Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

only much improved and greatly simplified. They use the same words as in everyday language, only with contrasting differences. They have a key to this code. There is no concealment of it. The Communists proclaim it just as widely as Hitler proclaimed his program. The key is in their dialectical materialism. The study of dialectical materialism, which is a prolonged affair, provides the definitions for these code words. One example is "peace." The word "peace" has a literal meaning under communism. It means a state of affairs under which there is no opposition any longer to communism. That is "peace"; that, and only that.

Senator KEATING. So when a Communist uses the word "peace," and proclaims that there should be peace in the world, as they do so frequently, that is the peace they are talking about?

Mr. HUNTER. That is the only peace they mean, and our failure to admit it foredooms our diplomats and our intelligence officers, who insist in writing as if the Reds were employing our dictionary as we use it in America

Senator KEATING. In other words, there is no meeting of independent minds. When we talk about what the Communists are talking about, we are not talking about the same thing at all?

Mr. HUNTER. We and the Communists are in fact speaking two different languages. The only way one can deal with Chinese Communists, or Communists anywhere, in writing a treaty or any agreement, would be to proceed exactly as if we were speaking two languages, and to have a clause in the treaty or agreement specifying that "the words contained herein are defined as found in Webster's dictionary," or "as interpreted under dialectical materialism."

That is because we are dealing with two languages, and it is the only way the words can be defined.

President Gamal Abdel Nasser recently complained bitterly that Khrushchev had fooled him. Khrushchev had made an agreement of nonintervention. Nasser was wrong. Khrushchev had made the agreement, but what Khrushchev had agreed to was noninterference as Communists understand it.

Adlai Stevenson had the word explained to him by Khrushchev himself, when he visited Moscow not long ago. He tells about it in an article he wrote for the U.S. News & World Report of September 5, 1958. Noninterference, as Khrushchev explained to Stevenson, means not interfering with Communist activity or expansion. Mr. Stevenson learned that Khrushchev meant this for outside of the Communist bloc the same as inside, just as much in the United States as anywhere else.

When Mr. Stevenson asked what about Communist noninterference with free world activities elsewhere, Khrushchev brushed that off at once, saying that was not the word, that was not the meaning.

Stevenson should have known this. Nasser certainly is experienced enough to have known it. Khrushchev didn't break any agreement. He agreed to noninterference, which means noninterference with communism. He did not interfere with communism in Egypt, he helped it along. That was what he meant all along.

And when we go to the summit conference, we are going to be taken for a ride exactly as we were taken for a ride at the Geneva Conference a woeful ride then-unless we stop making believe that the

Chinese Communists do not have, that the Communist world does not have, a code language of its own.

Senator KEATING. So that we should carry our dictionaries with us and let them bring theirs, and then, in any agreement that we enter into, describe each word according to the basic document?

Mr. HUNTER. Exactly as an agreement between a French and a Spanish group, translated into their two languages. Yes, that's the

only way.

That is one of the two points I want to bring out, and I cannot stress it too strongly, because all our misconceptions and blunders at the United Nations, and everywhere else in dealing with the Reds, are due to our persistence, our stubborn persistence, in making believe they are speaking American English, or English English, and not Communist English.

This is the first time I ever used that description; yes, the best way to describe it is as Communist English.

Senator KEATING. So that when they use the English language, they use it with a meaning attributed to the English words according to the Communist doctrine?

Mr. HUNTER. Exactly. It is in their way of speaking, as with the word "aggression." Aggression to them means an attack on communism. It does not mean a Communist attack on the free world. That is not aggression.

Mr. SOURWINE. What does freedom mean?

Mr. HUNTER. Freedom under communism means the privilege of following the laws of dialectical materialism. And that brings me to my second point, which must be explained, too, before we can understand what the Communists say about the communes, or anything else. Instruction in this, along with the code language, should be obligatory for every person we send abroad as an intelligence officer, analyst or diplomat, and surely, if I may make the suggestion, should be understood by our Members of Congress. This second point is dialectical materialism. The Communists have gotten away with it because they make it so complicated that it usually takes days to explain, and by that time everybody is in a coma. But I think I can give a capsule description of it, which will be accurate.

