Here are several of Professor Barnes‘s conclusion:
If the world policy of today  cannot be divorced from the mythology of the 1940‘s a third World War is inevitable. History has been the chief intellectual casualty of the second World War and the cold war which followed many professional historians gladly falsify history quite voluntarily…
Why? To get a publisher, and to get favorable reviews for their books? The alternative is either oblivion or the vicious attack of a smearbund, as Professor Barnes puts it, if unofficial censors operating through newspaper editors and columnists, hatchet-men book reviewers, radio commentators, pressure group intrigue and espionage, and academic pressures and fears. The powerful vested political interest is strong enough to smother books by a truthful writer. Powerful pressure groups have also found the mythology helpful in diverting attention from their own role in national and world calamity.
Professor Barnes is not hopeful of the future:
Leading members of two of the largest publishing houses in the country have frankly told me that, whatever their personal wishes in the circumstances, they would not feel it ethical to endanger their business and the property rights of their stockholders by publishing critical books relative to American foreign policy since 1933. And there is good reason for their hesitancy. The book clubs and the main sales outlets for books are controlled by powerful pressure groups which are opposed to truth on such matters. These outlets not only refuse to market critical books in this field but also threaten blackout ultimatum.
Bruce Barton (San Antonio Light, April 1, 1951) expresses the same opinions in condensed form and dramatic style. and adds dome of the results of the historical blackout:
We have turned our backs on history; we have violated the Biblical injunction, remove not the ancient landmarks; we have lost our North Star. We have deliberately changed the meaning of words. . . More and more bureaucracy, tighter and tighter controls over Freedom and Democracy. Lying to the people becomes conditioning the public mind. Killing people is peace. To be for America First is to be an undesirable citizen and a social outcast. . . Crises abroad that any student of history would normally anticipate, hit the State Department and the Pentagon as a complete surprise.
Thus the study of falsified history takes its toll even among fellow-workers of the falsifiers.
(d) The propagation of Marxism and other alien ideas is accomplished not only by persons in those businesses which control public opinion but also by the actual infiltration of aliens, or their captives among Americans of old stock, into the periodical selecting and book-selecting staffs of a wide variety of institutions. The penetration is especially notable in the book-selecting personnel of bookstores, libraries, schools, and colleges.
The National Council for American Education (1 Maiden Lane, New York 38, N.Y.) is effectively showing the grip which persons tolerant of Communism and hostile to the American government have upon U.S. universities, and is also exposing Communist-inclined textbooks used in schools and colleges. Needless to say, such great facts of history as those outlined in Chapters I and II, above, have not been found in school history texts examined by the author. The menace is recognized by our own United States Congress, which offers a pertinent booklet entitled 100 Things You Should Know About Communism and Education (Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 10 cents). The question of Communist workers in the ranks of American clergy is not to be taken up here. Suffice it to say that many well-meaning but gullible members of the clergy have been lured into various American and National and other well sounding conferences, councils, and committees, many (but not all) of which are subversive.
In this connection, persons favorable to Western Christian civilization should be warned about carelessly joining an organization, even though it has an innocent-sounding or actually a seemingly praiseworthy name. The following organizations by their names suggest nothing subversive, yet each of them is listed by the Senate of the United States (Hearings before the Subcommittee in Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 81 st Congress, Part 3, pp. A8 and A9) as being not merely subversive but Communist:
Abrahm Lincoln School, Chicago, Ill.
American League Against War and Fascism
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born
American Peace Mobilization
American Russian Institute (of San Francisco)
American Slav Congress
American Youth for Democracy
Civil Rights Congress and its affiliates
Congress of American Women
Council for Pan-American Democracy
Jefferson School of Social Science, New Youk City
Jewish Peoples Committee
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee
League of American Writers
Nature Friends of America (since 1935)
Ohio School of Social Sciences
People‘s Educational Association
Philadelphia School of Social Science and Art
Photo League (New York City)
Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade
Walt Whitman School of Social Science, Newark. N.J.
