editor-in-chief of the dalia color. >> host: allan ryskind author of blacklist screenwriters agents of stalin allies of hitler. that kind of sums it up. thanks for coming on. it's certainly jarring. agents of stalin allies of

hitler. >> but it's true. when i talk about it each and every one of them but i'm talking about are members of the communist party in the united states that you have to be loyal to the soviet union. so when hitler decided to make his alliance in the soviet union not only was it to be pro- hitler but the members in the united states in hollywood as well and they are going to be making a movie picture of it by the way.

he was one of the greatest apologists in this time. have which i go into in some detail. >> host: in and the forgotten chapter i think -- >> guest: the fourth american writers which were held i guess it was in new york that they had these conferences and i go into detail and show how they were on the side of adolf hitler. what they did was be a demonize and it was a pariah country so far as the hollywood left was concerned in the wake of the fourth week of the fourth american writers congress and all these people on england

saying that england is the enemy, not hitler. >> host: so this is after the pact of 1939 so by that point it is clear it's already happened. he's already shown aggression toward his neighbors and these are people who are reading the newspaper every day and know that if they are taking hitler. >> guest: many >> guest: many people were jewish and the point is that they were willing to do it and when they made the deal with stalin, first of all they would get the eastern half in the

baltic states you could have all of that. that is a fairly good deal so far as many of the people were concerned but the point is what it is unleashed world war ii. everyone understands that in 1939 that was one of the factors eight days later hitler and dana stalin was going to support him. that's why he made that deal with stalin. he invades poland and takes the western half and then england and france said over and over again they are going to declare a war if he invaded because they've taken over austria and the rest of czechoslovakia. he was the prime minister at the time and said if you go into

poland now that is exactly what happens. and the next year it's western europe and they congratulate them and it's why all this is going on and figure taking over europe. >> what are the allies saying? >> guest: they are undecided and if you read what they are doing i imagine the league of the american writers where they have all sorts of people who are from hollywood and they are all taking seats and it became what i call the super isolationist plaintiff -- point out the unc can't do anything to go after

hitler into power to bring fascism to the united states. you have to remember this was all prior. >> host: what happened to the league after? >> guest: it changed its name. it existed to some extent but it was no longer. all of the mobilization committees and in the league of american writers and all these groups now have the super isolationist plaintiff view. he is not the problem.

as soon as they were doublecrossed. the invasion takes place and it's a total shock. how long before stalin's allies picket and become pro- war. they have the whole thing fully against the invasion of the united states helping out england and even though it is a life and death struggle june 8 i think it was 1941 when the

league of american writers folded the tent after three days of bashing england. and then two weeks later something like that hamlet says forget about what he just said that england, they actually get support. we don't worry about it. it's no longer the imperialist country that we said it was. this is the way to fight hitler. even though they had invaded at this point and went against the soviet union because he had basically lost the air force and was unable to do so so therefore she said i'm going to invade russia instead. and at that point he was out of

danger but these people say we have to fight. give us your aid. >> host: so these are people taking about foreign policy from the foreign cover. >> guest: to be a member of the party, and this is what people don't understand and for the radio talk shows i've been on, they don't understand. they think it is a communist party. what is the difference. but the point is to be a member of the communist party you have to have your allegiance to the government. >> we go into this about how they came to the united states and actually talked to the people. hollywood ten were on the side

which turned out to be eissler and he escaped and ended up in east germany. >> host: there were many on the american left who had the affinity of the the depths of depression in 1933. but this is much later than that. this is after the trials for example. americans understood stalin was a dictator, didn't they? >> guest: it hurts the communists. the head of the party in hollywood he said that the worst mistake the communists made was the line with hitler. he said they lost a lot of credibility at that point.

if they hadn't aligned themselves with hitler it would have been much better. they would have still felt they needed are pretty good after all. but i agree. he was a famous journalist and a key worked with the united press over there in the soviet union. he came back and wrote a book that outlines all of the various crimes. so the point is about what do people know about it certainly the alliance that was credible by the way because he had been persevered and what here's a good journalist and when he's all he said all these things people have to listen. i think that he was the one who

was important in helping change the american opinion. but so far they still like the soviet idea and the socioeconomic idea. there was no question. but in terms of hollywood and improved people, no question about that but because of the pack no question about it. but let me go through something else. first of all as i said there's a movie coming out the editor of the publication of the screenwriters guild. >> screen writers guild.

