pred_label
stringclasses 2
values | pred_label_prob
float64 0.5
1
| wiki_prob
float64 0.25
1
| text
stringlengths 68
1.02M
| source
stringlengths 37
43
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
__label__wiki
| 0.570515
| 0.570515
|
Title: Transponder
Subject: Acronyms and abbreviations in avionics, Shared Risk Resource Group, GOES-R, Galaxy 25, Galaxy 15
Collection: Communication Circuits, Motorsport Terminology, Radar, Radio Electronics, Radio-Frequency Identification, Wireless
A Highway 407 toll transponder
In telecommunication, a transponder is one of two types of devices. In air navigation or radio frequency identification, a flight transponder is a device that emits an identifying signal in response to an interrogating received signal. In a communications satellite, a transponder gathers signals over a range of uplink frequencies and re-transmits them on a different set of downlink frequencies to receivers on Earth, often without changing the content of the received signal or signals.
The term is a portmanteau for transmitter-responder. It is variously abbreviated as XPDR, XPNDR, TPDR or TP.[1]
Satellite/broadcast communications 1
Optical communications 2
Motorsport 7
Underwater 8
Gated communities 9
See also 10
Satellite/broadcast communications
A communications satellite’s channels are called transponders, because each is a separate transceiver or repeater. With digital video data compression and multiplexing, several video and audio channels may travel through a single transponder on a single wideband carrier. Original analog video only has one channel per transponder, with subcarriers for audio and automatic transmission identification service (ATIS). Non-multiplexed radio stations can also travel in single channel per carrier (SCPC) mode, with multiple carriers (analog or digital) per transponder. This allows each station to transmit directly to the satellite, rather than paying for a whole transponder, or using landlines to send it to an earth station for multiplexing with other stations.
Optical communications
In optical fiber communications, a transponder is the element that sends and receives the optical signal from a fiber. A transponder is typically characterized by its data rate and the maximum distance the signal can travel.
The term 'transponder' can apply to different items with important functional differences, mentioned across academic and commercial literature:
according to one description,[2] a transponder and transceiver are both functionally similar devices that convert a full-duplex electrical signal into a full-duplex optical signal. The difference between the two is that transceivers interface electrically with the host system using a serial interface, whereas transponders use a parallel interface to do so. In this view, transponders provide easier-to-handle lower-rate parallel signals, but are bulkier and consume more power than transceivers.
according to another description,[3] transceivers are limited to providing an electrical-optical function only (not differentiating between serial or parallel electrical interfaces), whereas transponders convert an optical signal at one wavelength to an optical signal at another wavelength (typically ITU standardized for DWDM communication). As such, transponders can be considered as two transceivers placed back-to-back. This view also seems to be held by e.g. Fujitsu.[4]
As a result, difference in transponder functionality also might influence the functional description of related optical modules like transceivers and muxponders.
A bumblebee worker with a transponder attached to its back
Another type of transponder occurs in identification friend or foe systems in military aviation and in air traffic control secondary surveillance radar (beacon radar) systems for general aviation and commercial aviation. Primary radar works best with large all-metal aircraft, but not so well on small, composite aircraft. Its range is also limited by terrain and rain or snow and also detects unwanted objects such as automobiles, hills and trees. Furthermore it cannot always estimate the altitude of an aircraft. Secondary radar overcomes these limitations but it depends on a transponder in the aircraft to respond to interrogations from the ground station to make the plane more visible.
Depending on the type of interrogation, the transponder sends back a transponder code (or "squawk code", Mode A) or altitude information (Mode C) to help air traffic controllers to identify the aircraft and to maintain separation between planes. Another mode called Mode S (Mode Select) is designed to help avoiding over-interrogation of the transponder (having many radars in busy areas) and to allow automatic collision avoidance. Mode S transponders are 'backwards compatible' with Modes A & C. Mode S is mandatory in controlled airspace in many countries. Some countries have also required, or are moving towards requiring, that all aircraft be equipped with Mode S, even in uncontrolled airspace. However in the field of general aviation there have been objections to these moves, because of the cost, size, limited benefit to the users in uncontrolled airspace, and, in the case of balloons and gliders, the power requirements during long flights.
The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea requires the Automatic Identification System (AIS) to be fitted aboard international voyaging ships with gross tonnage (GT) of 300 or more, and all passenger ships regardless of size.[5] Although AIS transmitters/receivers are generally called transponders they generally transmit autonomously, although coast stations can interrogate class B transponders on smaller vessels for additional information. In addition, navigational aids often have transponders called RACON (radar beacons) designed to make them stand out on a ship's radar screen.
Many modern automobiles have keys with transponders hidden inside the plastic head of the key. The user of the car may not even be aware that the transponder is there, because there are no buttons to press. When a key is inserted into the ignition lock cylinder and turned, the car's computer sends a radio signal to the transponder. Unless the transponder replies with a valid code, the computer will not allow the engine to be started. Transponder keys have no battery; they are energized by the radio signal itself.
Electronic toll collection systems such as E-ZPass in the eastern United States use RFID transponders to identify vehicles. The Highway 407 in Ontario is one of the world's first completely automated toll highways.
Transponders are used in motorsport for lap timing purposes. A cable loop is dug into the race circuit near to the start/finish line. Each car has an active transponder with a unique ID code. When the racing car passes the start/finish line the lap time and the racing position is shown on the score board.
Passive and active RFID systems are used in off-road events such as Enduro and Hare and Hounds racing, the riders have a transponder on their person, normally on their arm. When they complete a lap they swipe or touch the receiver which is connected to a computer and log their lap time. The Casimo Group Ltd make a system which does this.
NASCAR uses transponders and cable loops placed at numerous points around the track to determine the lineup during a caution period. This system replaced a dangerous race back to the start-finish line.
Sonar transponders operate under water and are used to measure distance and form the basis of underwater location marking, position tracking and navigation.
Transponders may also be used by residents to enter their gated communities. However, having more than one transponder causes problems. If a resident's car with simple transponder is parked in the vicinity, any vehicle can come up to the automated gate, triggering the gate interrogation signal, which may get an acceptable response from the resident's car. Such units properly installed might involve beamforming, unique transponders for each vehicle, or simply obliging vehicles to be stored away from the gate.
Acronyms and abbreviations in avionics
Muxponder
Rebecca/Eureka transponding radar
^ TP
^ Optical Fiber Telecommunications V: Systems and networks, Academic Press, 2008, page 353-354
^ WDM and DWDM Multiplexing Powerpoint presentation, School of Electronic and Communications Engineering, Dublin (Ireland), slide 61
^ Fujitsu DWDM Primer, 2004
^ International Maritime Organization. "December 2000 amendments".
This article incorporates public domain material from the General Services Administration document "Federal Standard 1037C" (in support of MIL-STD-188).
This article incorporates public domain material from the United States Department of Defense document "Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms".
Transponding with DCC - Transponding in model railroading
WorldHeritage articles incorporating text from the Federal Standard 1037C
WorldHeritage articles incorporating text from MIL-STD-188
WorldHeritage articles incorporating text from the Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms
Communication circuits
Radio electronics
Motorsport terminology
Radio-frequency identification
Sprint Cup Series, Mexico, Touring car racing, Canada, Daytona Beach, Florida
Internet, Information, Alexander Graham Bell, Propaganda, Telecommunications in Egypt
Amateur radio, Radio, Data transmission, Ethernet, Digital signal processing
Sony, Samsung Electronics, Toshiba, Ibm, Kyocera
United States, Thailand, Indonesia, India, London
Radar, Weather, Air traffic control, Jet engine, Transponder
Shared Risk Resource Group
Internet protocol, Synchronous optical networking, NP-complete, Graph rewriting, Optical amplifier
Nasa, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite, National Weather Service, Goddard Space Flight Center
Intelsat, Canada, Geostationary orbit, Galapagos Islands, Mexico
Intelsat, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Guiana Space Centre, Geostationary orbit, C band
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1520
|
__label__wiki
| 0.905214
| 0.905214
|
Citizen Penn
Review of Citizen Penn, Starring Sean Penn: – Raindance Film Festival 2020 – review by Penny Nair Price. Hopefully “no good turn goes unpunished” does not apply to Penn’s care to natural disaster and other unfortunates – read on to discover his caring nature. Sean Penn – who stars in this film about supplying aid…
Connery dies aged 90
Sir Sean Connery, James Bond actor, being the first to bring the role to the big screen and appearing in seven of the spy thrillers. The Scottish star died peacefully in his sleep in the Bahamas, having been “unwell for some time”, his son said. Daniel Craig the current James Bond said Sir Sean was…
New four-week Lockdown for England, and Furlough scheme extended until November
Boris Johnson announces four-week England lockdown from Thursday 5th November 2020 to 2nd December 2020 to try to keep rising coronavirus levels under control. All bars and restaurants will close but takeaways can continue to operate as in the Spring lockdown. Shielding measures will not be reintroduced, but vulnerable people or those aged over…
Baker itching for a new challenge beyond law enters politics
A definitive biography of legendary White House chief of staff and secretary of state James A Baker III: the man who ran Washington when Washington ran the world. From the end of the Watergate scandal to the aftermath of the Cold War, no Republican won the presidency without his help or ran the White House…
“We moved from being part of nature to being apart from nature” David Attenborough
David Attenborough, the 94-year-old natural historian, broadcaster, and legend who filmed his first wildlife documentary in Sierra Leone while the country was still a British colony and seen a colossal expanse of the natural world. In A Life On Our Planet, he highlights the natural world has been damaged and how much trouble we are…
Tremors hit Greek Island of Samos and Turkey killing 85 and injuring 1000
A 7.0 magnitude Earthquake shakes the Greek Island of Samos about 11miles off the coast of Western Izmir Province, which was even felt in Athens, Crete, and Istanbul. Turkey’s Aegean Coast also had tremors causing buildings to collapse according to US geological Survey. In 1999 17, 000 people died in Izmir after an earthquake. The…
International Photography Awards 2020
The winners of this year’s International Photography Awards (IPA), open to professional, non-professional and student photographers around the world, received over 13, 000 submission across its 13 categories. Winners of the professional categories will be entered into the IPA’s Photographer of the Year Competition, with the chance of winning $7, 750($ 10, 000) prize. The…
JIMMY IS PUNK
Raindance will continue to support and inspire film fans and the broader film community, enabling them to thrive during COVID19 pandemic. Britain’s arts and culture organisations have long recognised the need to adapt to survive when faced with the likes of funding cuts or changes in the way audiences engage – and like its compatriots…
Pfizer vaccine could be ready before Christmas
British government who bought vaccine doses for 20 million people, hopes that a German vaccine backed by Pfizer could be ready to distribute before Christmas, if the drug is shown to be successful, with the first doses reserved for the elderly and most vulnerable. Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer said that the vaccine was in…
Kim Kardashan mocked for birthday party on private island
Reality star Kim Kardashian West has been accused of being “ tone deaf” after celebrating her 40th birthday on a private island with a large group of family and friends. Kardashian said the trip followed “two weeks of multiple health screens and asking everyone to quarantine” with the photos of the event posted on Twitter,…
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1529
|
__label__wiki
| 0.9511
| 0.9511
|
Total Milwaukee Bucks
Bucks’ Khris Middleton named reserve for NBA All-Star Game
TORONTO – Khris Middleton came into the NBA as a largely unheralded second-round pick at No. 39 in the 2012 draft. About a year later, he was generally regarded as the “other guy” sent from the Detroit Pistons to the Milwaukee Bucks in the trade headlined by Brandon Jennings and Brandon Knight.
Over six seasons in Milwaukee, Middleton has steadily climbed from a standout player on a 15-win team to a consistent, high-level contributor with his best work coming on the biggest stage of last season’s playoffs when he was arguably the top performer in the series between the Bucks and Boston Celtics.
In the long shadow of Giannis Antetokounmpo, Middleton has embraced his complementary role. While it doesn’t necessarily allow for him to shine as much or his name to be as widely known — it’s become a tired cliché for pundits and outsiders to call Middleton underrated or under-appreciated — he focuses more on the fact that he knows exactly how much his team values what he does.
Milwaukee Bucks forward Khris Middleton (left) will join Giannis Antetokounmpo in the NBA All-Star Game in Charlotte. (Photo: David Butler II, David Butler II-USA TODAY Sports)
In the locker room at Scotiabank Arena following a 105-92 win over the Toronto Raptors that moved the Bucks further ahead of everyone else in the Eastern Conference, Middleton was able to bask in the glow of a day a long time in the making that he couldn’t have scripted any better.
The Bucks had won, claimed a 3-1 win in the season series against the Raptors and before the game, the NBA announced he — for the first time — had been selected among the Eastern Conference reserves for the All-Star Game as voted on by the league’s head coaches.
NBA: Live scoreboard, box scores, standings, statistics
“Definitely couldn’t get any better,” he said.
When the announcement came, Middleton was sitting at his locker with headphones in while watching film on the TV across the room to prepare for the game. Either his dad or his sister — he can’t remember which — called him first to give him the news.
Moments after the announcement on TNT, general manager Jon Horst entered the room and was the first person to congratulate Middleton in person before telling Antetokounmpo, the captain of one of the all-star squads, that he was going to have to pick his teammate in the all-star draft on Feb. 7.
The gravity of Horst’s words didn’t immediately register with Antetokounmpo, but then his eyes lit up and he broke into a wide smile, pointing at Middleton and asking, “All-star?” He then went over to congratulate Middleton, something the rest of the Bucks did one-by-one as they filtered in and out of the locker room.
“I’m really happy for him,” Antetokounmpo said. “As I’ve said it in the past, he’s sacrificed so much for this team. He’s one of the leaders of the team. He definitely deserves it. I’ve been teammates with Khris for six years; I’ve never seen a smile on him that bright when he found out he was an all-star.”
Joining Middleton among the Eastern Conference all-star reserves are Washington’s Bradley Beal, Detroit’s Blake Griffin, Toronto’s Kyle Lowry, Philadelphia’s Ben Simmons, Orlando’s Nikola Vucevic and Indiana’s Victor Oladipo, who is injured and will soon be replaced on the team. The Western Conference reserves are San Antonio’s LaMarcus Aldridge, New Orleans’ Anthony Davis, Denver’s Nikola Jokic, Portland’s Damian Lillard, Golden State’s Klay Thompson, Minnesota’s Karl-Anthony Towns and Oklahoma City’s Russell Westbrook. The All-Star Game will be played on Feb. 17 at Spectrum Center in Charlotte.
With Middleton joining Antetokounmpo in Charlotte, the Bucks will have two all-stars for the first time since 2001 when Ray Allen and Glenn Robinson were picked for the midseason exhibition in Washington, D.C.
For both Middleton and Antetokounmpo, experiencing the All-Star Game together is especially meaningful. The two arrived in Milwaukee in 2013 and together toiled through a 15-win season. They’re the only two players on the current roster who have fully experienced the Bucks’ rebuild over the past six seasons, with each lending their skills and leadership to that ongoing campaign to construct a championship contender in Milwaukee.
“We both never thought we were going to be No. 1 in the East, going to the All-Star Game, taking the coaching staff with us,” Antetokounmpo said, thinking back to six years ago. “I was 18, he was 21 at the time. We were just fighting for a spot, fighting for some playing minutes. It was hard. It was hard playing against Khris and Khris is going to tell you it was hard playing against me. But we never thought we were going to be in this situation representing the Milwaukee Bucks in the All-Star Game.”
Doing what they’ve done, particularly in a small market like Milwaukee, means even more.
“Giannis has been here his whole career and he hasn’t told us or made us think that he wanted to leave,” Middleton said. “From everything I’ve heard, he wants to be here for the rest of his career and I feel the same way. For us, it’s not being in the right market, it’s being with the right team. This organization laid down everything that they can to make sure we succeed.”
Entering Thursday’s game, Middleton was averaging 17.3 points, 5.7 rebounds and 4.2 assists per game while shooting 37.6 percent from three-point range. The only other players in the league averaging at least 17-5-4 and shooting at least 37 percent on three-pointers are Oklahoma City’s Paul George and Golden State’s Stephen Curry and Kevin Durant — each of whom will start in the All-Star Game.
Middleton’s overall numbers may be down compared to last year, but that’s largely due to a schematic shift by the Bucks that includes less playing time for everyone. His per-36-minute scoring, rebounding and assist numbers are the best of his career while he’s played a key role in Milwaukee owning the best winning percentage in the NBA as the calendar flips to February.
The league’s coaches obviously took notice.
“I think he’s always been very well respected around the league,” Warriors coach Steve Kerr said earlier this season. “Maybe not as well-known as other people in his class. He’s an excellent player. He fits the modern game with the way he shoots the ball and his own defensive ability with his length. He’s a key part of their team.”
When Middleton arrives in Charlotte for his first all-star appearance, he’s going to do so knowing he belongs there among the best players in the league. If he didn’t know it before he certainly learned it over the past year. Last season he took on a greater role for the Bucks, averaging a career-high 20.1 points while playing all 82 games before upping his output further during the playoffs when he averaged 24.7 points and shot 59.8 percent — 61.0 percent on three-pointers — in a seven-game series against the Celtics.
Prior to that playoff series, Middleton was named to the U.S. men’s national team pool, which included participating in a summer minicamp in July. There, he played with and against some of the best players in the world and received affirmation from San Antonio Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, who pulled Middleton aside to remind him he was there because he belonged.
“That was a huge confidence boost for me,” Middleton said. “Being in that type of group with those types of players in that type of setting gave me a lot of confidence.
“It gave me reason to believe I am one of the best players here; I am one of the best players in the league.”
Milwaukee Bucks: How they directly influenced the James Harden trade – Behind the Buck Pass
Milwaukee Bucks: 3 keys to victory when hosting Dallas Mavericks – Behind the Buck Pass
Milwaukee Bucks: How the James Harden trade impacts them – Behind the Buck Pass
Detroit Pistons still can’t solve Milwaukee Bucks despite Jerami Grant’s excellence – Detroit Free Press
Detroit Pistons: 3 takeaways from Bucks game – Piston Powered
More in Milwaukee Bucks
Milwaukee Bucks: How they right affected the James Harden trade Behind the Buck Pass Boston...
Milwaukee Bucks: 3 keys to victory when internet hosting Dallas Mavericks Behind the Buck Pass...
Milwaukee Bucks: How the James Harden trade impacts them Behind the Buck Move Houston Rockets...
Detroit Pistons even now can not address Milwaukee Bucks regardless of Jerami Grant’s excellence Detroit...
NBA scores and highlights: Bucks defeat Raptors in top of the table clash
Bucks complete another comeback win
Total Bucks is an independent site and is not affiliated with the NBA or the Milwaukee Bucks
Milwaukee Bucks will hold national anthem auditions September 24 at Fiserv Forum
Milwaukee Bucks Open-Scrimmage Recap: Notes and Notables
So how good are these Milwaukee Bucks?
With new coach and new arena, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Bucks are all smiles
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1531
|
__label__wiki
| 0.833898
| 0.833898
|
Azerbaijan election lacked genuine competition in environment of curtailed rights and freedom
April 13, 2018 Europe , OPINION/NEWS
Reuters photo
The early presidential election in Azerbaijan took place within a restrictive political environment and under laws that curtail fundamental rights and freedoms, which are prerequisites for genuine democratic elections.
Against this backdrop and in the absence of pluralism, including in the media, the election lacked genuine competition. Other candidates refrained from directly challenging or criticizing the incumbent, and distinction was not made between his campaign and his official activities, the international observers concluded in a preliminary statement. At the same time, the authorities were co-operative and international observers were able to operate freely in the pre-election period, and the election administration was well resourced and prepared the election efficiently.
On election day the observers reported widespread disregard for mandatory procedures, a lack of transparency, and numerous serious irregularities, including ballot box stuffing. More than half of the vote counts were assessed negatively, largely due to deliberate falsifications and an obvious disregard for procedures.
“We have noted the positive attitude displayed by the national authorities of Azerbaijan towards international election observation, as well as the professional work of the Central Election Commission in the pre-election period. We stand ready to continue our co-operation and turn it into a joint effort to tackle the fundamental problems that a restrictive political and legal environment, which does not allow for genuine competition, poses for free elections,” said Nilza de Sena, Special Co-ordinator and Leader of the short-term OSCE observation mission. “I encourage the authorities to take good note of the recommendations ODIHR will make in their final report. We will be ready to assist in this process, if requested by Azerbaijan, and to continue our dialogue on the future development of the country`s democracy.”
The election took place in conditions dominated by the ruling New Azerbaijan Party (YAP), which nominated the incumbent president as one of the eight candidates who took part. Some opposition parties boycotted the election, citing a non-competitive environment, while others not participating said the early election date left them with insufficient time to do so meaningfully.
Overall, the campaign generated limited public engagement. The ruling party campaign in favour of the incumbent was well-organized and well-resourced, while the candidate did not campaign himself but made visits across the country and received many high-profile foreign dignitaries in his official capacity. The campaigns of the other seven candidates were limited and appeared hampered by a lack of regional structures and resources.
“We have to consider that, in a political environment where democratic principles are compromised and the rule of law is not observed, fair and free elections are not possible,” said Viorel Riceard Badea, Head of the delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. “On election day we observed several irregularities, but there is no way to know how this affected the outcome of the election.”
Highly restrictive laws related to the media challenge the freedoms of expression and the press, and extend also to website and social media content. Defamation is a criminal offense, punishable by imprisonment and with additional penalties for defamation of the president, further limiting the freedom of expression key to political campaigning, the observers said. The largest part of the political coverage in media outlets monitored was of the incumbent in his official capacity, while all other candidates combined received only a fraction of the time. As required by law, the public broadcaster allocated free airtime to candidates, although only through roundtable discussions on television and radio.
“A few weeks of campaigning during which candidates could present their views on television cannot make up for years during which restrictions on freedom of expression have stifled political debate,” said Margareta Kiener Nellen, Head of the delegation from the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. “The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly will certainly continue to support all steps by the authorities that will bring the country forward on a path towards creating the open political environment necessary for truly free and fair elections.”
“Fundamental rights and freedoms, which are pre-requisites for genuine democratic elections, are severely restricted in practice,” said Corien Jonker, Head of the Election Observation Mission from the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. “The authorities should deliver on Azerbaijan’s commitment as an OSCE participating State to respect, protect and support the democratic rights of its citizens.”
The election administration at all levels appeared highly organized and well-resourced but, due to the lack of political differentiation between the three groups in parliament that nominate commissioners, there is no guarantee the administration is impartial, the observers said. The Central Election Commission held regular public sessions at which no dissenting or argumentative opinions were stated, and the majority of members did not engage in any discussions.
The CEC denied registration to two nominees after ruling a considerable number of the supporting signatures they submitted as duplicate or invalid, leaving them short of the total required. The CEC working group responsible for the verification of signatures was unable to clearly demonstrate the process was technically adequate and accountable. There is no legal provision for nominees to address errors or shortcomings identified by the CEC in relation to the signatures.
The CEC reported registering a total of 58,175 domestic observers, including 4,041 accredited by NGOs, while a number of the international observers’ interlocutors maintained that obstacles introduced by the government and the election administration limit the ability of civil-society organizations to operate. One such organization remains unregistered since 2008, and its volunteers had to accredit themselves individually, some of them facing difficulties.
This was the first presidential election since constitutional amendments in 2016 further increasing the powers of the president. A number of constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights and freedoms related to elections are subject in practice to legal and administrative restrictions. The Election Code is detailed and well-structured. Although a few previous ODIHR recommendations in this area have been taken into account, none of the priority recommendations by ODIHR and Venice Commission were addressed.
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) has a comprehensive approach to security that encompasses politico-military, economic and environmental, and human aspects. It therefore addresses a wide range of security-related concerns, including arms control, confidence- and security-building measures, human rights, national minorities, democratization, policing strategies, counter-terrorism and economic and environmental activities. All 57 participating States enjoy equal status, and decisions are taken by consensus on a politically, but not legally binding basis.
Tags AsiaAzerbaijanCentral Election CommissionElectionEuropeFreedom of SpeechIlham AliyevNew Azerbaijan PartyODIHROSCEPolitics
Previous post Poetry
Next post Poetry
You can be first to comment this post!
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1532
|
__label__wiki
| 0.591304
| 0.591304
|
Deptford Township, New Jersey
Township of Deptford
Benjamin Clark House, built 1769
Nickname(s):
"First Flight in America"[1]
Deptford Township highlighted in Gloucester County. Inset map: Gloucester County highlighted in the State of New Jersey.
Census Bureau map of Deptford Township, New Jersey
Deptford Township
Location in Gloucester County
Show map of Gloucester County, New Jersey
Location in New Jersey
Show map of New Jersey
Location in the United States
Coordinates: 39°48′50″N 75°07′07″W / 39.813794°N 75.118693°W / 39.813794; -75.118693Coordinates: 39°48′50″N 75°07′07″W / 39.813794°N 75.118693°W / 39.813794; -75.118693[2][3]
June 1, 1695 as Bethlehem
Named for
Deptford, England
Faulkner Act Council-Manager
• Body
Paul Medany (D, term ends December 31, 2021)[4][5]
• Manager
Thomas Newman Jr.[6]
• Municipal clerk
Dina L. Zawadski[7]
17.57 sq mi (45.50 km2)
0.24 sq mi (0.61 km2) 1.35%
163rd of 565 in state
59 ft (18 m)
(2010 Census)[10][11][12]
• Estimate
(2019)[13]
72nd of 566 in state
3rd of 24 in county[14]
1,760.3/sq mi (679.7/km2)
UTC−05:00 (Eastern (EST))
UTC−04:00 (Eastern (EDT))
3401517710[2][18][19]
0882149[2][20]
www.deptford-nj.org
Deptford Township is a township in Gloucester County, New Jersey, in the United States. As of the 2010 United States Census, the township's population was 30,561,[10][11][12] reflecting an increase of 3,798 (+14.2%) from the 26,763 counted in the 2000 Census, which had in turn increased by 2,626 (+10.9%) from the 24,137 counted in the 1990 Census.[21]
Deptford was first formed on June 1, 1695, at which time it was known as Bethlehem. It was incorporated as a township by an act of the New Jersey Legislature on February 21, 1798, as one of the state's initial group of 104 townships formed under its new Township Act. Over the centuries, portions of the township were taken to create Washington Township (February 17, 1836), Woodbury Borough (March 27, 1854; now Woodbury City), West Deptford Township (March 1, 1871), Wenonah (March 10, 1883), Westville (April 7, 1914) and Woodbury Heights (April 6, 1915).[22]
Deptford is a suburb of Philadelphia, located on the eastern side of the Walt Whitman Bridge, one conduit which joins southern New Jersey with Philadelphia. It is located 10 miles (16 km) southeast of Philadelphia and 50 miles (80 km) northwest of Atlantic City.
2 Geography
3 Demographics
3.1 2010 Census
4 Economy
5 Arts and culture
6 Parks and recreation
7 Government
7.1 Local government
7.2 Federal, state and county representation
7.3 Politics
9 Transportation
9.1 Roads and highways
9.2 Public transportation
10 Notable people
Dutch explorer Cornelius Jacobsen May led some of the earliest European settlement in the area, and was followed by settlers from Sweden and Finland before coming under British colonial rule. When it was first formed in 1695, the township covered an area of 106 square miles (270 km2) that included today's Deptford Township along with present-day Monroe Township, Washington Township, West Deptford Township, Westville, Woodbury and Woodbury Heights.[22][23]
Deptford Township is named after the English port of Deptford.[24][25]
The Clement Oak in Deptford was the site of the first hot air balloon landing in North America, gathering that distinction when Jean-Pierre Blanchard completed his flight to Deptford from Philadelphia in 1793. During his flight, Blanchard carried a personal letter from George Washington to be delivered to the owner of whatever property Blanchard happened to land on, making the flight the first delivery of air mail in the United States as well.[26]
According to the United States Census Bureau, the township had a total area of 17.57 square miles (45.50 km2), including 17.33 square miles (44.89 km2) of land and 0.24 square miles (0.61 km2) of water (1.35%).[2][3]
The township borders the municipalities of Mantua Township, Washington Township, Wenonah, West Deptford Township, Westville, Woodbury and Woodbury Heights in Gloucester County; and Bellmawr, Gloucester Township and Runnemede in Camden County.[27][28]
Oak Valley (with a 2010 Census population of 3,483[29]) is an unincorporated community and census-designated place (CDP) located within Deptford Township.[30]
Other unincorporated communities, localities and place names located partially or completely within the township include Almonesson, Blackwood Terrace, Clements Bridge, Cooper Village, Country Club Estates, Good Intent, Hammond Heights, Jericho, Lake Tract, New Sharon, Oak Valley, Salina, Westcottville, Westville Grove, Woodbury Gardens, Woodbury Park and Woodbury Terrace.[23][31]
Historical population
1860 4,213 * 25.6%
2019 (est.) 30,349 [13][32][33] −0.7%
Population sources: 1800–2000[34]
1800–1920[35] 1840[36] 1850–1870[37]
1850[38] 1870[39] 1880–1890[40]
1890–1910[41] 1910–1930[42]
1930–1990[43] 2000[44][45] 2010[10][11][12]
The 2010 United States Census counted 30,561 people, 11,689 households, and 7,995 families in the township. The population density was 1,760.3 per square mile (679.7/km2). There were 12,361 housing units at an average density of 712.0 per square mile (274.9/km2). The racial makeup was 78.80% (24,082) White, 12.16% (3,717) Black or African American, 0.24% (73) Native American, 4.45% (1,361) Asian, 0.04% (12) Pacific Islander, 2.04% (622) from other races, and 2.27% (694) from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 5.99% (1,830) of the population.[10]
Of the 11,689 households, 27.8% had children under the age of 18; 50.1% were married couples living together; 12.9% had a female householder with no husband present and 31.6% were non-families. Of all households, 25.3% were made up of individuals and 10.0% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.58 and the average family size was 3.11.[10]
21.6% of the population were under the age of 18, 8.4% from 18 to 24, 27.2% from 25 to 44, 27.7% from 45 to 64, and 15.0% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 39.8 years. For every 100 females, the population had 92.8 males. For every 100 females ages 18 and older there were 90.0 males.[10]
The Census Bureau's 2006–2010 American Community Survey showed that (in 2010 inflation-adjusted dollars) median household income was $66,833 (with a margin of error of +/- $2,897) and the median family income was $76,303 (+/- $2,216). Males had a median income of $52,310 (+/- $2,247) versus $46,532 (+/- $4,525) for females. The per capita income for the borough was $30,476 (+/- $1,269). About 6.9% of families and 8.6% of the population were below the poverty line, including 13.7% of those under age 18 and 10.3% of those age 65 or over.[46]
As of the 2000 United States Census[18] there were 26,763 people, 10,013 households, and 7,079 families residing in the township. The population density was 1,529.7 people per square mile (590.5/km2). There were 10,647 housing units at an average density of 608.6 per square mile (234.9/km2). The racial makeup of the township was 83.44% White, 12.38% Black, 0.21% Native American, 1.53% Asian, 0.03% Pacific Islander, 0.99% from other races, and 1.41% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 2.86% of the population.[44][45]
There were 10,013 households, out of which 31.6% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 53.9% were married couples living together, 11.9% had a female householder with no husband present, and 29.3% were non-families. 24.3% of all households were made up of individuals, and 9.3% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.62 and the average family size was 3.12.[44][45]
In the township the age distribution of the population showed 23.8% under the age of 18, 7.4% from 18 to 24, 32.2% from 25 to 44, 21.6% from 45 to 64, and 15.0% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 37 years. For every 100 females, there were 93.2 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 90.2 males.[44][45]
The median income for a household in the township was $50,147, and the median income for a family was $56,642. Males had a median income of $40,641 versus $28,986 for females. The per capita income for the township was $21,477. 5.9% of the population and 4.3% of families were below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 6.2% of those under the age of 18 and 8.1% of those 65 and older were living below the poverty line.[44][45]
Deptford Mall
The Deptford Mall is the seventh-largest shopping mall in New Jersey and the largest in the South Jersey region of the state, with a Gross leasable area of 1,069,657 square feet (99,374.4 m2).[47] Macerich purchased the mall in 2007 for $241 million.[48]
The Deptford Mall is surrounded by an eight-screen movie theater (the other six-screen theater is now demolished for a new strip mall, though another twelve-screen theater is planned nearby), 12 strip malls, bars and numerous restaurants and individual stores. This business district is a major contributor to Deptford having one of the lowest municipal tax rates in Gloucester County.[citation needed]
Deptford is featured briefly in the film Patti Smith: Dream of Life, a 2008 documentary about rock musician Patti Smith.[49]
Tall Pines State Preserve is a 111-acre (45 ha) nature preserve that opened in November 2015 as Gloucester County's first state park and is located along the border of Deptford Township and Mantua Township. Originally a forest that was turned into an asparagus field and then a golf course, the land was preserved through the efforts of the South Jersey Land and Water Trust, the Friends of Tall Pines, Gloucester County Nature Club, and the New Jersey Green Acres Program.[50]
Deptford Township operates within the Faulkner Act, formally known as the Optional Municipal Charter Law, under the Council-Manager form of municipal government. The township is one of 42 municipalities (of the 565) statewide that use this form of government.[51] The governed body is comprised of the seven-member Township Council, whose members are elected on an at-large basis in partisan elections to serve four-year terms of office on a staggered basis, with either three or four seats coming up for election in odd-numbered years.[8] The council then selects a mayor and a deputy mayor to serve two-year terms from among its members during the reorganization meeting in January. There are no term limits for council, mayor or deputy mayor, and elected officials can remain in those offices as long as they continue to be nominated by the council every two years and as long as they win their council elections every four years. The council hires an independent manager to serve as the chief administrative official of the township. The Township Manager is Rob Hatalovsky.[6]
As of 2020[update], the members of the Deptford Township Council are Mayor Paul Medany (D, term on committee and ends December 31, 2023; term as mayor ends 2021), Deputy Mayor Tom Hufnell (D, term on committee ends 2023; term as deputy mayor ends 2021), Kenneth Barnshaw (D, 2021), MacKenzie Belling (D, 2023), Bill Lamb (D, 2021), Wayne Love (D, 2021), Phillip Schocklin (D, 2021).[4][52][53][54][55][56]
Federal, state and county representation
Deptford Township is located in the 1st Congressional District[57] and is part of New Jersey's 5th state legislative district.[11][58][59]
For the 116th United States Congress, New Jersey's First Congressional District is represented by Donald Norcross (D, Camden).[60][61] New Jersey is represented in the United States Senate by Democrats Cory Booker (Newark, term ends 2021)[62] and Bob Menendez (Paramus, term ends 2025).[63][64]
For the 2018–2019 session (Senate, General Assembly), the 5th Legislative District of the New Jersey Legislature is represented in the State Senate by Nilsa Cruz-Perez (D, Barrington) and in the General Assembly by Patricia Egan Jones (D, Barrington) and William Spearman (D, Camden).[65][66] Spearman took office in June 2018 following the resignation of Arthur Barclay.[67]
Gloucester County is governed by a Board of Chosen Freeholders, whose seven members are elected at-large to three-year terms of office on a staggered basis in partisan elections, with two or three seats coming up for election each year. At a reorganization meeting held each January, the Board selects a Freeholder Director and a Deputy Freeholder Director from among its members. As of 2020[update], Gloucester County's Freeholders are Freeholder Director Robert M. Damminger (D, West Deptford Township; 2021),[68] Deputy Freeholder Director Frank J. DiMarco (D, Deptford Township; 2022),[69] Lyman J. Barnes (D, Logan Township; 2020),[70] Daniel Christy (D, Washington Township; 2022),[71] Jim Jefferson (D, Woodbury; 2020),[72] Jim Lavender (D, Woolwich Township; 2021),[73] and Heather Simmons (D, Glassboro; 2020).[74][75]
Constitutional officers elected countywide are: County Clerk James N. Hogan (D, Franklinville in Franklin Township; 5-year term ends 2022),[76][77][78] Sheriff Carmel Morina (D, Greenwich Township; 3-year term ends 2021)[79][80][81] and Surrogate Giuseppe "Joe" Chila (D, Woolwich Township; 5-year term ends 2022).[82][83][84][78][85][81]
As of March 23, 2011, there was a total of 19,449 registered voters in Deptford, of whom 8,169 (42.0%) were registered as Democrats, 2,740 (14.1%) were registered as Republicans and 8,523 (43.8%) were registered as Unaffiliated. There were 17 voters registered to other parties.[86]
In the 2012 presidential election, Democrat Barack Obama received 62.3% of the vote (8,427 cast), ahead of Republican Mitt Romney with 36.5% (4,938 votes), and other candidates with 1.2% (168 votes), among the 13,639 ballots cast by the township's 20,488 registered voters (106 ballots were spoiled), for a turnout of 66.6%.[87][88] In the 2008 presidential election, Democrat Barack Obama received 60.4% of the vote (8,655 cast), ahead of Republican John McCain with 37.1% (5,311 votes) and other candidates with 1.5% (215 votes), among the 14,332 ballots cast by the township's 20,166 registered voters, for a turnout of 71.1%.[89] In the 2004 presidential election, Democrat John Kerry received 58.0% of the vote (7,426 ballots cast), outpolling Republican George W. Bush with 40.8% (5,220 votes) and other candidates with 0.6% (104 votes), among the 12,806 ballots cast by the township's 17,725 registered voters, for a turnout percentage of 72.2.[90]
In the 2013 gubernatorial election, Republican Chris Christie received 60.9% of the vote (4,794 cast), ahead of Democrat Barbara Buono with 37.7% (2,969 votes), and other candidates with 1.4% (111 votes), among the 8,093 ballots cast by the township's 20,145 registered voters (219 ballots were spoiled), for a turnout of 40.2%.[91][92] In the 2009 gubernatorial election, Democrat Jon Corzine received 48.9% of the vote (4,158 ballots cast), ahead of Republican Chris Christie with 41.0% (3,487 votes), Independent Chris Daggett with 7.3% (622 votes) and other candidates with 0.8% (65 votes), among the 8,500 ballots cast by the township's 19,678 registered voters, yielding a 43.2% turnout.[93]
The Deptford Township Schools is a public school district, comprising eight school facilities, that serves students in pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade.[94] As of the 2017–18 school year, the district, comprised of eight schools, had an enrollment of 4,419 students and 329.5 classroom teachers (on an FTE basis), for a student–teacher ratio of 13.4:1.[95] Schools in the district (with 2017-18 enrollment data from the National Center for Education Statistics[96]) are Central Early Childhood Center[97] (639 students; in grades PreK-1), Pine Acres Early Childhood Center[98] (240; PreK-1), Good Intent School[99] (353; 2-6), Lake Tract School[100] (488; 2-6), Oak Valley School[101] (369; 2-6), Shady Lane School[102] (419; 2-6), Monongahela Middle School[103] (643; 7&8), Deptford Township High School[104] (1,092; 9-12) and New Sharon School[105] which serves students ages 3–21 with developmental or cognitive disabilities.[106]
Students from across the county are eligible to apply to attend Gloucester County Institute of Technology, a four-year high school in Deptford Township that provides technical and vocational education. As a public school, students do not pay tuition to attend the school.[107]
Rowan College at Gloucester County is located in Deptford, and opened there in 1968 as Gloucester County College with classes held at Monongahela Junior High School and Deptford High School.[108]
The southbound New Jersey Turnpike in Deptford Township
As of May 2010[update], the township had a total of 150.03 miles (241.45 km) of roadways, of which 99.01 miles (159.34 km) were maintained by the municipality, 28.87 miles (46.46 km) by Gloucester County and 18.75 miles (30.18 km) by the New Jersey Department of Transportation and 3.40 miles (5.47 km) by the New Jersey Turnpike Authority.[109]
Deptford Township is crisscrossed by several major transportation routes, including Route 41,[110] Route 42,[111] Route 45,[112] Route 47,[113] and Route 55.[114] County roads include County Route 534, County Route 544, County Route 551 and County Route 553. The New Jersey Turnpike passes through, but the nearest interchange is Exit 3 in neighboring Bellmawr/Runnemede.[115] A very short section of Interstate 295 also passes through Deptford Township.
NJ Transit bus service is available to Philadelphia on the 400, 401, 402, 408, 410 and 412 routes, and local service is provided on the 455 and 463 routes.[116][117]
Rock musician Patti Smith hails from Deptford.
See also: Category:People from Deptford Township, New Jersey.
People who were born in, residents of, or otherwise closely associated with Deptford Township include:
Enrico Di Giuseppe (1932-2005), operatic tenor who performed with the New York City Opera and the Metropolitan Opera.[118]
Evan Edinger (born 1990), YouTuber and world traveler.[119]
Shaun T. Fitness (born 1978), motivational speaker, fitness trainer and choreographer best known for his home fitness programs T25, Insanity and Hip-Hop Abs.[120]
Isaac Hopper (1771–1852), abolitionist, founder of the Underground Railroad.[121]
Michael Johns (born 1964), health care executive, former White House speechwriter, conservative policy analyst and writer.[122]
Katrina Law (born c. 1985), actress.[123]
Bob Levy (born 1962), stand-up comic.[124]
Dave Rowe (born 1945), former professional football player who played for the Baltimore Colts, New England Patriots, Oakland Raiders and San Diego Chargers.[125]
Mel Sheppard (1883–1942), winner of four gold medals at the 1908 Summer Olympics and 1912 Summer Olympics, who lived here for his first nine years.[126]
Patti Smith (born 1946), rock musician, songwriter and poet.[127]
Gary Stuhltrager (born 1955), eight-term member of the New Jersey General Assembly.[128]
^ Kuperinsky, Amy. "'The Jewel of the Meadowlands'?: N.J.'s best, worst and weirdest town slogans", NJ Advance Media for NJ.com, January 22, 2015. Accessed July 12, 2016. "Deptford, in Gloucester County, has '1st Flight in America' emblazoned on its water tower, referring to the first hot-air balloon landing in North America, all the way back in 1793."
^ a b c d e f 2019 Census Gazetteer Files: New Jersey Places, United States Census Bureau. Accessed July 1, 2020.
^ a b US Gazetteer files: 2010, 2000, and 1990, United States Census Bureau. Accessed September 4, 2014.
^ a b Mayor & Council, Deptford Township. Accessed April 30, 2020.
^ 2020 New Jersey Mayors Directory, New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. Accessed February 1, 2020. As of date accessed, Medany is listed with a term-end year of 2023, which is the end of his four-year council term, not his two-year mayoral term of office.
^ a b Township Administration, Deptford Township. Accessed April 30, 2020.
^ Township Clerk, Deptford Township. Accessed April 30, 2020.
^ a b 2012 New Jersey Legislative District Data Book, Rutgers University Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, March 2013, p. 28.
^ U.S. Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System: Township of Deptford, Geographic Names Information System. Accessed March 5, 2013.
^ a b c d e f DP-1 - Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 for Deptford township, Gloucester County, New Jersey Archived 2020-02-12 at Archive.today, United States Census Bureau. Accessed August 22, 2012.
^ a b c d Municipalities Sorted by 2011-2020 Legislative District, New Jersey Department of State. Accessed February 1, 2020.
^ a b c Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2010 for Deptford township Archived 2016-03-04 at the Wayback Machine, New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development. Accessed August 22, 2012.
^ a b QuickFacts for Deptford township, Gloucester County, New Jersey; Gloucester County, New Jersey; New Jersey from Population estimates, July 1, 2019, (V2019), United States Census Bureau. Accessed May 21, 2020.
^ a b GCT-PH1 Population, Housing Units, Area, and Density: 2010 - State -- County Subdivision from the 2010 Census Summary File 1 for New Jersey Archived 2020-02-12 at Archive.today, United States Census Bureau. Accessed December 11, 2012.
^ Look Up a ZIP Code for Deptford, NJ, United States Postal Service. Accessed August 22, 2012.
^ Zip Codes, State of New Jersey. Accessed October 8, 2013.
^ Area Code Lookup - NPA NXX for Deptford, NJ, Area-Codes.com. Accessed October 8, 2013.
^ a b U.S. Census website , United States Census Bureau. Accessed September 4, 2014.
^ Geographic codes for New Jersey, Missouri Census Data Center. Accessed September 1, 2019.
^ US Board on Geographic Names, United States Geological Survey. Accessed September 4, 2014.
^ Table 7. Population for the Counties and Municipalities in New Jersey: 1990, 2000 and 2010, New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development, February 2011. Accessed August 22, 2012.
^ a b c Snyder, John P. The Story of New Jersey's Civil Boundaries: 1606-1968, Bureau of Geology and Topography; Trenton, New Jersey; 1969. p. 138. Accessed August 22, 2012.
^ a b Township History, Deptford Township. Accessed November 7, 2019. "The old township, incorporated in 1695, comprised some 106 square miles and included what today is West Deptford, Washington Township, Monroe, Westville, Woodbury and Woodbury Heights.... It was settled in 1623 by the Dutch under Cornelius Jacobse Mey and was later claimed by the Swedes and the Finns before coming under British control.... Today, Deptford is comprised of many sections, including Almonesson, Jericho, New Sharon, Oak Valley, Westville Grove, Cooper Village, Blackwood Terrace, Hammond Heights, Lake Tract, Woodbury Terrace, Woodbury Gardens, Country Club Estates and Good Intent."
^ Hutchinson, Viola L. The Origin of New Jersey Place Names, New Jersey Public Library Commission, May 1945. Accessed August 28, 2015.
^ Gannett, Henry. The Origin of Certain Place Names in the United States, p. 104. United States Government Printing Office, 1905. Accessed August 28, 2015.
^ Roncace, Kelly. "Jean-Pierre Blanchard's balloon landing, a major part of Deptford's history, turns 217", Gloucester County Times, January 5, 2010. Accessed May 7, 2012. "More than 200 years ago, President George Washington watched as Jean-Pierre Blanchard soared over the Delaware River and into New Jersey skies, before finally landing in Deptford Township for the first hot air balloon flight and landing in North America's history."
^ Municipalities within Gloucester County, NJ, Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. Accessed November 7, 2019.
^ New Jersey Municipal Boundaries, New Jersey Department of Transportation. Accessed November 7, 2019.
^ DP-1 - Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 for Oak Valley CDP, New Jersey Archived 2020-02-12 at Archive.today, United States Census Bureau. Accessed May 7, 2012.
^ New Jersey: 2010 - Population and Housing Unit Counts - 2010 Census of Population and Housing (CPH-2-32), United States Census Bureau, August 2012. Accessed November 6, 2012.
^ Locality Search, State of New Jersey. Accessed May 7, 2015.
^ Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Minor Civil Divisions in New Jersey: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019, United States Census Bureau. Accessed May 21, 2020.
^ Census Estimates for New Jersey April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019, United States Census Bureau. Accessed May 21, 2020.
^ Barnett, Bob. "Population Data for Gloucester County Municipalities, 1800 - 2000, WestJersey.org, January 6, 2011. Accessed August 6, 2011.
^ Compendium of censuses 1726-1905: together with the tabulated returns of 1905, New Jersey Department of State, 1906. Accessed October 8, 2013.
^ Bowen, Francis. American Almanac and Repository of Useful Knowledge for the Year 1843, p. 232, David H. Williams, 1842. Accessed October 8, 2013.
^ Raum, John O. The History of New Jersey: From Its Earliest Settlement to the Present Time, Volume 1, p. 256, J. E. Potter and company, 1877. Accessed October 8, 2013. "Deptford contained a population in 1850 of 3,355; in 1860, 4,213; and in 1870, 4,663. West Deptford township was formed from Deptford in 1871." Deptford's population of 4,663 for 1870 includes population of Woodbury of 1,965, which is listed separately, but not subtracted out in this count.
^ Debow, James Dunwoody Brownson. The Seventh Census of the United States: 1850, p. 138. R. Armstrong, 1853. Accessed October 8, 2013.
^ Staff. A compendium of the ninth census, 1870, p. 258. United States Census Bureau, 1872. Accessed October 8, 2013. Deptford's population of 4,663 for 1870 includes population of Woodbury of 1,965
^ Porter, Robert Percival. Preliminary Results as Contained in the Eleventh Census Bulletins: Volume III - 51 to 75, p. 98. United States Census Bureau, 1890. Accessed October 8, 2013. Deptfor's 1990 population of 2,064 includes the 383 for Wenonah that is listed separately in subsequent reports.
^ Thirteenth Census of the United States, 1910: Population by Counties and Minor Civil Divisions, 1910, 1900, 1890, United States Census Bureau, p. 336. Accessed May 7, 2012.
^ Fifteenth Census of the United States : 1930 - Population Volume I, United States Census Bureau, p. 716. Accessed March 7, 2012.
^ New Jersey Resident Population by Municipality: 1930 - 1990, Workforce New Jersey Public Information Network. Accessed June 28, 2015.
^ a b c d e Census 2000 Profiles of Demographic / Social / Economic / Housing Characteristics for Deptford township, New Jersey Archived 2007-07-11 at the Wayback Machine, United States Census Bureau. Accessed October 31, 2016.
^ a b c d e DP-1: Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000 - Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data for Deptford township, Gloucester County, New Jersey Archived 2020-02-12 at Archive.today, United States Census Bureau. Accessed August 22, 2012.
^ DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics from the 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates for Deptford township, Gloucester County, New Jersey Archived 2020-02-12 at Archive.today, United States Census Bureau. Accessed May 7, 2012.
^ Directory of Major Malls: Deptford Mall Archived 2012-03-06 at the Wayback Machine, International Council of Shopping Centers. Accessed May 7, 2012.
^ Staff. "Deptford Mall sold for $241M", Philadelphia Business Journal, January 9, 2007. Accessed May 7, 2012. "A California company said Tuesday it will pay $241 million for the Deptford Mall in South Jersey. The buyer is Macerich Partnership LP, the operating partnership of Santa Monica-based Macerich Co. (NYSE:MAC).... Deptford Mall, which is 1 million square feet, is anchored by JC Penney, Sears, Macy's and Boscov's. "
^ "Patti Smith: Dream of Life", Electric Sheep, December 2, 2008.
^ "Tall Pines State Preserve; Gloucester County's First State Park" Archived 2016-04-14 at the Wayback Machine, Natural Awakenings: South Jersey Edition. Accessed May 19, 2016. "This 111-acre parcel of land that straddles Mantua and Deptford townships was originally forested woodlands, then an asparagus field before it became a golf course named Tall Pines in the early 1950s."
^ Inventory of Municipal Forms of Government in New Jersey, Rutgers University Center for Government Studies, July 1, 2011. Accessed November 18, 2019.
^ 2018 Municipal User Friendly Budget, Deptford Township. Accessed September 17, 2019.
^ 2020 Muniicpal Data Sheet, Deptford Township. Accessed April 30, 2020. As of date accessed, Belling, Hufnell and Medany are all listed with an incorrect term-end year of 2022.
^ Gloucester County 2020 Official Directory, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed April 30, 2020.
^ General Election November 5, 2019 Summary Report Unofficial Results, Gloucester County, New Jersey Clerk, November 12, 2019. Accessed January 1, 2020.
^ Plan Components Report, New Jersey Redistricting Commission, December 23, 2011. Accessed February 1, 2020.
^ 2019 New Jersey Citizen's Guide to Government, New Jersey League of Women Voters. Accessed October 30, 2019.
^ Districts by Number for 2011-2020, New Jersey Legislature. Accessed January 6, 2013.
^ Directory of Representatives: New Jersey, United States House of Representatives. Accessed January 3, 2019.
^ Full Biography, Congressman Donald Norcross. Accessed January 3, 2019. "Donald and his wife Andrea live in Camden City and are the proud parents of three grown children and grandparents of two."
^ About Cory Booker, United States Senate. Accessed January 26, 2015. "He now owns a home and lives in Newark's Central Ward community."
^ Biography of Bob Menendez, United States Senate, January 26, 2015. "He currently lives in Paramus and has two children, Alicia and Robert."
^ Senators of the 116th Congress from New Jersey. United States Senate. Accessed April 17, 2019. "Booker, Cory A. - (D - NJ) Class II; Menendez, Robert - (D - NJ) Class I"
^ Legislative Roster 2018-2019 Session, New Jersey Legislature. Accessed July 3, 2018.
^ District 5 Legislators, New Jersey Legislature. Accessed July 3, 2018.
^ Johnson, Brent. "Yet another new lawmaker takes office in N.J.", NJ Advance Media for NJ.com, July 2, 2018. Accessed July 3, 2018. "Former Camden councilman William Spearman was sworn in Saturday as the newest member of the state Assembly, replacing Arthur Barclay, who resigned last month amid assault charges stemming from a domestic violence incident."
^ Robert M. Damminger, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Frank J. DiMarco, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Lyman Barnes, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Daniel Christy, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Jim Jefferson, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Jim Lavender, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Heather Simmons, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Board of Freeholders, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ James N. Hogan, Gloucester County. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Members List: Clerks, Constitutional Officers Association of New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ a b 2017 Gloucester County Election Results, Office of the Gloucester County Clerk. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Sheriff Carmel M. Morina, Gloucester County. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Members List: Sheriffs, Constitutional Officers Association of New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Surrogate Giuseppe Chila, Gloucester County. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Members List: Surrogates, Constitutional Officers Association of New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Row Officers, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Helene Reed Dies, New Jersey Globe, April 28, 2018. Accessed February 11, 2020.
^ Voter Registration Summary - Gloucester, New Jersey Department of State Division of Elections, March 23, 2011. Accessed November 6, 2012.
^ "Presidential General Election Results - November 6, 2012 - Gloucester County" (PDF). New Jersey Department of Elections. March 15, 2013. Retrieved December 24, 2014.
^ "Number of Registered Voters and Ballots Cast - November 6, 2012 - General Election Results - Gloucester County" (PDF). New Jersey Department of Elections. March 15, 2013. Retrieved December 24, 2014.
^ 2008 Presidential General Election Results: Gloucester County, New Jersey Department of State Division of Elections, December 23, 2008. Accessed November 6, 2012.
^ 2004 Presidential Election: Gloucester County, New Jersey Department of State Division of Elections, December 13, 2004. Accessed November 6, 2012.
^ "Governor – Gloucester County" (PDF). New Jersey Department of Elections. January 29, 2014. Retrieved December 24, 2014.
^ "Number of Registered Voters and Ballots Cast - November 5, 2013 - General Election Results - Gloucester County" (PDF). New Jersey Department of Elections. January 29, 2014. Retrieved December 24, 2014.
^ 2009 Governor: Gloucester County Archived 2012-10-17 at the Wayback Machine, New Jersey Department of State Division of Elections, December 31, 2009. Accessed November 6, 2012.
^ Identification, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020. "Purpose: The Board of Education exists for the purpose of providing a thorough and efficient system of free public education in grades Pre-Kindergarten through twelve in the Deptford Township School District. Composition: The Deptford Township School District is comprised of all the area within Deptford Township, within the County of Gloucester."
^ District information for Deptford Township Public School District, National Center for Education Statistics. Accessed November 1, 2019.
^ School Data for the Deptford Township Schools, National Center for Education Statistics. Accessed November 1, 2019.
^ Central Early Childhood Center, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Pine Acres Early Childhood Center, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Good Intent School, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Lake Tract School, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Oak Valley School, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Shady Lane School, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Monongahela Middle School, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Deptford Township High School, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ New Sharon School, Deptford Township Schools. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ New Jersey School Directory for the Deptford Township Schools, New Jersey Department of Education. Accessed December 29, 2016.
^ Admissions, Gloucester County Institute of Technology. Accessed November 7, 2019. "There is no charge to attend. GCIT is a public school.... GCIT is the vocational-technical school for Gloucester County residents. You must live in Gloucester County to apply and attend."
^ General Information, Rowan College at Gloucester County. Accessed September 9, 2017.
^ Gloucester County Mileage by Municipality and Jurisdiction, New Jersey Department of Transportation, May 2010. Accessed July 18, 2014.
^ Route 41 Straight Line Diagram, New Jersey Department of Transportation, updated April 2016. Accessed November 7, 2019.
^ Route 42 Straight Line Diagram, New Jersey Department of Transportation, updated March 2017. Accessed November 7, 2019.
^ New Jersey Turnpike Straight Line Diagram, New Jersey Department of Transportation, updated August 2014. Accessed November 7, 2019.
^ Gloucester County Bus / Rail Connections, NJ Transit, backed up by the Internet Archive as of July 26, 2010. Accessed November 6, 2012.
^ Gloucester County's Transit Guide, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Accessed November 7, 2019.
^ "Arts: It was a rocky road in 2006", Courier-Post, December 31, 2006. Accessed January 26, 2020. "Tenor Enrico di Giuseppe, a Metropolitan Opera star who lived in Deptford, died on New Year's eve."
^ Exploring My Hometown of Deptford, NJ and Philadelphia! at Evan Edinger Travel, YouTube. Accessed January 26, 2020.
^ Kuperinsky, Amy. "How celebrity trainer Shaun T went from Camden survivor to fitness superstar", NJ Advance Media for NJ.com, August 8, 2016, updated July 21, 2017. Accessed September 27, 2018. "Shaun Thompson was born in Camden and spent his early years with his mother and brother in Philadelphia. Feeling trapped by what he describes as four years of sexual abuse by a family member, he took refuge with his grandparents in Deptford.... At Deptford High School, Blokker was a natural at track and field, but he really wanted to be the next Anderson Cooper."
^ Bulletin Article - September 2005 Archived 2007-09-27 at the Wayback Machine, Historical Society of Haddonfield, accessed April 17, 2007. "In the city, she boarded with the family of Isaac Hopper whose ancestors had lived in what is now Deptford, New Jersey."
^ Driscoll, Jessica. "Different cup of tea", Gloucester County Times, February 24, 2010.
^ Katalinas, Theresa. "Local Actress Has 'Remorse' in Horror Movie; Deptford native Katrina Law stars in the independent 'psychological horror' movie. Filming was largely in Horsham, PA's Penrose-Strawbridge house, which is said to be haunted.", West Deptford Patch, June 15, 2013. Accessed May 7, 2015.
^ Budzak, Gary. "Stern's irreverent cohorts to provide humor at Alrosa Villa", The Columbus Dispatch, October 16, 2008. Accessed April 12, 2011. "Levy, of Deptford, N.J., has performed stand-up for 20 years, earning the ironic nickname 'Reverend' for his foul language."
^ Staff. "Deptford selects Hall of Fame class", The Philadelphia Inquirer, April 8, 2009. Accessed February 8, 2011. "Deptford has selected a group that will make up its first athletic Hall of Fame class. The inaugural class will be inducted April 27 at Auletto Caterers in Deptford. Dave Rowe, a starter for the 1977 Super Bowl champion Oakland Raiders, will be one of seven athletes to be inducted."
^ Anastatsia, Phil. "A champion to remember Mel Sheppard won the first of his 4 Olympic golds 100 years ago.", The Philadelphia Inquirer, July 14, 2008. Accessed December 27, 2013. "Sheppard was born in 1883 in Almonesson, a section of Deptford Township in Gloucester County. He lived there, in a twin house, for the first nine years of his life.... At age 9, Sheppard moved with his family to Clayton, and got a job 'rolling jars' in a glass factory for $9 a month. His family moved to Haddonfield a few years later, then to the Grays Ferry section of Philadelphia when Sheppard was about 15."
^ LaGorce, Tammy. "Music; Patti Smith, New Jersey's Truest Rock-Poet", The New York Times, December 11, 2005. Accessed April 25, 2008. "But of all the ways to know Patti Smith, few people, including Ms. Smith, would think to embrace her as Deptford Township's proudest export."
^ Assemblyman Gary W. Stuhltrager, New Jersey Legislature, backed up by the Internet Archive as of February 25, 1998. Accessed June 12, 2010.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Deptford Township, New Jersey.
Deptford Township Official Web Site
Deptford Public Library
Deptford Township Schools
Deptford Township Schools's 2015–16 School Report Card from the New Jersey Department of Education
School Data for the Deptford Township Schools, National Center for Education Statistics
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1535
|
__label__wiki
| 0.651628
| 0.651628
|
New Judgment: McCann v The State Hospitals Board for Scotland [2017] UKSC 31
Matrix Legal Support Service New Judgments
On appeal from: [2014] CSIH 71
This appeal considered whether the respondent’s smoking ban infringed the claimant’s rights under ECHR, arts 8 and 14, and whether the smoking ban needed to comply, and did comply, with the principles set out in the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, s 1, which include the patient’s wishes and feelings. The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal, though only to the extent that the part of the impugned decision, which relates to the prohibition from possession of tobacco products and the powers of search and confiscation, does not comply with the 2003 Act and Mental Health (Safety and Security) (Scotland) Regulations 2005. The Court held that, in instituting the comprehensive smoking ban, there was no consideration of the principle that there must only be the minimum restriction on the freedom of the patient that is necessary in the circumstances by the Board. Equally there was no compliance with the obligations to inform and record in the 2005 Regulations, and as such the prohibition on having tobacco products and the related powers to search and confiscate were held to be illegal, falling to be annulled. The Court held that the policy infringed the claimant’s ECHR, art 8 rights to privacy, but that this was not disproportionate and pursued a legitimate aim of protecting public health, and considered that the art 14 challenge failed as the differences in treatment between detained patients in the State Hospital and patients in other NHS facilities or prisoners were a matter of timing rather than policy.
For judgment, please download: [2017] UKSC 31
For Court’s press summary, please download: Court’s Press Summary
For a non-PDF version of the judgment, please visit: BAILII
To watch the hearing, please visit: Supreme Court Website (11 Oct 2016 morning session) (11 Oct 2016 afternoon session)
Leave a reply on "New Judgment: McCann v The State Hospitals Board for Scotland [2017] UKSC 31"
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1537
|
__label__cc
| 0.732598
| 0.267402
|
IS A SIZE 6 MODEL NOW CONSIDERED PLUS-SIZED?
CULTURE, FASHION, NEWS
by Jessica Natale
Sizing in the modeling industry has been fluctuating for decades. Currently sample sizes are 0 and 2, making it impossible for a healthy woman to fit into clothing without succumbing to starvation. It has been documented that nearly 40% of models currently working in the industry are struggling with an eating disorder and our question is why?
A young model recently penned an essay about her struggles – she couldn’t find a job as a 5’11” model at 120 pounds because she was a size six, eventually being told by agencies that she should pursue plus-sized modeling instead. (It should be noted that Kate Upton, who has graced the cover of Vogue, happily admits to being a size 6 and Cindy Crawford, who was THE supermodel of her time, was also a size 6.) The subject is very tongue-in-cheek within the industry as stylists and photographers openly prefer to work with pin-thin models over healthy girls. The average size for an American woman is a 12, while models average a 0 or 2, so how is it that a 6 is considered plus-sized? The fashion industry is, more or less, promoting an unhealthy image to women across the world.
The horror stories of models eating tissues and sticking to a diet of cigarettes and Diet Coke are the farthest thing from glamorous, yet so many young women are drawn to the glamor of the industry. Back in the 90s, stories began to come out about models doing cocaine in order to stay awake during runway shows because their diet was so minimal, leading to drug addictions. It was around that time that Kate Moss entered the scene, becoming widely referred to as “Cocaine Kate.” Moss brought on a whole new breed of skinny in the industry that pushed the muscular build of models in the 80s out of the picture. In a 2009 interview, Moss is quoted saying “Nothing tastes as good as skinny feels.”
If nothing tastes as good as skinny feels then why does the image of a model walking down the runway nowadays put such a bad taste in our mouth? Women and girls who work in the industry are subjected to massive amounts of criticism – whether it be that they need to alter their facial features, lose weight, or change their hair, each time a model is told that she needs to change in order to work, she is being told that being herself just isn’t good enough.
Even the plus-sized women that we see in ads aren’t as plus-sized as they would appear. In the above photo, you see models wearing padding – a “trick” that is used in the industry to add weight onto plus-sized models in order for them to appear heavier without actually having to gain any weight. Although it may not be as large of an epidemic as models starving themselves, it’s still selling an unrealistic image to women across the world. And it’s not just the models themselves causing hypocrisy – we recently posted an article debating the use of photoshop in the fashion industry, outlining the psychological effects that unattainable images give to the public. Young girls shouldn’t have to grow up in a world where sickly-looking women are the idea of perfection and, more importantly, they shouldn’t have to feel like they need to starve themselves in order to achieve that image.
A size 6 is healthy, just as is a size 12. As long as women are treating their bodies correctly, it shouldn’t matter what the fashion industry has to say. Sample sizes are specifically designed for women who are “supposed” to fit into them and many models admit that even they can’t fit into sample clothing. Simply put, women shouldn’t let the media and fashion industry alter their perception of beauty.
