Masters Of Deceit: The Story Of Communism In America And How To Fight It

by J. Edgar Hoover

""Masters of The Story of Communism in America and How to Fight It"" is a non-fiction book written by J. Edgar Hoover, the first director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The book was published in 1958 and provides a detailed account of the history and tactics of communism in the United States. Hoover argues that communism is a dangerous ideology that seeks to undermine American values and institutions, and he outlines the ways in which the Communist Party has infiltrated American society. The book covers a range of topics, including the origins of communism, the rise of the Communist Party in America, and the tactics used by communists to spread their ideology. Hoover also describes the ways in which the FBI has been working to combat communism and protect American democracy. Throughout the book, Hoover emphasizes the importance of vigilance and education in the fight against communism. He argues that Americans must be aware of the dangers of communism and must work to counter its influence in all areas of society. The book includes a number of practical suggestions for how individuals and organizations can take action to fight communism, including supporting anti-communist legislation and exposing communist propaganda. Overall, ""Masters of Deceit"" is a comprehensive and detailed account of the threat posed by communism in America. While some of the book's arguments and tactics may be controversial, it remains an important historical document that sheds light on a critical period in American Who is Your Enemy? How Communism Began; The Communist Appeal in the U.S.; Life in the Party; The Communist Trojan Horse in Action; The Communist Underground; Bibliography of Major Communist Classics.This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the old original and may contain some imperfections such as library marks and notations. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions, that are true to their original work.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Political Science, Canon, American History, Biography

384 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 1958

Reviews

[Patrick Sprunger · Rating 1 out of 5]

J. Edgar Hoover. Very complicated man.

Did not like communism.

Masters of Deceit is a period piece, from the right's most histrionic moment. With admiration for the (already disgraced) Senator Joseph McCarthy and just one year ahead of former President Truman's denunciation of the House Un-American Activities Committee, Hoover's credibility is suspect. Fifty years later, it is downright surreal.

I presume Hoover anticipated a bumpy ride on the promotion circuit. He comes out of the gate swinging, as if antagonizing the reader to form a hard, crusty defense-bias. Those who make it past the introduction may actually wonder if their bias wasn't misplaced. Despite being heavily edited affairs, Hoover's brief biographies of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin are at least as competent as a Conservapedia(.com) article. His assessment of the Soviet Union may have come right out of Darkness at Noon or Nineteen Eighty-Four (and thus not the product of original scholarship), but they are not overly hyperbolic.

In fact, the first half of Masters of Deceit is so dull, it probably loses a great number of readers to fatigue. This was the plan.

For those who stick it out to the 2/3 mark, the gloves come off! Hoover loses his mind in a delusional word salad. His arguments careen off each other, alternately making zero sense and cancelling each other out. He fails to make the red "menace" at all menacing. Cautionary examples are more vague anecdote than anything (there was this... uh... lady... and she was... uh... communist! And her family was... uh... sad... and had to eat cold sandwiches for dinner!).

His centerpiece - the one incident in which the author moves from the vague into the specific - tells the bonechilling tale of a local party cell's six year campaign to infiltrate a small labor union. After six years, the operatives held offices in the union. Then infighting caused their cabal to implode. From what I can tell, they didn't actually do anything devious. Unless, that is, one counts the unintelligent, bumbling oaf public enemy number one. It seems bringing America to its knees consists entirely of publishing newsletters with circulation numbers in the triple digits.

Since one must rule out the existence of any actual threat to describe, the reader immediately wonders what Hoover's mission was in publishing Masters of Deceit. It is as most already suspect: Hoover was a bigot and the most miserly species of right-wing hawk.

"The Party has operated hundreds of major fronts in practically every field of Party agitation: 'peace,' civil rights, protection of the foreign-born, support for (political) 'victims,' abolition of H-bomb tests, exploitation of nationality and minority groups." (213)

And labor unions. And charity. And... Well, you get the idea.

Translation: Hoover is opposed to "peace," civil rights, constitutional rights, labor/consumer protection, and charity. A group who distributed food assistance to flood victims (in a time when the federal government did not automatically fill the role) was dangerous. The Scottsboro Boys weren't the victims of Jim Crow, they deserved worse than what they got. Hoover is, in short, in contempt of all things contemporary Americans consider decent.