Dialectical materialism is the Communist science of existence, which teaches that everything in the universe, not only in our world, is in a state of constant flux, constant change, except for one thing, only one thing that doesn't change, which is Communist line. Of course, once we boil this down, simply, into this paragraph, we find that far from being scientific, which the Communists say it is, dialectical materialism is sheer mysticism, mysticism of the most ridiculous sort, a quack religion. But it is the basis for all the brainwashing; it is the excuse for the horrible crimes committed against the Americans made prisoners in Korea.

It is the basis for the horrible crimes committed by the Communists against American civilians made prisoners on the soil of China, too, and in Europe. When dialectical materialism is imposed as the only true standard, it wholly eliminates our standard of what is true and what is false, what is good and what is bad.

Once a man is lured or forced through the brainwashing process, he tacitly at least accepts this as a science, agreeing that everything is in

constant flux in the universe except Communist line, and then obviously he can easily be made to employ a new standard for judgment of what takes place. A lie then is something which is not true to the Communist line. What is true, then, is something in accord with Communist line. And what is good or what is bad is judged only by whether it is good or bad for communism.

Hence, when the American soldiers were pressurized in Korea into admitting germ warfare, that was true, under dialectical materialism. Once one understands this mad logic called dialectical materialism and the code language that the Reds use on its behalf, any thought of remaining neutral regarding it is suicidal. It is impossible to coexist with such evil.

The two biggest lies that have ever been perpetrated by any government are those of Communist China, which it still maintains, the vicious lie of germ warfare, and the blasphemous lie that the nuns from America and Canada who staffed the orphanages in China systematically cracked the skulls of little babies and buried the smashed bodies in deep pits.

If you accept dialectical materialism, those accusations are true and good.

Well-and this cannot be denied, for the facts cannot be refutedonce this point is understood, any idea of sitting down and negotiating when that sort of a mad conception is adhered to, or compromising with it, becomes utterly impossible.

That is why we are making believe, exactly as we made believe, at the time of the Korean war, that the Chinese armies were not in Korea; because the true facts did not fit into State Department policy, and into our general policy-our wishful thinking.

We are making believe that this code language does not exist, and that dialectical materialism, which utterly changes all standards, does not exist either. Yet both must be understood before the communes can be understood, before anything that the Communists do can be understood. Before one can understand the United States, one would have to understand the spirit of the American Constitution, and our religious professions; and one must also understand how we use our dictionaries.

It is as simple as that.

Senator KEATING. Do your sources give you any information about the problem of religion in Communist China, and what effect, if any, the commune system has had on it.

Mr. HUNTER. Yes; I have a great deal of material on religion. It has been building up over a period of years. When I did my book, "The Story of Mary Liu," I gathered a tremendous amount of material on religion in China, and have been keeping it up ever since.

One of the byproducts of the communes is, in the Communist way of expressing it, the solution of the religious question. There is no room or time in the communes for religion. The organization simply crowds it out. Even before the communes, Red China had perpetrated one of its most artful hoaxes in the field of religion. The Communists say there must be freedom and equality in religion, which sounds fair enough, to our way of thinking. The Reds say that a priest, minister, monk, or mullah-Communist oppression is imposed indiscriminately on all religions should have no privileges that other

members of society do not possess. All of which sounds fair. Why should a minister have privileges not enjoyed by an educator, or an engineer, or even a military officer? But how does it work out? It works out in their usual upside-down manner.

Before anyone can obtain a diploma as an engineer or educator, or qualify for any profession, he first has to pass his tests in dialectical materialism. This is only being patriotic, it is explained. But here is how it works out. Dialectical materialism teaches atheism. Therefore, in the new seminaries of Communist China, in the "independent" Catholic church that they have tried to set up, and in their so-called reformed Protestant denominations, students have to qualify as atheists, by passing tests in dialectical materialism, before they are allowed to go out and teach religion. This is inferentially admitted in the Communist publications. The Communists regard the role of the church in China as helping dig its own grave. They have, with tremendous justification, the utmost contempt for our capacity to see through such tactics and for our willingness to stand up for our convictions, and not sell out when the dollar bill is waved at a labor or business leader. They believe, in exactly those words, that we can be bribed into digging our own grave. The role given religion is to operate as a political arm of the party, to subtly facilitate the spread of atheistic doctrines, and to ultimately replace religion by the quack faith of dialectical materialism. In all respects, this already operates as the obligatory, state religion.

