Archive for the ‘Communism’ Category

The Prosecution of Professor Chandler Davis: McCarthyism … – Monthly Review

Monthly Review | The Prosecution of Professor Chandler Davis: McCarthyism, Communism, and the Myth of Academic FreedomNavigationReturn to Content

$26.00 $89.00

The Prosecution of Professor Chandler Davis tells the true tale of a mathematician who found himselfat the height of the McCarthy era taking an involuntary break from chalking equations to sit opposite a row of self-righteous anti-Communist congressmen. Counted among a brave group of people who confronted a system rapidly descending into fascism as they asserted the First Amendment before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), Davis was one of a small number of left wingers who served time for contempt of Congress.

In this fascinating and disturbing narrative, author Steve Batterson takes a deep dive into extant archival records generated by the FBI, HUAC, the University of Michigan, and repositories holding the papers of former Supreme Court justices. Focusing on the seemingly conflicting Supreme Court decisions on labor leader John Watkins and Vassar College Psychology instructor Lloyd Barenblatt, he examines the plights of six faculty and graduate students at the University of Michiganincluding three future members of the National Academy of Scienceswhose lifes work was impacted by the anticommunist actions of a wide range of personnel at the University of Michigan. In particular, he examines the role played in the trial by Felix Frankfurter, a longtime Associate Justice on the Supreme Court, close advisor of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and co-founder of the ACLU. In the process, Batterson exposes the ways that McCarthys righteous emissaries relied on all kinds of institutions in 1950s Americafrom Hollywood studios to universitiesto sabotage the careers of anyone with a trace of Red.

Carefully doneand good reading as well.Stephen Smale, UC-Berkeley mathematician, Fields Medalist (Nobel Prize for Mathematics)

At a moment when conservative forces are once more taking a sledgehammer to academic freedom, Steve Batterson tells the story of the intrepid and far-sighted H. Chandler Davis as it needs to be told.Calmly unpicking the tenacious fallacies used to rationalize the anticommunist purge of the 1950s, he provides a deeply researched and compulsively readable biography that is note-perfect for our time and full of surprising historical details.Alan Wald, H. Chandler Davis Collegiate Professor Emeritus, University of Michigan, and author ofAmerican Night:The Literary Left in the Era of the Cold War

Steve Batterson is professor emeritus of mathematics and computer science at Emory University. He received his PhD in mathematics from Northwestern University in 1976, and soon embarked upon mathematical research at Emory, the Institute for Advanced Study, Boston University, and the University of California at Berkeley. In the 1990s he wrote a biography of the Fields Medal winner Stephen Smale, followed by two books and several articles on the history of mathematics.

Publication Date: 02/01/2024

Number of Pages: 200

Paperback ISBN: 978-1-68590-035-9

Cloth ISBN: 978-1-68590-036-6

eBook ISBN: 978-1-68590-037-3

{{{ data.variation.price_html }}}

{{{ data.variation.availability_html }}}

See more here:
The Prosecution of Professor Chandler Davis: McCarthyism ... - Monthly Review

Letter: Communism, it can start in schools | Opinion … – ECM Publishers

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

See original here:
Letter: Communism, it can start in schools | Opinion ... - ECM Publishers

Opinion: Fighting indoctrination with indoctrination – Des Moines Register

David Skidmore| Guest columnist

Poring over the bills that survived Iowa Legislatures March 3 funnel deadline, I came across House File 132, which immediately gave me a sense of dj vu. The Republican-sponsored bill would require both public and charter high schools across Iowa to offer a United States government course that would, in addition to covering electoral procedures and the U.S. Constitution, entail a comparative discussion of political ideologies, including communism and totalitarianism that conflict with the principles of freedom and democracy that were essential to the founding of the United States.

This bill follows a similar one signed into law in June 2021 by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis that requires high school government courses to include a comparative discussion of political ideologies, such as Communism and totalitarianism, that conflict with the principles of freedom and democracy essential to the founding principles of the United States. DeSantis followed up in May 2022 with a mandate that schools offer at least 45 minutes of instruction about the evils of communism on Floridas newly designated Victims of Communism Day, set for Nov. 7.