– Jessica Natale for The Untitled Magazine
RACIAL DIVERSITY IN FASHION MAY FINALLY BE GOING BEYOND TOKENISM Historically, white, skinny, and straight women have been the face of fashion. The rise of social media has made the last few years revolutionary in changing that standard. Gender and size inclusivity, along with racial representation,...
THE RISE AND FALL OF THE CONTROVERSIAL VICTORIA’S SECRET FASHION SHOW L Brands, Victoria’s Secret parent company, confirmed last Thursday that the famed Victoria’s Secret fashion show is canceled, at least for now. Chief Financial Officer Stuart Burgdoerfer claimed the show was great for branding at...
THE UNTITLED MAGAZINE’S ART ISSUE – COLLECTOR PRINT + DIGITAL EDITION The Untitled Magazine ART Issue Digital + Print Edition Available Now for Purchase! We are thrilled to present The Untitled Magazine‘s latest print edition, The ART Issue, which is dedicated to all the artists that we...
HOW SOCIAL MEDIA EXPOSED TWO PROMINENT PHOTOGRAPHERS AS SEXUAL PREDATORS In the span of two days, popular Instagram account Diet Prada facilitated the downfall of two of the industry’s prominent photographers. Marcus Hyde, photographer and friend of Kim Kardashian-West, Kanye West and Ariana Grande, and...
MODEL HALIMA ADEN MAKES HISTORY ON SPORTS ILLUSTRATED COVER On the newest cover of Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition, model Halima Aden wears a burkini and a hijab. Making her the first Muslim-American model to front their pages, the issue is appropriately titled “Shattering Perceptions.”...
Tags: beauty, Cindy Crawford, Fashion industry, Kate Moss, Kate Upton, model, Sample sizing, Self-image, The Untitled Magazine, Untitled-Magazine
PAULE KA SS14 AD CAMPAIGN FILM
THE OUTNET: SHOP FURTHER REDUCTIONS ON DESIGNER CLOTHING
Jessica Natale February 6, 2014
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1538
|
__label__wiki
| 0.724672
| 0.724672
|
Sustained release naltrexone (e.g. implants) are not recommended for treating opioid dependence
ATODA understands that Canberrans (including those in detention) continue to be referred to (or supported to access) interstate services that provide sustained release naltrexone (e.g. implants) for the treatment of opioid dependence.
ATODA wishes to re-iterate that sustained release naltrexone products are not registered with the Therapeutic Goods Administration
ATODA has recently updated its advice to members and stakeholders that sustained release naltrexone (e.g. implants) are not recommended for treating opioid dependence.
According to the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC):
“Evidence is currently at an early stage and as such, naltrexone implants remain an experimental product and should only be used within a research setting. Until the relevant data are available and validated, the efficacy of the treatment, alone or in comparison to best practice, cannot be determined. NHMRC’s position on naltrexone implants is that further research on adverse effects is required before a statement on safety can be confidently made.”
The Australian National Council on Drugs (ANCD) is an expert advisory council to the Australian Government and appointed by the Prime Minister. Its members include some of the country’s leading experts in their respective fields related to alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. The ANCD recently released a position statement on Naltrexone Sustained Release Preparations (Injectable & Implants). Their position statement agrees with the conclusion of the NHMRC review that further clinical trials are necessary to ensure the efficacy and safety of naltrexone.
The findings from the NSW State Coroner regarding the deaths of three people have continued to raise concerns about the use of naltrexone. The Coroner’s recommendations include strongly endorsing the statements and recommendations of the ANCD that naltrexone is not recommended for the treatment of opioid dependence.
ATODA calls on its members and stakeholders to raise awareness of this advice with consumers, families, support people and the broader community; the alcohol, tobacco and other drug sector; and allied sectors (including mental health, legal services, the courts and corrective services) to ensure that Canberrans are not referred for treatment for opioid dependence with sustained release naltrexone until there is sufficient evidence to ensure its safety and efficacy.
Efficacy and safety of naltrexone
National Health and Medical Research Council (2011). Naltrexone Implant Treatment for Opioid Dependence: Literature Review – 2010. Canberra: NHMRC.
Lobmaier P, Kornor H, Kunoe N, Bjørndal A. Cochrane: Sustained-Release Naltrexone for Opioid Dependence.
National and ACT guidelines in the treatment of opioid dependence
Gowing L, Ali R, Dunlop A, Farrell M, Lintzeris N (2014) National Guidelines for medication-assisted treatment of opioid dependence. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Note: the above national guidelines are the updated version of these guidelines these are the Intergovernmental Committee on Drugs. (2007) National Phamacotherapy Policy for People Dependent on Opioids. Canberra: Australian Government.
ACT Health. (2010) ACT Opioid Maintenance Treatment Guidelines. Canberra: ACT Government.
Note: The ACT guidelines are currently being reviewed, for further information contact the Opioid Treatment Advisory Committee Secretariat through ACT Health on aodpolicy@act.gov.au
Positions and statements
Australian National Council on Drugs
Their position statement agrees with the conclusion of the NHMRC review that further clinical trials are necessary to ensure the efficacy and safety of naltrexone.
Australian National Council on Drugs (2012). Naltrexone Sustained Release Preparation (Injectable & Implants). ANCD Position Statement – March 2012. Canberra: ANCD.
The Royal Australasian College of Physicians
The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) recognises that long-acting naltrexone products may ultimately prove to be a safe and effective treatment approach for opioid dependence. Accordingly, it is appropriate to support the development of registered products that safely and effectively deliver this treatment. However, until suitable product(s) have undergone normal regulatory assessment procedures and are licensed with the Therapeutics Goods Administration (TGA), unregistered products should not be used on a routine basis and a range of safeguards are required to protect patients, their families, and health professionals.
The Royal Australian College of Physicians (2013). The Use of Sustained Release Formulations of Naltrexone in Opioid Dependence Position Statement. Sydney: RACP.
ATODA
In 2012, ATODA developed a position, consistent with the NHMRC and ANDC, against the use of sustained release naltrexone for the treatment of opioid dependence in 2012. ATODA has updated this position to reflect further developments in the field. The most recent
Sustained release naltrexone (e.g. implants) is not recommended for treating opioid dependence in Australia (2012, Updated October 2014)
Following requests from ATODA, we are pleased that the Opioid Treatment Advisory Committee developed a formal statement in 2013 (see below).
ACT Opioid Treatment Advisory Committee
The Opioid Treatment Advisory Committee, as the advisory body on matters relating to opioid maintenance treatment in the ACT, supports the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) Position Statement, developed by RACP’s Australasian Chapter of Addiction Medicine.
Opioid Treatment Advisory Committee (OTAC)
Formal Statement: Naltrexone Sustained Release Implants
OTAC, as the advisory body on matters relating to opioid maintenance treatment in the ACT, supports the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) Position Statement, developed by RACP’s Australasian Chapter of Addiction Medicine (attached).
As no long-acting naltrexone product is registered currently for use in Australia by the Therapeutic Goods Association (TGA), until one or more suitable products have undergone normal regulatory assessment and are registered by the TGA, they should not be used on a routine basis.
It is essential that individuals who are opioid dependant and their families are informed regarding the lack of sound scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of naltrexone sustained release implants. Their use may put the individual at risk of harm or death.
OTAC looks forward to receiving news on the research developments in this area.
The Australian Injecting & Illicit Drug Users League
The Australian Injecting & Illicit Drug Users League (AIVL) has welcomed a recent coronial inquest into the deaths of three people in NSW associated with naltrexone implants and the media coverage earlier this week and today that has followed the report’s release. Unfortunately however, we also believe the recommendations of the inquiry do not go anywhere near far enough in addressing the seriousness of the apparent medical negligence issues and fundamental human rights abuses at the heart of these 3 cases.
Dr Alex Wodak
Injecting drug users are a marginalised group in Australia. It is particularly important that medical research and the provision of health services to marginalised groups is handled with even greater care than usual. Cutting corners in research and clinical treatment undermines the processes adopted over the years to minimise the chances of errors of judgment, both in research and in treatment.
If you are thinking about having naltrexone treatment (including a naltrexone implant), make sure that you do your homework first. Find out all you can about the benefits and risks. Get information from more than one source, and certainly from more than just the clinic providing the implant.
Warning over addicts’ implant (Canberra Times, 06 May 2013)
Drug addiction treatment divides opinions (ABC’s 7:30 Report, 23 October 2012)
Detox clinic reignites implant debate (The Brisbane Times, 20 October 2012)
Patient deaths don’t deter detox clinic (Australian Doctor, 15 October 2012)
Nile wants funding for heroin ‘cure’ (Sydney Morning Herald, 19 October 2012)
A dangerous method with tragic consequences (The Canberra Times, 16 October 2012)
Coroner slams clinic’s treatment of addicts (ABC News, 28 September 2012)
Coroner blames poor treatment for detox deaths (ABC’s Lateline, 27 September 2012)
Naltrexone and “naloxone” are not the same thing
ATODA notes that often naltrexone is confused with “naloxone” (or Narcan ®) which is a schedule 4 opioid antagonist used to reverse the effects of opioid overdose. For further information about “naloxone” please see:
Information about the ACT program
Naloxone Question & Answer document
info@atoda.org.au
Last updated 23 October 2014
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1543
|
__label__cc
| 0.576567
| 0.423433
|
Three Iowa Justices Defeated For Same-Sex Marriage Ruling
By Todd Zywicki on November 3, 2010 12:06 pm
Three Iowa Supreme Court Justices were tossed as a result of their votes mandating that same-sex couples be allowed to marry. They are the first Justices who failed to be retained since 1962, when the current system was implemented.
Although I don’t understand the complaint of Drake University Law School Dean Allan Vestal that this was a “misuse” of the right of voters to vote on judicial retention. Isn’t this exactly what the retention power is intended to do?
In Federalist 51 Madison defined the fundamental challenge of constitutional government: “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” There is no solution to this, just a tradeoff. You can increase the independence of elected officials, which makes it easier for the government to control the governed by insulating them from majoritarian and interest-group pressures. But if you increase independence you run the risk of increased agency costs when the government is unable to control itself–when politicians (including judges) pursue their own self or ideological interest instead of the purposes for which they are given independence in the first place. And vice-versa: more democratic control will make politicians more responsive to the governed but also reduce the risk of agency costs.
Iowa has set up one system that tries to balance this. If the voters of Iowa concluded that the Justices of the state Supreme Court abused their power in creating a right to same-sex marriage, and that this represents the Justices reading their own ideological views into the law, then it is entirely appropriate for them to toss some or all of the offending Justices. That’s not a “misuse” of the retention power; that’s what it is there for.
Whether Iowa has struck a proper balance between independence and accountability, or should balance it in some other way is a different question. And whether any other system has struck the balance correctly (whether more or less democratic) is also a separate question. But having struck the balance in this manner it seems to me that this was an entirely appropriate use of the voters’ recall power–to get rid of judges who the voters believe are misusing their authority to impose their personal views on the law.
A Few Thoughts on the Mid-Term Election Results
Mitch Daniels Wins Big
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1546
|
__label__wiki
| 0.8962
| 0.8962
|
Friday, 28th July 2017
The Australian Constitution, particularly section 44i, is on everyone’s mind at the moment. In the past month it has been discovered that four Senators held dual citizenship at the last election. As well as being Australian citizen Scott Ludlam is also a New Zealand citizen. Larissa Waters is a Canadian citizen and Matt Canavan is an Italian citizen. Each of these Senators claim that they did not know that they were citizens of another country as well as Australia. And then just last night we found out that Malcolm Roberts was a dual UK and Australian citizen until at least 5 December 2016.
Ludlam and Waters resigned once they had discovered their additional nationality, while Matt Canavan is going to the High Court to find out whether he can stay in the Parliament:
Section 44 Disqualification
Any person who:
(i) is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power….
shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
The Parliament meets again on 8 August 2017, where it is expected that a vote will take place in the Senate to send the question of whether Matt Canavan is capable of being chosen as a Senator to the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns. The High Court may also consider the eligibility of the two Greens Senators because whether they were ineligible or not will make a difference to how they are replaced. If they have already formally resigned but are found to be capable of being chosen, they may be able to return through a casual Senate vacancy. The Malcolm Roberts eligibility may also be referred to the High Court to discover whether he took all reasonable steps to renounce his UK citizenship before nominations closed. The question in this case is whether taking the first step towards renunciation is enough?
Now that section 44i is under media scrutiny there could be further Parliamentarians questioned over their eligibility to sit in Parliament.
Why do we have this section in the Constitution?
The people who wrote our Constitution wanted to ensure that the loyalties of our Parliamentarians were owed to the Crown. It was discussed at the Adelaide constitutional convention in 1897 whether someone who had taken a foreign oath of allegiance and later became a British subject should be able to sit in the Parliament. However, no amendments to the draft Constitution were made to allow dual loyalties.
In the early days
The third Prime Minister of Australia has a similar story to the Senators that have discovered they are dual citizens. Johan Cristian Tanck was born on board a ship in the port of Valparaiso in Chile to a Chilean father and an Irish mother in 1867. After the death or disappearance of his father he moved to New Zealand as a toddler with his mother. In New Zealand his mum married Irish born miner George Watson and he took on his stepfather’s surname sometime after 1877. After the death of his mother in 1886 and at the age of 19, Chris Watson moved to Sydney and was first elected to the NSW parliament in 1894. He was then elected to the House of Representatives in the first federal parliament 1901. Then in 1904 at the age of 37 he became Prime Minister.
Former Home Affairs Minister King O’Malley was born in Kansas in the 1850’s, but reinvented himself as a Canadian. He had an amazing story of his American mother crossing the border into Canada as soon as she felt labour pains to give birth to him. He arrived in Melbourne in 1888 and was first elected to the Victorian Parliament in 1896. He was the teetotaller responsible for the ban on alcohol in Canberra and now has the famous O’Malley’s pub named after him.
In The Man Time Forgot: The life and times of John Christian Watson, the world's first Labor Prime Minister by Al Grassby and Silvia Ordonez, citizenship is described:
Citizenship was a looser concept than it is now. Although, technically, one was a citizen of the country one was born in – or the nationality of the ship one was born on – the relative ease of travel between nations rendered such terms as ‘citizenship’ elastic. Many people, for many reasons, changed their nationalities and identities easily….While Watson and O’Malley reinvented their backgrounds to make themselves ‘British’ to enable them to sit in Parliament, it was not uncommon at the time for people in search of a new respectability in a new country to reinvent themselves.
No one ever questioned their loyalties to Australia. Chris Watson fought hard to get the Labor Party into Government in an alliance with both free traders and protectionist Parliamentarians. While King O’Malley was the Minister responsible for setting up our seat of government in Canberra. Today it is unlikely that Chris Watson, the first Labor Prime Minister in the world and King O’Malley would be able to sit in our Parliament.
Subject or citizen?
By the time our Constitution was written, many republics around the world were beginning to describe the people living within their countries as citizens. This was not so in most Commonwealth nations. While here, there was a local Australian sentiment, most Australians felt themselves to be British subjects. As did the people of New Zealand and Canada. As such, if you were born in these countries, you were a British Subject and capable of being chosen to sit in our Parliament.
The first Commonwealth nation to introduce citizenship legislation was Canada in 1946. In 1947 a conference was held in London to discuss the move to citizenship and it was recommended that similar legislation be rolled out throughout the Commonwealth nations. In 1948 the British Parliament passed citizenship legislation. Speaking in the House of Lords, Lord Altrincham stated:
Our present constitutional practice in Commonwealth affairs of bringing the legal practice of the Commonwealth into strict accordance with reality, and by reality I mean the way in which the King's lieges think and feel both as nationals of their own country and as citizens of a wider Commonwealth.
Later that year Australia introduced the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 under the Labor Prime Minister Ben Chiefly. When the Australian bill was introduced into the Parliament it was described as being evolution of Australian nationality that had been acquired without the loss of status as British subjects.
When did we stop being British subjects?
The High Court says it was in 1986. This was the year that the Australia Act was implemented in all Australian Parliaments and the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The consequence of this Act was the removal of Australian appeals to the Privy Council. With the introduction of the Australian Act the UK was considered a foreign power under section 44i of the Constitution, as it had no legislative, executive or judicial influence over Australia.
What if you don’t know you’re a citizen of another country?
There are a couple of previous cases in the High Court that could have an interesting precedent in regards to the claim that three of these Senators did not know they were dual citizens. The first one an obscure petition Nile v Wood in 1987. In this case three High Court Justices sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns dismissed an appeal of a candidate for a position of Senator in NSW. Elaine Nile made assertions that Senator Robert Wood was not capable of being chosen for the Senate for various reasons. One of the reasons was that ‘his actions against the vessels of a friendly nation indicate an allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power’. The judgement states:
….it would seem that s.44(i) relates only to a person who has formally or informally acknowledged allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power and who has not withdrawn or revoked that acknowledgment.
The question for the current cases of dual citizenship is whether our Senators acknowledged their allegiance to a foreign power. Three of our Senators have stated that they didn’t know they were dual citizens (although one has had Italian postal votes sent to him). While the fourth has travelled on a British passport (as a one years old) but says he chooses to believe he was never a British citizen. Travelling on a British passport or receiving postal votes for an election in another country might be seen as acknowledgment.
Another interesting case is that of Sykes v Cleary in 1992. The full bench of the High Court sat as the Court of Disputed Returns and found that Phillip Cleary was incapable of being chosen as a Member of the House of Representatives. This was because he was employed as a school teacher which is contrary to section 44iv of the Constitution. Public servants are not eligible of being elected to the Parliament. The court then considered the eligibility of two of the other candidates at the election who had dual citizenships. As well as being Australian citizens, one was Greek and the other Swiss. They remained entitled to the rights and privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power.
It was found that both of these candidates were not capable of being chosen for the House of Representatives because they had not taken reasonable steps to renounce their citizenship according to the laws of Switzerland and Greece. Chief Justice Brennan went into more detail about section 44i in his judgement:
Section 44(i) is concerned to ensure that foreign powers command no allegiance from or obedience by candidates, senators and members of the House of Representatives; it is not concerned with the operation of foreign law that is incapable in fact of creating any sense of duty, or of enforcing any duty, of allegiance or obedience to a foreign power. It accords both with public policy and with the proper construction of s. 44(i) to deny recognition to foreign law in these situations. If foreign law were recognized in these situations, some Australian citizens would be needlessly deprived of the capacity to seek election to the Parliament and other Australians would be needlessly deprived of the right to choose the disqualified citizens to represent them.
Chief Justice Brennan made an extreme example of a foreign power conferring nationality onto an Australian Parliamentarian in an attempt to disqualify them. This would not stand. North Korea could not grant citizenship to someone in the Parliament to disqualify them. Could the statement about foreign laws also apply to our Senators. If you don’t know you’re a citizen, can a foreign power command or enforce an allegiance or obedience onto you?
The Court of Disputed Returns
The Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 describes the Court of Disputed Returns in Section 354. The High Court is the Court of Disputed returns, however it also has the power to send part of a petition to the Federal Court if there are questions of fact to be discovered. There may be questions and fact finding that need to be explored for these Senators. For instance, it has been stated that the Italian citizenship of Matt Canavan was acquired without his knowledge. Although after 2001 a lot of Australians of Italian heritage were granted Italian citizenship in order to vote in the referendums and elections in the following decade. The Court might like to examine evidence and this could involve testimony from witnesses.
Section 46 of the Constitution
It was always intended that there should be a penalty for sitting in the Parliament if you were a disqualified person:
Section 46 Penalty for sitting when disqualified
Until the Parliament otherwise provides, any person declared by this Constitution to be incapable of sitting as a senator or as a member of the House of Representatives shall, for every day on which he so sits, be liable to pay the sum of one hundred pounds to any person who sues for it in any court of competent jurisdiction.
This is quite a steep fine, but the key words in this section are ‘until the Parliament otherwise provides’. In 1975 the Parliament passed the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act which overtook this section of the Constitution.
The penalty is now $200 a day for every day that a Senator or MP sits in the Parliament after someone sues them in the High Court. The maximum period that someone can be sued for is 12 months. If someone initiates a suit on Matt Canavan or Malcolm Roberts right now and then in six months the High Court declares that they were not eligible of being chosen for the Senate, they may be liable of a penalty of $36,500. Of course, the High Court may declare that they were duly elected, but that is the risk they are taking.
We already have two Senators that have been found by the Court to have been incapable of being chosen as Senators. Bob Day and Rod Culleton. And now the High Court will be asked to consider another four. How can we ensure that people who are putting their hands up to run for Parliament are eligible? Some commentators are suggesting that we should alter the Constitution to allow dual citizenship. Others do not agree with this. Changing section 44 of the Constitution would require a referendum.
Another option that has been suggested is that candidates should be officially vetted before nomination. That could be through the Australian Electoral Commission or another body. This is less problematic than changing the Constitution as it is just a legislative process. But, vetting more than 1000 candidates before an election would take a great deal of time and resources. It seems that there is no easy option. Meanwhile we now wait for the High Court to interpret section 44i.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1551
|
__label__cc
| 0.502023
| 0.497977
|
Home » Arts and Literature » Museums, Galleries, and Organizations » Weeden House Museum
Maria Howard Weeden
Weeden House Museum
Alyson Buck, Huntsville, Alabama
The Weeden House Museum, located in the Twickenham Historic District in Huntsville, Madison County, is dedicated to preserving and sharing the work of artist and poet Maria Howard Weeden and also interpreting the lives of the members of the Weeden family during the mid-nineteenth century.
The Weeden House was completed in 1819 by local entrepreneur Henry C. Bradford. Having lost his mercantile business in the Panic of 1819, Bradford sold the house after just one year of ownership. The home was later owned by John Read, U.S. Supreme Court justice John McKinley,
Weeden House
Bartley M. Lowe, and Mrs. Martha Chambers Betts. William Weeden, a doctor and successful planter, purchased the house and moved there with his second wife Jane and their five children in November 1845. Their last child, daughter Maria Howard Weeden, was born at the house on July 6, 1846, about six months after his death. During the Civil War, the home was occupied by Union officers, causing the Weedens to relocate to Tuskegee, Macon County, where the oldest daughter and her husband lived. After the war, Jane Weeden deeded the Huntsville home to daughters Kate and Maria, or Howard, as she was known. Howard never married and died at the house in April 1905 at the age of 58. By the time of her death, she had become an internationally recognized artist and an accomplished poet, having published four books before her death.
The house remained in the Weeden family until 1956 when it was purchased at public auction by Mrs. B.A. Stockton. After renting the house for some years, Stockton sold the house to the Twickenham Historic Preservation District Association (THPDA) in 1973. The Association had been organized in 1965 and was officially recognized by the city in 1972 for the purpose of preserving historic structures in downtown Huntsville. In order to secure necessary funds to develop the house as a museum, THPDA sold the house to the Huntsville Housing Authority in 1976. The THPDA leases the house for a nominal amount to make it available for the education and enjoyment of the public. The house opened to the public in 1981.
The house is furnished with authentic nineteenth-century furniture that has been acquired through donations or purchased from antique dealers using donated funds. The structure itself is
William Frye Landscape
of the Federal period of American architecture, reflecting the light, elegant designs of the Scottish architect Robert Adam. It can be described as a five-bay, two-story, gabled, L-shaped, center-hall brick home. There are six rooms in all; two parlors and a dining room downstairs, and three bedrooms upstairs. All of these rooms are open to the public on the guided tours of the house. Weeden's famous watercolor portraits of former slaves, along with some of her lesser known oil paintings are on display year round. Other artists with works displayed in the house include William Frye and John Grimes.
The Weeden House Museum is operated by the THPDA and overseen by the THPDA's Board of Directors. The Weeden House Museum is funded by grants from historical organizations based in Alabama which are awarded to the THPDA, and revenue generated through event rentals and entrance fees. The museum is open for group and individual public tours on a limited basis, currently Wednesdays through Saturdays. The museum is staffed by a director who has been assisted over the years by docents, interns, and other volunteers.
The most celebrated annual event at the Weeden House Museum is the Spirit of Christmas Past Tour of Homes and Luminaries, held on the second Saturday in December. Individuals and groups may tour the Weeden House and other homes in the Twickenham Historical
District, including five private homes typically closed to the public, that are decorated for Christmas. Each house offers live entertainment, such as traditional carols or readings of Weeden's poetry and opportunities to learn more about the historic homes. The Weeden House is the only constant on the tour, with the other homes rotating among the many historic structures in the Twickenham District. The Tour began in 1978 and featured more than 20 homes, but the event has since been scaled back to six houses. There are currently no other events that take place at the museum with any regularity.
Published: March 8, 2012 |  Last updated: March 8, 2012
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1556
|
__label__wiki
| 0.829816
| 0.829816
|
Census • Person • Jean-Nicolas Demeunier
aka: Démeunier, Desmeuniers
Bio Links Gallery Notes Contemporaries
Governance • Writers
1751, Mar 15 1789-1808 1814, Feb 2
a French author and politician. It was as a member of the Constitutional Committee that Démeunier had the biggest impact. He presented to the Assembly on behalf of the Committee a report (7 March 1791) on the need for the ministerial responsibility, and later declared support (26 August 1791) for the eligibility of the members of the royal family to hold elective office. He would also promote the organization of the jury and the Court of Cassation.
From Thomas Jefferson to Jean Nicolas Démeunier:
Founders Online
-all-ArchitectsArtistsAstronomersCartographersClergyCommerceComposersEducatorsExplorersGovernanceInventorsLegalMilitaryNavalPerformersPhysiciansPiratesScientistsSculptorsWriters Nationality
-all-AustriaCherokee nationDenmarkEnglandFranceIndiaIndonesiaJapanLenape TribesMohawk NationMoroccoNetherlandsPeruRussiaSeminole TribesSeneca TribesSerbiaShawnee TribeSwitzerlandTahitiTurkeyUnited StatesVenezuelaViet NamWest Indies
Jean-Nicolas Demeunier 1751, Mar 15 1789
1808 1814, Feb 2
Mohammed III 1710 ca 1748
1790 1790, Apr 9
Sultan of Morocco from 1757 to 1790 under the Alaouite dynasty. He was the governor of Marrakech ...
Lyman Hall 1724, Apr 12 1749
physician, clergyman, and statesman, was a signer of the United States Declaration of Independen...
Josiah Bartlett 1729, Nov 21 1750
an American physician and statesman, delegate to the Continental Congress for New Hampshire, and ...
HRE Joseph II 1741, Mar 13 1765
Holy Roman Emperor from 1765 to 1790 and ruler of the Habsburg lands from 1780 to 1790. He was t...
David Brearley 1745, Jun 11 1776
a delegate to the U.S. Constitutional Convention and signed the U.S. Constitution on behalf of Ne...
Benjamin Harrison V 1726, Apr 5 1745
an American politician, planter, and merchant, a revolutionary leader and a Founding Father of th...
James De Lancey [2] 1732 1758
a colonial politician, turfman, and the son of Lieutenant Governor James De Lancey and Anne Heath...
Francis Hopkinson 1737, Sep 21 1761
designed the first official American flag. He was an author, a composer, and one of the signers o...
William Paca 1740, Oct 31 1761
a signatory to the United States Declaration of Independence as a representative of Maryland, and...
Pomare I 1753 ca 1788
1791 1803, Sep 3
the unifier and first king of Tahiti and founder of the Pomare dynasty and the Kingdom of Tahiti ...
John Burgoyne 1722, Feb 24 1743
1792 1792, Aug 4
a British army officer, politician and dramatist. He first saw action during the Seven Years' War...
George Mason 1725, Nov 30 1747
1792 1792, Oct 7
a Virginia planter and politician, and a delegate to the U.S. Constitutional Convention of 1787, ...
Hamengkubuwono I unknown 1755
the first sultan of Yogyakarta, Indonesia.He ruled from February 13, 1755 to March 24, 1792. As a...
Richard Henry Lee 1732, Jan 20 1757
an American statesman from Virginia best known for the motion in the Second Continental Congress ...
James Wilson [2] 1742, Sep 14 1766
one of the Founding Fathers of the United States and a signatory of the United States Declaration...
Nguyen Hue 1753 1788
the second emperor of the Tay Son dynasty, reigning from 1788 until 1792. He was also one of the ...
HRE Leopold II 1747, May 5 1790
Holy Roman Emperor and King of Hungary and Bohemia from 1790 to 1792, Archduke of Austria and Gra...
Henry Clinton 1730, Apr 16 1751
a British army officer and politician, best known for his service as a general during the America...
John Hancock 1736, Jan 12 1754
an American merchant, statesman, and prominent Patriot of the American Revolution. He served as p...
Roger Sherman 1721, Apr 19 1754
an early American lawyer and statesman, as well as a Founding Father of the United States. He ser...
Israel Jacobs 1726, Jun 9 1770
a colonial Pennsylvania Legislator and United States Representative from Pennsylvania. In 1790, J...
King Louis XVI 1754, Aug 23 1774
King of France from 1774 until his deposition in 1792, although his formal title after 1791 was ...
Carter Braxton 1736, Sep 10 1760
a signer of the United States Declaration of Independence, as well as a merchant, planter, and Vi...
Abraham Clark 1726, Feb 15 1775
an American politician and Revolutionary War figure. He was delegate for New Jersey to the Contin...
Artemas Ward 1727, Nov 26 1751
an American major general in the American Revolutionary War and a Congressman from Massachusetts....
John Rutledge 1739, Sep 17 1760
the second Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. A lawyer and a judge, Rutledg...
Joseph McDowell 1758, Feb 25 1776
an American lawyer, soldier, and statesman from Morganton, North Carolina. His estate was name...
Louis XVII of France 1785, Mar 27 1793
1795 1795, Jun 8
the younger son of King Louis XVI of France and Queen Marie Antoinette. He was at birth given the...
Samuel Huntington 1731, Jul 5 1754
a jurist, statesman, and Patriot in the American Revolution from Connecticut. As a delegate to th...
Catherine the Great 1729, Apr 21 1762
1796 1796, Nov 6
a Russian monarch. She was the longest-ruling female leader of Russia, reigning from 1762 until h...
George Clymer 1739, Mar 16 1765
an American politician and Founding Father of the United States. He was one of the first Patriots...
Anthony Wayne 1745, Jan 1 1775
a United States Army officer, statesman, and member of the United States House of Representatives...
Horace Walpole 1717, Sep 24 1737
an English art historian, man of letters, antiquarian and Whig politician. He had Strawberry Hill...
Oliver Wolcott 1726, Nov 20 1747
1797 1797, Dec 1
a signer of the United States Declaration of Independence and also the Articles of Confederation ...
Martha Washington 1731, Jun 2 1789
the wife of George Washington, the first President of the United States. Although the title was n...
George Washington 1732, Feb11 1789
the first President of the United States (1789–97), the Commander-in-Chief of the Continental A...
Samuel Adams 1734, Jan 20 1750
an American statesman, political philosopher, and one of the Founding Fathers of the United State...
Robert Morris Jr. 1734, Jan 20 1750
a Founding Father of the United States, was a Liverpool-born American merchant who financed the A...
George Read 1733, Sep 18 1753
an American lawyer and politician from New Castle in New Castle County, Delaware. He was a signer...
Philip Schuyler 1733, Nov 10 1761
1798 1804, Nov 18
a general in the American Revolution and a United States Senator from New York. He is usually kno...
Thomas Heyward Jr. 1746, Jul 28 1775
a signer of the United States Declaration of Independence and of the Articles of Confederation as...
Patrick Henry 1736, May 29 1760
an American attorney, planter and politician who became known as an orator during the movement fo...
John Mare Jr. 1739 1765
1799 1802/03
an American painter, businessman, and public figure. Not much is known of Mare's training, althou...
Tipu Sultan 1750, Nov 10 1766
a ruler of the Kingdom of Mysore. He was the eldest son of Sultan Hyder Ali of Mysore. Tipu intr...
Red Jacket 1750 ca 1770
a Native American Seneca orator and chief of the Wolf clan. He negotiated on behalf of his nation...
Daniel Morgan 1736, Jul 6 1775
an American pioneer, soldier, and United States Representative from Virginia. One of the most gif...
Joseph McDowell Jr. 1756, Mar 8 1776
an American planter, soldier, and statesman from North Carolina. He was known as "Quaker Meadows ...
Abigail Adams 1744, Nov 11 1764
the closest advisor and wife of John Adams[2], as well as the mother of John Quincy Adams. She i...
Fisher Ames 1758, Apr 9 1774
a Representative in the United States Congress from the 1st Congressional District of Massachuset...
Edward Rutledge 1749, Nov 23 1774
an American politician, and youngest signer of the United States Declaration of Independence. He ...
William Blount [2] 1749, Mar 26 1776
an American statesman and land speculator, and a signer of the United States Constitution. He was...
Jeremiah Wadsworth 1743, Jul 12 1761
an American sea captain, merchant, and statesman from Hartford, Connecticut who profited from his...
James De Lancey [3] 1746, Sep 6 1769
a political figure in Nova Scotia. He represented Annapolis township in the Nova Scotia House of ...
Frederick Muhlenberg 1750, Jan 1 1770
an American minister and politician who was the first Speaker of the United States House of Repre...
Pieter Gerardus van Overstraten 1755, Feb 19 1780
Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies from 1796 until 1801. He was the last Governor-General...
John Adams [2] 1735, Oct 30 1797
an American lawyer, author, statesman, and diplomat. He served as the second President of the Uni...
John Watts unknown 1788
one of the leaders of the Chickamauga Cherokee (or "Lower Cherokee") during the Cherokee-American...
Robert Treat Paine 1731, Mar 11 1757
a Massachusetts lawyer and politician, best known as a signer of the Declaration of Independence ...
John Pickering 1737, Sep 22 1761
served as chief justice of the New Hampshire Superior Court of Judicature, and as judge for the U...
Alexander Hamilton 1755/57, Jan 11 1770
an American statesman and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. He was an influential...
George Walton 1749 1774
signed the United States Declaration of Independence as a representative of Georgia and also serv...
George Wythe 1726 1746
the first American law professor, a noted classics scholar, and a Virginia judge. The first of th...
Peter Muhlenberg 1746, Oct 1 1768
an American clergyman, Continental Army soldier during the American Revolutionary War, and politi...
Selim III 1761, Dec 24 1789
the reform-minded Sultan and Islam Caliph of the Ottoman Empire from 1789 to 1807. The Janissarie...
John Page 1743, Apr 28 1763
a figure in early United States history. He served in the U.S. Congress and as the 13th Governor ...
Christian VII 1749, Jan 29 1766
a monarch of the House of Oldenburg who was King of Denmark-Norway and Duke of Schleswig and Hols...
Aaron Burr 1756, Feb 6 1775
an American politician. He was the third Vice President of the United States (1801–1805), servi...
Jorgen Jorgensen 1780, Mar 29 1807
a Danish adventurer during the Age of Revolution. During the Action of 2 March 1808 his ship was ...
Mustafa IV 1779, Sep 8 1807
1808 1808, Nov 15/16
the Sultan and Caliph of the Ottoman Empire from 1807 to 1808. Mustafa's brief reign was turbulen...
Joseph Brant 1743 ca 1750
a Mohawk military and political leader, based in present-day New York, who was closely associated...
Blue Jacket 1743 ca 1770
1809 1810 ca
a war chief of the Shawnee people, known for his militant defense of Shawnee lands in the Ohio Co...
Buckongahelas 1720 ca 1770
a regionally and nationally renowned Lenape chief, councilor and warrior. He was active from the ...
Charles Willson Peale 1741, Apr 15 1770
an American painter, soldier, scientist, inventor, politician and naturalist. He is best remember...
Tecumseh 1768 ca 1800
a Native American leader of the Shawnee who attempted to organize a vast alliance of Native Ameri...
Samuel Chase 1741, Apr 17 1761
an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court and earlier was a signatory to the United...
Robert R. Livingston 1746, Nov 16 1770
an American lawyer, politician, diplomat from New York, and a Founding Father of the United State...
William Williams [3] 1731, Apr 23 1771
a merchant, and a delegate for Connecticut to the Continental Congress in 1776, and a signatory o...
George Clinton [2] 1739, Jul 26 1754
an American soldier and statesman, considered one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. H...
Thomas McKean 1734, Mar 19 1755
an American lawyer and politician from New Castle, in New Castle County, Delaware and Philadelphi...
Benjamin Rush 1745, Dec 24 1769
a Founding Father of the United States. Rush was a civic leader in Philadelphia, where he was a p...
Joel Barlow 1754, Mar 24 1778
an American poet and diplomat, and French politician. In politics, he supported the French Revolu...
Samuel Osgood 1747, Feb 3 1771
an American merchant and statesman born in Andover, Massachusetts, currently a part of North Ando...
Theodosia Burr Alston 1783, Jun 21 1801
1813 1813, Jan
the daughter of U.S. Vice President Aaron Burr and Theodosia Bartow Prevost. Her husband, Joseph ...
William Bligh 1754, Sep 9 1761
an officer of the British Royal Navy and a colonial administrator. He is best remembered for the ...
Elbridge Gerry 1744, Jul 6 1765
an American statesman and diplomat. As a Democratic-Republican he was selected as the fifth Vice ...
Gouverneur Morris 1752, Jan 31 1775
an American statesman, a Founding Father of the United States, and a native of New York City who ...
David Ramsay 1749, Apr 2 1773
an American physician, public official, and historian from Charleston, South Carolina. He was one...
Joachim Murat 1767, Mar 25 1790
a Marshal of France and Admiral of France under the reign of Napoleon. He was also the 1st Prince...
Napoleon Bonaparte 1769, Aug 15 1799
a French military and political leader who rose to prominence during the French Revolution and le...
Timothy Pickering 1745, Jul 17 1768
a politician from Massachusetts who served in a variety of roles, most notably as the third Unite...
John Clopton 1756, Feb 7 1776
a United States Representative from Virginia. He served as first lieutenant and as captain in the...
Emperor Kokaku 1771, Sep 23 1780
Given name, Tomohito, the 119th emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of successio...
Isaac Shelby 1750, Dec 11 1774
the first and fifth Governor of Kentucky and served in the state legislatures of Virginia and Nor...
Philip J. Schuyler 1768, Jan 21 1796
an American politician from New York. Schuyler lived in Rhinebeck, where he managed farms and est...
Jesse Fell unknown 1800
an early political leader in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. He was the first to successfully burn an...
William Ellery 1727, Dec 2 1748
a signer of the United States Declaration of Independence as a representative of Rhode Island. In...
King George III 1738, Jun 4 1760
King of Great Britain and Ireland from 25 October 1760 until the union of the two countries on 1 ...
William Floyd 1734, Dec 17 1774
1820 1821. Aug 4
an American politician from New York, and a signer of the United States Declaration of Independen...
Elias Boudinot 1740, May 2 1760
a lawyer and statesman from Elizabeth, New Jersey who was a delegate to the Continental Congress ...
Joseph Bloomfield 1753, Oct 18 1775
the fourth Governor of New Jersey. The township of Bloomfield, New Jersey is named for him. He at...
Thomas Jefferson 1743, Apr 2 1767
an American Founding Father, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776), and ...
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney 1746, Feb 25 1769
an early American statesman of South Carolina, Revolutionary War veteran, and delegate to the Con...
William Hull 1753, Jun 24 1775
an American soldier and politician. He fought in the American Revolution and was appointed as Gov...
Pierre-Simon Laplace 1749, Mar 23 1771
an influential French scholar whose work was important to the development of mathematics, statist...
Charles Carroll III 1737, Sep 19 1772
a wealthy Maryland planter and an early advocate of independence from the Kingdom of Great Britai...
Hamengkubuwono II 1750, Mar 7 1792
the second sultan of Yogyakarta 1792–1810, 1811–12 and finally 1826–28 during the Java War....
Manuel Quimper 1757 1770
1829 1844, Apr
a Spanish Peruvian explorer, cartographer, naval officer, and colonial official. He participated ...
Daniel Sargent Jr. 1764, Jan 15 1780
a successful American merchant and politician in Boston, Massachusetts. He was a successful merch...
William Clark [2] 1770, Aug 1 1789
an American explorer, soldier, Indian agent, and territorial governor. Along with Meriwether Lewi...
Petar I Petrovic-Njegos 1747/48 1782
the ruler of the Prince-Bishopric of Montenegro as the Metropolitan (vladika) of Cetinje, and Exa...
Simon Bolivar 1783, Jul 24 1807
a Venezuelan military and political leader who played a leading role in the establishment of Vene...
William H. Crawford 1772, Feb 24 1788
an American politician and judge during the early 19th century. He served as United States Secret...
William Wilberforce 1759, Aug 24 1780
an English politician, philanthropist, and a leader of the movement to stop the slave trade. A na...
Charles Grey 1764, Mar 13 1786
Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from November 1830 to July 1834. A member of the Whig Party,...
William Wirt 1772, Nov 8 1792
an American author and statesman who is credited with turning the position of United States Attor...
HRE Francis II 1768, Feb 12 1792
the last Holy Roman Emperor, ruling from 1792 until 6 August 1806, when he dissolved the Holy Rom...
William T. Barry 1784, Feb 5 1805
an American statesman and jurist. He served as Postmaster General for most of the administration ...
Major Ridge 1771 ca 1790
a Cherokee leader, a member of the tribal council, and a lawmaker. As a warrior, he fought in the...
Tenskwatawa 1775 1800
a Native American religious and political leader of the Shawnee tribe, known as The Prophet or th...
Noah Webster 1758, Oct 16 1781
an American lexicographer, textbook pioneer, English-language spelling reformer, political writer...
Morgan Lewis 1754, Oct 16 1774
an American lawyer, politician, and military commander. The second son of Francis Lewis, a signer...
Artemas Ward Jr. 1762, Jan 9 1783
like his father, Artemas Ward, he was a United States Representative from Massachusetts. He serve...
Albert Gallatin 1761, Jan 29 1788
a Swiss-American politician, diplomat, ethnologist and linguist. He was an important leader of th...
Richard M. Johnson 1780, Oct 17 1802
the ninth Vice President of the United States, serving in the administration of Martin Van Buren ...
Henry Clay 1777, Apr 12 1797
an American lawyer and planter, statesman, and skilled orator who represented Kentucky in both th...
Daniel Webster 1782, Jan 18 1805
an American politician who twice served in the United States House of Representatives, representi...
William R. King 1786, Apr 7 1806
an American politician and diplomat. He was the 13th Vice President of the United States for six ...
Josiah Quincy III 1772, Feb 4 1793
a U.S. educator and political figure. He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives (1805�...
Benjamin Tappan 1773, May 25 1799
an Ohio judge and Democratic politician who served in the Ohio State Senate and the United States...
Lewis Cass 1782, Oct 9 1806
an American military officer, politician, and statesman. He represented Michigan in the United St...
John McLean 1785, Mar 11 1807
an American jurist and politician who served in the United States Congress, as U.S. Postmaster Ge...
Theron Metcalf 1784, Oct 16 1807
an American attorney and politician from Massachusetts. He was a New England jurist and served a...
ref:T5-S50-P1196-CPerson-M
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1562
|
__label__cc
| 0.558888
| 0.441112
|
Stanfield Fumbles – Preston Wins
Phoning to check in
2015 Person of the Year
The Census Returns!
Sean C. on The Census Returns!
DS on The West is in
michael marshall on The West is in
kanwajit on Ready
Categories Select Category — 2013 LPC Leadership Race (54) Ads (43) Alberta Politics (171) 2008 Alberta Election (35) 2011 Alberta PC Leadership Race (7) 2011 ALP leadership race (17) 2012 Alberta Election (35) 2015 Alberta Election (3) BC Politics (7) Book Reviews (12) Boring internal Liberal Party matters (29) 2009 Liberal Bienial (8) 2012 Liberal Bienial (10) Budgets (17) by elections (31) Calgary Grit Contests and Polls (48) Best Premier (19) Canada’s Biggest Election (9) Political moment of the decade (12) Calgary Municipal Politics (25) 2010 Calgary Municipal Election (11) Featured Posts (61) Federal Politics (259) 2004 Federal Election (1) 2006 Federal Election (2) 2011 Federal Election (116) 2015 Federal Election (8) LPC Leadership 2006 (5) NDP Leadership 2012 (9) Fun with Numb3rs (43) Seat Projections (20) Great Moments in Spin (10) History (7) Humour (26) April Fools Day (2) Politicians in Cowboy Hats (10) Interviews (8) Leaders Debates (19) Manitoba Politics (3) New Brunswick Politics (3) Newfoundland Politics (2) Nova Scotia Politics (3) Off Topic (9) Ontario Politics (72) 2007 Ontario Election (9) 2011 Ontario Election (13) 2013 OLP Leadership Race (20) PEI Politics (1) Person of the Year (12) Policy (10) Political History (1) Politician Profiles (10) Polls (73) Quebec Politics (19) Saskatchewan politics (2) Scandals (15) Toronto Municipal Politics (22) 2010 Toronto Muncipal Election (10) Uncategorized (2,420) US Politics (16) 2008 US Election (2) 2012 US Election (4)
Alberta Liberal Party Alison Redford Bob Rae Census Dalton McGuinty Deborah Coyne Gerard Kennedy Jack Layton Jean Charest Jim Prentice Justin Trudeau Kathleen Wynne Marc Garneau Martha Hall Findlay Michael Ignatieff Naheed Nenshi Rob Anders Rob Ford Stephen Harper Thomas Mulcair
Archives Select Month March 2017 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 December 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004
Ads you should totally click
Online Poker in Canada
Calgary Grits
Thanks to a little help from his friends, Preston Manning emerged victorious last week in the “Best Prime Minister We Never Had” poll. While the contest did help to illustrate the problems of reading meaningful results from any form of Internet poll, I had a lot of fun running it and I hope it helped to shed a little light on some impressive politicians who were never lucky enough to become Prime Minister.
Preston himself was certainly a very well respected individual and I’ve said a few times here that it’s a shame he didn’t toss his name into the race to replace Ralph Klein as Premier of Alberta. He always said what he believed was right and certainly would have implemented a very bold agenda if he had ever moved into 24 Sussex. And, as a Liberal, it’s hard to say anything bad about the man who founded the Reform Party, thus ensuring Chretien a decade of power in the 90s.
I did find the rush to stuff the ballot box for Preston quite interesting. This was especially true in the final when there was a concerted effort for Preston to beat Tory Robert Stanfield. Obviously those on the right saw Manning as the one “true blue” politician in this contest, unlike the likes of Stanfield or Bill Davis. And, if you look at it, it’s hard to find an example of a “true blue” politician becoming Prime Minister or even coming close to the highest job in the land in our history. Mulroney and Diefenbaker both ran to the left of their Liberal opponents to get elected and even Harper, while far from being a Red Tory, had to moderate himself before Canadians would elect him. So, looking back at our history, I think it’s clear that Canada has never been and never will be a “small c” conservative country and that any Conservative who hopes to reach the top must show himself or herself to be a moderate.
Regardless, congrats again to Preston on his win – he’s certainly worthier than a lot of the individuals who have been Prime Minister.
Seeding Round
A field of close to 100 candidates was weeded down to 16. Mike Harris, Mitchell Sharp, CD Howe, and Paul Martin Sr. all missed the cut by a handful of votes.
Stanfield (66%) over McGee (34%)
Manning (66%) over Grey (34%)
Broadbent (51%) over Manley (49%)
Cartier (65%) over Davis (35%)
Douglas (66%) over Arbour (34%)
McKenna (55%) over Axworthy (45%)
Romanow (55%) over Lewis (45%)
Lougheed (62%) over Crosby (38%)
Stanfield (57%) over Lougheed (43%)
Cartier (65%) over Douglas (35%)
Manning (61%) over Romanow (39%)
McKenna (56%) over Broadbent (44%)
Stanfield (62%) over Cartier (38%)
Manning (79%) over McKenna (21%)
Manning (71%) defeats Stanfield (29%)
What if Political Biographies
Manley versus Broadbent What If
Manning versus Romanow What If
Stanfield versus Cartier What If
Seeding Round Profiles
Bubble Candidate Profiles
French Canadians
19th Century candidates
Female Candidates
Posted on September 6, 2006 by CalgaryGrit in Uncategorized
About CalgaryGrit
A former Calgary Liberal, now living in Toronto. My writings on politics can be found at www.calgarygrit.ca and online at the National Post.
Please, insert a valid App ID, otherwise your plugin won't work correctly.
Copyright © 2012 Calgary Grit. All rights reserved.
Plugin from the creators of Brindes Personalizados :: More at Plulz Wordpress Plugins
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1567
|
__label__wiki
| 0.860439
| 0.860439
|
Battle of the Korsun–Cherkassy Pocket
Title: Battle of the Korsun–Cherkassy Pocket
Subject: 2nd Guards Airborne Division, Timeline of World War II (1944), Belgium in World War II, Nanking Massacre, Battle of the Atlantic
Collection: 1944 in the Soviet Union, Battles and Operations of the Soviet–german War, Battles and Operations of World War II Involving Czechoslovakia, Encirclements in World War II, Strategic Operations of the Red Army in World War II
Part of the Dnieper–Carpathian Offensive on the Eastern Front of World War II
Tiger Is of the III Panzer Corps, February 1944
24 January 1944 – 16 February 1944
Cherkasy / Korsun, USSR
Soviet victory, and successful German evacuation .[1][2]
Germany Soviet Union
Otto Wöhler
Hermann Breith
Wilhelm Stemmermann †
Theobald Lieb Georgy Zhukov
Nikolai Vatutin
58,000 men in pocket
59 tanks in pocket
242 artillery pieces in pocket[3]
80,000 men (reinforcement)
III Panzer Corps (201 tanks) (reinforcement)[4]
XLVII Panzer Corps (58 tanks) (reinforcement)[5] 336,700 men[6]
524 tanks (initially)
400 tanks (reinforcement)
1,054 aircraft
5,300 artillery pieces and mortars[7]
Frieser, Zetterling and Frankson: 30,000 killed, missing and wounded[8]
156 tanks [9]
50 aircraft[10]
A. N. Grylov and P. Ya. Egorov:[11]
Inside the pocket:
31.000 killed and wounded
16.500 captured
Beside the pocket:
1.500 captured
886 guns and mortars
500 aircraft.
Erickson, Glantz and House: 55,000 killed and wounded, 18,000 prisoners[12][13] 24,286 killed or missing and 55,902 wounded and sick [14][15]
728 tanks[16]
Białystok and Minsk
Bessarabia
1st Kiev
Tallinn disaster
Lyuban
Toropets and Kholm
Demyansk
Kholm
Rzhev, Summer 1942
2nd Kharkov
Case Blue
Little Saturn
3rd Kharkov
2nd Smolensk
2nd Kiev
Dnieper and Carpathian
Leningrad and Novgorod
Hube's Pocket
Jassy-Kishinev
Lvov and Sandomierz
2nd Jassy-Kishinev
Moonsund
Dukla Pass
Petsamo and Kirkenes
Vistula and Oder
Samland
East Pomerania
Lake Balaton
German capitulation
Dnieper–Carpathian Offensive
First Phase
Zhitomir–Berdichev
Kirovgrad
Korsun–Shevchenkovsky
Rovno–Lutsk
Nikopol–Krivoi Rog
Second Phase
Proskurov–Chernovtsy
Uman–Botoşani
Bereznegovatoye–Snigirevka
Polesskoe
The Korsun–Shevchenkovsky Offensive led to the Battle of the Korsun–Cherkasy Pocket which took place from 24 January to 16 February 1944. The offensive was part of the Dnieper–Carpathian Offensive. In it, the 1st and 2nd Ukrainian Fronts, commanded, respectively, by Nikolai Vatutin and Ivan Konev, trapped German forces of Army Group South in a pocket near the Dnieper River. During weeks of fighting, the two Red Army Fronts tried to eradicate the pocket. The encircled German units broke out in coordination with a relief attempt by other German forces, with "roughly two out of three" encircled men succeeding in escaping the pocket,[17] "and almost one third of their men ... dead or prisoners."[18]
The Soviet victory in the Korsun–Shevchenkovsky Offensive marked the successful implementation of Soviet deep operations. Soviet Deep Battle doctrine envisaged the breaking of the enemy's forward defences to allow fresh operational reserves to exploit the breakthrough by driving into the strategic depth of the enemy front. The arrival of large numbers of U.S. and British built trucks and halftracks gave the Soviet forces much greater mobility than they had in the earlier portion of the war.[19] This, coupled with the Soviet capacity to hold large formations in reserve gave the Soviets the ability to drive deep behind German defenses again and again.[20] Though the Soviet operation at Korsun did not result in the collapse in the German front that the Soviet command had hoped for, it marked a significant change in operations. Through the rest of the war the Soviets would place large German forces in jeopardy, while the Germans were stretched thin and constantly attempting to extract themselves from one crisis to the next. Mobile Soviet offensives were the hallmark of the Eastern front for the remainder of the war.
Encirclement 2
German relief attacks 3
Surrender demand and German maneuver within the pocket 4
Breakout through Hell's Gate 5
Outcome 6
Assessment 7
Propaganda and historiography 8
Bibliography 11
In the autumn of 1943, the German forces of Field Marshal Stavka) to deploy 1st and 2nd Ukrainian Fronts to form two armored rings of encirclement: an inner ring around the pocket followed by destruction of the forces it contained, and an external ring to prevent relief formations from reaching the trapped units. Despite repeated warnings from Manstein and others, Hitler refused to allow the exposed units to be pulled back to safety.
A Soviet light tank carries men into battle
General Konev held a conference at his headquarters at Boltushki on 15 January with his commanders and their political commissars to pass on the orders received from Stavka.[22] The initial attack was to be conducted by Konev's own 2nd Ukrainian Front from the southeast by 53rd Army and 4th Guards Army, with 5th Guards Tank Army to exploit penetrations supported by 5th Air Army, to be joined in progress by 52nd Army, 5th Guards Cavalry Corps and 2nd Tank Army. Additionally, from Vatutin's 1st Ukrainian Front, 27th and 40th Armies were to be deployed from the northwest, with 6th Tank Army to exploit penetrations supported by 2nd Air Army.[23] Many of these formations had received an inflow of new personnel. Red Army planning further included extensive deception operations that the Soviets claimed were successful, however, the German 8th Army war diary shows clearly that the German staffs were concerned with the threat at hand.[24]
Encirclement
The great expanse of Russia made controlling a "front line" difficult
The Soviet attack started on 24 January when Konev's 2nd Ukrainian Front attacked the salient from the southeast. Breakthrough was quickly achieved, and the penetration was exploited by the 5th Guards Tank Army and the 5th Guards Cavalry Corps the following day.[25] Despite the awareness of German 8th Army's staff that an attack was imminent, they were surprised by the appearance of the 1st Ukrainian Front's newly formed 6th Tank Army.[26] The 6th Tank Army, with 160 tanks and 50 self-propelled guns,[27] was inexperienced and took longer than expected to penetrate the western flank of the salient. A "mobile group" from 5th Mechanized Corps' 233rd Tank Brigade, under the command of General Savelev, with 50 tanks and 200 sub-machine gun armed infantrymen, occupied Lysyanka and moved into the outskirts of Zvenyhorodka by 28 January. Here, these troops of the 6th Tank Army met the 2nd Ukrainian Front's 20th Tank Corps. Over the next three days, the two tank armies formed a thinly manned outer ring around what was now the Korsun Pocket while another, inner, ring was formed by the Soviet 27th, 52nd, and 4th Guard Armies.[28]
Sweeping Soviet advances that created the pocket.
The Soviets were optimistic over the progress of the operation. Stalin was promised a second Stalingrad, and he expected it. Konev wired: "There is no need to worry, Comrade Stalin. The encircled enemy will not escape."[29] Inside the pocket were nearly 60,000 men from six German divisions, operating at about 55% of their authorized strength, along with a number of smaller combat units. Among the trapped German forces were the 5th SS Panzer Division Wiking, with the attached 5th SS Infantry Brigade Wallonien, the Estonian SS infantry battalion Narwa, and "several thousand" Russian auxiliaries.[30] General Wilhelm Stemmermann, the commander of XI Corps, was placed in command of the forces in the pocket. These forces were designated Gruppe Stemmermann. The 5th SS Panzer Division, with some 11,400 personnel,[31] had 30 operational Panzer III/IV tanks and assault guns left, and six more in repair.[32] The division further had 47 artillery pieces, of which 12 were self-propelled guns.[33]
German relief attacks
The relief attempt begins. Tanks and halftracks of 1st Panzer Division begin movements towards the pocket, early February 1944[34]
Manstein moved quickly, and by early February the III and XLVII Panzer Corps were assembled for a relief effort. Hitler intervened, however, and ordered the attack be transformed into an effort to counter-encircle the two Soviet army groups.
Articles with limited geographic scope from May 2012
Germany-centric
1944 in the Soviet Union
Battles and operations of the Soviet–German War
Battles and operations of World War II involving Czechoslovakia
Encirclements in World War II
Korsun-Shevchenkivskyi
Dispatch rider from a heavy tank battalion ... as a Tiger I passes by, February 1944 (description abbreviated from same image in Nash, p. 238)
Gunners from Art.Rgt. 188, 88th Inf. Div. (description abbreviated from same image in Nash, p. 145)
forum.axishistory.com photos of the battlefield
Terrain view of the Korsun Pocket area
Satellite view of the German escape route
Armstrong, Richard N. Red Army Tank Commanders: The Armored Guards. Atglen, Pennsylvania: Schiffer Publishing Ltd., 1994. ISBN 0-88740-581-9.
Carell, Paul. Scorched Earth. New York: Ballantine Books, 1971. ISBN 0-345-02213-0.
Department of the Army Pamphlet 20–234. Operations of Encircled Forces: German Experiences in Russia. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1952.
Dunn, Walter S. Hitler's Nemesis The Red Army 1930–1945. Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books, 2009.
Erickson, John. The Road to Berlin, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999.
Frieser, Karl-Heinz. Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Volume 8. München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 2007. ISBN 978-3-421-06235-2.
Glantz, David & House, Jonathan M. When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1995. ISBN 0-7006-0717-X
Haupt, Werner (1998). Army Group South: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941–1945. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Military History.
Krivosheev, G. F. Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century. London: Greenhill Books, 1997. ISBN 1-85367-280-7.
Liddell Hart, B. H. History of the Second World War New York, NY: Putnam, 1970.
Nash, Douglas E. (Paper written for the Command and General Staff College of the U.S. Army)No Stalingrad on the Dnieper, Fort Leavenworth: 1995
Nash, Douglas E. Hell's Gate: The Battle of the Cherkassy Pocket, January–February 1944 . Southbury, Connecticut: RZM Publishing, 2002. ISBN 0-9657584-3-5
Perrett, Bryan. Knights of the Black Cross, Hitler's Panzerwaffe and Its Leaders. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1986. ISBN 0-7090-2806-7
Shukman, Harold, ed. Stalin's Generals. New York: Grove Press, 1993. ISBN 1-84212-513-3
Tessin, Georg. Verbände und Truppen der deutschen Wehrmacht und Waffen-SS 1939 – 1945, Vol. 14, Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag, 1980. ISBN 3-7648-1111-0.
Willmott, H. P. June, 1944. New York, N.Y.: Blandford Press, 1984. ISBN 0-7137-1446-8
Zetterling, Niklas & Frankson, Anders. The Korsun Pocket: The Encirclement and Breakout of a German Army in the East, 1944. Drexel Hill (Philadelphia), Pennsylvania: Casemate Publishers. 2008. ISBN 978-1-932033-88-5.
^ a b c d "Nevertheless, the Soviet position, relative to the Germans, was stronger after the battle than before, so Korsun may be viewed as a Soviet victory, even though it was bought at a considerably higher price than it ought to have been." (Zetterling & Frankson, p. 298)
^ a b c Nash, p. 382
^ a b Frieser, p. 397
^ Frieser, p. 400
^ a b Krivosheev, p. 109
^ Numbers of Soviet AFVs, aircraft, and guns taken from Frieser, p. 395
^ Zetterling & Frankson, p. 277
^ a b c d Frieser, p. 405
^ Грылев А. Н. Днепр—Карпаты—Крым. — М.: Наука, 1970. (Anatoly Nikolayevic Grylev. Dniepr-Carpath-Krym. Moskva. Nauka
^ a b c Glantz & House, p. 188
^ Erickson, p. 179
^ Glantz & House, p. 298
^ Zetterling & Frankson, p. 283 (citing The Korsun-Shevchenkovskii Operation, p. 41 and 52; Krivosheev, p. 109)
^ Nash, p. 366
^ Liddell-Hart 1970, pp. 664-665.
^ Willmott 1984, p. 180.
^ Corps Detachment B was organized as an infantry division with six infantry battalions and normal supporting divisional units. The unit had been formed from elements contributed by the 112th, 255th, and 332nd Infantry Divisions. Tessin, pp. 26–27.
^ Zetterling & Frankson, p. 37
^ Zetterling & Frankson, pp. 37–39
^ The 6th Tank Army had been formed on 20 January 1944. Dunn, Hitler's Nemesis
^ a b Erickson, p. 177
^ Erickson, p. 177; Glantz & House, p. 187; and Frieser, p. 396
^ Konev, Battles Hitler Lost, quoted in Nash, p. 200
^ Nash, p. 27
^ Zetterling & Frankson, p. 336; a total of 242 artillery pieces were inside the pocket.
^ Image description abbreviated from nearly same image in Nash, p. 161
^ a b Perrett, p. 167
^ a b Nash, p. 162
^ a b Zetterling & Frankson, p. 180
^ Group Stemmermann essentially consisted of six divisions: 57th, 72nd, 88th, 389th divisions, Corps Detachment B (Division Group 112), all infantry formations with no armored components; and the 5th SS Panzer Division with the attached 5th SS Infantry Brigade and the Narwa Battalion. The only units considered still capable of aggressive, offensive operations were 72nd Infantry and 5th SS Divisions. (Department of the Army Pamphlet 20–234, pp. 19–20)
^ DA Pamphlet 20–234, p. 22
^ Nash, Appendix 8, p. 399
^ The regiments of this division were raised in the city of Trier and the Mosel valley in western Germany
^ Nash, pp. 212–214
^ Nash, p. 296, map of disposition of forces during the breakout
^ Carell, p. 418
^ Perrett, p. 168
^ a b DA Pamphlet 20–234, p. 40
^ Nash, p. 267. Editor's note – Soviet tank corps did not have organic heavy (JS-2) tank brigades. Nash may be referring to one of the independent heavy tank regiments that were assigned to the 2nd Ukrainian Front.
^ One such isolated group of stragglers from the Wallonien brigade was set upon by a "swarm of Cossacks" [Carell, p. 430]. The vengeful cavalry hacked at the escapees with their sabers in "an orgy of slaughter" [Perrett, p. 169]
^ Haupt, pp. 211–212
^ Nash 1995, p. 132
^ Nash 1995, pp. 3, 141–142
^ Nash 1995, pp. 149–150
^ Zetterling & Frankson, pp. 277–278
^ DA Pamphlet 20–234, p. 1
^ Glantz & House, p. 188. In this work, Glantz is skeptical of German accounts, writing "Although German accounts claim that 30,000 troops escaped, the Soviet version is far more credible..."
^ "There was no Stalingrad on the Dnieper, as the Soviets claimed..." (Nash, p. 382)
^ For example, U.S. Army historian Douglas E. Nash points to Soviet claims as being exaggerated; e.g., the Soviet 5th Cavalry Corps and 4th Guards Army "claimed that they had practically wiped out most of Wiking [on 6 February 1944], though this was not remotely close ... In fact, Wiking's biggest battles in the pocket were yet to come" (Nash, p. 110). The Soviets claimed "to have downed more than 329 aircraft" during the aerial supply operation; that number would have been more planes than the Luftwaffe had operational in its Korps area during this entire period and "should be regarded as an example of the degree of exaggeration to which the Soviets were prone. This would not be the last wildly inflated claim they would make" (Nash, p. 120).
^ Frieser, pp. 394–419
Korsun-Cherkassy Pocket order of battle
In 2011, May, author and historian Jean Lopez published, on Economica Edition (ISBN 2717860290, ISBN 978-2717860290 )a book named "Le chaudron de Tcherkassy-Korsun ", which cover extensively this battle.
