Useful Innocents: Clergy, Bourgeoisie and Politicians Who Did Not Attack Communism but Sustained an Incessant barrage of Defamations Against Anticommunist Organizations

Useful innocents are masters at eliminating the notion of how noxious communism is and of how imminent a danger it is to every country. Typical useful innocents have been the conservative‑looking clergyman, the unflappable and easy‑going bourgeois, the politician who seems completely absorbed by the unideological political flimflam and hodgepodge, and the like. They did not even see what little the media did show of blights of the communist regimes. Nor did they see the advance of the Red offensive in the daily life of the nation. They did not fear a future communist coup, much less a communist victory. Exuding insouciance, they lived tranquilly.

Their action created a climate of prejudice and disdain around Anticommunism that was symmetrically opposed to the climate of sympathy and trust that their innocence, so rarely sincere, effected for the benefit of communism.

Communism has also continually availed itself of the collaboration of fools, of whom Scripture says: "Infinitus est numerus" (Eccles. 1:15), and of whom "parvus est numerus" in the Red ranks.

We note that useful innocents would generally not take the initiative of speaking against anticommunist figures or groups; rather they preferred to systematically ignore them.

However, if someone in a certain circle, raised a discreditable fact and attributed it to some anticommunist person or group, the useful innocent was the first to believe it, the most indignant in reacting to it, and the most likely to add a detail (whether plausible or not) to confirm it.

On the contrary, if someone in the same circle mentioned something that discredited a communist person or group, the useful innocent, armed with the systematic doubts of a benevolent method of analysis, would immediately begin pleading attenuating circumstances on behalf of the accused, lamenting the possibility that unwarranted police investigations could disturb his family, and so forth. There is possibly a certain dose of fairness and common sense in all this; but there is, above all, a cunning and veiled partiality toward the communists. This becomes evident when considering that the useful innocent has recourse to these niceties only for persons and groups of the left, never for those of the right.

In his conduct the clever useful innocent would never utter a word in favor of communism. This was indispensable to his action, for if he were to praise communism, he would raise suspicions, cease to appear innocent and, consequently, no longer be useful.