Washington Bookshop Association
Wisconsin Conference on Social Legislation
Each of the above-named organizations is also listed, along with many others, in the valuable book, Guide to Subversive Organizations and Publications (May 14, 1951), issued by the House Committee on Un-American Activities (82nd Congress). As one example of the minace that may lurk behind an innocent name, read the Committee‘s Report on the Congress of American Women (October 23, 1949, Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C.).
The patriotic American should not be deceived by the fact that there is on pressure-group censorship on the open expression of pro-Communist views (witness the continued publication of the official Communist Party organ, The Daily Worker, New York) or on gross indecency, pseudo-Freudian or other (witness some titles on your drugstore rack of 25-cent books). The obvious lack of censorship in these fields merely helps conceal it elsewhere. Corrupt and conquer is an ancient adage. Thus, according to the columnist, Constantine Brown (The Evening Star, Washington, D.C., December 27, 1948), The Kremlin men rely on subversion and immorality. The only reason they have not plunged the world into another blood bath is that they hope moral disintegration will soon spread over the western world.
The Kremlin masters are right. Men cannot live by bread, by science, by education, or by economic might. As Washington knew, when he was found on his knees in prayer at Valley Forge, they can live only by a body of ideals and a faith in which they believe. These things our unofficial censors would deny us. To all censorships, governmental and other, there is an obvious corollary.
As long as information received by the public including those who poll public opinion is, in vital aspects, incomplete and is often distorted for propaganda purposes, the most well-intentioned polls intended to reflect public opinion on foreign affairs or domestic affairs are to be relied on only with extreme caution. The perhaps unavoidable leading question tendency in certain types of opinion polls has rarely been illustrated better than in an article What the GOP Needs to Win in 1952 by George Gallup in the September 25, 1951, issue of Look.
Legitimately laying aside for the purposes of the article the commonly mentioned Republican presidential possibilities, Eisenhower, Dewey, Taft, Stassen, and Warren, the American Institute of Public Opinion. . . chose nine Americans who might be dark horses in the GOP race. The poll people have, of course, a perfect right to choose such questions as they wish and to select names of individuals about whom to ask questions. The nine chosen in the poll under discussion were Paul G. Hoffman, Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., Charles E. Wilson (of General Electric), James Bryant Conant, Robert Patterson, James H. Duff, Margaret Chase Smith, Alfred E. Driscoll, and John J. McCloy.
Five of these are or have been functionaries under the New Deal and scarcely one of them is a Republican in the historical sense of the term. More-over, in dealing with the possibility of appealing to independent voters, why was no mention made of Senators Mundt, Brewster, Bridges, Martin, Bricker, Jenner, Capehart, Dirksen, Ecton, Millikin, Nixon, and Knowland, all of whom have drawn praise outside the Republican party?
As to independent voters of leftist leanings, they may storm into precinct conventions or vote in Republican primaries to force the choice of a candidate to their liking, but how many will vote for the Republican nominee, and, especially, how many will vote for non-leftist candidates for the Senate and the House in the general election?
Several of the instances of censorship mentioned in this Chapter call attention to the deplorable fact that many persons in the United States who have fought Communism aggressively with facts have been branded as anti-Semitic. Under this form of censorship, it is permissible to rail vaguely against Communism in the abstract, particularly if unnamed Communists are denounced along with Fascists, Nazis, and America Firsters; But a speaker who calls by name the foreign-born organizers of Communistic atomic espionage in Canada 1946), or mentions the common alien background of the first group of Americans convicted of atomic espionage (1950, 1951) is, in the experience of the author, subject to a vicious heckling from the floor and to other forms of attempted intimidation on the charge of anti-Semitism.
For nformation on Communist tactics, every American should read Menace of Communism, a statement of J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, before the Committee on Un-American Activities of the House of Representatives, March 26, 1947. Mr. Hoover said in part:
Anyone who opposes the American Communist is at once branded as a disrupter, a Fascist, a Red baiter, or a Hitlerite, and becomes the object of a systematic campaign of character assassination. This is easily understood because the basic tactics of the Communist Party are deceit and trickery.
