Capozzola,Christopher. “The Only Badge Needed is Your Patriotic Fervor: Vigilance,Coercion, and the Law in World War I America.” 88,no. 4 (March 2002). On the excesses and abuses of the volunteeranti-subversive campaigns of World War I.
Kovel,Joel. . New York: Basic Books, 1994. Antiradicalism and anticommunism hascorrupted America since its origins and produced a ruthless cruel nightmarenation that threatens the entire world.
Pedersen,Vernon L. . Urbana and Chicago:University of Illinois Press, 2001. Based on archival research in both theUnited States and Moscow. “The Communist Party of Maryland must be respectedfor raising tough, pointed questions and challenging the assumptions ofmainstream society. It was one of the earliest advocates of civil rights forblacks, it consistently questioned the enormous gap between rich and poor, andit always urged reforms to improve the lot of working Americans. Suchidealistic goals brought the Party such talented leaders as Earl Reno, PatrickWhalen, Al Lannon, Albert Blumberg, and Dorothy Rose Blumberg, the best and thebrightest that the United States had to offer. But the Party’s commendablegoals were ultimately dictated not by domestic American conditions but by theneeds of Soviet politics and foreign policy, causing constant shifts instrategy and tactics....As aconsequence, the Maryland Party sowed confusion and divisiveness in the ranksof both friends and opponents alike. Maryland’s Senator John Reed, a laborsupporter, begged the CIO and the Communist Party to stop crossing each otherup, and Party control of the Progressive Citizens of America divided Americanliberals in the face of resurgent conservatism. Progressive-mindedconservatives, such as Father Cronin, found Communist ideology so abhorrentthat they distorted their own views by allying themselves with unsavoryelements on the basis of anticommunism alone. The Party can not be blamed forthe excesses of its opponents, but its presence in society was so divisive thatit ultimately did more harm than good.”
“Vietnam Background: Congress and the war: Years of Support,” Congressional Quarterly online; and Donald A. Ritchie, “Advice and Dissent: Mike Mansfield and the Vietnam War,” in Randall B. Woods, ed., Vietnam and the American Political Tradition: The Politics of Dissent (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p. 199.
Schneider,David Moses. “The Workers’ (Communist) Party and American Trade Unions.” diss.(1927) published as a book. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1928. Veryearly academic examinations of Communist activity.
Kelly Moore, Disrupting Science: Social Movements, American Scientists, and the Politics of the Military, 1945-1975 (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2008); Michael Albert, Remembering Tomorrow: From SDS to Life After Capitalism-a Memoir (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2006), pp. 97, 99; and Richard Lyman, Stanford in Turmoil: Campus Unrest, 1966-1972 (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2009), pp. 136, 180-181. On Bechtel, see Sally Denton, The Profiteers: Bechtel and the Men Who Built the World (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2016), pp. 84, 85.
Jeremi Suri, Review of Jessica Elkind, “Aid under Fire: Nation building and the Vietnam War,” American Historical Review, February 2017, p. 204.
Robert Mann, A Grand Delusion: America’s Descent into Vietnam (New York: Basic Books, 2001), pp. 512, 594, 682; “Gallup Poll Reports 49% Believe Involvement in Vietnam an Error,” New York Times, March 10, 1968, p. 4; and Charles DeBenedetti, with Charles Chatfield, assisting author, An American Ordeal: The Antiwar Movement of the Vietnam Era (Syracuse University press,1990), p. 310.
Robert Mann, in A Grand Delusion: America’s Descent into Vietnam (New York: Basic Books, 2001), expresses a similar view, writing “that millions of deaths might have been averted had the American people and their leaders opened their eyes to the delusions leading them progressively deeper into the morass of Southeast Asia in the 1950s and 1960s – a national crusade undertaken to defeat an enemy that had once been our ally and that had originally wanted nothing more than independence from brutal colonial rule. From beginning to end, America’s political, military, and diplomatic leaders deluded themselves, accepting a series of myths and illusions about Vietnam that exacerbated and deepened the ultimate catastrophe.” (p. 2)
Gerson,Louis L. .Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1964. Discusses the influence, generallyin favor of firm opposition to Communist and Soviet influence, of central andeastern European ethnics on early American Cold War policy.
Joseph A. Buttinger, Vietnam: A Dragon Embattled, (New York: Praeger, 1967), Vol. 2, pp. 976-77. Buttinger was born in Bavaria and became a leader in the anti-Nazi movement in Austria. He fled to Paris in 1938, then immigrated to the United States, where he helped found the International Rescue Committee and the Friends of Vietnam. He became a friend and supporter of Ngo Dinh Diem, but became disillusioned with Diem’s repressive policies and denounced him. A self-taught expert on Southeast Asia, Buttinger’s writings were sought out as the U.S. became more involved in Vietnam. His two-volume study, Vietnam: A Dragon Embattled, was hailed by the New York Times as “the most thorough, informative and, over all, the most impressive book on Vietnam yet published in America.”
Howard Jones, Crucible of Power: A History of American Foreign Relations from 1897 (Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources, 2001, p. 292. An earlier version of the “domino theory” was written into National Security Council memorandum 64, adopted February 27, 1950, which stated that “the threat of Communist aggression against Indochina is only one phase of anticipated communist plans to seize all of Southeast Asia.”
Linsin,Christopher Edward. “Not By Words, But By Deeds: Communists and AfricanAmericans during the Depression Era.” Ph.D. diss. Florida Atlantic University,1993. Maintains that historians have misread the impact of Communism onworking-class blacks during the Depression by focusing on membership as ameasure of success. Declares that the CPUSA sought wide influence, not widemembership. During the early 1930s the CPUSA influenced the black proletariatby advocating social equality. This advocacy distinguished it from otherinferior black ameliorative organizations -- like the National Association forthe Advancement of Colored People and the National Urban League -- that calledfor only the economic and political emancipation of African Americans. By thelast half of the 1930s the CPUSA, readily embracing the Kremlin’s call for aPopular Front against fascism, began to work in coalitions withliberal-bourgeois agencies. This regrettable cooperation with moderateorganizations eroded CPUSA influence with African America.