It's actually two paragraphs.
Purging the Left of communists became a longstanding practice, having injurious effects on various progressive causes. For instance, in 1949 some twelve unions were ousted from the CIO because they had Reds in their leadership. The purge reduced CIO membership by some 1.7 million and seriously weakened its recruitment drives and political clout. In the late 10940s, to avoid being "smeared" as Reds, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), a supposedly progressive group, became one of the most vocally anticommunist organizations.
The strategy did not work. ADA and others on the Left were still attacked for being communist or soft on communism by those on the Right. Then and now, many on the Left have failed to realize that those who fight for social change on behalf of the less-privilege elements of society will be Red-baited by conservative elites whether they are communists or not. For ruling interests, it makes little difference whether their wealth and power is challenged by "communist subversives" or "loyal American liberals." All are lumped together as more or less equally abhorrent.
liberalism is just center-right economics and you've confused their marketing campaigns for their product. liberal politicians are just people adapting the language of leftists to disguise a center-right economic policies on behalf of the private equity companies that finance their campaigns. words are fun. good luck.
Imagine not having a systematic analysis or a materialist understanding of economics or politics, and still saying you aren't a liberal.
You think materialism means something other than "how it actually effects people". you're an academic. which is a just broke-ass liberal. You want theory to be real so you can ignore the actual humans. you wasted your parents money on a degree you can't use and you're mad on a forum about it instead of being made at it.
Okay spook