See full scan at the bottom of the page.
This compact, two-page pamphlet—distributed by a group called American Women Against Communism—captures a tumultuous moment in mid-20th-century America. By invoking both patriotic ideals and warnings of subversion, it claims that U.S. citizens’ fundamental right to free expression is in jeopardy. Within a few paragraphs, it ties together fears of communism, lingering wartime alliances, accusations of “sedition,” and the perceived erosion of “loyal American” speech.
Historical Context
Although undated, the reference to an American military alliance with the Soviet Union places this pamphlet sometime toward the end of World War II or in the immediate postwar years. During this period, the U.S. found itself grappling with a paradox: the Soviet Union had been an ally against Nazi Germany, yet its communist ideology was increasingly viewed at home as a dire threat to American values. Organizations like American Women Against Communism flourished in that era, mobilizing around concerns that communists and other “foreign powers” were undermining the American system from within.
The text also alludes to a perceived continuity of external threats: both “NAZIS and COMMUNISTS” are cast as subversive. This worldview reflected a larger anxiety that political enemies—whatever their affiliation—would exploit American freedoms to dismantle the country from within.
Strategy and Purpose
- Emphasis on Free Speech as a Rallying Cry
The pamphlet uses the iconic language of Justice Joseph Story (a U.S. Supreme Court Justice in the early 19th century) to highlight that Americans are “rapidly being deprived” of fundamental First Amendment rights. By wrapping its argument in patriotic and constitutional language, the text seeks to galvanize readers who might already be wary of governmental overreach or perceived foreign plots. - Portraying Critics as Victimized Patriots
The document contends that citizens who speak out against communism are being labeled “Fascist” or accused of “cooked-up” crimes. This plays into a broader Cold War trope of “the silent majority” being too afraid to voice their anti-communist convictions for fear of social or legal reprisals. - Call to Action
It encourages readers to “DARE to speak the truth” and forward the pamphlet to their local newspaper editor. In other words, it’s not merely an informational handout—it’s an invitation to help spread anti-communist sentiment in the name of preserving free speech.
Language, Imagery, and Symbolism
- Patriotic Framing:
The pamphlet’s cover features a prominent American flag and strong purple borders, reinforcing a sense of national pride and duty. - Dramatic Rhetorical Questions:
Repeated “WHY—” queries highlight an alarmist tone, implying that foundational rights are under immediate siege and demanding urgent answers. - Conflation of Threats:
Both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are invoked as “recognized ENEMIES OF OUR REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT,” reflecting a deep-seated belief that any foreign ideology—despite past or current alliances—threatens American sovereignty. - Moral Absolutism:
The text portrays a stark division between patriotic Americans and subversive enemies. Ambiguity or nuance about war alliances or political beliefs is dismissed.
Impact
Pamphlets like this served to rally segments of the public who were already inclined toward conservative or nationalist positions. By branding themselves as “Loyal American Citizens,” organizations such as American Women Against Communism tapped into widespread fears that international and domestic forces could dismantle cherished liberties.
- Influence on Public Discourse:
Circulating in community centers, churches, and local media outlets, materials like this bolstered grassroots anti-communist activism and helped shape the postwar “Red Scare” environment, in which free speech debates became increasingly contentious. - Legacy in American Politics:
The tension the pamphlet highlights—between protecting free speech and stifling supposed subversives—remains a significant thread in U.S. political dialogue. Today, it underscores how the First Amendment can be embraced as a tool of both inclusivity and exclusion, depending on the ideological framing.
Despite its thin format, Free Speech: What Has Become Of It? is emblematic of an era when pamphleteers effectively harnessed patriotic imagery and alarmist language to shape public opinion. As a historical artifact, it illustrates how fears of communism intersected with questions of civil liberties, a debate that still resonates in discussions of protest, dissent, and national security.
Special thanks to the USC Digital Imaging Lab for their support in digitizing this item.
