Jump to content

Red-baiting

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected fromRedbaiting)

Red-baiting,also known asreductio ad Stalinum(/ˈstɑːlɪnəm/) andred-tagging(in the Philippines),[1]is an intention to discredit the validity of a political opponent and the opponent's logical argument by accusing, denouncing, attacking, or persecuting the target individual or group asanarchist,communist,[2]Marxist,socialist,Stalinist,orfellow travelerstowards these ideologies.[3]In the phrase,redrefers to the color that traditionally symbolizedleft-wing politicsworldwide since the 19th century, whilebaitingrefers to persecution, torment, or harassment, as inbaiting.[4]

Communistand associates, or more broadlysocialist,have been used as apejorativeepithetagainst a wide range of individuals, political movements, governments, public, and private institutions since the emergence of thecommunist movementand the widersocialist movement.In the 19th century, theruling classeswere afraid of socialism because it challenged their rule. Since then, socialism has faced opposition, which was often organized and violent. During the 20th century, as socialism became a mainstream movement and communism gained power throughcommunist parties,their main opponents were thepolitical right,alongside organizedanti-communistsandcritics of socialism.[5]The United States is a notable exception among theWestern worldin not having had a major socialist party, and for having engaged in red-baiting, resulting in two historicRed Scareperiods during the 1920s (First Red Scare) and 1950s (Second Red Scare). Such usage as an insult has been used as a tactic by theRepublican PartyagainstDemocratic Partycandidates, and has continued into the 21st century, including conflating German fascistNazismassocialismand for left-wing politics.[5]

In the United States, the termred-baitingdates to as far back as 1927.[6]In 1928,blacklistingby theDaughters of the American Revolutionwas characterized as a "red-baiting relic".[7]A term commonly used in the United States,red-baitinginAmerican historyis most famously associated withMcCarthyism,which originated in the two historic Red Scare periods.[8]While red-baiting does not have quite the same effect it previously did due to theRevolutions of 1989,[9]some pundits posit that notable events in 21st-centuryAmerican politicsindicate a resurgence of red-baiting consistent with theCold Warera.[10]It can even be argued that John F.[11]Kennedy had unfairly Red-baited Nixon during their famous 1960 televised presidential debates. The Democratic candidate had been officially briefed on some of the secret plans of the Eisenhower Administration for overthrowing Castro’s Communist regime in Cuba, but then publicly accused Vice President Nixon of doing nothing in that regard, knowing that his opponent was sworn to secrecy on that project and therefore would be left looking weak on Communism.

Background

[edit]

Both communist and socialist movements have faced hostility since their breakthrough in the 19th century.Friedrich Engelsstated that in 1848, at the time whenThe Communist Manifestowas first published, socialism was respectable, while communism was not. TheOwenitesin England and theFourieristsin France were considered respectable socialists, while working-class movements that proclaimed the necessity of radical change denoted themselvescommunists;this latter branch of socialism produced the communist work ofÉtienne Cabetin France andWilhelm Weitlingin Germany.[12]While democratliberalslooked to theRevolutions of 1848as ademocratic revolution,which in the long run ensuredliberty, equality, and fraternity,communists denounced 1848 as a betrayal of working-class ideals by abourgeoisieindifferent to the legitimate demands of theproletariat.[13]

In countries such as 19th-century Germany and Italy,[14]socialist parties have been banned,[15]like withOtto von Bismarck'sAnti-Socialist Laws.[16]In the 1950s,West Germanyand the United States banned the majorcommunist party,theCommunist Party of Germany[17]and theCommunist Party USA,[18]respectively.[nb 1]With the expansion ofliberal democracyanduniversal suffrageduring the 20th century, socialism became a mainstream movement which expanded for most of the world, ascenter-leftandleft-wingsocialist parties came to govern, become the mainopposition party,or simply a commonality of the democratic process in most of theWestern world;one major exception was the United States.[20]In theEastern world,communist parties came to power throughrevolution,civil war,coup d'état,and other means, coming to cover one-third of the world population by 1985,[21]while in Western Europe communist parties were part of several post-war coalitions, before being ejected on the United States' orders, such as in Italy.[22]Those parties in the West continued to be an important part of themulti-party democracyprocess;[23]those in the East became an oppressive driving force for most of the 20th century due to theSoviet Union's role inWorld War IIas part of theAllied powersagainst thefascist-ledAxis powers,and later in theCold War.[24]In Western Europe Socialist parties greatly contributed to existing liberal democracy.[25]