>> host: and a very talented guy. >> guest: no question about it. but he was the editor of the major publication. by 1944 was a prominent screenwriter. all of the information is coming out in suggesting somehow the communist party really wasn't a threat in hollywood but the people were innocent. i am saying my dad joined the

screen writers guild and started out as a left-wing. of course in the latter part of his life he was all conservative but when he was in new york -- he was part of the left-wing. but my dad also did a number of plays at the time and he won a pulitzer prize and then my dad did a couple of musicals and came out to hollywood when he cannot to hollywood he was a --

that was permanent. he was all in favor of the screen writers guild and was basically a product of the left. there is no question about that but he liked the idea that it was a good idea. but the point is he went in and he found he had some socialist friends but he goes into the screen writers guild and he sees that they are a minority and he talks about that. he didn't like the way they operate at all, they were in lockstep and they would try to intimidate the non-communist members of the board of the governing board and then they would use all of these delay tactics when they thought that

the order was basically to force them to go home and then there would be a resolution or something like that and they were also on the side of running for office and they were defending the criminal enterprise and the soviet union. so he didn't like that at all. in hollywood it's actually controlled. it's dominated by the communists and he was doing the screenwriting publication.

i had a chapter in my book about the screenwriter and all of that and he was praising them and all of that and they used the vehicle to damage the reputations of people and that kind of thing and then you could hear so and so talk about the soviet man and have the head of the counterparty in hollywood and he would tell you about that kind of thing. then he is also the managing editor and my dad would come home and they wouldn't speak to each other at all.

my dad had some sort of funny comment when he actually testified in 1947. he said that this will not help the relations. and it didn't help. ireland of him talking to me about it and that sort of thing. i saw gordon and all of that but my dad found out how and why he was and wasn't using so i just thought that was an amusing anecdote to -- >> host: so he was called back to testify.

>> guest: what happened was it was the first major committee meeting and the first hearing on communism in hollywood and people think of as joe mccarthy and the committee. he had nothing to do with it, he didn't begin until 1950 and i hate to say it but even bill o'reilly gets it wrong. they are managed to misconstrue what's happening all the time and of course this has nothing to do with joe mccarthy but the point is the point he viewed as an anti-communist bully and people say joe mccarthy had it so therefore they just say -- it was a witchhunt. but basically what happened in 47 is that the house committee

basically 19 people from hollywood only 11 testified and they became famously known as the hollywood ten. a lot of people like that for the top guys. we asked them a question very politely you have to remember this is during the cold war. and we know what stalinist like. they've taken over people the soviet union was the enemy and basically stalin had declared that we were the enemy and the point is they were members of the conspiracy that's loyal to

the soviet union and that country wishes to destroy the united states argue a member of that particular group and they didn't ask it in that way they said are you a member of the communist party. it is a question about the membership. you have to be loyal. they have a construction in the communist party which if you deviate from it is out of the party. it was controlled by the basically controlled by the communist party in new york and he would take over messages.

i didn't originate. it wasn't my -- >> host: but this came to light after 91 the collapse of the soviet union. >> guest: much of this came before all that and that's what people don't understand and people on the house committee and the senate committee all had these wonderful hearings which they demonstrate. but anyway, we are back to the fact that instead of just even politely saying we are at war we are not or we don't think that his constitutional you have no right to ask us they heard all kinds of the words i guess you could say in their rhetoric against the people that ask the question and --

>> host: they went right back at the members of congress. >> guest: yes. he was the young chief investigator. they answered the question and the point is that what happened even though hollywood paints a totally different picture removing people arbitrarily they wouldn't answer the question finally.

that's actually -- wasn't from the superiors clicks >> guest: they had communist lawyers and all that and in his memoir he says they chose this idea but then they wouldn't answer the question. he said that's what happened. but at the time the point is they acted in such a provocative way and people heard them on the radio and the news and all that and the fact is the studio who hadn't wanted the hearings in

the first place my dad actually was was presented before he went and said we don't want you going there. and they acted in such a provocative manner that in fact all of the rest of us were asking in a very calm and judicious manner and then the americans for democratic action approved of liberalism at the time but you couldn't belong. they actually advertised. they were still on his side. and when they acted provocatively, the producers

said this is terrible for us. if you were part of the conspiracy you can't work in hollywood and that's how the blacklist began. that's what it was. >> host: who made the decision, the studio is clicks >> guest: that's what they came out with him all of them have they didn't want anything that they said look we have to do this because otherwise -- >> host: the so-called hollywood ten who refused to cooperate, they went to jail? >> guest: they went to jail for contempt of congress because they used the first amendment. they talked about the first