In 2007, Volume 8 of the German semiofficial history of the war (The German Reich and the Second World War) was published, and part of the work authored by Karl-Heinz Frieser addressed the events at Korsun. This work also doubts Soviet claims regarding the German casualties while discussing the situation of the German forces in detail, using available data from the German archives. However, while German casualties in this work are taken from German archives, it bases its assessment of Soviet AFV and gun losses (uncritically) on German wartime claims.[89]
More recently, the 2002 work by U.S. Army historian Douglas Nash, Hell's Gate: The Battle of the Cherkassy Pocket, January–February 1944, took issue with Soviet claims that Korsun was another Stalingrad.[87] Similarly, the Swedish historians Niklas Zetterling and Anders Frankson disputed the assertions of the Soviet General Staff Study of the Korsun Operation in their 2008 work, The Korsun Pocket. The Encirclement and Breakout of a German Army in the East, 1944, using statements to describe the staff study such as "anything but accurate" and "completely unreliable." Yet, both Nash and Zetterling/Frankson conclude that Korsun was a Soviet victory even as all three authors took issue with Soviet characterizations of the battle.[1][2][88]
John Erickson's 1983 The Road to Berlin and David Glantz's 1995 When Titans Clashed covered events on the entire Eastern Front from a German and Soviet perspective, and also devoted several pages to the fighting in the Korsun Pocket. Erickson did not question Soviet claims regarding German casualties, and Glantz questioned the veracity of German claims regarding the total of escapees from the pocket.[86] Glantz has also translated the Soviet General Staff Study on the Korsun Operation into English as The Battle for the Ukraine: the Red Army's Korsun'-Shevchenkovkii Operation, 1944.
One of the initial historiographical works on the fighting at Korsun was a 1952 U.S. Army publication, DA Pamphlet 20–234, Operations of Encircled Forces: German Experiences in Russia. This work was written in the context of NATO's Cold War confrontation with the Soviet Union, and authors were highlighting historical experience of the Wehrmacht that may have proven useful to NATO forces had a war between the Soviet Union and NATO broken out.[85] Like most of the English-language works on the Eastern Front of this era, it was written from the German point of view.
On the part of the Germans, the counter-attack was depicted as a glorious success in which one group of brave German soldiers freed their equally heroic comrades who had been trapped in the pocket. General von Vormann, who commanded the relief attempt of the XXXXVII Panzer Corps, bitterly noted that "The troops who took part were astonished and unbelieving when they were told they had won a great victory at Cherkassy in the Ukraine in 1944." The German high command, however, was relieved that so many troops were able to escape. Even Adolf Hitler, who was known to launch into furious tirades over any reversal on the Eastern front, only complained briefly about the amount of equipment that had to be left behind.[84]
Both sides hailed the events at Korsun as a victory. the supreme commander" was Zhukov's unhappy verdict.[83]
Propaganda and historiography
Soviet sources give total losses of 80,188 casualties for the 1st and 2nd Ukrainian Fronts, with 24,286 killed and missing, and 55,902 wounded or sick. These losses were incurred over the period of 24 January – 17 February 1944.[6]
German losses indicate that of the 60,000 men originally inside the pocket, their number had shrunk to less than 50,000 by 16 February. 45,000 of these took part in the breakout, resulting in 27,703 German soldiers and 1,063 Russian auxiliaries breaking out unscathed. In addition 7,496 wounded reached the III Panzer Corps, with an additional 4,161 wounded evacuated from the pocket by air. Left behind were a total of 19,000 dead, wounded, captured or missing. Total casualties killed, wounded or missing, were 31,000.[81] German documents list total escapees as 40,423, including the wounded flown out of the pocket and evacuated from Lysyanka.[82]
The Soviet performance was also beset by errors. Soviet intelligence on German forces in the pocket was faulty in overestimating their strength.[3] At the same time, the Soviets underestimated German capability for a counter-attack and had to hurriedly move more forces forward to bolster the strength of their encircling rings.[80] The Soviet air force was unable to significantly hinder the German aerial resupply effort.[10] Ultimately, the encircling forces were unable to prevent a German breakout, allowing a significant portion of the trapped Germans to escape. Given the initial circumstances of the battle, the degree of Soviet losses makes clear that while the Soviets won at Korsun, it was a victory that came at a high price.[1]
Hitler's insistence on holding the exposed salient strongly limited the options of German field commanders.[78] Once the Soviets had encircled the German forces, the German relief efforts produced mixed results. The effectiveness of the German counterattack was limited by Hitler's plan for splitting his strength to attempt a counter envelopment. The XLVII Panzer Corps' attacks were ineffective due to the weakness of its divisions. Though the III Panzer Corps was far more effective, the corps wasted a week on a failed attempt to encircle the Soviet forces.[37] When III Panzer Corps was finally given the mission of driving to relieve Gruppe Stemmermann, the Germans were unable to provide Bäke's heavy tank regiment with adequate fuel supplies, leading Bäke to stop the advance on Hill 239 because one group of his tanks had run out of fuel.[79] This logistical failure was compounded by the vagueness of the radio message to General Stemmermann ordering the breakout attempt. Hill 239 remained under Soviet control, resulting in significant casualties among Stemmermann retreating force.
The battle around Korsun was a Soviet victory.[1][2][77] The German forces became trapped, and as the pocket collapsed the forces inside were forced to retreat through gaps in the Soviet forces surrounding them, resulting in significant losses in men and tremendous losses in equipment. However the details of the battle make it clear that both sides committed significant mistakes.
Soviet forces in Ukraine, 1944
General Stemmermann was killed during the breakout when his command car was fired upon and hit by a Soviet antitank gun.[76] General Lieb survived the war. General Vatutin was shot by Ukrainian Nationalist UPA insurgents on 29 February 1944 and died on 15 April 1944.[12] The commander of 2nd Ukrainian Front, General Konev, was made a Marshal of the Soviet Union for his victory at Korsun. Konev also survived the war.
With German armoured reserves drawn to the Korsun Pocket, the Soviets struck Army Group South in two other sectors. The 13th and 60th Armies (General Vatutin's 1st Ukrainian Front) advanced south of the Pripiat' Marshes, capturing the remnants of the German XIII Corps at the Battle of Rovno [75] and advancing to Lutsk. To the south, the 3rd and 4th Ukrainian Fronts (Generals Malinovsky and Tolbukhin) attacked along the bend of Dnepr River, capturing Kryvyi Rih.[12]
In a U.S. Army brief written following the war, General Lieb commented:
The Red Army encirclement of Cherkasy–Korsun inflicted serious damage on six German divisions, including the 5th SS Panzer Division. Though most of the men escaped, they had to leave nearly all of their heavy equipment behind. These units had to be withdrawn, requiring rest and near complete re-equipping. The escaped wounded were transported from collection points near Uman to rehabilitation areas and hospitals in Poland, and were then sent on leave to their home towns.
That so many reached the German lines at Lysyanka was due in great measure to the exertions of III Panzer Corps as it drove in relief of Group Stemmermann. The cutting edge was provided by Heavy Armored Regiment Bäke (Schweres Panzer Regiment Bäke), named for its commander Lt.Col. Dr. Franz Bäke. The unit was equipped with Tigers and Panthers and an engineer battalion with specialist bridging skills.[74]
By mid-day, the majority of the now intermingled divisions had reached the Gniloy Tikich stream, turbulent and swollen to a breadth of 15 meters and a depth of two meters[31] by the melting snow. Despite the fact that the 1st Panzer Division had captured a bridge, and engineers had erected another, the panicking men saw the river as their only escape from the rampaging T-34s. Since the main body was away and south of the bridgeheads, the last tanks, trucks and wagons were driven into the icy water, trees were felled to form makeshift bridges and the troops floundered across as best as they could, with hundreds of exhausted men drowning, being swept downstream with horses and military debris. Many others succumbed to shock or hypothermia. Groups of men were brought across on lifelines fashioned from belts and harnesses. Others formed rafts of planks and other debris to tow the wounded to the German side, at all times under Soviet artillery and T-34 fire. Gen. Lieb, after establishing a semblance of order at the banks throughout the afternoon, crossed the Gniloy Tikich swimming alongside his horse.[71] When the 5th SS Panzer Division commander Herbert Gille attempted to form a human chain across the river, alternating between those who could swim and those who could not, scores of men died when the chain broke. Several hundred Soviet prisoners of war, a troupe of Russian women auxiliaries and Ukrainian civilians who feared reprisals by the Red Army, also crossed the icy waters.[72] Toward the end phase of the breakout, engineers had built several more bridges and rear guard units of 57th and 88th Infantry Divisions crossed the river "dry", including "20 [horse drawn] panje wagons with ... about 600 wounded" aboard.[73]
Gruppe Stemmermann had paid a staggering price in casualties for the vagueness of the radio message that had ordered the breakout from the pocket.
What followed was a scene illustrative of warfare at its most savage:
General Konev, now aware of the German breakout, resolved to keep his promise to Stalin not to let any "Hitlerites" or "Fascists" escape annihilation. Soviet intelligence, however, at this stage vastly overestimated the armored strength of III Panzer Corps, and Konev therefore proceeded in force. At this time the 20th Tank Corps brought its brigade of the new Joseph Stalin-2's to the Korsun battlefield.[67] Konev ordered all available armor and artillery to attack the escaping units, cut them into isolated groups and then destroy them piecemeal.[68] The two blocking Soviet rifle divisions, 206th Rifle and 5th Guards Airborne, had been smashed by the German assault forces; without infantry support Soviet tanks then fired into the escaping formations from a distance. With no anti-tank weapons in the field, T-34s commenced to wade into unprotected support troops, headquarters units, stragglers and red-cross identified medical columns.[69][70]
At the left flank column, a reconnaissance patrol returned bearing grim news. The geographic feature Hill 239 was occupied by Soviet T-34's of the 5th Guards Tank Army. Despite efforts to capture Hill 239, the high ground remained in Soviet hands and had to be bypassed. The direction of the German retreat had to veer off to the south toward the Gniloy Tikich River. When daylight arrived, the German escape plan began to unravel. Very few armored vehicles and other heavy equipment could climb the slippery, thawing hillsides and the weapons had to be destroyed and abandoned "after the last round of ammunition had been fired."[66]
With extreme reluctance, Stemmermann and Lieb decided to leave 1,450 non-ambulatory wounded at Shanderovka attended by doctors and orderlies.[60][61][62] The troops then began to assemble at dusk into three leading assault columns with Division Group 112 to the north, 5th SS Panzer Division to the south and 72nd Division in the center with the reinforced 105th Regiment in the first echelon to provide the assault power.[63] "By 2300 the 105th Regiment – two battalions abreast – started moving ahead, silently and with bayonets fixed. One-half hour later the force broke through the first and soon thereafter the second [Soviet] defense line."[64] All went well for several battalions and regiments who reached the German lines at Oktyabr by 0410. Major Kästner and his 105th grenadiers reached friendly lines by cautiously approaching the forward position of Panthers of 1st Panzer Division of the III Panzer Corps, bringing their wounded along and their heavy weapons, but losing the trailing, horse drawn supply column to Soviet artillery. The 105th entered Lysyanka at 0630.[65] On the opposite front of the cauldron, General Stemmermann and his rear guard held fast and thus assured the success of the initial breakout.[66]
The German breakout
Password Freedom, objective Lysyanka, 2300 hours.[59]
The message did not specify that Zhurzintsy and the hill were still firmly in Soviet hands—a failure that caused Group Stemmermann severe casualties during the German breakout of the pocket. Lt.Gen. Theobald Lieb was appointed by 8th Army to lead the breakout. Only seven kilometers lay between Group Stemmermann and III Panzer Corps, but in between Konev "was in the process of repositioning forces for a final crushing attack which would take place [on] 17 February."[54] His formidable force of "three armies – the 4th Guards, 27th, 52nd ... and 5th Guards Cavalry Corps" – surrounded the encircled German forces and "elements of 5th Guards Tank Army had recently been added ... with the most powerful units, in particular armor, placed between Group Stemmermann and III Panzer Corps."[55][56] General Stemmermann elected to stay behind with a rearguard of 6,500 men, the remaining, combined strength of 57th and 88th Infantry Divisions.[57] The pocket was now a mere 5 kilometers in diameter, depriving Stemmermann of room to maneuver. Shanderovka, once seen as a gate to freedom, now became known as Hell's Gate.[58] The Red Army poured intense artillery and rocket fire on the area around the encircled troops, with nearly every round finding a target. Sturmoviks of the Red Air Force bombed and strafed, only infrequently challenged by Luftwaffe fighters. Various unit diaries described a scene of gloom, with fires burning caused by Soviet night bombing with incendiaries, destroyed or abandoned vehicles everywhere and wounded men and disorganized units on muddy roads. Ukrainian civilians were caught between the combatants. On 16 February 1944, Field Marshal von Manstein, without waiting for a decision by Hitler, sent a radio message to Stemmermann to authorize the breakout. It said simply:
Capacity for action by III Panzer Corps limited by weather and supply situation. Gruppe Stemmermann must perform breakthrough as far as the line Zhurzintsy–Hill 239 by its own effort. There link up with III Panzer Corps.[53]
The northward thrust toward the pocket by the III Panzer Corps had been halted by Red Army determination, terrain, and fuel shortages. After several failed attempts by German armored formations to seize and hold Hill 239 and advance on Shanderovka, Soviet counterattacks by 5th Guards Tank Army forced III Panzer Corps into costly defensive fighting. 8th Army radioed Stemmermann:
Congestion on the road
Breakout through Hell's Gate
The pocket had "wandered" south and half-way toward its rescuers and rested on the village of Shanderovka. The settlement was heavily defended by the Soviets; had been captured by 72nd Infantry troops, was retaken by units of the Soviet 27th Army and recaptured by the Germania regiment of 5th SS Panzer Division. By nightfall on 16 February, III Panzer Corps fought its way closer to the encircled formations, the spearheads were now seven kilometers from Group Stemmermann.[52]
On 11 February Major Robert Kästner's 105th Grenadier Regiment of the 72nd Infantry Division captured Novo-Buda in a night assault.[48] The following night Komarovka fell in similar fashion.[49] On the evening of 15 February the 105th Regiment again, using its last reserves and with two assault guns, secured Khilki, defeating a Soviet counterattack supported by armor.[50] However, of all the German divisions in the pocket, the 5th SS Panzer Division "did more than any other to ensure the continued survival of Gruppe Stemmermann ..."[51] Since the 5th SS Division was the only truly mobile force inside the pocket, the division's tracked units were repeatedly shifted from one end of the pocket to the other to shore up crumbling lines.
Stemmermann began withdrawing troops from the north side of the pocket, reorienting the thrust of the escape direction, and attacking south to expand toward the relief forces on the north bank of the Gniloy Tikich. The frenetic maneuvering within the pocket confused the Soviets, convincing them that they had trapped the majority of the German 8th Army. The trapped forces were now to capture the villages of Novo-Buda, Komarovka, Khilki and Shanderovka at the southwestern perimeter of the pocket to reach a favorable jump-off line for the breakout.[47]
The Luftwaffe effort succeeded in delivering 82,948 gallons of fuel and 868 tons of ammunition plus four tons of medical supplies to the encircled forces and 325 tons of ammunition, 74,289 gallons of fuel and 24 tons of food to spearheads of the relief formations, as well as evacuating 4,161 wounded while the Korsun airfield remained operational.[46] But even this effort had only met about half (78 tons) of the daily requirements (150 tons) of the encircled troops as estimated by the German 8th Army headquarters.[10]
The German air force mounted an aerial resupply operation to both the encircled forces and the German relief columns. On 28 January, the VIII Aviation Corps (Fliegerkorps) began operations that eventually saw the use of 832 transport aircraft, 478 bombers (from which supplies were dropped at low altitude), 58 fighter bombers, and 168 fighters. Over the course of the operation, only 32 transport aircraft, 13 bombers, and five fighters were lost.[10] After the Korsun airfield was abandoned on 12 February, deliveries had to be dropped in by parachute. Fuel drums and ammunition crates were dropped into snowbanks by transports flying just above the deck.
Ju 52s at Korsun airfield, Ju 87s in formation above (January 1944).
Both antagonists realized that the Wehrmacht relief efforts had come to a critical stage. Despite heavy Soviet propaganda inducements, very few German soldiers and no Waffen-SS men in the cauldron had surrendered.[43] Zhukov thus decided to send parlementaires under a white flag with surrender demands.[35] A Red Army lieutenant colonel, translator and bugler arrived in an American jeep and presented letters for both Stemmermann and Lieb signed by Marshal Zhukov and Generals Konev and Vatutin. The German officer on headquarters duty, a major at Corps Detachment B and a translator, received the emissaries.[44] After cordial talks, refreshments and a handshake, the Soviets departed without an answer – the "answer would be in the form of continued, bitter resistance."[45]
On 11 February, III Panzer Corps continued its drive east. The exhausted force reached the Gniloy Tikich stream and established a small bridgehead on the eastern bank. III Panzer Corps could advance no further, Group Stemmermann would have to fight its way out.[42]
Panzer IVs carry infantry, January 1944
Surrender demand and German maneuver within the pocket
Konev issued orders for the 4th Guards Army and 5th Guards Cavalry Corps to attempt to split the pocket on the night of 5–6 February. The strike was to fall where the two German corps bordered.[39] As fighting progressed the Soviet goal became clear to Stemmermann and Lieb. Stemmermann ordered the 5th SS Division's armor to the scene. Together with the 72nd Infantry Division the Soviet attack was brought to a halt, buying the defenders time.[39] Red Army efforts were renewed between 7–10 February. This effort was hobbled by shortages in supply. III Panzer Corps' penetrations toward the Gniloy Tikich River made the supply lines for Soviet formations such as Vatutin's 6th Tank Army much longer.[40] The Red Air Force attempted to resupply some units, using the Po-2 aircraft.[41] Despite supply difficulties, units from the 2nd Ukrainian Front were able to close in on Korsun by 10 February, collapsing the pocket to an area of six by seven miles.[27]
On 11 February Breith began a push with the 16th and 17th Panzer Divisions driving toward the Gniloy Tikich River. They initially made good progress. The 1st Panzer Division and 1st SS Panzer Division LSSAH covered the northern flank of the drive. As they drove deeper into the Soviet positions Zhukov ordered Vatutin to assemble four tank corps with the goal of cutting off the attacking German spearhead.[38] The weather warmed, turning the roads to a soft mud and bogging down German progress. Here the liabilities of Germany's wheeled vehicles became evident. The Soviet forces had been provided lend-lease U.S. built four-wheel and six-wheel drive trucks. These were largely able to get through, whereas German two-wheel-drive vehicles were not.[38]
World War II, Adolf Hitler, Soviet Union, The Holocaust, Germany
World War II, Russia, Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, Russian language, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic
Eastern Bloc, Soviet Union, Vietnam War, Berlin Wall, United States
Eastern Front (World War II)
Russian language, Berlin, World War II, Battle of Stalingrad, Ukraine
2nd Guards Airborne Division
World War II, Soviet Union, Mukacheve, Czechoslovakia, Košice
World War II, United States, Berlin, France, Germany
Belgium in World War II
World War II, United Kingdom, Nazi Germany, Brussels, Royal Air Force
Nanking Massacre
World War II, International Military Tribunal for the Far East, Japanese war crimes, Tokyo, John Rabe
Battle of the Atlantic
World War II, United Kingdom, Nazi Germany, Royal Canadian Navy, Operation Overlord
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1569
|
__label__wiki
| 0.609509
| 0.609509
|
Home Richard Harries: Case study
Richard Harries: Case study
at Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)
Deputy Director (Innovation), Department for Communities and Local Government
Government has always been done “by the numbers”. From the thirteenth-century Chancellor of the Exchequer counting his jetons on a black and white chequered sheet to the 1941 survey of “foundation garments” (commissioned by a War Ministry worried that demand for corsets was contributing to a nationwide steel shortage) the Government has always needed to understand the scale and dimensions of its remit.
Yet despite this long history of measurement, analysis and prediction, the record of successive administrations has been less than impressive. As Josiah Stamp, a senior civil servant from the early twentieth century observed: “Governments are very keen on amassing statistics. They collect them, add them, raise them to the nth power, take the cube root and prepare wonderful diagrams. But you must never forget that every one of these figures comes in the first instance from the village watchman, who just puts down what he damn well pleases.”
Throughout my own career in the civil service I have been fascinated by the use and abuse of numbers in Government. So when the chance arose to explore these issues with some of the best brains in Cambridge, it was not one to miss! My own fellowship is based around two core lines of enquiry:
are there new approaches to data collection, manipulation and analysis that offer technical improvements to the way Government deals with numbers?
where technical improvements cannot be made, perhaps where social problems are inherently unmeasurable, what are the appropriate structural responses?
I wanted to explore things like: how can governments best exploit citizen- generated data? how can citizens best exploit open public data? where data and analysis lets us down, how can we draw on “the wisdom of the crowds”? are there lessons we can learn from history and literature? and what is the potential for self-government through technology?
My fellowship started with a very intense five days exploring these issues with thirty of the country’s leading historians, computer scientists, economists, theologians and dramaturgs. The conversations I had were deep and powerful, a helter-skelter mix of insight and serendipity, that often led me to new and surprising lines of enquiry.
But it’s not just about interesting discussions in picturesque surroundings. The connections I made have proved just as useful back at the office. I was delighted to host a highly successful “Science Day” for my department, bringing in experts from Cambridge and beyond to explore the role that science and technology can play in tackling policy challenges ranging from fracking and urban design to social care and waste collection. And I was equally delighted when the Smith Institute for Industrial Mathematics agreed to sponsor an investigation into “business rates pooling” at the 91st European Study Group with Industry in Bristol. From high-brow dialogue to real-world problem solving: this for me is the genius of the Policy Fellowship Programme.
http://www.csap.cam.ac.uk/network/richard-harries/
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1574
|
__label__wiki
| 0.748633
| 0.748633
|
Maersk to Recycle First Two Vessels in Alang, India
May 24, 2016 10:43:00 AM
Maersk Group announced Friday that it has reached an agreement to beach the Maersk Georgia and the Maersk Wyoming at Alang's Shree Ram ship recycling facility, its first disposals in India since its announcement of a new partnership with South Asian yards. The vessels are due to arrive in late May
The market for ship recycling is dominated by practices unchanged for decades. Out of a total of 768 ships recycled globally in 2015, 469 – representing 74% of the total gross tonnage scrapped – were sold to facilities on beaches in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh with challenges to workers and the environment.
The Maersk Group’s policy is to only recycle ships responsibly. Until recently, this was only feasible in a limited number of yards in China and Turkey.
“By initiating recycling of vessels in Alang at responsible yards, we ensure further development of financially feasible and responsible recycling options to the benefit of Alang and the shipping industry. This development will take time, but we are determined to work with the yards for the long haul,” says Annette Stube, Head of Sustainability in the Maersk Group.
Steady improvements of conditions have been witnessed in ship recycling yards in Alang in the last couple of years. Following several audits at upgraded facilities in Alang in 2015, the Maersk Group concluded that responsible recycling can be accelerated in the area, if the engagement is made now.
“The Alang plans come at a cost for us, but we will invest money and human resources to ensure we can already now scrap our vessels in compliance with the Hong Kong Convention provisions (HSE) as well as international standards on labor conditions and anti-corruption. We will also have staff on-site at Shree Ram. They will be working closely with the yard to further upgrade practices, processes and facilities to ensure that the recycling of our vessels complies with our standards,” says Annette Stube.
To accelerate the upgrade of more yards in Alang, the Maersk Group is working on building a broader collaboration with other ship owners to increase demand for responsible ship recycling and to find sustainable solutions. A first step is a dialogue with Japanese ship owners in collaboration with the Japanese ship owners association (JSA) in the coming months.
Other CTI Group member website:
www.cti-cert.com
www.polyndt.com.sg
www.cti-cert.org
http://www.cem-international.co.uk
http://www.cti-cmcs.com
http://www.reach24h.com
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1575
|
__label__cc
| 0.536138
| 0.463862
|
Movies A - Z
Riske Business: More Underrated Horror Movies
by Adam Riske
Some suggestions to send your Scary Movie Month out on a high note.
Arachnophobia (1990)
This movie has its fans, but it doesn’t get brought up all that much anymore. Arachnophobia was a gateway horror movie for me during my early days and I had just as good of a time with it on a revisit a couple of years ago. It’s fun in a The Blob (1958) sort of way. Jeff Daniels is an inspired everyman lead as the new town doctor, the movie has just the right balance of scares and laughs (John Goodman!) and the deadly spiders are very creepy crawly. This movie doesn’t get the love it deserves. Co-starring Harley Jane Kozak who at 8 years old I saw and was all “If I weren’t 8, I’d ask for a date.”
Cat’s Eye (1985)
The final segment featuring a young Drew Barrymore and a tiny creature gets the most attention, but the first two segments are what make Cat’s Eye a really strong anthology for me. If you can get past James Woods being in it, “Quitters, Inc.” is effectively cruel in a fun Tales from the Crypt way and the middle story (“The Ledge”) with Robert Hays having to walking around the ledge of a high-rise building to avoid the wrath of a gangster is great, suspenseful filmmaking. This is a top of the silver medal category horror anthology.
Creepshow 2 (1987)
Yep, another anthology. Like Cat’s Eye, Creepshow 2 goes 2 for 3 for solid stories with the highlights being the freaky and gross “The Raft” which was my immediate favorite story the first time I watched it and my new favorite “The Hitch-hiker,” an amusing segment that closes the film out. Just get past the first story, the slow and shruggy “Old Chief Wood’nhead” and it’s smooth sailing from there. Bonus: The Hitch-hiker is played by Tom Wright who would go on a play basically the same type of zombie role in the original Tales from the Hood.
Critters 2: The Main Course (1988)
Critters 2 is the movie I wanted Critters to be. In a manner like Gremlins 2: The New Batch, the film really doubles down on the ingenuity of the gags and the creature design. It also moves at a fast clip making it a great hangout movie if you’re having a Halloween-themed movie night. Critters 2 holds a soft spot in my heart because it comes from the awesome writer-director-podcaster extraordinaire Mick Garris and features a scene of hundreds of Critters converging to form a rolling Critter Ball. This movie’s a blast from start to finish.
Halloween II (2009)
Specifically the director's cut. I’ve beaten the drum for this movie in the past and I’m going to again. I don’t think there’s another movie like Halloween II in the franchise. It takes the trauma of the events of the original Rob Zombie remake dead seriously and it really works as a tragedy about the death march of Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor Compton, in a performance I think is a bit underrated too). I rewatched this movie a few days ago and it’s exhausting and impactful with some masterful sequences. I totally get when people don’t like Rob Zombie films, but I will never understand when they simply dismiss the quality of his filmmaking.
Stop reading this and go see Hell Fest right now! Let it in your life. It’s this year’s Birth of the Dragon i.e. it’s a perfect movie.
The Night Flier (1997)
This was my favorite new-to-me discovery of last year’s Scary Movie Month. It has that great, warm early-90s Stephen King adaptation feel and tells an interesting story about a tabloid night crawler (who flies, making him a night flier) in pursuit of a vampire attacking regional airports. It’s a page-turning (can I use that phrase here?) character study with a showcase performance by the late, great Miguel Ferrer. The movie is methodically paced but stick with it until the end which is full of creepy imagery and great payoffs.
In recent years I’ve grown a nostalgia for Dark Castle productions like the House on Haunted Hill (1999) and House of Wax (2005) remakes. My favorite of their output though is Orphan. It’s nuts, deeply unsettling and goes for broke with its premise. I won’t spoil the twist here but let me just say it’s really satisfying and sets up a climax where you’ll definitely have a rooting interesting in favor of the always magnificent Vera Farmiga. I want to watch this again right now.
I hope you’re all having a great month. If you have any underrated horror film recommendations, leave a comment below!
Posted by Patrick Bromley at 12:00 PM
Labels: 2018 scary movie month, arachnophobia, cat's eye, creepshow 2, halloween II, orphan, riske business, the night flier, underrated horror movies
Mauricio October 29, 2018 at 12:42 PM
...Last Shift (2015) seems to be a hidden horror jem on Netflix; I don't think I've seen anyone review it this month...
Alex O. October 29, 2018 at 1:15 PM
Great reminder that I need to revisit Critters 2; I revisited Critters last year and found it okay, but lacking/bit of a slog.
I'll recommend Southbound (2015), the best "new to me" horror film I've seen this month. I feel like it doesn't get mentioned much, even when people are discussing anthologies. But this is consistently, from story to story, really good movie making with a variety of scares.
benpeterson October 29, 2018 at 6:14 PM
Orphan yes! Love this movie. This is one I dragged my friends to and even my mom back when it came out because it worked on me in so many different ways and I wanted others to experience it too. I find it to be scary as hell, and the one scene involving a very special group of flowers actually shook me a little bit. Vera Farmiga rules so much. I hope she doesn’t fade away.
Luke Ciancio October 29, 2018 at 6:52 PM
"the Raft" segment scared me so much as a kid that I was afraid to sleep near the edges of my bed for months!
Matt Lohr October 29, 2018 at 11:30 PM
I was at the premiere of Orphan, and will never forget how the audience exploded at Vera Farmiga’s final line to Esther.
benpeterson October 30, 2018 at 10:19 AM
Its well earned
Daniel Epler October 29, 2018 at 11:58 PM
I would gladly do this list as a marathon.
A Casual Listener October 30, 2018 at 3:47 AM
Cat's Eye is one of the films I watched repeatedly on cable as a kid. I have always preferred the first two stories. The scene of the pigeon pecking Robert Hayes' ankle left an indelible memory.
Noticing Cat's Eye turn up on Turner Classic Movies last year made me feel old.
Adam Riske October 30, 2018 at 7:47 AM
I felt the same way when I was looking at the TCM schedule for next month and saw The Lawnmower Man on there.
Will Benson October 31, 2018 at 12:16 AM
This is going back to your streaming picks but thanks for Bad Moon. Hadn't seen it in forever and it made my day. Also I love me some Orphan...I mean, the movie.
Tweets by @fthismovie
Blog Archive January (16) December (34) November (27) October (59) September (34) August (32) July (31) June (59) May (39) April (30) March (35) February (25) January (29) December (26) November (23) October (68) September (27) August (32) July (26) June (54) May (32) April (26) March (35) February (31) January (30) December (20) November (32) October (78) September (40) August (49) July (42) June (70) May (46) April (43) March (47) February (44) January (48) December (42) November (48) October (83) September (39) August (41) July (40) June (74) May (44) April (43) March (52) February (47) January (47) December (43) November (48) October (89) September (48) August (49) July (45) June (77) May (46) April (51) March (52) February (44) January (44) December (45) November (44) October (80) September (51) August (48) July (50) June (88) May (55) April (50) March (56) February (51) January (53) December (45) November (41) October (61) September (48) August (48) July (51) June (74) May (50) April (46) March (45) February (48) January (53) December (41) November (43) October (55) September (44) August (45) July (43) June (64) May (44) April (47) March (43) February (35) January (37) December (25) November (27) October (35) September (23) August (27) July (25) June (50) May (25) April (22) March (22) February (20) January (21) December (19) November (19) October (21) September (17) August (19) July (20) June (17) May (17) April (19) March (16) February (10) January (15) December (6) November (11) October (10) September (16) August (8) July (6) June (6) May (7)
© F This Movie!. Awesome Inc. theme. Powered by Blogger.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1579
|
__label__wiki
| 0.916813
| 0.916813
|
Progressives today do not want to discuss their history. I want to discuss their history.
Author Archives: progressingamerica
About progressingamerica
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle - Sun Tzu (Chapter 3)
Fabian Freeway – High Road to Socialism in the USA – Table of contents
Posted on December 19, 2012 by progressingamerica
Table of contents for the book Fabian Freeway, and two paragraphs of the Foreword to give a brief description.
Fabian Freeway – High Road to Socialism in the USA
By: Rose L. Martin
Western Islands, Boston, MA, 1966
Foreward and Preface
Chapter 1-Make Haste Slowly!
Part 1 – Great Britain
Chapter 2-Sowing the Wind
Chapter 3-The Dangerous Fabians
Chapter 4-A Chosen Instrument
Chapter 5-Sedition Between Two Wars
Chapter 6-Dirge For An Empire
Chapter 7-Trial By Ordeal
Chapter 8-Tomorrow, The World?
Part 2 – The United States
Chapter 9-The Fabian Turtle Discovers America
Chapter 10-Putting The Silk Hat On Socialism
Chapter 11-The Professor Goes To Washington
Chapter 12-The Perfect Friendship
Chapter 13–Left Hands Across The Sea
Chapter 14-The More It Changes…
Chapter 15- …The More It Stays The Same
Chapter 16-By Any Other Name
Chapter 17-Fabian Face Cards in the New Deal
Chapter 18-Secret Weaponry
Chapter 19-Power and Influence
Chapter 20-More Power and Influence
Chapter 21-The Commanding Heights
Epilogue: The Moving Finger Writes
The American people have been and are complacently unfamiliar with Communism’s helpmate, Fabian Socialism. For over fifty years but especially since the middle nineteen-thirties there have been insinuated into high places in our government at Washington men whose collaboration in this socialistic movement has been greatly responsible for breaking down our constitutional form of government and substituting therefor the Socialist idea of centralized government.
Every loyal American should read this book. It is well documented, and proves beyond doubt that those who have wielded such vast influence upon successive Presidents, especially since Franklin Roosevelt, do not have a desire to retain the freedom of the individual and the free enterprise system, but rather seek to establish the very coercion from which our forefathers fled. The reader will be shocked when he comprehends that there are those in high places in government who are dedicated to this Socialist movement. The ultimate objective of the Fabian Socialist movement is no different than the ultimate objective of the Communist movement.
http://tinyurl.com/bd88e3a
Posted in FabianFreeway | Tagged Fabian Society, Fabians, Progressivism, Socialism | Leave a reply
Appendix I, II, III, IV, V, and VI for the book Fabian Freeway.
The author here presents the names of many members and cooperators
of the British Fabian Society and the British Labour Government as well as
the names of members and cooperators and/or sponsors of American Fabian-
type socialistic organizations such as the League for Industrial Democracy
(LID); and of organizations which pose as “liberal,” such as Americans for
Democratic Action (ADA). The theme developed in the main body of the
book is illustrated graphically as the lists conclude with the names of many
ADA members who hold high positions in the Johnson Administration, today.
The reader’s attention is called to the use of symbols (*) and (t) used
for example to denote the presence of Fabian Socialists in the British Labour
Government; and to denote members of ADA who are members or cooperators
of the League for Industrial Democracy, and so forth. Thus the tie-ins,
in terms of persons in both “liberal” and Socialist organizations, are shown.
A listing in certain of the following categories, does not of and by itself
convict an individual as a Socialist. However, by an amassing of evidence of
this kind, a persistent pattern appears and a movement convicts itself.
Here the mechanics are unveiled by which Socialism is transmitted from
Great Britain and other countries to the United States. And here, in the
United States, a Socialism is rapidly nearing completion for which
International Communism is the only logical beneficiary. Americans who wish to
change this tragic state of affairs are thus informed of the facts.
The following selective historical lists are offered as indicative of two
things: 1) the continuity of the roster and of the Fabian Society; 2) the
steady acquisition to Fabianism of new blood, always well-mixed with the
old.(footnote)
It has become a fascination for the writer to read lists of names. They were
gathered from the “Personal Notes,” the “Women’s Group,” the Kingsway Hall
Lectures, “Nursery,” Meetings of the Society, Election Lists, London
County Council election lists, Fabian Society Executive Committees and
records of attendance thereof. Many names (at least two hundred) which
did not appear at the historical level have become those of old friends. They
testify to the unbroken existence and the steady functioning of the Society.
Many tum up in news items, such as the study of the Institute of Pacific
Relations made by a Senate Committee: Creech-Jones, Noel-Baker, R. H.
Tawney, for example.
Individuals became Fabians by being proposed, sponsored, and elected;
and were required to subscribe to the Basis. If the Basis made them English
Socialists, the Society made them members of the Labour and Socialist
International. MacDonald is not included after 1919; yet the Fabianism in his
attitudes and those of his advisers is patent. Likewise, for all his close
associations, Professor Gilbert Murray has not been listed here. Sir Stafford
Cripps and Ernest Bevin like G. D. H. Cole and Ellen Wilkinson, swung to
the far Left at times; but they are Fabians all-and Margaret Cole has
made the old home in the Society comfortable for them all by enlarging the
porch! John Scurr, a Catholic, belonged; but not John Wheatley. Arnold
Bennett, J. B. Priestley, John Galsworthy are listed, although seldom; Patrick
Braybrooke and St. John Ervine, often. The first three names are associated
with The Clarion which consistently from 1929 to 1931 praised the artistry
of Charles Chaplin and Paul Robeson. Reginald Pugh belonged, but up to
1950, not Arthur (now Sir Arthur) Pugh of Steel and Smelters trades.
A complete list of those who never came back to the Society even in
spirit as Wallas, Wells, and Annie Besant did-while Chesterton, S. G. Hobson
(Pilgrim to the Left), A. Drage (New Age), H. Slesser did not-would
be significant. Although Clement Attlee credits much of Labour’s strength
(footnote) Initials appearing occasionally after British names mean:
EC == Executive Committee
JP == Justice of the Peace
L.C.C. == London County Council
MP == Member of Parliament
NEC (LAB) == National Executive Committee, Labour Party
TUC == Trades Union Congress
to Irish Catholic workingmen, the latter are vastly unrepresented in the
Fabian Society.
An estimated proportion of professed intellectuals to all others (also middle
class) seems to be about three in eight. This includes those holding
degrees, Bachelor of Arts (more usually, Bachelor of Science), Master of
Arts, Doctor of Philosophy, and those recording their military rank for
prestige, professors – oddly -many medical doctors. Elsewhere is a list
of Protestant ministers. Fabians often filled the position of Justice of the
Peace, the office on which very much of local civics hinges. In 1945 local
Fabian societies added 2,200 members to the Society. Fabian Society Annual
Report, 1946, said, “Newly elected M.P.’s expected the Fabian Society to …
provide them at short notice with policies, or with material for
speeches.”
Names like those of Ben Tillett, J. H. Thomas, J. R. Clynes, J. Wheatley,
E. Befin, A. Bevan, W. Citrine (now Viscount), John Hodges of the steel
workers, Frank Hodges of the miners, and Frank Smith of the coal miners,
were drawn into the field of gravity of the Society.
Margaret MacDonald, nee Gladstone, died in 1911. She ranked with Mary
MacArthur, Mary Middleton, Mrs. Bruce Glazier, Margaret MacMillan, to
whose labors Socialism in Britain is heavily indebted; although, like Mrs.
Glazier, they were inclined to confuse their Socialism with religion, leaving
the philosophic propositions of Fabianism to Haldane, Joad, Russell, and
Slesser (not to mention Wells and Shaw).
A sampling of names of Fabian Justices of the Peace in the nineteen-twenties
and nineteen-thirties follows:
David Adams F. W. King
R. Aldington T. W. McCormack
G. Burgneay H. J. May
Alderman H. Carden Gwyneth Morgan
John Cash Marion Phillips
Lilian Dawson Mrs. C. D. Rackham
C. S. Giddins E. Cubitt Sayres
G. M. Gillett G. Thomas
M. W. Gordon Mrs. G. Tiffen
Bart Kelly A. G. Walkden
Some names represented prominent British families:
Oliver Baldwin Lady Cynthia Mosley (nee Curzon)
Sir Ernest Benn Malcolm Muggeridge (nephew of Beatrice Webb)
Anthony Wedgewood Benn Philip Noel-Baker
Charlotte Haldane John Ramage
Naomi Haldane (Mitchison) Viscountess Rhonda
Lady Jowitt Miss Sankey
Ishbel MacDonald T. Drummond Shiels
Lady Melville Lady Frances Stewart
Allen Moncrieff C. Trevelyan
A sampling of speakers under Fabian auspices:
Viscount Bryce
Sir Walter Citrine (after 1945)
Hans Kohn (now in the U.S., listed as a member of the Society)
A. Duff Cooper (listed only once)
Herman Finer (now in the U.S., frequent lecturer and member of the
Fabian Society)
G. P. Gooch
Professor Julian Huxley (now of UNESCO)
Father Vincent McNabb(listed but once)
S. de Madariaga (historian)
A. Allison Peers (listed but once)
A. J. Penty (guild socialist, usually criticized)
Evelyn Sharp
Wickham Steed
Freda Utley (listed but once)
John Winant (U.S. Ambassador, luncheon guest speaker)
Protestant ministers whose names appear in Fabian lists (often M.P.’s):
James Adderly C. Jenkinson
Ramsden Balmforth James Kerr
G. C. Bynon Richard Lee
Henry Carter J. Massingham (non-practicing)
John Clifford (deceased, 1923) William Mellor (non-practicing)
J. E. Hamilton Ben Spoor
S. D. Headlam (deceased, 1923)
A partial list of foreigners heard by the Society, mostly Social Democrats
(this list is not alphabetical; it falls into a sort of chronological order):
Count Karolyi (in 1919, he resigned the presidency of the new Republic of
Hungary, when the Social Democrat regime led to that of Bela Kun)
Alfredo de Sordelli, Argentine writer
Herman Kantorowicz, German professor of Jurisprudence (once at Columbia)
Henri Gans
Baron Felix de Bethune (member)
Otto van der Sprenkel
Wolfgang Thiekuhl
Hans Kohn, German Social Democrat, now in the United States
G. Salvemini, Italian Social Democrat, Harvard professor
Carlo Rosselli, Italian anti-Fascist, Social Democrat, writer of Socialisme
Liberale; his Oggi in Spagna, domani in Italia posthumously published with
preface by Salvemini
A. H. Abbati (Swiss background)
J. B. Peixotto (member), American-born, cosmopolitan artist
K. Young (Chinese Consul General)
Sobei Mogi
D. J. Santilhano (Dutch), author of Banking for Foreign Trade
Prince Dimitri Sviatopolk Mirsky (1932)
Since 1940:
Dr. Alexander Baykov
Daw Saw Yin (of Burma)
Herta Gotthelf
Kudmul Shanti Rangarao (1947)
Anwar Iqbai Qureshi (Indian, 1947)
Kurt Schumacher (1947, reporting from Social Democratic contacts in Germany)
W. Sellers, of Nigerian Government
Stephen Drzcivieski
Professor Andre-Philipov (anti-Petain), September, 1942
Fabian names important in their avocations:
Sir Ernest Barker, political scientist
Patrick Braybrooke, lecturer,frequently in the United States, father of editor
of Wind and Rain
Edward Carpenter, poet (one might say laureate of “the movement”)
Colin Clark, economist
Victor Cohen, writer, lecturer at Fabian Summer Schools
M. H. Dobb, economist of London School of Economics, contributor to
Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences
Denis Healey, appointed to “persue a forward policy” in International
Labour Organisation, Geneva (1946)
Julian Huxley (UNESCO)
H. W. Nevinson, writer
John Ramage, Scottish shipbuilder, contributor to Labour Year Book
Maurice Reckitt (and Eva C. Reckitt), contributor to Labour Year Book, author
of Faith and Society, National Guildsman, Anglican Christian Socialist.
W. E. Walling, U.S. labor economist
Fabians who have worked or are working on the American scene (incomplete
Herbert Agar
G. E. G. Catlin (Cornell
Arthur Creech-Jones
A. E. Davies
Herman Finer (University of Chicago)
H. Duncan Hall
Herman Kantorowicz (Columbia)
Hans Kohn
Harold Laski (Harvard and Roosevelt)
Jenny Lee, invited by “forward” groups of John Hopkins and Columbia
Michael Oakshott
Maurice Orbach
John Parker (Chicago, Roosevelt)
D. N. Pritt
S. K. Ratcliffe, consistent visitor and reporter
W. Hudson Shaw (Oxonian), who came yearly to lecture in the University;
Extension Courses under auspices of Woodrow Wilson, in Philadelphia. They
published The Citizen, 1895 to 1901. (Shaw, known as “Broughman Villiers”)
R. H. Tawney
Graham Wallas
Barbara Ward, Catholic, but not lecturing under Catholic auspices (Lady
Lindsay)
A typical list of Fabians found in Fabian News and Fabian Society Annual
Report in 1923-24:
F. G. Abbis Izak Goller
David Adams W. Graham
Percy Alden A. Greenwood
Major C. Attlee Mary Griffiths
W. J. Baker C. H. Grinling
Elizabeth Banks Dr. L. H. Guest
Mr. and Mrs. Granville Barker Grace Hadow
E. Beddington Behrens B. T. Hall
Marion Berry Dr. S. Hastings
G. C. Binyon W. Henderson
G. P. Blizard Lancelot Hogben
Maeve Brereton Lt. R. G. K. Hopp
Dr. Mabel Brodie L. Isserlis
George Burgneay Dr. Robert Jones
Noel Buxton Hon. Arnold Keppel
Percival Chubb James Kinley
Major Church George Lansbury
J. D. Clarkson Harold Laski
Mrs. Hansen Coates H. B. Lees-Smith
Mrs. A. E. Corner J. F. MacPherson
Morley Dainow W. H. Marwick
Gilbert Dale Sylvain Mayer
A. Emil Davies Rosalyn Mitchell
Mrs. Boyd Dawson Herbert Morrison
Dr. Percy Dearmer Miss Pennythorne
F. Lawson Dodd Reginald Pugh
H. Drinkwater Amber Reeves
G. S. M. Ellis W. A. Robson
Dr. J. W. Evans W. Samuels
Dr. Letitia Fairfield J. Scurr
M. Farrman Hugh Shayler
Dr. Herman Finer W. E. Simnet
F. W. Galton Dr. Gilbert Slater
Joseph Gill Captain Lothian Small
G. M. Gillett N. A. Sprott
F. W. Gladstone J. C. Squire
J. Stewart A. G. Walkden
Fred Tallant D. W. Wallace
Brig. Gen. C. B. Thomson Col. T. B. S. Williams
F. Thoresby Ernest Wimble
Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Tiffen Ella Winter
Early Obituaries:
Arthur Clutton-Brock Maurice Hewlett
Baron Felix de Bethune George Standring
G. H. Ellis Herbert Trench
William Game George H. Underwood
K. A. Hayland Edmund H. Woodward
Stewart Headlam
A list of names of Fabians from the Fabian News and Fabian Society
Annual Report, 1929-31:
Albert Albery J. L. Etty
Major D. Leigh Aman Henry Farmer
Vera Anstey Montague Fordham
A. Earle Applebee J. A. Lovat Fraser
Mabel Atkinson G. M. Gillett
Oliver Baldwin Alban Gordon
Mrs. M. E. Beadle Charlotte Haldane
Captain Hubert Beaumont A. Clifford Hall
Sir Ernest Benn J. E. Hamilton
Wedgwood Benn Mrs. M. A. Hamilton
William Bennett Mrs. M. Hankinson
J. D. Beresford J. Hazelip
Theodore Besterman A. Henderson
G. P. Blizard W. W. Henderson
Constance Bloor Will Herron
Patrick Braybrooke Mrs. D. L. Hobman
Dr. W. H. Brend F. E. Holsinger
Dr. F. G. Bushnill F. W. Hooper
Philip Butler Daniel Hopkins, M.A., LL.B., M.C.
Ronald Chamberlain
Major Church George Horwill
Anna Corner Hubert Humphreys
Sir Stafford Cripps, K.C. S. B. Jackson
George Cruickshank Lady Jowitt
Hugh Dalton, D.S.C. Lt. Commander J. M. Kenworthy
A. E. Davies Mrs. A. M. Lang
J. Percival Davies George Lansbury
Admiral Dewar Susan Lawrence
Dorothy Elliott A. J. Lynch
St. J. Ervine Ishbel MacDonald
A. G. F. Machin Bernard Shaw
B. Skene MacKay Dr. Drummond Shiels
Margaret McKillop, M.A., M.B.E. Nicholas Size
Miles Malleson C. M. Skepper
J. J. Mallon Dr. Gilbert Slater
S. F. Markham, B.A., B. Litt. Kingsley Smallie
Henry May Frank Smith
J. B. Melville, K.C. W. G. Smith
Mrs. H.C. Miall-Smith Harry Snell
Rosslyn Mitchell Mrs. Snowden
Edith Morley Marion Somerville
Herbert Morrison Colonel Maurice Spencer
Oswald Mosley Leopold Spero
Joseph W. Neal Jessie Stephens
H. W. Nevinson Lady Frances Stewart
J. T. Newbold Mrs. H. M. Swanwich
Rt. Hon. Noel-Buxton D. Taylor
H. St. John Philby Norman Tiptaft
Lord Ponsonby Mrs. R. Townsend
Richard Pope Ethel Turner
E. B. Powley George Van Raalte
Mrs. H. M. Pulley Gilbert J. Walker
Mrs. C. D. Rackham Graham Wallas
T. Ridpeth William English Walling
J. Jones Roberts Professor F. E. Weiss
H. S. Rowntree James Welsh
Bertrand Russell Rebecca West
Miss Sankey Ellen Wilkinson
J. A. Sargent F. H. Wiltshire
John Scurr L. A. wingfield
John Sharman A. Young
Evelyn Sharp Dr. Ruth Young
Rev. G. S. Belasco J. H. Stobart Greenhalgh
J. W. Buttery Frederick Walter King
Miss M. Gibson Mrs. M. Kirkwood
Fabian names from Fabian Society Annual Report and Fabian News in
1934-36:
A. H. Abbati Oliver Baldwin
Jennie Adamson Major Harry Barnes
Sir Norman Angell J. P. Barter
A. E. Applebee H. L. Beales
Wilcox Arnold L. A. Benjamin
Major C. Attlee Wedgwood Benn
Francis Bacon Theodore Besterman
Mrs. G. P. Blizard Arthur Henderson
R. D. Blumenfeld, editor Daily Express Mrs. E. A. Hubback
Maud Bodkin Miss B. L. Hutchins
I. M. Bolton C. Jenkinson
H. N. Brailsford Thomas Johnston
Lionel Britton Sir William Jowitt
C. Delisle Burns Mrs. R. Keeling
Henry Carter Helen Keynes
Professor G. E. G. Catlin Dr. Hans Kohn
Mrs. Cavendish-Bentinck George Lansbury
Colin Clark Harold Laski
T. W. Coates Richard Lee
G. D. H. Cole H. W. Lewis
Dudley Collard H. Light
J. S. Collis Lord Listowel
W. G. Cove Kingsley Martin
Ida M. Cowley Mrs. C. J. Mathew, L. C. C.
Philip Cox Dr. Caroline Maule
A. Creech-Jones Francis Meddings
Stafford Cripps Captain W. J. Millar
R. C. Crossman W. Milne-Bailey
Morley Dainow Herbert Morrison, J. P., L. C. C.
Hugh Dalton H. T. Muggeridge
A. E. Davies, L. C. C. F. J. Osborn
J. P. Davies F. W. Pethick-Lawrence
Dr. Har Dayal Miss Picton-Turberville
Barbara Drake, L. C. C. Major Graham Pole
A. R. Dryhurst Lord Ponsonby
Mary Ellison Mrs. C. D. Rackham
R. C. S. Ellison John Ramage
St John Ervine S. K. Ratcliffe
Gordon Esher Paul Reed
Rowland Estacourt T. Reid
Dr. Eric Fletcher W. A. Robson
Dr. M. Follick F. A. P. Rowe
Robert Fraser Bertrand Russell
J. S. Furnivall H. P. Lansdale Ruthven
F. W. Galton Joclyn Rys
G. T. Garrett H. Samuels
Robert Gibson, K. C., LL. B. Captain W. S. Sanders
Alban Gordan Amy SAyles
Barbara Ayrton Gould A. Luckhurst Scott
Dr. L. Haden Guest Dr. S. Segal
Captain Basil Hall T. Drummond Shiels
J. H. Harley Lewis Silkin
T. Driffield Hawkins Arthur Skeffington
Lord Snell R. H. Tawney
Frank Soskice Ivor Thomas
Mrs. Arnold Stephens Ernest Thurtle
F. L. Stevens Ben Tillett
Michael Stewart Nanette Tuteur
Professor J. L. Stocks Sir Raymond Unwin
G. R. Strauss R. McKinnen Wood
Hubert Sweeny Leonard Woolf
J. A. Fallows Dr. Robert Lyons
A. Henderson (1937) Fred Tallant
Walter Hudson Alexander Wicksteed
Mrs. R. B. Kerr George Francis Wilson
James Leakey
A specially selected list of names of Fabians from records of 1942 to 1947,
showing continuity and prestige:
Clement Attlee Harold Laski
F. R. Blanco-White George Lathan
H. N. Brailsford A. Lewis
Marjorie Brett J. J. Mallon
Frances Coates Mrs. L’Estrange Malone
Margaret Cole Kingsley Martin
Cecily Craven C. Mayhew
A. Creech-Jones Herbert Morrison
Richard Crossman P. Noel-Baker
HughDalton R. Postgate
A. E. Davies R. A. Raffan
Barbara Drake J. W. Raisin
Dorothy Elliott John Ramage
Lord Faringdon W.A. Robson
Eric Fletcher Amy Sayle
J. S. Furnivall Emanuel Shinwell
F. W. Galton Arthur Skeffington
Agnes Gibson Reginald Stamp
Rita Hinden Edith Summerskill
Lancelot Hogben Leonard Woolf
C. E. M. Joad Barbara Wootton
William Jowitt
Mostyn Lloyd Beatrice Webb (1943)
William Mellor (1942) Sidney Webb (1948)
Lord Olivier (1943) Ellen Wilkinson (1947)
These names had long been listed; many through the thick and thin of the
nineteen-twenties. They must have kept up their dues, for Margaret Cole
made a clean slate of the paid up membership in her reorganization.
These names, old and new, of Fabians of the 1942 to 1947 group have taken
on the hue and verve of ZIP and the New Fabian Research Bureau:
Austen Albu John Parker
Dorothy Archibald Morgan Phillips
Sir Richard Aucland Sybil Prinsky
N. Barou
N. Pritt (retained as counsel for “the Eleven” Communists on appeal
before the U.S. Supreme Court)
Barbara Betts
F. A. Cobb
Freda Corbett Sir Hartley Shawcross
E. F. M. Durbin Stephen Spender
M. Edelman John Strachey
Hugh Franklin Ivor Thomas
V. Gollancz Sybil Thorndike
Frank Horrabin Herbert Tracey
Compton MacKenzie W. N. Warbey
Ian Mikardo G. D. N. Worswick
Ivor Montagu Lamartine Yates
George Orwell K. Zilliacus
Last, but not the least, there follows a list of “empire” and “international”
topics and the names of specially interested Fabians. These were taken from
the Fabian Society Annual Report of 1945-1946, and which covers the
election following the last year of war coalition when “Labour” formed a
“Socialist” Government:
Fabian Colonial Essays, contributed by H. N. Brailsford, M. Fortes, J. S.
Furnivall, Ida Ward, C. W. Greeniage, L. Woolf, Margaret Wrong, et al.,
edited by Rita Hinden.
Newfoundland the Forgotten Island, by Lord Ammon.
The World Parliament of Labour, by R. J. P. Mortished: International
Labour Organisation.
Africa, the West Indies, Palestine, India, and questions concerning the
Post-War Settlement and dealing with education, resources, crops, unionism,
politics, were treated by P. Noel-Baker, Wilfred Benson (ILO), E. E. Doll,
A. Dalgleish, Lord Faringdon,* Captain Gammons, Frank Horrabin, *
Julian Huxley, A. Creech-Jones,* Lord Listowel,* Harold Laski,* Professor
W. MacMillan, John Parker,* Lord Rennel, Reginald Sorensen, L. Woolf,*
K. Zilliacus.*
The names marked by asterisks are those of persons also serving on the
Fabian Executive.
An International Farewell Gathering held in October, 1945, was presided
over by P. Noel-Baker and sent greetings to French, Belgian and Italian
“comrades” in letters signed by representatives of twelve countries and
addressed to Daniel Mayer, Louis de Brouckere and Pietro Nenni, leading
Social Democrats. Cf. FSAR, 1945, p. 15. In every Fabian Society Annual
Report, 1929 to 1950, the name of Margaret Cole appears in official, foreign
and domestic connections.
As to the Webbs: Sidney (Lord Passfield) was on the Fabian Executive
as late as 1934. From 1935 to 1939, while A. Emil Davies kept the Society
together and the Fabian News coming out, the Webbs, having held up the
publication of their book on Soviet Russia until after the Election of 1935,
devoted themselves to receiving persons of “liberal” persuasion of every
rank (including Maisky, the Russian Ambassador) and to propagandizing
for Sovietism. They received a direct and negative reply to their rhetorical
question: Soviet Socialism: A New Civilisation? from Pius XI in Divini
Redemptoris.
Re: Fabian-inspired Brain Trust on U.S. Trade Union movement, see Fabian
News, November, 1943. The following names are listed as participating:
Bryn Roberts, British TU Delegate to the United States.
Stanley Ceizyk (member of International Association of Machinists Unions”,
AFL).
Hugh T. Mahoney (member of the U.S. Steel Workers Union, CIO).
Sam Berger (Labor Advisor to U.S. Mission for Economic Affairs).
Ernest Davies, M.P., son of A. E. Davies and disciple of Laski; one time
editor of The Clarion.
The following names are those of Fabians who may be characterized as
“old-timers” of the nineteen-twenties and nineteen-thirties. These names
were gleaned from the Fabian News and Fabian Society Annual Report.
Many will be recognized as well-known in :6elds not usually characterized
as “Fabian.” These are marked with an asterisk.
* Dr. Addison; Elections (FSAR)
Herbert Agar; New Fabian Group, 1930
R. Aldington; Fabian parliamentary candidate, 1930, J.P.
* Rt. Hon. L. S. Amery; Livingstone Hall lecturer, 1933
* Lord Arnold; Summer School, 193,3
Oliver Baldwin; Fabian parliamentary candidate, 1929, Personal Notes,
Professor Ernest Barker; Personal Notes, 1925, Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1928
* H. Granville Barker; Fabian Society Annual Report, 1919
* Mrs. R. Cavendish-Bentinck; Appeal by Hon. Treasurer, 1936
* J. D. Beresford; Fabian Summer Schools, 1930-1933
Annie Besant; King’s Hall lecturer, 1919, Obit., 1933
Amber Reeves Blanco-White; Personal Notes, 1923, Summer School lecturer, 1936
* Margaret Bondfield; King’s Hall lecturer, 1920, parliamentary candidate,
1920; President of Trades Union Congress, 1923, Fabian Women’s
Group, 1931
* C. Delisle Burns; Meetings of the Society, 1927, Kingsway Hall lecturer,
1927, Obit., 1934, Personal Notes, 1933
* Rt. Hon. Noel Buxton, M.P.; Meetings of the Society, 1924, General
Election, 1929
* Percival Chubb; Personal Notes, 1923
* Arthur Clutton-Brock; 1924
Alderman A. Emil Davies, L.C.C.; Executive Committee, 1924 (ret.), 3rd
week Summer School, 1925 (chairman), Executive Committee election,
O. V. der Sprenkel; Annual Meeting, 1925, Fabian Summer School, 1930
* R. C. K. Ensor; King’s Hall lecturer, 1919, Personal Notes, 1933
* St. John Ervine; Kingsway Hall, 1927, Personal Notes, 1934
Rowland Estcourt; Obit., 1934
* Dr. Letitia Fairfield; Lectures, 1919, Executive Committee, 1924 (ret.)
Lovat Fraser; Annual Meeting, 1925
F. W. Galton; Executive Committee, 1924 (ret.), 1925-26 FAR; Executive
committee Election, 1934, Development Fund, 1946
Dr. G. P. Gooch; Meetings of the Society, 1924, Essex Hall lecturer, 1929,
Livingstone Hall lecturer, 1938
* Rt. Hon. Arthur Greenwood, M.P.; General Election, 1924, Meeting of
the Society, 1926, Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1929
Major Haden Guest, M.P.; Executive Committee, Council elections, 1919;
1924 (ret.), Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1924, General Elections, 1924,
Summer School committee, 1925 (chairman), Fabian parliamentary candidate,
1934, Personal Notes, 1934
* Grace Hadow; Fabian Women’s Group, 1924
Charlotte Haldane; Fabian Women’s Group, 1929, Fabian Nursery Dance,
Elizabeth Haldane; Fabian Women’s Group, 1930
* Rt. Hon. Viscount Haldane; Obit., 1928, (OM)
Captain Basil Hall; Executive Committee, 1924 (ret.) 2nd week Summer
School (chairman) 1925; Executive Committee Election, 1934, Fabian
Summer School, 1934
* Professor Duncan Hall; Personal Notes, 1926
Mary Agnes Hamilton; Fabian Summer School, 1929, Fabian Women’s
Group, 1930, Personal Notes, 1933
* J. L. and Barbara Hammond; Personal Notes, 1926
* Professor Lancelot Hogben; Autumn lecturer, 1936, Summer School, 1942
Hubert Humphreys; (Not to be confused with the American Hubert
Humphrey.) Caucus-Labour Party Conference, 1955
Helen Keynes; Summer School, 1927, Executive Committee Election, 1934,
Dr. Hans Kohn; Personal Notes, 1926, 1934, 1937; Fabian Summer
School, 1933
* Rt. Hon. G. Lansbury; General Election, 1924, Personal Notes, 1930, 1935
Professor A. D. Lindsay; Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1926
Kenneth Lindsay; Summer School lecturer, 1928
Mrs. C. L’Estrange Malone; Executive Committee Election, 1933,Women’s
Group Meeting, 1942
S. F. Markham, M.P., B.A., B. Litt.; General Election, 1929, Personal
Notes, 1930
Oswald Mosley, M.P.; Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1924, Livingstone Hall
lecturer, 1931
H. T. Muggeridge; Fabian parliamentary candidate, 1934, Personal Notes,
J. T. Walton Newbold; Personal Notes, 1929
J. F. Oakeshott, (father of Professor Michael Oakeshott, who is not a
Fabian); Personal Notes, 1922
* Lord Olivier; Kingsway Hall, 1927, Personal Notes, 1933
E. R. Pease; Executive Committee, 1924 (ret.), Publicist, 1925, Annual
Meeting, 1927
* Lord Ponsonby; Livingstone Hall lecturer, 1931, Summer School, 1935
H. S. Rowntree; Fabian parliamentary candidate, 1929
* Bertrand Russell; Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1924, 1926-, 1930, 1934;
Autumn lecturer, 1937
Sir Arthur Salter; Friends Hall lecturer) 1937
Professor G. Salvemini; FAR, 1929
John Scurr, M.P.; General Election, 1924, Personal Notes, 1925, 1930;
London County Council Election, 1931, Obit., 1932
Clarence Senior; Personal Notes, 1929 (USA)
Harry Snell, M.P., L.C.C.; Executive Committee, 1924, (ret.), 1925-26,
FAR, 1936, Executive Committee Elections, 1931, 1934, (Lord Plum¥
stead)
* Wickham Steed; Autumn lecturer, 1936
F. L. Stevens; (Clarion) Personal Notes, 1930, Fabian parliamentary
candidate, 1935
Hannen Swaffer; Summer School, 1931
Sir Raymond Unwin; Personal Notes, 1919, Autumn lecturer, 1935
Professor Graham Wallas; King’s Hall lecturer, 1921, General Election,
1924; Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1930, Obit., 1932
William English Walling; Summer School, 1929
Rebecca West; Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1929
Ellen Wilkinson; Fabian Women’s Croup, 1930, Stop Press, 1947
* P. Lamartine Yates; Fabian Summer School, 1942
The following names are those of Fabians who in the nineteen-forties and
nineteen-fifties contributed to the work of the Society notably enough to be
reported in Fabian News and Fabian Journal, in New Fabian Essays, in
pamphlets, lectures on the Colonial Bureau and the International Bureau.