Senator KEATING. And this is, you say, obligatory?

Mr. HUNTER. Yes.

Senator KEATING. They don't profess to force a religion on the people, do they?

Mr. HUNTER. The word Mao Tse-tung and the other Communist ideologists use in China is "persuasion." The "persuasion" tactic is the Chinese Communist contribution to Red ideology. Stalin was more impatient; he just killed off the whole sectors of the population that failed to be quickly enough convinced of the righteousness of Communist logic. The Chinese Communists depend more on brainwashing. They attempt more vigorously to persuade people to see things the way the Communist hierarchy desires.

This word "persuasion," though, does not mean ordinary verbal persuasion, any more than their word "learning" means just learning. They have a new meaning for learning, and write it differently. There is learning, as we know it; and then there is learning which refers only to political education, which is pro-Marxist. Persuasion, in its political sense in China embraces every pressure known to man, every type of flattery, bribery, force, threat, cajolery, torture, and subjection.

"Reform by labor" is a part of this persuasion. Its victims are sent to state farms, actually prison camps, now also merged with the communes. They refer to it, too, as "reeducation." All of it is the slave labor that directly threatens American labor standards. It already has seriously crippled Japan's effort to get back on its own feet by exporting to other countries of Asia in the normal manner. Senator KEATING. That is, the slave-produced goods being exported from Communist China in competition with Japan-produced goods enables them to very greatly undersell the Japanese. Even

though Japan's wage standards may not be high, Chinese slave labor can undersell them. Is that what you mean?

Mr. HUNTER. Utterly so. In fact, the Chinese Communists don't conceal this objective. They have plainly told the Japanese that unless they throw over their collaboration with the United States, and collaborate instead with the so-called People's Democracies, Red China's economic warfare will hurl Japan to its knees. In places such as Malaya, this strategic phase of Red China's trade is very frank. The Chinese Communist trading agents deal on a discriminatory basis with traders who play ball with them politically. They help spread the impression, which is one of the greatest assets of Communism everywhere, that the Reds stand by the people who help them, and fight their enemies uncompromisingly. I have seen evidence of this throughout the world. While we encourage people to go out on a limb for our principles, the impression is that as soon as there is any trouble, we take refuge in the doctrine of noninterference. We have been made to appear, certainly in Asia, as people who let others down and even betray them when they get into trouble defending the same principles we proclaim.

Senator KEATING. Whereas they use their trade policy in Asian countries as an instrument of their own foreign power?

Mr. HUNTER. Yes; and as an instrument of more than foreign policy; as an instrument of war.

Senator KEATING. An instrument whereby they seek in other countries in the Far East to bring adherence to their political viewpoint. Mr. HUNTER. Completely, so as to destroy the economic fabric of those countries and make the American aid program a failure. Malaya and Singapore, for instance, have been forced for the first time in their histories to impose restrictions and tariffs on shipments of certain textiles and other goods from Communist China. Red trade agents discriminate between businessmen according to their willingness to help the Communists; in other words, their willingness to be traitors in their own country, and set their price scales accordingly. Finished textiles, such as dresses and sarongs, are sold to collaborators below the original price of just the material. A dress is used like a bullet in Communist psychological warfare. Trade is a weapon, exactly as religion or anything else under communism. They refer to it as a weapon. The unhappy victims of this war are, first of all, their own people.

The secondary target of this war is the United States. Anti-Americanism is an integral part of Communist doctrine in China. Chinese communism imposes the obligation to keep hate for the United States within one's perspective at all times. That our democratic society must be overthrown is written into important documents in Red China.

Senator KEATING. What kind of documents?

Mr. HUNTER. I believe it even is in the preamble of the so-called Chinese Communist constitution. Practically all decrees issued by the party or the Government contain references to this obligation.

« AnteriorContinuar »