History

[edit]

Peru

[edit]
Protest sign against the administration ofPedro Castillo,stating "Get out: Terrorists of the government"

Since the 1930s, the political elite of Peru used fear mongering tactics to influence the public by targeting foreigncommunistmovements according to historian Antonio Zapata of thePontifical Catholic University of Peru,beginning withJoseph Stalinand later withFidel Castro.[26]Terruqueosbegan to appear during the 1980s and would occur throughout theinternal conflict in Peru.[27][28][29]The basis of theterruqueobegan during the presidency ofFernando Belaúndewhen Legislative Decree 46 broadly defined terrorism as "any form of glorification or defense of the political discourse of subversive organizations".[30]Into the 1990s,authoritarianpresidentAlberto Fujimoriutilizedterruqueoswith the help of theNational Intelligence Serviceto discredit those who opposed him, including dissenters from his own government, with political scientist Daniel Encinas saying that this would evolve into conservative politicians using the attack to target those opposed to Fujimori's neoliberal economic policies and that the right-wing used theterruqueoas a "strategy of manipulating the legacy of political violence".[27][28][31]Ultimately, aculture of fearwas created by Fujimori according to Jo-Marie Burt, with individuals fearing that they would be described as a terrorist.[32]

Theterruqueowould then become so prominent that political discussions in Peru often devolved into the attacks, especially during elections.[28]According to Fernando Velásquez Villalba,terruqueosare a latent phenomenon that appear more frequently in times of crisis.[30]Terruqueoswere intense againstPedro Castillo;he was portrayed as a "communist threat" that would bring "terrorism" and humanitarian disaster similar to Venezuela.[30]When the2022–2023 Peruvian political protestsoccurred, right-wing groups and the government ofDina Boluarteused theterruqueoto label protesters as terrorists, providing an excuse for authorities to use violence with impunity.[33][34]Experts of the United Nations condemned its usage during the protests.[34]

Philippines

[edit]

In the Philippines, red-tagging poses threats to the lives or safety of its targets[35]and impinges on the right to free expression and dissent.[1]Red-tagged individuals also tend to become vulnerable to death threats[36]and allegations of terrorism.[1]TheUnited Nationswarns that red-tagging is a "criminalizing discourse" that undermines the value of the work of human rights defenders and places them at risk of violence and various forms of harassment.[37]

An anti-redtagging banner in a protest against the closure ofLumadschools, 3 December 2020

Communismhas generally been viewed with disfavor and particular distrust by large sectors ofPhilippine societyever since the country gained independence from the United States on 4 July 1946 through theTreaty of Manila.Shared ideological preferences with the United States, resulting from more thanfour decadesofbenevolent assimilationand exacerbated by the onset of the Cold War, have resulted in some Filipinos being predisposed to suspicion ofcommunistsympathies.[38]This predisposition makes red-tagging an effectivefear appealtool used by players in the political arena, given that it authorizes law-enforcement agencies and the military to act on the taggings.[39]

Red-tagging is almost never employed inforeign relations of the Philippines,including members of rulingcommunist parties,owing to the principle ininternational lawofWestphalian sovereigntyin another country's domestic affairs. This can be seen especially in the government's cordial relations with theLao People's Revolutionary Partyand theCommunist Party of Vietnam,[40]both of which are ruling parties ofASEANmember states.[nb 2]One of the notable exceptions to the nontagging of foreigners was United States citizen Brandon Lee, anancestral-domainparalegal in theCordillera Administrative Region.Lee was tagged as acommunistand automatically an "enemy of the state" and was subsequently shot four times.[42]United States citizenLiza Soberanoand Australian citizenCatriona Grayhave also since been red-tagged and publicly threatened, the former with assassination and the latter with rape.[43]

Australia

[edit]

In the early 1950s,Liberal Partyleaders likeRobert Menziesred-baitedLaborpoliticians and described them as insufficiently tough on the People's Republic of China.[44]: 93 

United States

[edit]

20th century

[edit]

