So Long, 1933

Damon Runyon

Wilkes-Barre Evening News/January 1, 1934

Now what of sport of 1933? Well, you remember the old story of the young man who was bankrolled by his pals to go to a far city to play the noble game of faro. He was an expert player, the game was reported thriving in the alien sector, and they expected nice dividends from their investment.

Not hearing from the young man for some time after his departure, the pals wired him one day:

“How is the game?”

Back came the terse replay:

“Game good, send more money.”

That is about the way it was with sport in 1933.

Artistically, sport was even more successful than usual in 1933. Financially, it was a flop. With the ides of December, the professional promoters, at least, were absolutely convinced that the big money days of sport are definitely over, something they had commenced to suspect several years ago.

And yet o’er an amateur field that had been darkened by gloom spread a new glow. I here refer to college football, which took a sound leathering at the box offices in 1932. The stadiums began filling up again in 1933, with crowds of 80,000 on several suspicious occasions.

East and West.

To my mind, the highlight of the year was the winning of the National League pennant and the world’s series by the New York Giants under “Memphis Bill” Terry. This was a case where the rank outsider came dashing home the winner. It was the most spectacular baseball event in years, yet many empty seats yawned at New York and in Washington.

Drama, and perhaps a touch of tragedy, was provided by Mrs. Helen Wills Moody, one of the greatest woman tennis players this country has ever produced, when she walked off the tennis courts, suddenly and without warning, while in competition against Mrs. Helen Jacobs, leaving her title to her sister Californian.

Mrs. Moody was ill—has been ill ever since, in fact. Physically, she was unequal to the task she imposed upon herself. She was rather more severely criticized in some quarters than I thought she deserved, and that was the tragedy in the passing of a great champion.

Notre Dame Drama

Another tremendously dramatic event of the year was the astounding victory of Notre Dame over Army’s unbeaten football horde before a huge crowd in New York. Notre Dame’s team went through one of the most disastrous football seasons in its history. Yet by a tremendous rally in the final quarter Notre Dame emerged victorious, though it seems that wasn’t enough to save the job of “Hunk” Anderson, its head coach successor to the football immortal, Knute Rockne, for soon afterwards Anderson was evicted, and Layden, one of Rockne’s celebrated “Four Horsemen,” takes over the job. 

Another stirring chapter in football events of 1933 was the rise of Princeton, after a dolorous gridiron period that extended over several years. Under a bustling new football coach, “Fritz” Christler, the Nassau Tigers wound up undisputed champions of the collegiate East.

They could have had the invitation from Stanford for the Rose Bowl game that went to Columbia but Princeton has an agreement with Yale that prevents post-season games. Thus Columbia received the distinction of being the first New York City team to be invited to the Rose Bowl. It was beaten only by Princeton during the season. Stanford ended the championship regime of University of Southern California on the West Coast. It had commenced to look as if Howard Jones’ men were permanent champs.

The boxing game remains very sad. Primo Carnera won the heavyweight championship of the world by flattening Jack Sharkey, who got the title from Max Schmeling. Before the Carnera-Sharkey fight, Jack Dempsey, the old Manassa Mauler, came to New York and promoted a battle between Max Schmeling and Max Baer. Taking that match was one of the few managerial errors ever credited to Joe Jacobs, manager of the German. He could have grabbed Sharkey instead, and would have regained the title, as Sharkey seems to be all washed up.

Baer Real Contender

Baer knocked out Schmeling, and became the foremost contender for the big title, but he immediately stopped fighting and went into the movies. Madison Square Garden has a contract on Carnera, the champion. Baer says he will not fight Carnera unless Jack Dempsey has “a piece” of the promotion.

The Garden says it doesn’t care for any partners.

Barney Rosa, a young Chicago Hebrew, won the lightweight title from Tony Canzoneri, and successfully defended it against Tony later on. Jimmy MacLarnin became the welterweight champion by beating Young Corbett III, and then hung up his gloves for a long, long recess. Vincent Dundee arrived at the middleweight title, on a pretty fair claim thereon. Freddie Miller disputes the featherweight title with Kid Chocolate and Kid Chocolate was knocked out by Canzoneri in an overweight match.

But nowhere did these various events attract any considerable attention—or money. Especially money. Baer and Schmeling drew the top gate of the year, $200,000, yet the promoters failed to make any profit, while Carnera and Sharkey turned up one of the lowest heavyweight championship “takes” in years, though the show made upwards of $35,000.

The indoor boxing receipts fell off woefully all over the country. The public definitely soured on the boxing game. Whether or not it will ever come back remains to be seen. There are very few drawing cards in the game, and these drawing cards rarely appear. Most of the big arenas that were thrown up in various cities throughout the country on the flood tide of interest in boxing have been bankrupt for some time.

Professional football continued its steady growth during 1933. The “exhibition” form of wrestling, which thrived enormously for a time, continued to draw, but not like it did in the beginning. And in general, sport probably had less to kick about than any other field dependent upon public patronage for its livelihood.

Nothing Doing in Dade County

Damon Runyon

Wilkes-BarreEvening News/January 20, 1934

It is my painful duty to report to the boys around Lindy’s and other points of the Broadway sector, that there is nothing doing down here.

The boys will understand what I mean.

There is golfing, swimming, dog racing, racing, fishing, boating, bridge, pinochle, casino, boxing, aviation, jai lai, wrestling, football, baseball, hunting, eating, drinking, smoking, et cetera, but otherwise, there is nothing doing.

