considerable offense.

  Although largely abandoned in the 80s, the Little Red Book is still studied and admired by some segments of the Chinese population to this day, and even by some in other countries who find its leftist message inspiring.

  A similar cult of personality existed in the Soviet empire, where thousands of statues, images and paintings of Stalin hung in virtually every public space and household. Huge images and placards were prominently displayed during the interminable military and worker marches. His writings and grandiloquent titles were part of a successful program to raise Stalin to godlike stature, in the same vein as the Roman Caesars and Egyptian Pharaohs.

  Although somewhat tempered after his death, Stalin’s memory still lingers in the minds of many Russians with awe and reverence that extends far beyond normal admiration, regardless of evidence of his treacherous regime.

  In Cambodia, Pol Pot constructed his own lawless doctrine with a sadistic regime whose reign of terror took place between 1975 and 1979; a bloody outpouring where, by some estimates, one-quarter to one-third of the Cambodian population was exterminated. His gift to the Cambodian people was total collectivism based on the doctrine of Pol Pot-ism, the Cambodian version of fundamentalist Maoism, spoken in the name of the ominous Angkar, a faceless and lawless organization developed to indoctrinate, control, and terrorize the populace. This new societal construct aimed to elevate Pol Pot to an exalted stature spread by his Khmer Rouge cadres through the use of slogans, maxims, advice, instructions, watchwords, orders, warnings, and threats. Henri Locard’s book, Pol Pot’s Little Red Book, reports stories from survivors, interspersed with historical commentary and contextual analysis, thoroughly exposing the horrific foundation upon which it was based.

  Hitler, of course, laid out his “religious” ideas about society and German nationalization in Mein Kampf, which became a type of bible for many, including the SS and Nazi Party officials who fawned over the Fuehrer’s godlike words and image and relished in the magnificent public assemblies he orchestrated.

  One of the most egregious present-day examples of the cult of personality and worship is the dictatorship of Kim Jong-Un in North Korea. Beginning in 1948, three generations of the Kim family has required total loyalty and reverence by the subjugated populace. This ruling dynasty created a government known worldwide for its political purges and Russian-style gulags.

  The first modern leader of North Korea, Kim Il-Sung (1948–94), changed Korean history books to include the declaration that his actual birthplace was on a volcano, the place where the mythical father of Tagun, the founder of Korea, descended from heaven five thousand years ago. thus creating a divine association.

  At the massive statues of Kim Il-Sung and his son Kim Jong-Il, in Pyongyang, people can be seen bowing in reverence at the flower-festooned bases of the monuments, whose figures with outstretched arms and warm smiles belie the brutal, totalitarian control of all aspects of life in North Korea. (Similarly in Russia, the murals and statues of Stalin bore the smiling countenance and open arms of the warm �
��Uncle Joe.”) Journalist Mark Bowden, observing similar devotions to Kim Jong-Un today in North Korea, has reported that, “The multitudes stand and clap at the merest glimpse of him” and, “Men and women weep for joy when he smiles and waves.”

  * * *

  PART V

  THE SCIENCES

  CHAPTER 14

  DARWIN, COMMUNISM, AND RELIGION

  The Marxist education I received was deeply committed to promoting a doctrinaire ideology in regard to the beginning of the universe, human evolution and the necessity for the societies of the world to abandon religion. This was based on their interpretation of Charles Darwin’s theories, expounded in his 1859 book, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Presentation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, which introduced the theories of “natural selection,” “survival of the fittest,” and also purported to prove that man, and not God, was the ultimate authority. Darwin was the foremost example of a man who was able to shake off the shackles of religion and thus be able to let his mind develop new scientific theories.

  Orville was always quick to use Darwin in defense of communism. He would carefully spell out how Darwin’s ideas were so relevant, how they justified communist ideals and how religion was nothing more than a cruel invention to control the masses. This, he stated with conviction; however, my mother would sidestep the word “communism” and replace it with “progressive ideas.”