amendment. >> host: how long did they go? >> guest: 11 months, ten months but the point is they keep talking about the first amendment but the fact is you can somehow refused to answer whether you are a member of the party or the plan or anything else and you can't say i won't answer the question because i'm pleading the first amendment. there is always a check. the fifth amendment is different. it's a result of this particular hearing and because they went to jail for contempt of congress, the courts or the lawyers said how about the fifth amendment. can we use the fifth amendment and then we don't have to justify clicks yes you can do that is on the self-incrimination i refuse to answer. that's like testifying against

yourself but you can't use the first amendment. and that is of course what happened. the major hearings that was going to cause all sorts. you had humphrey bogart and celebrities and he came to washington and they were wanting to get rid of the house committee and also wanted to support all the people that were being questioned from the hostile witnesses that were being questioned so that became a big brouhaha. he somehow had a soft spot i don't know why but he did and nevertheless he had created for committee for the first amendment and they were

cosponsors of the celebrities that came here. but as a result of those hollywood hearings in the house committee, the communists lost out. imagine before in terms of the studio unions and then they were churning out the films talking about how wonderful the agricultural program was and the plaintiffs it's just unbelievable but anyway after those hearings because of the blacklist people of hollywood and the screenwriters guild they had an election and of the

unions he was a major union leader and they were on their way out after the hearings and then the plaintiffs people don't realize this but in the book it reminds me of the good guys and they did the right thing. >> host: it's kind of hard to debate that he was a bad. but that's what those movies did the fact is they went beyond that. he made sure he put them in the

propaganda into the character. >> host: so your father was a favorable witness. you have robert taylor -- >> host: the hollywood ten famously blacklisted for the time someone moved to mexico a lot of them are of hollywood movies after a decade. your father by contrast ever worked for hollywood again did he? >> guest: it's a complicated story about idb leave because he's done about 50 pounds -- 50

films but the truth is his career was hurt for a while but i think he could have gotten back in. the fact is that in my understanding of things first of all, he had a health problem. he had a turner will -- terrible ulcer. he didn't have the energy to do that. he talks about even in his book. >> host: i shot an elephant in my pajamas, that is a great tale. >> guest: but anyway where am i., we were talking about -- the

union leaders and others he told me that i can't remember the producer but he could have written a bob hope movie and my dad said he just wasn't up to it. he could have done it but he wasn't up to it. a lot of people like the others that were under pressure they were threatened and all that but anyway, i guess i'm a a reporter more than anything else and i can't say something that i think is -- >> host: so it is so striking

that johnny got his gun clearly they were working on behalf of joseph stalin and then by extension adolf hitler would drive them to do something like that? >> guest: they really did believe in comics. they did the philadelphia story with katharine hepburn but he became a revolutionary socialist and he headed the league of the writers and he writes a memoir about it and he was always a

revolutionary socialist and he says that the communists controlled -- he said i was the head of it but they were in control. he acknowledges that the also i believe in the idea that there would have to be a revolution in the united states where they would take away. that is what has to happen. he agrees with it. they agreed in. the whole point was to strip the revolution in the united states. >> host: you don't mean metaphorical. >> guest: no i mean in other words they say it and the point is they talk about it. you have congratulatory formed

and you have these telegrams coming from the soviet union and everywhere else and all they do is talk about the soviet violence and the revolution. they say we believe in the revolution. it's all proven. and somewhere this is the international publisher and that's the communist publishing house and it has the proceedings of what they say so the point is i'm not making it up but you can go to this american writers congress and anybody who wants to can actually look at this and see that this is what they were proposing. they thought that it was about the common mistake you can't belong to the league is basically what they said when they formed the league of american writers they said everyone has to be leave that

the revolution is inevitable and they say that in the call for the first american writers and got he will form a league of american writers which will be formally associated with the international units of revolutionary writers which is in moscow. >> host: the irony is that the freedom of expression was completely banned in the soviet union so why would the writers whose livelihood depends on freedom of expression -- >> guest: nobody understands that because the writer always views this idea of the freedom of expression because that's how they advance the minority. nobody needs in the revolution and all the rest of the only way they can advance the goal is to make sure that in the united

states and they always do the freedom of expression and take control and once they take control they banned freedom of expression and it's very clear that is what they were going to do. in fact it's sort of interesting into position in hollywood they are on sort of the opposite side of me that they did a very good book. they did an excellent book and i give them credit in terms of information because they did an excellent book even though it is still on the left. they said is it fair to call for writers in hollywood, is it fair to call them stalinists if they don't even mention words i thought they would say communist or something like that. then they talk about all the writers and they say yes it is. they defend everything stalin ever dared including his crimes. so it's not just me. so somehow it isn't highlighted

the way that my book is that the point is even somebody that is favorable acknowledges the fact and the reason i still get back to the point philosophically they believed in it. >> host: so it is a religious faith. >> guest: here he is supporting -- did i mention this, supporting north korea the granddaddy and the point is that kim il sung of north korea invaded south korea and what he says in this manuscript which never made it to the screen but the point that i got from the wisconsin historical society is the unpublished manuscript but nonetheless dedicated and he says north korea was fighting for its freedom and we were fighting for our freedom or independence. >> host: when it invaded.

