Glenn Beck is the new face of McCarthyism, not of the KKK.
What's the difference and why does it matter?
Beck's story appeals to the lesser angels of our nature. It is as much myth as fact. The beast he aroused can be fought and weakened by steady diet of rational thought. Beck's die-hard followers are beyond reach, but Beck's movement thrives because it also reaches people who don't know what to believe. Some of these people can be inoculated against Beck by rational discourse and an appeal to common sense.
But to be effective, we have to understand the beast we're fighting.
Beck's beast is the same one aroused by McCarthyism. It is not the same racism and hate of the KKK, though they are all Beck's natural allies. The racism and hate in the Tea Party are byproducts, the hot blood that pumps when the cold heart of this beast is aroused.
The heart of this beast is fear.
The questions are what do people fear, and how does Beck manipulate it?
The link to McCarthyism comes through Glenn Beck's hero, the late Cleon Skousen (Salon article), who had once been an FBI agent. Skousen had a gift for public speaking, and after he left the FBI, he promoted himself as an anti-communist expert who had worked closely with J. Edgar Hoover. According to his personnel file, these were outright lies. After the some people asked the FBI about Skousen's background, the FBI pejoratively called Skousen a "professional anticommunist," and said that he did far more harm than good.
Beck is, as Skousen was, a Mormon. Skousen had a cozy relationship with the Mormon heirarchy, especially Mormon prophet David O. McKay (prophet from 1951-1970). McKay recommended Skousen's books from the pulpit, which carried a heavy weight with Mormons. Skousen later enjoyed the support of Ezra Taft Benson (Mormon prophet from 1985-1994), who was also a strong supporter of the John Birch Society. Thomas S. Monson, who heads the Mormon church today, published the 1st edition of Skousen's first best seller nearly 50 years ago. The main reason McKay supported Skousen, it seems, was that communist countries excluded Mormon missionaries: communism was Satan's tool to prevent the Gospel of Jesus Christ from reaching all God's children. Spreading the word of God, as interpreted by the Mormons, probably motivated Skousen, but the message he crafted and sold reached a broader audience. Skousen supported with other anti-communist organizations without prejudice, most notably the John Birch Society and the Christian Anti-Communism Crusade (CACC).
Skousen also claimed to be a constitutional expert. He did have some training in law, and he had made a hobby of learning about the founding fathers. Skousen's interpretation of the Constitution, however, lacks academic rigor. The point of The Constitution its role in a grand narrative that he wants to tell about human history. He believed the authors of the constitution were directly and divinely inspired, and the constitution was a holy document, nearly infallible. The constitution was (according to Skousen) the reason why the world had made more progress than the previous 5,000 years combined (hence the title, "The 5,000 Year Leap" (Another dkos diary)). Changes to the constitution were, therefore, the devil's work. Skousen placed a heavy emphasis on the phrases in the Constitution limited the powers of the federal government. Socialism would expand the powers of the federal government beyond the defined limits, and Skousen saw no difference between communism and socialism. The struggle against both was a holy war.
Skousen capitalized on fear that was stoked by Joseph McCarthy himself. McCarthy gave a speech in Wheeling, West Virginia that he repeated in Salt Lake City, Utah. McCarthy said that the "western Christian" world was losing a moral war with the "atheistic Communistic" world. He claimed to have a list of communist sympathizers who were working inside the state department. McCarthy's message resonated with Americans across the country, including the Mormons. The real question is why?
Before attempting an answer, it's useful to first point out how Skousen, Beck, McCarthy and others like them have misrepresented history, to their own ends.
The Enlightenment: The Enlightenment, which is characterized by Faith in Reason, was the real cause of the 5,000 year leap.
The opinions of the founding fathers on religion varied. Most of them did not believe in organized religion, but they did believe in Christian philosophy. The founders beliefs in Jesus Christ's divinity varied. Some clearly believed in the divinity of Jesus, but Thomas Jefferson edited the bible to expurgate all references to Jesus' divinity. The debate over what the founding fathers believed about God is, to say the least, irrelevant. Faith in reason, not faith in God, was what distinguished the founding fathers.
James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin are counted among Enlightenment philosophers. The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, and The Bill of Rights were three major products of The Enlightenment.
