Forgotten Fellow Travelers in the Struggle Against the War

Robbie Lieberman. The Strangest Dream: Communism, Anticommunism and the U.S. Peace Movement, 1945-1963. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2000. xvii + 244 pp. Notes and index. $34.95

Almost two-thirds of a century has passed since the publication of Merle Curti's Peace or War: The American Struggle, 1636-1936. While putting the finishing touches on the book in the midst of rising military dictatorships in Europe and Asia, Curti insisted that the historical fight against war had to be told. "The history of this crusade," he claimed, "is a stirring one. The struggle could be waged only at the cost of great toil and devotion and sacrifice." More importantly, the movement for peace was part and parcel of a larger development in the realm of social change. In Curti's estimation, "What Americans did to limit or uproot the war system was at every point affected by the traditions and ideals of American life which were dominant in varying degrees at different times." Historic processes had been at work influencing the direction of peace work: "The conquest of the frontier, the coming of the immigrants, internal conflicts between industrialists, planters, farmers, and other workers, and the development of technology and an urban society had a hand in what was done, or what was not done." ¹

Historically, those forces influencing the direction of the American peace movement have been characterized by five approaches. According to the late historian Charles DeBenedetti's The Peace Reform in American History (1980), many peace workers, mostly non-pacifists, have limited their commitment to specific antiwar actions, opposing American involvement in various wars for any number of reasons. Others have upheld the banner of internationalism, maintaining that peace would be secured with the institutionalization of organizations established for the prevention and settlement of disputes among nations. Some peace activists have subscribed to various pacifist ethics on the grounds that peace is based on ongoing human relationships, which precludes resorting to violence. Numerous peace seekers have pursued peace through antimilitarism, believing that the existence of large standing armies poses a threat to individual liberty and constitutional democracy as well as to peace. Those more radically inclined have connected peace action with their own allied interests, such as capitalism, civil rights, feminism, anarchism, anti-imperialism, and socialism. All in all, over the course of the American experience, peace activists and organizations have tried either to form ideal communities for the larger society to emulate, or to engage in reform efforts intended to replace those political or social institutions, or cultural patterns that have prevented the achievement of lasting peace. The primary goal of peace activists has been to make peace, and not simply to oppose war.

Clearly, the struggle against war has involved many different types of people with various political persuasions. More often than not, certain elements within peace movements have done the lion's share of the work as effective organizers without the accompanying recognition. Because of political beliefs or past associations, some tireless peace activists associated with Communism have been ignored or neglected in the historical record. During the cold war period, in particular, they had an active "hand in what was done." But "what was not done" was to give them their just due.

"What was not done" serves as a major theme in Robbie Lieberman's engagingly written and thought-provoking analysis of the role Communists sought to play, but were largely ignored, in the American peace movement during the years 1945 to 1963. Her effort is to resurrect the contributions of one forgotten group to the peace movement. In captivating prose, the author examines how grassroots peace work became associated with Communist subversion in the early cold war years thereby silencing whatever contributions the peace movement may have had in influencing governmental policy. Not mincing words, moreover, Lieberman is unforgiving in her criticisms of peace historians who have failed or neglected to take...