See full scan at the bottom of the page.
In the midst of America’s Cold War–era crusade against communism, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) loomed large in U.S. political life. Formed in 1938, HUAC rapidly expanded its investigative mandate after World War II, probing alleged “subversive” activities in government, labor unions, entertainment, and everyday communities. However, by the 1960s, public opposition to the committee’s methods was growing.
This pamphlet—produced by the National Committee to Abolish HUAC—reflects a determined effort to speak out against what critics viewed as HUAC’s abuses of power and violations of constitutional rights.
Historical Context
Established as a permanent committee in 1945, HUAC’s mission was to uncover Communist influence within the United States. Over the following decades, it held numerous high-profile hearings and investigations, which detractors argued relied on fearmongering, blacklists, and intimidation rather than fair legal processes. Presidents John F. Kennedy and Harry S. Truman, both quoted in this pamphlet, were among those who challenged HUAC’s ethos. By the mid-1960s, civil liberties advocates, religious groups, and various civic organizations increasingly rallied to terminate or curtail the committee.
This pamphlet from the National Committee to Abolish HUAC situates itself within that growing resistance. Citing the costliness of HUAC’s investigations in taxpayer dollars, it questions whether the public was truly getting its “money’s worth.” Moreover, it highlights prominent Americans—ranging from trade unionists to religious figures—who were willing to speak publicly about their opposition to the committee.
Strategy and Rhetorical Approach
The piece adopts a pointed, confrontational style that seeks to awaken public consciousness. The bold question—“Do YOU control HUAC, or Does HUAC control YOU?”—directly challenges the reader, appealing to their sense of personal agency and self-determination. By invoking the voices of President John F. Kennedy (“Unscrupulous demagogues have used the power to investigate as tyrants…”) and President Harry S. Truman (“The House Un-American Activities Committee is the most Un-American thing in America today”), the pamphlet leverages high-profile endorsements of its cause.
In addition, it offers practical next steps: readers could request speakers, attend events, or directly engage with the National Committee to Abolish HUAC. By emphasizing the range of notable Americans—from various political and social strata—lining up against HUAC, the publication attempts to legitimize and galvanize broader opposition.
Language, Imagery, and Symbolism
- Photographs of Respected Public Figures: John F. Kennedy and Harry S. Truman appear prominently, their images and quotations conveying moral authority.
- Typography and Layout: The large capitalized letters (“H U A C”) and rhetorical questions create visual emphasis and underscore the urgency of the appeal.
- Evocative Photographs: One particularly striking image shows a protestor being dragged by authorities, captioned “San Francisco’s infamous ‘Black Friday’ in 1960 demonstrated the anti-democratic nature of HUAC.” This visual underscores the committee’s alleged brutality and feeds the narrative that HUAC stifled free speech.
Each of these elements serves to frame HUAC’s tactics as unconstitutional, financially irresponsible, and harmful to fundamental American principles like free expression and fair inquiry.
Impact
Pamphlets like this one served as rallying cries and educational tools, inviting the American public to question HUAC’s legitimacy. While HUAC lingered for several more years, culminating in its dissolution in 1975 (by then renamed the Internal Security Committee), growing activism against it played a key role in undermining the committee’s once-dominant influence.
The National Committee to Abolish HUAC’s direct and action-oriented language set a template for future activism challenging government overreach. In a broader sense, these materials remind modern audiences of the delicate balance between national security interests and constitutional rights—an issue that remains relevant whenever governments wrestle with perceived internal threats.
Special thanks to the USC Digital Imaging Lab for their support in digitizing this item.