U.S. Sen. Rick Scott, a Florida Republican, recently introduced a bill in the U.S. House that would require schools nationwide to teach students the dangers of communism.

This sudden urgency to protect the precious minds of todays youth from the allures of communism whisked me back to my senior year of high school in 1976. I recall wiling away hours in the back of the class, counting down the days until graduation, in a required course dreaded by all seniors titled Americanism vs. Communism.

In 1961, following the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, the Florida Legislature passed a law requiring that all students take AVC, as it was universally called, to graduate. In addition to providing students with a greater appreciation of democratic processes, freedom under law, and the will to preserve that freedom, the law required that the course place particular emphasis upon the dangers of communism, the ways to fight communism, the evils of communism, the fallacies of communism, and the false doctrines of communism.

Initially, the State Department of Education used official reports of the House Committee on Un-American Activities and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoovers book "A Study of Communism" as texts. Instructors were forbidden from presenting communism in a favorable light. The course continued, in various forms, until the law was finally repealed in 1991, following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

One study of Floridas Americanism vs. Communism law refers to it as an effort to dispense an official ideology, mirroring the practices of the political systems the lawmakers intended to warn against.

Now we have been suddenly transported back a half century, which is puzzling. It is not as if the earlier precedent was a stunning success. One researcher interviewed faculty and students who taught or took AVC in Central Florida high schools in the mid-1960s. Students universally panned the course, considering it boring propaganda. I can certainly attest to this conclusion. I recall students with their heads on their desks, films showing red ink blots spreading across the globe to illustrate the communist threat and readings informing us that Karl Marx was a bad father. The teacher appeared to enjoy the course least of all.

Indeed, former instructors interviewed for the study generally disliked being forced to teach pre-cooked answers dictated by politicians rather than genuine social science. The bolder instructors sought to transcend the limitations of the required teaching materials by following established methods for teaching comparative government in the classroom, although this sometimes led to harassment in an environment where faculty were required to take loyalty oaths.

The irony of House File 132 is that it fails to recognize that communism and other forms of totalitarianism have failed in most places where they have been tried precisely because humans are generally averse to propaganda and indoctrination. AVC was a waste of precious class time and a distraction from the kind of education that serves as the real bulwark to closed and rigid ideologies: critical thinking and exposure to a diversity of ideas.

The retro-Cold War classrooms that the current crop of Republican legislators want to create as part of their broader culture war branding may prove good politics in the short run but will not serve any meaningful educational purpose. Perhaps that is the point.

David Skidmore is a professor of political science atDrake University.

Read the original post:
Opinion: Fighting indoctrination with indoctrination - Des Moines Register

Sinn Fin ‘bordering on communism’ with approach to housing … – Newstalk

Sinn Fin is 'bordering on communism' with its approach to housing, Mattie McGrath has said.

The Independent TD for Tipperary said he cannot vote with the Government to end the eviction ban, but he 'can't stomach' Sinn Fin's motion either.

A vote will take place in the Dil on Wednesday.

Deputy McGrath told The Hard Shoulder Government plans to offer more supports in the budget is not soon enough.

"They've had 11/12 years now to build houses and provide homes," he said.

"We have more housing reports than we have had hot dinners; and here [are being told] we're going to have measures that will help renters, first-time buyers and will help small renters.

"The budget is in October: they've seen the figures that tens of thousands of small tenants, landlords have left the market.

"They're being priced out of it, taxed out of it, no supports".

Deputy McGrath said the Government is making 'empty promises'.

"The eviction ban isn't something I like as a tool, it's probably unconstitutional," he said.

"We have nine amendments - obviously none of our amendments will be voted on if the Government's counter-motion is taken first.

"The Government are gung-ho about this; they want business as usual and they want to make empty promises, look after the big...companies who have multiple thousands of units".

However hesaid Sinn Fin is using 'political opportunism' with its motion.

