Comments by "Digital Nomad" (@digitalnomad9985) on "Communist Spies in Hollywood? - Michael Malice" video.

  1.  @michaelhorn6029  "Are all land reform efforts Communist in nature or Communist inspired? When the major land owners in a poor country want to stop land reform they would go to the US State Department and say" That went more often the other way. "Mao isn't a Stalinist he's an 'agrarian reformer' ". Same thing about Castro. Every new socialist authoritarian is something entirely new. We can't learn from the past because there IS NO PAST. Irrationally, we are reassured every time that there can be a benign redistributionist Socialism, and every time those who listen are fooled. "So what was the point of overthrowing them fifty years ago?" 1. Fifty years of staving off totalitarianism. A lifetime of difference for somebody who lives a long way away from you whom you don't care about. 2. Winning the global struggle against communism. "Is law and order restored to these places? Or were our anti-communist foreign policies only good for fighting Communism and bad in every other way." Inefficient non-alligned authoritarianism is less odious and less stable than international Communism, and it poses less of a threat to the world at large. Sometimes when we help a country fight communism we get Guatemala, sometimes we get South Korea. Thwarting a homicidal, slandering global conspiracy against mankind is a good thing, all other things being equal. Nation building abroad is not so much. We can't force the formation of a libertarian democracy. We can sometimes keep our allies and co-belligerents from being overwhelmed by a powerful mutual enemy. You can be sure our major enemies are willing to make deals with local regimes without a litmus test of ideological purity. There is no substitute for winning. In trying to maintain freedom against communism, global jihad, and the like we're not going to hold together a winning coalition without credibility. The nonaligned over which we are competing are often compelled to ask of us not just, "Are they a dependable ally?", but "Are they even trying to win?".
    8
  2.  @JeffCaplan313  There is nothing profound, mysterious, or complicated about the difference between argument and mere manipulation. The objectively distinguishable difference is in the content, not the intent.
    6
  3.  @royboy4571  "He just confirms your bias." @TheKatieLea comes with experience. You come with assertions.
    4
  4.  @Rotwold " so what was the point of investigating Hollywood?" McCarthy never investigated Hollywood. That was the House Committee. McCarthy was a SENATOR.
    3
  5.  @commentingisdangerous7530  Yes, those were communists. If you say they were anybody else, you're a liar.
    2
  6.  @str.77  Sorry, you are both wrong. The House Committee might have made some mistakes, but McCarthy was a senator and didn't serve on House commitees. Every person HE targeted was an active handled agent of Soviet espionage. The Verona Soviet diplomatic code had been broken by J. Edgar Hoover's FBI who passed the classified info to McCarthy, so McCarthy knew who the moles were in the Federal Government before he started investigating them, he just had to get evidence that could be introduced in open court, which he did. Obviously, this could not be revealed at the time, but it has since been declassified. Alger Hiss and all the others save one were unanimously found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of espionage by a jury of 12 of their peers. I know that Hiss, at least, had an agent traded for him and lived out his days in the Soviet Union. The one that was not convicted got off by playing to existing stereotypes, acting like a "dumb negro" in the hearings, and the Democrats played along by laughing uproariously at the minstrel show. That's not wrong, and that's not luck.
    1
  7.  @classreductionist  Every person accused by Joseph McCarthy was an espionage agent of the Soviet Union. The Communist Party is invariably a seditious conspiracy of foreign hostile totalitarian powers, but that is not what McCarthy got them convicted of. Being a Soviet Agent is a criminal offense. Being a member of a seditious conspiracy is a firing offense.
    1
  8.  @barrykrishna9981  You are trying to evade the issue. J. Edgar Hoover's FBI had secretly cracked the Soviet diplomatic code (code named "Verona"). Hoover passed on to McCarthy which government officials were SOVIET ESPIONAGE ASSETS, and McCarthy proceeded to find evidence for it that could be brought out in open court. All but one of those he accused, notably including Alger Hiss, were tried and found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of espionage unanimously by a randomly chosen jury of 12 of their peers. The exception got off by appealing to stereotypes passing herself off in the hearings as a "dumb negro", and the Democrats played along with it by laughing uproariously at her minstrel show antics. This has since become unclassified and is independently confirmed by the Kremlin archives when they were unsealed after the fall of the Soviet Union. Later Alger Hiss, at least, was traded for by the Soviets and lived out the balance of his life in the Soviet Union. The Communist Party, USA has always been a seditious conspiracy against the US on behalf of a hostile foreign power. That is a firing offense. Being a spy is a criminal offense. Neither is a civil right as such.
    1
  9.  @royboy4571 What point are you trying to make? That countering espionage is hypocritical if you have spies?
    1