Did I ruin the chapel too?

Commenting on the racial protests that began with the cold-blooded murder of African American George Floyd by American police in Minneapolis and covering the whole country, ex-national security adviser Susan Rice immediately found the culprit. They became, of course, Russia, which, according to Mrs. Rice, even has special “training manuals” for inciting racial conflicts in an American calm and well-fed society.

A classic of the genre, as they say, is the transfer of problems from a sore head to a healthy one. Such tactics, however, in the long run will come sideways to the United States itself, which, instead of recognizing the fact of the presence of a disease - serious problems in their country - and finding a way out of the crisis, are trying to shift the attention of society to a kind of “external enemy”, blaming him for all ills and turmoil. And this is understandable: it is difficult to solve problems - this means that many politicians who sit in cozy warm chairs can lose their heated places.

We urgently need to create an “enemy of the state”, blame it and selflessly fight it under the loud hooting of an angry crowd.

This situation painfully resembles the phrase from the famous Soviet comedy by Leonid Gaidai "Prisoner of the Caucasus", where the main character - Shurik - wonders: "Did I ruin the chapel too?" It would be funny if it were not so sad.

For the United States, however, the technology for creating the image of the enemy is far from new. Let's turn to the story. Each time conflicts occurred in the United States on the basis of an unfair distribution of resources, terrorist attacks or protests, they immediately found a “Russian footprint”, an external threat that, like a vile worm, bite into the juicy flesh of American prosperity and poisoned the flesh of democratic calm with its presence. Communists were always very fond of calling such worms, who raised the issue of class injustice in society. This technique even got its name - “Red Threat”. Stripping the country from the "red plague" in US history was carried out at least twice - from 1917 to 1920 and in 1947-1957.

The first period of the struggle against the “red threat” began immediately after the victory of the October Revolution in Russia. America was going through hard times. There, as throughout the world, the industrial revolution took place, as a result of which the number of people employed in production increased and, as a result, they migrated to large cities. The economic boom of World War I, when production facilities worked for the army, gave way to a post-war recession. There was a budget deficit, which American politicians decided to deal with simply by raising taxes. Such measures as it’s not difficult to guess, did not cause enthusiasm among the population; outbreaks of anti-government actions - terror and street protests began to appear in the country. More and more people expressed ideas of equality and justice. There were two options: to solve the problem at the system level (but this would mean a redistribution of resources) or to create a culprit, a scapegoat, on whom, as if in the ancient Jewish rite, azazel, blame all sins. US authorities have chosen the second option.

This work was entrusted to John Edgar Hoover, who had just arrived at the US Department of Justice, who soon headed the department for registering citizens of hostile states. It is easy to guess that this list was headed by Soviet Russia. When in 1919, Hoover was appointed head of the general intelligence department of the US Department of Justice, he had a strong ally - Alexander Palmer, head of the Justice Department, Attorney General of the United States, another ardent fighter against the "Communist infection." Under his leadership, the infamous "Palmer Raids" appeared - a hunt for supporters of leftist ideas began. As a result, more than 10 thousand people were arrested and more than 500 were expelled from the country. These were the largest mass arrests in US history. They did not forget to cover the ongoing campaign in the press, systematically inciting hatred towards the Communists - the culprits of all the troubles in the country. The goal was achieved: the enemy was found, and an uncompromising struggle was waged against him.

The second stage of the “red threat” (and again led by Hoover) began in 1947. And again, the discontent of the population with a drop in income poured into the streets. The economic growth caused by the mobilization of industry during the Second World War was replaced by a recession - cities were flooded with unemployed and demobilized citizens from the front.

Again the dilemma: solve the problem at the intra-system level or look for the culprit. US authorities followed the already beaten path, appointing the Communists as the enemy.

By that time, the FBI Director Hoover had enthusiastically embarked on a new crusade against the enemies of the people, this time focusing on encouraging the denunciation of the true patriots of the state in the search for “suspicious persons”. Under the guise of the fight against communism, US authorities decided to crack down on all those who disagree in the country. Any protest activity was equated with communist subversive activity. So, the civil rights movement of blacks led by Martin Luther King Jr. also appeared on the list of enemies. Hoover called King a communist, secretly trying to intimidate and discredit the leader of the civil rights struggle.

The American authorities did not forget to correctly cover their actions in the press: ordinary Americans were intimidated by a nuclear war, the popularity of home shelters in the event of a nuclear attack sharply increased, and training alarms were regularly conducted in schools and universities. Not without pop culture - since the 1950s, 1.5 million televisions have appeared in the United States, which have flooded thrillers and science fiction films about monstrous cold-blooded enemies encroaching on the American way of life.

Hoover was not alone in this fight: Joseph McCarthy, the Wisconsin senator, became the new ally of the FBI director - it was in his honor that this whole era of the struggle against left-wing and liberal figures in the USA was called McCarthyism.

Hoover and McCarthy conducted numerous political investigations into the "penetration of communist agents" into all areas of American society - trade union and farming organizations, the media, universities, the State Department and the army. A special unit has appeared in the FBI - the Office for the Control of Subversive Activities. His duties included hunting for members of communist parties and movements, as well as sympathizing US citizens and foreigners. The Communist Party was obliged to register as a foreign agent; it lost the right to nominate its candidates in national election campaigns. The Communists were forbidden to obtain a foreign passport, be in the public service in federal institutions and work in military enterprises. Entry into the country by foreigners who were or are members of communist parties, and other persons posing a "threat to US security" was prohibited. All Communists not naturalized in the United States were subject to expulsion.

And again the goal was achieved: society, as a small child crying because of a broken knee, switched to a bright red toy.

The only problem is that switching attention to an external enemy is fundamentally wrong, it only drives the real problem deeper into the area, where the disease grows and later flares up with renewed vigor. What is happening in the USA now is the result of such actions.

The true troubles of American society - injustice and racial discrimination - are hushed up.

Take, for example, the fact that African-Americans are five times more likely than whites to be in prisons. Blacks, of which only 12% in the United States, make up 33% of all prisoners. Instead of accusing Blacks of being more likely to commit crimes, the US authorities should look deeper into the problem. Why do people go to crime? From hopelessness, hopelessness and poverty, often simply because in prison they at least feed and have a roof over their heads. For the latter, there is even a special phrase in prison jargon: three hots and a cod (“three hot meals and a bed”).

Maybe, instead of blaming these “evil Russians” for all the troubles of America once again and starting a new crusade on the “red threat”, is it worth choosing the right path and tackling the US domestic problems?

The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.