Rob Tucker on Norman Thomas

I had a discussion with [Eric Chester] about this at the convention. He came across a Freedom of Information document that named Thomas as a CIA collaborator. He said yes, of course Norman Thomas lied about it, he had to. I could not make him see that the memories of those of us who knew Thomas during the 50s and 60s was valid information, nor could I get him to believe that possibly the CIA could be mistaken. Thomas in that era was fulltime in the same business as the CIA, namely, encouraging democratic socialists abroad, as opposed to bolsheviks. Thomas was immensely hostile to the CIA because sooner or later their complicity always came out, and it was the kiss of death. (I was very interested in his views on the CIA, because my father worked in the Reports section of CIA and privately held the same opinion about the "spooks"; we spent an immense amount of money on agents who produced intelligence that was nothing that could not be found in published sources, and was often biased and wrong, as the Bay of Pigs so clearly showed. Dad was sent off to Miami after the Bay of Pigs, where his job, basically, was to ferret out and fire all those anti-Castro agents who had reported that the Cuban people were ready to rise against Castro, in defiance of common sense. The CIA can be hugely wrong.) Then also, it was simply out of character for Thomas to behave furtively, and certainly, to lie, or put himself in a position where he might have to lie. If Chester were a real scholar, his book on the Dominican Republic and what really went on there would indeed have reported that at least one CIA file named him as working with them -- and then would have noted that people who knew Thomas well at that time all found this incredible. But Chester also has a belief that Thomas was very right-wing. In fact in the 50s and 60s his views on most issues put him well to the left of most members of our Party, only, at that time he was not pushing his views except on foreign policy issues. Chester and I discussed all this and neither of us could move the other. He persisted in saying no one should be a god to us, whereas to me Thomas was never a god. He was the greatest American of his time and I felt privileged to work with him, but he was first of all somebody I knew rather well, and he certainly made mistakes in his time, and said so at the drop of a pin. At any rate, even if Eric's source should be believed, as a leading member of our Party he should want to protect Thomas's reputation because it is still an asset to us. He cannot see this.

-- Rob