Mark Abrams; Publicist, 1952,-53,-55, Summer School lecturer, 1951-54
Dorothy Archibald; Fabian May School, 1946, Election of the Executive
Committee, 1946
Dr. Alexander Baykov; International Affairs Group, 1941
Anthony Wedgwood Benn, M.P.; Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1932, Friends
Hall lecturer, 1937, Com. of the House 14-day work, 1956, Chairman,
International Bureau, 1962-63
Helen C. Bentwich, L.C.C.; Livingstone Hall lecturer, 1938, “Recreation
in a Machine Age” lecture, 1942
Geoffrey Bing, M.P.; Autumn lecturer, 1947
Professor P. M. S. Blackett; Jubilee lecturer, 1946, Retiring Executive
Attendance Record, 1947
Don Bowers; T. U. C., Central London Fabian Society speaker
Christopher Boyd, M.P.; Local Societies Committee, 1954-55, (Retain death
penalty)
Wilfred Brown; Co-oped to E. C., 1954, Publicist, 1956
W. A. Burke, M.P.; Trades Unions’ Section, NEC (LAB) 1955
Lord Campion; Clerk of House of Commons, Easter School lecturer, 1955
Barbara Castle, M.P.; Summer School lecturer, 1953, Constituency
Organisations’ Section NEC, (LAB) 1955
A. J. Champion, M.P.; Summer School, 1953
Walter M. Citrine; Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1933
J. Cooper; Trades Unions’ Section, NEC (LAB) 1955
Freda Corbett; Socialist Propaganda Committee, 1941
Geoffrey de Freitas, M.P.; Summer School, 1952, Director, 1953; New
Year School Director, 1954
John Diamond; Hon. Treasurer of Fabian Society, 1952,-54,-55,-56, Finance
and General Purposes Committee, 1952, 70th Anniversary Reception,
1954,ChahTnan,1955
Rt. Hon. John Dugdale, M.P.; Colonial Advisory Committee, 1952,-54,-55,
One day School, 1953
Andrew Filson; Stop Press, 1947, Research Programme, 1947
Herman Finer, D. Sc.; Personal Notes, 1924, Executive Committee Election,
1937, (Professor, University of Chicago)
Michael Foot, M.P.; Fabian Colonial Bureau Committee Debate, 1947
Hugh Franklin; Socialist Propaganda Committee, 1941
Tom Fraser; Committee of the Parliamentary Labour Party, 1956
Herta Gotthelf; International Bureau, 1948
C. W. W. Greenidge; Colonial Bureau, 1952,-54,-55
Anthony Greenwood, M.P.; Constituency Organisations’ Section NEC
(LAB), 1955
R. J. Gunter; Trades Unions’ Section NEC (LAB) 1955
Margaret Herbison, M.P.; Women’s Lecture Group, 1947, NEC (LAB)
John Hynd, M.P.; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952,-54,-55,
Weekend School, 1952
Douglas Jay, M.P.; Elections, 1947, Autumn lectures, 1947
Sybil Jeger; Personal Notes, 1937, Local Societies and School and Socials
Carol Johnson; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952-1955
R. W. G. Mackay, M.P.; Summer School, 1949
Compton Mackenzie; Shaw Society, 1946
Hector McNeil; Socialist Propaganda Committee, 1941, Obit., 1955
G. R. Mitchison, M.P., Q.C.;á Married to Naomi Haldane, Essayist, 1952
Fred Mulley, M.P.; Summer School lecturer, 1953, Local Societies
Committee, 1954-55
B. Nicholls; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1954-55
Maurice Orbach; Middlesex Committee lecturer, 1947
Michael Pease; Publicist, 1949
Phillips Price, M.P.; Retain death penalty, 1956
Sybil Prinsky; Local Society News, 1947, Regional News, 1947
Dr. Victor Purcell; Speaker at International and Colonial Bureau
Conference, 1952, Publicist
J. W. Raisin; Northwest London Fabian Societies, 1946, Local Societies
Committee, 1952,-54,-55
Kenneth Rose; Annual General Meeting, 1954
Solly Sachs; Summer School, 195,3
Eve Saville; Research and Publications Assistant, 1952
Hilda Selwyn-Clarke; Secretary of the Colonial Bureau, 1955, Assistant
Secretary, 1953-1955,
Sydney Silverman, M.P.; Easter School lecturer, 1956
F. W. Skinnard; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952,-54,-55,
Publicist, 1955
R. W. Sorensen, M.P.; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952, Vice
chairman, 1954-55
Jack Tanner; President of T. U. C., Speaker at 70th Anniversary Reception,
Sybil Thorndike; Shaw Society, 1946
Evelyn Walkden, M.P.; Socialist Propaganda Committee, 1941
H. W. Wallace; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952,-54,-55
W. N. Warbey, M.P.; Summer School, 1949,
W. P. Watkins; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1954-55
A. Wedgwood-Benn; Autumn lecturer, 1935, Colonial Bureau Advisory
D. Widdicombe; International Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952
Ronald Williams, M.P.; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952,-54,-55;
Summer School, 1954, Publicist, 1955
H. V. Wiseman; Summer School, 1952
G. D. N. Worswick; May School, 1946, European Recovery, 1949
Michael Young; Retiring Executive Attendance Record, 1947, Summer
School lecturer, 1951, Easter School lecturer, 1954
AMERICAN PUBLICISTS MENTIONED WITH APPROVAL IN
BRITISH FABIAN SOCIALIST PUBLICATIONS
Joseph and Stewart Alsop; 1956 John Herling
Max Beloff; 1956 American Foreign Policy Mark DeWolfe Howe
Henry Steele Commager George F. Kennan; American Diplomacy, 1900-1950
Professor P. Sargent Florence Harry W. Laidler; Personal Notes, 1932
S. Glover John Gunther; 1956 Dr. Margaret Mead; Weekend
Colonial Conference lecturer, 1942 Mark Starr; 1955 Creeping Socialism
T. A. Oxley; Travel slides on U.S.A., 1955 Adlai Stevenson; 1955
Harry S. Truman; 1956
Eleanor Roosevelt David Williams; 1947 Fabian Journal
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.; 1954
Rudolf Schlesinger; Weekend School Lecturer, 1953 John G. Winant; Luncheon, 1941
Elaine Windrich; 1956, Essayist, 1955
Albert Schweitzer Ella Winter; Personal Notes, 1924
D. C. Sommervell
BRITISH PUBLICISTS MENTIONED WITH APPROVAL IN
Timothy Bankole; 1956, Kwame Nkrumah Lord Ismay; 1955
James Avery Joyce; 1955
Vernon Bartlett; 1955, Autumn lecturer, 1937 H. O. Judd; The Development of Social Administration
Professor Norman Bentwich; 1953 Michael Lindsay; 1947
Aneurin Bevan; 1954, Autumn lecturer, 1942 Rene MacColl; Just Back from Russia: 77 Days Inside the Soviet Union
Lord Beveridge; 1949
D. W. Brogan; 1955 Jules Moch; Human Folly: To Disarm or Perish?
Ivor Brown
Dean of Canterbury; Eastern Europe in the Socialist World H. J. P. Mortishead; 1946
Malcolm Muggeridge; Easter School lecturer, 1955
Lord Chorley; 1956, Essayist, 1954-1955 D. L. Munby; 1953-1954, Essayist, 1952
Issac Deutscher; Weekend School lecturer, 1953 J. F. Northcott; 1953-1955
Maurice Dobb; 1955 J. Boyd Orr
Arnold Forster; 1947 George Padmore; Gold Coast Revolution
R. K. Gardiner; The Development of Social Administration
Raymond Postgate; 1955, Retiring Executive Attendance Record, 1947
George Godfrey; 1955, Chairman of the Fabian Society of New South Wales
J. B. Priestley; 1947
Michael Greenberg; British Trade and the Opening of China, 1952
Viscount Samuel; The Good Citizen
Dr. John Hammond; International Bureau, 1943 W. H. Scott; 1955
John Hatch; Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1954-55, Commonwealth Officer of Labour Party, 1956, Publicist, 1956
Professor Hugh Seton-Watson; 1953, International Bureau Advisory Commi9ttee, 1954-55
Leo Silberman; 1956
J. A. Hobson; 1954
Lord Simon of Wythenshawe; 1955
Derrick Sington; Essayist, 1953-1955
Stephen Spender; 1942 Weekend Education Conference
Leslie C. Stevens; Life in Russia
A. J. P. Taylor; 1955, Summer School lecturer, 1955
Morgan Thomson; Editor of Forward, Speaker, 1952
Peter Townsend; 1955-56, Home Research Committee, 1954-55
Arnold Toynbee; 1956, Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1926
Veronica Toynbee; Easter School lecturer, 1954, 70th Anniversary Reception, 1954
Barbara Ward (Lady Lindsay)
Barbara Wooton; The Social Foundations of Wage Policy, Retiring Executive, 1942, 1954
The following members of the London Fabian Society were selected from
about five hundred cards as representing Fabians who have given conspicuous
service to the Society, judging by the citations in Fabian News, Fabian
Journal and Fabian Society Annual Report.
Sir Richard Aucland, M.P.
Livingstone Hall Lectures, 1937
Guest of honor at luncheon, 1942
Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952
Speaker at Colonial Bureau Meeting,1952
Brian Abel-Smith
Essayist, 1955
Executive Committee, 1954-55
Weekend School lecturer, 1956
Austen Albu, M.P.
Retiring Executive Attendance Record, 1946
Finance and General Purposes
Committee,1952
Publicist, 1953, 1954
Chairman, Annual General Meeting, 1954
Chairman, Society, 1954
Executive Committee, 1952-1956
Attended 70th Anniversary Reception, 1954
Home Research Committee, 1955
Speaker at Central London Fabian Society
Rt. Han. Clement R. Attlee, M.P.
Council Elections,’ 1919
Personal Notes, 1922,1934
General Election, 1924
Jubilee Rally, 1946
Speaker at 70th Anniversary Reception,1954
Leader of the Parliamentary Party, 1955
Resigned as Leader Parliamentary Labour, 1956
Dr. Thomas Balogh
Fabian Weekend School lecturer,
Autumn School lecturer, 1952
Home Research Committee, 1952, 1954-55
Economic Adviser to the Maltese Government, 1956
Dr. N. Barou
Current Publications, 1948
Welsh Council of Fabian Societies, 1949
Summer School lecturer, 1951
Local Societies Committee, 1952
G. R. Blanco-White
Annual Meeting, 1936
List of Candidates, 1942
Schools and Socials Committee, 1952, 1954-55
Resigned Committee, 1955
Arthur Blenkinsop, M.P.
Summer School lecturer, 1953-54
Summer School seminar leader, 1954
H. N. Brailsford
Meetings of the Society, 1927
Personal Notes, 1932, 1935
Fabian International Bureau, 1942
Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952, 1954-55
Elected Honorary Member, 1953
Fenner Brockway, M.P.
Easter School lecturer, 1949
Addressed North London Society, 1953
Defeated as candidate for Parliament from Eton, 1964
Ritchie Calder
Speaker at Summer Schools, 1952
Executive Committee, 1952-53, 1954-1956
Autumn Weekend School lecturer, 1954
James Callaghan, M.P.
Easter School Director, 1949, 1953, 1956
Summer School lecturer, 1953,1956
Observe Malta Referendum, 1956
G. E. G. Catlin
Executive Committee Election, 1936
Livingstone Hall Lecture, 1938
Donald Chapman, M.P.
Labour Party Conference, 1951
General Secretary of Fabian Society, 1952
National Transportation School, 1952
Chairman of Home Research, 1952
G. D. H. Cole
Guest of honor 70th Anniversary Dinner, 1954
Publicist, 1954-1956
President of Society, 1954
Margaret Cole
Research by Local Fabian Societies, 1947
Honorary Secretary of Fabian Society,1952
Essayist, 1952, 1955
Finance and General Purposes, Home
Research, Colonial Bureau Advisory,
International Bureau Advisory Local
Societies, and Schools and Socials
Committees-1952, 1954-55
Executive Committee, 1952-1955;
Vice Chairman, 1955-56; Chairman, 1956
Chairman of Further Education, L.C.C., 1953
Director, Education School, 1955
President, Fabian Society, 1962
A. Creech-Jones
Fabians and the Colonies, 1949
Executive Committee, 195á2-1956
Visit to Africa, 1955
Sir Stafford Cripps
President of the Fabian Society, 1952
C. A. R. Crosland, M.P.
Summer School lecturer, 1951-1955
Chairman, Fabian Society, 1962-63
R. H. S. Crossman, M.P.
Fabian Summer School, 1937
International Bureau, 1942
Home Research, International Bureau
Advisory Committees-1952, 1954-55
Schools and Socials Committee, 1954-55
Summer School Director, 1955
Constituency Organisations’ Section NEC (LAB) 1955
Select Committee of House on 14-day work, 1956
Rt. Hon. Hugh Dalton, M.P.
Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1924
Fabian Reception Tea, 1946,
Jubilee Lecture, 1946
Summer School lecturer, 1952, 1954
Easter School, 1953
Weekend School Director, 1956
Ernest Davies, M.P.
Barbara Drake
Executive Committee, 1924, 1925-26
Executive Committee Election, 1924,1934
London County Council Election, 1931
Fabian Library, 1943
T. Driberg, M.P.
E. Durbin, M.P.
Fabian Easter School, 1943
Maurice Edelman, M.P.
Fabian May School, 1946
Summer School, Denmark, 1947
Lord Faringdon
Chairman of Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952, 1955
Executive Committee, 1952, 1954-1956
Reported to Annual General Meeting,1954
Finance and General Purposes; Committee member, 1955
Wilfred Fienburgh, M.P.
Summer School speaker, 1952
Hugh Gaitskell, M.P.
New Year Weekend School lecturer,1951
Executive Committee, 1952
Editor, New Fabian Essays, 1954
70th Anniversary Reception, 1954
New Year School lecturer, 1954-55
Treasurer, NEC (LAB) 1955
Leader of Parliamentary Labour Party, 1956
Gerald Gardiner, Q. C., M. P.
Co-opted EC, 1954
Abolish death penalty, 1956
Publicist, 1956 (Capital Punishment)
Rt. Hon. James Griffiths, M.P.
Chairman of International and Colonial Bureau Conference, 1952
Director of New Year Weekend School, 1951
Colonial Bureau Speaker, 1952
Constituency Organisations; Section NEC (LAB) 1955
Deputy Leader of Parliamentary Labour Party, 1956
Denis Healey, M. P.
International Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952, 1954-55
Essayist, 1952-1956
Speaker at Rally, 1953
Dr. Rita Hinden
Publicist1946, 1954
International Bureau Conference, 1949
Colonail Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952, 1954-55
Introduced Annual Report to Colonial Bureau, 1954
J. Frank Horrabin
Chairman of the Colonial Bureau, 1945-1950
Shaw Society, 1946
Douglas Houghton, M. P.
Fabian Society Annual Report, 1952-53
H. D. Hughes
Summer School Director, 1951, 1953-54
Vice Chairman of Fabian Bureau, 1952
Reported to Annual General Meeting, 1954
Autumn Weekend School Director, 1954
Chairman Committee Home Research, 1955
Education School lecturer, 1955
Judge of “Why I am a Socialist,” 1955
Rt. Hon. Douglas Jay, M. P.
Autumn School lecturer, 1947, 1952
Financial Secretary to the treasury of last Labour Government
Parliamentary delegate to Brazil, 1955
Roy Jenkins, M.P.
Summer School lecturer, 1949, 1951-1955
Fabian Society Annual Report, 1954-1956
Finance and General Purposes Committee, 1952-1955
Annual General Meeting, 1954
Cyril E. M. Joad
Personal Notes, 1921
Summer School, 1942, 1952
James Johnson, M.P.
Local Societies Committee, 1952-1955
Sir William Jowitt, K.C., M.P.
H. J. Laski
Executive Committee, 1944, Chairman
Susan Lawrence, M.P., L.C.C.
Kingsway Hall Autumn lecturer, 1924
Welsh Council of Fabian Societies
Fabian Women’s Group, 1929
Lord Listowel
Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee, 1952-1955
Publicist, 1955-56
Richard Loewenthal
Staff member of the Observer
James MacColl, M.P.
Home Research Committee, 1954-1955
Norman MacKenzie
Summer School speaker, 1952-1954
Assistant Editor of New Statesman and Nation
T. E. M. McKitterick
February Weekend School, 1952
International Bureau Advisory and Local Societies Committees, 1952-1956 Chairman
Prospective Labour Candidate for York, 1955
Co-opted to Executive Committee, 1954
Kingsley Martin
Executive Committee Election, 1931, 1934
Caucus-Labour Party Conference, 1955
“Fabian of Long Standing,” 1955
Ian Mikardo, M. P.
Local Society News, 1947
Summer School, 1949, Director, 1952
Speaker at Central London Fabian Society, 1952
Finance and General Purposes Committee, 1952; Resigned, 1955
Socialism and the Press, Chairman, 1953
Easter School Director, 1954-55
Constituency Organizations’ Section NEC (LAB) 1955
Bosworth Monck
General Secretary of Laski Fund, 1948
Ivor Montagu
Election of the Executive Committee, 1946
H. Morrison, M.P.
Fabian parliamentary candidate, 1934
Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Party, 1955
National Executive Committee (LAB) 1955
Resigned Parliamentary Labour Party, 1956
Marjorie Nicholson
Secretary of the Colonial Bureau, 1950-1955
Staff of the Trades Union Council, 1955
Lord Pakenham
Autobiography, Born to Believe
John Parker, M.P.
Chairman of the Society, 1952
Summer School, 1952, Director, 1953-1956
Finance and General Purposes Committee, 1952
Home Research Colonial Bureau Advisory, International
Bureau Advisory and Schools and Socials Comittees, 1952
Executive Committee, 1952-1955, Secretary, 1956
Lord Pethick-Lawrence
Conference on Problems, 1946
Philip Noel-Baker, M.P.
Fabian Colonial Bureau, 1950-1956
D. N. Pritt, M.P.
Colonial Bureau and Debates, 1947
S. K. Ratcliffe
Essex Hall, 1927
Sumer School lecturer, 1925
R. D. V. Roberts
Home Research Committee, 1954-55
Professor W. A. Robson
Executive News, 1948
W. T. Rodgers
Assistant Secretary, 1951
Secretary of the International Bureau, 1952-1955
Labour Party Conference Delegate, 1954-55
General Secretary, 1954-55
J. W. Robertson Scott
Personal Notes, 1922, 1926, 1930, 1937
Rt. Hon. Sir Hartley Shawcross, K.C., M.P.
Jubilee Lecturer, 1946
Dr. T. Drummond Shiels
Kingsway Hall lecturer, 1930-1932
Summer School lecturer, 1933-34, 1937
Emanuel Shinwell
Arthur Skeffington, M.P.
Hon. Treasurer’s Report, 1937
Inaugural Meetings, 1947
Easter School, 1947, Director, 1949
London Labour Party Conference
Executive Committee, 1951-52, 1954-55
Finance and General Purposes Committee, 1952, 1954-55
Local Societies Committee Chairman, 1952-1955
Socialist, Co-operative and Professional
Organisations’ Section NEC (LAB) 1955
Sir Frank Soskice, M.P., Q.C.
Reginald Stamp, L.C.C.
Northwest London Fabian Societies, 1946
Mary Stewart
Finance and General Purposes and Local
Societies Committees, 1952,1954-55
Publicist, 1953, 1955-56
Michael Stewart, M.P.
Summer School Co-Director, 1952, lecturer, 1954
New Year School lecturer, 1954-.55
Publicist, 195-6
John Strachey, M.P.
Elections, 1947
Essayist, 1952, 1955-56
Dr. Edith Summerskill, M.P.
Women’s Group lecturer, 1946
Meeting of the Society, 1926
Rt. Hon. Patrick Gordon Walker, M.P.
One Day School lecturer, 1953
Essayist (Fabian International Essays) 1956
Author, 1952, Equality
Guest of Honor at 70th Anniversary Dinner, 1954
Philip Thurman
London Labour Party Conference Delegate, 1951-52
Schools and Socials Committee, 1952, Chairman, 1954-55
Local Societies Committee, 1954-55
Herbert Tracey
Socialist Propaganda Committee, 1941
Eirene White, M.P.
New Year Weekend School lecturer, 1951
Colonial Bureau Committee, 1952, 1954-55
Colonial Bureau Advisory Committee Meeting speaker, 1952
Chairman, Fabian Society 1958-59
Rt. Hon. Harold Wilson, M.P.
Fabian Society Annual Report, 1954-55 (Chairman)
Speaker at International Bureau
Conference on German Rearmament, 1954
Caucus-Labour Conference at Margate, 1955
Leader, Parliamentary Labour Party, 1963
Woodrow Wyatt, M.P.
New Year Weekend School lecturer, 1951-52
Leonard Woolf
Meetings, 1949
International Bureau Advisory Committee, Chairman, 1952, 1954-55
Rt. Hon. Kenneth Younger, M.P.
May School, 1946
February Weekend School Director, 1952
International Bureau Advisory
Committee, 1952,1954-55
Weekend School, 1953 (Director)
Speaker International Bureau Conference
on German Rearmament, 1954
Essayist, 1955-56
Editor, Fabian International Review, 1955
Speaker at London Labour Party Conference Tea, 1955
Parilamentary Labour Party Committee, 1956
Konni Zilliacus
Meetings, 1942, 1949 (International Luncheon)
Executive Committee Elections, 1946
[Copied from the Fabian Society Annual Report 1962-63]
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1962/1963
The following are the results of the Annual Ballot certified to the General
Secretary by the Chief Scrutineer:
A. Wedgwood Benn T. Balogh
B. Abel-Smith W. T. Rodgers
P. Townsend P. Shore
R. H. S. Crossman H. J. Boyden
Mary Stewart John Hughes
H. D. Hughes R. Neild
C. A. R. Crosland Betty Vernon
A. Skeffington S. Hatch
Under Rule 9 of the Society’s Rules, the Executive Committee has co-opted
the following :five mem,bers: Jeremy Bray, M.P.; John Greve; John Vaizey;
Rex Winsbury; Richard Bone.
The Executive Committee elected the following to serve for 1962/1963:
Chairman, Mary Stewart; Vice Chairman, Brian Abel-Smith; Honorary
Secretary, John Parker, M.P.
Mary Stewart, who is Chairman of the East London Juvenile Court and co¥
author of two Fabian pamphlets, has been a member of the committee for
13 years. Brian Abel-Smith has served continuously since 1955, and John
Parker has been Honorary Secretary since 1954. John Diamond, M.P., was
returned unopposed as Honorary Treasurer for the thirteenth time in the
Annual Ballot.
THE LABOUR PARTY GOVERNMENT
AS OF OCTOBER, 1964
This list appeared in the November-December, 1964 issue of Fabian News,
With the following notation:
* A member of the Cabinet.
t A member of the National Fabian Society.
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food-Minister: *t Frederick Peart.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries: James J. Hoy, t John Mackie.
Aviation-Minister: t Roy Jenkins.
Parliamentary Secretary: t John Stonehouse.
Ministers of State: George Darling, t E. C. Redhead, Roy Mason.
Parliamentary Secretary: t Lord Rhodes
Colonies-Secretary of State: *t Anthony Greenwood.
Under-Secretaries of State: t Lord Taylor, t Eirene White.
Commonwealth Relations-Secretary of State: *t A. G. Bottmley.
Minister of State: Cledwyn Hughes.
Under-Secretary of State: t Lord Taylor.
Defense-Secretary of State: *t Denis Healey
Deputy Secretary of State and Minister of Defense for the Army:
t Frederick Mulley
Mini9ster of Defense for the Royal Navy: t Christopher Mayhew.
Minister of Defense for the Royal Air Force: Lord Shacleton.
Under-Secretary of State for Defense for the Royal Navy:
t J. P. W. Mallalieu.
Under Secretary of State for Defense for the Army: G. W. Reynolds.
Under-Secretary of State for Defense for the Royal Air Force:
t Bruce Millan.
Duchy of Lancaster-Chancellor: *t Douglas Houghton.
Economic Affairs-Minister *t George Brown.
Joint Under-Secretaries of State: t Maurice Foley, t W. T. Rodgers.
Education and Science-Secretary of State: *t Michael Stewart.
Ministers of State: t Lord Bowden. t R. E. Prentice.
Joint Under-Secretaries of State: t James Boyden, Denis Howell.
Foreign Affairs-Secretary of State: *t Patrick Gordon Walker.
Ministers of State: Lord Caradon, Alun Gwynne-Jones, t G. M. Thomson,
W. E. Padley.
Under-Secretary of State: t Lord Walston.
Healty-Minister: t Kenneth Robinson.
Parliamentary Secretary: t Sir Barnett Stross.
Home Department-Secretary of State: * Sir Frank Soskice.
Minister of STate: Alice Bacon.
Joint Under-Secretaries of State: Lord STonham, George Thomas.
Housing and Local Government-Minister: *t R. H. S. Crossman.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries: t James MacColl, t R. J. Mellish.
Labour-Minister: *t Ray Gunter.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries: t Richard Marsh, Ernest Thornton.
Land and Natural Resources-Minister: t Frederick Willey.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries: t Lord Mitchison, t Arthur Skeffington.
Law Officers-Attorney-General: t Elwyn Jones.
Lord Advocate: George Gordon Stott.
Solicitor-General: Dingle Foot.
Solicitor-General for Scotland: James Graham Leechman.
Lord Chancellor: * Lord Gardiner.
Lord President of the Council: * Herbert Bowden.
Lord Privy Seal: *t Earl of Longford.
Ministers without Portfolio: t Eric Fletcher, Lord Champion.
Overseas Development-Minister: *t Barbara Castle.
Parliamentary Secretary: t A. E. Oram.
Paymaster-General: George Wigg.
Pensions and National Insurance-Minister: t Margaret Herbison.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries: t Harold Davies, Norman Pentland.
Post Office-Postmaster-General: t Anthony Wedgwood Benn.
Assistant Postmaster-General: Joseph Slater.
Power-Minister: *t Frederick Lee.
Parliamentary Secretary: John Morris.
Public Building and Works-Minister: t Charles Pannell.
Parliamentary Secretary: Jennie Lee.
Scotland-Secretary of State: * William Ross.
Minister of State: E. G. Willis.
Under-Secretaries of State: Judith Hart, Lord Hughes, J. Dickson Mabon.
Technology-Minister: * Frank Cousins.
Parliamentary Secretary: Lord Snow.
Trade, Board of-President: *t Douglas Jay.
Transport-Minister: *t Thomas Fraser.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries: t Lord Lindgren, t Stephen Swingler.
Treasury-Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury: ~t Harold Wilson.
Chancellor of the Exchequer: *t James Callaghan
Chief Secretary: t John Diamond. .
Parliamentary Secretary: Edward Short.
Economic Secretary: t Anthony Crosland.
Financial Secretary: t Niall MacDermot.
Lords Commissioners: G. H. R. Rogers, George Lawson, John McCann,
t Ivor Davies, t Harriet Slater.
Wales-Secretary of State: *t James Griffiths.
Minister of State: Goronwy Roberts.
Under-Secretary of State: Harold Finch.
Her Majesty’s Household-Treasurer: Sydney Irving.
Comptroller: Charles Grey
Vice-Chamberlain: William Whitlock.
Captain of the Honorable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms: Lord Shepherd.
Lord in Waiting: Lord Hobson.
Certain names, long identified with the Fabian Society, were not specifically
noted as members-as, for instance, Lord Gardiner, fonnerly on the Fabian
Executive; or Jennie Lee, widow of Harold Wilson’s fonner chief, Aneurin
Bevan. Similarly, Alice Bacon-not starred on the above list-was named
in Fabian News, September, 1957, as a member of the Leeds local of the
Fabian Society. Under the heading, “The General Election,” the same issue
November-December, 1964 of Fabian News {pp. 2-3} also contained the
following comments, which can be regarded as official:
The Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, was Chairman of the Society in 1954-55
and for many years a member of the Executive Committee. The Minister of
Housing, Dick Crossman, joint editor of New Fabian Essays, only retired from
the Executive Committee last year after many years service. Lord Gardiner,
Patrick Gordon Walker, James Griffiths, Douglas Houghton, Lord Longford and
Michael Stewart are all former members of the Executive Committee. Denis
Healey was chairman of the International Bureau, Arthur Bottomley sat on the
Commonwealth Subcommittee, James Callaghan on the Home Research Committee,
and Barbara Castle, the Minister for Overseas Development, has been
actively associated with the Society’s Commonwealth research.
Other Ministers
Outside the cabinet, Roy Jenkins, the Minister for Aviation, was Chairman of
the Society 1957-1958. Anthony Wedgwood Benn, the Postmaster-General, is the
Society’s new Vice Chairman and is Chainnan of the International and Common¥
wealth Bureau, Anthony Crosland the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, was
Chairman in 1961-62. Other active Fabians are George Thomson, Chairman of
Venture Editorial Board, who has now become Minister of State at the Foreign
Office, and Christopher Mayhew, who is an ex-employee.
Junior Appointments
Nearly half the remaining more junior appointments have also gone to members
of the Society. Among them, Eirene White, Chairman 1958-59, becomes
Parliamentary Secretary at the Colonial Office; H. J. Boyden, one of the hardest
working members of the Executive and Vice-Chairman of Local Societies Committee,
becomes Joint Parliamentary Secretary of State for Education and Science.
Dick Mitchison, who recently went to the House of Lords, becomes Parliamentary
Secretary, Ministry of Land and Natural Resources. He was Treasurer of the New
Fabian Research Bureau for six years. John Mackie and Lord Walston, who
once wrote a Fabian pamphlet on agriculture together, receive appointments in
the Ministry of Agriculture and the Foreign Office respectively.
Fabians will have been particularly pleased to hear about the appointments of
Bill Rodgers, John Diamond and Arthur Skeffington, who have been so long
associated with the work of the Society as General Secretary, Honorary Treasurer,
and Chairman of the Local Societies Committee respectively. Bill Rodgers and
another Fabian, Maurice Foley, become Joint Parliamentary Under-Secretaries
in the Department of Economic Affairs. John Diamond becomes Chief Secretary
at the Treasury, and Arthur Skeffington becomes Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry
of Land and Natural Resources. Richard Marsh, who joined the Executive Committee
last year, becomes a Parliamentary Secretary at the Ministry of Labour.
The following boxed item in the same historic issue of Fabian News may
also be pertinent:
The Executive Committee, at its meeting on November 3rd, received with
regret the resignations from the Committee of Thomas Balogh and Robert Neild,
consequent upon their appointments as Economic Advisers to the Cabinet Office
and the Treasury respectively.
Thomas Balogh also resigned his position as Vice-Chairman of the Society.
Anthony Wedgwood Benn was appointed Vice-Chairman to succeed him.
THE NEW LABOUR GOVERNMENT
(from FABIAN NEWS, Vol. 77, Nos. 4/5 April/May 1966)
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries-James H. Hoy. t John Mackie.
Aviation-Minister: t Fred Mulley.
Parliamentary Secretary- Julian Snow.
Colonies-Secretary of State; *t Fred Lee.
Under-Secretaries of State- t Lord Beswick, t John Stonehouse.
Commonwealth Relations-Secretary of State: *t A. G. Bottomley.
Minister of State- Judith Hart.
Under-Secretary of State- t Lord Beswick.
Defence-Secretary of State: *t Denis Healey.
Minister of Defence for the Army- Gerry Reynolds.
Minister of Defence for the Royal Navy- t J. P. W. Mallalieu.
Minister of Defence for the Royal Air Force- Lord Shackleton.
Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Royal Navy- t Lord Winter-bottom.
Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army- t David Ennals.
Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Royal Air Force- t Merlyn Rees.
Duchy of Lancaster-Chancellor: t George Thomson.
Economic Affairs-Minister: *t George Brown.
Minister of State: t Austen Albu.
Under-Secretary of State: t W. T. Rodgers.
Education and Science-Secretary of State: *t Anthony Crosland.
Ministers of State- t Edward Redhead. t Goronwy Roberts.
Joint Under-Secretaries of State- Denis Howell, Jennie Lee.
Foreign Affairs-Secretary of State: *t Michael Stewart.
Ministers of State- t Lord Caradon, Lord Chalfont, t Eirene White, W. E. Padley.
Under-Secretary of State- t Lord Walston.
Health-Minister: t Kenneth Robinson.
Parliamentary Secretary- Charles Loughlin.
Home Department- Secretary of State- *t Roy Jenkins.
Minister of State- Alice Bacon.
Joint Under-Secretaries of State- t Lord Stonham, f Maurice Foley, t Dick Taverne.
joint Parliamentary Secretaries- t James MacColl, t R. J. Mellish.
Parliamentary Secretary- t Shirley Williams.
Parliamentary Secretary- t Arthur Skeffington.
Law Officers-Attorney General: t Elwyn Jones.
Lord Advocate- George Gordon Scott.
Solicitor-General- Dingle Foot.
Solicitor-General for Scotland- H. S. Wilson.
Lord Chancellor- * Lord Gardiner.
Lord President of the Council- * Herbert Bowden.
Lord Privy Seal- *t Earl of Longford.
Ministers without Portfolio- *t Douglas Houghton. t Lord Champion.
Overseas Development-Minister: *t Anthony Greenwood.
Parliamentary Secretary- t A. E. Oram.
Paymaster-General- George Wigg.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries- t Harold Davies, Norman Pentland.
Assistant Postmaster-General- Joseph Slater.
Power-Minister: *t Richard Marsh.
Parliamentary Secretary- t Jeremy Bray.
Public Building and Works-Minister: t Reginald Prentice.
Parliamentary Secretary- t H. J. Boyden.
Minister of State- E. G. Willis.
Under-Secretaries of State- Lord Hughes, t Bruce Millan, J. Dickson Mabon.
Joint Pariliamentary Secretaries- t Edmund Dell, t Peter Shore.
Ministers of State-George Darling, t Lord Brown, Roy Mason.
Parliamentary Secretary- t Lord Rhodes.
Transport-Minister: *t Barbara Castle.
Joint Parliamentary Secretaries- t Stephen Swingler, John Morris.
Treasury-Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury: *t Harold Wilson.
Chancellor of the Exchequer- *t James Callaghan.
Chief Secretary- t John Diamond.
Parliamentary Secretary- Edward Short.
Financial Secretary- t Niall MacDermot.
Lords Commissioners- t Alan Fitch, J. Harper, W. Howie, George Lawson, William Whitlock.
Assistant Whips- Edward Bishop, Ronald Brown, H. Gourlay, Walter Harrison, Neil McBride, Charles Morris, Brian O’Malley
Wales-Secretary of State: * Cledwyn Hughes.
Minister of State- t George Thomas.
Under-Secretary of State- t Ifor Davies.
Her Majesty’s Household-Treasurer: John Silkin.
Comptroller: Charles Grey.
Vice-Chamberlain- John McCann.
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms- t Lord Shepherd.
Captain of the Yeomen of the Guard- t Lord Bowles.
Lords in Waiting- Lord Hilton, t Lord Sorensen.
Baroness in Waiting: Lady Phillips.
NOTES: * A member of the Cabinet.
t A member of the Fabian Society.
PARTIAL RECORD OF PAST AND PRESENT “COOPERATORS,”
AS LISTED BY THE [AMERICAN] LEAGUE FOR INDUSTRIAL
DEMOCRACY ON THE OCCASION OF ITS 50TH ANNIVERSARY#
(This list appeared in the Congressional Record of October 12, 1962,
originally prepared by Mina Weisenberg for the 50th Anniversary of the LID)
* further abbreviations added
Some Leaders of College Chapters:
Walter R. Agard, Pres., Amherst ISS, 1914-15; Prof. of Classics, U. of Wisc.;
Pres., American Classical League.
James W. Alexander, former Pres., Princeton ISS; Exec. Com. and Treas.,
ISS, 1920-21; noted mathematician.
Devere Allen, former Pres., Oberlin ISS; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1939-1944; Dir.
and Ed., Worldover Press.
Harold Arnold, Wesleyan ISS; late Director of Research, Bell Telephone
Laboratories (dec.).
Gregory Bardacke, former student leader, Syracuse U. LID; Bd. of Dir.,
LID 1955; Director, American Trade Union Comm. for Histadrut.
Murray Baron, Member, Brooklyn Law School SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID,
1940; Public Relations Consultant; Ch., Manhattan Liberal Party.
Thomas S. Behre, Sec., Harvard ISS; New Orleans businessman, active in
liberal movements (dec.).
Daniel Bell, member SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1948; Labor Ed.,
Fortune Magazine; author; economist.
John K. Benedict, member Union Theological Seminary SLID; formerly
Field Sec., LID.
Walter Bergman, formerly of Michigan ISS; Dir. of Research, Detroit Public
Otto S. Beyer, former Pres., U. of Illinois ISS; 1917; labor arbitrator and
consultant; former Ch., National Mediation Bd., (dec.).
Andrew J. Biemiller, former Sec., U. of Pa. and Philadelphia Chaps. LID,
1928-1932; Congressman, 1944-1956; Legislative Comm., AFL.
Carroll Binder, Pres., 1916, Harvard ISS; Editorial Ed. Minneapolis
Tribune.
George H. Bishop, officer U. of Michigan ISS, 1911; faculty, Washington U.
(St. Louis).
Hillman M. Bishop, former Pres., Columbia SLID; Assoc. Prof. of Government, C.C.N.Y.
Julius S. Bixler, former Sec., Amherst ISS; Pres., Colby College.
Bruce Bliven, Pres., Stanford ISS, 1910-1912; Editorial Dir., New Republic.
Hyman H. Bookbinder, former student leader, SLID; former N.Y. Exec.
Com., LID; political researcher, CIO.
Randolph Bourne, former Columbia ISS; essayist (dec.).
Leroy E. Bowman, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1940; Field Sec., 1940-41; Assoc.
Prof. of Sociology, Brooklyn College.
Robert A. Brady, former U. of California SLID; economist.
Jerome Breslaw, N.Y.U. Chap., SLID; Ch., SLID 1954-55.
Paul F. Brissenden, U. of California ISS; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923; Prof. of
Economies, Columbia U.
Thomas Brooks, Harvard SLID; research staff, T.W.U.A.
Heywood Broun, a founder, Harvard Socialist Club, 1906; Bd. of Dir., LID,
1933-34; columnist; author (dec.).
George Cadbury, U. of Pa. SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1953; economic
consultant.
Maurice S. Calman, organizer of ISS Chap., N.Y. School of Dentistry (1911)
and N.Y.U. School of Law; former Socialist Alderman, N.Y.C.; past Pres.,
Harlem Dental Society.
Wallace J. Campbell, former Pres. U. of Oregon SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID,
1940, 1945-1948; National Council since 1948; Washington Representative, Cooperative League of U.S.A.
Jesse Cavileer, former Pres., Syracuse U. SLID; student Sec., SLID; Bd. of
Dir., 1947-1949; National Council LID, 1949; Unitarian Minister,
Alice Cheyney, formerly Pres. Vassar ISS; labor economist.
E. Ralph Cheyney, Pres., U. of Pa. ISS; poet (dec.).
Evans Clark, Pres., Amherst ISS, 1910; Pres. and Vice Pres., ISS and LID,
1918-1923; Dir., Twentieth Century Fund, 1928-1953; editorial writer.
Everett R. Clinchy, member, Wesleyan SLID; Pres., National Council of
Christians and Jews.
Ramon P. Coffman, formerly Yale SLID; founder of Uncle Ray Syndicate.
Felix S. Cohen, Pres., C.C.N.Y. LID, 1925-26; former Asst. Solicitor Dept.
of Interior, in charge of Indian Affairs; author; teacher; lawyer (dec.).
lecturer in Philosophy of Law, Yale, C.C.N.Y.; recipient of LID John
Dewey Award, posthumous, 1954.
Cara Cook, Mt. Holyoke SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950; Exec. Sec.,
N.Y. Ethical Culture Society.
Elmer Cope, Ohio Wesleyan SLID; labor economist.
Babette Deutsch, member, Barnard ISS, 1917; poet.
Leonard W. Doob, member, Dartmouth College SLID; Prof. of Psychology,
Yale.
Paul, H. Douglas, Pres., Columbia ISS, 1915; Exec. Com. ISS, 1915-16;
economist; U.S. Senator.
Evelyn Dubrow, formerly N.J. College for Women SLID; Sec., N.Y. ADA.
Tilford Dudley, Wesleyan SLID; Asst. to Pres., PAC-CIO.
Ethan E. Edloff, formerly U. of Michigan ISS and Detroit LID; educator.
George Edwards, formerly Pres., Harvard SLID; former Field Sec., SLID;
Judge of Court of Domestic Relations, Detroit.
Gustav Egloff, Pres., Cornell ISS, 1910-1912; leading American chemist.
Samuel A. Eliot, Jr., former Harvard ISS, 1912; Prof. of English, Smith
College.
Herbert L. Elvin, Yale SLID; Dir., Dept. of Education, UNESCO.
Boris Emmet, officer, U. of Wisconsin ISS, 1911; labor statistician.
Abraham Epstein, former Pres. U. of Pittsburgh ISS; bd. of Dir., LID, 1940-
41; founder and former Sec., American Assoc. for Social Security; authority
on Social Insurance (dec.).
Harold U. Faulkner, Wesleyan ISS, 1913; National Council, LID; Prof. of
History, Smith College; authority on Economic History.
William M. Feigenbaum, founder, 1906, of Columbia U. ISS; newspaperman (dec.).
Samuel H. Fine, active in N.Y.U. SLID; former Ch., SLID; Bd. of Dir.,
1952-1954; accountant, ILGWU.
Osmond Fraenkel, Pres. Columbia ISS 1910; N.Y. attorney; Counsil, ACLU.
Anna Caples Frank, Vassar SLID; former Membership Sec., LID; public
relations counselor.
Isabelle B. Friedman, Hunter College ISS; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1951;
Pres. N.Y. Chapter, 1954-55; representative of LID at N.G.O. of UN.
Samuel H. Friedman, formerly leader C.C.N.Y. ISS Chap.; former Pres.,
N.Y. Chap., LID; Bd. of Dir., LID 1953; Pres., Community and
Social Agency Employees Union; Socialist leader.
Roland Gibson, formerly with Dartmouth College SLID; formerly, Bd. of
Dir., LID; Political Scientist, U. of Illinois.
Louis Gollumb, leader C.C.N.Y. ISS, 1912; writer.
William Gomberg, C.C.N.Y. SLID Chap.; Dir., Management Engineering
Dept.ILGWU.
John Temple Graves, officer, Princeton ISS, 1911; author, columnist,
lecturer.
William Haber, U. of Wisconsin SLID; Prof. of Economics, U. of Michigan.
Robert Halpern, Pres. C.C.N.Y. Chap., LID; N.Y. attorney.
Elizabeth Healey, formerly Connecticut College; student Sec., SLID, 1947;
James Henle, Vice Pres., Columbia ISS; Vanguard Press, 1928-1952.
John Herling, formerly Harvard SLID; formerly active in Emergency Com.
for Strikers Relief and in LID radio activities; ed., John Herling’s Labor
Sidney Hertzberg, Wisconsin SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1945; writer;
foreign correspondent.
Rene E. Hoguet, former Harvard Chap. ISS; former Pres., N.Y. Chap.;
businessman.
Arthur N. Holcombe, Harvard Chap., ISS, 1906; Prof. of Government,
Harvard; Pres., American Political Science Assoc., 1936.
Carroll Hollister, Amherst College, SLID; pianist.
Sidney Hook, Pres., C.C.N.Y. Chap., SLID, 1922-23; receiver, LID John
Dewey Award, 1953; Ch., Dept. of Philosophy, N.Y.U.; author.
Harold Hutcheson, Yale SLID; Prof. of English, Lake Forest College.
Eugenia Ingerman, See., Barnard ISS, 1910; physician.
Morris Iushewitz, Milwaukee State Teachers College SLID; Bd. of Dir.,
LID, 1951; Sec.-Treas., N.Y. City CIO Industrial Council.
Nicholas Kelley, charter member, Harvard ISS; Bd. of Dir., LID,
1912-1933; Vice Pres. and General Counsel, Chrysler Corp.
Murray Kempton, member LID Summer School, 1938; Bd. of Dir. and
National Council, LID since 1951; columnist.
Freda Kirchwey. Sec. and Pres., Barnard ISS, 1912-1915; former Bd. of Dir.,
LID; pub., The Nation.
William Klare, officer U. of Michigan ISS, 1911; former Vice Pres. Statler
Corp.
Maynard Krueger. U of Pa. and Philadelphia Chap., LID 1928-1932; Prof.
of Economics, U. of Chicago.
William Sargent Ladd, Amherst ISS; former Dean, Cornell Medical (dec.).
Harry W. Laidler, Founder, 1905, Wesleyan ISS; Bd. of Dir. of LID since
1905; Exec. Officer ISS-LID since 1910; author, economist, lecturer.
Joseph P. Lash, former Sec. SLID; UN Correspondent, New York Post.
John V. P. Lassoe, Jr., Yale SLID; Dir. of Adult Education, A.A.U.N.
William L. Leiserson, Pres. U. of Wisconsin ISS, 1907-08; Economist,
former Ch. National Mediation Bd.
Daniel Lerner, formerly N.Y.U. SLID; author; authority on Psychology of
Max Lerner, Brookings Institution SLID at Washington U. (St. Louis);
columnist; teacher; writer.
Aaron Levenstein, member, SLID; National Council, LID; Research
Institute of America; author.
Grace Mendelsohn Levy, former Brooklyn College SLID and Sec., SLID;
Staff, N. Y. C. Housing Authority.
Harold J. Lewack, officer, N.Y.U. LID; National Pres., SLID, 1954; labor
educator.
John L. Lewine, Yale SLID; Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap; teacher; Sec., Ameri¥
can Institute of France.
John F. Lewis, Jr., formerly U. of Pa. ISS; Philadelphia lawyer and civic
reformer.
Marx Lewis, N.Y.U.-SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1945; Sec.-Treas., United
Hat, Cap and Millinery Workers Union.
Walter Lippmann, Pres., Harvard Socialist Club, 1909-10; Exec. Com., ISS,
1911-12; columnist; author.
Karl N. Llewellyn, formerly Yale SLID; Prof. of Law, U. of Chicago; author.
Charlotte Tuttle Lloyd, former Pres., Vassar SLID; former attorney, Dept.
of Interior.
Roger S. Loomis, formerly U. of Illinois ISS; Prof. of English Literature,
Columbia U.
Jay Lovestone, Pres. C.C.N.Y. ISS; Dir., International Relations, ILGWU.
Isadore Lubin, former Pres., Clark and U. of Missouri ISS; labor statistician;
Industrial Commissioner, N.Y. State.
Jerome Lubin, Brooklyn College SLID; former Ch., SLID; City Planner.
Charles Luckman, Sec., Kansas City Junior College SLID; former Pres.,
Lever Brothers; architect.
Ralph McCallister, member SLID; Dir., Program and Education, Chautauqua.
Arthur McDowell, U. of Pittsburgh; Staff, Upholsterers International Union
of N.A.
Kenneth MacGowan, Pres., Harvard ISS, 1910-11; Prof. of Theater Arts,
U.C.L.A.; dramatic critic; movie producer.
Charles A. Madison, Pres., U. of Michigan ISS; pub.; author.
Anita Marburg, Vassar ISS; educator.
Otto C. Marckwardt, adviser, V. of Michigan ISS, for many years; English
Dept. U. of Michigan.
Will Maslow, active in SLID; Dir., Commission on Law and Social Action,
American Jewish Congress.
Daniel Mebane, former Pres. V. of Indiana ISS; former Treas. and Pub.,
New Republic.
Kenneth Meiklejohn, former Swarthmore SLID; specialist in Labor Law.
Inez Milholland, Pres. Vassar ISS; lawyer (dec.) .
Spencer Miller, Jr., Amherst ISS; former Sec., Workers Education Bureau
and Asst. Sec. of Labor.
Hiram K. Moderwell, Sec. Harvard ISS, 1911; foreign correspondent;
dramatic critic (dec.).
Emanuel Muravchik, member, SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID; Field Sec., Jewish
Labor Com.
Margaret J. Naumberg, Pres. Barnard ISS, 1910; educator.
Leland Olds, formerly Amherst ISS; receiver of John Dewey Award, LID,
1953; former Ch., Federal Power Commission.
Samuel Orr, N.Y.U. ISS; Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., 1954; former Judge;
labor lawyer.
Gus Papenek, formerly Cornell SLID; Ch., SLID, 1952; Agricultural
Consultant, Pakistan.
Talcott Parsons, Sec., Amherst SLID, 1923-24; Prof. of Sociology, Harvard;
Selig Perlman, U. of Wisconsin ISS, 1909-10; Prof. of Economics, U. of
Wisconsin; author.
Irving Phillips, formerly Harvard SLID; former Field Sec., SLID; Staff,
ILGWU.
Richard Poethig, formerly Wooster SLID; former Sec., SLID; minister.
Justine Wise Polier, formerly Barnard SLID; Justice, Court of Domestic
Relations, N.Y.C.
Paul R. Porter, formerly Kansas U. SLID; fanner Field Sec., LID; former
Deputy Administrator, E.C.A., Europe; Pres., Porter International Corp.
Dorothy Psathas, Connecticut College SLID; Sec., SLID, 1951-5á2; public
Carl Raushenbush, Amherst, former Bd. of Dir., LID, National Council;
labor consultant.
H. Stephen Raushenbush, Amherst ISS, 1916-17; Sec., LID; Com. on Coal
and Power, 1926-1929; anthor; researcher, Public Affairs Institute.
Paul Raushenbush, former Amherst ISS; economist.
Victor G. Reuther. former Wayne U. SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950;
Asst. to Pres., CIO.
Walter P. Reuther, Founder and Pres., Wayne U. SLID, 1932; receiver of
League’s John Dewey Award, 1950; Pres., CIO; Pres., UAW-CIO.
John P. Roche, formerly Cornell SLID; Vice Pres., SLID; Bd. of Dir., 1948;
Assoc. of Government, Haverford College.
Will Rogers, Jr., formerly Stanford U. SLID, 1934-35; ed., actor.
Lawrence Rogin, formerly Columbia U. SLID; Educational Dir., T.W.U.A.
Leonore Cohen Rosenfeld, formerly Mt. Holyoke College SLID; housewife.
Henry Rosner, formerly C.C.N.Y. SLID; Dir., Div. of Finance and Statistics,
Welfare Dept., N. Y. C.
Harry Rubin, N.Y.U. SLID; Bd. of Dir., 1948-1952.
Morris H. Rubin, Wisconsin U. SLID; Ed., Progressive Magazine.
Raymond Rubinow, U. of Pa. SLID; consultant on International Relations.
David J. Saposs, Pres.-Sec., Wisconsin U. ISS, 1910; labor economist;
Emil Schlesinger, former Pres. C.C.N.Y. SLID; labor attorney.
Lawrence Seelye, Amherst ISS; former Pres., St. Lawrence U.
Clarence Senior, U. of Kansas SLID; Bd. of Dir., LID; receiver of John
Dewey Award, 1953; sociologist; authority on Latin America.
Andre Shifrin, Yale Chap., 1954-55; Exec. Com., SLID.
William Shirer, formerly Sec., Coe College SLID; author; correspondent.
David Sinclair, Wisconsin U. SLID; formerly N.Y. Exec. Com.; physicist.
Albert J. Smallheiser, former Sec. Columbia ISS, 1911-12; Social Science
teacher and active spirit in N.Y. Teachers Guild.
Tucker Smith, N.Y.U. ISS; economist.
Boris Stem, U. of Wisconsin ISS; Staff, U.S. Dept. of Labor.
Irving Stone, formerly officer, U. of So. Cal., SLID; novelist.
Monroe Sweetland, formerly Syracuse U. SLID; former Field Sec., SLID;
National Council; Ed., Oregon Democrat.
Ordway Tead, Pres., Amherst ISS; 1911-12; Research Dir., LID, 1914-15;
teacher; pub.; author; former Ch., Bd. of Higher Education, N.Y.C.
Lazar Teper, Johns Hopkins SLID; Research Dir., ILGWU.
Frank Trager, Johns Hopkins U. SLID; Bd. of DIr., LID, 1951; former
Dir., M. S. A., Burma; Prof. of Research, N.Y.U.
Gus Tyler, C.C.N.Y.-SLID; Political Dir., ILGWU.
Jerry Voorhis, formerly Yale SLID; Sec., Cooperative League of U.S.A.
Selman A. Waksman, Sec. Rutgers U. Chap., 1914-15; receiver of John
Dewey Award, LID, 1953; co-discoverer of Streptomycin.
James Wechsler, Columbia SLID; Ed., New York Post.
Mina Weisenberg, Hunter College ISS; Bd. of Dir., 1954-55; Sec., N.Y.
Chap. LID; Treas., N.Y. Teachers Guild, AFL; teacher of Social Studies.
Ray B. Westerfeld, Sec., Yale ISS; economist; banker.
Nathaniel Weyl, Columbia SLID; writer; economist.
Alvin G. Whitney, Pres., Yale ISS, 1910-11; publicist.
Elsie Gibson Whitney, Middlebury College ISS, 1914; publicist.
Simon W. Whitney, formerly Yale SLID; economist.
Paul Willen, founder Oberlin College SLID; writer.
Chester Williams, U.C.L.A.-SLID; writer; lecturer on International Relations.
David Williams, pres., Marietta college ISS, 1909-10; Unitarian minister.
Frank Winn, formerly U. of Michigan SLID; Ed., U.A.W.-C.I.O Magazine.
Theresa Wolfson, former President Adelphi College ISS; Bd. of Dir., LID,
1944; receiver of LID John Dewey Award, 1945; Prof. of Economics,
Brooklyn College; author.
James Youngdahl, Washington U. SLID; Field Sec., SLID Southwestern
Organizer, A.C.-W.A.
Milton Zatinsky, former member SLID; labor economist.
Gertrude Folks Zimand, Pres., Vassar ISS, 1917; Sec., National Child Labor Com.
A Few Past and Present Cooperators:
Leonard D. Abbott, signer of call to ISS; ed., writer (dec.).
Charles Abrams, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1954-55; housing expert; N.Y. State
Administrator of Rent Control, 1955.
Luigi Antonini, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1951; First Vice Pres., ILGWU.
Jesse Ashley, Exec. Com., ISS, 1912-13; 1917-18; N.Y. attorney; prof. of
Law; feminist (dec.).
George E. Axtelle, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1954-1955; Prof of Education, N.Y.U.
Fern Babcock, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1946-1955; Program Coordinator, National
Council, Y.W.C.A.
George Backer, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1953; businessman; Ed.; former Pres., ORT.
Hope S. Bagger, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID; author.
Emily G. Balch, Exec. Com., ISS 1919-20; winner of Nobel Peace Prize (1946).
Roger Baldwin, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1920-1923; Dir., ACLU 1917-1952; Ch.
of Bd., International League for the Rights of Man.
Angela Bambace, National Council, LID; Staff, Baltimore ILGWU.
Jack Barbash, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1947-1952; National Council since 1952;
labor economist; author of “Taft-Hartley Act in Action.”
Benjamin W. Barkas, Former Ch., Philadephia Chap., LID; labor educator.
Solomon Barkin, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1953; Dir. of Research, T.W.U.A.
Katrina McCormick Barnes, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1953; Pamphlet Sec.
since 1953; Sec. ACLU.
John Bauer, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1938-1942; economist; writer; authority on
Public Utilities; author, “America’s Struggle for Electric Power.”
Charles A. Beard, faculty sponsor ISS; historian.
Helen Marston Beardsley, National Council, LID; housewife; active in
peace movements.
Arnold Beichman, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950-1954; National Council since
1954; Press Representative, International Confederation of Free Trade
Unions.
Robert Bendiner, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1948-1952; writer.
Nelson Bengston, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1948; investment counselor.
John C Bennett, Vice Pres., LID, 1954; Dean, Union Theological
Seminary; author.
Victor L. Berger, guest of honor at League’s Carnegie HaIl Meeting, 1911;
Congressman; Socialist leader (dec.).
Jacob Billikoff, former National Council, LID; labor arbitrator (dec.).
Alfred M. Bingham. cooperator, LID; writer; Legislator.
Frederick C. Bird, former Sec., LID Com. on Coal and Power; Dir., Dept.
of Municipal Research, Dunn and Bradstreet.
Helen Blankenhorn, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923-24; writer.
Brand Blanshard, National Council, LID; Prof. of Philosophy, Yale.
Paul Blanshard, Field Sec. and lecturer, LID, 1923-1933; Commissioner of
Investigation, N.Y.C., 1933-37; writer; lecturer.
Harriet Stanton Blatch, former Exec. Com., ISS; suffrage leader.
Anita C. Block, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923-1933; lecturer, dramatic critic.
Frank Bohn, frequent lecturer for LID; writer; lecturer.
William E. Bohn, formerly active in U. of Michigan ISS; formerly Staff,
Socialist Review, Ed., New Leader.
Karl Borders, former Sec., Chicago Chap., LID; former Chief Administrator,
UN international Children’s Fund (dec.).
Louis B. Boudin Exec. Com. ISS, 1917-1921; attorney; authority on Socialism
and Labor and Constitutional Problems (dec.).
Bjarne Braatoy, Pres., LID~ 1940-1944; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1940-1948;
National Council since 1948; author; teacher, technical consultant, German
Social Democratic Party.
Phillips Bradley, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1940; Prof. of Government, Syracuse U.
Rae Brandstein, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID, since 1954; Exec. Sec.,
National Com. for Rural Schools.
May Vladeck Bromberg, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1940-1942; social service.
Robert W. Bruere, Exec. Com., ISS, 1908-1910; writer; labor mediator and
Arbitrator.
Rosemary Bull, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1954; publicist.
Ralph J. Bunche, receiver of LID Award, 1951; winner of Nobel Peace Prize.
Elizabeth B. Butler, Exec. Com., ISS, 1907-08; writer on labor (dec.).
James B. Carey, National Council, LID; Pres. IUE-CIO; Sec.Treas. CIO.
Jennie D. Carliph, former Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap,; active in work for Civil
Liberties.
J. Henry Carpenter, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1945-1954; former Exec. Sec.,
Brooklyn Div., Protestant Council (dec.).
Edmund B. Chaffee, former Bd. of Dir., LID; former Dir., Labor Temple,
N.Y. (dec.).
Oscar L. Chapman, receiver of LID Award, 1953; former U.S. Sec. of the Interior
Stuart Chase, Treas., LID in the twenties; lecturer; author of “Waste and
the Machine Age.”
John L. Childs, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1948; Prof. Emeritus of Philosophy
of Education, Teachers College, Columbia; author; former Ch., Liberal Party
Gordon R. Clapp, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1955; former Ch., TVA; Deputy
Administrator, N.Y.C.
Ethel Clyde, Bd. of Dir., LID during thirties; active in many social movements.
William F. Cochran, host of ISS at Summer Conference in 1916; former
member National Council (dec.).
Fannia M. Cohn, long member of ISS and LID; former N.Y. Exec. Com.,
LID; Sec., Education Dept., ILGWU.
M. J. Coldwell, Vice Pres., LID; member Canadian Parliament; leader of
C.C.P. of Canada.
McAlister Coleman, LID; lecturer; writer; labor ed.; author (dec.).
George Willis Cooke, Exec. Com., ISS, 1905-1908; minister; writer.
Albert Sprague Coolidge, Bd. of Dir., LID; Dept. of Chemistry, Harvard;
active in American Federation of Teachers and other organizations.
Jessica G. Cosgrave, Exec. Com., ISS, 1911-1913; Vice-Pres., 1911-12;
former Pres., Finch School (dec.).
George S. Counts, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1954; Prof. of Philosophy of
Education, Teachers College, Columbia; former Ch., Liberal Party; author.
Grace L. Coyle, National Council, LID; Prof., School of Applied Social
Sciences, Western Reserve University; Pres., National Conference of
Social Work 1940.
George F. Cranmore, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1944-1950; Asst. Regional Dir.,
UAW-CIO (dec.).
Frank R. Crosswaith, frequent League lecturer; Sec., Negro Labor Com.;
Member, N.Y.C. Housing Authority.
Max Danish, former Bd. of Dir., LID; former Ed., Justice.
Clarence Darrow, signer of Call for formation of League; labor and Civil
Liberties attorney (dec.).
Maurice P. Davidson, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1946-1954; National Council since
1954; N.Y. attorney; former commissioner, N.Y. State Power Authority.
Jerome Davis, former Bd. of Dir., LID, 1936-1941; author; lecturer; teacher.
Eugene V. Debs, frequent League lecturer; Socialist leader (dec.).
Jerome De Hunt, former Bd. of Dir., LID; trade union and labor political leader.
Solon De Leon, former Bd. of Dir., LID; economic researcher.
Max Delson, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1950; Ch., Finance Com., since 1952;
labor and Civil Liberties attorney.
Albert De Silver, Exec. Com., ISS and Bd. of Dir., LID, 1919-1934; Treas.,
1919-20; lawyer; former Dir., ACLU (dec.).
John Dewey, Pres., LID, 1939-40; Honorary Pres., 1940-1953; leading
American educator and philosopher; Prof. of Philosophy, Columbia Univ.
(dec.).
Samuel De Witt, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1945; businessman; poet; dramatist;
Frank C. Doan, Exec. Com., ISS, 1912-1914; Prof., Meadville Theological
Seminary; writer (dec.).
T. C. Douglas, receiver of Award, 1953; Premier of Saskatchewan, Canada.
David Dubinsky, receiver of LID Award, 1949; Pres., ILGWU.
Elizabeth Dutcher, Exec. Com., ISS, 1907-1914; social worker.
Kermit Eby, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950-1954; National Council since 1954;
Assoc. Prof. of social Sciences, U. of Chicago.
Sherwood Eddy, frequent lecturer for LID; author; writer; religious leader.
John Lovejoy Elliott, former Bd. of Dir., LID; head of Hudson Guild;
leader N.Y. Ethical Culture Society (dec.).
Henrietta Epstein, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., 1954-55; Social Insurance
expert.
Morris ERnst, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923-24; lawyer; writer; attorney, ACLU.
Samuel Eubanks, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1949-1954; National Council since
1954; former Vice-Pres., National Newspaper Guild.
James Farm, student Field Sec., SLID, since 1950; lecturer; writer.
James T. Farrell, National Council, LID; novelist.
Israel Feinberg, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950-1954; former Manager, N.Y. Joint
Board, Cloakmakers’ Union (dec.).
Louis Fischer, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1950; writer; lecturer; author of “Life
of Gandhi.”
Harry F. Fleischman, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., since 1954; Dir., National
Labor Service, American Jewish Congress.
Louise Adams Floyd, Exec. Com., ISS’ and Pres., N.Y. Chap., 1919 to early
twenties (dec.).
Walter Frank, frequent host LID meetings; N.Y. attorney; leader in civic
and social movements.
Ephraim Frisch, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1945; Rabbi; former Ch., Commis¥
sion of Justice and Peace, Central Conference of Jewish Rabbis.
Walter G. Fuller, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1921-22; writer; ed. (dec.).
A. Garrick Fullerton, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., since 1954; economic re¥
searcher.
Zona Gale, Vice Pres., LID, 1923-1925; novelist (dec.).
Lewis S Gannett, of Dir., LID, 1920-1924; Literary Ed., New York
Herald Tribune.
Benjamin Gebiner, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1950; Asst. Sec., Workmen’s
Circle.
Martin Gerber, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1953; Dir., Region 9, UAW-CIO.
W. J. Ghent, Sec., ISS, 1907-1910; author; Ed.; educator.
Charlotte Perkins Gilman, signer of organization call, ISS; author; feminist.
Elisabeth Gilman, Pres., LID, 1940-41; Sec., Christian Social Justice Fund (dec.).
Arthur Gleason, Exec. Com., ISS and Bd. of Dir., LID, 1918-1923; Pres.,
ISS, 1920-21; Vice Pres., LID, 1921-1923; writer (dec.).
Louis P. Goldberg, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1945; National Ch., Social
Democratic Federation; N.Y. attorney.
Maurice Goldbloom, formerly N.Y. Exec. Com.; writer on international and
inter-cultural affairs.
Clara G. Goldman, National Council, LID; housewife; active in peace
movements.
J. King Gordon, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1945-1952; former Managing Ed., The
Nation; on staff of UN.
Elmer E. Graham, former Ch., Detroit Chap.; Staff, UAW-CIO.
Frances A. Grant, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID, since 1954; Sec., U.S.
Com. of Inter-American Association for Democracy and Freedom.
John H. Gray, National Council, LID; fonner Pres., American Economic
Assoc. (dec.).
Felix Grendon, former Exec. Com., ISS; Shavian authority; teacher.
Murray Gross, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1950; Asst. Manager, N.Y. Joint
Board, Dressmakers’ Union.
Charles Grossman, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1950; businessman; Ch., Reunion
of Old Timers.
Harold M. Groves, National Council, LID, Prof. of Economics, U. of Wisconsin.
Cameron P. Hall, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1947-1949; Exec. Sec., Dept. of
Church and Economic Life, National Council of Churches.
Meyer Halushka, Chicago Chap.; educator.
M. V. Halushka, Chicago Chap.; teacher.
Rose Laddon Hanna, fonner Exec. Sec., ISS; writer; lecturer.