Red-baiting was employed in opposition toanarchists in the United Statesas early as the late 1870s when businessmen, religious leaders, politicians and editorial writers tried to rally poor and middle-class workers to oppose dissident railroad workers and again during theHaymarket affairin the mid-1880s. Red-baiting was well established in the United States during the decade beforeWorld War I.In the post-war period of 1919–1921, theUnited States governmentemployed it as a central tactic in dealing with labor radicals, anarchists, communists, socialists, and foreign agents. These actions in reaction to theFirst Red Scareand the concurrentRed Terrorserved as part of the organizing principle shapingcounter-revolutionarypolicies and serving to institutionalizeanti-communismas a force in American politics.[45]

The period between the first and second Red Scares was relatively calm owing to the success of government anti-communism, the suppressive effects ofNew Dealpolicies on radicalorganized laborand thepatriotismassociated with total mobilization andwar effortduringWorld War II.[46]Red-baiting re-emerged in the late 1940s and early 1950s during the period known as theSecond Red Scaredue to mountingCold Wartensions and the spread of communism abroad. SenatorJoseph McCarthy's controversial red-baiting of suspected communists and communist sympathizers in theUnited States Department of Stateand the creation of aHollywood blacklistled to the termMcCarthyismbeing coined to signify any type of recklesspolitical persecutionorwitch-hunt.[8]

The history of anti-communist red-baiting in general and McCarthyism in particular continues to be hotly debated and political divisions this controversy created continue to make themselves felt.Conservativecritics contend that revelations such as theVenona projectdecryptions and theFBI Silvermaster Fileat least mute if not outright refute the charge that red-baiting in general was unjustified.[47]HistorianNicholas von Hoffmanwrote inThe Washington Postthat evidence revealed in the Venona project forced him to admit that McCarthy was "still closer to the truth than those who ridiculed him" but has continued to believe that McCarthy did not identify the correct people.[48]A similar view was expressed by SenatorDaniel Patrick Moynihan,who led theMoynihan Commission on Government Secrecydeclassifying the Venona decryptions.[49]Liberalscholars contend that even if someone could prove that the United States government was infiltrated by Soviet spies, McCarthy was censured by the Senate because he was in fact reckless and politically opportunistic, and his red-baiting ruined the lives of countless innocent people.[50]In 1950, United States presidentHarry S. Trumanhad called McCarthy "the greatest asset theKremlinhas. "[51]HistorianEllen Schreckerwrote that "McCarthyism did more damage to the constitution than the American Communist Party ever did".[52]

21st century

[edit]

Although red-baiting in the United States does not have quite the same effect it previously did due to the fall of mostMarxist–Leninistgovernments in the 1990s,[9]some pundits posit that events in 21st-century American politics indicates a resurgence of red-baiting consistent with the 1950s.[10]The United States government's measures in 2008 to address thesubprime mortgage crisissuch as theTroubled Asset Relief Programwere not only criticized ascorporate welfarebut red-baited as a "gateway to socialism".[53]Political activist and authorTim Wisesays that the emergence of such red-baiting may have been motivated by, and given additional force by,racismtowards PresidentBarack Obamaand fear that theprogressivepolicies of his administration would erodewhite privilegein the United States.[54]

Some commentators posit that red-baiting was used byJohn McCain,Republicanpresidential nominee in the2008 United States presidential election,when he commented that Obama's improvised comments onwealth redistributiontoJoe the Plumberwas a promotion ofsocialism.[55]JournalistDavid Remnick,who wrote the biographyThe Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama,[56]countered that it should be obvious that after one year in office Obama is acenter-leftpresident and the majority of his policies are in line with the center-left Democratic tradition.[57]In July 2011,The Fiscal Timescolumnist Bruce Barlett wrote that an honest examination of theObama presidencymust conclude that he has in fact been a moderatelyconservative Democrat,and that it may take twenty years before Obama's basic conservatism is widely accepted.[58]Author and columnistChris Hedgesposits that the Obama administration's policies have been mostlyright-wing.[59]

In April 2009, RepresentativeSpencer Bachusmade the claim that seventeen of his Congressional colleagues weresocialistsbut could only name SenatorBernie Sanders,who has been openlydescribing himselfas ademocratic socialistfor years.[60]Sanders countered that American conservatives blur the differences betweendemocratic socialismandauthoritarian socialism,and betweendemocracyandtotalitarianism.For Sanders, the United States would benefit from a serious debate about comparing thequality of lifefor themiddle classin the United States and inNordic countrieswith a longsocial-democratictradition.[61]