I mean if you are dying, and a little whirl at Mr. Pharaoh’s bank would save your life, you would have to go right ahead and croak as far as Dade County, Florida, is concerned. It sounds heartless, perhaps, but that’s the way it is down here, boys.

Why, I have just learned that an old stickman has been chased out of town because a cop overheard him muttering to himself “’He’s coming out, men,” and all the poor old stickman was doing was exercising his voice so it would not get rusty.

Nary a Wheel Turns

Nary a wheel turns in all the broad confines of Dade. I mean roulette wheel.

Of course, if you like punch boards, you can get a little action around here. There are also several spots along the boulevards where optimistic blokes will bet you they can guess your weight. But they will not bet enough to make it worthwhile to have a pair of shoes made with leaden soles, You finally have to fall back on the horses and dogs. Well, they’re tough enough at that.

Speaking of the horses, Bill Dwyer’s Tropical Park, which opened Dec. 30, has been handling on an average of around $116,000 per day, with a high handle so far of $161,157. On that basis Bill ought to make a little money. He was mighty dubious about the early opening to which he had been forced by the distribution of racing dates down here, but it looks now as if they did him a favor.

Speaking of Dogs

Speaking of the dogs, I attended the opening of the Miami Beach track the other night, and you could scarcely budge for the mob. And this is only one of three dog tracks in operation here. 

The Miami Beach track by the sad sea waves, was originally part of that great dream of George Tex Rickard’s who visioned Florida as the sporting playground of these United States. A big gambling casino was included in the dream.

It was with mainly the idea of bringing crowds to Florida that Rickard promoted the Sharkey that some of the folks might drift into the dog track and the casino while waiting for the fisticuffing to begin. Tex died here following an operation for appendicitis, and his pugilistic promotion rolled on into a $400,000 gate, proving that he was a canny dreamer.

Misses Boom Rush

It is a pity that Tex couldn’t have lived to see the boom-time rush that is now surging into Miami and stacking up against the pari-mutuel windows at the horse and dog tracks. I am inclined to think that the crowd here right now exceeds the unexpected jam at the place last year and they tell me that the official season is just about starting.

It is said that the dog and horse track people do not want the open gambling that has prevailed hereabouts in other years in almost every year, in fact, up to the last year. Their reasons are logical enough. The open gambling seeps in money that might otherwise find its way into the maws of the mutuels. The business people never did care much for the open gambling, and for that matter some of them are not so fond of the mutuels, though they accept the latter as a sort of necessary evil.

Love for Honky-Tonks 

So the open gambling seems to have no friends except the lovers of the picturesque like your correspondent. I used to love those honky-tonks over the garages with the croupiers in full cry. There have been rumors from time to time that a few of the “first class” places might be permitted to turn a casual card and wheel, but I fear there is no hope for the good old honks.

No community that didn’t get in plenty of fresh money every few days could stand the pari-mutuel grind that goes on in Miami at the horse and dog tracks, day and night, for four solid months. It would “milk” any ordinary city dry in a short time. But here the money comes in from all over the country, and new bankrolls are arriving by every train.

Who Goes Nazi?

Dorothy Thompson

Harper’s Monthly/August, 1941

It is an interesting and somewhat macabre parlor game to play at a large gathering of one’s acquaintances: to speculate who in a showdown would go Nazi. By now, I think I know. I have gone through the experience many times—in Germany, in Austria, and in France. I have come to know the types: the born Nazis, the Nazis whom democracy itself has created, the certain-to-be fellow-travelers. And I also know those who never, under any conceivable circumstances, would become Nazis.

It is preposterous to think that they are divided by any racial characteristics. Germans may be more susceptible to Nazism than most people, but I doubt it. Jews are barred out, but it is an arbitrary ruling. I know lots of Jews who are born Nazis and many others who would heil Hitler tomorrow morning if given a chance. There are Jews who have repudiated their own ancestors in order to become “Honorary Aryans and Nazis”; there are full-blooded Jews who have enthusiastically entered Hitler’s secret service. Nazism has nothing to do with race and nationality. It appeals to a certain type of mind.

It is also, to an immense extent, the disease of a generation—the generation which was either young or unborn at the end of the last war. This is as true of Englishmen, Frenchmen, and Americans as of Germans. It is the disease of the so-called “lost generation.”

Sometimes I think there are direct biological factors at work—a type of education, feeding, and physical training which has produced a new kind of human being with an imbalance in his nature. He has been fed vitamins and filled with energies that are beyond the capacity of his intellect to discipline. He has been treated to forms of education which have released him from inhibitions. His body is vigorous. His mind is childish. His soul has been almost completely neglected.

At any rate, let us look round the room.

The gentleman standing beside the fireplace with an almost untouched glass of whiskey beside him on the mantelpiece is Mr. A, a descendant of one of the great American families. There has never been an American Blue Book without several persons of his surname in it. He is poor and earns his living as an editor. He has had a classical education, has a sound and cultivated taste in literature, painting, and music; has not a touch of snobbery in him; is full of humor, courtesy, and wit. He was a lieutenant in the World War, is a Republican in politics, but voted twice for Roosevelt, last time for Willkie. He is modest, not particularly brilliant, a staunch friend, and a man who greatly enjoys the company of pretty and witty women. His wife, whom he adored, is dead, and he will never remarry.

He has never attracted any attention because of outstanding bravery. But I will put my hand in the fire that nothing on earth could ever make him a Nazi. He would greatly dislike fighting them, but they could never convert him. . . . Why not?

