The Cold War was an ideological supremacy battle between the U.S. and the Soviet Union that had domestic implications for both sides. In other words, the Cold War was reflected in culture, social beliefs, books, movies, and music. On the global front, the U.S. was locked in a political and ideological conformation with the Soviet Union. The fear of Communism was real n the United States, and this contributed to the creation of Cold War Americanness. Anyone with links to the Soviet Union was considered disloyal as the hate for Communism increased in American society. The anti-communist rhetoric was rife in the U.S. The U.S. was characterized by racial segregation because racial equality was considered a communist ideal. Also, this was the second Red Scare and McCarthyism, where there was an extensive search for communists in American society. In other words, racism and McCarthyism shaped what can be considered the American “common sense” during the Cold War era.
In his book “Here I Stand,” Paul Robeson depicts the events in American society during the Cold War era. As a victim of racial segregation and McCarthyism during this period, Robeson is better able to describe what it meant to be “American” during the Cold War era. He faced hate and prejudice in the 1950s as an African American and a person who supported Communism. Also, his race and ideological position made him face censorship and persecution from the American authorities and British intelligence. In the Cold War context, people like Paul Robeson were considered “un-American” because of their public support for Communism and the fact that he belonged to the black race. His support for African independence, fascination for the Soviet Union, and open criticism of McCarthyism made him an “enemy” of American society in the Cold War era context. Paul Robeson’s book “Here I Stand” is a reflection of the racism and McCarthyism that characterized American society in the Cold War era.
Racial Segregation in America during the Cold War era.
The American society in the Cold War era was anti-communist, and any divergent voice was bound to face rejection and persecution. The Passport Office of the Department denied Paul Robeson a passport to ensure he did not travel abroad (Robeson 63). Robeson states in his book, “I have broken any law, one has been forced to suffer die loss of many thousands of dollars in fees offered to me as an artist in contracts that I have been unable to accept, and the legal expense of fighting my case for the past seven years has been considerable” (63). This is a clear demonstration of how the state was persecuting him because of his position on Communism. As an African American, he had come out openly to fight for their rights, and that is one of the reasons his passport was revoked in 1950. Although he was not the only person whose passport application had been denied during the Cold War era, his case was publicized because of his agitation for African-American rights.
Apart from fighting for African American rights, Robeson was instrumental in advocating for African independence, contrary to American beliefs at the time. This came out in the State Department’s brief in 1952 regarding his passport appeal case. The brief states that “…we submit that this would not amount to an abuse of’ discretion given appellant’s frank admission that he has been for years extremely active politically in behalf of the independence of the colonial people of Africa” (Robeson 64). By advocating for African liberation, Robeson was considered going against American interests. As a defiant advocate of African freedom, Robeson was also against the White Supremacy entrenched in American society after WWII (Robeson 64). He believed that any decent American should have supported African liberation because the U.S. a country came into being because of a Revolution. However, Robeson concludes that anyone who supported African liberation was considered “un-American” at the time.
Americans supported imperialism during the Cold War era, and people who opposed this ideology were considered traitors. In his account, Robeson states that “…it simply is not true that the real interests of our country are opposed to colonial independence, and most Americans, white and Negro, are aware of that truth” (65). He argued against the notion that colonial independence would hurt America’s interests. The U.S. government considered Robeson’s travel as a threat to America’s interests because he was going to promote African liberation and associate with the perceived communist enemies of the United States. The state was against his concert tours because he spoke against the racial segregation and oppression of African Americans in the U.S. while abroad. The State Department accused him of criticizing the African American conditions in the country while abroad, which is why he was denied a travel passport (Robeson 66). However, Robeson thought that they had always criticized the oppression of Blacks while at home, and this was not a justifiable reason to prevent him from traveling abroad. For Robeson, this was a demonstration of intolerance, discrimination, and unjust treatment of African Americans.
Robeson was an apostle of Soviet Communism during the volatile era, and this caused his persecution. Apart from being a human rights defender and a militant advocate of racial equality, his links with Communism made him to be despised. Also, many doors were closed against Robeson because of his affectionate support for the Soviet Union and Communism. He accuses American and British detractors of Communism of using propaganda to create negative sentiments against the ideology. He opposed the “Free World” talk because he believed it was hypocritical and was only used to fool colonial peoples. Robeson supports a West African Pilot newspaper’s sentiments that “We have every cause to be grateful to the Communists for their active interest in the fate of colonial peoples and their constant denunciation of the evils of imperialism” (38). This is a clear demonstration of his affectionate support for Communism that made him be labeled as “un-American.” The Soviet Union had always embraced Robeson, and he believed that the Soviets had a genuine and active interest in promoting the interests of colonial people compared to imperial America (38). Thus, Robeson’s support for Communism was seen as an international conspiracy.