In May 2009, a number of conservative members of theRepublican National Committeewere pressing the committee and by extension chairmanMichael Steeleto officially adopt the position that theDemocratic Partyissocialist.Over a dozen members of the conservative wing of the committee submitted a new resolution, to be eventually voted on by the entire committee, that would call on the Democratic Party to rename itself theDemocrat Socialist Party;had this resolution been adopted, the committee's official view would have been that Democrats aresocialists.[62]On 20 May 2009, supporters of the resolution agreed to accept language urging Democrats to "stop pushing our country towards socialism and government control", ending a fight within the ranks of the Republican Party that reflected the divide between those who want a morecentristmessage and those seeking a more aggressive, conservative voice such as the one expressed by theTea Party movement.[63]Frank Llewellyn, the national director ofDemocratic Socialists of America,commented that Republicans never really define what they mean bysocialism,and are simply engaging in thepolitics of fear.[64]

In July 2009, talk show hostGlenn Beckbegan to devote what would become many episodes on his TV and radio shows, focusing onVan Jones,a special advisor in President Obama'sWhite House Council on Environmental Quality.Beck was especially critical of Jones' previous involvement in radical protest movements and referred to him as a "communist-anarchist radical".[65]In September 2009, Jones resigned his position in the Obama administration after a number of his past statements became fodder for conservative critics and Republican officials.[65]Timecredited Beck with leading conservatives' attack on Jones,[66]who characterized it as a "vicious smear campaign" and an effort to use "lies and distortions to distract and divide".[67]

Insult usage

[edit]

Communistorsocialisthave been used as a pejorative within red-baiting, mainly in reference to authoritarianstate socialistregimes andCommunist statesbut also for any proposal that may further expand the role of the government,[68]byanti-communistsand thepolitical rightfor bothcommunistsandsocialists,and for those who are neither but are alleged to be adoptingsocialistpolicies, as is done byRepublicansforDemocraticcandidates in the United States.[5]Those terms have also been used as an insult for severalleft-wingpoliticians incenter-leftsocialist parties to describe them as farthest left and more extreme than they actually are in an effort to marginalize them.[nb 3]For some scholars,communistandsocialist,and the memories of such authoritarian regimes, are used as an insult to dismiss anycriticism of capitalismand support for socialism by positing that any form of communism or socialism would always and inevitably result in 20th-century Communism and authoritarian regimes.[76]

Germany

[edit]

The 1994 federal election saw a "red socks" campaign used by thecenter-right,including theCDU/CSUand theFree Democratic Party(FDP), to scare off a possiblered–red–green coalitionalliance (SPDPDSThe Greens). Analysts have stated that such a strategy likely paid off, as it was seen as one of the decisive elements for the narrow victory ofHelmut Kohlfor the CDU/CSU–FDP. The red-baiting campaign was criticized as an obvious attempt to discredit the whole left; the PDS reinterpreted it for itself by printing red socks.[77]

As the CDU/CSU was falling down while the SPD was surging in the polls, the 2021 federal election saw a Red Scare campaign against a possible red–red–green federal government,[77]which was feared by conservatives,[78]who engaged in red-baiting by promoting a Red Scare.[79]A capital flight to Switzerland ensued due to fear of increased taxes for the very rich through higherinheritance taxesand awealth tax.[80]AsThe Leftunderperformed, a left-wing coalition was ruled out by just a few seats in theBundestag,[81]and the German financial market rallied as a result, as such threat was eliminated.[82]

United Kingdom

[edit]

In the United Kingdom, formerLabour PartyleaderJeremy Corbynwas often labelled acommunistorMarxist,[83]and acommunist spyby commentators in mainstream national newspapersThe Daily Mail,The Sun,The Telegraph,andThe Times,despite experts and researchers stating that no evidence exists.[84]During the 2017 general election campaign,Steve BushandGeorge Eatonof theNew Statesmancommented that the Labour Party's manifesto was moreKeynesianthan anything,[85]with Eaton stating that the adopted policies "would be regarded as mainstream in most European countries".[86]According to some studies, media coverage of Corbyn has often been hostile and misrepresentative of his views.[87]

United States

[edit]