"So what it is [is] grandstanding by Sinn Fin, political opportunism of the worst type using these vulnerable people," he said.

"I hate abstaining, because I like to be present at votes one way or another, but I'm minded to abstain.

"I don't want a slippery slope here".

Deputy McGrath said some people living abroad, who brought a property to come home to, "can't get people out of their houses."

"Are we going to give any rights to people who own property?

"I know what Sinn Fin are at: this is bordering on communism, that people haven't the rights over their own property.

"It's opening the gates for their next plan from [Housing Spokesperson] Eoin Broin... ideas that people's property would be seized and be given out to free to people.

"This is the kind of policies that are abhorrent to me".

Deputy McGrath said he cannot vote with the Government as they "did nothing, sat on their hands" in the last six months.

"Now they're promising 'X, Y and Z' - but I know it's like the snow off a ditch: it'll melt and be gone by the end of the week.

"The Taoiseach today told the Dil that if the [Sinn Fin] motion was to succeed, that it wasn't binding on the Government to accept it and he wouldn't accept it.

"The eviction ban is going to go anyway".

Asked how he will vote on Wednesday, Deputy McGrath said: "One is bad and the other is worse.

"I definitely won't be supporting the Government, but will I even support the Sinn Fin motion: I have no stomach for it.

"It's going down the road of their policies; we know the little red book they operate from, we know where they're going.

"They've no interest in ordinary people getting [and] building people houses, they've an interest in fear politics and hysteria," he added.

Listen back to the full interview below:

See more here:
Sinn Fin 'bordering on communism' with approach to housing ... - Newstalk

50 years since leaving Vietnam: How did the war change perceptions of veterans? – KOCO Oklahoma City

50 years since leaving Vietnam: How did the war change perceptions of veterans?

Almost 50 years ago, the Vietnam War came to an end for U.S. troops, leaving millions of veterans struggling to readjust to civilian life in a country deeply divided on the morality and ultimate outcome of the war. This Clarified episode dives into how the Vietnam War affected veterans and changed the way veterans are perceived in America.

Updated: 6:55 AM CDT Mar 23, 2023

The Vietnam war is arguably the most controversial war in living memory, and its divisive nature massively impacted the way its veterans were treated upon return. Perceptions of veterans in the United States changed with Vietnam, and through learning from mistakes and mistreatment, experience has improved for other veterans.The Vietnam War officially began in 1965, at the height of the cold war, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent combat troops into South Vietnam. At the time, the U.S. believed strongly in the "domino theory" if one country fell to communism, its neighboring countries would soon follow. North Vietnam was under communist control, so the U.S. entered the war to try to stop the spread of communism and target Soviet allies. The war proved controversial throughout the nation, with thousands of students and anti-war protestors staging demonstrations. Some rejected the reasoning for the war, arguing the U.S. shouldnt be involved in the first place, but others felt that the U.S. was right to fight communist and soviet allies. It was also the first televised war, and images of the horrors happening had enough power to change some minds. In January of 1973, the US signed a peace deal and began withdrawing troops on March 29. It also marked the end of the draft. However, the war wouldnt officially end until 1975 when communist forces in the North took over South Vietnam. The Vietnam war had a massive impact on American life, culture and politics. Almost 3 million Americans served in the war, which amounted to around one percent of the US population in the 60s and 70s. Both sides took losses, with Vietnam suffering terribly with 3 million dead and the US losing 58,000.Given the controversial nature of the war and Americas ultimate defeat, veterans werent given the homecomings often expected and that had been seen in the world wars before them. Instead, many civilians shied away from talking about the war. This affected veterans greatly. They felt that their war service was something that they had to conceal, that they had to hide, and they felt that their service was often very unappreciated, said Edward Miller, a Dartmouth College professor specializing in the Vietnam War.Even worse, many veterans struggled to access the military benefits they were promised by the government, including education and health care. One of the most poignant examples of this was the challenge veterans faced accessing health care, support, and acknowledgment of the issues caused by Agent Orange, a herbicide used in the war. In the '70s and '80s, you got more American veterans who were coming down with all sorts of cancers and other diseases, which were eventually linked to Agent Orange. For a long time, the Defense Department of Veterans Administration argued that this was not something that they were responsible for, says Miller. It was only after veterans banded together and successfully implemented class action lawsuits that the Defense Department changed its policy and began providing health care to veterans.In the '80s, things began to look up for veterans with the opening of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., which honored the lost men and women of the war. The opening of the memorial led to more marches and celebrations of veterans across the nation, and the government eventually began to acknowledge its wrongdoings in its treatment of veterans. This morphed into the "thank you for your service" culture prevalent today, in which civilians thank veterans in an attempt to acknowledge their sacrifices, regardless of politics.Miller recommends going above just thanking veterans but also engaging them in conversation about their experiences. For me, asking someone to tell you about their military service is an invitation to a conversation and, in my experience, that leads to more productive engagement and an opportunity for Americans to learn from Vietnam veterans, he says.