Communist witch-hunt for people who appeared to support the Soviet Union was a common occurrence during the Cold War era. Robeson was subjected to a legislative hearing in 1946 for being associated with the Communist Party (29). In this hearing, he refused to sign affidavits and give a testimony. He believed that this was a violation of First Amendment provisions that guaranteed free conscience and free speech. The United States was a capitalist society that focused on private profit through production, and a supporter of a socialist society was bound to be despised. Robeson strongly believed in scientific socialism because it created a society that was ethically, culturally, socially, and economically superior to the capitalist principles (39). For him, White Americans were responsible for the “Communist Propaganda.” The struggle for African American rights befitted from the “Communist Propaganda” through some gains in desegregation in educational institutions, hotels, and restaurants.
The U.S. government sought to create a false narrative about the welfare of African Americans to counter the Communist influence. As a result, the government selected some African-American intellectuals, ministers, and entertainers to portray the image of a free and equal America (Robeson 81). This meant to counter and silence African American activists, such as Robeson, who refused to support the notion that America was a free and equal society. The reality was that American society did not have racial equality during the Cold War era, and anyone who appeared to fight for the rights of Minority groups like African Americans was considered a Communist. As a racist society during the Cold War era, the U.S. was not ready to embrace communist sentiments because communists did not support racism (Robeson 81). According to Robeson, true communists opposed racism in all forms. However, they were accused of inciting nationalism in Asia and Africa and, in the process, leading to a rebellion against the West. Therefore, a person like Robeson, who supported the Communists, was considered a traitor and “un-American” in the Cold War context.
White supremacy was rife in American society during this era, and minority races like the Black race were considered inferior. The White majority, who felt that they should not mingle with Blacks in public places or access equal socio-economic opportunities, opposed agitation for African American rights. As a result, racism became a norm in American society in the Cold War era, leading to agitation from the Black community. Any organization or movement formed to fight for racial equality was labeled a “Communist front.” For instance, The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (N.A.A.C.P) was considered Communist for championing racial equality (Robeson 107). Robeson activism made him famous outside the United States, where he was banished for his ideological stance and fight for racial equality in an era of racial segregation.
The play “A Raisin in the Sun” by Lorraine Hansberry highlights the racial, class, and gender prejudice in American society that made it difficult for African Americans to achieve their dreams like other Americans. The play depicts the struggle for middle-class acceptance by an African-American family that does not seem to agree on how to use money from an insurance payment. The play is set in 1950s America, right at the onset of the old war era, characterized by racial discrimination, as suggested in Robeson’s autobiography. This is a segregated community in Chicago that highlights racial discrimination when it comes to housing, education, and employment. The play paints the picture of what it meant to live in an all-white neighborhood during the Cold War era and the struggles that African Americans had to go through to cross racial and class barriers.
People were not treated equally in 1950s America because of their race and gender, as highlighted in the life of the Younger family in the play “A Raisin in the Sun” by Lorraine Hansberry. In this play, Karl Linder, one of the residents in the all-white neighborhood, offers to give the Younger family extra money to move out of the neighborhood because they are seen as a danger to the neighborhood because of their racial identity (Hansberry 116). In this play, White Americans come up with flimsy excuses to ensure that they do not mingle with African Americans. The case of Linder and the Younger family illustrates the housing discrimination that was rampant in the American community during the Cold War era. The family is convinced to stop their plan to live in an all-white neighborhood because of race. Although the Younger family resisted initially, they eventually moved out of the neighborhood. This instance highlighted in Hansberry’s play confirms Robeson’s assertion that America was not a free and equal society.
It is interesting to note that the propagators of racial segregation were not willing to admit what they were doing and came up with reasons to justify their actions. In his explanation of the decision to send out the Younger family from the neighborhood, Lindner states that “It is a matter of the people of Clybourne Park believing, rightly or wrongly, as I say, that for the happiness of all concerned that our Negro families are happier when they live in their communities” (Hansberry 117). In this case, he denies that the decision was not based on racial prejudice to try and convince the family to agree with the community’s decision for them to move out of the neighborhood. American society was deeply divided along racial lines in the Cold War era, and Hansberry’s play illustrates the deep-rooted racial segregation. As a result, people like Robeson, who came out to speak publicly about the racial inequalities in American society, ended up being despised and persecuted.