During the 20th century, the United States underwent two Red Scares, first in the 1920s and then in the 1950s throughMcCarthyism.[88]In a speech on 10 October 1952,[nb 4]outgoing United States presidentHarry S. Truman(Democratic Party) lambastedRepublicansfor having "opposed almost all our programs to help the economic life of the country" and "having blindly turned [their] back on the tradition of public action for the public good", referencing then-Republican United States senatorRobert A. Taft,who made the1952 United States presidential electioncampaign about "creepy socialism", a scare word "they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years" according to Truman.[89]Socialismandsocializationhave been mistakenly used to refer to any state or government-operated industry or service (the proper term for such being eithermunicipalizationornationalization); both terms have also been incorrectly used to mean any tax-funded programs, whether government-run or privately run.[90]

Into the 21st century, with the rise in popularity and to the mainstream of self-declareddemocratic socialistUnited States senatorBernie Sanders,socialisthas continued to be used as an insult, mainly byconservatives.[91]Among conservatives,socialistis used as an insult to imply thatNazism,and by extensionfascism,was aleft-wingideology, which is contrary to the consensus among scholars of fascism as afar-rightideology.[92]An example of this is conservative columnistJonah Goldberg's bookLiberal Fascism,wheremodern liberalismandprogressivismare described as the child offascism,which is considered to besocialist.[92]For conservative figures such asDinesh D'SouzaandCandace Owens,American Leftfigures likeAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez,Sanders, andElizabeth Warrenare not onlysocialistsbut since the Nazis are wrongly considered to besocialistsin this view, they are dangerous, and in turn any who oppose them cannot have any link to Nazism or the far right.[92]The use ofsocialistas an insult to falsely imply that the Nazis were leftists is seen as a way to disavow far-right history, erase leftist victims of Nazi violence, and justify violence against leftists.[93]MonopolySocialism, a version of theMonopolyboard game by Hasbro, was criticized for confusing socialism with communism, and mocking left-wing ideas in general. Some noted that the original game was created as asatireofcapitalism,which is not widely known nowadays.[94]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^The former's decision was upheld in a landmark case establishing limits onfreedom of expressionor speech by theEuropean Commission of Human RightsinCommunist Party of Germany v. the Federal Republic of Germany,[19]while the latter was applied through theCommunist Control Act of 1954,which remains standing even though it has not been enforced, apart from two minor cases in the states of New Jersey and New York.[18]
  2. ^Given the long and traumatic experience ofEuropean colonisation of Southeast Asia,ASEAN strongly upholds the principle of noninterference.[41]
  3. ^Those politicians disagree with thepolitics of triangulationand theThird Waypolitics adopted by their own parties like throughNew Labour,[69]such as by moving to the right in an attempt to regainpolitical powerand seeing a return tolaissez-fairecapitalism as a more pressing immediate concern;[70]they are generally opposed toneoliberalism,[71]or reject theWashington Consensus,and advocate a return along the lines of thesocial-liberalparadigm of thepost-war consensusand theGolden Age of Capitalism,whereKeynesian economicsformed the base,[72]and there was moreeconomic interventionismandnationalizationpolicies, in contrast to thederegulationandprivatizationof the neoliberal era.[73]Those who left their center-left parties to found parties to their left are categorized by political scientist as Left parties withinfamilles spirituelles,[74]and asleft-wing populistparties.[75]
  4. ^Notable excerpts include:

    [Republican Senator Robert] Taft explained that the great issue in this campaign is "creeping socialism." Now that is the patented trademark of the special interest lobbies. Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.

    Socialism is what they called public power.

    Socialism is what they called social security.

    Socialism is what they called farm price supports.

    Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.

    Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.

    Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.

    When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan "Down With Socialism" on the banner of his "great crusade," that is really not what he means at all.

    What he really means is, "Down with Progress — down with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal," and "down with Harry Truman's fair Deal." That is what he means.[89]