Donald Harrington, National Council, LID; Minister, Community Church, N.Y.C.
A. J. Hayes, Vice Pres., LID since 1954; Pres., International Assoc. of
Machinists.
Ellen Hayes, Exec. Com., ISS, 1916-17; author; Prof. of Mathematics,
Wellesley College (dec.).
Paul R. Hayes, Bd. of Dir. and National Council, LID since 1951; Prof. of
Law, Columbia U.
Timothy Healy, Bd. of Dir., 1925; trade union leader.
Eduard Heimann, National Council, LID; Prof. of Economics, New School; author.
Adolph Held, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1945; Dir., Welfare and Health Benefits,
ILGWU; Ch., Jewish Labor Com.
Albert H. Herling, Bd. of Dir., LID, 195,2-53; Staff, City of Hope; author.
Mary Fox Herling, Exec. Sec., LID, 1929-1940; National Council since
1940; active in public and cooperative housing.
Hubert C. Herring, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1933-1938; Exec. Dir., Com. on
Cultural Relations with Latin America; author.
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, signer of organization call, 1905; author;
literary critic.
Morris Hillquit, Treas., ISS, 1908-1915; N.Y. labor attorney; Socialist leader;
author (dec.).
Mary W. Hillyer (Blanshard), Bd. of Dir., LID, 1940-1949; Dir., LID
Lecture Series in thirties; Staff, Planned Parenthood Assn.
Julius Hochman, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1936-1938; Manager, N.Y. Joint Board,
Dressmakers’ Union.
John Haynes Holmes, Vice Pres., LID since 1938; Minister Emeritus, N.Y.
Community Church.
Darlington Hoopes, LID cooperator; Socialist leader and former Legislator.
Bryn J. Hovde, Vice Pres., LID, 1948-1954; housing authority; former Pres.,
New School (dec.).
Don Howard, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1941-42; social worker; Dean, School of
Social Welfare, U. of California.
Frederick C. Howe, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923-1925; author; social reformer (dec.).
Quincy Howe, Bd., of Dir., LID, 1939-1941; radio and television commentator;
writer; teacher.
Jessie Wallace Hughan, Exec. Com., ISS and Bd. of Dir., LID, 1907-1950;
Vice Pres., 1920-21; teacher; author; economist (dec.).
Hubert H. Humphrey, receiver of LID and Reunion of Old Timers 1948
Awards. (Not to be confused with the British Fabian Socialist, Hubert
Humphreys.)
Robert Hunter Exec. Com., ISS, 1905-1911; author; social worker (dec.).
Ales Irvine, former lecturer for ISS; author; minister; lecturer (dec.).
James Weldon Johnson, former Bd. of Dir., LID; author; poet; diplomat;
Sec., NAACP (dec.).
Mercer Green Johnston, National Council, LID; minister; social reformer.
John Paul Jones, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1945; former Pres., N.Y. Chap.;
Minister, Union Church, Brooklyn.
Paul Jones, former Bd. of Dir., LID; Bishop, Protestant Episcopal Church
Horace M. Kallen, Exec. Com., ISS, 1919-20; educator; philosopher; author.
Leonard S. Kandell, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1951; Pres., Digby Management Co.
Vladimir Karapetoff, Vice Pres., LID in twenties; Prof. of Engineering,
Cornell U.; musician; inventor (dec.).
Florcence Kelley, Exec. Com., ISS, 1911-1921; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1921-22;
Vice Pres., 1912-1918, 1921-1923; Pres., 1918-1920; Sec., National
Consumers League; author; social reformer (dec.).
W. H. Kelley, Exec. Com., ISS, 1907-08; social worker.
Edmond Kelly, Exec. Com., ISS, 1908-1910; lawyer; author; former Counsel
for American Embassy, Paris.
Paul Kennaday, Exec. Com., ISS, 1907-1918; Treas., 1907-08; writer; social
worker.
A. M. Kidd, National Council, LID; Prof. Emeritus of Economics, U. of
William H. Kilpatrick, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1953; Vice Pres. since 1954;
leading American educator.
Clifford Kirkpatrick, National Council, LID; Prof. of Sociology, U. of
Indiana.
George R. Kirkpatrick, organizer, ISS, 1908; author; lecturer (dec.).
Cornelius Kruse, National Council, LID; Prof. of Philosophy, Wesleyan U.
Alice Kuebler, Exec. Sec., ISS, 1919-1920 (dec.).
Winthrop D. Lane, Exec. Com., ISS, 1918-1931; writer.
Bruno Lasker, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1921-22; writer; sociologist.
Louis Lasker, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1948; leader in Public Housing
W. Jett Lauek, former Bd. of Dir., LID, labor economist (dec.).
Algernon Lee, Exec. Com., ISS, 1910-1916; Sec., 1910-11; late Pres., Rand
School; author (dec.).
Abraham Lefkowitz, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1945; Principal, Samuel Tilden
Herbert H Lehman, receiver of LID Award, 1950; U.S. Senator from N.Y.
William M. Leiserson, Columbia ISS; former Ch., National Mediation Bd.;
labor economist.
Alfred Baker Lewis Bd. of Dir., LID, 1940-1954; Ch. of Bd. 1945; Pres.,
Union Casualty Co.
Trygve Lie, receiver of LID Award, 1947; former Secretary-General, UN.
Henry R Linville, formerly Bd. of Dir., LID; teacher; former Pres., New
York Teachers Guild (dec.).
Ben E. Lippincott, National Council, LID; Prof. of Economics, U. of
Minnesota, author.
Jack London, Pres., ISS, 1905-1907; novelist (dec. ).
Cedric Long, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923-1925,; active in Cooperative movement (dec.).
Harry Lopatin, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID; Managing Ed., Workmen’s
Circle Call; Staff, City of Hope.
Lewis Lorwin, Exec. Com., ISS, 1920-21; author; authority on Labor.
Owen R. Lovejoy, Exec. Com. and Treas., ISS, 1905-06; former Sec.,
National Child Labor Com.
Robert Morss Lovett, Pres., LID, 1921-1938; Vice Pres., 1938-1949; former
Prof. of English Literature, U. of Chicago; former Ed., New Republic.
Sara Kaplan Lowe, Sec. to Dr. Laidler since 1925; office manager.
John Lyon, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID; public relations counselor.
Marcia J. Lyttle, National Council, LID; active in peace movements.
Church and former Pres., Federal Council of Churches (dec.).
Bertha Mailly, former Bd. of Dir., LID; former Exec. Sec., Rand School.
Julius Manson, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1955; Staff, N.Y. State Board of Mediation.
Edwin Markham, frequent lecturer, ISS; poet.
Jan Masaryk, former Honorary Member, LID; former Foreign Sec. Czechoslovakia (dec.).
James H. Maurer, Vice Pres., LID, 1923-1944; former Pres., Pa. Federation
of Labor; former’ Socialist Legislator (dec.).
George Meany, receiver of LID Award, 1954; Pres., AFL.
Alexander Meiklejohn, Vice Pres., LID, since 1938; former Pres., Amherst;
author, lecturer.
Darwin J. Meserole, Exec. Com., ISS, 1918-1921; attorney; Active in Fight
Against Unemployment (dec.).
Katherine Maltby Meserole, member 1st Exec. Com, ISS; educator.
Etta Meyer, Vice Pres., N.Y. Chap., LID; social worker.
Edna St. Vincent Millay, former Vassar SLID; poetess (dec.).
Abraham Miller, Bd. of Dir., LID since 1945; Sec., N.Y. Joint Bd., ACWA.
Nathaniel M. Minkoff, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1952; Ch. of Bd., 1946-1948;
Pres. since 1948; Sec. Treas., N.Y. Joint Bd., Dressmakers’ Union,
Broadus Mitchell. Johns Hopkins ISS, 1917-18; Bd. of Dir., LID, 1945-1952;
Prof. of Economics, Rutgers U.; author.
Hiram K. Moderwell, Sec., Harvard ISS; writer; dramatic critic (dec.).
William P. Montague, Exec. Com., ISS, 1917-18; Bd. of Dir., 1920-1923;
Prof of Philosophy, Columbia (dec.).
Therese H. Moore, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID; housewife.
Wayne Morse, receiver of LID Award, 1954; U.S. Senator from Oregon.
Amicus Most, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID, since 1954; former Chief of
Industrial Department, E.C.A., Germany; contractor.
Lewis Mumford, former member, N.Y. Chap. Exec. Com., LID; author; city planner.
A. J. Muste, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1921-22; Sec. Emeritus, F.O.R.
Isidore Nagler, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1953–; Manager, N.Y. Joint Bd.,
Cloakmakers Union, ILGWU.
George Nasmyth, Exec. Com., ISS, 1918-1920; student of International
Affairs (dec.).
Benjamin B. Naumoff, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950; Pres., N.Y. Chap., 1952-1954;
Chief Field Examiner, N.L.R.B., N.Y. Region.
Nellie Seeds Nearing, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923; author; educator (dec.).
S. L. Newman, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1945-1952; former Vice Pres., International
Association of Machinists.
Reinhold Niebuhr, former Pres., N.Y. Chap., LID; former Bd. of Dir. and
Treas.; author; Vice Pres., Union Theological Seminary.
Morris S. Novik, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950; radio consultant.
Harry A. Overstreet, National Council; author; lecturer; educator.
Mary W. Ovington, Exec. Com., ISS, 1914-15; a founder, NAACP.
Jacob Panken, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1948; former Justice, Court of
Domestic Relations, N.Y.C.
Ernst Papanek, of Dir., LID, 1955; Dir., Wiltwyck School.
Herbert W. Payne, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1946-1952; Treas., 1943-1952; late
Vice Pres., Textile Workers Union of America (dec.).
Dorothy Pearson, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap., LID; active in liberal movements.
Orlie Pell, Bd. of Dir., LID; Education and Research Assoc., American
Labor Education Services.
Elsie Cole Phillips, Exec. Com., ISS, 1910-1914; Vice Pres., 1910-11.
William Pickens, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1923-1942; author; former Field Sec.,
NAACP (dec.).
Ernest Poole, Exec. Com., ISS, 1908-1918; Vice Pres., 1912-18; novelist;
winner, Pulitzer Prize (dec.).
J. S. Potofsky, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1925-26; Pres., ACWA.
Eliot D. Pratt, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1948-1952; National Council; Ch., Bd. of
Trustees, Goddard College.
Sherman D. Pratt, National Council, LID; publicist.
Paul W. Preisler, National Council, LID; teacher; attorney.
Carl Rachlin, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1950; former Pres., N.Y. Chap.; labor
and Civil Liberties attorney.
Walter Rautenstrauch, former Bd. of Dir., LID; Prof. of Industrial Engineering,
Columbia (dec.).
Cleveland Rodgers, Bd. of Dir., LID, in forties; formerly Ed., Brooklyn
Eagle and member, N.Y. City Planning Commission.
George E. Roewer, formerly Boston Chap.; legal consultant; labor lawyer.
Eleanor Roosevelt, recipient of LID Award, 1953; “First Woman of the World.”
George Ross, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1948; businessman; Sec., People’s
Educational Camp Society.
I. M. Rubinow, Exec. Com., ISS, 1913-1917; Authority on Social Insurance.
Charles Edward Russell, frequent lecturer for League; author; writer.
Stanley Ruttenberg, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1950-1952; Dir. of Research and
Education, CIO.
Helen Sahler, former Sec., N.Y. Chap.; sculptor; painter (dec.).
Mary R. Sanford, Exec. Com., ISS, 1907-1938; Treas., 1916-1919; Vice
Pres., LID, 1938-1948; publicist.
Joseph Schlossberg, Bd. of Dir. LID, 1940; Treas., 1945; Sec.-Treas.
Emeritus, A.C.W.A.; Member, Board of Higher Education, New York
City.
Karl Scholz, National Council, LID; Prof. of Economics, U. of Pa.
Adelaide Schulkind, Vice Pres., N.Y. Chap., 1954; Sec., League for
Mutual Aid.
Leroy Scott, Sec., ISS, 1910-1917; writer; novelist.
Vida D. Scudder, Exec. Com., ISS, 1912-1916; Vice Pres., LID, 1921-1954;
Prof. of English Literature, Wellesley (dec.).
H. D. Sedgwick, Exec. Com., ISS, 1912-1917; educator; writer (dec.).
Bert Seidman, former Ch., Washington Chap., LID; Research Dept., AFL.
Toni Sender, Frequent League lecturer; Representative of International
Confederation of Trade Unions at UN.
Boris Shishkin, Bd. of Dir., LID; economist, AFL.
Upton Sinclair, founder; Vice Pres., ISS, 1905-1917; novelist.
Winifred Smith, National Council, LID; former Prof. of English, Vassar.
George Soule, Bd. of Dir., LID; author; economist; Prof. of Economics,
Bennington College.
John Spargo, Exec. Com., ISS, 1916-1919; writer.
Sterling Spero, Bd. of Dir., LID; Prof. of Public Administration, N.Y.U.
Sidney Stark, long LID cooperator; businessman.
Sidney Stark, Jr., National Council, LID; businessman.
Lincoln Steffens, frequent lecturer, LID; writer (dec.).
Charles P. Steinmetz, Vice Pres., LID, 1921-1924; inventor; electric wizard (dec.).
Helen Phelps Stokes, Exec. Com., ISS, 1907-1921; Bd. of Dir., 1921-1940;
Vice Pres., 1940 (dec.).
J. G. Phelps Stokes, Exec. Com., ISS 1905-1918; Pres., 1907-1918; publicist.
Benjamin Stolberg, former Bd. of Dir., LID; writer (dec.).
George Streator, National Council, LID; former Bd. of Dir.; labor editor.
Carol Lloyd Strobell, Exec. Com., ISS, 1913-1921; writer.
Louis Stulberg,. Bd. of Dir., LID; manager, Loca1 66, ILGWU.
Norman Thomas, Exec. Com., ISS, 1918-1921; Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1921;
Exec. Com., 1922-1936; Socialist leader; author; lecturer; Ch. Post War
World Council.
John Thurber, former Ch., Washington Chap. LID; labor statistician and
historian.
Richard C. Tolman, U. of Illinois ISS; physicist (dec.).
Ashley L. Totten, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1951; Sec.-Treas., Brotherhood of
Sleeping Car Porters.
Thorstein Veblen, National Council, 1925-1929; sociologist (dec.).
Oswald Garrison Villard, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1933-34; former Ed. and Pub.
The Nation (dec.).
B. Charney V1adeck, Bd of Dir., LID, in thirties; Business Manager, Jewish
Daily Forward; former N.Y.C. Councilman (dec.).
Stephen Vladeck, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1955; labor attorney.
Wil1iam C. Vladeck, Bd. of Dir., 1953-1955; architect.
Anna Strunsky Walling, active member since 1905.
L. Metcalfe Walling, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1948-1952; former Administrator,
Fair Labor Practices; attorney.
William English Walling, Exec. Com., ISS, 1912-1918; author; social scientist (dec.).
Agnes A. Warbasse, Bd. of Dir., 1925-26; leading cooperator (dec.).
Arthur Warner, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1921-1923; writer; ed. (dec.).
Adolph Warshow, formerly Bd. of Dir., LID; business~an (dec.).
Morris Weisz, National Council, LID; labor economist.
Mildred Perlman Westover, Sec., SLID, 1952-53; Bd. of Dir., 1953-1955.
Bertha Poole Weyl, Bd. of Dir., LID, 1922-1945; Vice Pres., since 1945; housewife.
Bouck White, Exec. Com., ISS, 1912-1915; author (dec.).
Samuel S. White, National Council; labor-management relations.
Pearl Willen, Bd. of Dir., LID, since 1952; lecturer; social service.
Norman Williams, Jr., Bd. of Dir., LID; Legal Dept., N.Y.C. Planning
Commission.
William Withers, National Council, LID; Prof. of Economics, Queens College.
Herman Wolf, Bd. of Dir., 1953-1955; public relations.
Helen Sumner Woodbury, Exec. Com., ISS and Dir., 1917-1924; labor
economist (dec.).
Louis Yagoda, Exec. Com., N.Y. Chap.; N.Y. State Board of Mediation.
Phil Ziegler, National Council, LID; Ed., Railway Clerk.
Savel Zimand, Bd. of Dir., LID; 1921-1924; writer; health educator.
Charles Zimmerman, Bd. of Dir., LID; Vice Pres., ILGWU; Manager,
Local 22.
Charles Zueblin, Exec. Com., ISS, 1916-1921; author; lecturer (dec.).
APPENDIX III
OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND COUNCIL OF THE LEAGUE
FOR INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY, 1963
Nathaniel M. Minkoff, President
William H. Kilpatrick, Chairman of the Board
Vice Presidents; John C. Bennett, M. J. Coldwe11,
Frank P. Graham, A. J. Hayes, John Haynes Holmes,
Alexander Meiklejohn, Ernest Nagel, Mark Starr
Joseph Schlossberg, Treasurer
Caro1 Weisbrod, Student Secretary
Harry W. Laidler, Executive Director Emeritus
Robert J. Alexanderm Luigi Antonini, Shelley Appleton, George Backer,
Gregory J. Bardacke, Solomon Barkin, Murray Baron, Daniel Bell, Nelson
Bengston, LeRoy Bowman, Jerome Breslaw, Rosemary Bull, George Cadbury,
John L. Childs, Henry M. Christman, Charles Cogen, Cara Cook, Albert
Sprague Coolidge, George S. Counts, Louise Crane, Max Delson, Samuel
DeWitt, James Farmer, Louis Fischer, Isabelle B. Friedman, Samuel H.
Friedman, Benjamin A. Gebiner, Martin Gerber, Murray Gross; Susan Gyarmati,
Adolph Held, Leonard S. Kandell, William Kemsley, John V. P. Lassoem Jr.,
Harold Lewack, Lewis Lorwill, Julius Manson, Henoch Mendelsund,
Abraham Miller, Isiah Minkoff, Amicus Most, Emanuel Muravchik,
Benjamin B. Naumoff, Aryeh Neier, Morris S. Novik, Ernst Papanek, Orlie
Pell, Carl Rachlin, Victor G. Reuther, Marvin Rich, George Ross, Andre
Schiffrin, Clarence Senior, Boris Shishkin, Rebecca C. Simonson, Sterling
Spero, Sidney Stark, Jr., Louis Stulberg, Harold Taylor, Norman Thomas,
Ashley L. Totten, Frank N. Trager, Francis T. Villemain, Stephen Vladeck,
Rowland Watts, Mina Weisenberg, Jacques E. Wilmore, William Wolpert,
Charles S. Zimmerman. Student Representatives: Eldon Clingan, Michael
Rosenbaum.
George E. Axtelle, Angela Bambace, Jack Barbash, Helen Marston Beardsley,
Arnold Beichman, Brand Blanshard, Wallace J. Campbell, James B. Carey,
Ethlyn Christensen, Gordon R. Clapp, Grace L. Coyle, Clark M. Eichelberger,
Robert Engler, Harold U. Faulkner, Clara G. Goldman, Charles
Grossman, Harold M. Groves, Donald Harrington, Paul R. Hayes, Eduard
Heimann, Mary Fox Herling, Mary Hillyer, Sidney Hook, John Paul Jones,
Clifford Kirkpatrick, Cornelius Kruse, Aaron Levenstein, Alfred Baker Lewis,
Marx Lewis, Harry A. Overstreet, Eliot D Pratt, Sherman Pratt, Paul W.
Preisler, Carl Raushenbush, Asher W. Schwartz, Winifred Smith, George
Soule, Monrue Sweetland, Morris Weisz, Samuel S. White, William Withers,
Theresa Wolfson.
(Official stationery of LID bears the notation: “Officially Accredited to the
United States Mission to the United Nations.”)
APPENDIX IV
ORIGINAL OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS OF THE AMERICAN
CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, 1921
Harry F. Ward, Chairman
Duncan McDonald
Jeannette Rankin, Vice Chairman
* Helen Phelps Stokes, Treasurer
* Albert De Silver
* Roger N. Baldwin
Walter Nelles, Counsel
Lucille B. Milner, Field Secretary
Louis Budenz, Publicity Director
National Committee
Jane Addams Agnes Brown Leach
Herbert Bigelow Arthur Le Sueur
Sophonisba P. Breckenridge * Henry R. Linville
Robert M. Buck * Robert Morss Lovett
Joseph D. Cannon Allen McCurdy
John S. Codman Grenville S. McFarland
Lincoln Colcord Oscar Maddous
James H. Dillard Judah L. Magnes
James A. Duncan * James H. Maurer
* Crystal Eastman * A. J. Muste
* John Lovejoy Elliott * George W. Nasmyth
Edmund C. Evans * Scott Nearing
William M. Fincke Julia O’Connor
John A. Fitch * William H. Pickens
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn William Marion Reedy
William Z. Foster John Nevin Sayre
Felix Frankfurter Rose Schneiderman
Ernst Freund * Vida D. Scudder
Paul J. Furnas Seymour Stedman
* Zona Gale * Norman M. Thomas
A. B. Gilbert Edward D. Tittmann
* Arthur Garfield Hayes William S. U’Ren
* Morris Hillquit * Oswald Garrison Villard
* John Haynes Holmes * B. Charney Vladeck
* Frederick C. Howe George P. West
* James Weldon Johnson L. Hollingsworth Wood
* Listed by Mina Weisenberg among “collaborators” of League
for Industrial Democracy.
OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS OF THE AMERICAN
CIVIL LmERTIES UNION, JUNE, 1962
(Names marked * appear on Mina Weisenberg’s list of League for Industrial
Democracy “collaborators”; names marked t appear on official founders list
of Americans for Democratic Action.)
Ernest Angell=Chairman
Ralph S. Brown, Jr., Sophia Yarnall Jacobs=Vice Chairmen
Edward J. Ennis, *Osmond K. Fraenkel=General Counsel
Dorothy Kenyon=Secretary
B. W. Huebsch=Treasurer
*t Morris L. Ernst, John F. Finerty, *John Holmes, *Norman Thomas=
Directors Emeritus
Robert Bierstedt Dan Lacy George Soll
Robert L. Crowell * Will Maslow * Stephen C. Vladeck
* Walter Frank Harry C. Meserve J. Waties Waring
Lewis Galantiere Edward O. Miller Alan Westin
Walter Gellhorn Walter Millis Howard Whiteside
Louis M. Hacker Gerard Piel Edward Bennett Williams
* August Heckscher Harriet Pilpel
Frank S. Horne Herbert Prashker
* John Paul Jones Elmer Rice
National Executive Staff
John de J. Pemberton, Jr.=Executive Director
Alan Reitman=Associate Director
Melvin L. Wulf=Legal Director
Marie M. Runyon=Membership Director
Lawrence Speiser=Washington Office Director
(1101 Vermont Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
Telephone: MEtropolitan 8-6602)
Louise C. Floyd, Leanne Golden, Colleen Carmody, Julie
Barrows=Executive Assistants
Jeffrey E. Fuller=Staff Associate
t Francis Biddle==Chairman
Pearl S. Buck, Howard F. Burns, * Albert Sprague Coolidge, J. Frank Dobie,
Lloyd K. Garrison, * Frank P. Graham, t Palmer Hoyt, Karl Menninger,
Loren Miller, * Morris Rubin, Lillian E. Smith=Vice Chairmen
Sadie Alexander * Roger N. Baldwin
J. Garner Anthony Alan Barth
Thurman Arnold Dr. Sarah Gibson Blanding
Clarence E. Ayres * Catherine Drinker Bowen
Prof. Julian P. Boyd * Max Lerner
Van Wyck Brooks Prof. Robert S. Lynd
John Mason Brown Dr. Millicent C. McIntosh
Dr. Robert K. Carr Patrick Murphy Malin
Prof. Allan K. Chalmers Prof. Robert Mathews
* Stuart Chase Prof. Wesley H. Maurer
Grenville Clark * Emil Mazey
Dr. Rufus E. Clement *Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn
Prof. Henry S. Commager Sylvan Meyer
* Prof. George S. Counts Donald R. Murphy
Prof. Robert E. Cushman Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer
* Melvyn Douglas John B. Orr, Jr.
Prof. Thomas H. Eliot t Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam
Victor Fischer James G. Patton
Walter T. Fisher t A. Philip Randolph
James Lawrence Fly Elmo Roper
Dr. Erich Fromm t Prof Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
Prof. Ralph F. Fuchs Dr. Edward J. Sparling
Prof. Willard E. Goslin Prof. George R. Stewart
Prof. Mark DeW. Howe t Dorothy Tilly
* Quincy Howe Jose Trias-Monge
Dr. Robert M. Hutchins William L. White
Gerald W. Johnson Thornton Wilder
Dr. Mordecai W. Johnson t Aubrey Williams
James Kerney Marion A. Wright
Benjamin H. Kizer Dean Benjamin Youngdahl
Agnes Brown Leach
OFFICERS OF THE NATIONAL COMMITTEE TO ABOLISH
THE HOUSE UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE,
AN OFFSHOOT OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL
LIBERTIES UNION, 1964
Honorary Chairmen
James Imbrie
Alexander Meiklejohn
Clarence Pickett
Chairman Emeritus
Aubrey W. Williams
Harvey O’Connor
Vice Chairmen
Dorothy Marshall
Sylvia E. Crane
Organization Liaison
Charles Jackson
East Coast Region
Harry Barnard
(to be announced)
Robert W. Kenny
Executive Director-Field Representative
Frank Wilkinson
[Sponsors’ List follows. Note interlock with LID, ADA and ACLU.]
NATIONAL COMMITTEE TO ABOLISH THE HOUSE UN-AMERICAN
ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE:
(Titles and Institutions Listed for Identification only)
[List as published by above-named Committee in the Bulletin of Abolition
News, official publication of the National Committee]
PROF. MAX F. ABELL PROF. HERBERT BLAU
Agric. Econ. Emer., U. of N.H. English, San Francisco State
PROF. JOHN W. ALEXANDER PROF. FRANK J. BOCKHOFF
Assoc. Dean, Columbia College Chemistry, Fenn College
PROF. ROLAND H. BAINTON PROF. DERK BODDE
History, Yale University University of Pennsylvania
PROF. STRINGFELLOW BARR PROF. D:WIGHT L. BOLINGER
Humanities, Rutgers University University of Colorado
PROF. M. V. L. BENNETT DEAN WARREN BOWER
Neurology, Columbia University English, New York University
PROF. ERIC BENTLEY PROF. THEODORE BRAMELD
English, Columbia University Political Science, Boston Univ.
PROF. DANIEL M. BERMAN PROF. EMILY C. BROWN
Government, American University Vassar College
PROF. ROBERT BIERSTEDT PROF. R. McAFEE BROWN
SOCiology-Anthropology, N.Y.U. Religion, Stanford University
PROF. NEAL BILLINGS PROF. JUSTUS BUCHLER
U. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Philosophy, Columbia University
PROF. ALLAN M. BUTLER
Pediatrics Emer., Harvard Univ.
PROF. EDMOND CAHN
Law, New York University
PROF. EDWIN S. CAMPBELL
Chemistry, New York University
PROF. THOMAS S. CHECKLEY
Law, University of Pittsburgh
PROF. PAUL F. CLARK
Microbiology Emer., U. of Wis.
PROF. STANLEY COBB
Psychiatry, Harvard University
PROF. WHITFIELD COBB
Statistics, Hollins College
_PROF. HUBERT L. COFFEY
Psychology, U. of Caln.-Berkeley
PROF. JULIUS COHEN
Law, Rutgers University
PROF. ROBERTS. COHEN
Physics, Boston University
PROF. CARL W. CONDIT
PROF. EDWARD U. CONDON
Physics, Washington University
PROF. HOLLIS R. COOLEY
PROF. ALBERT S. COOLIDGE
Chemistry Erner., Harvard Univ.
PROF. ARTHUR C. DANTO
Philosophy, Columbia University
PROF. WILLIAM C. DAVIDON
Physics, Haverford College
PROF. BERNARD D. DAVIS
Bacteriology, Harvard University
PROF. DAVID B. DAVIS
History, Cornell University
PROF. HORACE B. DAVIS
Social Science, Raleigh, N.C.
PROF. STANTON LING DAVIS
Case Institute of Technology
DR. JAMES P. DIXON
President, Antioch College
PROF. NORMAN DORSEN
PROF. EDMUND EGAN
Mt. Mercy College
PROF. RUPERT EMERSON
History, Harvard University
PROF. THOMAS I. EMERSON
Law, Yale University
DR~ JOHN C. ESTY, JR.
Dean, Amherst College
PROF. ROBERT FINN
Mathematics, Stanford University
PROF. H. BRUCE FRANKLIN
English, Stanford University
PROF. MITCHELL FRANKLIN
Law, Tulane University
PROF. BEN W. FUSON
English, University of Kansas
PROF. JOHN D. GOHEEN
Philosophy, Stanford University
PROF. WILLIAM J. GOODE
Sociology, Columbia University
PROF. GORDON GRIFFITHS
History, University of Washington
PROF. A. D. GUREWITSCH
Columbia-Presbyterian Med. Ctr.
PROF. WALTER E. HAGER
Edu. Emer., Columbia Teach. Col
PROF. BERNARD F. HALEY
Economics Erner., Stanford Univ.
PROF. ALICE HAMILTON
Medicine Emer., Harvard Univ.
PROF. FOWLER HARPER
PROF. DOROTHEA HARVEY
Asso. Dean, Columbia University
PROF. ROBERT HAVIGHURST
Education, University of Chicago
PROF. M. HEIDELBERGER
Columbia Univ. P. & S. Emer.;
National Academy of Sciences
PROF. R. L. HEILBRONER
PROF. BURTON HENRY
Education, Los Angeles State Col.
PROF. DAVID HIATT
English, Carroll College
PROF. WILLIAM E. HOCKING
Philosophy Emer., Harvard Univ.
PROF. FRANCIS D. HOLE
Soil Sciences, University of Wis.
PROF. M. DE WOLFE HOWE
Law, Harvard University
PROF. H. STUART HUGHES
PROF. HERBERT JEHLE
Physics, George Washington U.
PROF. EARL S. JOHNSON
Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
PROF. PAUL E. JOHNSON
DR. WILMOT R. JONES
Prine. Emer., Frnds. Sch., Wil., Del.
PROF. ERICH KAHLER
PROF. DAVID KETTLER
Political Sci., Ohio State Univ.
PROF. JACK C. KIEFER
Mathematics, Cornell University
DR. JACK E. KITTELL
Headmaster, Dalton School
PROF. LEONARD KITTS
Design, Ohio State University
PROF. PAUL KLEMPERER
Pathology Emer., Mt. Sinai Hosp.
DEAN JOHN W. KNEDLER, JR.
PROF. I. M. KOLTHOFF
PROF. MICHAEL KRAUS
History, Col. of the City of N.Y.
PROF. Y. H. KRIKORIAN
Phil., College of the City of N.Y.
PROF. JOHN C. LAZENBY
Emer., University of Wisconsin
PROF. KAREL DE LEEUW
PROF. HOWARD H. LENTNER
Political Sci., Western Reserve U.
PROF. GEORGE LEPPERT
Mechanical Eng., Stanford Univ.
DEAN LEONARD W. LEVY
Grad. Sch., Brandeis University
DR. FREDERICK J. LIBBY
PROF. LEE LORCH
Mathematics, Univ. of Alberta
PROF. OLIVER S. LOUD
Antioch College
PROF. DAVID RANDALL LUCE
Phil., U. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
PROF. HELEN M. LYND
Sarah Lawrence College
PROF. C. MAC DOUGALL
PROF. R. M. MAC IVER
PROF. ROLAND P. MACKAY
Neurology, Northwestern Univ.
DR. HANS MAEDER
Director, Stockbridge School
PROF. HUBERT MARSHALL
Political Science, Stanford Univ.
PROF. KIRTLEY F. MATHER
Geology Emer., Harvard Univ.
PROF. WESLEY H. MAURER
Journalism, University of Mich.
PROF. KENNETH O. MAY
Mathematics, Carleton College
PROF. A. MEIKLEJOHN
Phil. Pres. Emer. Amherst Col.
PROF. KARL MEYER
Biochem., P & S, Columbia Univ.
PROF. CLYDE R. MILLER
Emer., Columbia University
PROF. ARVAL A. MORRIS
Law, University of Washington
PROF. PHILIP MORRISON
Physics, Cornell University
PROF. GLENN R. MORROW
PROF. LINCOLN E. MOSES
Statistics, Stanford University
PROF. OTTO NATHAN
Economics Emer., New York U.
PROF. HANS NOLL
Biochem., Med. Sch., U. of Ptsbrg.
PROF. PAUL OLYNK
Science, Fenn College
PROF. JAY OREAR
PROF. ERWIN PANOFSKY
Art Historian, Princeton Univ.
PROF. HOWARD L. PARSONS
Philosophy, Coe College
PROF. LINUS PAULDING
Nobel Laureate: Chemistry; Peace
REV. ARTHUR C. PEABODY
Headmaster Emer., Groton School
PROF. ROBERT PREYER
PROF. JOHN H RANDALL, JR.
PROF. NORMAN REDLICH
PROF. ALAN RHODES
PROF. OSCAR K RICE
Chem., Univ. of North Carolina
PROF. WILLIAM G. RICE
Law, University of Wisconsin
PROF. DONALD H. RIDDLE
Pol. Science, Princeton University
PROF. WALTER B. RIDEOUT
English, Northwestern University
PROF. CLAYTON ROBERTY
History, Ohio State University
PROF. THEODORE ROSEBURY
PROF. W. CARSON RYAN
Edu. Emer., U. of North Carolina
PROF. MARIO G. SALVADORI
Indus. Eng., Columbia University
PROF. MEYER SCHAPIRO
Fine Arts, Columbia University
PROF. PAUL A. SCHILPP
Philosophy, Northwestern Univ.
PROF. CARL E. SCHORSKE
History, Univ. of Calif.-Berkeley
PROF. SEYMOUR SCHUSTER
Mathematics, Univ. of Minnesota
PROF. HARLOW SHAPLEY
Astronomy Emer., Harvard Univ.
PROF. THEO. SHEDLOVSKY
Rockefeller Institute
PROF. HENRY NASH SMITH
English, Univ. of Calif.-Berkeley
PROF. ROCKWELL C. SMITH
PROF. JOHN SOMERVILLE
Phil., City University of N.Y.
PROF. PITIRIM A SOROKIN
Sociology, Harvard University
PROF. BENJAMIN SPOCK
Ped. & Psychtry. West. Res. Univ.
PROF. KENNETH M. STAMPP
PROF. NORMAN E. STEENROD
PROF. MILTON R. STERN
Asst. Dean, Gen. Education & Ext., N.Y.U
PROF. ERNEST L. TALBERT
DR. HAROLD C. TAYLOR
Former Pres., Sarah Lawrence Col.
PROF. J. HERBERT TAYLOR
Cell Biology, Columbia University
PROF. PAUL TILLITT
Political Science, Rutgers Univ.
PROF. HAROLD C. UREY
Nobel Laureate: Chemistry
DR. MARY VAN KLEECK
Industrial Sociologist
PROF. WILLIAM VICKREY
Economics, Columbia University
PROF. WALTERS S. VINCENT
Med. Sch., Univ. of Pittsburgh
PROF. MAURICE B. VISSCHER
Scientist, Univ. of Minnesota
PROF. WILLIAM VORENBERG
Speech, New York University
PROF. PAUL W. WAGER
PROF. LEROY WATERMAN
Emer.~ University of Michigan
PROF. ROBERT H. WELKER
PROF. URBAN WHITAKER
Intl. Rel., San Francisco State
DEAN I. G. WHITCHURCH
Kingsfield, Maine
PROF. HAROLD WIDOM
PROF. H. H. WILSON
Politics, Princeton University
PROF. M. WINDMILLER
San Francisco State College
PROF. KURT H. WOLFF
Sociology, Brandeis University
PROF. PAUL R. ZILSEL
Physics, Western Reserve Univ.
RABBI A. N. ABRAMOWITZ
REV. LYMAN ACHENBACH
Universalist, Columbus, Ohio
REV. GEORGE A. ACKERLY
Meth.; Chrm., World Fel., Inc.
REV. WILLIAM T. BAIRD
Essex Community, Chicago
REV. CHARLES A. BALDWIN
Chaplain, Brown University
DR. JOHN C. BENNETT
Theologian, New York City
DR. ALGERNON D. BLACK
Director, Ethical Culture Society
REV. TREOD’ORE R. BOWEN
Calvary Methodist, D.C.
REV. WALTER R. BOWIE
Theologian, Alexandria, Virginia
DR. EDWIN A. BROWN
Brook Park Methodist, Berea, O.
REV. RAYMOND CALKINS
Congregational, Cambridge, Mass.
DR. J. RAYMOND COPE
Unitarian, Berkeley, California
REV. HENRY HITT CRANE
Cent Meth. Emer., Detroit, Mich.
REV. JOHN E. EVANS
Unitarian, Plainfield, N.J.
REV. W. W. FINLATOR
Pullen Memorial Baptist,
Raleigh, N.C.
RABBI OSCAR FLEISHAKER
Co-Chrm., Religious Freedom
REV. S. H. FRITCHMAN
Unitarian, Los Angeles, Calif.
RABBI ROLAND GITTELSOHN
Temple Israel, Boston, Mass.
RABBI JOSEPH B. GLASER
Union of Amer. Hebrew Congo
RABBI ROBERT E. GOLDBURG
Congregation Mishkan Israel,
New Haven, Conn.
RABBI DAVID GRAUBART
REV. W. H. HENDERSON
REV. JOHN HAYNES HOLMES
Community Ch. Emer., N.Y.
RABBI PHILIP HOROWITZ
Brith Emeth Cong., Cleveland, O.
REV. STUART J. INNERST
Friends Natl. Com. on Legislation
RABBI LEON A. JICK
Free Synagogue, Mt. Vernon, N.Y.
REV. MARTIN L. KING, JR.
Pres., Southern Christian
RABBI EDWARD E. KLEIN
Free Synagogue, New York City
DR. JOHN M. KRUMM
Chaplain, Columbia University
REV. DENNIS G. KUBY
Unitarian Society, Cleveland, O.
REV. JOHN H. LATHROP
PROF. PAUL LEHMANN
RABBI EUGENE LIPMAN
Temple Sinai,D.C.
RT. REV. EDGAR A. LOVE
Bishop, Methodist Church,
Baltimore, Md.
DR. JOHN A. MACKAY
Pres. Emer. Princeton Theological
RT. REV. WALTER MITCHELL
Episcopal Bishop of Ariz., Ret.
DR. WALTER G. MUELDER
Dean, Boston Theological Sem.
REV. A. J. MUSTE
Secty. Emer., Fellowship for
DR. REINHOLD NIEBUHR
DR. VICTOR OBENHAUS
Chicago Theological Seminary
REV. ROBERT O’BRIEN
Unitarian, Monterey, California
RT.REV.M.E.PEABODY
Episc. Bish., Central N.Y., Ret.
REV. EDWARD L. PEET
Wesley Meth., Hayward, Calif.
DR. DRYDEN L. PHELPS
DR. THEODORE A. RATH
Pres., Bloomfield Col. & Sem.
DR. HARRY B. SCHOLEFIELD
Unitarian, San Francisco, Calif.
DR. HOWARD SCHOMER
Pres., Chicago Theological Sem.
REV. ALBERT L. SEELY
Protestant Chap., U. of Mass.
RABBI BERNARD SEGAL
Dir., United Synagogues of Amer.
DR. D. R. SHARPE
Baptist, Pasadena, California
DR. GUY EMERY SHIPLER
Editor, The Churchman
REV. F. L. SHUTTLESWORTH
Pres., Ala. Christian Movement
Pres., Southern Conf. Edu. Fund
PROF. ARTHUR L. SWIFT, JR.
RABBI H. D. TEITELBAUM
Temple Beth Jacob,
Redwood City, Calif.
PROF. BURTON H.
THROCKMORTON, JR.
Bangor Theological Sem., Me.
DR. JAMES D.TYMS
Dean, School of Religion,
REV. LUCIUS WALKER
Dir., Northcott Neigh. House,
REV. WYATT TEE WALKER
Dir., Southern Christian
RABBI JACOB J. WEINSTEIN
KAM Temple, Chicago, Ill.
REV. KENNETH B. WENTZEL
DR. DAVID RHYS WILLIAMS
Unitarian, Rochester, New York
DR. ROLLAND E. WOLFE
Prof. of Rel., Western Res. Univ.
DONNA ALLEN
Industrial Relations Writer, D.C.
JAMES ARONSON
Editor, National Guardian
MAX AWNER
Editor, Labor News
JAMESWriter
S. L. M. BARLOW
HARRY BARNARD THOMAS B. HESS
Writer Editor, Art News
JOSEPH BARNES JOSEPH HIRSCH
Editor-Writer Painter
PETER BLUME B. W. HUEBSCH
Painter Publisher
KAY BOYLE JAMES JONES
Writer Writer
ANNE BRADEN MATTHEW JOSEPHSON
Editor, Southern Patriot Writer
BENIAMINO BUFANO Sculptor ALBERT E. KAHN Writer
ALEXANDER CALDER Artist ROCKWELL KENT Artist
JOHN CIARDI Poet PHIL KERBY Editor, Frontier
FREDA KIRCHWEY
GEORGE DANGERFIELD
Fonner Editor, The Nation
DR. HELEN LAMB LAMONT
BABETTE DEUTSCH
JAMES LAWRENCE, JR.
IRVING DILLIARD Architect
Fonner Editor-Editorial Page
St. Louis Post Dispatch DENISE LEVERTOV
BELLA LEWITZKY
Poet, Ed./Pub., City Lights Books
SARA BARD FIELD
LENORE MARSHALL
WALDO FRANK ALBERT MAYER
ERICH FROMM CAREY McWILLIAMS
Writer Editor, The Nation
MAXWELL GEISMAR JESSICA MITFORD
RUSSELL W. GIBBONS ASHLEY MONTAGU
Ed., Writer, Civil Lib. Leader Writer-Anthropologist
DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT IRA V. MORRIS
Phys.; Ed./Pub., Sun Times Writer
ROBERT GWATHMEY GEORGE B. MURPHY, JR.
Painter Writer
E. Y. HARBURG TRUMAN NELSON
Lyricist Writer
STERLING HAYDEN RUSS NIXON
Actor-Writer Manager, National Guardian
EMMY LOU PACKARD
BERNARD B. PERRY
Editor, Indiana Press
BYRON RANDALL
RODERICK SEIDENBERG
BENSHAHN
RAPHAELSOYER
I. F. STONE
Writer-Editor
MILTON K. SUSMAN
Writer; Member, Natl. Academy
of Arts & Letters
PIERRE VAN PAASSEN
Writer; Clergyman
DON WEST
BUSINESS, LABOR AND
THE PROFESSIONS
KURT A. ADLER, M.D., PH.D.
ARIS ANAGNOS
Insurance, Beverly Hills
NELSON BENGSTON
Investment Securities, N.Y.C.
DR. WALTER G. BERGMAN
Former Dir., Instruct. Research,
Detroit Public Schools
JESSIE F. BINFORD
Social Worker; Former Dir.,
Hull House
JOHN BRATTIN
Attorney, Lansing, Michigan
JAMES L. BREWER
Attorney, Rochester, New York
HARRY BRIDGES
Pres., Intl. Longshoremen’s &
Warehousemen’s Union
BENJAMIN J. BUTTENWIESER
New York City, N.Y.
HELEN L. BUTTENWIESER
Attorney, New York City
GRENVILLE CLARK
Attorney-Writer, Dublin, N.H.
JOHNM.COE
Attorney, Pensacola, Florida
JOHN O. CRANE
Found. Trustee, Wds. Hole, Mass.
PERCY M. DAWSON, M.D.
Los Altos, California
JACKG.DAY
Attorney, Cleveland, Ohio
EARL B. DICKERSON
Attorney-Corp. Exec., Chi., Ill.
FRANK J. DONNER
Attorney-Writer, New York City
BENJAMIN DREYFUS
Attorney, San Francisco, Calif.
FYKEFARMER
Attorney, Nashville, Tennessee
OSMOND K. FRAENKEL
Attny.-Civil Lib. Leader, N.Y.C.
A. C. GLASSGOLD
Hotel & Club Employees
Union, AFL-CIO
VIOLA JO GRAHAM
Social Worker, Madison, Wis.
VINCENT HALLINAN
WILLIAM J. HAYS
Businessman, D.C. & N.Y.C.
FRANCIS HEISLER
Attorney, Carmel, California
HUGH B. HESTER
Brig. General, U.S. Army, Ret.
Banker, Ret., Lawrenceville, N.J.
APPENJOHN JURKANIN
Pres. Local 500, Almag.
Meatcutters, AFL-CIO
Attny.; Former Attny. Gen.,Cal.
BENJAMIN H. KIZER
Attorney, Spokane, Washington
RAPHAEL KONIGSBERG
Real Estate, Los Angeles, Calif.
WILLIAM M. KUNSTLER
Attny., Civil Lib. Leader, N.Y.C.
MARK LANE
Attny., Former N.Y. Assem.
MORTON LEITSON
Attorney, Flint, Michigan
SIDNEY LENS
Writer; Bus. Mgr. Local #929
AFL-CIO, Chicago, Illinois
CHARLES C. LOCKWOOD
Attorney, Detroit, Michigan
WALTER C. LONGSTRETH
Attorney, Philadelphia, Penn.
BRIAN G. MANION
Attorney, Beverly Hills, Calif.
DAVID A. MARCUS, D.D.S.
LAFAYETTE MARSH
Attny., Real Est., La Grange, Ill.
C. H. MARSHALL, JR., M.D.
Former Pres., Nat!. Medical Asso.
EDWARD A. MARSHALL, M.D.
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
LEO MAYER, M.D.
Orthopedic Surgeon, N.Y.C.
B. F. McLAURIN
Brotherhood of Sleeping Car
Porters, AFL-CIO
JAMES McNAMARA
United Hat, Cap & Millinery
Workers, AFL-CIO
FRANCIS J. McTERNAN
ROBERT S. MORRIS
Attorney, Los Angeles, California
DIXIV
51WALTER M. NELSON
HARRY K. NIER, JR.
Attorney, Denver, Colorado
RICHARD OTTINGER
Attorney, Dist. of Columbia
THOMAS QUINN
Bus. Agent .#BIO~ AFL-CIO~
OSCAR RADEMACHER
Attorney, Medford, Wisconsin
S. ROYREMAR
Attorney, Newton, Massachusetts
DEAN A. ROBB
Attorney-Civil Liberties Leader,
CATHERINE G. RORABACK
DR. SUMNER M. ROSEN
Rsch. Asso., Ind. Union Dept.,
AFL-CIO, Boston, Massachusetts
FRANK ROSENBLUM
Secty.-Treas., Amalgamated
Cloth. Wkrs. of Amer., AFL-CIO
HENRY W. SAWYER, III
DARBY N. SILVERBERG
Attorney, Torrance, California
BENJAMIN E. SMITH
OLIVIA PEARL STOKES, M.D.
CARL SUGAR, M.D.
Psychiatrist, Los Angeles, Calif.
JOHN E. THORNE
Attorney, San Jose, Calif.
DONALD E. TWITCHELL
BRUCE C. WALTZER
A. L. WIRIN
J. CLARENCE YOUNG
Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia
CAROLYN E. ALLEN
YWCA Exec., Ret., Mil., Wise.
KATHARINE M. ARNETT
Asso. Secty., Women’s IntI.
League for Peace & Freedom,
(W.I.L.P.F.) Philadelphia, Pa.
RALPH B. ATKINSON
WILLIAM V. BANKS
Supreme Grand Master, IntI.
Masons & Eastern Stars
JOSIAH BEEMAN
Pres., Calif. Fed. of Young Dem.
HON. ELMER A. BENSON
Former Gov. of Minnesota
MRS. JOHN C. BERESFORD
Secty., Fairfax County, Virginia
Council on Human Relations
ELIZABETH B. BOYDEN
CARL BRADEN
Field Organizer, Southern Conf.
Educational Fund, Inc.
DR. THOMAS N. BURBRIDGE
Pres., San Francisco NAACP
ALDEN B. CAMPEN
MRS. EDWARD C. CARTER
ELISABETH CHRISTMAN
ETHEL CLYDE
JOHN COLLIER, SR.
Former U.S. Commissioner of
SPENCER COXE
Civil Liberties Leader,
MRS. SYLVIA E. CRANE
Woods Hole, Massachusetts
EDWARD CRAWFORD
Chrm., N.Y. Council to Abolish
MARIAN W. DALGLISH
Chrm., Pittsburgh, Pa. W.I.L.P.F.
DR. JAMES A. DOMBROWSKI
Dir., Southern Conference
JOSEPHINE W. DUVENECK
PHYLLIS EDGECUMBE
CARRIE B. EDMONDSON
EDWINA E. FERGUSON
Corona del Mar, California
W.H.FERRY
Vice-Pres., Fund for the Republic
JAMES FORMAN
Dir., Student Non-Violent
HARVEY FURGATCH
La JoHa, California
RUTH GAGE-COLBY
Nat!. Bd., W.I.L.P.F.; Stamf., Conn.
MARCUS I. GOLDMAN
JOSEPHINE GOMON
Civil Liberties Leader, Det., Mich.
CHESTER A. GRAHAM
Former Reg. Dir., Friends
Committee on Legislation
ALFRED HASSLER
Ex. Sec. Fellowship of Recon.
ARLENE D. HAYS
BETTY HAYS
DR. EDWIN B. HENDERSON
NAACP Leader, Falls Church, Va.
FRANCES W. HERRING
Women for Peace, Berkeley, Cal.
MRS. R. V. INGERSOLL
MRS. FRED H. IRWIN
Vice-Pres, Cleveland Chapter
United Federalists
KATHLEEN L. JOHNSON
CORETTA KING
LANGSTON BEACH
Chrm., Student Non-Violent
MRS. CHARLES MADISON
Past Pres., Catholic Women’s Club
KATHERINE MARSHALL
Former Chrm., Cleveland Voice
of Women, Cleveland, Ohio
FRANCES B. McALLISTER
AVA HELEN PAULING
Vice-Pres., National Board,
W.I.L.P.F., Santa Barbara, Calif.
CLARENCE E. PICKETT
Exec. Dir. Emer., Amer. Friends
Servo Committee, Phila., Pat
HEDIPIEL
Dist. Ldr., Reform Dem. Club,
SIDNEY PINES
Chrm. Amer. Zionist Council
of Dallas
HON. JUSTINE WISE POLIER
Judge, New York City
SHADPOLiER
Pres., American Jewish Congo
MRS. THEODORE ROSEBURY
EDWIN A. SANDERS
Exee. Seety., Amer. Friends Servo
Com., Pac. S. W. Reg. Office
FRANCIS B. SAYRE
MARVIN SCHACTER
West Covina, California
Peace Action Center, Wash., D.C.
DR. BENJAMIN SEGAL
Pres. Phys. Chapt., Amer. Jewish
Cong., New York City, N.Y.
MARGARET T. SIMKIN
Los Angeles Board, W.I.L.P.F.
DR. GEORGE C. SIMKINS
Pres., Greensboro Branch, NAACP
ROBERT H. SOLLEN
Civil Liberties Leader:
HERBERT S. SOUTHGATE
NANCY P. STRAUS
A. BUEL TROWBRIDGE
WILLARD UPHAUS
Dir., World Fellowship, Inc.,
Conway, N.H.
CLARA M. VINCENT
Livonia, Mich. Ldr., W.I.L.P.F.
ROBERT S. VOGEL
Great Neck, N.Y.
EARL L. WALTER
Civil Rights Leader,
HON. J. WATIES WARING
Ret. Judge, New York City, N.Y.
Former Director, National Youth
Administration; Publisher,
The Southern Farmer
MRS. DAGMAR WILSON
Initiator, Women Strike for Peace
BEE R. WOLFE
Tacoma Park, Maryland
APPENDIX V
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, AMERICANS FOR
DEMOCRATIC ACTION, AS OF JANUARY 9, 1947
From Hearings before the House Select Committee on Lobbying Activities,
81st Congress., Second Session. Americans for Democratic Action. July 11,
12, 1950 (Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1950).
(Names with asterisk appear on the League for Industrial Democracy list.)
Alsop, Joseph, Washington, D.C.; columnist
Alsop, Stewart, Washington, D.C.; columnist
Altman, Jack, New York; executive vice president, United Retail,
Wholesale and Department Store Workers of America, CIO
Anderson, Douglas, Chicago; secretary-treasurer, United
Railroad Workers of America, CIO
Anderson, Eugenie, Minneapolis; chairman, Democratic-Farm-Labor
Party, First District, Minnesota; Ambassador to Denmark
Baldanzi, George, New York; executive vice president,
Textile Workers Union of America, CIO
* Bendiner, Robert, New York; associate editor, Nation; UDA Board
* Biemiller, Andrew, Milwaukee; Congressman
Bingham, Barry, Louisville; president, Louisville Courier-Journal
Blatt, Genevieve, Pittsburgh; chairman, Young Democrats of Pennsylvania
* Bohn, Dr. William, New York; editor, New Leader; UDA Board
Bowles, Chester, Essex, Conn.; Governor of Connecticut
Brandt, Evelyn, New York; Friends of Democracy
Brown, Andrew W., Detroit; Michigan Citizens Committee
Brown, Harvey M., New York; president, International
Association of Machinists; ECA Labor Chief
* Carey, James B., Washington, D.C.; secretary-treasurer, CIO
Carroll, John A., Denver; Congressman
Carter, Alison E., New York; executive secretary,
U.S. Students Assembly, UDA Board
Childs, Marquis, Washington, D.C.; columnist
Clifford, Jerry, Green Bay, Wis.
Crawford, Kenneth, Washington D.C.; associate editor, Newsweek
Cruikshank, Nelson, Washington, D.C.; director,
Social Security Activities, AFL, UDA Board
* Danish, Max, New York; editor, Justice; ILGWU
Davies, Dr. A. Powell, Washington, D.C.; clergyman, All
Souls’ Church and American Unitarian Association
Davis, Elmer, Washington, D.C.; radio commentator
Douds, Charles, Englewood, New Jersey; former regional
director, NLRB, New Jersey Progressive League
* Dubinsky, David, New York; president, ILGWU-AFL
Edelman, John, Washington, D.C.; legislative representative,
Textile Workers Union, CIO, Arrangements committee
* Edwards, George, Detroit; president, Detroit Common Council
Edwards, Margaret, Detroit; Michigan Citizens Committee, UDA Board
Ehle, Emily, Philadelphia, Pa.
Epstein, Ethel S., New York; labor arbiter, UDA Board
Ernst, Hugo, Cincinnati; president, Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union, AFL
* Ernst, Morris, New York; counsel, American Civil Liberties Union
Fedder, Herbert L., Baltimore; UDA Baltimore chapter representative
Feder, Michael Ernst, Wellesley; president, U.S. Student Assembly
* Fischer, Louis, New York; author, UDA Board
Fleischman, Bernard, Louisville; UDA Louisville chapter representative
Furstenberg, Dr. Frank, Baltimore; UDA Baltimore chapter representative
Galbraith, J. Kenneth, New York; Harvard professor; former
Deputy Director, OPA; Fortune
Gamow, Leo, Union City, N.J.; North Jersey Progressive League representative
Gilbert, Richard, Washington, D.C.; former Chief Economist, OPA
Ginsburg, David, Washington, D.C.; former General
Counsel, OPA, arrangements committee
Goldblum, A. P., Boston; Harvard Liberal Union, U.S. Student Assembly
Granger, Lester, New York; executive secretary, National Urban League
Green, John, Camden, N.J.; president, Indepent Union Marine
and Shipbuilding Workers, CIO
Greer, James, New York; Council for Democracy
Grogan, John J., Camden, N.J.; director of organization,
Independent Union Marine and Shipbuilding Workers, CIO
Harris, Louis, New York
Harrison, Gilbert, New York; executive vice chairman,
now president, American Veterans Committee
* Hayes, A. J., Washington, D.C.; vice
president, International Association of Machinists
Hays, Mortimer, New York; UDA Board
Haywood, Allan, Washington, D.C.; vice
president and director of organization, CIO
Hedgeman, Anna Arnold, Washington, D.C.
Henderson, Leon, Washington, D.C.
Higgins, Rev. George, Washington, D.C.;
National Catholic Welfare Conference
Hildreth, Melvin D., Washington, D.C.; General
Counsel, War Relief Control Board
Hoeber, Johannes U., Philadelphia, Pa.
Hoffman, Sal B., Philadelphia; president,
Upholsterers International Union
Holderman, Carl, Newark, N.J.; president, New
Jersey State Industrial Union Council, CIO
Holifield, Hon. Chet, Congressman from California
Hollander, Edward, Washington, D.C.; UDA
Chapter; arrangements committee
Hook, Frank, Ironwood, Mich.; former Congressman
Hudgens, Robert W., Washington,D.C.; former
Deputy Director, Farm Security Administration
Jackson, Gardner, Washington, D.C.; former
special assistant to Secretary of
Agriculture; arrangements committee
Johnson, Mrs. Clyde, Cincinnati; chairman,
Progressive Citizens Committee, UDA Board
Johnson, Morse, Cininnati; Progressive
Citizens Committee
Killen, James S., Washington, D.C.; vice
president, International Brotherhood of
Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers, AFL
Kerr, Chester, New York; Reynal & Hitchcock
Koppelmann, Herman, Hartford, Conn.; former Congressman
Kowal, Leon J., Boston, Mass.; representative,
Massachusetts Independent Voters Association
Kyne, Martin, New York; vice president, Retail,
Wholesale and. Department Store Workers, CIO
* Lash, Joseph P., New York; UDA Director,
New York City chapter; arrangements committee
* Lash, Trude Pratt, NewYork; UDA Board
Lerner, Leo, Chicago; chairman, Independent
Voters of Illinois, UDA Board
Levy, Mrs. Newman, New York; representative,
New York City chapter, UDA
* Lewis, Alfred Baker, Connecticut; UDA Board
Limbach, Mrs. Sarah, Pittsburgh;
Union for Progressive Action
Lindeman, Dr. Edward New York; president,
Loeb, James, Jr., Washington, D.C.; national
director, UDA: arrangements committee
McCulloch FranK., Chicago; vice chairman,
Independent Voters of Illinois;d irector,
Labor Education Division, Roosevelt College
* McDowell, A. G., Philadelphia; organization
director, Upholsterers International Union, AFL
McLaurin, B. F., New York; International
representative,Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, AFL
Messner, Eugene, New York; UDA Board
Montgomery, Don, Washington, D.C.: consumer
counsel, United Auto Workers, CIO
Mowrer. Edgar Ansel, Washington, D.C.; columnist
Munger, William L., New York; executive
secretary, United Hat, Cap and Millinery Workers, AFL
* Naftalin, Arthur, Minneapolis; secretary
to Mayor Hubert Humphrey
* Niebuhr, Dr. Reinhold, New York, chairman, UDA
Oxnam, Bishop G. Bromley, New York; retiring
president, Federal Council of Churches
Padover, Saul K., New York; PM
Panek, Nathalie E., Washington, D.C.; UDA
national office; arrangements committee
Phillips, Paul L., Albany, N.Y.; first vice president,
International Brotherhood of Papermakers, AFL
Pinchot, Cornelia Bryce, Washington; D.C.; UDA Board
* Porter, Paul A., Washington, D.C.; former OPA Director
Poynter, Nelson P., Washington, D.C.; publisher
Prichard, Edward F., Jr., Paris, Ky.;
former Deputy Director, OWMR
Rauh, Joseph, Jr., Washington, D.C.; former Deputy
Housing Administrator; arrangements comittee
Reinstein, Mrs. Florence, Pittsburgh;
* Reuther, Walter P., Detroit; president United
Auto Workers(UAW), CIO
Rieve, Emil, New York; president, Textile
Workers Union, CIO
* Roosevelt, Mrs. Franklin D., New York
Roosevelt, Franklin D., Jr. New York
Rosenberg, Marvin, New York; representative,
UDA, New York City chapter
Rosenblatt, Will, New York; UDA Board
Rowe, James H., Jr., Washington, D.C.; former
assistant to the President of the United States
Saltzman, Alex E., New York; UDA Board
Scarlett, Rt. Rev. William, St. Louis;
Episcopal Bishop of St. Louis
Schacter, Harry, Louisville, Ky.;
chairman, Committee for Kentucky
Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr., Washington, D.C.;
arrangements committee; professor, Harvard
Scholle, August, Detroit; president, Michigan
State Industrial Union Council, CIO
* Shishkin, Boris, Washington D.C.; economist,
AFL; USA Board, arrangements committee
Smith, Anthony Wayne, Washington, D.C.;
assistant director, Industrial Union
council, CIO; UDA member
Stapleton, Miss Laurence, Bryn Mawr, Pa.
Stokes, Thomas, Washington, D.C.; columnist
Taylor, Barney, Memphis; organization
director, National Farm Labor Union, AFL
Tilly, Mrs. M.E., Atlanta; Womens
Christian Services Committee, Methodist Church
Townsend, Willard S., Chicago; president,
Transport Service Employees; CIO
Tucker, John F. P., Washington, D.C.; USA
Turner, J. C., Washington, D.C.; business
agent, Operating Engineers, AFL; UDA chapter
* Voorhis, H. Jerry, California;
former Congressman
Weaver, George L. P., Washington D.C.; director,
Committee to Abolish Discrimination, CIO;
UDA Board, arrangements committee
*Wechsler, James, Washington, D.C.; New
York Post; arrangments comittee
Weyler, Edward, Louisville, Ky.; secretary
treasurer, Kentucky State Federation of Labor
White, Walter, New York; executive Secretary
National Assocation for the Advancement
of Colored People(NAACP)
Wolchok, Samuel, New York; president, Retail,
Wholesale and Department Store Employees, CIO
Wyatt, Wilson W., Louisville,
Ky.; former Housing Expediter
Young, Hortense, Louisville, Ky.;
UDA Louisville chapter
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC
ACTION, ADDENDA, JANUARY 22, 1947
Appleby, Paul H., Syracuse, N.Y.;
dean, School, Public Administration,
Berger,Clarence, Boston; Independent
Voters League
Boettiger, Mr. & Mrs. John, Phoenix,
Ariz.; publishers, Times
Brandt, Harry, New York; president,
Brandt Theaters
Carter, Hodding, Greenville, Miss.;
editor, Democratic Times
Cluck, Jack R., Seattle; chairman,
Progressive Citizens of Washington
Davis, William H, New York; wartime
chairman, National War Labor Board
* Douglas, Emily Taft, Chicago;
Congresswoman from Illinois
* Douglas, Paul, Chicago; professor,
University of Chicago; U.S. Senator
Erickson, Leif, Helena, Mont.; judge,
Graham, Dr. Frank, Chapel Hill,
N.C.; president, University of
North Carolina; U.S. Senator
Harrison, Marvin C., Cleveland;
attorney; Senatorial candidate
* Heimann, Dr. Edward, New York;
dean, Graduate Faculty, New
School for Social Research (NSSR)
Howell Charles R., Trenton, N.J.;
businessman; congressional
candidate, Congressman
Hoyt, Palmer, Denver; publisher of
Kuenzli, Irvin R., Chicago; secretary
treasurer, American Federation of
* Lehman, Herbert H., New York; former
Governor of New York; U.S. Senator
* Rogers, Will, Jr., Beverly Hills, Calif.
Smith, Louis P., Boston; treasurer,
Massachusetts Independent Voters League
Steinberg, Rabbi Milton, New York;
Park Ave. Synagogue
Sweetland, Monroe, Molalla, Oreg.;
publisher, Molalla Pioneer
Williams, Aubrey, Montgomery, Ala.;
Editor, Southern Farmer
Withers, William, New York; Chairman,
Division Social Sciences, Queens College
APPENDIX VI
Partial list of ADA members, past or present, in the Kennedy-Johnson
Administration between September, 1961 and June, 1962. (Los Angeles
Times, Washington Bureau. )
Aiken, (Mrs.) Jim G.
Congressional Liaison Officer
Baker, John A.
Belen, Frederic C.
Post Office Department-Operations Section
Bingham, Jonathan B.
U.S. Mission to the United Nations
Department of State-Special Adviser to the President
Cohen, Wilbur J.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare
Conway, Jack T.