Why? What was significant in 1957 to stimulate publication of Masters of Deceit? As previously stated, Senator McCarthy was already in disgrace. A Republican (Eisenhower) was in the White House; the Senate was nearly perfectly balanced (Democrats had a one seat majority); Duane Eddy had a hit with his instrumental "Rebel Rouser" and The Olympics's baby liked "western movies." Everything seemed pretty groovy. Even if Hoover's fear was of a Democratic takeover, he had already served two Democratic presidents and a host of Democratic-controlled congresses (and would again). Nothing in his manuscript is critical of Roosevelt, Truman. He never mentions New Dealers like Averell Harriman or Rex Tugwell. The highest ranking government official Hoover mentions is former Vice President Wallace - for whom he's sympathetically forgiving for past "pink" transgressions.

My guess is that Hoover didn't criticize the Democratic party out of self-preservation and an acknowledgment that he, himself, is associated with some of its most celebrated years. Nevertheless, Masters of Deceit is an energetic, red-blooded, Republican panic attack for the most stalwart cold warrior. It's manic. It's crazy. It's hilarious at times. What, if anything, do modern readers stand to gain by undertaking it?

Well, Masters of Deceit is instructive into the way fearmongering works as a strategy. It also can be instrumental in evaluating the merit of fearmongering, when it is encountered in situ.

To determine if Hoover's theory of a communist threat is warranted, one may run a diagnostic of sorts: Hoover gives us the blueprint for communist takeover. Go through the steps in your mind and ask yourself if it could work - even in a vacuum. If it cannot (it cannot), the thesis must be false. Thus, the warning is almost certainly propaganda.

In practice, apply the same concept to any manner of conspiracy theory, from the sophomoric perception of President Bush's "oil wars" to Glenn Beck's own red scare. If the blueprint they provide could not work in practice, they are full of shit. Like J. Edgar Hoover.

Interesting. Complicated. Full of shit.

[Gator · Rating 4 out of 5]

Masters of Deceit was written by J. Edgar Hoover in 1958. Although some of this book is outdated I think it can be used nevertheless to understand what we as a country are still up against in 2019. Communism is a force to be reckoned with and should be studied by free people as to be aware of what it looks like. Masters of Deceit is a good title for describing communist and their subversive behavior. below are some lines and quotes from the book that rang true. If your are interested in studying communism, socialism, marxism, leninism... The Naked Communist by Skousen & Masters of Deceit by Hoover are a great pair of books to get you started on your journey.


-A sad group of recruits are simply the twisted, mixed-up neurotics. Perhaps as sons and daughters of well-to-do parents they harbor a "guilt complex" about the very privileges that America has given them. Or, because of some setback in life, they are angry at society and turn to communism as a way to "get even."

-Communism has something to sell to everybody. And, following this principle, it is the function of mass agitation to exploit all the grievances, hopes, aspirations, prejudices, fears, and ideals of all the special groups that make up our society, social, religious, economic, racial, political. Stir them up. Set one against the other. Divide and conquer. That's the way to soften up a democracy.

Lenin was more pointed:
"As long as capitalism and socialism exist, we cannot live in peace: in the end, one or the other will triumph..."
-V.Lenin

[Alan Humphreys · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most educational reads I have ever had the pleasure of picking up. This book, while it is non-fiction, was entertaining through and through. Written during a time when there was a great fear of communism, by a man who knew more about it more than probably anyone; this book was really eye opening. While we generally don't face a lot of the issues that they were presented back then, the early communist mindset is beginning to infect the youth of today, who will eventually lead the future of this nation. It is my personal belief that everyone my age should read this book cover to cover, as well as the Communist Manifesto, if only to be educated on Socialism, Communism, Capitalism, etc. Because, the youth of today just don't know. And it is completely necessary that they begin to.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the book Hoover produced at the height of the Cold War for all those loyal Americans who had been calling the FBI every week to denounce their neighbors as suspected Communists. At long last, they could have the straight dope from the Man himself about how to identify the Enemy in their midst. One would expect that a guy running a massive spying organization would be more interested in getting citizens to stop clogging up his switchboards by assuring them that, no, ma’am, your garbageman probably isn’t a communist just because he mentioned liking borscht. But, if anything, this book seems geared to add fuel to the fire – I suppose it justified his budget if their were more calls than his overworked staff could handle.