See also, Our New Privileged Class, by Eugene Lyons (The American Segion Magazine, September, 1951). The label of anti-Semitic is tossed not only at those who mention Jewish Communists by name; it is tossed also at the opponent of American involvement in the program of political Zionism and an opponent of the Morgenthau plan, see Arnold Forster‘s A Message of Freedom (pp. 62 to 86). In this connection, it is interesting to recall that in the 1940 campaign the third term presidential candidate made much sport of
Martin, Barton, and Fish. At a conference of Democrats at Denver, Colorado, launching the 1952 campaign, Secretary of Agriculture Brannan recalled the success of the phrase and suggested for a similar smear in 1952 the off-key quartet of Taft and Martin, McCarthy and Cain. Would an opposing candidate dare crack back with humorous jibes at Frankfurter, Morgenthau, and Lehman? Your answer will reveal to you something you should know as to who wields power in the United State.
A zealous approach to securing the co-operation of Gentiles is shown in an article, Glamorous Purim Formula: Exterminate Anti-Semitic Termites…, by Rabbi leon Spitz (The American Hebrew, 1, 1946): American Jews must come to grips with our contemporary anti-Semites. We must fill our jails with anti- Semitic lunatics…
The Khazar Jew‘s frequent equating of anti-Communism with so-called anti-Semitism is unfortunate in many ways. In the first place, it is most unfair to loyal American Jews. Charges of anti-Semitism are absurd, moreover, because the Khazar Jew is himself not a Semite (Chapter II, above). The blood of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob flows not at all (or to a sporadic degree, as from immigrant merchants, fugitives, etc.) in the veins of the Jews who have come to America from Eastern Europe.
On the contrary, the blood of Old Testament people does flow in the veins of Palestine Arabs and others who live along the shores of the eastern Mediterranean. Palestinians, true descendants of Old Testament people, are refugees today from the barbarity of non Semitic Khazars, who are the rapers, not the inheritors, of the Holy Land!
Charges of anti-Semitism are usually made by persons of Khazar stock, but sometimes they are parroted by shallow people, or people who bend to pressure in Protestant churches, in educational institutions, and elsewhere. Seeking the bubble reputation in the form of publicity, or lured by thirty pieces of silver, many big-time preachers have shifted the focus of their thinking from the everlasting life of St. John III, 16, to the no man spake openly of him of St. John VII, 13.
In their effort to avoid giving offense to non-Christians, or for other reasons, many preachers have also placed their own brand of social-mindedness over individual character, their own conception of human welfare over human excellence, and, in summary, pale sociology over Almighty God (quotes from This morning by John Temple Graves, Charleston S.C., News and Courier, February 10, 1951).
Similar forces inimical to Western Christian civilization are at work in England. In that unhappy land, worn out by wars and ridden almost to death by Attlee‘s socialist government (1945-1951), the Spring 1950 Electoral Register form dropped the traditional term Christian name for the new Forename presumably inoffensive to British Jews, Communists, atheists and other non-Christians. In America, of course, Christian name and Family name have long since yielded to first, middle, and last. These instances are trivial, if you like but though mere straws, they show the way the wind is blowing.
Realizing the vast penetration of anti-Christian power communist, atheist, and what not into almost every thought-influencing activity in America, a commendable organization known as The Christophers (18 East 48 th St., New York 17, New York) has suggested a Christian counter-penetration into vital spots for shaping the future of our children and our land. Here in their own words, with emphasis supplied by their own italics, is a statement of the purpose of the Christopher: Less than 1% of humanity have caused most of the world‘s recent major troubles. This handful, which hates the basic truth on which this nation is founded, usually strives to get into fields that touch the lived of all people:
(3) the writing end of newspapers, magazines, books, radio, motion pictures and television
(4) trade unions
(5) social service
(6) library work
If another 1% go (or encourage others to go) as Christophers or Christ-bearers into these same 6 fields and work as hard to restore the fundamental truth which the other 1% are working furiously to eliminate, we will soon be on the high road to lasting peace.
