Communist infiltration of Hollywood motion-picture industry : hearing before the Committee on Un-American activities, House of Representatives, Eighty-second Congress, first session (1951)

1454 COMMUNISM IN MOTION-PICTURE INDUSTRY nist Party to agitate right up to the day we are on the barricades, up to the day when they, themselves, have decided that the day has come where they have a fighting chance ? I say "No." Mr. Doyle. Well,'then, are you familiar with the decision by the United States Supreme Court with reference to the Smith Act ? Mr. Ashe. I believe I am. Unfortunately, I don't share the views of the Supreme Court. I am unhappy to say that. Mr. Doyle. Well, now, in what way do you not, on the question of the Communists? Mr. Ashe. I think that the Supreme Court is demonstrating in this country the difficulty of a democratic Nation to protect itself from being overthrown. I think that we are going to have to do some very serious thinking about the legalism by which the Communist Party manages to be—manages to keep itself from being brought to heel. The whole history of all of the other countries that have gone behind the iron curtain is a history of vacillation, of evasion, of hesitation, of fear, of talking about democratic rights until the whole country has lost all of its democratic rights and the Communist Party is in the saddle. Mr. Doyle. Then you would agree with the Supreme Court, though, in its recent decision on at least one point where it declares that, in substance and effect, it wasn't necessary for there to be preact of vio- lence; that the encouragement of a preact of violence was sufficient? Mr. Ashe. I think it had—I may be wrong. I think there was a question of real and present danger, wasn't there? Mr. Doyle. All right. Mr. Ashe. Well, I say that time is here now. Mr. Doyle. Then would you answer my question by saying that the real and present danger consists of a person orally advocating the forceful overthrow, or should the person have to do some overt act. Mr. Ashe. The advocacy orally is a part and parcel of, although it may precede and probably will precede, the actual overt act. In other words, you can't have revolution unless revolution is discussed and unless tactics and strategy are worked out. This requires talking and it requires discussion. Mr. Doyle. May I ask you one more question, Mr. Ashe, or two ? In my study of the statutes under which this committee functions, I per- haps went an additional step to try to understand the meaning of the word "subversive" in our statute which I read to you, and in studying Mr. Webster's dictionary I found that the term "subvert" means— to overthrow; to overturn ; to ruin utterly; to undermine the morals, allegiance, or faith of; to corrupt. Now, in view of that defining of the word "subvert" by Webster and Webster's Dictionary, do I understand that your appraisal of the Communist Party is that it sounds in time to subvert—in other words, that it is definitely the program to try to subvert our Nation? Mr. Ashe. Absolutely, at all times. Mr. Doyle. One more question. We had testimony before this com- mittee in Washington several months ago from a former FBI agent who had been assigned to the duty of studying Communist cells in certain parts of our Nation, and he testified before us in substance that in his presence and to his knowledge—he had the places in mind and the occasions in mind—he heard conversation and discussion by members of the Communist cells there as to ways and means in which