Hoover is somewhat different in disposition to the various cranks who wrote about Communism during this period, by virtue of the fact that he did have access to the mechanisms of power and the ears of Presidents of either party that gained office. As a result, he doesn’t throw around accusations of Communist infiltration in the State Department without any data to back it up. And he had some real data as well. Of course the Communist Party, USA had been a reasonably well-funded organization in the 1930s, did take orders from Moscow, and was about as rigidly hierarchical and authoritarian as Hoover claims. By 1958, it was mostly a disempowered group of hardcore believers and useless apparatchiks, but it was still active enough to manage something of a resurgence in the 1960s. And there had been spying incidents for the USSR as well; Soviet archives have since confirmed that Julius (if not Ethel) Rosenberg had passed along documents and that something odd was going on with Whitaker Chambers and Alger Hiss after all.

But, that’s not to say that this book really looks like a very good guide to preventing security breaches or slavish behavior in the Communist party. Rather, it seems to be a guide to identifying people that don’t quite “fit” into the dominant perception of “normality” in the late 1950s. Do you know a woman who works outside the home? The Communists probably ordered her to, so that the family could donate her wages to the Party. Does someone at your block entertain at late hours? Those may be Communist meetings, disguised as dinner parties. Did a co-worker recently sell his car and start riding the bus? The profit from the sale went to the Communists. And any indication of family problems or a family not living in accordance with the standard patriarchal hierarchy was a sure sign of Communism.

Today, this book can easily be read as a guide to what the ruling class of the time considered acceptable behavior, what the “dominant paradigm” was and how easy it was to deviate from that. That’s probably going a bit too far, however, because, for all of Hoover’s power and prestige, it can’t be assumed he represented the majority. His was not an elective office, and it would have taken an act of Congress to depose him, an act made all the less likely by the power he had to dig up dirty secrets about his opponents. Hoover probably believed that he represented “normalcy” as well as all the positive values of Christian, democratic America, but it is going too far to credit him as such. The 1950s were a far more diverse time than is generally realized, as many historians have since pointed out. However, it may also be said that some of the excesses of the Beats and jazz musicians and other rebels of the period were in reaction to the culture of Hoover, and were all the stronger for the power Hoover’s voice had. The real value of this book may be to understand why they was so angry.

[Julie Gayler · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is essentially Hoover’s propaganda to counter communism.

The first chapters dealing with history are the most interesting. I haven’t fact checked all of it, but he brings up a lot of relevant and summarized history of communism. I learned a lot, not so much from the book itself, but from investigation into the topics he was addressing.

As the book progresses, he runs on and on about generic and vague ways communism is harmful, with very few facts. If he had condensed all the factual information, it would be far more interesting — but, probably far less valuable as the intended propaganda.

I had to draw upon my reserves and determination of my intended purpose to read it. It was drudgery for the most part. To all the people who actually made it all the way through, every word...hats off to you. It was an ordeal at times.

I am glad I read the book as insight into his arrogant and paranoid nature. The way he addresses the issues is often condescending, as one might explain very basic principles to a child. I felt like that was his intended goal: break down the threat of communism in a way that all the ignorant masses could finally understand the dangers. The book offers a peek into the attitudes and paranoia of the Cold War. It’s valuable for that purpose, as it gives clear insight into the attitudes of the red scare from the top down.

A favorite moment for me was when he described the horrors of mothers so busy with the Party’s wishes, she had to give her poor husband and children cold sandwiches for dinner. Can you imagine?!

Read if you’re interested in this particular historical topic, and in the perspectives involved. Skip it if you’d rather miss out on very little information and much rambling propaganda on communism in America.

[John Lucy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Why the frick did I read this book? I'm still not entirely sure, but it has a lot to do with the fact that I was simply curious what J. Edgar had to say. And that is probably the only somewhat acceptable reason to ever read this book.

Most of the book applies only to that time period in which Hoover was writing. Not that communism has stopped existing or even lost its appeal, but the almost scare tactics and the almost conspiracy theory that Hoover uses don't really have a place in our world anymore. I mean, surely some people will find the book to the point, but those people have probably already learned enough about communism to form an opinion and then not bother with Hoover's book anyway. The book certainly doesn't bring you up to the present day, either, obviously.

I also can't help but think that Hoover could have done a whole lot better to give the reader a sense of authority. Yes, he was the director of the FBI at the time of writing, but he doesn't cite much of anything or tell you from where much of his quotations and things come.

What this book can be is an excellent introduction in learning how to write propaganda. I'm not saying one way or another whether Hoover was or is right about anything, but he certainly makes you think that he is obviously right and that you better start doing something about it. Read the book in that light and this can be fun at times.

