I Led 3 Lives

We remember hearing somewhere, some time ago, a saying that went something like this:

"The Devil does his best when the belief in him by the people of the World in his existence is low!"

Now, one can take this LITERALLY, as a METAPHOR or even both ways, we want to respect your own beliefs. But no matter which route you take, the one universally true fact remains. There is true Evil in the world. We have to deal with that every day.

"There is No Evil!", I heard someone say? We have "moral equivalence" among different beliefs of various Peoples, Nations, Creeds, Political and Economic Systems. One is as good as the next. Is that what you say? Well, let's go there, just momentarily.

Let's see now, can we think of any examples of what could be truly be labeled as "Evil", with that Capital "E". How 'bout the indiscriminate detonation of explosives or incendiary devices in a crowded place, with a innocent civilian lives(you know, women, children, the aged, the infirm). Is this a "justified" "Warefare"? What about Late Term "Abortion"? Really now, wouldn't Late Term "Murder" be a more realistic terminology? Finally, what about Child Pornography? Got anyone out there who wants to defend this true "Evil"? Just as this 'Devil', be it literal or metaphoric, prospers the most when ignored, so it is the same for the "Vanguard of the People", the Communist Party.

If we go back to say, the 1930's, one could be an openly Soviet type "Scientific Socialist" (It's their term, not mine). Then, we came to the Post World War II Era of "the Iron and Bamboo Curtain", aka the 'Cold War'. We found former Allies like the Soviet Union with our former "Uncle Joe" Stalin still calling the shots and China, with "Agraian Reformer", Mao Tse Tung, now in charge. In short order, the Communist Party of the United States of America, found itself on our sh*t list. They were declared illegal. The reasoning being, that the Soviet-style of Socialism, aka International Communism, is a movement that recognizes on international boundaries in their self proclaimed "Revolution without borders." Ergo, the C.P.U.S.A. is an extension of the Kremlin's own field operators.*

So we come to this I LEAD 3 LIVES TV series. It was a moderately budgeted, yet very realistically produced series of half hour dramas.The choice of Richard Carlson as the lead portraying the real life hero, one Herbert A. Philbrick. The only other regulars that this writer can recall were(actors name unk to me)Mrs. Philbrick and his F.B.I. contact man(played by the same guy who was later cast as "The Hills Brothers Coffee Broker" in those commercials.) The episode always had at least one scene of Philbrick getting his assignment or passing info by meeting with his "handler" in some supermarket, drug store or similar type of shop .

Because so much of the action of the story takes place with the main character, Philbrick dealing with his Red superiors, there is a lot of voice over "thinking to self" portrayed. Lines from Mr. Carslon something like, "What do you do now, Philbrick?", are employed in virtually every segment.

As an instructional as well as public service, the main pillars of the Reds' belief system are clearly exemplified on screen. Hence, we have references to the Party and Atheism, Dialectic Materialism, Class Struggle and etc. There is proper protocol maintained by the calling by the fellow 'Cell' members "Comrade".

And speaking of the depiction of these "Cell Meetings", there is great care showing of the secrecy employed.**Hence, we were shown how the members would all arrive to the secret location via separate routes, at staggered times,and both entering and exiting via different routes.

And so about my favourite episode involved the discovery by Mrs. Philbrick that husband Herb was a Communist. It seems that it must have been about 3/4 of the program filled with Mrs. P giving her husband the needle by using such references as, "why pray, Herb, your kind doesn't believe in God!" Eventually Herb's FBI Handler shows up and sets the record straight!

There are some lesson to be learned by our Nation from this 1950's cold war relic. In particular is the use of these highly secret "Cells", with all of their super secret activity. If the Cells of the Reds were dangerous to our way of life then why do we not take the secret Cells of the Militant Islamists seriously.

After all, what is the reason for all of this secrecy? You don't suppose that it means that they're involved in some dangerous, deadly and (yes) evil activity, do you? Shocking!!

* Although most folks in the USA, were not fooled by the Red propaganda machine, it was proved that Moscow was financing this Gus Hall(perennial CPUSA Leader) & Company for the years.

** It also is an obvious question, but who needs secret operations, other than "wrong Doers", who are up to no good!

It's hard to be objective about a series designed to raise the strongest political emotions. I should say that I haven't seen an episode since the show left the air 50-some years ago. I did, however, grow up with the series and share in its political assumptions. What I couldn't see then, but do see now, is how much a creature of its time it was. I think it's probably telling that the series-- to my knowledge - has never been revived or syndicated since the original showing.

As I recall, the show worked well enough strictly as entertainment. The episodes followed a formula as most series do-Herb (Carlson) would learn of some nefarious red doings, consult with FBI man Dressler (Zaremba), foil the doings, and end the show with an instructional on the many insidious appeals of communism. Drama grew out of thwarting red plans and avoiding exposure since Herb was an undercover FBI informant. I don't know how good the ratings were, but I can see the show being kept on the air regardless of popular ratings.