Beside him stands Mr. B, a man of his own class, graduate of the same preparatory school and university, rich, a sportsman, owner of a famous racing stable, vice-president of a bank, married to a well-known society belle. He is a good fellow and extremely popular. But if America were going Nazi he would certainly join up, and early. Why? . . . Why the one and not the other?

Mr. A has a life that is established according to a certain form of personal behavior. Although he has no money, his unostentatious distinction and education have always assured him a position. He has never been engaged in sharp competition. He is a free man. I doubt whether ever in his life he has done anything he did not want to do or anything that was against his code. Nazism wouldn’t fit in with his standards and he has never become accustomed to making concessions.

Mr. B has risen beyond his real abilities by virtue of health, good looks, and being a good mixer. He married for money and he has done lots of other things for money. His code is not his own; it is that of his class—no worse, no better, He fits easily into whatever pattern is successful. That is his sole measure of value—success. Nazism as a minority movement would not attract him. As a movement likely to attain power, it would.

The saturnine man over there talking with a lovely French emigree is already a Nazi. Mr. C is a brilliant and embittered intellectual. He was a poor white-trash Southern boy, a scholarship student at two universities where he took all the scholastic honors but was never invited to join a fraternity. His brilliant gifts won for him successively government positions, partnership in a prominent law firm, and eventually a highly paid job as a Wall Street adviser. He has always moved among important people and always been socially on the periphery. His colleagues have admired his brains and exploited them, but they have seldom invited him—or his wife—to dinner.

He is a snob, loathing his own snobbery. He despises the men about him—he despises, for instance, Mr. B—because he knows that what he has had to achieve by relentless work men like B have won by knowing the right people. But his contempt is inextricably mingled with envy. Even more than he hates the class into which he has insecurely risen, does he hate the people from whom he came. He hates his mother and his father for being his parents. He loathes everything that reminds him of his origins and his humiliations. He is bitterly anti-Semitic because the social insecurity of the Jews reminds him of his own psychological insecurity.

Pity he has utterly erased from his nature, and joy he has never known. He has an ambition, bitter and burning. It is to rise to such an eminence that no one can ever again humiliate him. Not to rule but to be the secret ruler, pulling the strings of puppets created by his brains. Already some of them are talking his language—though they have never met him.

There he sits: he talks awkwardly rather than glibly; he is courteous. He commands a distant and cold respect. But he is a very dangerous man. Were he primitive and brutal he would be a criminal—a murderer. But he is subtle and cruel. He would rise high in a Nazi regime. It would need men just like him—intellectual and ruthless. But Mr. C is not a born Nazi. He is the product of a democracy hypocritically preaching social equality and practicing a carelessly brutal snobbery. He is a sensitive, gifted man who has been humiliated into nihilism. He would laugh to see heads roll.

I think young D over there is the only born Nazi in the room. Young D is the spoiled only son of a doting mother. He has never been crossed in his life. He spends his time at the game of seeing what he can get away with. He is constantly arrested for speeding and his mother pays the fines. He has been ruthless toward two wives and his mother pays the alimony. His life is spent in sensation-seeking and theatricality. He is utterly inconsiderate of everybody. He is very good-looking, in a vacuous, cavalier way, and inordinately vain. He would certainly fancy himself in a uniform that gave him a chance to swagger and lord it over others.

Mrs. E would go Nazi as sure as you are born. That statement surprises you? Mrs. E seems so sweet, so clinging, so cowed. She is. She is a masochist. She is married to a man who never ceases to humiliate her, to lord it over her, to treat her with less consideration than he does his dogs. He is a prominent scientist, and Mrs. E, who married him very young, has persuaded herself that he is a genius, and that there is something of superior womanliness in her utter lack of pride, in her doglike devotion. She speaks disapprovingly of other “masculine” or insufficiently devoted wives. Her husband, however, is bored to death with her. He neglects her completely and she is looking for someone else before whom to pour her ecstatic self-abasement. She will titillate with pleased excitement to the first popular hero who proclaims the basic subordination of women.

On the other hand, Mrs. F would never go Nazi. She is the most popular woman in the room, handsome, gay, witty, and full of the warmest emotion. She was a popular actress ten years ago; married very happily; promptly had four children in a row; has a charming house, is not rich but has no money cares, has never cut herself off from her own happy-go-lucky profession, and is full of sound health and sound common sense. All men try to make love to her; she laughs at them all, and her husband is amused. She has stood on her own feet since she was a child, she has enormously helped her husband’s career (he is a lawyer), she would ornament any drawing-room in any capital, and she is as American as ice cream and cake.

II

How about the butler who is passing the drinks? I look at James with amused eyes. James is safe. James has been butler to the ‘ighest aristocracy, considers all Nazis parvenus and communists, and has a very good sense for “people of quality.” He serves the quiet editor with that friendly air of equality which good servants always show toward those they consider good enough to serve, and he serves the horsy gent stiffly and coldly.

Bill, the grandson of the chauffeur, is helping serve to-night. He is a product of a Bronx public school and high school, and works at night like this to help himself through City College, where he is studying engineering. He is a “proletarian,” though you’d never guess it if you saw him without that white coat. He plays a crack game of tennis—has been a tennis tutor in summer resorts—swims superbly, gets straight A’s in his classes, and thinks America is okay and don’t let anybody say it isn’t. He had a brief period of Youth Congress communism, but it was like the measles. He was not taken in the draft because his eyes are not good enough, but he wants to design airplanes, “like Sikorsky.” He thinks Lindbergh is “just another pilot with a build-up and a rich wife” and that he is “always talking down America, like how we couldn’t lick Hitler if we wanted to.” At this point Bill snorts.