References

[edit]
  1. ^abcCMFR 2019.
  2. ^Merriam-Webster2010.
  3. ^The Free Dictionary2016.
  4. ^Merriam-Webster2016.
  5. ^abcNichols 2011.
  6. ^The New York Times,23 August 1927.
  7. ^The New York Times,April 1928.
  8. ^abThe Free Dictionary2010.
  9. ^abLeibovich 2009.
  10. ^abWise 2009;Hedges 2010.
  11. ^https:// unz /runz/american-pravda-jfk-richard-nixon-the-cia-and-watergate/
  12. ^Todorova 2020.
  13. ^Evans & Strandmann 2000,pp. 207–235, "1848 in European Collective Memory".
  14. ^Berman 2006,p. 52.
  15. ^Dolack 2016,p. 30.
  16. ^Sabry 2017,p. 164.
  17. ^Major 1997,p. 17.
  18. ^abMcAuliffe 1976.
  19. ^Petaux 2009,p. 166;Benedek & Kettemann 2014,p. 86.
  20. ^Foner 1984;Lipset & Marks 2000.
  21. ^Lansford 2007,pp. 9–24, 36–44.
  22. ^Leeden 1987,p. 63–64.
  23. ^Leeden 1987,p. 137–139.
  24. ^Columbia Encyclopedia 2007.
  25. ^Pierson 1995,p. 71.
  26. ^Tegel, Simeon (21 March 2023)."Peru's far right is reviving decades-old terrorism narratives to undermine protests".Coda Media.Retrieved2 April2023.
  27. ^abFeline Freier, Luisa; Castillo Jara, Soledad (13 January 2021).""Terruqueo" and Peru's Fear of the Left ".Americas Quarterly.Retrieved18 November2021.It was in this context that Martha Chávez,... accused demonstrators of being linked to the terrorist left... As absurd as it may seem, this kind of attack is common in Peru, and recently there is even a name for it: terruqueo, the mostly groundless accusation of being connected to once powerful communist terrorist organizations.... After the end of the conflict, the term came to be used carelessly and often as a racially charged political insult, targeting progressive or left-wing politicians or activists, organizations committed to the defense of human rights, and, at least historically, people of indigenous origin.
  28. ^abc"Qué es el" terruqueo "en Perú y cómo influye en la disputa presidencial entre Fujimori y Castillo".BBC News(in Spanish).Retrieved18 November2021.
  29. ^Asensio, Raúl; Camacho, Gabriela; González, Natalia; Grompone, Romeo; Pajuelo Teves, Ramón; Peña Jimenez, Omayra; Moscoso, Macarena; Vásquez, Yerel; Sosa Villagarcia, Paolo (August 2021).El Profe: Cómo Pedro Castillo se convirtió en presidente del Perú y qué pasará a continuación(in Spanish) (1 ed.).Lima, Peru:Institute of Peruvian Studies.pp. 13–24.ISBN978-612-326-084-2.Retrieved17 November2021.
  30. ^abcVillalba, Fernando Velásquez (2022)."A TOTALIDADE NEOLIBERAL-FUJIMORISTA: ESTIGMATIZAÇÃO E COLONIALIDADE NO PERU CONTEMPORÂNEO".Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais.37(109): e3710906.doi:10.1590/3710906/2022.S2CID251877338.terruqueo, ou seja, a construção artificial, racista e conveniente de um inimigo sociopolítico para deslegitimar formas de protesto social
  31. ^Mendoza, Marina (1 March 2022)."The political use of terrorism in the 2021 Peruvian presidential campaign".Revista Universitas(36).Universidad Politécnica Salesiana:243–268.doi:10.17163/uni.n36.2022.10.ISSN1390-8634.S2CID247116260.[permanent dead link]
  32. ^Burt, Jo-Marie (2006). ""Quien habla es terrorista": The Political Use of Fear in Fujimori's Peru ".Latin American Research Review.41(3): 32–62.doi:10.1353/lar.2006.0036.S2CID146449265.
  33. ^Loanes, Ellen (14 January 2023)."Peru's violent unrest shows no signs of stopping".Vox.Retrieved15 January2023.
  34. ^ab"Peru: UN experts call for end to violence during demonstrations, urge respect for human rights".Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.Retrieved9 March2023.
  35. ^Gavilan 2020.
  36. ^RSF 2019.
  37. ^Robles 2019.
  38. ^Torres 2019;Walker 2020.
