Well the context of the times really; communism was a happening thing back then.
The Iron Curtain was a very real thing, as was communist expansionism. Many countries were experimenting with socialism in their internal policies and America was manoeuvered into a more politically polarized position than was held at first.
I'm not a proponent of witch-hunts, just seeing where McCarthy could drum up popular support for the sessions. Bear in mind that the USSR had half a century of experience of spycraft, and they learnt lots of lessons dealing with the nazis. They managed to get the secrets of the atomic bomb as well as other military secrets from the US - so a general awareness of their intent and ability was well known to the general public.
This was also a generation who had witnessed a lot of brutality recently, and was inured to some harsh interrogation techniques if they were done to further the "public good". Inquisition hearings in a court-like atmosphere were very civilized by their standards.
2007-03-02 16:08:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
There is little or no difference between McCarthyism and Bush/Cheneyism. I would think that a good deinition of their methodologies is the politics of fear, but a perceived fear, not a real fear. Their speeches and antics generate a fear in those who are prone to fear (and we find out that is a relatively large number). Basically, that is the same thing that Hitler did 20 years or so prior to McCarthy.
McCarthy was literally brought down by one TV news broadcast when Edward R. Murrow took his speeches and the garbage that was in them, showed them on the television and then showed the reality. Mccarthy lost influence and died not long after that.
Bush and Cheney have propagated a group of lies about Irag, now Iran, and doing basically the same thing. However in broadcast after broadcast onthe news where either one of them was interviewed, they have said certain things only to deny what they said in subsequent invterviews. There is only one requirement for a good liar, on attribute that a liar has to have and that is MEMORY. You have to remember what lies you told and stick to them. You stick to them until you believe the crap yourself. Neither Bush nor Cheney have that capacity, they don't remember what they have said and they have been caught time after time.
Some years ago the philosophy of people like Bush, Cheney, and McCarthy was that the public has a short memory. Now the public does nto have to remember anything since most of thelies were either caught on film (in McCarthy's days) and on video tape in the Bush/Cheney fiasco. So when Cheney says "I did nto say that," the news caster probably has a film available to him to show HIM exactly what he waid and then you see him start to waffle.
2007-03-03 02:42:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Polyhistor 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Same reason that people buy into hating "A-rabs".
It's a common enemy. It's a lot easier than studying the real facts and refusing to generalize about people.
2007-03-02 15:08:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by Monc 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Because they saw Communist boogey men and women under every bed, in every closet, and hiding behind every tree. They thought that somehow McCarthy and his actions somehow protected democracy, and made us better than such Communists.
2007-03-02 15:45:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by some_guy_times_50 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
overreaction to the threat of communism
2007-03-02 15:10:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by wassupmang 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
xenophobia
2007-03-02 15:16:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Double O 6
·
0⤊
1⤋