Mr. G is a very intellectual young man who was an infant prodigy. He has been concerned with general ideas since the age of ten and has one of those minds that can scintillatingly rationalize everything. I have known him for ten years and in that time have heard him enthusiastically explain Marx, social credit, technocracy, Keynesian economics, Chestertonian distributism, and everything else one can imagine. Mr. G will never be a Nazi, because he will never be anything. His brain operates quite apart from the rest of his apparatus. He will certainly be able, however, fully to explain and apologize for Nazism if it ever comes along. But Mr. G is always a “deviationist.” When he played with communism he was a Trotskyist; when he talked of Keynes it was to suggest improvement; Chesterton’s economic ideas were all right but he was too bound to Catholic philosophy. So we may be sure that Mr. G would be a Nazi with purse-lipped qualifications. He would certainly be purged.

H is an historian and biographer. He is American of Dutch ancestry born and reared in the Middle West. He has been in love with America all his life. He can recite whole chapters of Thoreau and volumes of American poetry, from Emerson to Steve Benet. He knows Jefferson’s letters, Hamilton’s papers, Lincoln’s speeches. He is a collector of early American furniture, lives in New England, runs a farm for a hobby and doesn’t lose much money on it, and loathes parties like this one. He has a ribald and manly sense of humor, is unconventional and lost a college professorship because of a love affair. Afterward he married the lady and has lived happily ever afterward as the wages of sin.

H has never doubted his own authentic Americanism for one instant. This is his country, and he knows it from Acadia to Zenith. His ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War and in all the wars since. He is certainly an intellectual, but an intellectual smelling slightly of cow barns and damp tweeds. He is the most good-natured and genial man alive, but if anyone ever tries to make this country over into an imitation of Hitler’s, Mussolini’s, or Petain’s systems H will grab a gun and fight. Though H’s liberalism will not permit him to say it, it is his secret conviction that nobody whose ancestors have not been in this country since before the Civil War really understands America or would really fight for it against Nazism or any other foreign ism in a showdown.

But H is wrong. There is one other person in the room who would fight alongside H and he is not even an American citizen. He is a young German emigre, whom I brought along to the party. The people in the room look at him rather askance because he is so Germanic, so very blond-haired, so very blue-eyed, so tanned that somehow you expect him to be wearing shorts. He looks like the model of a Nazi. His English is flawed—he learned it only five years ago. He comes from an old East Prussian family; he was a member of the post-war Youth Movement and afterward of the Republican “Reichsbanner.” All his German friends went Nazi—without exception. He hiked to Switzerland penniless, there pursued his studies in New Testament Greek, sat under the great Protestant theologian, Karl Barth, came to America through the assistance of an American friend whom he had met in a university, got a job teaching the classics in a fashionable private school; quit, and is working now in an airplane factory—working on the night shift to make planes to send to Britain to defeat Germany. He has devoured volumes of American history, knows Whitman by heart, wonders why so few Americans have ever really read the Federalist papers, believes in the United States of Europe, the Union of the English-speaking world, and the coming democratic revolution all over the earth. He believes that America is the country of Creative Evolution once it shakes off its middle-class complacency, its bureaucratized industry, its tentacle-like and spreading government, and sets itself innerly free.

The people in the room think he is not an American, but he is more American than almost any of them. He has discovered America and his spirit is the spirit of the pioneers. He is furious with America because it does not realize its strength and beauty and power. He talks about the workmen in the factory where he is employed. . . . He took the job “in order to understand the real America.” He thinks the men are wonderful. “Why don’t you American intellectuals ever get to them; talk to them?”

I grin bitterly to myself, thinking that if we ever got into war with the Nazis he would probably be interned, while Mr. B and Mr. G and Mrs. E would be spreading defeatism at all such parties as this one. “Of course I don’t like Hitler but . . .”

Mr. J over there is a Jew. Mr. J is a very important man. He is immensely rich—he has made a fortune through a dozen directorates in various companies, through a fabulous marriage, through a speculative flair, and through a native gift for money and a native love of power. He is intelligent and arrogant. He seldom associates with Jews. He deplores any mention of the “Jewish question.” He believes that Hitler “should not be judged from the standpoint of anti-Semitism.” He thinks that “the Jews should be reserved on all political questions.” He considers Roosevelt “an enemy of business.” He thinks “It was a serious blow to the Jews that Frankfurter should have been appointed to the Supreme Court.”

The saturnine Mr. C—the real Nazi in the room—engages him in a flatteringly attentive conversation. Mr. J agrees with Mr. C wholly. Mr. J is definitely attracted by Mr. C. He goes out of his way to ask his name—they have never met before. “A very intelligent man.”

Mr. K contemplates the scene with a sad humor in his expressive eyes. Mr. K is also a Jew. Mr. K is a Jew from the South. He speaks with a Southern drawl. He tells inimitable stories. Ten years ago he owned a very successful business that he had built up from scratch. He sold it for a handsome price, settled his indigent relatives in business, and now enjoys an income for himself of about fifty dollars a week. At forty he began to write articles about odd and out-of-the-way places in American life. A bachelor, and a sad man who makes everybody laugh, he travels continually, knows America from a thousand different facets, and loves it in a quiet, deep, unostentatious way. He is a great friend of H, the biographer. Like H, his ancestors have been in this country since long before the Civil War. He is attracted to the young German. By and by they are together in the drawing-room. The impeccable gentleman of New England, the country-man—intellectual of the Middle West, the happy woman whom the gods love, the young German, the quiet, poised Jew from the South. And over on the other side are the others.