  Both Orville and my mother were very clear about the accuracy of Darwinian Theory; bolstered by acquaintances in the scientific arena, mostly associated with their close friend, botanist Prof. Harry Highkin. I followed in lockstep with that belief for many years, maintaining Darwin as the benchmark for a person who exhibited sober and unfettered thinking. The abstract theory coupled with the intellectual respectability of Darwin seemed to all fit quite nicely together for me. I recall heated discussions in my dormitory at Menlo College, and later at USC, where my imperious and deprecating rhetoric was voiced in full passion. The larger ramifications of Darwin’s ideas did not become truly clear to me until much later in life, but at the time of my enthrallment, I really knew very little about the man, his methods, or even how well his theories had held up in the world of science over the prior hundred years (now over 150 years). I also had no idea how important it was in the development of the expanding political Marxist and communist doctrines.

  What I did know was that invoking Darwin’s name was a powerful political statement that I agreed with; an impregnable fortress of truth that seemed so logical that only a dunce would dare disagree.

  During the writing of this work, this section was, by far, the most difficult and lengthy subject to discuss due to its complexity and importance to Marxist ideology. It delves into not only Darwin and his life, but touches on some of the significant evolution and origin-of-life theories put forth by subsequent generations of scientists including work in the fields of genetics, molecular biology, evolutionary biology, sociobiology, evolutionary psychology, archeology, geology, paleontology, mathematical population genetics, intelligent design, political science, and other areas. It is a bewildering world with fierce opponents on all sides, battling for recognition and their position in their tight-knit scientific and philosophical communities. Accusations of “pseudo-science” and irrelevancy are hurled at each other by the various camps in defense of their turf.

  But unfortunately, and unknown by the general population, much of this antagonism has been fostered and enflamed by the rigid protocols of radical politics and the battle to have the scientific community conform to leftist ideology. This might seem strange to many as most people envision science and politics as being separate fields. What does the polio vaccine or the study of moon rocks have to do with communism or capitalism?

  I also wish to be clear that I am not promoting any of the myriad theories about the origins of life, the process of evolution or non-evolution, or intelligent design (ID) concepts. My own opinions notwithstanding, my thrust here is to illuminate elements of leftist orthodoxy that have become woven into the fabric of scientific, and evolutionary studies, and which also figured so prominently in the attitudes expressed in our household. Readers can decide for themselves what school to follow, whether or not political ideologies should have a role in evolutionary science or, conversely, whether various ID hypotheses (supernatural or not) should be expelled from study by the scientific community.

  Darwin’s link to Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao: This section cannot be underestimated due to its fundamental importance, past and present, to Marxist philosophy. The appearance of Darwin on the international stage was of vital importance in the selling of communism to the world. To Karl Marx and his co-author, Friedrich Engels, Darwin’s ideas had the effect of a miner discovering the Comstock Lode. Marx and Engels produced The Communist Manifesto in 1848 eleven years before Darwin’s publication of Origin, but Darwin’s ideas regarding the triumph of the strong and the subjugation of the weak was a powerful addition to this new idealistic philosophy. It provided Marx and Engels with a “scientific rationale” to deny creation and by extension, to deny God, both fundamental to their socio-political theories. It also neatly applied “natural selection” to politics and economics; to socialism and communism; and ultimately to the higher and final order of government that would supplant the lower order of primitive capitalism just as capitalism supplanted feudalism. In addition, it also supported Marx’s concept of perpetual “class struggle,” as reflective of nature.

  After reading Origin when first published, Marx wrote to Engels, stating, “This is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view.”

