Alex WellersteinVerified account

Fair enough. Haynes & Klehr say 'secret member', based on Herken, but it's rather indeterminate. I'm writing about Frank O & Caltech's Unit 122 which was essentially a closed cell yet much more than fellow travelling.

JRO himself clearly saw what Frank was doing as something far further — he expressed extreme disapproval. It's very hard to imagine JRO becoming a true member of the CP, in part because of the party discipline stuff. JRO wasn't a discipline kind of guy.

Did he have lots of connections with CP members and raise money for CP causes and probably fake his way through conversations on CP issues over martinis? Sure. Does that make you a member of CPUSA? Not in my book, and not in the book of the FBI, either.

Being in CO without my library, I'm unable to re-read what Bird & Sherwin say about this. I recall Herken making a more extreme claim. What stood out for me in both books - being a CP member or fell trav meant different things in 1935 vs 1950

Both rely heavily on Chevalier's later recollections, which are sketchy and can be interpreted different ways. Chevalier said that it was more of a "discussion group" than a "closed unit."

Chevalier says JRO never paid any dues, and it was only 6 or 7 people, they took no orders, and did not think of themselves as CP members. He is impressively vague on what it was or wasn't: "We both were and were not." I rank that as fellow traveler, personally.

I’m less sure about this, partly because the culture of membership denial ran so deep and was such an important tactical defence. This kind of indeterminacy was carefully maintained which not to say I think JRO was a member but the vagueness is handy.

Chevalier had no problem in essentially implicating himself and many other members of the "discussion group" — it is only JRO that he gives a special, "not really a member" status to. I think that is significant, esp. since this was after JRO's death.