-----Original Message-----
>From: Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
>Sent: Feb 22, 2011 7:02 PM
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] NONSENSE RE THE '60S - was A Note on an old slogan
>
>I read yours. :-)
>
>The red-baiting was course omnipresent, but it first appeared in media
>coverage of SNCC. Ted quotes quite a bit of the media on the SNCC voting
>campaign in Mississippi. A number of blacks had been murdered during that
>campaign, but no media & no FBI until two whites were murdered. Some
>accounts referred to Fannie Lou Hamer as "illiterate" and worse, but I
>forget the other epithets.
>
>Carrol
>
>P.S. Fannie Lou Hamer was born in 1917. Probably she grew up in the shadow
>of mustard gas or something.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
>On Behalf Of Chuck Grimes
>Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 6:22 PM
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] NONSENSE RE THE '60S - was A Note on an old slogan
>
>Whenever reporters interviewed those participating in an action or
>demonstration, they _never_ were interested in the shared political ideas
>that moved the demo; they were _only_ interested in the individual motives
>for being there of the person they were interviewing. Carrol
>
>---------
>
>Besides the attempt to personalize and refusal to accept the direct protest
>against state political censorship, quibbling about definitions of freedom
>of speech, there were another forces at work.
>
>There was an endless and boundless propaganda campaign to demonize obvious
>protest demands, as communist inspired actions. The effect was to
>criminalize dissent as traitorous and dangerous acts. In other words demands
>
>for student freedom of speech at a public university was a demand only a
>communist would make. Of course such communist demands must be supressed
>because once you let the communist in on freedom of speech, they will take
>over and take away freedom of speech for all.
>
>I wasn't a marxist or communist at that point, but it was an obvious smear
>that many were trying to dodge, so as not to give the establishment any
>legitiment support. So, the answer to the question, `why are you here?'
>often merged into personal motives. It was a media trick question, since the
>
>person interviewed obviously had the freedom of speech he or she was
>demanding. When did you stop beating your wife? I didn't understand this
>joke, until it was explained to me. My own answer to such a question now
>would be, read the sign asshole.
>
>Once Reagan was governor, he and or his staff were particularly skilled at
>turning these demands into dubious and suspicious affairs, at least close
>enough to keep up a political wedge between students and the bulk of the tax
>
>paying public and voters.
>
>There is a video clip of Reagan addressing a meeting of the UCB faculty
>senate, to get an insight into how this worked. He effectively turned the
>demand for freedom of speech in the classroom and campus on the faculty. He
>said, words to the effect, see, the moment you allowed such a thing, you
>insured chaos would follow.
>
>Somebody will have to go through a PBS Frontline history of FSM to find this
>
>clip. It was from a news clip of the period.
>
>All during Reagan's campaign he vowed to take control of the chaos of public
>
>education that tax payers were paying for... etc. Of course there was no
>chaos. Public education was beginning to respond to about a decade of
>student and progressive teachers demands to change the methods, materials,
>content and ways of the public education system. Remember we were not
>allowed to study evolution. I had to take home a letter to be signed by my
>parents to permit the units on evolution in an advanced placement second
>year biology class. We had no sex, reproduction, and social relationship
>studies in our social studies classes. We were given soft, socially
>irrelevant fiction to read. History, government, and social studies in LA
>secondary education was an irrelevant bore. For example most history books
>stopped in 1945 with maybe some nonsense about Eisenhower, Korea, and the
>nuclear age. We were raised in an education system of no content.
>
>Of course by the early 60s the underlying issues were the continued
>suppression of civil rights, defacto segregation and the building war in
>Vietnam. These were the very core of what freedom of speech was about, i.e.
>government wrong doing.
>
>``P.S. These posts are a running monologue on my part. I'm not reading what
>other shave to say. I don't want to get angry at anyone.'' CC
>
>Fair enough. The sound of one hand clapping.
>
>
>CG
>
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
Thanks,
John A
http://www.arkansawyer.com/wordpress/