[Alice · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a reread & I gave it 5 stars because for me this book frames that place in time & defines the mindset in much of America. In 1962 my school in suburban Chicago used Masters of Deceit as a text book. 7th & 8th grade Social Studies classes spent September thru December studying this book & the communist/socialist ideology. It was a big deal. The school board had to approve, the PTA had to approve. Were we too young to know these brutal truths they wondered. All adults involved decided this knowledge would save us from the Communists tricks. To my knowledge that was the only year that hatred & mistrust were taught in that school. Perhaps because some students became a little paranoid, some became bullying liars & tattletales just like J Edgar himself, and some having been introduced to new ideas sought out more. Many of us in the latter group became peace loving hippies, supporters of Socialized Medicine & card carrying members of the ACLU. My old teacher is most likely rolling over in her grave.

[Deborah · Rating 1 out of 5]

Dry reading.

Looking at this reading from a neutral point, it is a paranoid and detailed one sided detail of a feared government.

The account includes the history and origin of communism.

Even a capitalist economy can be perverted by those in power as we are now seeing in many countries.

[Linda]

Repetitious. Boring. Some surprises as far the Communist party, and history. Would not recommend it to anyone.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Communism is a direct assault on individual freedom.

Communism, an atheistic and materialistic philosophy, claims that man is only what he eats, that there is only a difference of degree, not an essential difference between human and other forms of life. Throughout history, man has been confronted with a nerve tending struggle against tyranny.

Communism is dedicated by ideology and practice to complete domination of the world and aims to destroy all other social orders and ti communique the entire world.

Freedom is dedicated to peace and liberty for human beings to pursue many goals.

Communism advances its cause regardless of any cost to and demand on the individual.

While, Freedom supports the right of the people of all countries to select their own social orders.

In order to keep freedom in the United States and other countries, one must fight against communism.

This book was extremely insightful on communism and shows Americans that with faith and dignity and worth of the individual, we can face the future with vitality and resolute purpose.

[Nathan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Hilarious or frightening, I can't tell which, and neither for the intended reasons. J. Edgar Hoover, if one reads anything about him written in more contemporary times, is known to be a bit, well, crazy. And no stranger to the use of propaganda. Interesting that he writes a book part of which is devoted to exposing the vicious propaganda plots of the communist sympathizers living in 1962's United States. It reads like one long paranoid rant. It also puts into perspective the atrocious gamut of distracting political books that come out each election cycle in America, books that put forth a lot of rhetoric and agenda, yet never seem to really anticipate where the world or the country is truly headed.

NC

[Catherine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good historical microcosm of the “patriotic”/pro-American psychology in response to the expanding/encroaching worldwide communist campaign. While an historical understanding of the Red Scare might not seem relevant, the analysis of the tactics and psychology of the communist machine is rather eye-opening in the 21st century, where many of these strategies, tactics, and propaganda are the meat and potatoes common fare offered by both “sides” of modern media (hello, agitation campaigns and victimhood reinforcement). Yes, there is a definite flavor of patriotic “us vs. them, and aren’t we glad to be us?” underscoring the whole book. But the nationalistic positivism, while a little Koolaid-y for anyone besides far right’ers these days, shouldn’t prevent a critical student of history to observe and take to heart as warnings the rather thorough analysis of how subversive entities systematically operate within societies to gain ground/clout on the unsuspecting masses.

[Darnoc Leadburger · Rating 3 out of 5]

When I admit that I read some weird stuff, people think I'm talking about all the science fiction; in reality, I'm talking about books like this, a piece of 1950s anti-Communist propaganda written by the then-director of the FBI (or his ghostwriter(s)). Why? Because it was cheap - a dollar at a senior center book sale, which was more of a waste of time than not in retrospect - and because it's a window into an interesting period of American history that I haven't experienced much about, especially as a twenty-year-old. I wouldn't say it was *that* informative - any book telling you to trust the FBI, or any branch of the government, because they wouldn't want to hurt you is peddling repugnant BS - but it was interesting, and even though it's hard to rate it on the same criteria one would rate fiction or legitimate nonfiction, I'll do my best.

