See full scan at the bottom of the page.
Authored by Charley Ellis and illustrated by Merle Shore, If We Remain Silent… is a striking, pocket-sized booklet produced by the United Defense Committee Against “Loyalty” Checks. Published in Los Angeles, it offers a pointed critique of post–World War II loyalty oaths—especially those tied to President Harry Truman’s Executive Order 9835 (1947) and local “loyalty check” programs that threatened the jobs and civil liberties of government employees.
Historical Context
In the late 1940s and early 1950s, the United States entered a period of intense anti-Communist fervor, often referred to as the Second Red Scare. Fears of Soviet espionage led to federal, state, and local “loyalty” investigations, which demanded that public servants and even private citizens affirm their patriotism by signing oaths or affidavits disavowing Communist ties. Truman’s Executive Order 9835 authorized broad loyalty reviews of federal workers, prompting a wave of similar measures at the municipal level.
Los Angeles County, for example, required thousands of its employees to complete a “loyalty check,” prying into personal beliefs, political affiliations, and social acquaintances. If We Remain Silent… emerged as a protest against these sweeping inquests, warning that fundamental rights—freedom of speech, association, and thought—were in jeopardy.
Key Messages and Content
- “The People vs. Thought Control”
Early pages frame a then-pending Supreme Court case: Helen Parker, et al. vs. County of Los Angeles, et al. It was set to be the first major “loyalty oath” case at the nation’s highest court—one that, the pamphlet contends, would decide whether the government or the people “rule” in a democracy. - Real-Life Examples
Citing cases of suspended or dismissed workers (such as an African American mail carrier who socialized with someone “suspected” of Communist sympathy), the pamphlet shows how easily hearsay or slight associations could trigger an accusation of “disloyalty.” It thereby illustrates the chilling effect that loyalty checks had on free thought and social contact. - Encroachment on Civil Liberties
With quotations from the Bill of Rights and references to the Founding Fathers, If We Remain Silent… argues that loyalty affidavits constitute “thought control.” The text highlights leading questions from local, state, and federal hearings—e.g., “What kind of books did you buy?”; “What do you think democracy is?”—which transform personal convictions into potential grounds for dismissal. - Rhetorical Urgency
The title’s refrain—“If we remain silent”—echoes throughout, warning that inaction opens the door to further witch-hunts. A quote from former Assistant U.S. Attorney General O. John Rogge drives home the pamphlet’s thesis: “If we remain silent too long, we will have forfeited our right to speak.”
Visual and Stylistic Elements
- Striking Cover Illustration
Merle Shore’s cover art depicts an anxious figure grasping a torn “Loyalty Oath,” while, in the background, men in dark uniforms interrogate another citizen. It underscores the pamphlet’s central message: silence in the face of authoritarian intrusion endangers everyone’s freedom. - Dramatic Headlines and Excerpts
Interior pages feature bold headings like “The People vs. Thought Control” and “On Trial—Ideas!” This heightened language reflects the era’s sense of crisis over McCarthyism and loyalty investigations. - Mix of Legal Citations and Personal Stories
The pamphlet weds references to Supreme Court precedents with anecdotal incidents, creating a compelling narrative that such laws are both unconstitutional and destructive to everyday lives.
Impact
If We Remain Silent… was part of a broader grassroots resistance to McCarthy-era loyalty tests. It aimed to unite labor unions, civil libertarians, and everyday citizens in challenging local and federal intrusions on free thought. While many loyalty programs persisted into the mid-1950s, publications like this helped galvanize public awareness and fueled legal battles that would, over time, limit the scope of ideological inquests.
The pamphlet stands as a relic of Cold War-era civil liberties activism. Its warnings about the dangers of unchecked government scrutiny remain resonant, reminding modern readers that freedom of speech and association can be precarious when political climates turn fearful.
Special thanks to the USC Digital Imaging Lab for their support in digitizing this item.