Robeson was a famous African-American performer who was denied the chance to perform on white-owned money. The fact that he was denied a chance to perform in the United States and abroad because of his skin color and public condemnation and racism. Although Robeson had not been convicted of any crime, it was evident that this was part of the broader racial segregation in American society. No justifiable reason was given when Robeson was denied a chance to perform in white-owned venues and a passport to go and perform abroad. His decision to expose the racist policies in the United States and the hypocrisy of the American government landed him in trouble. The Jim Crow laws that promoted racial segregation remained persistent in the 1950s during the Cold War era (Robeson 74). Robeson questioned why the American government was claiming to support freedom and human rights in foreign countries while there were human rights violations at home. Also, Robeson opposed America’s imperialist mission abroad because he believed that there were tendencies to promote human rights violations in other countries.
There was increased reluctance to allow racial equality in American society, and that is why the legislators in the South were reluctant to abolish the Jim Crow laws. For instance, they were reluctant to implement the Supreme Court decision to end segregation in school segregation (Robeson 75). Robeson was against the concept of “gradualism” that had taken root in American society. In his book, he expresses his displeasure with gradualism when he states, “We must wait, we are told until the hearts of those who persecute us have softened—until Jim Crow dies of old age” (75). This highlights the reluctance of American society in this era to allow for racial equality. Although this was considered a practical way of ensuring justice for people of color, Robeson believed that it was another way of prolonging racial inequality. In this case, the lawmakers in the South were asking for indefinite time to comply with the provisions of the American Constitution. This was an illustration of the deep-rooted racial segregation in the country. According to Robeson, “gradualism” had not worked for more than a century, and there was no way the people of color would continue waiting for equality policies to be implemented gradually (75). Thus, racism remains a significant issue in American society to this day.
The people of color remained at the mercy of the people in power during this period. African Americans and other people of color were treated as second-class citizens in their country. Robeson was against the idea of viewing any improvement in welfare as tolerance and charity because all Americans should be treated equally before the law. In other words, Robeson believed that African Americans should not enjoy equal rights and justice as a favor because they deserved to be treated equally as stipulated in the American Constitution (Robeson 75). However, equal rights remained a mirage in this era because most Supreme Court rulings on racial equality were ignored by the broader American society that was not willing to embrace racial equality. Racial inequality became one of the significant blemishes in American culture in the Cold War era. This is a sign that there was no.
Anti-Communism or McCarthyism in the American Society
Paul Robeson is one of the victims of McCarthyism because he was fascinated by the Soviets and public support for Communist ideals. This era was characterized by fear and suspicion because of the anti-Communism in American societies. There were fears that the communist spies were in the country, and anyone with links to the Soviets and the Communist Party was considered an enemy of the state. McCarthyism is a concept that was introduced at the height of the Cold War in the 1940s and the 1950s. This domestic anti-communism had devastating impacts on its victims like Robeson, who openly supported the Soviet Union and the Communists. The Communist Party members and all the affiliate organizations were under attack and persecution by the American authorities in the new wave of domestic anti-communism. The U.S. government and security agencies claimed that the intensive anti-communist campaign was meant to prevent any form of Communist subversion. The Second Red Scare inspired the McCarthyism movement characterized by the anticommunist fervor that affected American culture, society, and politics. This happened during the initial phases of the Cold War and was popularized and named after the Republic Senator Joseph McCarthy, Wisconsin. McCarthy made sensational claims that some members of the U.S. State Department had been infiltrated by Communists.
The American Communist Party became an easy target for the authorities because the members were considered a threat or danger to national security. As a result, “government and nongovernment actors at national, state, and local levels developed a range of mechanisms for identifying and punishing Communists and their alleged sympathizers” (Storrs 2). A person like Robeson was being linked to the Communist Party but denied the links despite being forced to swear an affidavit. This shows the high anti-Communist sentiments in the international society. As a result, Storrs observes that thousands of Americans who were suspected of having Communist links were subjected to loyalty tests, FBI investigations, and congressional committee hearings (2). Such people were always on the brink of facing espionage charges whose punishment was execution. Some of the negative judgments that resulted from such targeted interrogations include long-term unemployment, loss of passport like in the case of Robeson, deportation, and imprisonment.
The second Red Scare, or McCarthyism in this era, was informed by either genuine or false insecurities. The two primary reasons for the anti-Communism campaign were the perceived threat to national security and the fact that the Communist movement would contribute to political repression because of its threat to democracy (Storrs 3). There were concerns that American Communists leaked crucial security information to the Soviets through their espionage missions. Although there are genuine concerns about the threat posed by Communists to national security, it was also confirmed that innocent people were persecuted in the name of looking for Soviet spies (van der Maar 102). There was a delicate balancing act between individual liberties and national security in fighting against communists.