Housing and Home Finance Agency
Coombs, Philip
Department of State-Assistant Secretary
Cox, Archibald
Docking, George
Export-Import Bank
Donahue, Charles
Department of Labor-Solicitor
Elman, Philip
Finletter, Thomas K.
Department of State-Special Missions
Freeman, Orville
Secretary of Agriculture
Fowler, Henry H.
Under Secretary of the Treasury
Galbraith, John K.
Ambassador to India
Goldberg, Arthur J.
Secretary of Labor
Lewis, Robert G
Commodity Credit Corporation-Department of
Loeb, James Jr.
Ambassador to Peru
Louchheim, Katie
McCulloch, Frank W.
Chairman-National Labor Relations Board
Morgan, Howard
Federal Power Commission
Murphy, Charles
Department of Agriculture-Commodity Credit
Peterson, Esther
Assistant Secretary of Labor
Reeves, Frank D.
Commissioner, D.C. (Withdrawn)
Ribicoff, Abraham A.
Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare
Schlesinger, Arthur, Jr.
Assistant to the President
Sorensen, Theodore
* Stevenson, Adlai
Special Missions, United Nations
(Denied Membership in ADA)
Stoddard, Charles S.
Taylor, William L.
Civil Rights Commissions
Weaver, George L. P.
International Labor Affairs-Department of Labor
Weaver, Robert C.
Wofford, Harrison
Special Assistant to the President
Woolner, Sidney
* Associated with Independent Voters of Illinois, an ADA affiliate.
Epilogue <<
Epilogue for the book Fabian Freeway.
Sweet are the uses and perquisites of political office, even for those who declare their sole aim is to free humanity from its age-old burden of misery. In America, Hubert Humphrey, whose heart bleeds publicly for the poor of all nations, finds a $750,000 tax free mansion ordered for his vice presidential comfort by an ADA-controlled majority in the Congress. In Britain, Harold Wilson coolly invites the leaders of Socialist parties from fourteen countries, many like himself already holding top government posts, to meet at Chequers, traditional country home of British prime ministers.
With unintentional humor British newspapers hailed that event as a diplomatic coup—as if Harold Wilson, sometimes accompanied by Hubert Humphrey, had not been meeting on the Continent with the same Socialist leaders for years. Recognizing the revolutionary import of the new locale, Socialist International Information for May, 1965 headlined the conference “Socialist Summit at Chequers.” Even the usually conservative Times of London commented in a leading article on April 26,1965, “If Western Europe is to be led by Socialists, that may prove to have been a very useful beginning.”
As international Socialism, open or disguised, moves steadily into positions of power, its chief spokesmen and political agents present an increasingly bland front to the world. This phenomenon was noted by Zigmunt Zaremba, chairman-in-exile of the Socialist Union of Eastern Europe and a Socialist member of the Polish Parliament before World War II. Attending the Eighth Congress of the Socialist International at Amsterdam in 1963, he reported that “eminent party leaders, one after another, came to the rostrum to express, most cautiously, their parties’ attitude toward important political questions, carefully skirting those questions which were ‘premature.'”
“The Congress,” wrote Zaremba in an article reprinted in the U.S. Socialist quarterly, New Politics (Winter, 1964), “was clearly a gathering of those who held high office in their countries and those who hoped to do so shortly.” (1) And he went on to say:
“Only those questions on which there was already a consensus were brought to the floor for discussion and decision. These included disarmament and aid to the underdeveloped countries. Minor resolutions on France, Spain Russian anti-Semitism, racism and civil rights struggles in the USA, and imprisonment of Socialist leaders by Communist-bloc countries were passed unanimously.
“But behind the facade a whole series of questions was heatedly discussed. From the platform, only Guy Mollet [chairman of the French Socialist Party] touched on the question of the relationship of socialist and Communist movements in the present period. Behind the scenes, however, this question was the central issue of the discussions of the Central European Study Group and the Socialist Union of Eastern Europe.”
For Socialist leaders, using the machinery of universal suffrage to gain and hold political power, special caution appears to be indicated as they round the bend heading toward an international federation of Socialist states. Because deep-rooted sentiments of patriotism, national honor and personal independence still animate a great many voters in a great many countries, every effort must be made by international Socialists to obscure the fact that the political and economic bases for such sentiments are being obliterated as rapidly as possible.
Just as a majority of citizens in the later Roman Empire never realized the Empire had fallen, because the outward forms of imperial government persisted several centuries longer; so the peoples of the so-called Free World are not to be made aware that their world is becoming progressively less free. “Socialism is about equality and freedom,” insists Peter Townsend, chairman of the Fabian Society for 1965-66. (2) But George Bernard Shaw knew better. He knew the role that coercion must play in any Socialist scheme of things, and perhaps Peter Townsend does, too.
Meanwhile, whole populations are being conditioned to regard Socialist norms as normal, in preparation for a day when the leaders may more openly reveal their hands. Practical acceptance of many Socialist programs has been obtained, for the most part, by making shrewdly calculated appeals to the immediate interests of key groups and individuals, appeals which are invariably swathed in high humanitarian phrases. By now this technique has reached a point at which as one cynic observed, humanitarianism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.
Particularly in England and the United States where the public is indifferent to ideology, the psychological approach is used, as was suggested long ago by the British Fabian, Graham Wallas, in his book The Great Society. Developed in depth over the years by Fabian-inspired researchers, that method has been graded and refined with a view to reaching every level of modern society—labor, business, the professions, the bureaucracy, senior citizens, career-minded youth, even pre-school children. It calls for the permeation of colleges, universities, and religious seminaries by Fabian Socialist-oriented educators and administrators, as well as the introduction of uniform “standards” and “guidelines” into federally financed educational systems. For total effect, it requires total control of communications and entertainment media, a state of affairs already in being, if not in full force.
The professor is still the main channel through which the Fabian Socialist outlook percolates to society at large. As the venerable Walter Lippmann said, in a keynote speech opening “The University in America” Convocation at Los Angeles in May, 1966: “Professors have become in the modem world the best available source of guidance and authority in the field of knowledge . . . There is no other court to which men can turn and find what they once found in tradition and custom. Because modern man in his search for truth has turned away from kings, priests, commissars and bureaucrats, he is left, for better or worse, with the professor.” (3) The gathering which Lippmann addressed that night included some 1,500 persons, among them presidents, deans and faculty members as well as bright students of the leading American universities. It was sponsored and steered by the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions—offshoot of an offshoot of the Ford Foundation whose president was Professor McGeorge Bundy, former instructor and guide of American Presidents.
So the long-range plan, artlessly set in motion by a little group of serious thinkers meeting at 17 Osnaburgh Street, London, more than eighty years before and patiently pursued by three generations of respectable Fabian Socialists, moved smoothly toward its destined conclusion. With the clear-cut victory of the Fabian-led Labour Party in the 1966 British elections and the repeated success of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration in pushing one welfare state measure after another through the United States Congress, official cooperation between the two major English-speaking nations for the advancement of Socialism promised to reach new heights. The irony of it was, that as the de facto policies and actions of the heads of state leaned more and more strongly to the Left, their personal reputation for moderation soared.
Although Prime Minister Wilson’s new government contained an even larger percentage of identifiable Fabians than before, (4) he was nearly always described in the general press as a right wing Socialist —really, hardly radical at all. Those hard-core Fabian Socialists who filled the Cabinet and the junior Ministries to the exclusion of simple Labourites presumably served as a kind of Loyal Opposition within the government they operated.
As if to confuse the picture still more, Peter Townsend’s New Year’s Message to the Society had warned the Wilson government against giving an impression of being bogged down by short-term problems at the expense of long-range Socialist objectives. He told Fabians that “they will serve the Government far better as demanding, if sympathetic, critics than as captive apologists.” (5) Since it would be decidedly awkward for members of the Government to take such a stand, one must infer that the chairman’s message was addressed to rank-and-file Fabians in private life. They were urged to bring pressure on their coy leaders to do what the latter eagerly desired but preferred to do as though yielding to popular demand.
On the other side of the Atlantic, President Johnson fathered a whole flock of legislative acts, from Civil Rights to Federal-Aid-to-Education to Medicare, acts which had been plugged for years in both ADA and Socialist Party platforms. He pushed Keynesian-type deficit spending to breathtaking altitudes, and talked of extending the anti-poverty war—by then, costing well over one billion dollars a year at home—to the farthest corners of the earth. In matters of foreign trade and nuclear disarmament he offered fresh concessions to the Soviet bloc; while his alternately hot-and-cold Asian policy aided Moscow in its acrid and often deceptive dialogue with the Chinese Reds. Meanwhile, the “dialogue,” blown up, by Leftist propaganda, to the stature of a “split,” was something from which naive freemen could extract passing comfort.
In a paternal mood, Johnson even commended the United Nations Children’s Fund for having transformed Halloween into “a program of basic training in world citizenship.”(6) And yet Johnson was consistently referred to in the public prints as a moderate with conservative leanings, who basked in the support of the business community.
It is true that a select number of business executives had come to accept the Administration’s post-Keynesian economics, in somewhat the same spirit as the New England transcendentalist, Margaret Fuller, once announced, “I accept the Universe!” Their conversion was due in part to the good offices of the Committee for Economic Development—an admitted affiliate of London’s Fabian-inspired PEP (Political and Economic Planning), which now operated on a world-wide scale to secure the cooperation of management during the current period of peaceful transition to Socialism. Not unnaturally, such business leaders enjoyed Administration favor, and reciprocated with favors of their own in campaign season.
This did not deter LBJ, however, from attempting to shift the blame for looming inflation, provoked by his Administration’s prodigality, on his “friends” of the business community. Sternly the President told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that if businessmen failed to keep rising prices down, they must expect to pay higher wages and higher taxes. It was the smoothest propaganda trick of a political year!
If in some respects, the President taxed the tolerance of his business supporters, his martial gestures in Vietnam proved no less a trial to his backers of the ADA. But they, too, remained sympathetic critics of LBJ, giving him credit for services rendered on the domestic front. In voting at their 1966 convention to disapprove the Administration’s military policy in Vietnam, Americans for Democratic Action denounced the sin while continuing to love the sinner.
No one attending that convention and hearing Vice President Humphrey’s pained defense of the Government’s Vietnam policy doubted that he was really suffering, or failed to interpret his speech as a sacrifice on the altar of political necessity. Behind the scenes, it might well have been pointed out that two of the very same officials who had provoked the Korean War and then maneuvered it to a stalemate were once more directing U.S. Asian policy: Dean Acheson and Dean Rusk. Surely their skills could be relied upon to avert an American victory in Vietnam, if only by the simple device of sending too many troops to the scene and keeping military hardware in short supply.
Had not Rusk already intimated that a happy end-result of the bloodshed in Vietnam could be the eventual recognition of Red China, an event long and earnestly desired by the Fabian-begotten ADA? Although Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. gallantly volunteered to supplant Secretary Rusk as a presidential adviser, his offer was interpreted as a bit of high-level buffoonery—possibly designed to remind fellow-Fabians that any man is replaceable, if not expendable. Whether one graduate or another of the British Fabians’ finishing school process was in charge, in the long run it made little difference, except perhaps to the individuals concerned.
Meanwhile Rhodes Scholars still manned the international ramparts in Washington. Walt Whitman Rostow of MIT’s Center for International Studies (reputed to have been started with $300,000 worth of CIA money) was back at the White House again. Harlan Cleveland held forth as U.S. Ambassador to NATO. On the home front Nicholas deBelleville Katzenbach—who married a daughter of the Phelps Stokes clan, one of the founding families of the Fabian Socialist movement in America—had moved up to first place at the Department of Justice.
Like those other old Oxonians with whom he conferred from time to time in Washington, Britain’s Prime Minister Harold Wilson claimed to support U.S. policy in Vietnam. But it hardly seemed more than lip service, in view of the fact that British merchant vessels docked regularly in North Vietnam ports and British companies engaged in trade with Hanoi. Though the Wilson government procured United Nations authority for the British Navy to seize and search ships on the high seas which were bound for Rhodesia, this privilege was not expected to apply to the Southeast Asian trade.
From the first, Harold Wilson appeared to favor negotiation as a means of ending the Vietnam conflict. His initial peace-feeler took the form of a visit to Hanoi by Harold Davies, M.P., a minor official in the Wilson government. Davies was an admirer of President Ho Chi Minh, who as far back as 1924 declared at a Communist International Congress, “I am a French colonial and a member of the French Communist Party.” (7) On the same occasion Uncle Ho, falsely represented today in Leftist propaganda as leading a national independence movement like George Washington, stated plainly:
“According to Lenin, the victory of the revolution in Western Europe depended on its close contact with the liberation movement against imperialism in enslaved countries and with the national question, both of which form a part of the common problem of the proletarian movement and dictatorship.” (8)
Since those remarks were republished in Hanoi as recently as 1960, there is no reason to believe Ho Chi Minh has changed his stripes from that day to this.
Harold Davies, M.P. could look forward to a warm personal welcome in Hanoi, having written an enthusiastic article about the Northern Republic which appeared in the Left Wing French publication, Horizons, for December, 1957. It was quoted three years later in a little giveaway volume issued by Hanoi’s Foreign Languages Publishing House and rather confusingly entitled The Democratic Republic of Viet Nam, 1945-1960: Impressions of Foreigners (p. 63). When his unofficial peace mission produced no visible results, Davies quietly returned to his post as parliamentary secretary to the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance in London.(9)
So the question of the relationship between the Socialist and Communist movements in the present day—a question that only Guy Mollet of the French Socialist Party had ventured to broach publicly —becomes meaningful for Americans. While on the surface that relationship seems variable enough, its true nature and extent is still one of the best kept secrets of two highly secretive world organizations. Any public statements on the subject by leaders of the twin Internationals may be dismissed as inevitably misleading. Any inferences must be drawn from the facts of history itself, which records again and again the peculiarly protective attitude of the Socialists toward the Communist bloc nations and their agents and the great degree of sustained collaboration.
The Socialist and Communist world movements are like the two faces of a coin—not identical, yet inseparable. Sometimes one side appears uppermost, sometimes the other; but at the core they are still one. Which side of this counterfeit coin might face up at a given time, probably depends upon the circumstances of the moment. It is, of course, to the interest of every man, woman and child in America, desiring personal liberty in a free and sovereign nation, that the fraudulent nature of this coin be recognized and exposed so that we may be forever spared the necessity of making such a spurious choice.
One by one, the costliest and most highly prized nuclear secrets of the United States, on which the peace and safety of the whole Free World depend, have been delivered to the Soviet military clique, as a result of the consistently permissive temper of British and American Fabian Socialists toward Communist activists. Published hearings of the Subcommittee on Internal Security of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary demonstrate that today, as in the age of Roosevelt, the most elementary security precautions have been scrapped by a Fabian-dominated Administration indisposed to keep Communist operatives from entering the country or to deny them the privileges accorded to loyal American citizens.
At the popular level, it is evident that something resembling the United Front movement of the pre-World War II years has been revived, to exert pressure on Socialist-oriented governments in matters of peace and disarmament. How broad this movement is may be gathered from an International Peace/Disarmament Directory compiled in 1962 by one Lloyd Wilkie of Yellow Springs, Ohio. Without claiming to include the names and addresses of all organizations working in one way or another for “peace,” it lists more than six hundred groups and subgroups throughout the world and more than one hundred periodicals. They include academic, scientific, religious and merely agitational groups, ranging from end to end of the political spectrum.
Of course, the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom—founded long ago by the Chicago Socialist Jane Addams and conveniently used as a cover by illegal U.S. Communists in the nineteen-twenties—is there with all its branches. The Council on Foreign Relations is listed, as well as its opposite number in Britain, The Royal Institute of International Affairs. Both the Communist and Socialist Parties USA are named, as well as the ADA; but the two major American political parties are slighted. The Catholic Worker is cited, but the Vatican’s peace efforts are discreetly overlooked.
The author explains he has played no favorites, and suggests that the inquiring reader learn the various shades of difference for himself, by getting in touch with as many of these groups and periodicals as he sees fit. To a casual observer, it is instructive to note how many of the national peace movements in foreign countries are affiliated with the World Council of Peace, chaired in 1962 by Professor J. D. Bernal, 94 Charlotte Street, London W-1. Even to reach the chairman of the Soviet Peace Committee, N. Tikhonov, whose local address was not available at press time, one was referred to the World Council of Peace in London.
While peace is undoubtedly wonderful, the motives of those who organize so-called peace movements and peace demonstrations of varied degrees of violence, are often suspect. In the past as in the present, pacifist groups have been used at critical moments to promote defeatism and to paralyze a nation’s will to defend itself. One of the more striking historical examples was the so-called Bonnet Rouge Conspiracy, in which French Socialists participated during World War I, and which led one French regiment after another to lay down its arms in the face of an advancing enemy.
In the present atomic era the chief effort of international peace and disarmament groups seems to be directed at inducing the United States to renounce its role as an atomic power, thereby leaving the Soviet Union supreme in the field. One can only speculate as to how far the veiled disarmament propaganda, purveyed by such high-level Fabian-inspired agencies as the Council on Foreign Relations and the American Assembly, influenced the nuclear pause proclaimed in 1961 by President Kennedy; or the decision of Secretary McNamara in 1964 to cancel the nuclear strategy of NATO without consulting his European Allies. In the final analysis, World Government under Socialist rulers becomes the pacific sea toward which all tributary movements flow.
With the end so nearly achieved, it seems more than ever unfair that the American people should not be permitted to know the identity of their betrayers. In almost every other country of the Free World, Socialism operates openly as a political party, and frequently is the ruling party. Here in America both the Socialist Party and the Socialist Labor Party are small and weak, and merely serve to delude the public into believing there is little to fear from that quarter. Yet the unseen and unacknowledged Fabian Socialist movement, whose American practitioners call themselves liberals or progressives, has access in the United States to greater sources of wealth and power than anywhere else on earth. It has penetrated multi-billion dollar tax free foundations, and manipulates the U.S. Treasury itself. Precisely because its leaders are not known for what they are, they occupy a great many key posts in government today and act invisibly in union with alien masterminds to dissolve the strength and substance of this nation.
Though the situation is acutely dangerous for a land that was liberty’s true home, it is not necessarily hopeless. The answer was supplied by a relatively unschooled American, General Andrew Jackson, who fought in his own day to make America free and great. Perhaps it is only a legend, unknown to such sophisticated scholars as Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., but it became a tradition among professional military men of an earlier era.
Just before the Battle of New Orleans, we are told, an unusually dense fog descended on the fields outside the city, where General Jackson’s army was to make its stand. As he rode out to inspect his ill-equipped troops, a young soldier spoke up.
“But General, sir,” said the boy, “how can I fight and defend myself against an enemy I can’t see?”
“Sooner or later, your enemy will show himself,” replied the General, “and you will know what to do.” Then, looking upward a moment as if for guidance, he added: “And in your future life, if you survive this—and by God, you will!—you will be confronted by many unseen enemies of your hard-fought liberty. But they will show themselves in time—time enough to destroy them.”
1. Italics added, then removed.
2. “Chairman’s Message,” Fabian News (January, 1966). (The author of that Message is not the same Peter Townsend who was once Princess Margaret’s suitor.)
3. Los Angeles Times (May 8, 1966).
4. Fabian News (April-May, 1966), announced there were 28 new Fabian Members of Parliament, and again printed a list of Labour Government appointments which identified present, though not past, members of the Fabian Society. It also listed, under the heading “New Fabian Appointments,” the following:
Dick Marsh, a former member of the Executive Committee and an active member, of the Society’s Trade Union Group, becomes the youngest member of the Cabinet at 38.
Eirene White, a former Chairman of the Society becomes the first woman Foreign Office Minister.
George Thomson, former chairman of the “Venture” Editorial Board, Summer School Director, etc., has been appointed Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with special responsibility for political negotiations for the entry of the country into the Common Market.
Reg Prentice, another former member of the Executive Committee has become Minister of Works.
5. Fabian News (January, 1966).
6. Congressional Record (March 7, 1966), p. 4829.
7. “Report on the National and Colonial Questions at the Fifth Congress of the Communist International,” Selected Works of Ho Chi Minh (Hanoi, Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1960), Vol. I, p. 143.
8. Ibid., pp. 143-144.
9. Davies’ name appears in this connection on the Government appointments lists released by the British Information Service as I. D. 702 (November, 1964 and April, 1966).
Chapter 21 << | >> Appendices
Posted on December 9, 2012 by progressingamerica
Chapter 21 of the book Fabian Freeway.
The 1960 election campaign in the United States marked the first successful attempt of Left liberals, by then firmly lodged in the Democratic Party organization throughout the country, to regain such unobstructed access to the power of the Presidency as they enjoyed in the Roosevelt era.(1) That, after all, was an initial reason for founding Americans for Democratic Action, as some of its best friends have pointed out.
Three choices were offered in the Democratic primaries, with Adlai Stevenson a sentimental fourth, although he seemed to have little serious desire to run again in the grand national handicap. It looked like a genuine horse race for the nomination; but in retrospect is discovered to have been what sports fans call a “boat race.” No matter which of the aspirants won, ADA would collect on the ticket. Even Lyndon Johnson, billed as the white hope of southern conservatives, had in fact been sired by the New Deal. Moreover, there were enough fiscal and electioneering irregularities in his background to guarantee his docility in the unlikely event that he gained the 1960 Presidential nomination.
Supposedly, a primary in the United States is wholly the personal affair of the candidates, with the party organizations coming into play only after the nomination has been made. Since ADA was not a political party, however, but merely a fraction within the Democratic Party, it appears to have acted from the start to control the selection of the nominees.
In the primary race, Senators Hubert Humphrey and John F. Kennedy ran as an entry, with the former serving as the unwitting pacemaker. Both were led to the post by trusty ADA grooms. David C. Williams took leave from the ADA World to write his friend Humphreys campaign speeches, insuring their impeccable Fabian Socialist color. Senator Kennedy, generally considered an “outsider,” had a larger and more vigilant stable crew. It numbered at least three ADA founders: Gardner (Pat) Jackson, an old New Dealer hired for young Kennedy by his father; Monroe Sweetland, of the League for Industrial Democracy; and that improper Bostonian, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.
At a later date this circle was enlarged to include another ADA founder, the Canadian-born Professor J. Kenneth Galbraith, an authority on the evils of affluence; the socially acceptable Paul Nitze, an adviser on military policy and the nonexistent missile gap; and Littauer Professor Seymour E. Harris, grand master of the mysteries of Keynesian economics and finance. Harris was also the co-author of an ADA-sponsored pamphlet on Medicare, and in 1962 would produce a study on the costs of higher education, which he judged should exceed 9.2 billion dollars annually by 1969-70.(2)
Meanwhile former Student ADA-ers Theodore Sorenson and Larry O’Brien served as leg-men and exercise boys, recruiting swarms of crisp, crew cut assistants for every local headquarters. A well-schooled ADA member, Professor James MacGregor Burns of Williams—who had taken a special course of study at the London School of Economics (3) in 1949—was to write Kennedy’s official campaign biography. Despite his own and his family’s great wealth, Senator Kennedy did
not possess enough intra-Party strength of his own to afford the luxury of independence.
In the Wisconsin and West Virginia primary sprints Hubert Humphrey forced his younger rival, John F. Kennedy (not previously known for any consistent political philosophy) to equal and outstrip him in liberal sentiments. While Humphrey’s campaign was brief and afflicted by money troubles, apparently he was not informed in advance of his peacemaking role: he desperately wanted to be President. At the Democratic National Convention—with tears in his eyes, for he tended to weep like a child under stress—Humphrey was finally persuaded by Joseph Rauh, Jr. to throw his support to Kennedy. As a consolation prize Hubert would be made Democratic whip of the Senate and permitted to name his former assistant, Orville Freeman, Secretary of Agriculture in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration.
A reliable tip on the primary results was volunteered, as early as March, 1960, by the knowing Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. To a sympathetic newspaperman, James Reston, he confided: “Nostalgically I am for Stevenson; ideologically I am for Humphrey; but realistically I am for Kennedy.” From the moment the Democratic Convention opened in Los Angeles, it was clear to all but the most unrealistic observers that Kennedy was the predestined winner.
Despite his youth and less than distinguished performance in the Senate, he had many points to recommend him to a star-struck electorate. John F. Kennedy had the clean-cut, photogenic good looks of a motion picture hero, in addition to charm and breeding. In World War II he had served with the Navy’s daredevil torpedo boat fleet in the Pacific and suffered enduring wounds. Having produced several best-selling books, he was considered an author and presumably an intellectual; yet he was actively interested in sports. Moreover, he had a devoted family, able and willing to spend an unlimited amount of money to put one of its sons in the White House. All this, and heaven, too: Kennedy was certain he could deliver the Catholic vote. (4)
With his family and religious background, who would ever believe John F. Kennedy was committed before his nomination to carrying out a Fabian Socialist program? Even Left liberals were incredulous. Did not Pope Pius XI declare in 1931: “No man can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true Socialist?” (5) At the Los Angeles Convention Joseph-Rauh, Jr., known as Walter Reuther’s man, had some difficulty inducing bewildered ADA purists to cast their votes for Kennedy.
Rauh said he believed Kennedy to be a liberal, (6) and doubtless he had reasons. As ADA’s key man on the platform committee, Rauh knew very well that the Democratic Party’s radical platform was written months before the National Convention. By April, 1960, Kennedy had an opportunity to see it in nearly final form.(7) Far from objecting to its contents, Kennedy told Rauh that he wanted above all things to campaign on a liberal platform. (8) What else may have been said at the time is not reported. One thing, however, is sure. To win the affirmative backing of ADA’s top brain trusters and of left wing union leaders trained to drive hard bargains—and through these, to gain the practical support of the Democratic Party organization—substantial assurances were required.
Perhaps the sharpest opposition to Kennedy within ADA came from its honorary president, Eleanor Roosevelt. Apparently, she nursed some resentment both on ideological and personal grounds against his father, former Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy. Eleanor Roosevelt’s chief reason, however, for mistrusting Senator Kennedy was his failure to have taken a stand against Senator Joseph McCarthy, bane of orthodox Left liberals and Communists in the fifties. From 1948, McCarthy had carried on what seemed at times to be a one-man campaign to alert the country to the dangers of Communist infiltration in government. In the process, he seriously alarmed Fabian Socialists who feared they might be the next to be exposed.(9)
Americans for Democratic Action waged a tireless vendetta against McCarthy through every medium at its command, even publishing and selling thousands of copies of a Senate Subcommittee report on the Senator’s personal finances.(10) In Britain the New Statesman and other Fabian Socialist-edited journals expressed shocked indignation at that man from Wisconsin who, according to them, was imperiling the American Bill of Rights—a document for which foreign as well as home-grown leftists often profess a touching concern. The agitation in educated circles on both sides of the Atlantic culminated in a resolution of censure against McCarthy by the U.S. Senate. ADA claimed and still claims today to have been primarily responsible for that propaganda coup. If so, it was surely one of the strangest cases of political lobbying in congressional history. Analysis suggests that the Senate’s 1954 resolution against McCarthy was im the nature of a test vote, demonstrating ADA’s dominance in the Democratic Party organization as well as its influence on liberal Republicans.
As a young congressman, Kennedy had originally represented a working-class district in Boston made up almost entirely of Irish Catholic voters. They abhorred Communism and idolized McCarthy, Republican though he was. In those days, Kennedy was outspokenly anti-Communist in foreign affairs; but voted affirmatively with the liberals on Federal spending and labor bills affecting his constituents. His father’s hail-fellow-well-met friendship with McCarthy was a distinct asset to Kennedy in Massachusetts. To some degree, John F. Kennedy owed his own election as Senator in 1952 to McCarthy, who failed to go to Massachusetts that year and campaign for Kennedy’s Republican opponent, Henry Cabot Lodge.
When the resolution to censure McCarthy came up two years later in the Senate, Kennedy’s voice was not heard. Being hospitalized at the time, he could not be present—though he could, of course, have paired his vote. For this McCarthy’s friends never forgave Kennedy, and neither did aggravated liberals like Eleanor Roosevelt. After his Pulitzer Prize winning book, Profiles in Courage, appeared in 1956, Eleanor Roosevelt is said to have commented that “Mr. Kennedy should show more courage and less profile”—an unkind reference to the rumor that the Kennedy nose, broken years before in football, had been quietly remodeled by plastic surgery during his long stay in the hospital.
Sensitive as he was to criticism, somehow it was the barbs from the Left that disturbed him most. “What did they want me to do, commit hara-kiri?” he asked a reporter. Apparently, the more practical politicians in ADA realized it would have meant political suicide in Massachusetts for Kennedy to speak out against McCarthy, and accepted his neutrality as a mark of deference to their side. Though Kennedy had been quoted in 1953 by the Saturday Evening Post as saying of Americans for Democratic Action, “I don’t feel comfortable with those people,” as time went on he learned to suffer them more gladly. In part, his increased cordiality seems to have been due to the discreet efforts of his aides, Theodore Sorenson and Lawrence O’Brien; in part, to his own discovery that ADA held the whip hand in the Democratic Party.
That uncomfortable fact was impressed upon Kennedy in 1956, when he tried and failed to win the Democratic nomination for the Vice Presidency. It was a fact to be seriously considered by a young man in a hurry, whose fond parents, brothers and sisters quite literally expected him to become President of the United States. In token of his improving relations with the liberal Left, the New Leader for May 18, 1957, printed a well-advertised book review by Senator John F. Kennedy. It gave favorable notice to a liberally slanted history of the U.S. Senate, written by a political commentator who later became an ardent apologist for the Kennedy-Johnson Administration.(11)
In September, 1959, when Kennedy had already begun to look like a serious Presidential contender, Allen Taylor, director of the New York State ADA, thoughtfully sent Ted Sorenson a long memorandum entitled, “Liberals’ Doubts About Kennedy, and How to Handle Them.” (12) Evidently Kennedy learned how; and it was a costly lesson. Not all the Kennedy family wealth, estimated at several hundred millions, could have paid for it. The price was his personal independence.
On January 20,1961, John F. Kennedy was sworn in as the thirty-fifth President of the United States. He had achieved the heights; but he had done so by one of the slimmest popular margins ever claimed for a victorious candidate, a mere 119,000 votes, in an election still regarded as doubtful by sober historians. Kennedy’s inaugural speech, for which he is perhaps best remembered, summoned the United States to “a long twilit struggle . . . against the common enemies of mankind . . . tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.” Surely a noble sentiment, if pursued by Constitutional means and without destruction of the country’s internal order, or national sovereignty.
Fired by the drama of the occasion and the beauty of the youthful President’s rhetoric, few listeners asked by what means that global struggle would be waged. As months went by, the inference deepened that anyone who ventured to question the methods and underlying aims of the new Administration was a cold-blooded advocate of tyranny, poverty, disease and war. The questioners have now been silenced by the tragic circumstance that John F. Kennedy was assassinated less than three years after becoming President. Apparently he was shot by a young assassin from the ranks of the Far Left whose motives and connections have not yet been fully explained.
Exploiting the natural grief of JFK’s widow and relatives, as well as the emotions of a shocked American public, the same Left liberal clique that helped put Kennedy in the White House endowed him with a halo of martyrdom. For month after month leading to the national elections of 1964, every form of heart-appeal that could be devised by Fabian experts in mass psychology was utilized to keep sorrowing voters faithful to the Party of JFK. The same elite corps of Left liberal intellectuals, who had surrounded him as President, now sought to perpetuate themselves or their alternates in power by perpetuating the memory of John K. Kennedy—not quite as he was, but as a golden memory. De mortuis nil nisi bonum. During the last years of his short but crowded lifetime, John F. Kennedy was sometimes compared by informed observers to Britain’s leading Catholic Fabian, Lord Francis Pakenham. Both were Christian gentlemen of inherited wealth, secure social position and Gaelic antecedents—although Pakenham came from a long line of Anglo-Irish landlords, and Kennedy from Irish peasant stock. Both had style, grace and good manners, though, of the two, Kennedy was far better looking. They were frankly but not crudely ambitious. While they might normally have been expected to find their habitat in conservative politics, both found they could go farther faster by allying themselves with the Fabian Socialist movement.
Pakenham became a convinced Marxist by joining the Oxford City Labour Party of the middle thirties where, as he has said, the name of Marx was on the tongue of every student and don.(13) Kenney absorbed the Keynesian outlook almost imperceptibly at Harvard College–after some desultory training at the London School of Economics, which his biographers usually took pains to minimize. Yet both were prominent Catholic laymen, Kennedy by birth and Pakenham by conversion. Neither seemed to perceive any conflict between the exercise of Catholic piety and the aims of international Socialism; even though one Papal Encyclical after another has affirmed that the right to own productive property and enjoy its fruits is among the natural rights of mankind. Both were adroit, quick-witted but not serious thinkers, and depended on others for ideas.
At the request of the Fabian Socialist Prime Minister, Clement Attlee, Pakenham was made a peer, Lord-in-Waiting and Privy Councillor, so that he could aid the Labour Party in the House of Lords. On being elevated to his new estate, he was received by the monarch, King George VI. It was a curious and moving encounter, the significance of which somehow escaped Lord Pakenham. He has told how the King looked at him long and penetratingly, and after a pause said suddenly: “Why did you . . . join them?” (14) The same question might have been asked about John F. Kennedy.
Historically, the Kennedy-Johnson Administration took office pledged to the most outspokenly radical program ever sponsored by an old-line political party in the United States. For publicity purposes the Administration was known as the New Frontier. The label was mystifying as applied to a casually elegant young man from Massachusetts, whose entourage was heavily weighted with doctors of philosophy from the Ivy League universities. Hardly anyone—except the oldest New Dealers, and a few scholars in the Anglo-American section of Fabian Research—remembered that the Progressive left-winger, Henry Wallace, once wrote a book called New Frontiers.
Published in 1934, New Frontiers restated in glowing terms the philosophy and objectives of the New Deal, where—as the veteran Fabian Socialist, Harry Laidler has affirmed—one Socialist demand after another was gratified. “We need now,” wrote Wallace, “to re-define property rights in a way that will fairly meet the realities of today.” (15) Americans, he said, must abandon the frugality, competitive spirit and individualism of the Old Frontier, where men, “whether Protestant or Catholic, accepted implicitly the Protestant ethic.” (16)
On the New Frontier to come, Wallace said, “socially disciplined” men will work cooperatively to increase the wealth of the human race and apply their inventive skill to changing society itself. They will modify the governmental and political machinery, as well as the monetary and price system, to achieve “a far wider possibility of social justice and social charity” in the world. “So enlisted,” wrote Wallace, “men may rightfully feel that they are serving a function as high as any minister of the Gospel. They will not be Communists, Socialists or Fascists, but plain men trying to gain by democratic methods the professed objectives of Communists, Socialists or Fascists….”(17) Whatever its name, the imaginary New Frontier described by Henry Wallace sounded very much like old-fashioned Fabian Socialism.
There were at least two old New Dealers on Kennedy’s campaign staff, Gardner Jackson and Monroe Sweetland, who had worked in the Department of Agriculture under Wallace and shared many of his views. Undoubtedly, they remembered his “vision” of the New Frontier. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., who wrote a history of the Roosevelt era, might also have been expected to be familiar with the Wallace book. In searching for a label to use during the Kennedy campaign and after, which implied a Socialist commitment yet seemed merely picturesque to the general public, someone at Kennedy headquarters thought of borrowing the New Frontier tag from Wallace—on the chance that few would identify the source. If the matter ever came up, it could always be explained away as purely coincidental.
After presenting the new Administration with a name, a philosophy and a platform, ADA brain trusters took precautions to make sure their program would be carried out. In the interim between Kennedy’s election and inauguration, appropriate steps were taken to staff the White House and the departments at every level with ADA members, past or present, and their Fabian-schooled allies. Less than three weeks after the Democratic Party’s close victory at the polls, Professor Samuel H. Beer of Harvard, then national chairman of ADA, wrote to congratulate his personal friend, John F. Kennedy.
Beer, described editorially as “professor of Government at Harvard,” had contributed an article to the November, 1956 issue of the British Fabian Journal, entitled ‘Labour Rethinks Its Policy. An American View.” From this, it could at least be inferred that he enjoyed direct contacts
with Britain’s Fabian Socialists.
Beer suggested that the new President’s first public acts should clearly demonstrate his intent to build a New Frontier for America, with the help of “forward-looking” and “imaginative” public servants. Characteristically, competence was not mentioned. Beer’s letter to the President continued boldly:
“ADA has no interest in individuals as such; however, we feel that the appointment to high office of such men as Chester Bowles, Orville Freeman, Adlai Stevenson and G. Mennen Williams will signify to the world your determination to shape your Administration in the image of your eloquent liberal campaign.” (18)
The four individuals named by Beer, and many more ADA favorites, were appointed to serve in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration.
Alert Washington newsmen identified at least three dozen important officials, from Cabinet rank down, as past or present members of Americans for Democratic Action. Professor Brock a friendly witness, not only confirmed the tally; but added that the number of ADA members serving in government posts, high and low, under the Kennedy-Johnson Administration was in reality much larger than even some of its keener critics knew. (19) “The extent of ‘infiltration’,” crowed Brock, “is greater than Senator Goldwater dreams.” Just as every key post in the British Labour Party Government from 1945 to 1951 was admittedly held for some time at least by a member of the Fabian Society, American Fabian Socialists seemed to have achieved somewhat similar status under the Kennedy-Johnson Administration.
While this phenomenon of “infiltration” was frequently noted, in whole or in part, no one could say just how it occurred. Perhaps the simplest and most logical explanation is that the majority of Left liberal appointments were made through routine patronage channels. Anyone familiar with Washington realizes that a President is in somewhat the same situation as an author who receives some ten free copies of his book to give to personal friends and connections, the remainder being distributed in the routine order of business. For the most part, government appointments high and low—not excluding persons who have qualified for the higher civil service ratings—are cleared through the county, state and national committees of the Party in power.
That fact does not relieve a President of responsibility for appointments announced by the White House; but it does indicate the extent of ADA control over the Democratic Party machinery, that is, an extent necessary to place so large a number of handpicked employees in all branches of the Federal Government. Evidently, the relationship of ADA to the Democratic Party in America approximated—if it did not quite equal—that of the London Fabian Society to the British Labour Party.
Most of the top Government spots had been filled by February 10, 1961, when ADA chairman Beer and three colleagues called to pay their respects in person to President Kennedy. For the first time since Truman’s day, representatives of ADA were welcomed as such at the White House. In requesting the interview, Beer had written to the President’s appointment secretary, “I want to make it clear that it is program, not jobs in which we are interested.” After the conference, where economic policy and civil rights were discussed, Beer commented: “We felt that in both fields the President’s objectives were ours, and that he was attempting and would attempt to pursue them just as far as he politically could.” (20)
No public reference was made to mutual aims in the fields of foreign and military policy, relating to world development, cooperation with Communist nations, de facto disarmament and eventual federal union of all nations in a socialized world. Those delicate undertakings were left to selected, Fabian-trained officials and consultants manning the Government at strategic points, who could be depended upon to pursue their objectives systematically in consultation with social democratic officials abroad. White House ghost-writers—better versed in the Fabian classics than in simple arithmetic–even supplied the President with a space age version of the Independence Day comments made by Edward Bellamy in 1892.(21)
In a speech delivered at Independence Hall in Philadelphia (of all places), on July 4, 1962, President Kennedy “virtually proposed to repeal the Declaration of Independence in favor of a declaration of international interdependence.”(22) To a passive and somnolent audience, he declared:
But I will say here and now on this day of independence that the United States will be ready for a Declaration of Interdependence—that we will be prepared to discuss with a United Europe the ways and means of forming a concrete Atlantic Partnership—a mutually beneficial partnership between the new union now emerging in Europe and the old American Union founded here 175 years ago …. Today Americans must learn to think continentally.” (23)
These words were spoken on the 186th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
Other echoes of the Cooperative Commonwealth—foretold long ago by Edward Bellamy; father of the American Fabian movement— were revived by friendly Keynesian economists in anticipation of the 1964 election contest. No mention was made of their literary inspiration, which was obvious to Socialists but unknown to the average citizen—namely, Bellamy’s Looking Backward, a novel depicting Socialist America in the year 2000. In March, 1963, a twenty-three man “research team” employed by an organization called Resources for the Future released a 987-page report. It described the material wonders that the common man in America would enjoy in the year 2000. Assuming, of course, that the Keynesian policies adopted by the Kennedy-Johnson Administration were continued indefinitely! Financial support for the “study” was supplied by the Ford Foundation at the expense of the American taxpayer.
By combining Keynesian theory with production and population statistics, and feeding the mixture into electronic computers, the young researchers came up with precise figures on what the year 2000 would hold. Any possibility of war, pestilence or bankruptcy was omitted from their calculations. Economic scarcity would no longer exist in that future America, where atomic reactors would supply only peaceful power, automobiles with wings would outnumber adult citizens, and the average family income would be $11,000 per year (without reference to purchasing power).
Apart from such attention-catching items, an interesting feature of this forecast was its assumption that Federal spending would increase in very much the same ratio as industrial production and Gross National Product. In short, an ever-expanding government would continue to appropriate an overall 20 per cent to 25 per cent of the nation’s annual income. The miraculous pitcher would continue to pour milk and honey without interruption, while the tax pressures under which the average American operates today would simply be multiplied by five.
A demand for continuous economic “growth,” which calls for production to rise each year like a supermarket’s sales figures, was first voiced by New Frontier spokesmen in the 1960 Presidential campaign. It was based upon the latest post-Keynesian mystery: the Gross National Product, officially adopted as an index of prosperity by the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. Just how the Gross National Product itself is computed has never been clearly explained to the public. A clue to the process, however, was offered by Newton N. Minow, an early New Frontiersman who formerly headed the Federal Communications Commission.
At a 1963 symposium arranged in Los Angeles by the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions—wayward grandchild of the Ford Foundation—Minow stated bluntly:
“Nearly fifteen per cent of our national work force is already employed by the local, state or federal government, and this represents almost a third of the gross national product.” (24)
So the Government can increase the Gross National Product at will, by the simple device of hiring more and more public servants— thereby increasing the ranks of an ADA-educated and chosen bureaucracy. A variation of this method of improving the nation’s prosperity-image is to give frequent and substantial pay raises to government and state employees, especially in the higher brackets.
Two assumptions dangerous to the future of constitutional government in America are concealed in the tricky concept of the Gross National Product. First, the notion that government is entitled to take a fixed percentage of the rising national income each year, irrespective of national necessities. And second, that a government has the right to base its budget estimates on the private resources of individuals and companies. Recalling that the original purpose of Keynesian economics was to provide a method for a peaceful transition to Socialism in the United States, it becomes apparent that the economic policy adopted under ADA tutelage by the Kennedy-Johnson Administration, in effect, gives a green light to Socialism on the high speed Fabian Freeway.
Dissembling their joy at the trend of Administration policy, Left liberals outside the Government maintained a critical attitude and continued to call for greater speed. For the most part, their grumbling was confined to their own special groups and house organs—while ADA commentators both on the air and in the daily press strove to rally broad popular support for the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. In the call to its annual convention in May, 1963, Americans for Democratic Action declared gravely that “the record of the Kennedy Administration so far has been one of accommodation to its critics of the right.”
The New Republic commented editorially on June 1, 1963, that “in general the Kennedy performance is less impressive than the Kennedy style.” It even charged the Administration with a lamentable tendency to yield to business pressures. “For example,” said the New Republic, “the admirable goal of the Alliance for Progress (in effect, U.S. sponsorship of a peaceful social revolution) (25) has been compromised by the Administration’s reluctance to tangle with influential business and property interests, both North and South American.”(26) This type of needling by friendly critics was evidently intended to direct the Administration more firmly on the route international Socialism felt it should take.(27) At the same time, such comments helped to disarm conservative critics and to disguise the fact that the Kennedy-Johnson Administration was in reality a chosen instrument of Fabian Socialism.
While giving space to left wing complaints about the Administration, the New Republic ( still considered the opposite number to Britain’s Fabian-edited New Statesman) was usually careful to print an answer by some prominent ADA brain truster. In its issue of May 25, 1963, one Herbert Rowan had expressed the dissatisfaction of certain Keynesian economists at President Kennedy’s apparent unwillingness to spend more money and incur larger deficits. The following week Professor Seymour E. Harris (28) hastened to defend the Administration’s record for liberality—pointing out that from 1953 to 1961 Eisenhower’s annual expenditures rose by 7 billion dollars, while Kennedy’s, in a mere three years, rose by 17 billion dollars! Harris explained in all seriousness that President Kennedy would have been glad to spend more, but was prevented by the temper of Congress from doing so. (29) Whether or not the sniping from the Left had an effect, the annual budget announced by the Kennedy-Johnson Administration nudged 100 billion dollars.
To the New Republics Washington correspondent, who was disturbed about Kennedy’s latter-day overtures to selected business groups, (30) Professor Harris replied that it is still important to maintain the confidence of businessmen. While government must be careful not to yield to their “demands,” said he, there is no harm in speaking kindly to them. By way of authority Harris quoted the oracle of modern Left liberals, John Maynard Keynes, who once wrote in a letter to Franklin D. Roosevelt:
“. . . It is a mistake to think that they [businessmen] are more immoral than politicians. If you work them into the surly, obstinate, terrified mood, of which domestic animals, wrongly handled, are so capable, the nation’s burdens will not get carried to market. . . .”(31)
This humane attitude, so reminiscent of the SPCA, (32) has inspired some false hopes among businessmen, as well as some unfounded fears among Left liberals. It was commended by Keynesian advisers to President Kennedy, as well as to his successor, President Johnson.
Less than six months later all criticism from the Left or the Right was abruptly hushed, when John F. Kennedy was suddenly and inexplicably struck down by an assassin’s bullets. Before the Presidential airplane left Dallas for Washington, carrying the casket of the slain Chief of State, the next Chief Executive had been sworn in. By an unexpected stroke of fate Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson, whose hopes of reaching the White House appeared to have been permanently dashed in 1960, became the thirty-sixth President of the United States.
The panoply of the late President’s state funeral, and the four-week period of official mourning that followed, veiled the inevitable maneuvers going on behind the scenes to procure continuance of the political status quo. Among the foreign dignitaries who {few to America to pay their final respects to John F. Kennedy was Harold Wilson, Parliamentary Leader of the British Labour Party and acting chairman of the Socialist International. Not unnaturally, Wilson took the opportunity to discuss the probable future with old and loyal friends of the London Fabian Society in Washington, including the aging columnist, Walter Lippmann. Puzzled news correspondents reported that on the return trip from Arlington Cemetery, where John F. Kennedy had just been interred, the new President, Lyndon B. Johnson, made an unscheduled detour. He stopped off for a forty-minute conference at the Georgetown home of Walter Lippmann. (33) From this oddly-timed gesture, the trend of the incoming Administration might have been foreseen.
If anyone doubted that President Johnson meant to continue the Socialist-inspired policies, both foreign and domestic, of his Democratic Party forebears, such uncertainties were speedily resolved by his own public utterances. In January he told the nation: ‘We are going to take all the money that we think is being unnecessarily spent, and take it from the haves and give it to the have-nots.” (34) Addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations, Johnson announced he wanted to see “the Cold War end at once” and especially to see “a New Deal on a world scale” come to developing nations just “as it came to America thirty years ago.” (35) News photographers, who had been instructed that President Johnson’s pictures were to be taken from the left profile only, perceived (as the Richmond News Leader remarked) that his image was better from the left than from the right.
To the great American public, however, always eager to believe the best of an incoming President, the drift of Johnson’s statements was not immediately apparent. Even more than John F. Kennedy ( though for very different reasons) Lyndon B. Johnson, who had been so sharply attacked by Americans for Democratic Action in 1960, seemed an unlikely instrument of the Fabian Socialist world planners. A nonintellectual, whose reading matter for years had been confined to the daily papers, the Congressional Record and tales of early Texas history, he was surely no academic disciple of John Maynard Keynes.
As his biographers reveal, Johnson was a product of the New Deal school of spend-and-elect politics in which Franklin D. Roosevelt had been a past master. On the surface, he appeared to be merely a tall, hard-eyed professional politician from the Southwest, with a long record of wheeling and dealing on Capitol Hill. Johnson, however, revered power in every form and had displayed no hesitation about accumulating it as opportunities arose. Having begun his career as a poor but ambitious graduate of a small Texas teachers’ college, he lacked the style and literary eclat of John F. Kennedy. Nevertheless, Lyndon B. Johnson and his helpmate, Lady Bird, were one of the wealthiest couples in their own right ever to occupy the White House.
Though he made no disclosure of personal assets on taking office, the joint worth of the Johnsons and their daughters was estimated to be no less than 9 million dollars (36) and possibly as much as 15 million dollars.(37) The business acumen of gentle Lady Bird Johnson has been credited with pyramiding a modest inheritance of $67,000 into a handsome fortune, during the twenty-three years her husband served, in an increasingly potent capacity, in Congress. If she was not the beneficiary of special favors incidental to her husband’s position, she may be ranked with Hetty Green as one of the shrewdest women in American financial annals. White House aides insist President Johnson never intervened in his wife’s business affairs, directly or indirectly. According to John Barton of the Washington Star, however, Texans who have had dealings with the Austin, Texas television station— which is owned 84.5 per cent by Lady Bird Johnson and her daughters—are prepared to state otherwise. (38)
Lyndon Baines Johnson first appeared on Capitol Hill in 1931, just before the New Deal dawned. He was employed on the staff of Congressman Richard Kleberg, member of the family that owned the fabulous King Ranch, and a respected leader in south Texas. Although the Congressman was outspokenly critical of the Roosevelt Administration, somehow Johnson managed to inject himself into its good graces. Old inhabitants of Kleberg County and adjacent Texas counties still claim to have knowledge that Johnson betrayed his original benefactor, Dick Kleberg; but no details have ever been made public. At any rate, young Lyndon was appointed Texas director of the National Youth Administration in 1935 and was commended for rare efficiency by Aubrey Williams, its national administrator.
In 1937, Johnson was elected to the House of Representatives on a platform supporting FDR’s Supreme Court packing plan. As a reward, President Roosevelt asked that the freshman lawmaker be assigned to the important Naval Affairs Committee, and thereafter seems to have taken a fatherly interest in his career. “Free Federal money” was invariably forthcoming for projects in Johnson’s home district, assuring his election for five more successive terms. Johnson has since been quoted as saying sentimentally to political audiences, “Franklin D. Roosevelt was a second daddy to me.”
Johnson ran for the United States Senate in 1948, on an anti-union labor plank, and was seated by a scant margin of 87 contested votes. One of his more zealous backers was George Parr of San Diego, Texas, known as the Duke of Duval County. Parr was the political boss and absolute monarch of several Spanish-speaking counties near the Mexican border, where a primitive, gun-toting style of politics prevailed. In the 1948 election, returns from Precinct 13 in Alice, Texas—county seat of Parr-ruled Jim Wells County—gave 765 votes to Johnson as compared to 80 for his opponent, although only 600 bate lots had been issued for that precinct.
With a state wide count showing Johnson to be the loser by 113 votes, he made a victory statement on September 2, 1948. Next day a recount in Alice produced a new total of 967 votes for Lyndon, giving him his famous 87-vote victory. Inspection of the Alice polling list by a Texas Ranger and two former FBI agents disclosed that some 200 names had been added in a different shade of ink. Several of those individuals, when interviewed, testified they had not voted; others, not interviewed, were found to be deceased! As might have been expected, fraud was charged. An injunction was issued and a hearing ordered by Federal Judge T. Whitfield Davidson of the Northern District of Texas.
After several hasty appeals by Johnson to other courts had been denied, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black obligingly set aside the Texas ruling, and no public hearing was ever held. The memory of those fateful events, however, lingers in the town of Alice. In spite of Parr’s repeated and none-too-gentle attempts to lay the ghost of that disputed election, it has returned again and again to haunt Lyndon Johnson. The truth is, that even in his own home state Johnson was never a very popular figure. He was what might be called a politician’s politician.
Undismayed, Johnson went to the Senate and was named Democratic Party whip in 1951. At approximately the same time, a former congressional page boy named Bobby Gene Baker was engaged as assistant Democratic Senate secretary. During Johnson’s first term in the Senate, as the Washington Star (39) has noted, he served on the Commerce Committee which has jurisdiction over the Federal Communications Commission. The Commission, in turn, regulates and licenses all radio and television broadcasting stations—including the station owned by Lady Bird Johnson in Austin, Texas, whose worth has been enhanced by a notable lack of local competition. No questions were asked about the number of out-of-state business firms that bought advertising time on the Austin station, although they dispensed no products or services on the Texas market.
About a year after becoming whip, Johnson succeeded to the post of Democratic floor leader in the Senate. His young lieutenant, Bobby Baker, was promptly promoted from assistant to Democratic Senate secretary. With Republicans holding the Upper House, though only by a frail majority of one, Johnson still found it useful, beginning in 1952, to cooperate with the Eisenhower Administration. Although noisemakers in ADA attacked Johnson in 1955 for giving tacit support to “a Republican assault on liberalism,” (40) he was vigorously defended by Senator Hubert Humphrey, former ADA national chairman. Ironically, much patronage flowed to Johnson during Eisenhower’s two terms as President, particularly after the off-year election success of the Democrats in 1958 made Johnson majority leader of the Senate. His personal power and influence now extended into both parties; he was a man to be courted and feared. Bland or cajoling in his lighter moods, he was said to display a hair-trigger temper and an unrestricted vocabulary when crossed.
By applying what Capitol Hill veterans describe as a combination of the carrot and the stick, whose use was determined by an intimate knowledge of his colleagues’ political problems or personal foibles, Johnson gained the reputation for being able to “get results” in Congress on practically any kind of legislation. In those operations, it has been suggested, the stack of bank notes kept on hand in the office of Democratic Senate secretary Baker may occasionally have played a part—as well as certain after hours gaieties organized by Baker that seemed more designed to entrap than to entertain. Bobby Gene was Johnson’s enforcer and frequent go-between. One of the Senate’s incorruptibles, the Honorable John R. Williams of Delaware, eventually forced the resignation of Baker by demanding an inquiry into the latter’s far-flung business activities. It appeared that Bobby Gene had been selling everything but the Capitol dome, and had made side money for himself amounting to more than 2 million dollars.
Congressional circles were amused when Lyndon Johnson, then Vice President, issued a straight-faced denial that Bobby Baker was ever a protégée of his. The close association between Democratic leader Johnson and Democratic Senate secretary Baker had been a matter of common knowledge on the Hill. As late as 1960, while campaigning in South Carolina, Johnson told Baker’s father, “Bobby Gene is my strong right arm, the last man I see at night, the first one I see in the morning!” It was hard to believe the shrewd and energetic majority leader did not know what his right arm was doing and had even forgotten that he had one! Lyndon Johnson was among the notables who attended the grand opening of Bobby Baker’s motel in Ocean City, Maryland.
Called before a Senate committee, Baker calmly refused to answer 125 questions on grounds of possible self-incrimination. He could do so with impunity, thanks to a Supreme Court decision barring citations for contempt by congressional investigating bodies. Though a whitewash was charged, the inquiry was closed and Baker escaped without penalties. By then all direct communication between Johnson and Baker had ceased. It was remarked, however, that Bobby Baker’s counsel at the Senate hearings was Abe Fortas, personal legal adviser to Lyndon Johnson and more recently a trusted member of the President’s Kitchen Cabinet.(40a)
No rumors of corruption, but the fact that he had regularly voted against civil rights legislation, led the majority of ADA intellectuals to denounce Lyndon Johnson in 1960. Only a handful of specialists, known to the Fabian International Bureau, were aware that Johnson’s dual role during the Eisenhower Administration had in reality helped to promote ADA-Socialist International programs of the nineteen-fifties—chiefly, in the fields of foreign aid and military spending.
Such policy was normally conveyed to the State Department as the fruit of “impartial research,” via some high level, bipartisan organization like the Council on Foreign Relations or the American Assembly. Legislation required to finance it was passed without difficulty, as a result of Johnson’s cooperative attitude in the Senate. Through the patronage made available to him by a grateful Republican Administration, a number of ADA-approved Democrats were quietly appointed to positions in the Departments of State (41) and Defense—the very areas where, as Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. had announced in the Fabian International Review, American Fabian Socialists intended to gain control.
Johnson could only have accomplished such feats by operating under at least nominally conservative colors, thus damaging his reputation among Left liberals. By voting with an influential group of southern Senators on domestic issues about which they felt strongly, he was able to win their support for other projects, where ADA spokesmen like Humphrey or Douglas would have failed. Since secrecy was necessary to avoid compromising delicate operations, Johnson resigned himself to incurring the wrath of most left-wingers —although, as he has since announced freely, he was always a New Deal liberal at heart.
It is not surprising, therefore, that otherwise well-informed ADA leaders expressed definite resentment against Johnson during and after the 1960 Democratic Convention. Joseph Rauh, Jr. has told of the dismay and sense of personal betrayal he felt, on hearing that Lyndon Johnson had been chosen as Kennedy’s running mate in the 1960 campaign. Rauh’s sentiments were echoed by David Dubinsky and other influential members of ADA. Some threatened to bolt the ticket or split their endorsement, but in the end were dissuaded from doing so.
John F. Kennedy had personally invited Johnson to be his running mate, reportedly calling him by telephone in the early morning hours. Previously, Johnson had declared he would refuse second place on the ticket. Not unnaturally, there was much speculation as to what led him to change his mind. One realistic account, attributed to a source close to Kennedy, went as follows: Johnson demurred at first, saying he would rather be majority leader of the Senate. To this Kennedy answered coldly and clearly: “What makes you think you’ll still be majority leader?” After a thoughtful silence, Johnson yielded. He consented to run for the Vice Presidency, but reserved the right to run simultaneously for the Senate.(42)
It was generally assumed Kennedy’s choice of Johnson, who had fought him so bitterly in the primaries, was dictated by political considerations. Apparently Kennedy did not think it safe just yet to write off the Southern vote, as Rauh and other ADA leaders urged him to do. Johnson’s name on the ticket might be helpful in holding the South for the Democrats. That was the picture in 1960.
Four years later a somewhat more emotional explanation of Johnson’s change of mind was circulated. Early in June, 1964, White House correspondents quoted President Johnson as saying that John F. Kennedy had had a premonition of death and deliberately chose Johnson to succeed him, explaining: “You are the man I’d want to be President, if anything happens to me.” It was those words, Johnson claimed, which decided him to run for the Vice Presidency. If Kennedy said such a thing, it might have been intended more as an appeal to human vanity, than as a solemn intimation of his own end. Remembering that he had just been nominated and was wholly absorbed by the prospect of the political battles ahead, it is improbable he looked very far beyond the coming November. Moreover, he was young, strong and cheerful, not given to dark forebodings. Indeed, Johnson who was nearly ten years older and had already suffered one massive heart attack, might well have been expected to predecease him.
Far from being a serious contribution to history, the story released by the White House in June, 1964, seemed no more than a rather ghoulish bit of campaign propaganda. Calculated to impress superstitious persons, it gave the effect of an endorsement from the grave. In a sense, Johnson had begun campaigning for reelection within a day or so after he took the oath of office. On November 24, 1963–just two days after the assassination—the Los Angeles Times printed a feature about Johnson from Washington which said: “Mr. Johnson was trained deliberately for the Presidency almost as if there had been a premonition in President Kennedy’s mind.”
Superficially, there were changes when the Johnson family moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Chic was replaced by folksiness; gilded youth by a fatherly air, which at times appeared slightly forced. In the anteroom to the President’s office, the ten gallon hat took precedence over the homburg. As far as the staff was concerned, the changes were equally superficial. Of course, Johnson brought in his own long time personal aides to deal with the press and the public. Ted Sorenson and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. departed. The former was replaced by speech-writer Sidney Hyman of the liberal Washington Post; the latter by Eric Goldman,(43) an old friend of ADA, who was asked to set up a screening service at Princeton to enlist a fresh supply of brain trusters and planners. ADA, it seemed, was playing a game of musical chairs.
Left liberal professors in the Executive Offices receded into the background, or returned to their accustomed haunts. Jerome Wiesner, who had headed the National Science Council, went back to MIT, and Walter Heller of the Council of Economic Advisers announced he would soon be leaving. The most prominent holdover was McGeorge Bundy, Harvard dean of Arts and Sciences, who as chief of the National Security Council now briefed the new President daily. For every Left liberal who vanished, however, another often less easily identified took his place. ADA infiltration, as Professor Brock had crowed, was so widespread both in the White House and the Departments, that a few changes really changed nothing at all.
It was to be expected that Johnson, offspring of the New Deal-Fair Deal, would turn to advisers of his own political generation. He preferred them to be nonofficial, rather than office fixtures: they aroused less comment that way. The new President’s counselors were prosperous attorneys of long residence in Washington, whom Johnson had known for years. Except for Clark Clifford, an accommodating practical politician who had served in the White House under Truman, all were known to lean to the Left.
Senior member of Johnson’s informal Cabinet was Dean Acheson, former protégée and lifelong friend of the New Deal’s architect-in-chief, Felix Frankfurter. As Under Secretary and Secretary of State in the years following World War II, Dean Acheson had been instrumental in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. He was identified with the school of diplomacy which had allowed Soviet Russia to occupy Eastern Europe and the Baltic States with no more than token protest and no resistance; delivered mainland China to Red rule; and launched the destructive “No Win” policy in Korea. He was the man who had refused to turn his back on Alger Hiss. To adult Americans who remembered the past, the return of Acheson had the eerie quality of a recurring nightmare.
Dean Acheson’s role as a confidant of President Johnson seemed to guarantee the tenure of his former assistant, Dean Rusk, and the coterie of former Rhodes Scholars at the State Department. This, in turn, assured the continuance of a Fabian-inspired foreign policy which favored Socialist and even Communist nations, while demanding the progressive sacrifice of America’s wealth, strength and prestige. William Bundy, brother of McGeorge, took over the post of Assistant Secretary for Far Eastern Affairs, once held by Rusk. Walt Whitman Rostow was assigned to steer the Alliance for Progress, apparently to speed the peaceful development of Socialism in Latin America, as a step toward achieving his declared goal of World Government.
Other informal advisers of President Johnson were James Rowe, Jr., a charter member of the Fabian ADA; (44) and Abe Fortas, of the firm of Arnold, Fortas and Porter, which had defended two generations of Communists and Left liberals in Washington. Once a Department of the Interior aide under Harold Ickes, Fortas was an expert in the political uses of public works—a talent which Johnson evidently proposed to utilize after his own reelection. Had not Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. once predicted that the United States would advance to Socialism through a series of New Deals? While Fortas was not directly identified with ADA, his law partner, Paul A. Porter, had been a member of its original Committee on Economic Stability.(45)
Johnson had promptly named Fortas to the commission, headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren, assigned to “investigate” the Kennedy assassination and “improve” on the massive report already submitted by J. Edgar Hoover. A lifelong advocate of civil liberties for Leftists, Fortas could be counted upon to help make sure that the assassination did not precipitate an unfavorable public reaction against Communists or Socialists.
Like Kennedy, Johnson was learning how to handle the liberals, or vice versa. The doubts expressed by so many ADA members a few years earlier were now converted into endorsements, as he threw his weight behind one New Frontier project after another. The subsidized wheat sale to Russia; the campaign year tax cut; the civil rights bill which, by implication, denied civil rights to service industries and promised a return to Reconstruction days in the South: all were dutifully, even vigorously backed by Johnson. In the area of national defense, he gave free rein to Secretary Robert McNamara, the former professor who personified the dictum of Mirabeau that “to administer is to rule.” Once a spokesman for unrestrained military spending, Johnson now seconded McNamara’s “economy” program, which involved a gradual phase out of the manned bomber by 1970, along with the progressive curtailment of nuclear weapons. To that end, Johnson himself issued an Executive Order stopping production of uranium and plutonium for military purposes.
President Johnson’s unconditional surrender to ADA programs was perhaps the clearest testimonial to ADA’s position of power in the Democratic Party; for power was one thing Johnson always recognized and respected. If he hoped to be reelected, he must have ADA support. Almost plaintively he reiterated in public statements that he really and truly was a liberal, and stressed his devotion to the memory of FDR. To Robert Spivak of the New York Herald Tribune Johnson remarked: “You say I am not a liberal. Let me tell you that I am more liberal than Eleanor Roosevelt and I will prove it to you ….” Presumably, the final proof of the pudding was to be postponed until after the 1964 national elections.