The book is in seven parts. Part One, "Who Is Your Enemy?", is kind of a status update on where communism was at around the globe in 1958 which implies that the presence of any communism is a bad thing. Part Two, "How Communism Begins," was possibly my favorite part of the book. It presents relatively solid historical facts (although some fact-checking is probably still a good idea) about Marx/Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and the then-contemporary faces of the Communist party. There's also a once-over of their philosophy of the working-class proletariat and the oppressive upper-crust bourgeoisie who must be overthrown for the sake of common, or governmental, ownership of the means of production. Besides the traditional answer of "everything," what could go wrong? Part Three is "The Communist Appeal In the United States" and examines how American communists are made up of both homesoil converts and powers-that-be from Communist countries who all parrot lines about being for equal rights when they really want to spread an insidious foreign agenda. Some of those homesoil converts people might mean well and believe the lies, and some may even "break from" Communism. There are numerous anecdotes of good people being brainwashed and good people leaving the communist party to tell the FBI all they know about their pamphlet-making activities or whatever the Hell it is they did.

"Life in the Party" talks about how the American Communists are used, and how their lives - from marriages to moving to employment - are controlled by Party handlers, who may ask them to work full-time for them in shadow positions or this or that. It's oppressive and shadowy and fittingly cartoonish; there's a certain film of unreality not smoothed over by "The Communist Trojan Horse in Action" and its explanation of how communists want to infiltrate higher and higher levels of elected office while making misleading promises to minorities like black Americans about all they will (or won't) do for them while also hating Jews. After trying to win over the support of minority readers, Part Six is about "The Communist Underground," which largely parrots stuff from "Life in the Party" while finally soliciting readers to report suspicious behavior that they see, which was surprisingly the first time Hoover asked us to keep tabs on our proverbial neighbor. Finally, "Conclusion" wraps this all up in a bow.

*Masters of Deceit* is a readable book; I'll give Hoover and the team credit for that. It isn't a dry and stuffy government document, and you can feel the author's sincerity whether it was there or not as it it written with a certain casual flair that you might read in a blockbuster at the time. It is also a little less fearmongering than I expected; other historical documents from this era make it seem like a more back-stabbing place than Hoover would apparently have had you believe, in this book at least. I didn't, however, find that it left a huge impact on me - it was easy to read, but it didn't want to stay between my ears, possibly because the messaging was a lot of the same thing repeated over and over again and the anecdotes were probably as fictional as you can get. I didn't buy a lot of Hoover's words, at least the ones that praised the American government - sure, we're better than the Russians, but are we really that commendable? - but I shouldn't be reading this as if he was trying to convince me. Instead I should ask, "Would this have convinced someone from the 50s?" My answer? "Hell if I know." I know it was a solid read that informed me in some regards, but not one that I think other people should read for context or something like that.

Still, this is a historical document - not a traditional work of nonfiction - and hence, I guess I'll give it a 6.5/10. My reading of it was solid and I got some things from it, but there was no overwhelming allure that compelled me about it; it was fine. I don't know when the next time I'll read something like this is, but hopefully it's a little more.... genuine? As I said earlier, "Hell if I know." Give this a read if you're curious about the time and politics, but otherwise, you probably don't need to read this in order to feel fulfilled with your life or even your worldview.

[TJ · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this book very interesting. It's amazing to me that propaganda works, but this book details how it was being done in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s.
What started as a fifth column effort by Communist Russia shortly after their revolution gradually grew to be a large group of people working toward revolution here.
The USSR fell since this book was written of course, but echoes of those misguided folks and their work are around today.
The techniques described in this book are still used effectively, which I find disheartening. Open almost any newspaper and you'll see examples. Everyone should be educated to look for the signs that they are being manipulated or lied to.

[Nelson Minar · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book back in high school as part of research for my US History term paper. And absolutely loved it. It's so bonkers! The whole idea of a Communist Menace meeting in secret in American living rooms, disconnected cells of 3-5 people discussing such horrible ideas as sharing wealth and guaranteeing basic social services. Also destroying America and turning it red, or something.

Of course this book isn't just bonkers, it's also evil. And Hoover's part of the Red Scare in the US is evil. But even as a teenager it was obvious to me this book was just crazy. Maybe that's what historical distance allows.

[RebL · Rating 2 out of 5]

I found this in with my dad's books. I believe he bought it when he went to visit his sister and her husband, who worked for Hoover, in Washington D.C. about the time of its publication, or else possibly my aunt and uncle gave it to him. It sat at the bottom of a bookcase at our house my whole life, but I never saw it leave the shelf until we boxed up his things when he died.