>> guest: a sickly it was there giving and somehow the reason that we were in the war at all first of all he blames us for the death of the korean children. the point is he's on his side so he was a dedicated communist no question about it and in this new book it leaves the outcome of your leaving it out and in the movie if they leave that out of the movie that will be tremendous. >> host: did any of the hollywood ten other repents? >> guest: yes. he was a semester actor in hollywood and i knew him back in 1997 because there that was the 50th anniversary of the hollywood ten were they put on this dramatic show about the terrible plight. the fact is that i feel

differently if they were truly talking about people who then blacklisted unfairly. if they were not stalinists or members of the fifth column here in the united states trying to destroy it and there was this system upon the country and the point is they praise the people who were stalinist. it wasn't like -- i would feel a little different about it but here he has an alibi and i would defend both to the death about what he said and then here he is for kim il sung. this is another little interesting story as it seems to

me. he was kicked out of the communist party. he was the head of the party that kicked out in 1945 on the ground that he was began believe there could be progressive capitalism and that there could be a peaceful transition to socialism and that even after the war come even after world war ii that the united states and the soviet union could actually be friendly for a while and as a result, it's a complicated story but anyway, people believe for a variety of reasons that they wanted him out. there was a big attack against him but everyone thought of as a that was a signal from stalin's or instantly the communist party here in the united states goes after him because he wants peaceful transition and once the united states basically to be cooperating in the soviet union after world war ii and they kicked him out.

and above hollywood ten -- it might have even been in 45 but of the hollywood ten, they went against him and there was a big debate about it and he said i either have to be leave when an invite choose to. so he was a major enemy of the soviet union. he was a biographer of this and he himself had been a member but he was a good biographer and an interesting guy and he said that was the first shot getting rid of him. and they were all on the side of course. >> host: you have a chapter in here about elliott. tell me his story.

>> guest: the thing about his story he went to ronald reagan and praised both people he said look i conducted with people, they are the ones that are helpful to me and when i say blacklist if all they had to do basically if you were a communist and you have a car and a house committee found out that you were a member of the party and had an amonte member of the party etc. as long as you could get back to work in hollywood easily. they wouldn't see anything say anything but all you have to do is renounce. that's all you have to do and of course they would say you have to go back and name names and say who your fellow conspirators but they all got back to work. i just wanted to find out about that and he was praising the

liberal groups have said they were the ones who actually went before the committee and said they had been communist and spoke against them. they got them back into the work in hollywood so you could never get back you were a communist and other right wing was terrible and the house committee was terrible i don't think that's true. he was one who had been a communist, wouldn't name names. but then i forgot the date. he went before the committee and it was a written testimony it was very carefully done and he said look i am an economist and here's what we did. it was more on by playwright. i can't remember the name of the

group right now but he said yes we were communists and then he named eight people but what's interesting about the names of the people was that he actually -- a couple of them have already died and a couple he went to and before he actually testified and said look i am going to testify and i want you to know ahead of time this is what i'm going to do. so he did but what really got them angry is that he took out an ad in "the new york times" and said basically do as i do and the point is for some reason they thought that was the worst thing ever. it's a good thing and supposedly his wife had something to do with it. his wife led the fight against them when they got the lifetime

award. nobody wanted to give him a lifetime award. he's terrible, he named names and he took out the ad. >> host: to list toles with about award for. >> guest: lifetime -- in my view but you can probably remember better than i can but he did a ton of stuff and i'm trying to remember the names now he did get an oscar. no question he was targeted. everyone understood he was a turkic playwright and movie writer or director but they wanted to deprive him of the award so i talked to gordon about that who led and called

him on the phone and he led the fight against him and said you can't he said you can't get this award because you named names. they all named names names but the heated him particularly because of that. i asked him what you have against him and he said that was it. that was one of the major points if you take out an ad in "the new york times" not only did it name names but they took out the ad and said that was the nature reason. i'm at the former editor of the nation who gets to the columbia school of journalism and all that and he has this book naming names which is a very good book by the way but the point is his attitude towards everything is terrible for anybody to name names. i don't think that apple. i want to name the names of people who were conspirators.