  39. ^Hammann & Stoltenberg-Lerche 2011;Sambalud 2017;Ayalin 2018;Vera Files, 16 October 2018;Walker 2020.
  40. ^Bordadora 2011;Calica 2012.
  41. ^Azmi & Sepe 2020.
  42. ^Fonbuena 2019.
  43. ^Sadongdong 2020;Aurelio, Mangosing & Valenzuela 2020.
  44. ^Crean, Jeffrey (2024).The Fear of Chinese Power: an International History.New Approaches to International History series. London, UK:Bloomsbury Academic.ISBN978-1-350-23394-2.
  45. ^Bennett & Edsforth 1991;Hedges 2010.
  46. ^Bennett & Edsforth 1991.
  47. ^Haynes & Klehr 2003.
  48. ^Woods 2004a,p. 170.
  49. ^Moynihan 1998,p. 15.
  50. ^Theoharis 2002.
  51. ^Wheatcroft 1998.
  52. ^Schrecker 2000.
  53. ^Cianfrocca 2009.
  54. ^Street 2015;Prince 2016,p. 15.
  55. ^Hedges 2010.
  56. ^Remnick 2010.
  57. ^CNN, 9 April 2010.
  58. ^Barlett 2011.
  59. ^Hedges 2010;Hedges 2011.
  60. ^Akers 2009.
  61. ^Sanders 2009.
  62. ^Hallow 2009.
  63. ^Evans 2009.
  64. ^Llewellyn 2009.
  65. ^abBrodey 2009.
  66. ^Von Drehle 2009.
  67. ^Franke-Ruta & Wilson 2009.
  68. ^Astor 2019.
  69. ^Cassidy 2015;Cassidy 2019.
  70. ^Romano 2006.
  71. ^Hinnfors 2006;Lafontaine 2009;Corfe 2010.
  72. ^Klein 2008,p. 55.
  73. ^Hale, Legget & Martell 2004,pp. 9–26.
  74. ^March 2011.
  75. ^Damiani 2020.
  76. ^Ghodsee 2014;Ghodsee & Sehon 2018;Engel-Di Mauro et al. 2021.
  77. ^abDeutsche Welle, 24 September 2021.
  78. ^Oltermann 2021.
  79. ^The Economist,3 September 2021;Kirschbaum 2021.
  80. ^Hirt 2021.
  81. ^Reuters, 27 September 2021.
  82. ^Siedenbiedel 2021;Aktuelle Nachrichten Online,27 September 2021.
  83. ^Fisher 2019.
  84. ^Harding et al. 2018.
  85. ^Bush 2017.
  86. ^Eaton 2017.
  87. ^Cammaerts 2016;Cammaerts et al. 2016.
  88. ^Walker 2011.
  89. ^abMikkelson 2019.
  90. ^Reinhardt 2009.
  91. ^Goodman 2015.
  92. ^abcGranieri 2020.
  93. ^Berlatsky 2021.
  94. ^Kaur, Harmeet (23 August 2019)."Yes, there's a socialism-themed Monopoly game. It packs a message tailored for capitalists".CNN. CNN.Retrieved17 November2022.
Bibliography
  • Barson, Michael (1992).Better Red Than Dead: A Nostalgic Look at the Golden Years of Russiaphobia, Redbaiting, and other Commie Madness(paperback ed.). New York City, New York: Hyperion Books.ISBN9781562829742.
  • Carleton, Don E.; Faulk, John Henry (2014).Red Scare: Right-Wing Hysteria, Fifties Fanaticism, and Their Legacy in Texas(paperback ed.). Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.ISBN9780292758551.
  • Kling, Andrew A. (2011).The Red Scare(hardcover ed.). San Diego, California: Lucent Books.ISBN9781420506808.
  • Murray, Robert K. (2003) [1955].Red Scare: A Study in National Hysteria, 1919–1920(paperback ed.). Boston, Massachusetts: Textbook Publishers.ISBN9780758119759.
  • Nichols, John (2011).The S Word: A Short History of an American Tradition... Socialism(paperback ed.). New York City, New York: Verso Books.ISBN9781844678211.
  • "Red-Baiting in the Philippines: Civil Society Under General Suspicion"(PDF).Observer: A Journal on Threatened Human Rights Defenders in the Philippines.3(2). International Peace Observers Network. December 2011.ISSN2192-3353.
  • Sabin, Arthur J. (1999).Red Scare in Court: New York Versus the International Workers Order(paperback ed.). Copenaghen: Museum Tusculanum Press, University of Copenhagen.ISBN9788772895819.
  • Schmidt, Regin (2000).Red Scare: FBI and the Origins of Anticommunism in the United States, 1919–1943(paperback ed.). Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.ISBN9780812217049.
  • Woods, Jeff (2004).Black Struggle, Red Scare: Segregation and Anti-Communism in the South, 1948–1968(paperback ed.). Baton Rouge, Louisiana: LSU Press.ISBN9780807129265.
Further reading
Sources
[edit]