The Enlightenment its roots in Europe, at least as far back as Isaac Newton. In France, the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen" paved the way for the French Revolution.
Faith in Reason became mainstream through The Enlightenment, and this paved the way for minor revolutions that established many fields of thought in the next century. Physics had already been placed on solid ground through Newton. Great leaps in medicine came through the germ theory of disease (Robert Koch, and others), the idea of selective toxicity and modern anti-infective drugs (Paul Ehrlich), vaccines (Jenner, and others), and the establishment of the International Sanitary Commissions to fight the great cholera pandemics of the 19th century. The modern study of biology was established through the theory of evolution (Charles Darwin), genetics (Mendel), and The New Synthesis (Dobzhansky, Fisher, Wright, Haldane, etc.). In economics, a general theory about markets (Adam Smith) and the capability of managing economies (Keynes). Psychology was founded (Freud). The Green Revolution made it possible to feed the world today (Norman Borlaug). Important inventions, attributable in part to The Enlightenment, include electricity, the telephone, the light bulb, the internal combustion engine, the airplane, and the computer. Most of what makes your life different from a Roman citizen is in the list above.
In the grand sweep of history, The Constitution was part of a greater movement. It is one effect, but probably not the underlying cause.
Big Government: The Constitution explicitly limits the powers of the federal government, but James Madison, who wrote most of The Constitution and The Bill of Rights, believed that checks and balances in government were needed to protect individual rights from the tyranny of the majority. Skousen, Beck and the Tea Baggers consistently emphasize the wrong underlying principle. Madison also authored many of the federalist papers that are a useful commentary on The Constitution. Then, when James Madison became President, he supported the formation of the National Bank that he had previously opposed, because it was useful to raise funds for war. After all he had written, Madison was ultimately a pragmatist. The Federal Government could expand its powers as needed to fulfill its mission, so long as the individual rights were protected from the tyranny of the majority.
The founding fathers were men of their time. The Constitution was written before, and could not possibly have anticipated, the modern understanding of infectious diseases and their propensity to cross state and national boundaries, or the rise of modern economics and monetary policy. The Constitution did not anticipate the rise of modern corporations with potentially unlimited political power, compared with the individuals. The emphasis on promoting the general welfare and preventing individual rights from tyranny would, arguably, have swayed some of them to support programs that the Tea Baggers oppose. What can be said about their likely beliefs in socialism? It is, to put it simply, impossible to know what the founding fathers would have done in another age. If, as they wrote, their emphasis was on protecting individuals from the tyranny of the majority, it's likely that they would have supported the enlargement of government and an expansion of its powers sufficient to protect individuals from other sources of tyranny. On the questions of our day, the founders intent in writing The Constitution should be weighed against the serious limitations of the times.
The Constitution was, after all, one of the first products of The Enlightenment, not the last. It can be seen as an underlying cause of what came next, because good government builds wealth and provides a space for enterprise.
Back to McCarthy: How did it all get started in Wheeling? First, McCarthy held up a document and said, "I have here in my hand..." a document that would prove that there are communists in the State Department. Second, the media reprinted the claims without looking at the document or checking the facts. Third, the claims were picked up and amplified by other media outlets, also without examining the document. Fourth, McCarthy repeated his claims, and when he was asked for evidence to support some of his claims, he responded by making more accusations, which were also reported by the media. A few years later, the media finally turned on McCarthy and destroyed him politically. He died in 1957.
The real question is why people were so ready to believe McCarthy. On the one hand, the question is obtuse. A US Senator (an authority) said he had proof, and the media (another authority) reported it. People believed. While this response explains the furor at the time, it doesn't explain the long, underground life of McCarthyism through Skousen and its reemergence with Glenn Beck.
The reason for the long life of McCarthyism is the claim of conspiracy. This one is a doozy. It involves communists, bankers, intellectual elites, government officials (and all of it being orchestrated by the devil himself.) Why do claims of conspiracy take such a strong hold on the human mind? That's a question I'll have to pursue next time, in my continuing determination to expose this stoopidity to the light of reason.
Note Apologies for leaving it here, but this has grown long, and I've got many things to do this week, so I'll continue later.