> Liberals who think that whether or not Julius Rosenberg was "innocent"
> in the eyes of American criminal justice is a momentous question are
> thinking like the HUAC. That you accept the terms of American justice,
> and think in terms of political "guilt" and "innocence," means that
> you have already accepted the terms of ideology that makes the
> National Security State the "protector of American freedoms."
>
> For many liberals, the only crime of so-called "McCarthyism" is that
> it went too far, "innocent" people lost jobs and reputation. They are
> no defenders of political liberties, if liberties in question include
> the freedom to reject capitalism.
>
> Julius Rosenberg passed atomic secret to the Soviet Union? How
> shocking! The HUAC got _that_ right, after all! We _were_ communist
> dupes! We all must now atone for a sin of defending the guilty!
> (Forget what made the atom bombs secret, forget what the American
> monopoly of the atom bombs meant for the rest of the world.)
>
> Those who can't reject Americanism and the ideology of the National
> Security State, those who are horrified by Julius Rosenberg's act
> while sleeping soundly under the protective watch of the CIA, can't be
> trusted to defend communists and anarchists the next time we face a
> rising tide of political persecution.
>
> Yoshie
Yoshie, do I detect a bit of veiled guilt by association here? I haven't read every single post in this thread, but no one i've read has spoken of atoning, no one has said "americanism" is to be embraced, said they were "horrified" by Julius Rosenberg's act, or declared themselves glad to be "sleeping soundly" thanks to the CIA. No one has said only innocent victims (of US courts or lynchings, which you seem to think are the same) deserve fair trials.
Your real beef is with the Communist party. The CP COULD have made the kind of hardassed defense you would, if your posts are any judge, surely have preferred. Julius rosenberg could have defended his acts along the lines you suggest-- and saved Ethel's life (she died to keep up the pretense of innocence that you now say is so unimportant -- how do you feel about that?) Similarly, Instead of taking the fifth, lying, going on and on about their patriotism, going underground, fleeing the country etc CP members COULD have defended their right to be communists and tried to use the HUAC hearings to explain to people what that meant. They would have gone to jail,sure -- but they arguably would have come out of the McCarthy era less psychologically damaged and in better political shape.
it was the CP itself that orchestrated the "ceremonies of innocence" that so infuriate you now.
Katha