What Was McCarthyism?
From Kenneth C. Davis‟s Don’t Know Much About History
It was from this toxic cloud of hysteria that senator Joseph McCarthy (1909-1957) emerged ….
He was the freshman senator from Wisconsin elected to the Senate in 1946 by lying about his wartime
service record and smearing his …opponents. In a short time this scruffy, mean-spirited alcoholic was
lining his pockets with lobbyist money and was generally thought of as the “worst senator” in
Washington. By 1950 he was looking for the issue that would keep his leaky political boat from sinking.
McCarthy found that issue when he was fed some obsolete documents relating to old
investigations of Communists in government jobs. In February 1950, McCarthy told a women‟s club in
Wheeling, West Virginia, that he held, “here in my hand,” a list of 205 men in the State Department
named as members of the Communist Party who were part of a spy ring. The numbers changed from day
to day and even McCarthy wasn‟t sure where he had gotten them. His bulging briefcase of “evidence”
generally held only a bottle of bourbon. But this was the beginning of his “Big Lie,” consisting of
evidence and charges fabricated by a desperate man. In the following days, the emptiness of McCarthy‟s
“evidence” should have ended his Senate career. But it didn‟t work out that way. In 1950, America was
more than ready to believe what Senator McCarthy had to say.
Time has altered the meaning “McCarthyism.” In 1950 it meant a brave, patriotic stand against
Communism, with the broad support of the media and people. Now it has come to mean a smear
campaign on groundless accusations from which the accused cannot escape, because professions of
innocence became admissions of guilt and only confessions were accepted. Many of those who came
before McCarthy, as well as many who testified before the powerful House Un-American Activities
Committee (HUAC), were willing to point fingers at others to save their own careers and reputations. To
fight back was to be tarred with McCarthy‟s “Communist sympathizer” brush. For many, particularly in
the entertainment industries of radio, motion pictures and television, that meant “blacklisting” that ruined
careers. In this cynical atmosphere, laws of evidence and constitutional guarantees didn‟t apply to
“devious Communists.” For four years, McCarthy was as powerful as any man in Washington. He could
force the President to clear appointments through him, and McCarthy‟s rampage forced President
Eisenhower to institute a new round of “loyalty” programs to prove that he too was “tough” on
Communism.
But in 1954, McCarthy took up a battle that turned against him when he challenged the U.S.
Army to purge supposed Communists from the Pentagon. With the assistance of Roy Cohn, a young
attorney whom McCarthy had earlier dispatched overseas to eradicate “communistic books” from U.S.
International Information Administration libraries, McCarthy had begun to attack certain army officers as
Communists. Once again he captivated the public imagination with his charges. But this time he
overreached. The Army was President Eisenhower‟s turf. Eisenhower and the army started to hit back…
The media also turned on him. CBS‟s legendary reporter Edward R. Murrow (1908-1965), the
man who had brought the blitz of London live to America on radio during the war, took aim at McCarthy
on his TV program “See It Now,” a predecessor to “60 Minutes.” By simply showing clips of McCarthy
without editorializing, Murrow allowed the Senator‟s bluster to undermine him, exposing McCarthy for
the charlatan he was.
During the thirty-six days of the Army-McCarthy hearings, McCarthy finally came undone, his
cudgel-like attacks, remorseless crudeness, and unfounded accusations being revealed in an unpleasant
light. The daily televised hearings dissolved as Joseph Welch, the respected lawyer representing the
Army, turned the tables on McCarthy and routed him in public. The hearings ended inconclusively, but
the rest of the Senate smelled blood. By the end of 1954, McCarthy was condemned by his peers, and his
public support eroded. His hold on the Senate and the public gone, McCarthy spiraled downward in a
pathetic drunken tailspin. He died in May 1957 of health problems brought on by alcoholism.
Arthur Miller and McCarthyism
As well as understanding some of the historical background
of the play, it‟s important to be aware of the historical
context of when the ply was actually written in 1953. Miller
was not only intrigued by the witch trials of the seventeenth
century Salem, but he was also concerned with more recent
events in the United States.
At the end of World War II, two powerful nations emerged –
the USA and the USSR. Despite having been allies in the war, the two countries distrusted one another.
A battle for nuclear weapon superiority arose between the two: the capitalist United States versus the
Communist Soviet Union. Mistrust and hostility between the two gave rise to the „Cold War‟ and the
United States worked at home and abroad to oppose the threat of communism.
In this climate of fear, a United States Senator, Joseph McCarthy, alleged that government departments
were being infiltrated by communists and he waged a campaign against them. He accused and vilified
many public servants as well as prominent radio, TV, and motion picture personalities.
Arthur Miller was caught up in the frenzy, being asked to
apologize for an interest in Marxism when he was younger.
Brought before the House Committee of Un-American
Activities, he refused to apologize and was sent for trial.
Initially he was fined and was given a suspended prison
sentence, but he appealed and was acquitted. Miller fought to
maintain his dignity and his principles. This was shortly before
The Crucible first opened.
Answer the following questions:
1.
How is this situation relevant to what happens in The Crucible?
2. What parallel can you draw between Miller and Proctor?
3. What message might Miller have for his modern audience?