In this typewritten letter on personal stationery from Patrick J. Frawley Jr.—then Chairman of the Board of Schick Safety Razor Company and Technicolor Corporation—the author urges the recipient to read You Can Trust the Communists (to be Communists) by Dr. Fred Schwarz.
Stating that the book is “one of the best documents” on stopping “the inroads of atheistic Communism,” Frawley highlights religion as a powerful organizing force and encourages individuals of all faiths to fight Communism “individually for maximum effectiveness.”
Historical Context
During the mid-20th century, the fear of Communist expansion, both at home and abroad, was a defining feature of American politics and society. From the McCarthy era in the early 1950s to the escalation of the Cold War into the 1960s, private citizens and business leaders alike formed or joined anti-Communist networks that promoted “American values,” which typically included religious devotion. Entrepreneurs such as Patrick Frawley Jr.—whose companies spanned diverse industries—sought to influence public opinion and policy, making explicit religious appeals to counter what they saw as the “godless” threat of Soviet influence.
Dr. Fred Schwarz, the author cited in Frawley’s letter, was an Australian physician who became a prominent anti-Communist activist in the United States. Schwarz’s Christian Anti-Communism Crusade, founded in 1953, held mass rallies and published tracts designed to alert Americans to the perceived dangers of Communism. His book You Can Trust the Communists (to be Communists) was widely distributed and repeatedly championed by conservative figures, including Frawley.
Strategy and Content
- Religious Framing
Frawley highlights Schwarz’s assertion that religion is among “the most powerful motivating forces” in the fight against Communism. In a period when American identity was often bound up with religious faith, linking anti-Communism to church membership was a potent strategy. - Appeal to Civic Duty
The letter constructs anti-Communist action as a patriotic obligation. Frawley calls the threat of “atheistic Communism” the most pressing issue facing the nation, implying that every American, from layperson to corporate executive, shares responsibility for resisting it. - Mobilization Through Dissemination
By sending a copy of Schwarz’s book and soliciting the recipient’s feedback, Frawley encourages the formation of an informal reading network. He explicitly requests that the recipient recommend the text to “all with whom you come in contact,” effectively co-opting grassroots circulation methods to spread the message. - Personalized Persuasion
Frawley’s own success as the head of major companies—Schick Safety Razor and Technicolor—adds an air of executive prestige and business acumen. In Cold War America, the business leader was frequently seen as a cultural influencer, conferring legitimacy on the anti-Communist cause.
Language, Imagery, and Symbolism
- “Atheistic Communism”
By underlining Communism’s hostility toward religion, the letter offers a stark moral dichotomy: God-fearing Americans vs. godless collectivists. This framing resonates strongly with faith-based audiences and intensifies the perceived threat. - Urgent, Existential Tone
Frawley calls the penetration of Communism into American life “the most important question facing the American people.” Such sweeping language underscores the high stakes and compels the reader to treat the matter with equal gravity. - Deference to Shared Values
The request that “all religions should fight individually for maximum effectiveness” embraces a broad religious coalition while tacitly aligning them under a universal patriotic banner.
Impact and Relevance
While it is difficult to quantify the direct influence of Frawley’s letter, it exemplifies the symbiosis between business leaders and grassroots anti-Communist movements of the 1950s and 1960s. Such correspondence helped rally like-minded citizens, contributed to political pressure on policymakers, and reinforced a cultural equation between Americanism, capitalism, and religious faith.
The letter also captures the era’s combustible blend of corporate power, national identity, and ideological fervor. In many respects, it foreshadows the modern practice of CEOs speaking out on hot-button social or political issues. Then as now, such communications strive to shape public opinion—and potentially legislation—by aligning a brand or a prominent individual with a cause that resonates with a significant portion of the American public.
Special thanks to the USC Digital Imaging Lab for their support in digitizing this item.