in a life and death struggle with the union. >> host: and not the germany. >> guest: that i'm talking about this is afterwards. in the life and death struggle the point is surely we have a right to know what was going on and how they got control of the industry in 1944 and what they were doing and -- >> host: you make the case that they were filled with members of the hard left. but also fellow travelers. do you think that having an effect on the product or the art that they created? >> guest: it was clear absolutely in the point but as i mentioned before they had this to me during world war ii and even before world war ii you had the blockade for instance on the soviet side. it was a cry for the united

states to break its neutrality law. they leave out all sorts of stuff in the picture that was made and of course i understand where people would have been on the side though i think it turned out well but franco actually one but that's another thing that i could understand at least initially this guy is getting aid from mussolini and hitler, this is fascism and we want to fight it in some fashion. i understand that. but the fact is that it was very clear by the time this movie came out that the soviet union stalin was in control. >> host: they wrote an entire book on it and makes a point to soviets were every bit as brutal. >> guest: absolutely and the

point is when this movie came out the fact is that was basically depending and they had to go through swords but nevertheless it was very clear that everybody understood this was -- it had a great ending. i love the ending at the end talking about the bombings and all that on behalf of the soviet side and the point is they use that and they got clips and everything else and they said we have the american people on our side and he can get rid of the restrictions on helping because the neutrality act with all sorts of the law against doing anything. but the idea that we couldn't help anybody and they wanted

roosevelt to break the neutrality law into the soviet side and they did everything they could to do that but they failed. franco line and i think that it worked to our advantage in the long run especially if would have been terrible after world war ii if they controlled as much as they have. that would have been deadly for america after. >> host: why is it important to know this, for americans to know all of this? >> guest: first of all i want them to know the history. it should be correct. straighten out the record. and i think it's also important because in a way i guess that is my major point and in a way people realize all this i think they would have a different perspective on history as well and they would understand the way it is today is the activities robert taylor's name as part of the motion picture

alliance they yanked his name down from the building in los angeles and they took his name down because he had testified in 1947 against the house committee and after my dad bill lanchester had a documentary takes after my data. i don't find them taking after my dad data but it's even falsely represented that the point is that house committee on the activity which is incorrect to say that before the committee but the fact is -- i think that's it did a marvelous job both dated two major things. the hearings and then they have multiple hearings in the 50s and we have multiple hearings and you got a picture to look at the hearings and all the other things i rely on asp. but those hearings find an awful

lot about what the communists were up to and i think that is a good thing and i think as a result of the measure before that you have here with hollywood producing as i said in the 40s anyway in 1944 and 45 they were producing all the goofy pictures they were saying how wonderful he was in the soviet union and of the war and the point was as i mentioned the screenwriters guild was loaded with communists and after those hearings though because of what the house committee had done and the exposure of what it was really like and what people saw what was going on the fact was everything changed at least for a while and the screenwriters guild kicked out in the others too. so that was imported into some of the people you mentioned went to mexico and all the rest. david talks about that there was a hard-core writers around she

was a communist himself and he said with all of the other people i mentioned what they did is they would actually massage the scripts during an first of all they would be taught by people who were communist. and then they would actually have to get their ideology and then they would look at the scripts and they were able or powerful enough to change the scripts or massage them in a way that would be in accord with the communist party and of course that could explain one of the reasons why. >> host: the original political correctness. so we are amazingly almost out of time. that went fast. i am interested as we close here, your father at the end of his life looking back on hollywood having been in the middle of all of this how did he feel, was he bitter? >> guest: you can talk about

groucho marx on the other side but he was a good friend of my dad and would come over every christmas and -- >> host: he was a non-communist liberal? >> guest: and george kaufmann. a lot of these people were just liberal. i don't talk about those guys. of course. and the thing is even in this particular book i would just like the soft left in hollywood, billy crystal and others not to keep honoring these people who were enemies even i think they deserve to be during the cold war but even if they didn't want to be blacklisted out of first amendment awards. they figured trouble with the degree to december for the movie. the big defender of the constitution. that's the way that they advertised it that bryan cranston of breaking bad, he may be a great actor, i don't know but the point is he's going to

play trombone and this is the way that it's advertised when i first saw it. john wayne, he was part of the motion picture. >> host: you have done a lot to correct the record as you see it and the book is "hollywood traitors" block listed allies of his work thanks a lot. i appreciate it. >> guest: thanks. that was "after words," booktv signature program in which authors of the latest nonfiction books are interviewed by journalists, public policymakers and others familiar with their material. "after words" airs every weekend every week and a book tv at

10 p.m. on saturday, 12 and 9 p.m. on sunday and 12 a.m. on monday. you can also watch "after words" online. go to booktv.org and click on "after words" in the booktv series and the topics list on the upper right side of the page. ..

>> >> and her book "the meaty truth". considering the title discussing