To ADA’s annual Roosevelt Day dinners, President Johnson sent special greetings in 1964. Among other things the President’s message said: “I was a Roosevelt man lock, stock and barrel. In many ways he was my spiritual father.” (46) Reaction to this statement by members of the clergy attending the National Dinner in Washington is not recorded! The President also praised ADA for its “early advocacy of a test ban treaty, long before such support was popular.”
At the same time Johnson was cautious, ever-mindful of the perils of a campaign year. References to ADA as a left wing organization were stricken from the 1964 edition of his biography by Booth Mooney, a former Johnson staff-employee. A White House dinner for labor leaders and their wives, arranged by advice of David Dubinsky, was quickly followed by another dinner for handpicked leaders of business and industry. Both social events proved politically rewarding. The first resulted in an endorsement of Johnson by AFL-CIO brass at its Atlantic City convention; the latter in well-publicized pledges to vote for Johnson by a few prominent industrialists.(47) On May 4, he told a group of labor leaders:
“The time has come for labor and Government and business to agree that we are going to achieve—and keep–full employment.” (48)
One cannot help wondering if Johnson knew that the seemingly harmless phrase, “full employment,” is the keystone of Keynesian economics, an invention of Fabian Socialists created to lure the United States towards full-scale Socialism.
Apparently Johnson, like Kennedy, was surrounded by Left liberal idea men and speech-writers who could not resist displaying their Fabian Socialist scholarship—thereby betraying their own origins. Searching for phrases to describe their bright new world of the future, like the dodo bird, they invariably looked backward. A commencement address, for example, delivered by President Johnson at the University of Michigan on May 24, 1964, invited the youth of America to join him in building “the great society.” Anyone acquainted with the history of the Fabian Socialist movement knows that The Great Society was the name of a book by Graham Wallas, one of the original Big Four of the London Fabian Society.
First published in 1914, the 50th anniversary year of the Socialist International, The Great Society was based on lectures given four years earlier by Wallas as a visiting professor at Harvard. Wallas’ course, Government-31, was a “must” for members of the Harvard Socialist Club of his day. An American edition of The Great Society (reprinted in 1920) had been dedicated to erstwhile Harvard Socialist Club president, Walter Lippmann—who in 1964 declared his intention to vote for Johnson. Somehow The Great Society became the “rallying cry” for Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 campaign, replacing the slightly passe New Frontier. If Democrats resent the inference that their Party, their Administrations and their Presidents have been taken over lock, stock and barrel by a Fabian Socialist clique, why do they insist on borrowing their “rallying cries” from books and pamphlets written by well-known Fabian Socialists, British or American?
Further evidence of Democratic dependence on British Fabian Socialism—not merely for slogans, but for entire programs—was the Administration’s “War on Poverty.” Its source was officially disclosed by the British Fabian Socialist, Harold Wilson, Parliamentary Leader of the British Labour Party. Addressing the Eighth Congress of the Socialist International, which met in Amsterdam September 9 through 12, in 1963, Wilson said: “Ten years ago some of us in the Labour Party in Britain were moved to write a pamphlet called ‘War on Want,’ which led to a great movement in Britain and has gone far beyond our expectations ….”(49)
Strangely enough, the topic of the Socialist International Congress, where Harold Wilson spoke, was not poverty at all—or “want,” as the British call it. The subject under discussion was: “The International Situation and the Struggle for Peace and Disarmament.” The idea discreetly conveyed by Wilson was that disarmament might be achieved by popular demand in democratic countries, if funds normally allocated for national defense could be dramatically diverted into a war on poverty. While the movement might not succeed in abolishing poverty, it could certainly go a long way toward abolishing the armed forces of the Free World, and their weapons of the future.
Nearly ten years after the spark had been struck in Britain, the same idea was picked up and adapted to the American scene by a young man named Michael Harrington, a member of the executive committee of the American Socialist Party. Like so many other aspiring Socialists, he published a book. It appeared in 1962 as, The Other America: Poverty in the United States,(50) and it was an immediate sensation. This was not surprising, because all appropriate Fabian Socialist press and organizational contacts in the United States had evidently been primed to push the book and to promote the subject of poverty in general. Thus, a Saturday morning panel discussion at the 58th Annual Conference of the League for Industrial Democracy, held in May, 1963, was reminiscently titled, “Why Are the Many Poor?”—the title of Fabian Tract No. 1, first pamphlet ever printed by the London Fabian Society. (51)
President Kennedy is said to have read Harrington’s book and to have been deeply impressed with it. Michael Harrington had made the astonishing discovery that there are thirty-five million Americans who are, by White House standards, poor, and presumably should have Federal help of one kind or another. Quite a lot of Federal funds could be absorbed rehabilitating thirty-five million people, even in a small way.
Michael Harrington himself was then not quite thirty-five years old. A graduate of Yale University, he had been a regular contributor to The Reporter and to Commonweal, a Catholic laymen’s magazine of Left liberal leanings. For a time after leaving college, he was connected with the Catholic Worker movement—an independent but nominally Catholic movement of the Left, led by Dorothy Day, a convert from Communism. As recently as April, 1963, Miss Day— who had visited Castro’s Cuba only the year before—attended a reception honoring the veteran Communist leader, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn. On that occasion Dorothy Day was quoted, perhaps erroneously, by a Communist newspaper as saying, “My association with Elizabeth Gurley Flynn will go on through my life, despite our basic religious differences” because “we can work together on economic and social questions.” (52)
Possibly Miss Day, despite her fervor, was not familiar with the great Encyclical of Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, issued in 1937.
To Christians of the entire world the Holy Father uttered a warning, not merely for the moment but for all time: “Communism is intrinsically evil, (53) and no one desiring to save Christian civilization may cooperate with it in any undertaking whatever.”
There is no evidence that Michael Harrington cooperates with Communism today. He is, however, a member of the Executive Committee of the little Socialist Party, USA openly affiliated with the Socialist International, which invariably acts to protect Communist nations and in many instances promotes cooperation with them at the world level. On March 28, 1964, the new slick paper edition of Socialist International Information, official organ of the International, featured an article by Michael Harrington reprinted from New America, U.S. Socialist Party publication. There Harrington explained why the “war on poverty” would speed the advance of Socialism in the United States. The reasons given by Harrington are worth noting: first, that the program “is the assertion of a public claim on private resources”; and second, that “it will necessarily involve an expansion of the public sector of American society.”(54) A previous issue of Socialist International Information had noted “Michael Harrington’s contribution to Presidential thinking on ‘The War on Poverty.'” (55)
Early in 1964, Harrington was called to Washington, along with other “specialists,” to assist the Johnson Administration in drafting plans for its own anti-poverty campaign. Though the project was inherited from his predecessor, President Johnson had made it his own and announced the “war on poverty” as a major goal of his Administration. The campaign was frankly admitted to have been inspired by Michael Harrington’s book. As a result, leading newspapers of the country threw open their columns to the young specialist on poverty, for by-line articles as well as interviews.
For an avowed official of the little U.S. Socialist Party (56) to be so cordially received in press and government circles was something new in America. Simultaneously, Harrington was treated like a younger brother by prominent members of ADA. As far as anyone could remember, nothing just like it had happened in this country before. It raised the interesting possibility that other American Fabian Socialists might decide in the not-so-distant future to drop their disguise and call themselves by their own true name. Presumably, they would only feel free to do so if convinced that the final victory of Socialism was at hand. Did they see in the “war on poverty” a decisive weapon for bringing their long, but not wholly uncomfortable struggle to an end?
Added to his other services, Michael Harrington represented a very serious and well-organized attempt to sell the Fabian Socialist conception of social justice and “social charity” to the Catholic hierarchy and Catholic laity. It was designed to undermine one last great obstacle to the sweep of Socialism throughout the world. In that strangely un-Christian effort, Harrington and his friends have been aided effectively, if not directly, by two British Fabian Socialist waters widely feted in this country: Anne Fremantle, a niece of Beatrice Webb; and Barbara Ward (Lady Jackson), the latter described by a Washington news correspondent as one of President Johnson’s favorite authors.(57)
To head his anti-poverty campaign, President Johnson initially chose Sargent Shriver, brother-in-law of the late President Kennedy and himself a member of an old and respected Maryland family. Sargent Shriver, had broken with family tradition by going to Chicago and becoming, in 1952, an eager supporter of Adlai Stevenson. Marrying a Kennedy sister, he became director of the Peace Corps in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. Momentarily, his newer “poverty” post appeared to promise nothing more spectacular than a revival of Civilian Conservation Corps camps and similar half-forgotten projects dating from the New Deal. Its prospective importance was evident, however, from the fact that Adam Yarmolinsky (58) left his Pentagon post as Assistant Secretary for Defense for Personnel, to assist Shriver in launching the so-called war against poverty.
A young man of proper Socialist antecedents, of whom it had been rumored that he was being groomed by Left liberals to succeed J. Edgar Hoover, Yarmolinsky was no sacrificial lamb. He enjoyed the favor of leading ADA members, who regarded him as an authority on personnel practices measured by American Civil Liberties Union standards. Yarmolinsky’s presence in Sargent Shriver’s office could be taken as a virtual guarantee that the war against poverty would swell to boom proportions—after Johnson was reelected! That estimate was confirmed by a New York Times interview with Michael Harrington, which stated: “In Mr. Harrington’s view, President Johnson’s announcement of a war against poverty may be regarded as the staging phase for such a war rather than the beginning of one itself. The campaign can be started only when long-range plans that include vast public works programs are completed ….” (59)
Meanwhile, the political status quo was preserved without significant alteration. Keynesian economists were still in control of the Treasury and the Budget; agents of disarmament were in Defense. While Johnson talked of “frugality,” as FDR had done to win election in 1932, he planned in terms of deficit budgets—”under 100 billion dollars” today, but who knows what tomorrow? President Johnson asked an initial sum just under one billion dollars to wage war on poverty; another 500 million dollars annually to raise salaries of Federal employees, many of whom had received pay raises only a short time before; while 3.5 billion dollars was asked and obtained for foreign aid—”no more than last year,” but what of the years ahead?
The President promised “full employment”—and yet, by Executive Order, under the power relinquished to him by Congress, he proceeded to slash tariffs on imports priced to undersell American products, damage American industry and agriculture, and throw American citizens out of work. Subsidies were provided under the law for those who were “harmed” by tariff reductions; so that, in effect, the American taxpayer was subsidizing foreign industries. Meanwhile, American manufactures and raw materials were being shipped abroad as free gifts. American industrialists, finding it harder to compete at home against the flood of foreign imports and obliged to seek government contracts, were compelled to submit more and more to government control and restrictions. Many of these things were the result of legislation which Johnson had originally spearheaded while in the Senate. He was now in a position to exert the power they conferred on a Chief Executive.
Foreign diplomats must have smiled behind their hands at America’s pretensions of largesse, as the country’s viable gold reserves in 1963 shrank to less than 4 billion dollars over the minimum required by law to remain in the vaults at Fort Knox. With other countries holding due bills against the United States for more than 22 billion dollars in gold and able to demand payment at will, America was, in effect, at the mercy of its foreign pensioners. At any desired moment, they could demand payment in gold and throw the United States into bankruptcy. Did they delay because of trade benefits offered by the President, now armed with tariff-making powers? Or were they waiting for a moment when, by common consent of its creditors, the gold-poor United States might be forced into some supranational world order which meant an end of its nationhood?
The American dollar was no longer as good as gold. Even sheiks and desert potentates of the Middle East refused to accept it, demanding payment in bullion. How was it, with such an alarming shortage of the precious metal in the United States, that a major American oil company could still arrange to pay for its Middle Eastern oil leases and concessions in gold? How was it that we were not ourselves mining it vigorously? What was the influence in Washington that made such gold payments without replacement possible, and what political favors were asked in return?
President Johnson insisted the country had never been so prosperous nor the economy so sound—and he quoted figures to prove it. Everything seemed to be moving; everything seemed to be booming; and everything was fearfully expensive. Private debt in the United States reached the astronomical total of 826 billion dollars by the end of 1963; while the public debt ceiling was raised a few months later to 324 billion dollars. The average citizen was caught in a vise between debt and taxes, from which the campaign year tax cut offered no noticeable relief; while state and Federal politicians voted themselves larger salaries and handsomer pensions at public expense.
Who could save for old age or a rainy day? Sooner or later, the Government, which in one way or another was already collecting over one-third of the average citizen’s income, would have to pick up the tab for his medical and dental care, education, job-training and child rearing, in addition to unemployment insurance, old age pensions and burial costs. So the country went spinning along on wheels, faster and faster, down the non-stop Fabian Freeway that led to fiscal collapse—and a type of receivership sometimes known as Socialism.
This was how it had been planned, more than thirty years before, by a man named John Maynard Keynes and a small group of “respectable” Fabian Socialist conspirators in London, and by many others in other locales. They saw very plainly that the only way to capture the United States, and ultimately the world, for Socialism was by progressively weakening the financial system of this country to the point of total collapse. Once having reduced the two great English-speaking nations that were traditionally the bulwark of the free enterprise system and of liberty itself, Socialists would control the world— peacefully at first, perhaps later by force of Soviet arms. For when all is said and done, the Fabian Socialists have nowhere to go but to Communism.
By 1964, the United States had moved a great deal farther down the Fabian Freeway than most of its citizens knew. One final spurt of speed and power, and the total welfare state could be reached in a very few years. With the internal transition to Socialism apparently assured and external suasion applied at the psychological moment by a world-wide Communist-Socialist coalition, and possibly by a worldwide crisis calling for exceptional controls, the United States might be steered without conflict into the proposed World Federation of Socialist States. The rather simple legislation required for the purpose could be pushed almost imperceptibly through an ADA-controlled Congress.(59a) Was this the “fuller life” President Johnson’s advisers had in mind for America when they revived Graham Wallas’ dream of The Great Society in the one hundredth anniversary year of the Socialist International?
Lyndon Baines Johnson, former Democratic majority leader of the Senate and seasoned political manipulator, now seemed the man preordained for the job. A ruthless hand at the controls was needed, where a softer nature might flinch. Was it true, after all, that Johnson had been deliberately chosen in case “something happened” to JFK—chosen not only by Kennedy himself, but also by those master planners of international Socialism and Communism whose agents surround any modern Democratic Party chief? Surely the final push would not be wholly entrusted to a willing but non-Socialist Chief Executive. He must have helpers, alert and well-schooled. Looking forward to the 1964 national elections, James MacGregor Burns, member of ADA and former pupil of London’s Fabian Socialists, stated with clear and unmistakable intent: “Our need is not to win an election or a leader; we must win a government.” (60)
That is exactly what happened on November 3, 1964, after an apparently monotonous political campaign marked by a good deal of sub-surface drama. It was no doubt a deep personal satisfaction for President Johnson to find that the nickname of Landslide Lyndon, with which his enemies had taunted him from 1948, was now apropos. But the victory was not his alone. For the first time in nearly thirty years Democrats held a better than two-to-one majority in both houses of the Congress; and a remarkably large number of them owed their seats to ADA-COPE support. More than ever the High Court could be depended upon, in the time-tested words of Mr. Dooley, to “follow th’iliction returns.”
For all practical purposes, the constitutional separation of powers, seen by Anglo-American Socialists as the chief barrier to their conquest of the United States, had been reduced almost to the vanishing point. At long last a Socialist-schooled elite was in a position to exert unchallenged, if undeclared, control over all three branches of the Federal Government.
Obviously, the great majority of the American people was not aware of those circumstances, and would not knowingly have consented to them. Thus it seemed desirable for the Administration and its friends to keep the public guessing about Johnson’s intentions as long as possible. The President himself must speak only in the broadest generalities, and news management of the strictest kind must be enforced. For the time being, it was important to preserve the image of LBJ as a moderate middle-of-the-roader, equally beloved by management and labor, and in his benign way acting wholly by popular consent. Such considerations may explain the peculiar quality of the 1964 election campaign in the United States, where results were announced by television computers long before the votes had been counted. Organized labor and ethnic minority blocs were delivered almost intact to the Administration. Indeed, some experts claim the elections were actually won during the registration phase of the campaign, through the highly effective, if sometimes dubious, mass-registration techniques developed since 1958 by the industrial union branch of the AFL-CIO. Even in normally Republican areas Democrat registrars often outnumbered their rivals by as much as sixteen to one; and on election day were transformed into demon poll-watchers and vote-counters. One wonders whether even an Archangel Michael and his heavenly hosts would have sufficed to turn the tide, or to detect exactly what happened in 175,595 voting precincts around the country.
What the candidates said scarcely mattered. Their statements were transposed, interpreted and embellished by a practically solid phalanx of Left liberal press and TV commentators. Another unusual feature of the campaign was the vehemence of the overseas press in denouncing President Johnson’s opponent—especially in editorial opinions from Scandinavia, Belgium, West Berlin, Italy, England, where Socialist Governments held office. Was this a preview of the inspired world press to be hoped for under a future World Government?
Organized pressure, to a degree never known before in the United States, was exerted on members of the business community, great and small—the purpose being, ironically enough, to convey an impression that the nation’s businessmen were partial to President Johnson. Telephone calls from Washington warned that vital contracts might be forfeited. Credit was arbitrarily extended or denied. Federal and State agencies sent swarms of investigators to scrutinize the records of private companies and individuals. Well-timed offers of Area Redevelopment and other Federal funds were received in many smaller cities and towns. Even in the heyday of the New Deal, there had been nothing to equal this! Taking one thing with another, it was surprising that some twenty-seven million Americans were still found to have voted against Lyndon Johnson.
Tactics of the Johnson juggernaut were condoned by triumphant Washington insiders. In the excitement of victory, presidential favorite Walter Lippmann, who has seldom been known to make an unguarded statement, penned a more outspoken summary of the 1964 elections than any administration critic. “The campaign did not produce a debate about specific problems, and this was fortunate,” wrote Lippmann in his syndicated column of November 8, 1964. “For the real business of the campaign was not to map out a course for the future. It was to beat and crush a rebellion against the established line of domestic and foreign policy which was laid down in the generation which followed the great depression and the second world war.” The statement speaks for itself—and for the gentle Fabians.
1. Clifton Brock, Americans for Democratic Action (Washington, Public Affairs Press, 1962), p. 82.
2. Cf. Seymour E. Harris, Higher Education: Sources and Finance. (Result of a Study Sponsored by the Ford Foundation. Dedicated to McGeorge Bundy.) (New York, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1962).
3. Concerning the London School of Economics, Margaret Cole, president of the Fabian Society, wrote in 1963: “The argument which Webb might quite honestly have used but apparently did not–that the study of economic and social facts would of itself produce Socialist converts–turned out to be largely true. Whatever the political bias of its lecturers, the LSE retained (and deserved) for many a long day the reputation of being a manufactory of Reds.” From a review by Margaret Cole of Sir Sydney Caine’s book, The History of the Foundation of the London School of Economics and Political Science, The Social Science Weekly (April 18, 1963), Vol. I, No. 29, p. 26.
4. Victor Lasky, JFK: The Man and the Myth (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1963), App. B, pp. 587-598. Text of the so-called “Bailey Report,” analyzing the strength of the “Catholic vote” in the United States and circulated by Kennedy aids at the 1956 Democratic Convention. In 1960 the Gallup Poll reported that 78 per cent of U. S. Catholics had voted for John F. Kennedy.
5. From the Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931.
6. Brock, op. cit., p. 181.
7. Ibid., pp. 181-182; p. 179.
8. Ibid., p. 182-184.
9. That Communists have exploited such fears, and continue to do so, can be seen from the statement made in 1961 by U. S. Communist Party Leader, Gus Hall: “No matter what one’s attitude may be towards the Communist Party, it must be recognized that the fight for its rights as a political party is a matter of defending the Bill of Rights and all democratic rights, and peace forces, and not of the Communists alone. This is an old lesson, but sometimes it has to be learned anew.” Gus Hall, “The Ultra-Right, Kennedy and the Role of Progressives,” Political Affairs (August, 1961) pp. 19-20. This was the article which–with that fine inconsistency for which Communists are noted–unleashed a general attack by all left wing and “liberal” forces in the United States against the “extreme right.”
10. Brock, op. cit., p. 146.
11. “Inside the Upper House,” a review by John F. Kennedy, U. S. Senator from Massachusetts; author of Profiles in Courage. The New Leader (May 13, 1957), p. 9. (The book reviewed was Citadel, by William S. White, New York, Harper & Brothers, 1957.)
13. Lord Pakenham, Born to Believe (London, Jonathan Cape, 1953), p. 79.
14. Ibid., p. 159.
15. Henry A. Wallace, New Frontiers (New York, Reynal & Hitchcock, 1934), p. 268. (First printing, 50,000 copies.)
16. Ibid., p. 275-276.
21. Editorial by Edward Bellamy which appeared in the Boston Globe, July 4, 1892.
22. The New York Times (July 11, 1962). Quoted from an article by James Reston.
23. The New York Times (July 5, 1962). Cf. Also Harry A. Overstreet, A Declaration of Interdependence (New York, W. W. Norton, 1937).
24. LeRoy Collins, Orville L. Freeman, Hubert H. Humphrey, Newton N. Minow, Hyman G. Rickover, and Thurgood Marshall on The Mazes of Modern Government: The States, the Legislature, the Bureaucracy, the Courts. An occasional paper on the role of the political process in the free society. (Santa Barbara, Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, 1963), p. 21.
25. That is, in Latin America.
26. New Republic (June 1, 1963).
27. It is interesting to note that this rebuke coincided with the return to London on May 23, 1963 of a Socialist International mission to Latin America. An account of that mission, contained in the Secretary’s Report to the Congress of the Socialist International, read as follows: “The Chairman of the Socialist International, Alsing Anderson died almost immediately after his return from the Inter-parliamentary Union Conference in Brazil, where he had done valuable contact work for the realization of the decision of the Oslo Council to send a mission to Latin America. The members, Max Diamant (Germany) and Yehuda Schuster (Israel), left London on 25 March and returned on 23 May, 1963. They visited the following countries: Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, where they met leading representatives of the Socialist and Popular Parties.” Socialist International Information (August 24, 1963), Vol. XIII, No. 34-35.
28. In 1947, the year of ADA’s founding, Harris was a member of its so-called Committee on Economic Stability. Other members of the Committee were: Chester Bowles, Chairman; Lauchlin Currie, William H. Davis, J. K. Galbraith, Richard V. Gilbert, David Ginsburg, Leon Henderson, Robert R. Nathan, Paul A. Porter, Joseph L. Rauh, Jr.
29. Seymour E. Harris, “Kennedy and the Liberals,” New Republic (June 1, 1963).
30. In May, 1963 Kennedy delivered what Professor Harris termed a “brilliant address” to the Committee on Economic Development.
32. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
33. Human Events (February 18, 1964). Quoted from the New York Daily News.
34. Associated Press dispatch from Washington (November 25, 1963).
35. The New York Times (December 18, 1963).
36. Associated Press dispatch from Washington (June 8, 1964).
37. Human Events (May 30, 1946).
38. Washington Star (June 8, 1964).
40a. Justice Fortas now occupies the seat on the Supreme Court which Arthur Goldberg, an ADA founder and former counsel for the CIO, vacated to become Ambassador to the United Nations.
41. Frank L. Kluckhohn, former New York Times correspondent who served in the Department of State during the Eisenhower Administration, reports that of 126 political appointments in the Department, 107 went to Democrats–many of them recommended by Johnson. Frank L. Kluckhohn, The Inside on LBJ (New York, Monarch Books, 1964), p. 33.
42. Theodore H. White, The Making of the President, 1964 (New York, Atheneum, 1965), App. B., pp. 429-438.
43. Since resigned. Due to be succeeded by Prof. John P. Roche of Brandeis University, past national president, ADA.
44. See Appendix IV.
45. Report of the Committee on Economic Stability. Published by Americans for Democratic Action, May, 1946. (See title page.)
46. ADA World (February, 1964).
47. It is a fact not generally known that the business leaders who made these endorsements of Johnson also happened to be trustees of the Committee for Economic Development, an organization which enjoys the benefit of “close consultation and discussion” with its Fabian-steered counterpart in Britain, known as PEP. Committee for Economic Development. Report of Activities in 1963. From Thomas B. McCabe, Acting Chairman, p. 6; pp. 15-18.
48. U. S. News and World Report (May 18, 1964).
49. Socialist International Information (January 4, 1964), Vol. XIV, No. 1.
50. According to Socialist International Information (March 14, 1964), “copies of Harrington’s book, The Other America, are available in paperback for 95¢, from the Socialist Party, 1182 Broadway, New York, 1 N.Y. In Britain it has been published by Penguin Books–price 3/6.”
51. Chairman of this panel session was Harry W. Laidler, Executive Director Emeritus of the LID. Panelists included: Jack Conway, Special Assistant to Walter Reuther; Martin Fleisher, faculty, Brooklyn College; Robert Lampman, President’s Council of Economic Advisers; S. M. Miller, faculty, Syracuse University Youth Development Center; Oscar Ornati, faculty, New School for Social Research, author, forthcoming book on poverty; Michael D. Reagan, Director, Public Administration Programs, Syracuse University; Patricia Sexton, faculty, NYU.
52. The Worker (Sunday, April 7, 1963). Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, since deceased, was accorded a full-scale State funeral in Moscow’s Red Square.
53. The Latin word used in the Encyclilcal is pravus, root of the English word “depraved.”
54. Italics added, now removed.
55. “Socialist Helped U. S. Map War on Poverty,” Los Angeles Times (March 22, 1964).
56. Membership of the U. S. Socialist Party-Socialist Democratic Federation, an affiliate of the Socialist International, was officially listed as 3,000 in 1963. Numerically, it is one of the smallest Socialist Parties in the world, being outnumbered by the Luxembourg Socialist Workers’ Party with a membership of 7,000. (Not all American Socialists necessarily belong to the Socialist Party, nor can be identified through such membership.–ed.) Socialist International Information. (August 24, 1963), Vol. XIII, No. 34-35, “Secretary’s Report” (September, 1961-July, 1963) to the English Congress of the Socialist International, meeting in Amsterdam, September 9-12, 1963.
57. In 1937 Barbara Ward was the co-author with Leonard Woolf of a volume entitled Hitler’s Road to Bagdad. (Fabian International Section, The Fabian Society. London, Allen & Unwin, 1937). This book is not listed in recent biographies of Barbara Ward, circulated by her American publisher.
58. Adam Yarmolinsky was the son of Avraham Yarmolinsky, long time head of the Slavonic language room at the New York Public Library, and the poetess, Babette Deutsch, a life long “collaborator” of the League for Industrial Democracy, who participated in many Socialist and United Front undertakings. A graduate of Harvard Law School, Adam Yarmolinsky headed the Fund for the Republic’s Washington office in 1955, and thereafter was Secretary of the Fund. His superior was W. H. Ferry, who in 1962 issued a blast against J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. Yarmolinsky’s biography in Who’s Who in America lists no investigative or personnel experience, prior to his appointment as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Personnel in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration.
59. Quoted from The New York times (no date) by Socialist International Information (March 14, 1964).
59a. On a single day in 1966, April 29, twenty nine resolutions looking towards the formation of an Atlantic Union regional Federal government were dropped into the Congressional hopper. (House Joint Res. 1089 through 1117.)
60. James MacGregor Burns, The Deadlock of Democracy (New York, Prentice Hall, 1963), p. 228.
Chapter 20 << | >> Epilogue
Liberal historians have been pleased to remark that the Holy Roman Empire was not Holy nor Roman nor an Empire. Similarly, it might be said today that Americans for Democratic Action is neither American nor Democratic; and there would be more truth than humor in the statement. Although the proof must at times be sought in a variety of obscure publications never meant for mass consumption, there is ample evidence that the inspiration for the organization was both British and Fabian Socialist; that its leaders have maintained close ties with leaders of the London Fabian Society; and that its emergence coincided narrowly with the post World War II revival of the Socialist International, whose declarations are echoed in ADA programs.
In that connection, it will be useful to sketch the relationship between the London Fabian Society and the Socialist International where the Society has been represented in one way or another since its early years. In 1896, George Bernard Shaw attended the London Congress of the Socialist International as a Fabian delegate.(1)
Founded in London in 1864, (2) the First Socialist International, whose honorary corresponding secretary for Germany and effective creator was Karl Marx, had been dissolved at Hoboken, New Jersey in 1876. The Second Socialist International was reconstituted in Paris in 1889, on the one-hundredth anniversary of the storming of the Bastille. It survived until 1914, dominated largely by the German Social Democratic Party. (3) During World War I, social democratic splinter groups in Allied countries were utilized for subversive purposes by a special division of German Military Intelligence.
An open split among Socialist parties and societies of the world occurred during and after World War I. Following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the Third or Communist International (called the Comintern) was formed in Moscow in 1919. The Comintern was nominally dissolved in 194041 and renamed the Cominform, and several of its leading ideologues have since held posts in the United Nations. Dimitri Manuilsky and Otto Kuusinen, prominent figures of the Communist International, have served as Soviet representatives in the crystal Tower of Babel on the East River in New York City.
Efforts of the British Labour Party, spearheaded by Fabian Socialist Arthur Henderson, failed to restore the old Socialist International in 1921, because a number of member parties demanded an organization that would unite both Socialists and Communists. Still, the British Labour Party persisted. On their own initiative, executives of the Second and Third Internationals met at Paris in February, 1922, but apparently failed to reach a firm agreement. The new Labor and Socialist International finally assembled in May, 1923 at Hamburg, Germany, where Arthur Henderson was elected president of the executive committee. From 1923 to 1938 the British Labour Party [under Fabian Socialist leadership] dominated the Socialist International.(4)—and continues to do so today. This Party has been considered for decades to be the most important Socialist labor party of the world, and has sent labor organizers to many English-speaking countries, including the United States.
From the start, both the Socialist and the Communist Internationals have claimed to be the modern-day heirs of Karl Marx, by a kind of profane apostolic succession. Neither has ever forsaken the hope of uniting world-labor in one fold, a chief point of dispute being the identity of the secular shepherd. While the Communist Parties are more vociferous in denouncing the Socialists and in practice suppress Socialist Party activities within the Communist bloc, Communist governments do not hesitate to accept practical aid from Socialist leaders abroad—and, in fact, rely heavily upon it.
Leaders of the Socialist International and its affiliates, impelled by a pluralist outlook, have never relaxed their patient efforts to persuade the Communist leaders, individually or collectively, to adopt a more “practical” point of view at home. As recently as the winter of 1964, Zigmunt Zaremba, Socialist and former member of the Polish Parliament and chairman of the Socialist Union of Central Eastern Europe, declared: “Nobody wants to deny Communism the right to exist but, equally, Communism cannot deny this right to Socialism!”(5) To more impartial observers, these rights are by no means self-evident.
Under the impact of World War II the Second International, whose Bureau was in Zurich, once more fel1 apart. During the war years, as has already been noted, the Fabian International Bureau served as host in London to a number of the Socialist International’s exiled leaders. In 1946 the old International was formally dissolved at a conference of delegates from nineteen countries held at Clacton-on-Sea and Bournemouth, England; and an International Socialist Bureau was set up in London. At a congress held in Zurich on June 7-9, 1947, a resolution was passed stating the time was ripe to consider reestablishing the Socialist International.
Meanwhile, affairs of the International from November, 1947, were handled by the Committee of the International Socialist Conference, known as COMISCO, which held its first session in London during March, 1948. Under the chairmanship of the veteran British Fabian Socialist, Morgan Phillips, COMISCO took an active hand in setting up the labor arm of the Socialist International, the Confederation of Free Trade Unions. COMISCO likewise undertook to revitalize the more overt affiliates of the Socialist International, among others, (6) the International Organization of Socialist Youth.
Through Socialists of many nationalities accredited to the United Nations, COMISCO aided the International Organization of Socialist Youth in obtaining consultative status on various inter-governmental bodies. (7) These included UNESCO and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, represented by Gunnar Myrdal and Walt Whitman Rostow. Young Socialists, who were not always in their first youth, were pledged to work for a new world order “to replace capitalism by a system in which the public interest takes precedence over the interest of private profit.” (8) The Students’ League for Industrial Democracy, whose adult board included leading members of ADA, was officially listed in 1956-57 as belonging to the International Organization of Socialist Youth.(9)
Formal rebirth of the Socialist International occurred at the Frankfurt Congress of 1951, after which a permanent headquarters was established in London. At that congress the term “Social Democracy” was made interchangeable with “Democratic Socialism,” a distinction without a difference. A second congress held in October of the same year at Milan issued a Declaration of Socialist Policy for Under-developed Territories—whose effects are still evident today in the policies of the United Nations and the foreign aid policies of the United States. After explaining that technical and financial aid must be tendered in such a way as to avoid embarrassing the recipient governments or committing them to anything whatsoever, the International – declared coolly: “It is the primary task of Socialists [in the developed countries] to create a public opinion favorable to active participation in a program of assistance to underdeveloped countries, even if this effort should entail sacrifices from the peoples of the more advanced countries.”(10) Both as publicists and public officials, ADA supporters have been intensely active in promoting long-term aid “without strings” to newly constituted governments of backward nations, some barely emerged from cannibalism.
Decisions of the Frankfurt Congress were transmitted to the United States by Norman Thomas, one of the few open and avowed Socialists still to be found in this country—the others claiming to be liberals or progressives. Yet in the January, 1953, issue of The Progressive, a Left liberal monthly that boasted of having been founded in 1909 by the elder La Follette, the League for Industrial Democracy advertised three pamphlets for sale. They were: Democratic Socialism, by Norman Thomas; National Health Insurance, by Seymour E. Harris; and World Labor Today, by Robert J. Alexander. Endorsers, sponsors and contributors of the magazine at that time included endorsers, sponsors and/or prominent members of ADA. (11) In the same issue, The Age of Suspicion by James Wechsler of ADA, was offered gratis with subscriptions to The Progressive and membership in the Political Book Club. Book Club judges were Gerald W. Johnson, formerly of the Baltimore Sun, Michael Straight of the New Republic, and the durable Professor Max Lerner—intimate of Harold Laski, of the old British Left Book Club.
The September, 1954, issue of The Progressive featured a debate between Norman Thomas and Robert R. Nathan, then chairman of the ADA executive committee. It dealt with alleged defects and virtues of Americans for Democratic Action, Thomas taking the negative side. In “The Trouble with ADA,” Norman Thomas reproached the organization for not insisting that the United Nations be strengthened to a point where it could enforce world disarmament.
On that issue, Thomas seems to have been premature, and the attitude of ADA was soon vindicated by higher authority. At its congress of July, 1955, in London, held jointly with the Asian Socialist Conference, the Socialist International declared: “This repeated emphasis on the need for world disarmament prior to the establishment of a fund for the underdeveloped nations is most unfortunate.” (12)
Extolling “The Value of ADA” in The Progressive, Robert Nathan prudently confined himself to aspects of domestic politics. Admitting ADA had from the first been “torn between the political present and the Fabian future,” he said that he expected ADA “to serve as a broker between ideas and their political implementation”—an argument for the art of the possible. Personally, continued Nathan, he was for “pragmatism with a philosophy of liberalism,” and he insisted that he, for one, repudiated Socialism!
An obvious reason for the “debate,” always a favorite Left liberal device, seems to have been to give Nathan the opportunity of confronting a notorious American Socialist and denying that ADA was a Socialist-oriented body. The utility of such denials can be inferred from the fact that Robert R. Nathan, (13) a senior official of the organization, was still able in 1963 to mingle amicably with top executives of private industry, as a trustee of the Committee for Economic Development.(14)
To exploit the classic Fabian techniques of permeation and penetration, it was important for ADA spokesmen to quash any allegation of Socialism, even before it was raised. Caution was further imposed upon the small but increasingly powerful organization by a profound popular distrust of foreign “isms” still extant throughout the country. If ADA and its chosen instruments were generally recognized to be part of a world-wide Socialist movement seeking to liquidate the United States by easy stages, they would be repudiated by the great majority of the American electorate, including the bulk of organized labor.
Nobody was more alert to that danger or more patently eager to avert it than Walter Reuther, president of the United Automobile Workers Union, and presently heading the Industrial Union Division of the AFL-CIO. From 1951, Reuther had been a perennial vice chairman of Americans for Democratic Action, and his Washington attorney, Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., has held a series of executive posts in ADA. Asked on the Face the Nation broadcast for March 16, 1958, if he was ever a Socialist, Reuther replied, “Yes, but that was thirty years ago when I was very young and very foolish, and I got over it very quickly, for which I am very thankful.” Thirty years earlier, the Dies Committee was hearing testimony about Reuther’s postgraduate education in the Soviet Union and his presence at union caucuses of the Communist Party USA. (15) At that time, it hardly occurred to investigators to ask if he was also a Socialist.
Only three years before the Face the Nation broadcast, however, Walter Reuther had served on the committee for the 50th Anniversary Dinner of the League for Industrial Democracy—a Fabian Socialist organization with which, except for a brief interruption, he had been connected since his college days. In 1949, he had been invited to address the London Fabian Society on its native heath.(16) If, as Reuther said, he “got over” being a Socialist, there seems to be some confusion as to just when his reformation took place.
Adepts of social psychology since the days of Graham Wallas, the modern torchbearers of the American Fabian movement reacted swiftly against any public charge of foreign entanglements. When it was reported in Washington at the mid-century that ADA was somehow connected with Fabian Socialist leaders of the British Labour Party, the suggestion was protested with a vehemence that seemed excessive. Carey McWilliams, editor of The Nation, denounced it as the invention of black reactionaries bent on destroying the children of light. Going further, he ascribed it to “paranoid delusions, of which our reactionaries are the victims.”(17)
Yet in a foreword to the volume in which those rash statements appeared, McWilliams acknowledged his own “deep indebtedness to Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn, with whom I had the honor to collaborate in a brief submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of the Hollywood Ten.” Dr. Meiklejohn, once president of the University of Wisconsin, was a long time collaborator, official and board member of the LID, acknowledged affiliate of the London Fabian Society. Since factual refutation seemed impossible, name-calling, slander and charges of mental ill-health were the standard retort of American Fabians to any outsider seeking to link them with their British brethren.
Referring to Senator Jenner’s speech in 1949 about an ADA booklet advertising summer study-tours to Britain, Clifton Brock said plaintively, ‘`Thus the initial tactic in the campaign to destroy ADA’s reputation was to associate it with Britain’s Labour Government.” (18) Whatever the Senator’s motive may have been, the connection to which he pointed was an inescapable and enduring fact. As late as 1960, the Fabian News, in its roster of local events, announced a joint meeting of the Central London Fabian Society with Americans for Democratic Action, held on July 13 at Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London, W.C.I. (19)
With rare indiscretion, the Fabian Society Annual Report for 1949-50 had also announced two receptions held by the Society for its American associates:
“A reception for James Loeb and some members of the Americans for Democratic Action was addressed by Austin Albu, M.P., who spoke on the history and work of the Fabian Society. Patrick Gordon Walker, M.P. acted as host, and other delegates to COMISCO attended.(20)
“The second reception was for the United States delegation to the first conference of the International Confederation of Free Trades Unions of the World. The guests were received by the Rt. Hon. James Griffiths, M.P. and speeches on behalf of the guests were made by Walter Reuther (CIO j and David Dubinsky (AFL). Both of these receptions were organized in conjunction with the Director of the London Bureau of Americans for Democratic Action.”
From the foregoing, it appears that James Loeb, Jr., then National Executive Secretary of ADA, and his unnamed companions were delegates to COMISCO, the Committee of the International Socialist Conference. Their host at the reception, Patrick Gordon Walker, became the British Labour Party’s chief spokesman on foreign affairs, and in October, 1964, was named Foreign Secretary following a narrow Labour Party victory at the polls. The Director of the London Bureau of ADA, who arranged both receptions, has been identified as David C. Williams (21)—former Rhodes Scholar and member of the Fabian Society, who had sent Patrick Gordon Walker to the United States when ADA was in process of being organized.
In April, 1952, according to Fabian News, David C. Williams addressed a meeting of Members of Parliament on America’s Point Four program for aid to underdeveloped nations. An article by Williams on the same subject appeared in the November, 1952, issue of Venture, organ of the Fabian Commonwealth Bureau. There Williams faithfully followed the line laid down by the Socialist International at its Milan Conference in 1951, and anticipated some points in the International’s 1955 declaration on SUNFED. (22) He assured his readers, for, instance, that the United States would not use the “power of the purse” to influence recipient nations, and said that private American capital—except for oil interests—was reluctant to invest in the program. Since such “investment” was supposed to be on a virtually nonprofit, no-return basis, it is not astonishing that private investors failed to find it attractive.
Other articles by ADA keynoters continued to appear in official British Fabian publications, never known to give space to any writer not affiliated in some way with the international Socialist movement. In May, 1954, Fabian International Review published “Eisenhower and Foreign Policy,” by Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., then national co-chairman of ADA. Fabian News for the same month advertised it as an “important article,” a clear hint that all members of the Society should read it. The article was important for non-Fabians, too, because it announced with a candor quite unlike ADA’s more guarded pronouncements at home, the intention of Left liberals to gain control over both the foreign and military policies of the United States.
Its author was a second generation Harvard professor, whose father was a lifelong crony of Felix Frankfurter. Schlesinger, Jr. had been brought up to believe that Sacco and Vanzetti were saints, and that all who denied it were devils, and that radicalism was really Americanism. He graduated in 1938 from Harvard, a classmate of Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr. Though a non-Catholic himself, Schlesinger, Jr. chose for his senior honors essay to write a life of Orestes A. Brownson, a brilliant nineteenth century convert to Catholicism. It was published the following year and became a selection of the Catholic Book Club.
Some say the subject was suggested to him by Harold Laski, an old family friend and frequent house guest. Laski had been Joe Kennedy, Jr.’s teacher at the London School of Economics, and being convinced that young Joe had a great future in American politics, he may have wished to bring the two young men together on a basis acceptable to the elder Kennedys. As things turned out, it was Jack Kennedy to whom Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. attached himself in later years, both as a campaign aide and White House adviser.
Fluent, intelligent and supremely self-assured, Schlesinger, Jr. attended Cambridge University in 1938-39 as a “Henry fellow.” (23) Known since infancy to Harold Laski, young Arthur was warmly received in British Fabian circles and treated as a member of the Society. Toward the end of World War II, he had an opportunity to renew those contacts when he went overseas for the Office of Strategic Services, being employed in a clerical capacity in London, Paris and Germany. At that time—as he states wryly in Who’s Who in America—Schlesinger, Jr. “attained the high rank of corporal” in the Army of the United States, just as Adolf Hitler had done in the World War I Austrian Army—a circumstance which hardly qualified either of them to formulate overall military policies for their nations.
In his article for Fabian International Review, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. pointed out that control of military policy by Left liberals in the United States was only a preliminary step to gaining control of foreign policy. Discussing demands of American”liberals” at the time for a larger defense budget, he explained to his Fabian readers that from the “liberal viewpoint” the Eisenhower budget was “not a security budget, but a fiscal budget”—that is, motivated not by calm consideration of defense needs, but “by a fanatical passion to reduce taxes and move toward a balanced budget.” He added:
“I suspect that the drift of this argument has carried me outside the orbit of many British Socialists. The hard fact of the matter is that, where in Britain the left appears to want to cut the defense budget, in the United States the most effective liberals are opposed to the Eisenhower Administration’s policy of cutting defense spending [that is, as of 1954].”
Schlesinger suggested that American “liberals” had their own fiscal motivation—a strictly Keynesian one. They favored large defense outlays for the moment, not so much because of actual defense needs, as because this imposed a policy of large-scale public “investment” and deficit spending. “Above all,” Schlesinger concluded, “it has become evident that liberals could not hope to control foreign policy unless they were ready to try and control defense policy. . . . Military power becomes the master of foreign policy, not when there is too much of it but when there is too little.”(24)
Apprised of those weighty considerations, the Fabian-steered Congress of the Socialist International in its SUNFED Declaration of 1955 ordered the disarmament question to be temporarily soft-pedaled by international Socialists, and aid to backward nations stressed instead. It stated:
“. . . The trend of discussion at the U.N. has encouraged the belief that the creation of SUNFED might be made dependent on progress in disarmament . . . A world-wide agreement on disarmament would be extremely helpful; but we need not and should not wait for it, doing nothing in the meanwhile about economic plans. In fact, economic development in underdeveloped areas may itself lead to a decrease in world tension and may expedite talks on disarmament. Anyway, economic development is of sufficient importance to be considered on its own merits.” (25)
There followed in l956 the Millikan-Rostow Report, submitted to the National Security Council in Washington and advocating among other things what Senator Hubert Humphrey of ADA enthusiastically termed the SUNFED philosophy. The Report proposed a lump sum appropriation up to 12 billion dollars, to be dispensed by the United States Government over a period of five years in the form of long-term, low-interest loans to underprivileged nations. At the close of the first five-year plan, a second five-year plan of equal magnitude was envisioned, whether or not the original funds were repaid.
In fact, as the Millikan-Rostow Report (p. 79) loftily remarked, “The narrow criterion of whether a project can repay from its own revenues is at best irrelevant and at worst misleading.”(26) Most of this fantastic proposal was embodied in the U.S. Development Fund Loan Bill, presented to the United States Congress in 1957. Although the amount was trimmed before passage and placed on an annual appropriation basis, the spirit of the International’s declaration was preserved.
To induce the United States Government to adopt—even piecemeal and unawares—a program of the Socialist International, and to persuade the Socialist International to adjust its own timetable in accordance with the plans of Left liberals in America, was no small accomplishment. It presumed a more systematic interchange than was revealed in occasional articles by ADA keynoters, and occasional summit meetings between American Fabians and foreign Socialists. Regular and dependable communications were required between the political arm of the American Fabian movement and the Fabian policy planners of the British Labour Party, who dominated the Socialist International.
Obviously, the simplest control-measure was to assign a reliable agent of the Fabian Society to an obscure but central position in ADA. From the start, this function appears to have been entrusted to David C. Williams, a man of many hats in ADA. By temperament, training and connections he was well-qualified for such duty. Unlike other Rhodes Scholars of his circle at Oxford, Williams aspired to no public eminence, but was content to work industriously and almost anonymously within the confines of the Fabian Socialist movement. He was a transparency, through which the light emanating from New Fabian Research—where the policy-making operations of the Society resided—was transmitted to the American faithful for adaptation to home usage.
Following his graduation from Oxford, Williams had returned for a few years to Ohio, where he engaged in teaching, engineering research and organizational work for the Teachers’ Union. He became secretary of the Ohio Federation of Teachers, at about the same time that the British-born Mark Starr was climbing to national office in the organization. As secretary of the Ohio joint AFL-CIO legislative committee Williams lobbied for organized labor at the State Capitol, and in 1944 attempted (and failed) to obtain a seat in the Ohio Legislature.
During the final year of World War II he returned to London, where he represented the Union for Democratic Action and both the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organization—despite the fact that the AFL and CIO did not formally merge until ten years later. Williams also managed the Union for Democratic Action Educational Fund, a somewhat mysterious tax free foundation which survived at least until 1954. That year ADA, according to its own financial statement, “borrowed” $500 from the Fund.
David Williams was in London during 1945 and saw the Fabian-controlled Labour Party sweep to power. It is reliably reported that he participated in the operation, and certainly his sympathies were deeply involved. The suggestion has been made that Williams’ office was the channel through which substantial sums were routed by Socialist-led trade unions in America, to insure the Labour Party’s victory in the 1945 British elections—this in return for a promise of an early solution to the Palestine question, diplomatically referred to by Williams in his Fabian Journal article of 1947.
Knowledgeable persons regard David C. Williams as the true begetter of Americans for Democratic Action, and almost always a reliable clue to its operational policy. His articles, published by left wing journals in America and England, are not mere expressions of personal bias meant to exemplify that “freedom of discussion” on which ADA, like the Fabian Society, prides itself. They reflect the approved ADA line of the moment, as does the ADA World he has edited for years. More than any other person, Williams helped to shape that homogenized viewpoint on political, economic and social questions which marks ADA followers, for all their tendency to be critical of individuals, including each other.
Since 1947, ADA World has employed the device of the Congressional Score Card, previously used by the Union for Democratic Action. Originally, UDA collaborated with Michael Straight—publisher of The New Republic and son of its long time financial angel, Dorothy Whitney Straight Elmhirst—in issuing a rundown on members of Congress from the Left liberal point of view. Entitled “A Congress to Win the War,” it was first published as a supplement to The New Republic of May 18, 1942, and thereafter widely circulated in pamphlet form among academic and professional groups. Each legislator was given a plus or minus mark, according to whether his vote on selected issues was for or against the views of UDA.
As adapted by ADA World, the Score Card graded members of Congress percentage-wise for their voting record on bills rated important to the success of the ADA Fabian Socialist program. Issued annually as a Congressional Supplement, the Score Card not only alerted ADA followers to the stand they were expected to take on specific issues; but also warned legislators of impending reprisals in forthcoming election campaigns. Its effects were first demonstrated in the 1948 campaign, when 79 congressmen, 5 senators and 4 governors who had been endorsed and backed by ADA were elected to office. (27) Among those newly elected senators were two ADA leaders, Paul Douglas and Hubert Humphrey, the latter becoming first Democratic Party whip in the Senate and then Vice President of the United States. A former mid-west field director of ADA, Richard Bolling, was sent to the House from Missouri.
Though ADA claimed a national membership of only twenty-eight thousand at the time, its strength was swelled by the campaign efforts of the CIO-Political Action Committee, whose judgments coincided almost invariably with those of ADA. This was not surprising, since the CIO-Political Action Committee’s stand on individuals and issues was largely dictated by the Reuther brothers, Walter, Victor and Roy —all devout supporters of ADA. Similarly, an army of International Ladies Garment Workers and their families marched in regimented ranks to the polls, to register approval or disapproval of political candidates as rated by ADA—according to precepts and principles originating in New Fabian Research.
With the merger of the AFL and CIO in 195S, the functions of the Political Action Committee were taken over by the joint Committee on Political Education, known as COPE, a more potent and even more adequately financed body, for which ADA supplied both candidates and ideology. It was a setup similar to that envisaged long before by George Bernard Shaw, in which labor was to provide the money and votes for election campaigns—and Socialist intellectuals were to supply the leadership, programs and political jobholders at local, state and national levels. Labor furnished the real lobbying power behind ADA programs in Washington, where Americans for Democratic Action confessed to having only one registered lobbyist receiving the modest salary of $9,000 per year. Meanwhile, ADA continued to produce a stream of “expert” witnesses for Congressional committees—virtually “running an underground railway” between Capitol Hill, Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Potency of the combination can be inferred from the fact that ADA made at least one-third of their proposed policies effective in Congress from 1947 to 1960. (28) This analysis does not disclose the relative importance of the policies put over by ADA, nor take into account partial ADA victories. Deprecated by ADA spokesmen as a frustrating performance, falling far short of their own high hopes, it actually denoted an alarmingly high rate of progress for a small Socialist-inspired organization claiming a national membership of at most forty thousand persons and an annual budget of some $130,000.
A possible weakness in the ADA power structure, seldom mentioned by ADA publicists or their opponents, is the fact that only a small executive fraction of organized labor has been consciously involved in such maneuvers. While it is true that the so-called educational propaganda prepared by COPE reaches millions of Americans, via broadcasts, television, union newspapers and syndicated ADA columnists, its actual operations are controlled by a few powerful and sophisticated union chieftains. They represent the Socialist-minded minority, not the majority of union labor. Notably, they are leaders of the United Auto Workers and the International Ladies Garment Workers.
By coincidence, these are the very unions which have contributed most regularly and faithfully to the support of ADA national headquarters, even when other unions fell away. An estimate based on ADA’s own fiscal statements shows the total amount given directly by the ILGWU from 1947 through 1958 as $231,000, and the UAW total as $165,000. (29) To avoid conflict with the law, since 1951 such funds have been paid into ADA’s “nonpolitical” account—if anything connected with that organization can properly be termed nonpolitical. Possibly the services of Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., and the frequent sums “in excess of $100” donated by him and members of his immediate family to ADA, may be reckoned as an indirect UAW contribution.
ADA spokesmen, while admitting that in its early years one-third of the organization’s income came from labor unions, (30) point out that by 1960 a mere one-tenth of its annual budget was derived from union sources. This recalls the old story of the girl who had the baby out of wedlock, and excused herself by saying, “It was such a little one!” Whether such contributions were authorized by vote of the rank-and-file union membership is not recorded.
The ILGWU and the UAW have donated larger amounts of their members’ hard-earned cash to finance world-wide activities of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Moreover, it is in great part due to the leaders of those two globally-oriented American labor unions that the AFL-CIO has been induced to contribute an annual one million dollars since 1955, to support the labor arm of the Socialist International.(31) In July, 1963, Walter Reuther, president of the United Auto Workers and heir-presumptive to the presidency of the AFL-CIO, took an expense-paid trip to Harpsund, Sweden, to attend what proved to be a joint meeting of various European leaders of the Socialist International and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions. (32)
Reuther was accompanied by Senator Hubert Humphrey, another pillar of ADA. Though the two Americans were prudently described as “observers,” one wonders why they could not have found something in the whole wide world of a less officially Socialist character to observe.
Twelve months later that rustic conclave at the country home of Sweden’s Socialist Prime Minister, Tage Erlander, was repeated, with very many of the same personages attending. On July 4, 1964, it was announced in Socialist International Information that “the following have been invited, among others: Willy Brandt, Harold Wilson, Jens-Otto Krag, Giuseppe Saragat, Senator Hubert Humphrey and Walter Reuther. The meeting will be held in private, as was a similar meeting in Harpsund last year.” With refreshing candor, this front-page item was headlined “Socialist Leaders to Meet in Harpsung!” The meeting was scheduled for August 1-2, when Hubert Humphrey was already the Democratic Party’s candidate for the Vice Presidency of the United States.
If Americans for Democratic Action in some ways belied its name, at least nobody could deny that (to paraphrase Max Beerbohm) it stood for action with a capital H. Its members were frenetically busy people who never stopped trying to promote their programs and, incidentally, themselves. Chiefly they consisted—as one ADA sympathizer said—”of academic intellectuals, the more socially conscious union leaders and members, municipal reformers, and other assorted groups and individuals of liberal [sic] political and economic inclinations.” (33)
Because of its volubility and persistence, the organization made a good deal~more noise than its size seemed to warrant. Moreover, ADA had a tendency to arrogate to itself a monopoly on civic virtue and public interest legislation. This irritated well-meaning citizens who happened to believe that desirable reforms need not invariably be achieved by the enlargement of Federal powers. Undeterred by occasional setbacks which they mourned publicly but from which they usually managed to extract some advantage, ADA’s followers continued to spread their influence, via education and political action, into many high and otherwise sacrosanct places. (34)
In 1950, when only three and a half years old, ADA claimed to have 123 chapters in thirty states with a membership of nearly thirty-five thousand. Already it could boast of having made inroads into the Democratic Party machine. Eight major planks of the Fair Deal platform on which President Truman campaigned in 1948 coincided with ADA objectives—including the controversial civil rights plank which ADA delegates, led by Mayor Hubert Humphrey of Minneapolis, forced on the Democratic National Convention.
A number of President Truman’s key administrative appointments (though perhaps not so many as ADA would have wished) went to ADA members and friends after 1948. This was the pay-off for contributions, electoral and fiscal, made to Truman’s surprise victory by ADA labor leaders Dubinsky, Reuther et al. ADA announced that their role in political campaigns was to supply “the margin of victory:” a formula by which a minority claims the credit for swinging narrowly-won popular elections.
By the time the next national elections rolled around, Americans for Democratic Action had gathered enough intra-Party strength to sway a majority of delegates at the Democratic National Convention. In 1952, ADA was able to name a presidential candidate, Adlai Stevenson. Old pros of the Democratic Party suspected that no matter whom the Democrats ran that year, he was bound to lose. The country definitely wanted a change, and General Eisenhower with his World War II laurels and his heart-warming grin seemed an unbeatable popular candidate—as ADA had recognized four years earlier, when it tactlessly tried to persuade Eisenhower to enter the Democratic primary against his titular Commander-in-chief, President Truman.(35)
It was not necessary that ADA leaders supposed Dwight D. Eisenhower to be a Socialist or even a Left liberal. They regarded him as a political general who owed his spectacular rise in the armed forces to the New Deal and General George C. Marshall, and who was never known to have clashed with either—not even when ordered to halt American troops outside Berlin, so that Russian armies were the first to enter the city. While in London during World War II, Eisenhower had mingled affably though not intimately with Fabian Socialists in the British wartime Cabinet; (36) and apparently they concluded he might be amenable to management as a future President of the United States. General Eisenhower, however, proved cold to ADA’s 1948 proposition. He waited and received a more proper bid for 1952 from a group of Eastern Republicans.
Adlai Stevenson, whom ADA in its political wisdom chose to run against Eisenhower in two consecutive elections, was a candidate of another stripe. By his own statements, Stevenson was committed body and soul to ADA’s welfare state and One World goals. With minor reservations, he had been charitably inclined toward the Soviet Union ever since he visited Moscow in 1926, as a cub reporter for his family’s newspaper, the Bloomington Pantagraph. Stevenson had a barbed wit and a cultivated charm seemingly irresistible to Left liberals, who applauded him as madly in defeat as if he were a victor.
The ADA World in November, 1948 had mentioned Adlai Stevenson as “one of the original founders of ADA in Chicago.” As late as February, 1952, the same house organ referred to him as “a charter member of ADA.” Yet Stevenson wrote that very year im a letter to the late Senator Pat McCarran: “As for ADA, I have never been a member of it.” (37) Skeptics pointed out that Adlai was notoriously absentminded. Undeniably he owed his election as Governor of Illinois in 1948, to efforts of the Independent Voters of Illinois, an ADA affiliate and a regular donor to ADA’s national headquarters fund. Since the Independent Voters of Illinois, however, had retained its corporate independence, members of that organization could still state with legal accuracy that they did not belong to ADA.
At best it was a transparent subterfuge, deceiving nobody but the general public. Both politicians and personal admirers knew Adlai as ADA’s boy. For his 1952 campaign manager, he chose Wilson Wyatt, founder-member and first national chairman of Americans for Democratic Action.(38) Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.—member of ADA’s national board, chairman of its Massachusetts chapter and secretary of its foreign policy commission(39)—was Stevenson’s special assistant on campaign issues and tactics. Only a few years before, ADA executive secretary James Loeb, Jr. had remarked complacently: “If ADA has any short range liability, it has been its insistence on political integrity.” Under the Kennedy-Johnson Administration Adlai Stevenson, that paragon of political integrity, became United States Ambassador to the United Nations.
The repeated candidacy of Adlai Stevenson had more value for ADA than it did for the Democratic Party. Even as a loser, he provided a national sounding board for ADA’s Fabian Socialist propaganda, within the respectable framework of the two party system. More important still, as titular leader of the Democratic Party for eight years, Stevenson was able to deliver its national machinery into the hands of his ADA backers and associates.
Thus Americans for Democratic Action, during a period of apparent defeat, was able to solidify its influence not only on the Democratic National Committee, but also on local and state Democratic committees in virtually all states outside the Solid South. It had a bigger voice than ever in selecting congressional candidates, and it concentrated on winning congressional elections. The results were visible in the increased number of ADA-approved candidates sent to Capitol Hill in 1956 and after. For the first time in history, dedicated if unavowed agents of international Socialism gained effective control over the mechanics and patronage of a major political party in the United States. Not even Franklin D. Roosevelt had been able to change the pattern of the Party’s operations so completely.
This situation prevailed in April, 1960, when Chester Bowles of Connecticut, a founder of ADA, and the late Philip Perlman of Maryland, U.S. Solicitor General under Truman and long an ADA sympathizer, (40) were named chairman and vice chairman of the Democratic Party’s election year platform committee. Both belonged to the Democratic Advisory Council, a Left liberal caucus within the Party. Bowles held regional platform hearings in ADA strongholds like Philadelphia, St. Louis and Detroit, at which local ADA leaders aired their views. At least four other ADA members were named to the platform committee, including Joseph Rauh, Jr., sworn enemy of loyalty investigations and advocate of enlisting the Executive power to impose a de facto merger of racial elements in the United States. Rauh was the busiest single member of a subcommittee appointed to draft the Party platform.
In all but wording, the final document approved by the Democratic Convention in Los Angeles and ironically entitled “The Rights of Man,” was a replica of the platform adopted by ADA at its own annual convention. (41) Besides a provocative civil rights plank, openly inviting civil disturbances, it contained a civil liberties plank dictated by Rauh that might, if enacted into law, seriously impede the FBI in collecting evidence on cases of espionage or treason for prosecution by the U.S. Attorney General. Even so tolerant an observer as Professor Brock has described the 1960 Democrat platform as the most radical ever adopted by a major political party in this country. Far from being discarded at a later date as mere campaign oratory, it became the visible operating program of the Kennedy-Johnson Administration.
In the field of higher education, Students for Democratic Action (SDA) had been established by 1950 on 100 colleges and campuses. Its revolving membership was described merely as “exceeding 3000.”(42) Based on the same arithmetic, it can be computed that within ten years quite a few thousands of those anonymous trainees held positions in government, private industry, research foundations and the teaching profession. Normally, the better positions were obtained on the strength of superior college grades and recommendations supplied by liberal professors and deans.
A true-life Horatio Alger story of the Left may be seen in the career of Theodore Sorensen, once a model SDA member at the University of Nebraska. Sorensen’s father had been campaign manager for Senator George Norris—original sponsor of TVA and one of those Progressive Republicans known in their day as the sons of the wild jackass. While still in law school, young Ted lobbied at the State Legislature for a Fair Employment Practices Act. He registered with his local draft board as a conscientious objector, following the pacifist example set by his parents.
At the age of twenty-three, Ted Sorensen went to Washington, poor and apparently friendless. There he found work with the Government in a series of routine jobs; but continued dutifully to attend ADA conventions. He soon attracted the notice of powerful patrons. Less than two years after arriving in the nation’s capital, he was recommended by Senator Paul Douglas of ADA for the position of legislative aide to the newly elected and very wealthy junior Senator from Massachusetts, John F. Kennedy. After interviewing his prospective employer to make sure the two of them were “not too far apart on basic policy,” Sorensen took the job. Eight years later he accompanied his boss to the White House, in the capacity of confidential assistant.(43)
From conversations with several hundred present-day college students in various parts of the country, it is evident to this writer that a strong reason for the appeal of Left liberalism to aspiring youth has been the diligence of adult ADA members in acting as an unofficial placement service. At the same time, Left-leaning professors—whose own tenure is assured by the joint ADA-Civil Liberties Union battles for so-called academic freedom—can threaten conservative students with failure and loss of credits for giving “wrong answers” in opinion-forming courses.(44) Thus traditional American values are reversed, with Left liberalism becoming entrenched as the current status quo.
Like members of the Fabian Society who took positions with the Federation of British Industries, ADA members entering industry or public service usually renounced any formal connection with ADA. They became part of a diffused but growing army of ADA nonmembers advancing that organization’s ideas in ever-widening areas of American life. While ADA’s official membership figures remained in the vicinity of thirty-five to forty thousand, the range of its contacts expanded progressively throughout the apparently frustrating fifties.
In l957, Americans for Democratic Action convened to celebrate its 10th anniversary, meeting once more for sentimental reasons at the Willard Hotel in Washington. Twelve hundred delegates attended from all parts of the country. Old-timers of the League for Industrial Democracy were still very much in evidence. Speakers included the perennial Senators Douglas, Humphrey and Neuberger, with Wayne Morse of Oregon added to the list. (45) (Senator Morse’s melodramatic move from the Republican to the Democratic side of the Senate aisle did not alter the fact that he was first and foremost a Socialist both in words and deeds.) Walter Reuther, James B. Carey, A. Philip Randolph spoke for the unions, some of which after straying away had returned that year to the fold. (46) Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., Harvard historian, composed a not unflattering history of ADA for the occasion.
Conspicuous among the newer recruits was the towering figure and booming voice of Governor Theodore Roosevelt McKeldin of Maryland, (47) who had placed the name of Dwight D. Eisenhower in nomination at the Republican National Convention of 1952. Governor McKeldin’s presence indicated that during the past decade ADA had also made some slight progress in permeating the Republican Party. Theoretically, it was the purpose of ADA to work inside both major parties, in order to gain dual support for its own Fabian Socialist programs. In July, 1950, former Attorney General Francis Biddle, testifying before a Congressional Committee as national chairman of ADA, reaffirmed this intention, while disclaiming any Socialist bias. “My thought,” said Biddle, “is that we operate 90-some per cent in the Democratic area and a very small per cent in the Republican— and oh! that the Republican area were larger!” (48)
At that time Biddle was asked, “Have you [in the ADA] ever supported any Republican candidates?” He replied, “Yes, in the New York Mayoralty election we supported Newbold Morris against O’Dwyer.” (Newbold Morris, it may be recalled, addressed the LID’s 40th Anniversary Dinner in 1945, and there uttered warm words of praise for Norman Thomas.) Biddle further noted that ADA had backed Congressmen Richard Hoffman of Chicago and Jacob Javits of New York.