The United States introduced the Federal Loyalty program because of the fears of a possible Communist infiltration in the State Department. The fears became more profound in the late 1940s and the early 1950s with solid suspicion that government agencies had been infiltrated and the possibility of government secrets being leaked to the enemy was high (Storrs 8). As a result, President Truman introduced the federal employee loyalty program to help deal with the increasing fears and right-wing accusations. In his case, government employees who were suspected to be disloyal to the government were dismissed from their positions. However, there were complaints that some people were being dismissed without any reasonable grounds that they had Communist links. Storrs observes that “Millions of federal employees filled out loyalty forms swearing they did not belong to any subversive organization and explaining any association they might have with a designated group” (8). The FBI was involved in these investigations, leading to more than 12,000 resignations and 2,700 dismissals between 1947 and 1956 (Storrs 9). This indicates the anti-Communist culture in American society, where loyalty to the government became a primary requirement for keeping or getting a federal job.
McCarthyism created an environment for coercion because one could be considered disloyal for having a Communist relative. The Red Scare was enforced and supported by the three arms of government. The program’s constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court to conform to the anti-Communist culture that had become part of the American culture during this era (Storrs 9). The threshold of evidence for Communist links was reduced in the 1950s, leading to many unfair dismissals. It is also important to note that things worsened in 1954 under President Eisenhower when screening and moral tests were introduced to all civil service jobs, and the defendants were denied a right to a hearing (Storrs 9). This shows that there was a deliberate attempt by the American authorities to stamp out Communist elements from civil service.
Moreover, former loyal defendants were constantly under scrutiny by the authorities. Such loyalty investigations had adverse effects on a suspect’s civic participation, personal relationships, mental health, and economic security. Civil servants of all ranks felt the pressure, but low-level employees were the most affected.
Private employees who had contractual obligations with the U.S. government were also scrutinized, as well as civil servants. This was also done at the state and local levels to ensure government secrets were not leaked to the enemy. Some Dutch diplomats felt that this was extreme and would affect America’s foreign relations (van der Maar 102). Americans working for international organizations were subjected to the same loyalty screens amid protests against the violation of individual and sovereignty rights. However, the U.S. government was determined to fight the Communist ideals. Mandatory loyalty oaths were introduced in public universities to take ideological subversion within educational institutions (Storrs 9). In other words, loyalty was introduced in all the major sectors, including media, education, transportation, and industry. This was a total disregard for civil liberties, and the entire McCarthyism movement was based on opportunism and opportunism (Warner 101). The movement had institutional support from the FBI, meaning propagators would get away with many crimes. Also, the movement hurt the arts, academia, media, and civil service because of the fear it caused.
Conclusion
It is evident from this analysis that Paul Robeson’s book “Here I Stand” is a reflection of the racism and McCarthyism that characterized American society in the Cold War era.
Racial Segregation in America during the Cold War era. Robeson is a reflection of what the victims of the Cold War culture went through because of racism and the anti-communism campaign by the U.S. government. The fear of Communism was real n the United States, and this contributed to the creation of Cold War Americanness. By advocating for African liberation, Robeson was considered going against American interests. As a defiant advocate of African freedom, Robeson was also against the White Supremacy that was entrenched in American society after WWII.
Communist witch-hunt for people who appeared to support the Soviet Union was a common occurrence during the Cold War era. As a racist society during the Cold War era, the U.S. was not ready to embrace communist sentiments because communists did not support racism. Moreover, White supremacy was rife in American society during this era, and minority races like the Black race were considered inferior. The White majority, who felt that they should not mingle with Blacks in public places or access equal socio-economic opportunities, opposed agitation for African American rights. Any organization or movement formed to fight for racial equality was labeled a “Communist front.” For instance, The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (N.A.A.C.P) was considered Communist for championing racial equality. The Jim Crow laws that promoted racial segregation remained persistent in the 1950s during the Cold War era. There were fears that the communist spies were in the country, and anyone with links to the Soviets and the Communist Party was considered an enemy of the state. America’s federal loyalty programs confirmed the nation’s fear of Communist infiltration.
Works Cited
Hansberry, Lorraine. A Raisin in the Sun. Vintage Books, 1986.
Robeson, Paul. Here I Stand. Beacon Press, 1958.
Storrs, Landon R. Y. “McCarthyism and the Second Red Scare.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History. Oxford University Press USA, 2016.
Van der Maar, Rimko. “Easily Emotional” and “Always Inclined to Extremes.” Ambassador Herman van Roijen and Dutch Anxiety about American Anti-Communism, 1947–53.” Diplomatica, vol.4, no. 1, 2022: 100-123.
Warner, Michael. “Many Are the Crimes: McCarthyism in America.” Journal of Cold War Studies, vol. 3, no. 2, 2001: 101-103.
write