Written at the height of McCarthyism and published a mere four years after the death of Joseph Stalin, this is a fascinating peek into the mid-century anti-Red mindset. But honestly, here in the year 2023, after having seen the fall of the Soviet Union and how capitalism has dug its heels in more firmly than ever in the history than ever, all I have to say about it is "LOL". This book is ridiculous fear-mongering through and through.

[Frederick · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a surprisingly well-written book. It is filled with information the FBI gleaned from studying the Communist Party in America. I was amazed at Hoover's clear, balanced writing and the way he did not overdo the warnings he gave. As well, I was equally surprised at the FBI's efforts to clear people falsely accused of being in thrall to the Communist Party and its master, Stalin. I think this book is necessary reading for any student of the Cold War and, in fact, any student of American History. It will serve as a great reference book as well. His history of Communism was excellent. He also gave a great appraisal of American values without ignoring our misdeeds and failures.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dated now, of course, but good for a slice of 1940's - 1950's history of some counterespionage information about Communism and its workings in the United States. A lot of people here spied for the USSR. They got the atomic bomb and hydrogen bomb secrets and much else for a minimum of time and money, and that wherewithal affected the geopolitical world in many ways.

For a good historical perspective, the reader might consult Tim Weiner's "Enemies: A History of the FBI". Both books are free at archiv.org .

[Jose · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rings as true today as then , excellent information on organizing, fronts and philosophies and Modus Operandi of the "party" it's dupes, fellow travelers, sympathizers. Although dated and the name of the game has changed many of the buzzwords floating around now have been historically hijacked by this ideology. The book is highly recommended reading, a classic explaining terms. Any student of history and politics should read it lest he fall for the trap of buzzwords which have a secret meaning and/or links to such subversion.

[Kathy · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.41 / 5

It's hard for me to assign a rating to this book because I did not read this book for novelty entertainment. Though the book was 100% propaganda, I didn't read it to strengthen nor disavow my existing feelings about Communism and its implications on a free nation. I simply read it because I was curious about Hoover and his state of mind at the apex of his career before shit went south.

I learned more about this man from between the lines of this book than from any documentary I've watched on him. This book served its purpose.

[Kenneth · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read a library copy of this book when I was approximately junior high age, back in the day and thought it was awesome at the time, hence my 5 star rating. It must be remembered that it was written during the Cold War and that American Communists were believed to be working with the USSR against American interests (rightly so, in my opinion to this day). In any case the book reflects the 1950's and its politics and attitudes.

[Melissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting read. Author gives the reader a detailed description of what communism is and what their playbook is. From a book written in the 50’s I can definitely see things happening today that follow the communism plan. It’s a constant struggle to fight it. In the 50’s the author felt that Americans could step up and fight this. Today I think it’s more difficult, many are blind to their tactics.

[Victor · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great book about the devastating effects of Communism when enacted within a state. Hoover provides a great analysis on the history of Communism and the destructive consequences it has upon a country's economy and the people's standard of living. Hoover has written a compelling read that sheds light upon the insidious ideology that 'wants equality for all'.

[Janis · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm adding this book which I'm guessing I must have read back in 1962. Back then, I thought it was quite the book--in my defense, I was in 8th grade! Since then Hoover and much of what he did and said has lost it's credibility. It certainly kept my interest at the time though, so it must have been decently well-written.

[Joan Kark · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this when I was 12 years old in 1960. What I remember most about it was the idea that any of friends or neighbors could be Communists. As I watch the impeachment proceedings, I am so struck by the Republicans who support a president who seems to work at the behest of the Russian government, not communist but sinister all the same.

[Anthony · Rating 4 out of 5]

There was a lot in this book that can be applied to todays current issues. Also the reader is able to have a lot of reflection on these past events, and what can be learned from the similarities between then and now. It gives plenty of context that left me feeling more aware of the issue of communism as a whole. Bottom line if you love democracy it’s a very good read.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’d love an updated version. The principles remain true, in that revolutionaries always talk about building after burning and they never get to the building part. It’s so much easier to blame someone prosperous than work on yourself. But I lost interest 20 pages before the end.

[Terry Burgess · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very hard read. Repetitive in parts

[Red · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very informative book. Very relevant to today's world. He handily exposes the evil of communism. It's worth a read folks.

[April Strickland · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hoover was successfully canceled by the original cancel culture, but his contribution is undeniably important.