McCarthyism

Kate and I went to hear a panel discussion on "Resisting McCarthyism: to sign or not to sign the loyalty oath". This discussion was put on by the Alameda Public Affairs Forum, which is a group of local, progressive folk from Alameda concerned with politics and public policy. There were three speakers Professor Emeritus (CAL) Bob Blauner, Peter Franck, an attorney and the gentleman who runs the Alameda Forum.

After the panel discussion and Q&A session, Kate and I agreed that the intent was good, but they failed to make the discussion relevant to current times. The panel were likely all in their 70's, were highly educated (all had PhD's, JDs, and MA/MSs). They were mostly academics. They were all involved in the FSM during the 60s (Free Speech Movement). They tossed around TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) as if we were all there with them, but some of us were not. And although this was a very relevant part of our contemporary history, they failed to make the connection between was was relevant and important then and how to take the knowledge of that time and apply it and make it useful today. What does it matter what happened 50 years ago if we can't use that information and make it apply to our current time. For example, I asked how we could use what they learned during the McCarthy era and apply it to the Bush-Cheney Administration and take something away from how liberals behaved then and how they are behaving now ( and during the past 8-10 years).

Sadly, they danced around the question, far more interested in speaking about their time "back in the day". The discussion was interesting in that I felt that I got a first hand "look" at an important time of US history which took place in my back yard (Berkeley), but they failed the group by only talking about the past.

This is lifted from the Alameda Public Forum Mailing list:
"In 1949, the Regents of the University of California voted to require faculty to sign a loyalty oath affirming that they were not members of the Communist Party or other subversive organizations. A long struggle followed which roiled the University (both Berkeley and UCLA) and the politics of California –and the entire country. In the end, 31 faculty refused to sign the Oath and were fired. Others, including some of the most distinguished faculty resigned and many other potential teachers refused to take up posts at the University. Students – in a foreshadowing of the Free Speech Movement of the 1960s – rallied to the support of the faculty -- just as today throughout the University and State University system, where the future of public education is threatened, there were large rallies of students and teachers in opposition to the Oath.Professor Blauner has written a brilliant account of these events against the backdrop of the Cold War and the loyalty-security program of the Truman administration – and the “witch-hunt” associated with the name of US Senator Joseph McCarthy – as well as the emergence at Berkeley of the Free Speech Movement. Loyalty oaths haven’t vanished: Ohio has recently passed a state Patriot Act which requires state employees to sign a loyalty oath and the Federal Patriot Act has re-raised the same issues of freedom of speech and association that were at the heart of the loyalty oath controversy at the University of California"