  It is interesting to note that while Karl Marx was developing his principles aimed at the abolition of religion, destruction of capitalism, and his visions of a new society, he lived with his devoted family in impoverished circumstances. Marx Historian, Mary Gabriel, in an article entitled “Marx’s Not-so-Marxist Marriage,” reported that his wife, Jenny, “may not have understood what she was getting into when she married Marx, and the sacrifice of the countless privileges she might have expected as a Prussian aristocrat.” She bore him six children, three of whom died early. Their housemaid also bore Marx a son, who then grew up within the family. Author Gabriel noted also that in later years the family was living in a squalid flat in London, after being expelled from European country after country for his revolutionary writings. This seemingly grim existence may likely have contributed to the later suicides of two of his three remaining offspring, daughters Eleanor at age 43, and Laura at age 66. Laura and her husband, Paul Lafargue, committed double suicide, deciding “they had nothing left to give to the [communist] movement to which they had devoted their lives.” Eleanor died tragically by ingesting Prussic acid after learning of her faithless lover’s marriage to another.

  Paul Lafargue’s suicide letter strikes me as a testament to the hard, secular Darwinian world view that permeated Marx’s dogma, and that I was so familiar with in my youth. Lafargue expressed his wish to not live beyond seventy, as he felt he would be a burden to himself and others, “I fixed the exact year for my departure from life. I prepared the method for the execution of our resolution. I die with the supreme joy of knowing that at some future time, the cause to which I have been devoted for forty-five years will triumph. Long live Communism! Long live the Second International.”

  Lenin spoke at the pair’s funeral in Paris. Author Joseph Hansen, in the introduction to Leon Trotsky My Life, noted Lenin’s remarks at that function, which illustrated the cold-hearted devotion he demanded from his followers, “If one cannot work for the Party any longer, one must be able to look truth in the face and die like the Lafargues.”

  In the same vein, the Darwinian philosophy, adapted to communist class struggle, was laid out by Engels in his eulogy to Marx, “There were no catastrophes in history as there were none in nature. There were no inexplicable acts, no violations of the natural order; God was as powerless as
individual men to interfere with the internal, self-adjusting dialectic of change and development.”

  This stated, in essence, that there was no right or wrong in man’s behavior, any more than a hawk picking up a squirrel for breakfast or a tiger lunching on a zebra. In nature, there was no obligation to be kind or tolerant, and man was to be judged in the same fashion. Any acts of assassination, extermination, or societal mass murder could now be explained as merely the resulting truths of the dialectic arrived at by logical arguments. These truths were argued as immutable laws, blessed by Darwin and, using nature as a guide, it is an easy jump to develop a political philosophy from this line of amoral thought to eliminate the less fit and herd people into box cars headed for extermination camps (Nazis), or to send off millions to Siberian gulags.

  Even Lenin showed his admiration for Darwin by keeping a singular piece of art on his office desk, a “kitsch statue of an ape contemplating a human skull, while sitting on a stack of books; one being The Origin of Species.” Modern copies of that same sculpture are readily available online.

  Biographer and militant atheist, Yemelian Yaroslavsky, mentions in his 1940 book on Stalin that while an ecclesiastical student he (Stalin), “began to read Darwin and became an atheist.” In 1922, Yaroslavsky formed an organization called the “League of Militant Godless” (LMG) which was given special powers to dictate the ground rules of the national campaign to eradicate religion. By 1928, anti-religious education began in the first grade.

  Stalin’s atheism permeated his dictatorial regime which included the purging of religious figures; examples such as Archbishop Andronic of Perm, who was forced to dig his own grave and was buried alive, and Bishop Germogen of Tobolsk, who was strapped to a paddle wheel of a steamboat and mangled by the rotating blades. Nuns and priests were killed in unimaginable ways: beheaded, scalped, crucified, cut to bits by swords, having limbs chopped off, boiling in tar, and whatever other torture could be thought up. Also employed were prison and labor camps, and punitive psychiatry incorporating psychological punishment and mind control experimentation in order to force abandonment of religious convictions. It was estimated that fifty thousand clergy had been executed between 1917 and the end of the Khrushchev era (1964).