Each Christopher works as an individual. He takes out no membership, attends no meetings, pays no dues. Tens of thousands have already gone as Christ-bearers into the marketplace. Our aim is to find a Million. Positive, constructive action is needed. It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.
The Christophers publish News Notes (monthly, free of charge). By these notes (circulation 700,000) and by several books including Careers That Change Your World and by several books including Careers That Change Your World and Government Is Your Business, their effort has already made substantial progress, Their movement is worthy of support and imitation. Be it noted that the Christophers are not anti-anything. Their program is positive, they are for Christian civilization.
This chapter may well by closed by a reference to the most far-reaching plan for thought-control, or censorship of men‘s minds, ever attempted in the United States. Mrs. Anna Rosenberg‘s triumphal entry into the Pentagon in late 1950 was not her first. With the administration‘s blessing, she appeared there once before to present a plan for giving each World War II soldier an ideological disinfecting before releasing him from service, she to be inculcated.
Fortunately (or unfortunately, according to viewpoint) all general officers in the Pentagon were summoned to hear Mrs. Rosenberg, and their unconcealed disgust, along with the humorous and devastating attack of the Washington Times-Herald, killed the proposal. A recent account of Mrs. Rosenberg‘s scheme to establish re-orientation camps for American soldiers at the close of the World War II, on the theory they would be unfit to resume their normal lives at home appeared in the Washington Times-Herald for November 13, 1950.
The public is entitled to know what facts have been blacked out and what ideological doctrines have been inculcated in propaganda fed to our soldiers by the foreign-born Mrs. Rosenberg while in the manpower saddle in the wider field of our unified Department of Defense. In a song by William Blake used in their successful campaign in 1945, British Socialists pledged that they would not abstain from mental fight until they had made Jerusalem of England (Time, November 5, 1951).
According to Who‘s Who in America (Vol. 25), Mrs. Rosenberg‘s interests include Mental Hygiene. Can it be that her strong effort for lowering the draft age to eighteen was due to the known fact that boys of that age are more susceptible than older boys to propaganda? Who is it that has enjoyed the highest military position held by woman since Joan of Arc led the French armies against the English in the fifteenth century? For a partial answer, see the article on Mrs. Rosenberg in the Reader‘s Digest of February, 1951. For a portrait of another modern woman who has wielded power over armed men, see the similar article on Anna Rabinsohn Pauker in the same magazine, April, 1949.
The issue so alive in American hearts of using the draft, or universal military training, for sinister political propaganda was bluntly stated by Major General William B. Ruggles, Editor-in-Chief of the Dallas Morning News, on March 3, 1951: If the nation is to draft or even to enlist its manpower in national defense, the nation owes some sort of guarantee to the cannon fodder that it will not be sacrificed to forward devious methods of foreign policy or of war policy that somebody in high office is unwilling to lay on the line. They [U. S. soldiers] face the hazards of death with sublime courage. But they have a right to demand that their own leaders must not stack the cards or load the dice against them.
In 1952, however, the thought-controllers grew bolder. The Pentagon received a jolt in the past week when it scanned a proposal from the State Department that the Army should install political officers. One to each unit down to the regimental level. (Human Events, April 9, 1952). Comparing the startling proposal with the Soviet use of political commissars, Human Events states further that the current daring attempt . . .to gain control over the minds of youths in uniform is embodied in the bill for Universal Military Training, which was shaped and supported by Assistant Secretary of Defense, Anna Rosenberg.
Surely censorship is at its peak in America today. We must pass quickly into a thought-dictatorship which out-Stalins Stalin or begin now to struggle as best we can for our ancient liberties of political freedom and freedom of thought.
In the temple in ancient Jerusalem, Christ said: And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free (St. John, VIII, J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, wrote recently: Communism can be defeated only by the truth (The Educational Forum, May, 1950).
To become free then we must demand the truth from a government which spends monthly a king‘s ransom in propaganda to cover its mistakes and sugar-coat its policies. We must achieve, also, a relaxation of that unofficial censorship which perverts our school books, distorts our histories and our classics, and denies us vital facts about world affairs.