Mr. L has just come in. Mr. L is a lion these days. My hostess was all of a dither when she told me on the telephone, “ . . . and L is coming. You know it’s dreadfully hard to get him.” L is a very powerful labor leader. “My dear, he is a man of the people, but really fascinating.“ L is a man of the people and just exactly as fascinating as my horsy, bank vice-president, on-the-make acquaintance over there, and for the same reasons and in the same way. L makes speeches about the “third of the nation,” and L has made a darned good thing for himself out of championing the oppressed. He has the best car of anyone in this room; salary means nothing to him because he lives on an expense account. He agrees with the very largest and most powerful industrialists in the country that it is the business of the strong to boss the weak, and he has made collective bargaining into a legal compulsion to appoint him or his henchmen as “labor’s” agents, with the power to tax pay envelopes and do what they please with the money. L is the strongest natural-born Nazi in this room. Mr. B regards him with contempt tempered by hatred. Mr. B will use him. L is already parroting B’s speeches. He has the brains of Neanderthal man, but he has an infallible instinct for power. In private conversation he denounces the Jews as “parasites.” No one has ever asked him what are the creative functions of a highly paid agent, who takes a percentage off the labor of millions of men, and distributes it where and as it may add to his own political power.

III

It’s fun—a macabre sort of fun—this parlor game of “Who Goes Nazi?” And it simplifies things—asking the question in regard to specific personalities.

Kind, good, happy, gentlemanly, secure people never go Nazi. They may be the gentle philosopher whose name is in the Blue Book, or Bill from City College to whom democracy gave a chance to design airplanes—you’ll never make Nazis out of them. But the frustrated and humiliated intellectual, the rich and scared speculator, the spoiled son, the labor tyrant, the fellow who has achieved success by smelling out the wind of success—they would all go Nazi in a crisis.

Believe me, nice people don’t go Nazi. Their race, color, creed, or social condition is not the criterion. It is something in them.

Those who haven’t anything in them to tell them what they like and what they don’t—whether it is breeding, or happiness, or wisdom, or a code, however old-fashioned or however modern, go Nazi. It’s an amusing game. Try it at the next big party you go to.

First American Army in England Plan of Bullock

by Westbrook Pegler

Muscatine News-Tribune/May 31, 1971

Lieutenant Colonel C. Seymour Bullock, of the Canadian army, former Chicago clergyman, has completed organization plans for the first all-American army, to be formed in England to fight under the Stars and Stripes in France. If congress will accept this means of speedily placing the flag in the trenches the force will be constituted as a unit of the United States army, with a strength of 10,000 seasoned American officers and men from the British front. It is hoped to add to the strength at least 2,000 more from the civilian American population of Great Britain and France.

Colonel Bullock has enlisted Consul General Skinner of London in support of his plan. The Consul-General forwarded the suggestion to Washington and Bullock, through his acquaintance with Senator Smith of Michigan and former Representative Gardner of Massachusetts, hopes to receive the necessary authorization from congress. 

The 10,000 men will not be sent to France in a body. It is intended to take over only a small sector of the line manned by one battalion of Americans, about 1,000 men. The remaining troops will be held in England as a reserve force to be drawn upon for reinforcements when casualties are suffered. As casualties average about 50 per cent of a fighting force for every 45 days of aggressive fighting, there will still be a reserve of almost 5,000 men when the American million is ready to sail for Europe.

Officers are plentiful among the American soldiers in Europe. The names already registered with Colonel Bullock include officers from 18 states, the Philippines and Alaska. Privates in one Canadian battalion alone come from 43 states, Alaska, Porto Rico, the Philippines and Cuba. The new force will be especially well-off for machine-gun officers and crews and members.

The allied armies have drawn a total of 30,000 Americans since the war began. The extent of their casualties can be estimated from the conservative optimism of Colonel Bullock. He asserts that every “Yank” now fighting under a foreign flag is impatient to get into American khaki. Yet his highest estimate of the number obtainable is 10,000 officers and men. However, the missing 20,000 are not necessarily killed. Many have been discharged through wounds and others have been captured.

Remembering Hearst

Westbrook Pegler

Monroe (LA) News Star/August 17, 1951

New York. Aug. 17.— William Randolph Hearst was a great patriot who tried to keep the United States out of both world wars. Had he been able to persuade the Wilson administration to redeem the Democratic party’s campaign slogan of 1916, “He kept us out of war,” Mr. Hearst probably would have forfended World War II and the now descending doom of this republic in the political, economic and military showdown with the Soviet empire. Instead, Wilson hurtled into the first world war within a few months after he had been re-elected.

Wilson and Franklin D Roosevelt were toadies in their secret hearts who felt inferior to European royalty and other dignitaries of state. They were not of the people. They felt themselves to be superior to the American people and manipulated and exploited them to show off to European rulers. The Korean war is a consequence of the second world war, which was the first one.

Our press has a habit of referring to Bernard M. Baruch as a venerable elder statesman and an adviser of presidents. The two presidents who would seem to have listened most attentively to his counsel were the two presidents who pushed the United States into those wars. We have never been taken into the intimacy of those counsels between Mr. Baruch and presidents Wilson and Roosevelt so we do not know what advice he gave them. On results, assuming that they took his advice, it would seem to have been faulty counsel, whereas Mr. Hearst continually tried to arouse public opinion against disastrous decisions. He was ignored.

