REVIVING RED SCARE RHETORIC

More than three decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a U.S. president is again casting the threat of Communism as one of the biggest issues facing American voters. At rallies and campaign-style speeches across the country this summer, President Donald Trump is increasingly portraying Democrats as Communists, betting that his message will sharpen the ideological contrast heading into November's midterm elections. Even though polls continue to show that voters remain mostly concerned about the economy, the cost of living, and Mr. Trump's aggressive military posture internationally, most recently displayed during his unabating war with Iran, Republican strategists consider these losing electoral issues for the party. Some are beginning to see recent primary victories of young Democratic Socialists as an opportunity to transition the narrative equating Democrats, Democratic Socialist and essentially everybody contesting MAGA rule as Communists and reviving the Red Scare propaganda which dominated much of the political propaganda during the 20th century. The "Red Scare" was a deliberate government and media campaign used during the early 20th century and the Cold War to stoke an intense fear of Communist subversion. By portraying leftists, labor organizers, and minorities as threats, it fueled widespread xenophobia and mass civil liberties violations. The first Red Scare (1917-1920) was triggered by World War I and the Bolshevik Revolution. It demonized striking workers and immigrants, connecting legitimate labor struggles with "radical terrorism as threats to American society" incited by foreign agents. The government capitalized on these fears by passing the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, legally n in B criminalizing disloyal or anti-war speech. Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer used this climate to conduct the "Palmer raids," arresting and deporting thousands of suspected radicals without warrants. Following World War II, the rise of the Soviet Union and the Cold War, anti-Communist fear reached a fever pitch, resulting in what is commonly called as McCarthyism. Congressional committees like the "House Un-American Activities Committee interrogated writers, actors, and directors. Publications like "Red Channels" essentially destroyed careers by accusing hundreds of professionals of harboring pro-Soviet sympathies - often without evidence. Faced with potentially devastating electoral outcomes as the result of the upcoming November elections, President Trump took a page from the politically successful "Red Scare" campaigns of the 20th century, and revived its rhetoric by framing the political landscape as an apocalyptic battle between "common sense" and "hardcore, godless Communists." This strategy aims to rally his conservative base ahead of the mid-terms and combat progressive Democratic - Socialist victories. He has equated Democrats to Communists, conflating mainstream Democratic policies with Marxism, while portraying left-wing extremism as an existential threat to the American way of life. In his Independence Day speech at Mount Rushmore he actually made the point that "the Communist menace is a mortal threat to liberty. A person cannot be a Communist and a patriot." It is a fact that, recently, Democratic Socialist candidates have significantly increased their representation in our electoral politics. Candidates endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have won 35 primary elections so far this year, building on 250 DSA members holding elected public office across 40 states. The organization reached 120,000 dues paying members, marking the largest Socialist organization in U.S. history, surpassing the Socialist Party of America's 1912 peak. However, equating the organization and the Democratic Party with being Communist, and labeling them existential threats to American values smacks of empty revisionism. Communism as a political force no longer has the electoral pull it once had. Even in generally more receptive European countries its strength currently registers in the low single digits. President Trump's empty rhetoric can't be described as anything more than campaign propaganda designed to revitalize a fear palpable during much of the last century. It can no longer point to viable existential threats we ought to be concerned about. In reality his new campaign amounts to a "Hail Mary" pass, containing manipulative, hollow language created to bypass critical thinking and trigger strong emotional responses. We won't know until November 3 if his approach is successful. Some of his Republican followers might well be persuaded to overlook the substantive foundation of what they are asked to believe. For the rest of us, be aware! Empty propagandistic rhetoric has a proven, often successful, track record. Theo Wierdsma