Two general points are worth noting, neither of which makes specific assumptions about a series I haven't seen for decades. First, the program comes out of a formative Cold War period in which the complex dynamic of Western capitalism vs. Marxist anti-colonialism was reduced in the public mind to the simplistics of good vs. evil. Put briefly, the series functioned as a popular reflection of that McCarthy period in which self-serving stereotype replaced real world complexity.

Ironically, however, it's the same simplistic perception of good vs. evil that underlay much of the trauma of Vietnam ten years later, when the extreme disconnect between American beliefs about the war and the actual realities resulted in a domestic crisis at home and mutiny in the ranks abroad. In short, Americans of the 50's were woefully unprepared for the complex political realities evolving outside their TV sets. A longer-term consequence, I believe, of propaganda products like Three Lives and the simplistics of good vs. evil.

Second, during the three years of series run-time (1953-56), covert arms of the US gov't were directly responsible, we now know, for subverting at least two popular democracies abroad-The elected Arbenz gov't of Guatemala (1954) and the elected Mossadegh gov't of Iran (1953). Rather odd behavior, I believe, for the touted defender of democracy as the McCarthyite period presented our side. I wonder what Philbrick and Dressler would have said about our own sneaky subversives, keeping in mind that in democratic theory the will of the people is sovereign above all else.

These brief points are not intended as an apologetic for Soviet communism. I'm sure they propagandized their own people with similar stereotypes about the West, that is, when they weren't busy crushing dissent in their own part of the world. The too, I expect they had their own version of good vs. evil so as to revile capitalist legitimacy. Instead, these points amount to a way of putting together a more critically realistic perspective than what we're force-fed in the media and by long-ago shows like Philbrick's.

In reflecting back on that time, I think it's important to keep such considerations as these in mind. At any rate, It's too bad the episodes aren't available for viewing even now 60-years later. I think they'd still be as provocative and even relevant in today's world, though maybe not in the way intended.

(In passing-for readers too young to recall context. When Khruschev made his reckless "We'll bury you" remark, he was referring to out-producing the West, not to mass murder. Too bad it's since been retailed out of context, but I guess that's the sort of thing I've been talking about.)

I watched this show at first out of curiosity and I laughed just as many of my generation probably have . . .or will. Then I started researching that era and now I know they were deadly serious when they made that series! This was the sort of thing that Americans were truly fearful of, a Communist takeover. This was just as serious in the 50's as a Chinese invasion was in the late 1930's. Okay so maybe they dramatised things but they did that in "Dragnet" too, right? This was American propaganda made to make Mr and Mrs. Average American believe that Commies were around every conner trying to subvert the mentality of Post (Korean) War America. This could have been what led to people building fallout shelters instead of swimming pools and schools teaching kids to "duck and cover".

Okay, so maybe I got a little heavy handed in that last paragraph but watching the adventures of Mr. Philbrick led me to wonder just how much of it was Hollywood and how much was real? A certain Mr. Kruschev did promise "We will bury you without firing a shot!" so I really began to wonder and started watching the episodes with a less cynical eye. The one about vacuum cleaners that were really missile launchers smacked of the gadgetry that proliferated the James Bond movies of the 1960's but then, where did they get that idea? The one about taking over an American newsreel company and making propaganda movies seems unreal too but then, remember wasn't the US Government doing the same thing at the same time too?

Today watching "I Led Three Lives" gives me a chill. Everything they were talking about might really have happened. Perhaps all that paranoia was not unfounded. Mr. Herbert Philbrick, wherever you are, thank you.

"I Led 3 Lives" was a sincere and authentic expose of the activities of the Communist Party USA. I was impressed by it as a child and I think the plot lines remain very interesting. Although rather cheaply done it had good workmanlike production values. It still provides good insight into the motivations and activities of fanatical subversives which are still valid to this day. I think Richard Carlson did a good, serious job with his role and he was always one of my favorite actors of the '50's. My father, who was a USMC officer at the time with a great interest in the psychology of communism, followed the show regularly. All in all this was one of the more important television productions to ever come along. Unfortunately it would not be touched with a 10 foot pole by the establishment media producers today!

I recall the series very well and always tried to watch it. The series portrayed Mr. Hoover and his bureau as a professional, passionate, serious operation. I was a believer then. However, after Hoover's death, quite a bit was focused on how his bureau was run during the '50's and '60's, and his own hatred for Communists. A PBS program even depicted him as a power-hungry tyrant and a homosexual. Taking my own limited knowledge of the 1950 decade while growing up as a child, this TV series was very good. And, as far as Hoover is concerned, he knew how to handle the bunch of politicians in Washington probably better than anyone else. It would seem that this series is on some form of blacklist, as it never appears on cable, satellite, or independent TV channels running old shows. Why this is, I don't know. But, maybe after Mr. Khruschev's speech at the UN in 1960; "We Will Bury You", the country is in the form of being buried!