In September, 1914, as the infatuation of American dollar-aristocrats on the eastern seaboard grew more and more intolerant of straight American patriotism, Mr. Hearst wrote: “The war in horrifying progress in Europe is, in reality, that most dreadful of all wars, a civil war. It is a war between states which should be living in peace and amity, in cooperative effort, in intellectual and material progress and even in governmental accord as ‘the United States of Europe.’ . . . Accumulated treasures of centuries are being destroyed whose elevating and civilizing influence will forever be ended in the world. It means a diminution of the number and a weakening of the power in the world of the white nations — of the occidental nations, of which we are one. It means an assault; on the standards, the ideals, the conditions of life which have been the contribution of those occidental nations to the civilization of the world. It means a corresponding strengthening of oriental aims, ideals and ambitions. It tends to make possible an eventual triumph of ideals and conditions wholly foreign and offensive to our own.”

Mr. Hearst was a fighter of tremendous bold courage. His newspapers were burned and barred from newsstands. His supplies of raw paper were threatened. He took boycotts and fought back. His reporters were thrown out of England. Still he fought to warn the people of the United States of the horrible folly of Wilson’s course. Many young Americans who would soon be floundering in mud, sleeping in wet soldier suits, in drafty French barns in winter, dying in battle or in the pestilential camps where flu wiped out thousands of them, despised Hearst as a pro-German traitor. They hated with furious intensity a man who was trying to save them and their country.

A week later, Mr. Hearst wrote: “Truly, as Kipling says, ‘The Hun is at the gate’ but the Hun comes not, nor ever has come, from Germany, nor from any part of Europe but will come, as he has in the past, in almost irresistible tides of invasion from the interior of Asia.”

During Roosevelt’s war, the American and British military planners had this thought in mind in planning to keep the Asiatic Russian hordes at bay on the eastern borders of Poland and to keep western Europe secure in occidental hands. Roosevelt, Truman, and General Eisenhower made the western forces hold back while Stalin first slaughtered the Polish patriots and then accepted with surly condescension the gift of Anglo-Saxon eastern Europe, which occidental troops had won for him.

In 1917, Mr. Hearst wrote: “The United States is a republic but the United States went into this war without having secured the consent of its people or having sought to secure their consent, although it had two and one-half years to do so.”

At any time down to the very hour when congress yielded to British and French propaganda and declared war by joint resolution, the people would have voted to stay out of Europe’s war. Germany was not threatening the United States, but American war profiteers were selling food and munitions to the British while we submitted to their blockade around Germany. Naturally, the German U-boats began to sink the ships. Germany was hungry and our munitions were killing her boys, as fine as any crop of boys on earth, although they differed from their enemies in some superficial ways.

“The white races are blinded by the fury of their internecine strife,” Mr. Hearst wrote in 1918. “What does it matter how the white races are grouped among themselves? In any case, the white man’s civilization. the white man’s religions, the white man’s standards of living and morals will be maintained and that is all that counts. The whole program of the white nations is along the path of democracy to higher humanitarian ideals and more just and equal social and political conditions. Oriental­ism. on the contrary, means despotism.”

In 1941, Winston Churchill belatedly had the same idea—too late. In all such discussion Mr. Hearst implied the inclusion of the American Negro population in this “white” nation. The distinction he drew separated the Occident from the Orient. In September, 1939. he wrote: “We can keep out of the war if we want to. Europe could keep out if it wanted to. There is no situation in Europe which could not have been solved by the peaceful discussions which the president urged. But war is in no sense inevitable here.” Mr. Hearst encouraged labor unions when that was a very unpopular cause. When unionism ran riot he advocated compulsory arbitration through courts to be established for that special purpose. Of the strike of the Boston police in 1919, he wrote: “It is an utterly intolerable thing that such trusted public servants should seek to render allegiance to some class organization superior to that which they render to the whole public.”

On immigration he frankly noted in 1940 that “It no longer takes courage and character to come to a great unknown and undeveloped land called America.”

“America,” he said, “is a reasonably rich and well-developed country. It is the safest country in the world to live in. There is no longer need to incur danger or even to strive strenuously. Now America is a developed continent where living is soft and pickings are easy. Is it not time we considered more thoughtfully what kind of American citizens we should select for our safety and stability? We do not want social malefactors or political traitors. We do not want the refuse of Europe — the sewage and the garbage. We do not want the Communists and the criminals.”

We have no successor to William Randolph Hearst. Journalism never produced his equal. Had the country been given the wisdom to heed Hearst and the “visionary crackpot,” Henry Ford, who earnestly tried to get the boys “out of the trenches by Christmas” in 1915, the doom of western civilization would have been averted.

America’s Fighting Army In Need of Men and Supplies

Westbrook Pegler

Salina Daily Union/August 31, 1917

The army behind America’s fighting army needs men and supplies. It is tackling the stupendous job of supplying the fighting forces with scanty doles of labor and material.

Throughout a trip along the “line of communications” concluded today, the most frequent assertion encountered from army men was:

“Someone is asleep at home. The army needs masses of labor—especially carpenters and joiners—and vast supplies of all descriptions. Now is the time to send them, when transport of troops is not occupying the bulk of the tonnage.” 

After six months, the rear organization of the American army is a mere framework. 

The United Press correspondent has lived for a month with the American troops in the training camp. The men are physically and mentally almost ready to fight. But a tour of hundreds of miles of the American bases gives the striking impression that the rear organizations are far behind their combatant brothers. 

For instance, a certain base bakery is of makeshift appearance. It shows a couple of rows of field ovens. The bakers until a few days ago lived in tents. The flour supply looks big to the casual observer but the lowering flour sacks dwindle into molehills in comparison with the amount every army officer knows must be constantly forthcoming. 

