I will wade in here not to take a position on GG but as an historian. I’ve said this before, but saying mean things on Twitter and alleging Russia connections does not equal the new McCarthyism, and in fact, perpetuates a massive misperception of what the Red Scare was.
The fact that GG is employed and has a prominent public voice should be enough of a clue that something is different.
McCarthyism—the Red Scare, which we often identify w/the senator from Wisconsin but whose power came more from the House’s HUAC committee and (as GG suggested) the FBI—was a political movement within government to punish political activity & even political thought.
It wasn’t just saying “hey you’re a commie!” Public trials & congressional hearings touched just a fraction of those affected.
Instead, it meant government & private sector cooperation to ensure “economic sanctions”—that those accused of communist sympathies, fairly or unfairly, were shunned from employment opportunities.
Any kind of job could be at risk, but special pressure was put on those jobs most seen as shaping security—union members, defense industry workers, government officials, certain academics—& culture & children—teachers, academics generally, actors & writers, & ... journalists.
The fact that our tension today has to do with Russia is something of a red herring (plenty of academics were crushed for their work on China).
But essentially, McCarthism wasn’t just about name calling and to suggest it was warps this history terribly.
But essentially, McCarthism wasn’t just about name calling and to suggest it was warps this history terribly.
Exactly. Or DoJ going after the longshoremen’s union, or ensuring a blacklist for Hollywood writers or left-leaning academics. It was really a muscular response, gov’t power (covert & overt) was key, & private compliance essential.
“I’m being accused by a random person on Twitter of being a Russian stooge” is so far from what McCarthyism was or how it operated.