The Vietnam war is arguably the most controversial war in living memory, and its divisive nature massively impacted the way its veterans were treated upon return. Perceptions of veterans in the United States changed with Vietnam, and through learning from mistakes and mistreatment, experience has improved for other veterans.

The Vietnam War officially began in 1965, at the height of the cold war, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent combat troops into South Vietnam. At the time, the U.S. believed strongly in the "domino theory" if one country fell to communism, its neighboring countries would soon follow. North Vietnam was under communist control, so the U.S. entered the war to try to stop the spread of communism and target Soviet allies. The war proved controversial throughout the nation, with thousands of students and anti-war protestors staging demonstrations. Some rejected the reasoning for the war, arguing the U.S. shouldnt be involved in the first place, but others felt that the U.S. was right to fight communist and soviet allies. It was also the first televised war, and images of the horrors happening had enough power to change some minds.

In January of 1973, the US signed a peace deal and began withdrawing troops on March 29. It also marked the end of the draft. However, the war wouldnt officially end until 1975 when communist forces in the North took over South Vietnam. The Vietnam war had a massive impact on American life, culture and politics. Almost 3 million Americans served in the war, which amounted to around one percent of the US population in the 60s and 70s. Both sides took losses, with Vietnam suffering terribly with 3 million dead and the US losing 58,000.

Given the controversial nature of the war and Americas ultimate defeat, veterans werent given the homecomings often expected and that had been seen in the world wars before them. Instead, many civilians shied away from talking about the war. This affected veterans greatly.

They felt that their war service was something that they had to conceal, that they had to hide, and they felt that their service was often very unappreciated, said Edward Miller, a Dartmouth College professor specializing in the Vietnam War.

Even worse, many veterans struggled to access the military benefits they were promised by the government, including education and health care. One of the most poignant examples of this was the challenge veterans faced accessing health care, support, and acknowledgment of the issues caused by Agent Orange, a herbicide used in the war.

In the '70s and '80s, you got more American veterans who were coming down with all sorts of cancers and other diseases, which were eventually linked to Agent Orange. For a long time, the Defense Department of Veterans Administration argued that this was not something that they were responsible for, says Miller. It was only after veterans banded together and successfully implemented class action lawsuits that the Defense Department changed its policy and began providing health care to veterans.

In the '80s, things began to look up for veterans with the opening of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., which honored the lost men and women of the war. The opening of the memorial led to more marches and celebrations of veterans across the nation, and the government eventually began to acknowledge its wrongdoings in its treatment of veterans. This morphed into the "thank you for your service" culture prevalent today, in which civilians thank veterans in an attempt to acknowledge their sacrifices, regardless of politics.

Miller recommends going above just thanking veterans but also engaging them in conversation about their experiences.

For me, asking someone to tell you about their military service is an invitation to a conversation and, in my experience, that leads to more productive engagement and an opportunity for Americans to learn from Vietnam veterans, he says.

Read more:
50 years since leaving Vietnam: How did the war change perceptions of veterans? - KOCO Oklahoma City