A hard-working reserve captain showed me over the food magazine—from which he is constantly drawing. The building is only fair sized and yet it is less than half filled. 

French female labor is doing stevedore work for this American army in the rear, trundling crates of canned food and supplies, because of the shortage of American military labor. 

The American medical base is apparently the only one which has benefited to the fullest possibilities since the war. They have sufficient supplies and forces to cope with extraordinary casualties and illness for three months. However, shortage and cramping even here is causing the storage of a big portion of valuable medical supplies in unwalled and un-floored sheds. 

I found the aviation center grimly amusing to leisurely German prisoners thereabouts. Scores of patriotic alert young Americans are training at French air schools hoping to obtain repatriation and join the American forces when they attain proficiency in the air.

Mass Perversion in the Roosevelt-Truman State

Westbrook Pegler

Montana Standard/April 20, 1940

The hesitant discussion of sexual depravity in the Roosevelt-Truman bureaucracy, brought to public notice by the dismissal of 91 perverts in the State Department alone, has elicited interesting comments and some references which seem to cast light. Mr. Truman, of course, inherited the corruption. It took root and flourished under Roosevelt.

Morris L. Ernst, a pushful New Deal satellite, will do as one witness to set forth and explain the attitude of the New Deal culture toward the queers. Mr. Ernst has been a busy man in many affairs. He was counsel in the legal complication involving the lamasery on Riverside drive where Henry Wallace made speculative advances toward Oriental deities and his guru, Nicholas Roerich. He was counsel for the Newspaper Guild in the period of its hottest Communist infestation. He was a member of President Truman’s civil rights committee, which promoted the proposition that government should compel employers to hire persons obnoxious to them.

Mr. Ernst nevertheless found time to devote his mind studiously to sex and commit his findings, many of them elusive, to paper. His books include “To the Pure,” “The Sex Life of the Unmarried Adult” and, latest on this preoccupation, “American Sexual Behavior and the Kinsey Report.” In this little work, Ernst remarks angrily that only recently a committee on human reproduction was set up to seek answers “to some of the unknown questions as to how babies are born.” Very soon however, he is expertly discussing sexual practices which, far from propagating people, actually frustrate propagation. The western peoples, he says, have sought to impose their “pattern” or sexual morality, which he calls “customs,” on the rest of the world.

“As if,” he adds, “only one set of sexual customs was either desirable or natural,” from which I earnestly infer that he regards as “desirable” and “natural” some “customs” which are by religion, morals and law abhorrent to western peoples. If he so regards those “customs” then, as an authoritative New Dealer, he has at least established a base. In that case, we know what the New Deal morality really is. In that case, we can understand why abnormality flourished in the State Department, to say nothing of other departments, and why those Americans who are aghast at the revelations are in turn reviled as ignorant hypocrites.

“The Kinsey report shatters some of that complacency,” Mr. Ernst writes. So we were complacent and the word “complacency,” as used here, seems to despise us for a provincial bigotry. In Greece, he says, homosexuality was “an accepted outlet” and, “so far as we can tell, neither the strength of the Greek race nor the standards of its culture suffered.” Except that the race vanished, Mr. Ernst might have something there, but I find more interesting the author’s attitude toward the “outlet.”

“Our habits,” he says, “both of thinking and acting, have been so conditioned by the blind acceptance of standards fitted to another age that we do not know what a practical attitude toward sex behavior should be. What is normal? What is moral? What is pure? How much of the legal code dealing with sex is sensible? What is healthy?” He rejects judges, doctors and clergy as authorities on normality, morality, purity and good sense in law. In particular, he holds in contempt “celibates” who “have been the most dogmatic expounders of the normal and moral.”

Who then, however, would Mr. Ernst prefer — prostitutes, homosexuals and other perverts as arbiters of sexual behavior? Them and Mr. Ernst? The proportion of his writing on sex to the whole of his opera would thrust him into prominence. He is an authority. A New Deal moralist.

Although this book was published in 1948, long before the disclosure of the condition in the State Department, Mr. Ernst, by the merest accident, no doubt, seems to anticipate that explosion and to enter a plea long in advance. Speaking of the historic scandal in Kaiser Wilhelm’s court, he says there is difficulty in deciding whether public outcry is based primarily on the outrage “said to have been done to public opinion” or on a desire for political advantage.

Taking leave of Mr. Ernst, I now refer to a letter from a noted American reporter who has spent many years in Europe, especially Germany. He was a friend of Maximilian Harden, the journalist who exposed the perverts in the Kaiser’s court. Harden’s motive was “political” but in a patriotic sense. “Politics” is the science of government and Harden realized that this condition among the men who manipulated the Kaiser was dangerous to Germany. Had the perverts vanished when they were warned, Harden would have made no scandal.

My correspondent in Germany writes: “You say 91 homosexuals have been dismissed from the State Department in the last three years. What a terrible state of morals in our government. Is it confined only to the State Department? Not likely. Homosexualism is worse than Communism. It changes the mentality, blurs morality and the outlook, not only on sex but upon life, ideals, principles and scruples. It is a cancer. That is why I am so troubled that it has made such inroads in our State Department. Blackmail through threats of exposure is a powerful weapon often used to make a victim do a thing he does not want to do.”

But, see, this is the outmoded superstition or a Victorian bigot. If we consult Mr. Ernst, “such customs” do not “blur morality” and the outlook on sex, life, ideals, principles and scruples. On the contrary, it is the western “pattern” of sexual morality which blurs morality and the outlook. Abandon that “pattern” and the blur is cured and a beautiful, spiritual, intellectual and sexual existence comes into clear focus.

But Mr. Ernst himself seems confused and other-handed, for he follows these remarks with this one: “It Is not suggested that on the basis of these facts we change our standards, our ideals or even our laws.”

Tom Pendergast Gives Good, Rotten Government

Westbrook Pegler

El Paso Herald/February 21, 1938

KANSAS CITY, Feb. 21.—Here is a paradox for you. Tom Pendergast, the Democratic boss of Kansas City, gives good, rotten government, and runs a good, rotten city whose conventional Americans o the home-loving, baby-having, 100-per-cent type, live on terms of mutual toleration with wide-open vice and gambling.

Kansas City has been described as an overgrown trading post on the frontier, but that figure does justice to neither the facts nor the town. She is not a post at all, but a great city whose reputation has suffered from the inclusion in her name of “Kansas,” a word signifying thin-lipped social bleakness, prohibition, and an aversion to the pleasures of others. Kansas City is more like Paris. The stuff is there, the gambling joints and the brothels, including among the latter, a restaurant conducted in imitation of that one in Paris, more haunted by American tourists than the Louvre, where the waitresses wear nothing on before and a little less than half of that behind. But, like the Parisians, the people of Kansas City obviously believe that such things must be and, like the Parisians, are proud of their own indifference.

Their Side of the Story

Mr, Pendergast is an old-time saloon-keeper, and similar in some respects to Frank Hague of Jersey City. He is religious, rich and a benevolent despot in his relations with his loyal subjects, but he lacks Hague’s vindictiveness toward those who have the audacity to fight him. They differ again in their attitude toward prostitution, for Hague will not tolerate the business at all, whereas Pendergast treats it as part of the routine commerce of a big city.

His men claim that he absolutely refused to let his organization accept any graft, or “lug” as it is locally known, from prostitutes or brothel keepers, and would break any subordinate who should, but, of course, that is only their side of the story, hard enough to believe in any case, but the more so when the same men claim that he also forbids the collection of any “lug” from the gamblers.

Although he put off his apron and laid aside his beer mallet long ago, Mr. Pendergast is still operating in liquor and beer, being agent for various lines of merchandise, which naturally enjoy a strong preference in the cafes and saloons of the merry city on the edge of the Kansas desert. He generally permits other brands to be sold, but the loyal saloonkeeper knows whose line of grog and brew is worse.

Argues for His Concrete

Mr. Pendergast also sells ready-mixed concrete in vast quantities for public and private works, but at any suggestion of  monkey business, he is prepared to argue that his concrete is good concrete, and that his prices are the lowest and his facilities the best.

The police force is entirely political, every cop is beholden to some leader for his job, and removable or otherwise punishable on demand of the same one who appointed him, subject, however, in extreme cases, to Mr. Pendergast’s decision on appeal. The firemen are similarly situated. The individual cop could never have the audacity to demand money from a gambling-house keeper, for example. The operator would thing he was crazy. He doesn’t have to bother with cops. He does business with the organization, and a policeman might as well try to shake down the Santa Fe Railroad or a big department store.

But in spite of all this Mr. Pendergast runs a good town, with efficient public services and with comparatively little violent crime. Kansas City has adopted the old St. Paul and Toledo system of permitting criminals to relax and frolic without molestation, with the understanding that their activities while in town must be entirely social.

Of course, the machine will steal an election if necessary or just for practice. Sometimes the boys steal when there is no need and some outlandish totals have been rolled up when it would have been wiser to stand on an honest plurality.

Songs of the Sammies

Westbrook Pegler

Albany Daily Democrat/December 28, 1917

Old Ding Dong is still running around the trenches—a marked rat.

He is a big fellow, even for a trench rat, and the average trench rat grows as big as a Shetland pony, according to the Sammies.

A youthful infantryman caught him around one night as the big fellow scampered about the dugout. The Sammy was standing guard, and not being very busy guarding, he got a Y-shaped tree branch and clamped the Y over the rat’s neck.

With the rat held helpless he tied a little bottle around its neck and turned the animal loose again.

The next occupants reported that the rat was still an inmate of the dugout. And the Sammies have named him Ding Dong because the bottle sounds like a bell when it strikes the flooring.

There’s No Doubt About the Vote of the Canucks

Westbrook Pegler

Calgary Herald/December 14, 1917

Conscription in Canada will win in a walk if the sentiment of Canadians among the American military now “over there” can be regarded as a barometer. Simon-pure Americans in the expeditionary force rooted out all their Canadian pals today and cheered them as they entered the polling booths to vote on the question. Out in front of one polling place a red-haired New Yorker, formerly a Tammany Hall soap-box orator, pulled an impromptu election speech from the tailboard of a supply wagon. “What will happen if conscription loses in Canada?” he demanded. “Why, the Canadian corps will melt from the line like snow before an Indian summer sun. Am I right?”

“Of course you’re right,” came the yell from the line.

“You’re doggone right I’m right,” replied the orator.

“And what will the kaiser say if conscription loses? Why, he would smile and say, ‘Hindy, old boy, we have licked Canada.’ Am I right?”

“Of course you’re right,” was the reply.

“What will happen if you boys vote conscription? Why, this time next year we’ll be jumping around the kaiser’s throne-room in Berlin and the kaiser will be asking the New York street commissioners for a job pushing a broom. Am I right?”

Again the shout came back, “Of course you’re right.”

“You’re doggone right I’m right,” yelled the New Yorker in conclusion, and the crowd melted away to polling booths.