Since the price of ADA endorsement is support of its policies, the path pursued by its favorites can be surmised. During eight years as a Republican Congressman, Jacob K. Javits voted the ADA way on 82 of 87 roll calls and earned a rating of 94 per cent on its Score Card. (49) Despite his fidelity Javits failed to get official ADA backing when he ran for the office of New York Attorney General in 1954. The alleged reason was that his rival, former Congressman Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr., had a pluperfect ADA voting record. While some of Javits’ friends professed to regard this as base ingratitude, it is unlikely Javits saw it that way. For the first time in his life, he needed conservative upstate votes to win.
Born and bred on New York City’s lower East Side, a cherished speaker for years at LID (50) functions and those of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, Javits required no printed endorsement to carry Manhattan, the Bronx and much of Brooklyn. He could hardly have lost the garment workers’ vote if he had tried. On the other hand, a public announcement of ADA support, confirming rumors of his radical ties, might have been the kiss of death for Javits in suburban and upstate districts. A shrewd and accomplished campaigner, he could manage very well without such endorsement. From the apparently disinterested regularity with which he has voted for ADA programs ever since, it was obvious he harbored no grudge. As the senior senator from New York State in 1963, Javits still scored 94 per cent by ADA standards (51)—higher than any other senator on the Republican side of the aisle. Of course, he firmly denies being a Socialist.
ADA and labor union endorsements of political candidates are often separate but identical, especially if the union in question is the ILGWU. As the British-born Socialist, Mark Starr, explained, however, the complexion of the minority groups composing the ILGWU’s rank-and-file has altered over the years. A large proportion of the membership—which remains numerically stable, despite a heavy turnover in individual members—now consists of Negro, Puerto Rican and Mexican women.(52) The sole political issue that really engrosses them is civil rights; so in a sense, the fate of the ILGWU leadership may be said to hinge on that issue.
The old immigrant garment-maker from Eastern Europe is no more —except for a little group of laborites, whom David Dubinsky is said to have “rescued from the Nazis in Poland” during World War II, and brought to this country. (53) One of the latter, Henoch Mendelsund, today heads the ILGWU’s potent Joint Dress Board. As for the children and grandchildren of older European radicals who founded the garment workers union, they have prospered under the American system and many are today doctors, lawyers, college professors and civil servants. Far from becoming what the old-style unionist contemptuously referred to as “alrightniks,” a number of them are now the backbone of the Fabian Socialist ADA.
The present-day ILGWU not only endorses candidates, but also instructs its four hundred thousand plus members, their families and friends how to vote. It organizes union participation in political campaigns, to an extent not permitted by law even in Britain. In New York City the ILGWU, acting jointly with the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, has organized a private political party: the so-called Liberal Party, which elects its own captive congressmen and also has an important voice in the City and State governments. Elsewhere the ILGWU adapts its political activities to the local scene.
An official report of the General Executive Board to the ILGWU convention, meeting in May, 1962, at Atlantic City, told how the union “played a critical part in four important contests throughout the nation, aside from the national election of the Kennedy-Johnson ticket in November, 1960.” In San Antonio, Texas, for example:
“. . . former ILGWU staff member Henry Gonzales won a special election to fill a vacancy. Gonzales is the first American of Mexican background to be elected to Congress from Texas. For years he was a vigorous champion of civil rights as a member of the Texas State Senate. Several minutes after taking his oath as a Congressman, he handed the clerk of the House a bill calling for abolition of the poll tax. Within 48 hours after his election, Gonzales, after visiting with Pres. Dubinsky in the General Office, pitched into a 12-hour whirlwind drive throughout New York City in behalf of Mayor Wagner’s candidacy.” (54)
Gonzales gained some newspaper notoriety in 1963, reportedly for slugging a fellow-congressman who had referred to him as a radical.
Like Americans for Democratic Action, the ILGWU has occasionally supported Republicans in city or state elections—or else has appeared to give them an even break. Two contests in New Jersey involving Republicans were mentioned in the report of the Executive Board: (55)
“The peculiar feature of the New Jersey election in November, 1961 was the fact that two men classified as liberals were in a contest for the office of governor. The Republican candidate, former Secretary of Labor James P. Mitchell, had won the nomination in a primary contest against a conservative opponent.
“He then faced the liberal Democratic nominee, Richard Hughes. Because both candidates were broadly ‘1iberal,’ ILGWU units made their own choices in endorsements. It was apparent from the results which, despite contrary predictions, brought victory for Hughes, that garment workers and others clearly perceived the difference in his favor.
“In this instance, the ILGWU followed an earlier precedent: In 1960, Jersey ILGers, acting on the basis of Republican Senator Case’s liberal record, endorsed both him and Democratic candidate Lord. Case won reelection.” (56)
Senator Case in 1963 rated a high 88 per cent on the ADA Score Card.
For the Presidency and Vice Presidency, ADA and its allies have supported none but Democratic Party candidates to date. They have often been accused, however, of seeking to influence pro or con the Republican Party’s choice of nominees. Aside from the fact that left wing labor groups have been known to work in Republican primaries for the defeat of conservative candidates, and that ADA publicists always offer the Republican Party a great deal of unsolicited and somewhat suspect advice, evidence of ADA intervention is purely circumstantial. The’ case most frequently cited is that of the Republican Advance, a high level caucus of Eastern Republicans believed to have long since faded away.
Early in July, 1950,—just before former Attorney General Biddle on July 7, 1950, confessed to a House Committee ADA’s deep desire to extend its influence in Republican circles—Republicans from ten Eastern states held a week-long meeting and formed the Republican Advance Committee. Its declared object was to develop a program for the Republican Party that could compete successfully with the New Deal-Fair Deal program. A less advertised purpose was to select a Republican standard-bearer for 1952 other than Senator Robert Taft of Ohio, Republican leader on Capitol Hill.
Among political figures involved in the Advance, before or after its creation, were: Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York, titular head of the Republican Party, and his close associate, Herbert Brownell, who became Attorney General in the Eisenhower Cabinet; Senator Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts, later Ambassador to the United Nations, and his brother, Governor John Lodge of Connecticut, later Ambassador to Spain; Senator Ralph Flanders of Vermont; and New Hampshire’s Governor Sherman Adams of unhappy memory. It was this group which invited General Eisenhower to run for the Presidency in 1952, and which steered him into the White House.
Financial backers of the Republican Advance were reported to include Nelson A. Rockefeller, who became Under Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare in the Eisenhower Administration, and Sidney J. Weinberg, a partner in the Wall Street firm of Goldman, Sachs and a member since 1933 of the Business Advisory Council of the Department of Commerce, now called the Business Council. Only persons in the Advance group visibly associated with ADA were Russell Davenport, (57) an editor of Fortune magazine, and Governor McKeldin of Maryland.
Any part ADA may have played in instigating the Republican Advance is not susceptible of proof. It can merely be pointed out that the Fabian technique of permeation, as defined by Margaret Cole, envisaged persuading nonmembers of the Society to carry out, often unconsciously, the work and the will of Fabians. This has been the technique most often used by Left liberals of the United States in attempting to gain a foothold in Republican councils—as contrasted with their more direct and widespread penetration of the Democratic Party. It can also be said that in some respects the original aims of the Republican Advance were not displeasing to ADA.
Admittedly, ADA had a prime interest in blocking the Presidential nomination of Senator Taft, a man of strongly defined conservative principles. Labor’s Political Action Committee had denounced him for his joint authorship of the Taft-Hartley Act, since invoked by Democrat and Republican Presidents alike in moments of threatened national crisis. Yet Taft always carried his own heavily unionized state of Ohio by large majorities. For many months before the Republican Convention of 1952, ADA’s ever-growing corps of news commentators, political pollsters and syndicated columnists assisted in spreading the lethal rumor: “Taft can’t win!” A somewhat comparable situation arose in 1963-64, when political seers throughout the country united as if with one voice to downgrade the popular appeal of Senator Barry Goldwater.
In 1959, an ADA publicist engaged once more in the gratuitous sport of trying to pick a future Republican Presidential candidate. The Progressive for February, 1959, carried an article entitled “Rockefeller in Washington,” by David C. Williams, editor of the official ADA World and voice of the Fabian Society in America. Williams compared Nelson A. Rockefeller’s “blinding charm” to that of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. He explained that Rockefeller, by virtue of a long record of collaboration with New Deal-Fair Deal programs, had personally succeeded in “transcending’ the traditions of his party. Finally, Williams suggested that if Nelson Rockefeller were able to “escape the limitations of his own party” and “tap fresh sources of power” he might make an acceptable President by Left liberal standards.(58)
Variously referred to in British Fabian Socialist literature as international director and research-and-educational director of Americans for Democratic Action, David Williams had stated in an earlier work, The Intelligent Socialist’s Guide to America: “ADA is not a political party. It operates very much as the early Fabian Society did seeking to permeate the existing parties.” In advising Left liberals that Nelson Rockefeller was a promising medium for permeating the Republican Party at the top, Williams was merely perpetuating a time-honored tactic of American as well as British Fabian Socialists. Fabians had long concentrated on “educating” the offspring of prominent families —partly, perhaps, with a view to traducing famed conservative names.
Nelson Rockefeller seems to have been exposed to such psychological seduction since childhood. As a boy he attended the experimental Lincoln School, together with three of his brothers, Winthrop, Lawrence and David. The Lincoln School was operated by Columbia University’s School of Education, then dominated by the ideas of John Dewey, father of so-called Progressive Education and a president of the Fabian Socialist LID. There a sense of personal guilt for all the world’s ills was instilled into young scions of wealth, who were simultaneously reminded of their duty to help fashion a new and better social order.
In his adult years, Nelson Rockefeller often referred to the New Order that was bound to come. As late as 1962, he was praised by Left liberals as the author of a book called The Future of Federalism. It has been described by Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas as a “plea for a ‘new world order’ with the United States taking the lead in fashioning a new federalism at the world level.” In other words, Rockefeller called openly for a type of World Government similar to that urged by Walt Whitman Rostow and others—where the independence of the United States, as we have known it, will be abolished.(59) Reviewing Rockefeller’s book for the Washington Post, Justice Douglas wrote, rather strangely for one entrusted with preserving the United States Constitution:
“He [Rockefeller] does the nation great service when he propounds the theme of this book…. It is bold in conception and sets America’s sights high.”(60)
Summoned to Washington during World War II with other Republicans whom FDR had recruited in the name of national unity, “Rockefeller surrounded himself,” says David C. Williams, “with forward-looking staff members, whose ideas he eagerly solicited and put to use.” (61) Others have noted that the wartime agency which Rockefeller headed, as Coordinator of Inter American Affairs, contained an inordinate number of Communist fellow-travelers and assorted Left liberals. Rockefeller reappeared in Washington in 1950, as chairman of Truman’s International Development Advisory Board, assigned to draft plans for United States aid to underdeveloped nations. Through the Rockefeller Brothers’ Fund, he issued a report, Partners in Progress, “calculated [as Williams says] to make a maximum impact on public opinion.”
The happy if unbusinesslike idea of an equal partnership between rich and poor nations was of British Fabian Socialist origin. The Fabian Journal for June 7, l9S2, (pp. 20ff.), carried an unsigned article, “Advance to Democracy: A Report to the Fabian Colonial Bureau on the Implications of ‘Partnership’ in Multi-Racial Societies.” Ernest Davies, Fabian Member of Parliament and son of the former Fabian Society chairman, A. Emil Davies, was among the chief spokesmen for this radical interpretation of “Partnership.”
It may be recalled that Ernest Davies worked in New York City during the nineteen-twenties as a newspaper reporter. Davies was the presiding officer in l954 and l955 of the first and second London Parliamentary Conference on World Government, which evolved two schemes for revision of the United Nations charter looking toward the creation of a World Government. According to letters received from participants, the second Conference decided to set schemes of World Government aside temporarily, in favor of a World Development Program. It is significant that the slogan of “Partnership”(62)—like the term “Fair Shares,” which in America became Truman’s Fair Deal—originated in a Fabian Socialist bureau in London.
As a private citizen, Rockefeller organized a National Conference on International Economic and Social Development in 1952. He criticized the limited aid given by the Truman Administration to backward countries and urged that such aid be continued on a more lavish scale under the Eisenhower Administration. In particular, he called it “disastrous” to have made economic aid an adjunct to military aid under the Mutual Security Act.
While it may be questioned whether Rockefeller realized he was serving the interests of the Socialist International more effectively than the interests of the United States, some members of his “forward-looking” staff were probably very aware of the implications. No doubt he also had a certain mundane interest in opening up new lands for oil exploration and new markets for Standard Oil products—never suspecting that opportunities for private enterprise were due to be severely limited, under the Socialist International’s plan for World Development.
As Under Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare in the Eisenhower Administration, Nelson Rockefeller insisted that all “security” cases be routed to him for review. (63) David Williams remarked approvingly that Rockefeller “was consistently liberal in his judgment on borderline cases—and his New Deal background was such that the appearance of the names of liberal [sic] organizations in a civil servant’s file did not alarm him, as it did many others ….” Among those others was the Secretary, Oveta Culp Hobby, a peppery and patriotic lady from Texas who once headed the Women’s Army Corps. For one reason or another, Rockefeller soon found himself forced to resign, but he persuaded Sherman Adams, presidential major domo, to create for him the novel post of special assistant to the President for foreign affairs.
David Williams makes much of the fact that Nelson Rockefeller— who was elected Governor of New York State in 1958 and 1962–worked serenely with the New Deal-Fair Deal in Washington, but was unhappy under the Eisenhower Administration. Williams suggests that Rockefeller’s basic mistake in politics has been the wrong choice of party. Apparently, an attempt was made in the forties to enroll him in the Democratic Party—like another born Republican of vast weald~, considerable social charm and none too profound intelligence, W. Averell Harriman, who had joined the Democrats long before. In spite of all temptations, Rockefeller remained for utilitarian reasons a Republican. Among the reasons he has given for doing so, perhaps the most interesting as well as the most cynical is quoted by David C. Williams:
“Liberal Republicans and liberal Democrats often advocate the same programs,” said Nelson Rockefeller, “but the Republicans have the advantage that they can execute them without destroying the confidence of business. . . .” (64)
1. Max Beer, Fifty Years of International Socialism (London, Allen and Unwin, 1935), p. 90.
2. Yearbook of the International Socialist Labour Movement, 1956-1957. Edited by Julius Braunthal, Secretary of the Socialist International. Under the auspices of the Socialist International and the Asian Socialist Conference (London, Lincolns-Prager, 1956), pp. 26-36.
3. Walter Theimer, The Encyclopedia of Modern World Politics (New York, Rinehart & Co., 1950), pp. 341-342.
4. Ibid., pp. 341-342; 379.
5. Zigmunt Zaremba, “Socialist-Communist Collaboration; A Discussion,” New Politics, A Quarterly (Winter, 1964), Vol. II, No. 1, p. 75).
6. Other integrated affiliates of the Socialist International are: the Asian Socialist Conference; the International Council of Social Democratic Women; the Socialist Union of Central-Eastern Europe; the International Union of Social Democratic Teachers.
7. Other inter-governmental organizations in which the International Organization of Socialist Youth enjoys consultative status are: the U.N. Economic and Social Council; the U. N. Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East; U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America; U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization; International Labor Organization; World Health Organization; High Commissioner for Refugees; Council of Europe; Conference of Consultative Non-Governmental Organizations, World Federation of United Nations Associations; International Student Movement for the United Nations; coordinating Secretariat of the National Unions of Students; European Youth Council. Yearbook of the International Socialist Labour Movement, 1956-1957, p. 106. (See Bibliography.)
8. Ibid., p. 109.
11. Among them were: Chester Bowles, Ralph Bunche, Adlai Stevenson, Edward R. Murrow, Walter Reuther, and Alain Locke, then the only American Negro former Rhodes Scholar; as well as Senators Paul Douglas, Estes Kefauver, Ralph Flanders, Wayne Morse, Richard Neuberger.
12. Yearbook of the International Socialist Labour Movement, 1956-1957, p. 54. (See Bibliography). “The Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development (SUNFED): Joint Statement adopted by the Fourth Congress of the Socialist International and the Asian Socialist Conference.” This statement also declared (p. 53): “The policy of the borrowing countries . . . is definitely to restrict the influx of further private capital. Private investment cannot, therefore, be relied upon as the main source for the capital requirements of the underdeveloped countries. The Socialist parties in particular would not contemplate with equanimity an increase in private investors’ control over the economy of these countries.
“This leaves public investment as the real main source of external capital requirements.”
13. Previously Robert R. Nathan held high Government posts in the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations. During World War II he was chairman of the Planning Committee of the War Production Board and deputy director of the Office of War Mobilization and Reconversion. With ADA backing, he became a consultant to the President’s Committee on Economic Security, and was named economic adviser to France, Burma and the United Nations’ Korean Reconstruction Agency.
14. Committee for Economic Development, Report of Activities in 1963, from Thomas B. McCabe, Acting Chairman.
15. Investigation of Un-American Propaganda in the United States. Hearings before a Special Committee, House of Representatives, 75th Congress (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1938), Vol. III, pp. 2188 ff.
16. 67th Fabian Society Annual Report (July 1949-June 1950), p. 5.
17. Carey McWilliams, Witch Hunt: The Revival of Heresy (Boston, Little, Brown & Co., 1950), pp. 323-324.
18. Clifton Brock, Americans for Democratic Action (Washington, Public Affairs Press, 1962), p. 135.
19. Fabian News (July, 1960).
20. Italics added, then removed.
21. In August, 1949 The Progressive printed an article by David C. Williams, “Labor Under a Labor Regime,” an account of the British Labour Party in power. A biographical note described Williams as “London representative of Americans for Democratic Action,” adding that “his articles have appeared in The Nation, Labor and Nation and the New Leader.
22. SUNFED-Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development.
23. Who’s Who in America, 1964-65 (Chicago, A. N. Marquis), p. 1771.
25. Yearbook of the International Socialist Labour Movement, 1956-1957, p. 54. (See Bibliography).
26. “The Millikan-Rostow Report.” U. S. A. (September 28,1 956), Vol. III, No. 19.
29. These figures are based on average annual contributions of $21,000 from the ILGWU and $15,000 from the UAW over a period of 11 years. A list of contributions to ADA, in excess of $100, is filed annually with the Clerk of the House of Representatives under terms of the Corrupt Practices Act. It does not include donations to local and state branches of ADA or its affiliates. The same source also reveals that from 1951 to 1958 fourteen labor unions contributed a grand total of $350,546.40 to the national headquarters of ADA.
31. Lester Velie, Labor U. S. A. (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1958-59), p. 237.
32. Socialist International Information (August 3, 1963), Vol. XIII, No. 31-32. The item states, “Among those present were: Eric Ollenhauer, Herbert Wehner, and Willi Brandt (the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the German Social Democratic Party), Harold Wilson (Leader of the British Labour Party), Niels Mathiassen (Secretary of the Danish Social Democratic Party), Tryggve Bratteli (Vice-Chairman of the Norwegian Social Democratic Party), Tage Erlander (Prime Minister of Sweden and Chairman of the Swedish Social Democratic Party), the leaders of the Swedish, Norwegian and German Trades Union Congresses, Arne Geijer, Konrad Nordahl and Ludwig Rosenburg, Hubert Humphrey (American Senator) and Walter Reuther (Leader of the American Automobile Works Union).”
33. Brock, op. cit., p. 11-16.
34. Lobbying, Direct and Indirect. Hearings before the Select Committee on Lobbying Activities. House of Representatives, Second Session, 81st Congress (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1950), Part VI, p. 7.
35. Brock, op. cit., pp. 91-95.
36. Few Americans recall today that Clement R. Attlee was Churchill’s Deputy Prime Minister during World War II.
37. Washington, Post (August 30, 1952).
38. As of 1964, Wilson Wyatt was Lieutenant Governor of Kentucky, having previously failed to win the race for a seat in the U. S. Senate. He illustrates the tendency of ADA followers to settle for state or local offices, when blocked in their quest for national office.
39. These were the posts held by Schlesinger in 1950, according to former Attorney General Francis Biddle. Lobbying, Direct and Indirect, p. 30. (See Bibliography).
41. On July 7, 1960 Joseph Rauh, Jr. apprised the full platform committee of ADA’s stand on “the single most important issue,” namely, “civil rights.” His statement read in part:
“We believe the Democratic Party must be unmistakably committed to a program of federal action which will result in the eradication of segregation and other forms of discrimination from all aspects of American life.
“Such a program would pledge that the next President, if he is a Democrat, will use the tremendous resources of his office to make desegregation a reality as quickly as possible. . . .
In particular, he urged the following measures:
1. Enact Title III to empower the Attorney General to file civil injunction suits in cases involving denial of civil rights.
2. Support the Supreme Court’s decree int he school desegregation cases and provide assistance for school districts prepared to desegregate.
3. Declare support for sit-in demonstrations.
4. Improve procedures in both Houses of Congress so that the will of the majority shall prevail and Congress will be a more responsive instrument of our national purposes.
5. Pledge vigorous enforcement of existing voting laws and enact additional legislation to protect the right to vote, including, if necessary, direct federal control and operation of registration and elections.
6. Promulgate an executive order forbidding segregation and other forms of discrimination based on race, religion or national origin in all federal or federally aided programs.
7. Enact a federal fair employment practices law to establish and enforce equal job opportunity in all employment in or affecting interstate commerce.
42. Lobbying, Direct and Indirect, Part VI, p. 7. (See Bibliography.)
43. Victor Lasky, JFK: The Man and The Myth (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1963), p. 163-165.
44. An inquiry conducted from 1962 to 1964 in one California school district showed similar pressures operating in high schools and even grade schools. Parents feared to protest, because those who did so found their children penalized with bad marks and loss of credits needed to graduate.
45. In 1950 former Attorney General Biddle had named the following Senators as members of ADA: Humphrey, Lehman, Graham, McMahon, Douglas, Murray and Neely, all Democrats. Lobbying Direct and Indirect, p. 30. (See Bibliography.) While the ADA Score Card shows a very much larger number of Senators and Congressmen now winning high marks by ADA standards, no official list of ADA members on Capitol Hill is available. Senator Joseph S. Clark of Pennsylvania, is a former State chairman of ADA and contributes to ADA World. Senators Pat McNamara and Philip Hart of Michigan regularly follow the ADA-UAW line.
46. Reports for 1957 listing “Contributions of $100 and over” and filed by ADA with the Clerk of the House of Representatives under the Corrupt Practices Act, show twelve labor unions contributing that year to ADA’s “Non-Political Account,” for a total of $47,677.
47. William E. Bohn, “Americans for Democratic Action Celebrates Its Tenth Birthday, The New Leader (April 15, 1957), p. 9.
48. Lobbying, Direct and Indirect, p. 15. (See Bibliography.)
49. Brock, op. cit., p. 22.
50. Title of a League for Industrial Democracy Round Table in which Congressman Jacob Javits participated in 1952 was: “Needed: A MORAL AWAKENING IN AMERICA.” Corruption in business and in politics was discussed; but corruption in labor unions was not mentioned. Others who took part in the program with Javits included: Walter Reuther, James B. Carey, John Haynes Holmes, Charles S. Zimmerman, Sidney Hook, Mark Starr, Helen Gahagan Douglas, Abraham Lefkowitz, Gus Tyler, Leland Olds, George Catlin, James Farmer, August Claessens, and Samuel H. Friedman, reading a statement from Norman Thomas, then in Japan. Nancy Adams, Chief Woman Officer of the British Trades Union Congress, expressed the appreciation of the British labor movement for Marshall Plan aid. Clarence Senior, alleged expert on Latin American affairs and long time member of the London Fabian Society, presided over the Round Table. Harry W. Laidler, Editor, Needed: A MORAL AWAKENING IN AMERICA. A Symposium (New York, League for Industrial Democracy Pamphlet, 1952). Samuel Friedman, National Vice Chairman and Executive member of the token Socialist Party, USA was listed in 1946 as one of our four delegates from the United States to the Council and Congress of the Socialist International in Brussels. Socialist International Information, Congress Issue (September 19, 1964), Vol. XIV, No. 20-21.
51. United Press International dispatch (December 29, 1963).
52. Mark Starr, “Garment Workers: ‘Welfare Unionism’,” Current History (July, 1954), (Reprint by ILGWU.).
53. Report of the General Executive Board to the 31st Convention. (New York, International Ladies Garment Workers Union, 1962), p. 96.
54. Ibid., pp. 17-18.
56. Mitchell’s opponent in the primary was Robert Morris, former counsel for the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security. Observers reported that ILGWU workers and their associates, after assuring the defeat of Morris in the primary, failed to support Mitchell in the general election.
57. Lobbying, Direct and Indirect, p. 16. (See Bibliography.) Following is a fragment of pertinent testimony:
Mr. Brown: “Have you [ADA] become more active in the Republican Party recently, your organization?”
Mr. Biddle: “No–we have not, except–well in this sense. Our influence has been rather striking. I do not know if you have noted the organization of a similar movement in the Republican Party; I do not think they have a name for it–led by Russell Davenport.”
Mr. Brown: “You mean Republican Advance or something like that?
Mr. Biddle: “Something like that. I thought it might be called Republicans for Democratic Action, but that did not seem quite appropriate. . . .”
Chairman: “Did the national organization [ADA] actually take a position for Eisenhower for President?”
Mr. Loeb: “For Eisenhower or Justice [William O.] Douglas . . . The position taken at the Board meeting in Pittsburgh in April, 1948 was for Eisenhower or Douglas.”
58. David C. Williams, “Rockefeller in Washington,” The Progressive (February, 1959), pp. 11-13.
59. Cf. Nelson A. Rockefeller, The Future of Federalism (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1962).
60. Quoted in an advertisement for Rockefeller’s book, which appeared for nine successive months on the back page of Freedom & Union magazine, edited by Clarence K. Streit.
61. Williams op. cit., p. 11.
62. ADA World for May, 1955 announced a booklet, Partnership for Freedom, Proposals for World Economic Growth, published by the Union for Democratic Action Educational Fund. It was described as a 52 page booklet proposing a “new look” in American overseas aid. Sponsors of this booklet included: Eleanor Roosevelt, Reinhold Niebuhr, James G. Patton, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Thomas K. Finletter, Michael Straight, Robert R. Nathan, Stanley Andrews Benjamin V. Cohen, Elmer Davis, Quincy Howe, Isadore Lubin, Paul R. Porter, Victor G. Reuther, Willard L. Thorp.
63. Williams, op. cit., p. 12.
Chapter 19 << | >> Chapter 21
Three times in the twentieth century, American Fabian Socialists on advice of their principals in London have formed a new leadership group to meet the challenge of a new era. In each case this occurred during a period of change and dislocation following a victorious war. Invariably, too, it was at a moment when agents of more direct revolutionary action had so outraged public opinion that the future of radicalism in America seemed threatened and a protective front of more or less untarnished respectability was needed.
Following the Spanish-American War and coincident with the 1905 revolution in Russia, the Intercollegiate Socialist Society was founded upon the remnants of still earlier Fabian bodies. It was reorganized after World War I in the wake of various ill-starred Bolshevik intrigues, and became the League for Industrial Democracy, which supplied personnel and plans for the New Deal. Each leadership group in its day sparked a flurry of satellite organizations, committees and publications, longer or shorter lived as events might dictate. Thus the continuity and expansion of international Fabian Socialism under new names and fresh faces was assured, with the old goal of worldwide social revolution unchanged but unavowed. Psychologically, the process was adapted to what modern market research describes as the American taste for novelty, whether in the field of ideas or consumers’ goods.
Not long after World War II another key organization appeared, known as Americans for Democratic Action. It emerged out of the vapors and confusion that afflicted Socialist groups in the immediate postwar period. Directly descended from older Fabian Socialist elite bodies, ADA was more narrowly political in character than the ISS or LID, without actually being a political party. Just as a parasite vine can climb faster and higher by entwining itself around some previously rooted object, ADA would attach itself to one or both of the traditional political parties in the United States—with a view to imposing its program and its preferred candidates for national, state and local offices.
Like the original London Fabian Society, ADA’s limited size, modest budget and announced object of social reform for the voting masses offered no clue to the scope of its ambitions or the revolutionary nature of its long-range goals. Unlike the London Society, however, whose constitution states flatly that “the Fabian Society consists of Socialists,” Americans for Democratic Action has for reasons best known to itself usually chosen to deny its lineage and to disclaim its Socialist purpose.
Few contemporary Americans knew or cared that on January 3, 1947, a collection of men and women met at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., to set up what has properly been called a political action arm of the American Fabian Socialist movement. Though not a large crowd, its precise size is difficult even now to determine. Informed estimates vary from more than 400 to a founders’ list of 152 persons. (1) Nominally, they had responded to a “call” from the Union for Democratic Action to reorganize the “liberal” forces in the United States, at a time when the prestige of such forces was conceded to be at low ebb.
Since the day, almost two years before, when Franklin D. Roosevelt was laid to rest in the rose garden at Hyde Park, the political fortunes of the liberal Left had declined. Dazed New Deal Cabinet members and their aides relinquished their posts without a murmur. One by one, the wartime agencies with their wage-price-production controls, which left-wingers had hoped to retain as instruments of postwar policy, were folding. So-called liberals and progressives were being separated by the hundreds from the Federal payroll. Only the Department of State had succeeded in absorbing on a permanent basis any substantial number of the temporary wartime employees who could be relied upon to further assorted leftist aims.(2)
Access to the Presidential power, that made possible the attainment of so many Socialist schemes under Democratic Party auspices in the New Deal era, (3) was no longer a “liberal” perquisite. The new White House occupant, Harry S. Truman, was a product of Missouri’s Pendergast machine, which could claim closer ties with the underworld of organized crime than with the ideologists of organized labor’s Socialist wing. Henry Wallace—long the white hope of those Progressives who backed him instead of Truman for the Vice Presidential nomination in 1944–appeared to have thrown caution to the winds, aud was now reputed on good authority to be negotiating with U.S. Communist leaders to form a Third Party.(4)
The Cold War—a concept never fully accepted by Fabians—had replaced the starry-eyed wartime alliance with Soviet Russia and its agents in the United States. Slowly and painfully, the activities of Communists who had been employed indiscriminately since 1934 by Liberal-Democrat administrations in Washington were beginning to come to light. In June, 1945, the Federal Bureau of Investigation had arrested six persons associated with Amerasia, an obscure leftist periodical that maintained connecting offices in New York City with the then widely known and respected Institute of Pacific Relations. Incident to those arrests, the FBI recovered a staggering total of seventeen hundred top secret, secret and/or confidential documents relating to the Far East, all stolen from U.S. Government files.
In January, 1946, the defection of Igor Gouzenko, code clerk at the Soviet Embassy in Ottawa, led to the discovery of other widespread Communist espionage in Canada and the United States, aimed at undermining America’s postwar control of atomic weapons. Failure of the Truman Administration to prosecute the Amerasia case convincingly, (5) or to act energetically on information conveyed by Canadian authorities, furnished a natural campaign issue for the Republicans, who won control of the Congress in November, 1946, for the first time in years. Sadly the left wing Nation proclaimed in an election postmortem: “Let us not fool ourselves in this hour of appraisal. The progressive forces in America have been routed.”
For the Nation and its friends, however, there was still comfort in the fact that a Fabian-dominated Labour Party Government held power in postwar England. Pledged to liquidate the Empire overseas and the private enterprise system at home, rulers of that new Socialist stronghold were engaged in nationalizing Britain’s basic industries and regimenting her traditionally independent people along welfare state lines, on the strength of a spurious campaign promise to “abolish poverty.” “Now American progressives, temporarily out of power, have much to learn from Britain,” wrote David C. Williams in the Fabian Journal, monthly organ of the London Fabian Society. “As issues such as Palestine move toward solution, there will be growing attention to England’s domestic programme and an increasing tendency to put English experience to use in America.” (6)
For the time being, the Labour Party Government’s lavish deficits were being underwritten by the United States. A multibillion dollar “reconstruction” loan to Britain, negotiated by the late lamented John Maynard Keynes, had been approved by a Democratic Congress in the spring of 194ff; but more aid would unquestionably be needed to keep British Fabian Socialists in office for an indefinite term. To assure sympathetic cooperation at the highest official levels, it was essential for American Fabian Socialists, temporarily in eclipse, to improve their own situation at the earliest possible date.
This necessity was emphasized by a visit from the Honourable Patrick Gordon Walker, Labour M.P. and special emissary of the Fabian International Bureau. Soon after the November elections in America, he was dispatched on a lecture tour of the Eastern United States by David C. Williams, then directing the London Bureau of the Union for Democratic Action. Avowed reason for Gordon Walker’s trip was to rally America’s liberal Left in support of the Socialist Government in Britain. (7) His arrival in January, 1947, was timed to synchronize with a conference at the Willard Hotel called by the Union for Democratic Action.
That two-day conference in the nation’s capital marked the birth of Americans for Democratic Action (ADA). Sometimes described as a New-Deal-in-exile, ADA’s primary aim irrespective of high-sounding declarations was to recapture for its supporters the power and influence that individual Socialists (according to Dr. Harry Laidler) had enjoyed under the New Deal. In a keynote speech delivered at the opening session of the conference, Governor Chester Bowles of Connecticut (8) urged the delegates by implication to disassociate themselves from past united front activities and to “organize a progressive front divorced from Communist influence.” After scoring “illusions about a Third Party,” he denounced Republicans and conservative Democrats with impartial fervor. “But the fact remains,” he concluded, “that we have no practical alternative. All our efforts, all our ingenuity must be thrown into the struggle to establish liberal [sic] control of the Democratic Party.”(9)
Next day at a caucus composed of the more influential delegates, it was agreed that the Union for Democratic Action, boasting at most ten thousand members throughout the country, would merge with a new organization to be called Americans for Democratic Action. Among those taking part in the caucus were Eleanor Roosevelt, Presidential widow; David Dubinsky of the AFL and Walter Reuther of the CIO; Joseph Rauh, Jr., Washington attorney, subsequently known as “Mr. ADA”; Marquis Childs, newspaper columnist and author of Sweden: The Middle Way, an apologia for Scandinavian Socialism. Predetermined conclusions reached by this policy-making group were reported back to the conference on the very same day by Eleanor Roosevelt, who also stressed the view that the handiest vehicle for immediate advancement of the new organization’s program was the Democratic Party. (10) A carefully pruned statement of ADA principles was released to the press by Barry gingham, editor and publisher of the Louisville Courier-Journal.
To anyone schooled in the ways of American Fabian Socialism, operating behind a mask of liberal reformism and addicted to creating over the years new organizations with continuously interlocking memberships, the founders’ conference of ADA was merely a repetition of history. True, the Willard Hotel was a long way from the loft above Peck’s Restaurant, where founders of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society had met in response to a similar “call” more than forty years earlier. A larger number of the mid-century conferees could be classed as “opinion-formers,” having already achieved national prominence in their respective fields of politics, labor, education, religion and journalism; while others freely aspired to public office. Still there was an odor about the proceedings reminiscent of the old Fulton Street Fish Market district—although the sole surviving founder of the defunct Intercollegiate Socialist Society to attend was Dan Hoan, former Socialist Mayor of Milwaukee.
There was more visible evidence of kinship with the League for Industrial Democracy, successor to the ISS and still a going concern in its own right. In fact, the tie with LID was secured by a double knot. The Union for Democratic Action, which officially fathered ADA, had been launched on April 28, 1941, shortly after passage of the Lend-Lease Act and just before Hitler’s anticipated attack on Russia.l1 Formed to “help the Allies win the war,” it was summoned into being by a committee whose officers and members consisted almost to a man of seasoned LID “collaborators.” (12) A number of the selfsame individuals afterwards turned up as founders, officers and/or hard-core members of ADA. (13)
In his semi-official history of Americans for Democratic Action, an ADA Book Club selection in 1962, Professor Clifton Brock remarked by way of exculpation: “The UDA, ADA’s predecessor organization, was a splinter group spun off the Socialist Party. Very few UDA members remain in ADA today.” (14) The statement is both vague and misleading. In the first place, the announced aims of Union for Democratic Action and Americans for Democratic Action have never conflicted noticeably—as Brock’s use of the term “splinter group” would imply—with the aims of the little American Socialist Party or the larger Socialist International. Second, UDA disbanded when ADA was founded; but former UDA members joined the new organization en bloc, forming the nucleus of its day-to-day activities until age or political office made it preferable for them to retire to the sidelines. Moreover, ADA—in common with the London Fabian Society—has never laid undue stress on formal membership, once an identity of ideas and aims has been established.
At least three former UDA activists were to sene for years as rotating officials of ADA. These were: James Loeb, Jr., called the “organizing genius of UDA”; James Wechsler, editor-columnist of the New York Post, a confessed former Communist who embraced the Middle Way; and Joseph Rauh, Jr., termed the “lodestar” of ADA, who in his zeal for civil liberties has consistently served as counsel for individuals suspected of giving aid and comfort to Communists, from William Remington to Sidney Lens. (15)
These three—Loeb, Weschler and Rauh—are sometimes said to have been the “real founders” of ADA, which is not literally true. They could more accurately be described as expendables and frontrunners of Americans for Democratic Action—a semi-secret political society whose membership lists have never been made public and whose alleged sympathizers frequently seem as effective in its behalf as any dues-paying member. All three were present at the ADA’s founding conference. James Loeb, Jr. (16) was promptly named secretary-treasurer of a national organizing committee, jointly headed by Leon Henderson, former director of the Office of Price Administration, and Wilson Wyatt, former housing expediter, who became campaign manager for Adlai Stevenson in 1952.
The converging bloodlines of ADA were exemplified in the person of Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr, presiding at the Willard Hotel conference. He was not only national chairman of the Union for Democratic Action; but also former president of LID New York chapter and a seemingly permanent member of the LID national board of directors. Leading theologian of the liberal Left, (17) Dr. Niebuhr’s doctrines like his politics were “progressive.” Originally an advocate of the “Social Gospel,” he had progressed by 1934 to a doctrine which he styled “Christian Radicalism.”
At that point—as his young friend and co-founder of ADA, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. has noted—Niebuhr rejected the Sermon on the Mount for pragmatism, even declaring that the choice between violence and nonviolence in social change was purely a matter of expediency. (18) In his Reflections on the End of an Era, published in 1934, Niebuhr saw “the sickness of capitalism” as something organic, rooted in its very nature and “in the private ownership of the productive ,process.” He declared Marxism—which by definition is godless—to be an essentially correct theory and analysis of the economic realities of modern society” and predicted “the end of capitalism will be bloody rather than peaceful.” (19)
By 1944, when he delivered the West Foundation lectures at Stanford University, Dr. Niebuhr had progressed far enough to perceive the expediency of the Keynesian approach. Published the following years as The Children of Light and the Children of Dark ness ( a book Senator Robert Kennedy would take with him to the moon!), that lecture series was a plea for the “mixed economy’ and the “open society” according to the gospel of John Maynard Keynes.(20) In 1947, as a top figure in UDA, Niebuhr professed himself a “pragmatic liberal,” opposed to every dogma and dedicated to gradual, piecemeal social reform, very much as the early British Fabian Socialists had contrived to represent themselves to the public. That was the image, above all others, which ADA hoped to convey to the American people.
An outsider, witnessing those deliberations at the Willard Hotel that spawned the ADA, might easily have supposed he had wandered into some anniversary function of the League for Industrial Democracy. So many of the old familiar faces were there! The usual blue chip speakers and greeters at annual LID conferences and dinners— with the exception of such proclaimed Socialists as Norman Thomas or Harry Laidler—were in evidence on the platform and the floor.
Eleanor Roosevelt, who was to receive an LID award in 1953 as “First Woman of the World,” was free at last to proclaim her organizational ties with the liberal Left. She was accompanied by her son, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr., who as a Congressman would roll up a 100 per cent voting score in favor of ADA-approved bills, and who was to become Under Secretary of Commerce in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. In Eleanor Roosevelt’s entourage were her ever-controversial proteges, Joseph P. Lash and Aubrey Williams. Lash has been listed as an early LID collaborator. Williams, an editor of the Southern Farmer and deeply involved in the budding “civil rights” movement, was to serve on the national committee of the American Civil Liberties Union, (21) a League for Industrial Democracy affiliate.
Such veteran LID “collaborators” as Senators Herbert Lehman, Richard Neuberger and Frank Graham, sometime president of the University of North Carolina, were prominently on hand, along with senators-to-be Hubert Humphrey and Paul Douglas. Also present was Congressman Andrew Biemiller, another old regular of the League, later to serve as a congressional lobbyist for the united AFL-CIO. David Dubinsky of the ILGWU, Walter Reuther of the United Auto Workers, James Carey of the Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers and other left wing union chieftains cited as stable collaborators of LID, attended in person, flanked by their lawyers and lieutenants. Directly or indirectly, they offered the electoral and financial backing of Socialist-led unions grown to giant size in World War II. (22)
Editors and journalists long true to LID hastened to place their skills at the disposal of ADA. They included Robert Bendiner of The Nation; William Bohn, an old Socialist warrior of the “80 per cent Socialist” New Leader; Monroe Sweetland of the Molalla, Oregon Pioneer, afterwards on the campaign staff of Presidential candidate John F. Kennedy; and, of course, James Wechsler of the New York Post. Other old LID-ers were columnist Edgar Ansell Mowrer and long time Soviet apologist Louis Fischer. Ironically enough, two newcomers better known for their social graces than Socialist leanings, the brothers Joseph and Stewart Alsop, headed the alphabetical list of ADA charter members.
At its inception, Americans for Democratic Action appeared to be little more than a body of self-anointed political leaders in search of a following, and a program in search of a party. Convinced that no third party could win practical power in the United States, ADA’s initial task was to detach misguided progressives from the third party movement then being organized by Henry Wallace with the backing of American Communists. For the moment, what Professor Brock cynically calls “the utility of enemies on the Left” was doubly clear to ADA. By disassociating itself openly from domestic Communist Party leaders servile to Moscow (and subject, in any case, to being removed without notice), ADA insured its own respectability, as well as its ability to shield the more vulnerable elements of the Left in time of peril.
Apparently, ADA was the American version of that mysterious Third Force, often referred to by postwar European Socialists. The term was first used in Austrian Social Democratic newspapers, and given currency in the late nineteen-forties by the French Socialist leader, Leon Blum, to denote the end of the Popular Front. Deprecating Communist Party tactics on the one hand, and decrying conservatives as reactionary-fascist on the other, ADA sought to impose its own formula for achieving social change, via a series of New Deal-type “reforms,” as the only reasonable alternative.
Toward the Soviet Union proper, ADA’s attitude was marked by the same patience and helpfulness (though, naturally, “a little bit criticizing”) (23) which always distinguished the London Fabian Society. Indeed, the original ADA program asserted: “We firmly believe in breaking out of the vicious circle of mutual distrust between ourselves and Russia. We favor a policy based on an understanding of the legitimate [sic] aspirations of the Soviet Union.”
The function of this reborn organization was not solely to regain power and influence for its members and sympathizers, nor simply to repeat the experience of the New Deal. It was also to develop and speed new applications of the Keynesian method for a peaceful transition to Socialism, in terms of the postwar era. Momentarily, economists of the Keynesian school (represented at the ADA founders’ meeting by Dr. Boris Shishkin of the ILGWU and LID, and Dr. J. Kenneth Galbraith of Fortune Magazine and Harvard University) were somewhat embarrassed. The big American depression they predicted so confidently would follow World War II had somehow failed to materialize. How could all-out deficit spending be justified, in a robust and expanding economy?
As things turned out, there was little need for philosophic justification. Even so frivolous a bit of Keynesian propaganda as Galbraith’s book, The Affluent Society, proved largely superfluous, except as a morale builder for Keynesian professors. The utility of government spending as a lever for winning elections was already apparent to practical Democratic leaders and to legislators-of both national parties—the more so, when pointed up by ADA-stimulated pressures from trade unions, minority groups and liberal intellectuals. One project after another for permanent Federal spending programs in the fields of housing, health, nutrition, education and general “welfare” would be concocted by ADA or its allies, and presented by its chosen legislators. Defeated in one session of Congress, such bills would be revived with variations in the next.
Increased government authority over bank credit and bank reserves would be urged. “Goals” in housing, health, education and related fields were to be set by administrative planners. “Full employment,” keystone of the whole Keynesian economic structure, must be accepted as a responsibility of the Federal Government, with planning, supervision and controls over private employment implied but not stated. Government financing, and if necessary, government plants must be used to “provide more power, more steel and other vitally necessary raw materials.” Finally, would arise, during an election year, the Area Redevelopment Administration Program. All these steps would be proposed successively in ADA platforms, and urged again and again on the Congress and the Executive, until accepted in whole or in part. Each would lead the country another step closer to total welfare state control, and expand the “public sector” of the economy as opposed to the “private sector.”
Something new, however, was to be added in the new era: namely, uninhibited government spending in the international field. Means would be devised to transform the Marshall Plan—supposedly designed for temporary postwar reconstruction and eagerly supported by ADA—into a permanent, large-scale program of foreign assistance, direct and indirect. Even military spending at home and abroad would not be discouraged, providing the ultimate decisions were dictated by ADA-approved State Department officials. Until such time as international control of atomic energy (advocated in the original 1947 ADA program, and never abandoned) had been achieved, the threat of nuclear destruction could always be raised to generate that atmosphere of perpetual crisis needed to justify Keynesian spending policies. Membership cards of ADA announced its devotion to “freedom and security for all people everywhere”(24)–presumably at the expense of the United States.
It is hard to believe a handful of people, meeting privately at the Willard Hotel in 1947, could have contrived to spark so many of the measures which in less than twenty years have propelled the United States so far and so fast along the freeway to International Socialism. In fact, it might seem incredible, except for the undisguised evidence of what an even smaller group of Fabian Socialists—through penetration and permeation, through research, propaganda and persistence— has done to make a shambles of the former British Empire.
Possibly because he was in England when the reorganization (25) took place, a key instigator and ever-faithful servant of Americans for Democratic Action was not included on its founders’ list. He was David C. Williams, wartime representative in London of American trade unions and director of the London Bureau of the Union for Democratic Action Educational Fund. Concerning him, an editorial note in the Fabian Journal for March, 1947, (p. 7) stated authoritatively: “David C. Williams . . . is a member of the Fabian Society and of the St. Marylebone Local Fabian Society.”
Recalling that normal procedure in the Fabian Society has always been “join for one year, join for fifty,” there is no reason to suppose the foregoing statement is outdated—although the formalities of membership are not infrequently waived for individuals engaged in delicate overseas missions. David C. Williams, in particular, has been notable for his unswerving devotion to the cause of Fabian Socialism, by whatever name it might be called.
As ADA’s Director of Research and Education (26) and as long time editor of the ADA World, he has had a major responsibility for transmitting and expounding the Fabian policy-line on selected issues to ADA supporters. For almost twenty years, indifferent to wealth or worldly success, this quiet American has served as an efficient, durable and self-effacing link between Americans for Democratic Action and its Socialist blood brothers in Britain.
Williams was an Ohioan by birth and a citizen of the world by choice. Son and namesake of a Unitarian clergyman who once headed the Intercollegiate Socialist Society’s student chapter at Marietta College, (27) he qualifies as a second generation Fabian Socialist. Perhaps the most decisive fact in his life was that he went as an American Rhodes Scholar to Oxford, graduating in 1935. There he encountered a left wing political group operating on a scale then undreamed-of in the United States. For the first time, he saw labor politics practiced in public style by a student elite and was exposed to adult masterminds of a movement that was destined to provide him with a career.
It was a decade when Fabian influence, frustrated at the government level in Great Britain, rose to commanding heights in the universities. At Oxford G. D. H. Cole was “the great gazebo,” while at Cambridge John Maynard Keynes personally taught his exciting new theory. The Left Wing political tradition, however, was more pronounced and more continuous at Oxford. (28) Many an American student less predisposed than Williams found the allure of Fabian tutors and companions overwhelming, and never recovered from that early infatuation.
University Fabian Societies transformed into Labour Clubs (29) flourished almost beyond belief. The Oxford Labour Club in the thirties, for instance, boasted a thousand members and functioned virtually as a separate college within the university. It organized its own classes and lecture courses under its own touted professors and tutors, among them confirmed Fabian Socialists like G. D. H. Cole, A. D. Lindsay, Sir Arthur Salter and R. H. S. Crossman. (30) When the club held public meetings on questions of the day, it drew student audiences of two or three thousand. The speakers were such well-publicized personalities as Professor Harold Laski, John Strachey, Harold Nicolson, Herbert Morrison, Sir Stafford Cripps, all ranking members of the London Fabian Society. (31) Even the American Negro baritone, Paul Robeson, then attracting overflow audiences in London, gave a free concert at Oxford for the Labour Club.
Political theory was enlivened by some practical experience in politics, which involved organizing workers in nearby factory towns, sending delegations to Parliament and picketing the Ministries. Besides serving as a seed bed for future Fabian statesmen and civil servants, the Labour Club was also an agitational branch of the British Labour Party. Oxford students, transported to London by the busload, lent color and verve to mass demonstrations against the Government—a pattern now being commonly repeated in other countries around the world, sometimes with Communist assistance. More than one American joined the fun, although for visitors participation in British politics was strictly illegal. In 1938, Howard K. Smith—afterwards a foreign correspondent and television news analyst—became the first American Rhodes Scholar to head the Oxford Labour Club. (32)
British club members automatically held membership in the British Labour Party. Regardless of nationality, young Fabians of the inner circle that steered the Labour Club were elected as undergraduates into the parent London Fabian Society, according to a practice established since the turn of the century.(33) With reference to Americans, the process appears to have moved into high gear during the nineteen-thirties—the decade of the Great- Depression, the Spanish Civil War and the coming to power of Adolf Hitler. Not only the potential rulers of England, (34) but potential rulers of the United States as well, were to be groomed under Fabian supervision.
This was no mild academic joke; but a serious, long-range intention, pursued with patience and finesse, and backed by all the well-placed contacts at home and abroad that the Fabian Society could assemble. Young hopefuls tapped hr future prominence usually rose with astonishing celerity in their chosen careers. They were the predestined recipients of fellowships, research grants, literary prizes and other awards, as well as choice posts in government and the professions. Since the Association of Rhodes Scholars made corresponding efforts on behalf of its members, in the long run the results were doubly gratifying.
Thus one finds Rhodes Scholars of the nineteen-thirties serving in the nineteen-sixties as senior officials or consultants in a number of Federal departments in Washington. Some have been in government service for years; others are retreads and/or recent appointees. A few are in position to wield great influence, and through their access to the White House itself, to be instrumental in promoting policies advocated by British Fabians—notably in the fields of international, military, disarmament and monetary policy.
Meanwhile, Britons who were once their contemporaries in the Oxford Labour Club have risen to leadership in the Labour Party, and speak with authority in the councils of the Socialist International. A conspicuous example is Harold Wilson, Parliamentary Leader of the British Labour Party and Vice Chairman of the Socialist International, who was a student and Fellow at Oxford in the nineteen-thirties. In a memorial to the late President John F. Kennedy—”one of the numerous tributes paid to . . . [him] by Socialists throughout the world” (35)–Wilson said: “I know a good number of his associates; some of them I have known for many years.”(36)
At least one effect of such long-standing camaraderie must be noted, which vitally affects the security and defense capabilities of the United States. On July 24, 1963, Harold Wilson attended a meeting of the Bureau of the Socialist International at Congress House in London. There a resolution was adopted concerning the Moscow Three-Power Conference on nuclear tests, which declared in part:
“The Bureau of the Socialist International welcomes the prospect of an agreement ending nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in space and under water …. The Bureau hopes that this limited agreement will pave the way to an agreement covering all nuclear tests. The Bureau pays tribute to the efforts of Mr. Harold Wilson who during his recent conversations with Mr. Krushchev suggested this limited agreement as the most fruitful means to achieve early progress.”(37)
Soon afterwards—despite a sober warning from General Curtis LeMay, then U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff—the United States Congress was persuaded to ratify the test ban agreement suggested to Khrushchev by that noted nonmilitary expert, Harold Wilson, and endorsed by the Socialist International. At a time when civilian planners in the Pentagon looked primarily to atomic missiles for the future defense of America, the pact prevented the United States from testing the efficiency of nuclear warheads on missiles still unproved! Some leading proponents of the test ban in administration circles were Secretary of State Dean Rusk (Oxford, 1934) and Walt Whitman Rostow (Oxford, 1937-38). Thus the old school tie, in shades of pink to red, spans the Atlantic.
How many American Rhodes Scholars have been enrolled in the London Fabian Society over the years, it would be difficult to say. No statistics on the subject have been released. The identity of such recruits has been closely guarded, apparently to avoid embarrassing those who hold or hope to hold positions of influence in their native land. Moreover, this particular type of recruitment might be construed by jurists as violating the intent of the Rhodes Trust, which, however singular, was anything but Socialist.
Cecil Rhodes, under whose last will the Trust was created, (38) had been an impassioned English patriot and the most rugged of individualists. He looked forward secretly to a time when the United States would rejoin Great Britain, in a world federation of states steered from London. Superficially, his plans for international government, and for giving “young colonists” a political bias along with an Oxford education, might be said to resemble the Fabian Society’s. Fundamentally, however, his purpose was diametrically opposed to that of Sidney Webb’s select company.
Above all, Lord Rhodes was dedicated to the perpetuation and extension along classic capitalist lines of the British Empire, which Fabians schemed to dissolve. Obviously, he never intended that his fortune amassed in the gold fields and diamond mines of South Africa be used to train young Americans in Fabian Socialism; or to promote peaceful social revolution, under a cloak of learning and Old World culture, in a lost colony of the British Empire.
Of two thousand or more American Rhodes Scholars invited to Oxford since the Trust was formed, by no means did all succumb to the power of Fabian suggestion. There were men among them immune to Socialist blandishments, several of whom have found their careers in government abruptly terminated. Such patriotic and ill-rewarded Americans include Bryton Barron, former head of the State Department’s Treaty Section, and Elvis J. Stahr, Jr., Secretary of the Army during the Kennedy-Johnson Administration, who resigned in protest against the “muzzling of the military.”
There was also Stanley K. Hornbeck, Chief of the State Department’s division for Far Eastern Affairs in the nineteen-thirties and political adviser on the Far East, who was dragooned, apparently in all innocence, into serving as a character witness for Alger Hiss.(39) Hornbeck was one of those who attempted without success to stem a tide in the conduct of United States foreign affairs, which in the middle forties delivered mainland China to Communist rule. As late as 1950, he made a valiant though futile effort to warn his successor, Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk, against chat perilous policy which covertly protected and preserved the Chinese Communists.(40)
Presidential appointments of 1961-64, however, gave extraordinary prominence to American Oxonians of the same vintage as David C. Williams and Howard K. Smith, apparently holding mutually congenial views.(41) Among them were a Secretary of State; a Supreme Court Justice; several Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries and senior planners in areas directly concerned with formulating diplomatic, monetary, defense and disarmament policy for the United States. Even the Director of the Budget, Dr. Kermit Gordon—who states that “growth” is the answer to deficits(42)–was one of them.
Based on an analysis of their writings, speeches and official acts, the collective opinions of those officials on basic issues can be rather simply tabulated:
Economics: post-Keynesian, that is, the greater the deficit, the greater the national growth; developed nations must expend their substance for the benefit of under-developed nations, on a government to government basis.
Welfare State: responsibility of the Federal Government to provide financial aid from tax monies to an ever-growing number of private citizens and institutions; pilot programs in medicare, public housing, rent subsidies, urban renewal, job training, aid to education, research and depressed areas, to be expanded year by year; more centralized control, as a result of Federal aid to states and municipalities; social security system to be used as a basis for collecting computerized Federal dossiers on the entire population.
Foreign Affairs: relaxation at any price of “tensions” with the Soviet Union; eventual admission of Red China and East Germany to the United Nations; economic aid “without strings” to satellite and neutralist nations, and subsidized “trade” with Soviet Russia.
Defense: long-range planning by civilian officials, in collaboration with the State Department; disregard of professional military advice, and downgrading of nonpolitical officers; elimination of “first strike” weapons, as designated by the Soviet Union; gradual obsolescence of the Strategic Air Force and various strategic weapons, through cessation of production and new development.
Disarmament: gradual, to reassure the American public; progressive, to reassure the Soviet Union; ultimately total, to assure “peace under World Law” and a World Police Force.
World Government: to be achieved as rapidly as possible through the United Nations, via ”modernization” of the United States Constitution.
Implicit in all this but not openly stated, is the socialization of the United States through new forms of ownership and control of production, which must precede the application of any overall world plan.
Nearly all in the group are college professors who have served intermittently in government since World War II. In the years between, more than one has enjoyed the bounty of the great tax free research and educational foundations, where policy for government agencies and private institutions is often framed at the research stage. They include a former president of the Rockefeller Foundation; a former director of the Ford Foundation’s economic and administrative program; and a former large-scale beneficiary of the Carnegie Foundation, Dr. Walt Whitman Rostow. All appear to have been well-schooled in post-Keynesian economics and a world outlook that tends to subordinate traditional interests of the United States to other considerations.
If, as the record would indicate, they have been affected since their student days at Oxford by Fabian Socialist ideas, they might be expected to render signal service to Americans for Democratic Action, whose international program closely parallels that of the Fabian Society. A sheltered and protected group of non-expendables, those old Oxonians in the New Frontier seemed to have had little or no official contact with ADA—a possible exception being Assistant Secretary of State Harlan Cleveland, former publisher of The Reporter. (43) Like Harold Wilson, however, they can claim to have “known a good number” of its more eminent members and associates for years.(44) Several staunch supporters and/or founding members of ADA— Chester Bowles, G. Mennen Williams, J. Kenneth Galbraith, and W. Averell Harriman—have served with the group, sometimes in equally high government posts; but have apparently been expected to follow, not formulate official policy.
First and foremost in that Oxford group was Dr. Dean Rusk, named Secretary of State in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. Placid, plump and singularly gifted at avoiding the public eye or the appearance of being personally responsible for controversial decisions, his record merits examination. During the middle nineteen-forties, he succeeded to the same Political Affairs and Postwar Planning posts in the State Department previously held by Alger Hiss—according to that peculiar sequence whereby a respectable crypto-Socialist often replaces an exposed Communist in administrative Washington. (45) Rusk was a member of the American Council of the Institute of Pacific Relations, to which some highly reputable individuals and business firms with interests in the Far East innocently subscribed. Institute publications and propaganda are credited with having fostered those official United States policies which favored the Chinese Communists, deplored by Stanley Hornbeck and other concerned Americans.
Subsequently, the Institute of Pacific Relations was discovered by U.S. Government investigators to have been infiltrated by agents of Red Army Intelligence.(46) Yet Dean Rusk, a State Department official, still recommended Institute publications for use by the Chief of U.S. Military Intelligence. (47) Even in 1950, five years after the Amerasia case, he strongly supported the Institute’s request for Ford and Rockefeller Foundation grants.(48)
That year, as Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, Rusk delivered a memorable speech comparing the Chinese Reds to the American patriots of 1776. It was viewed in diplomatic circles as a prelude to recognition of Red China, contemplated by the State Department in 1950. Such action had already been taken by the Fabian-controlled British Labour Party Government of 1945-51, and was being urged in this country by ADA. The move was disrupted by the Communist invasion of South Korea, which the State Department accidentally invited through a widely circulated memorandum (evidently prepared in Dean Rusk’s division) declaring Korea to be “outside the defense perimeter of the United States.”
Dean Rusk demonstrated the same lenient attitude towards Communist troublemakers so characteristic of Fabian Socialists, as well as the classic Socialist function of opening the door to Communist conquest. During the Korean War he was instrumental in launching the fatal “No Win” policy, which persists to the present day. As President Harry S. Truman revealed in his Memoirs, it was Dean Rusk who took the first visible step towards establishing the principle of the “privileged sanctuary” in Manchuria, by agreement with Fabian Socialists then in control of the British Government at all levels.(49)
In a posthumously published interview with Bob Considine of the Hearst Newspapers,(50) General Douglas MacArthur stated he submitted a plan for victory that would have ended the Korean War in less than two weeks and eliminated Red China as a present or future military threat. Author of twenty victorious campaigns and conceded by experts to be one of the ablest military strategists of the century, General MacArthur was prevented by Fabian Socialist influence in our own State Department from putting his master plan into effect.
The reason alleged for the prohibition was that a clear-cut victory for American forces in the Far East might have touched off World War III. Owing to Soviet Russia’s very limited nuclear and logistic capabilities at that date, “fears” of a world holocaust conjured up by the State Department are now recognized to have been unfounded—as they have been on every subsequent occasion, thanks to the vastly superior power of American deterrents. This was no less true in the more recent Cuban crisis than it was during the Korean War: the function of deterrents being, after all, to deter! As lately as April, 1964, General Thomas S. Power flatly declared that as long as the Strategic Air Force is maintained at peak efficiency and the Russians know it, “there is no danger of a nuclear war.”(51)
The truth was that in 1950 Socialists everywhere—in America, in England and in the United Nations—displayed a quiet determination to protect and preserve Red China, whatever the cost in American or British casualties—just as Socialists of an earlier generation had moved in 1920 to preserve Soviet Russia. For the prolonged bloodletting in Korea and the final humiliating stalemate that so greatly damaged the American position in the Far East, Dean Rusk shared the responsibility to a degree not generally realized.
It hardly mattered that in 1952, when the damage had been done, Rusk delivered a verbal attack on the Red Chinese Government and spoke respectfully of Chiang Kai-shek; nor that he was chided for doing so by the British Fabian Socialist, Michael Lindsay, in a letter to the New Statesman.(52) This type of interplay only served to provide protective coloring for Dr. Rusk and to insure his availability for future service at a still higher official level.
As Secretary of State in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration, Dr. Rusk revived and enforced the principle of the privileged sanctuary in Southeast Asia. True, he talked bravely of victory in Vietnam. Yet at a cost of some 5 million dollars per day in United States economic and military aid, the jungle war in Vietnam was allowed to continue year after year under restrictions that made victory impossible. Once again the pretext was raised by the State Department (and echoed in the syndicated columns of such court favorites as Walter Lippmann, Marquis Childs, and Joseph Alsop) that the type of military action required to win in Southeast Asia would involve us in war with Red China—a war which that stricken country was neither economically nor militarily prepared to wager The fact is, that with Fabian-schooled officials and advisers dictating our foreign and military policies, the United States has not been and never will be permitted to win a clear-cut military or diplomatic victory over Socialist/Communist forces.
As in Chungking long before, demands were made for instant social and political “reforms” in war torn Vietnam. Once again pressures were applied by the State Department, and seconded by docile aides in the Pentagon. Inevitably they led to the overthrow and death of President Ngo Dinh Diem, who—whatever his alleged shortcomings from the viewpoint of Western Democracy—gave every appearance of being a sincere patriot and devout anti-Communist. It was not the first time that assassination had been condoned by Rusk’s State Department. With the same alacrity that they moved to recognize the killers of Diem, Dean Rusk and his subordinates hastened to extend diplomatic recognition to the transient administration of President Juan Bosch in the Dominican Republic, following the murder of General Rafael Trujillo. Eighteen million dollars in United States economic aid were rushed at record speed to Juan Bosch, whose accession was hailed in a congratulatory message from the Socialist International.(53)
Perhaps Rusk’s smoothest service to the cause of Fabian Socialism was his participation in the Skybolt incident of 1963. Out of a clear blue sky his junior partner, Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara, canceled production of the Skybolt missile, leaving the British Royal Air Force without a promised nuclear deterrent. This action was taken contrary to the advice of professional United States military experts. Unceremoniously announced to former Prime Minister Harold Macmillan at Bermuda, it was described at the time as the harshest blow inflicted in years on Britain’s ruling Conservative Party. Similar action had previously provoked the fall of a Canadian Government, and the return to power of a Left liberal Premier known for his sympathy toward Socialist programs.
Some theorized that a more indirect result of l’affaire Skybolt was to convince General Charles de Gaulle of France that American pledges of atomic aid were unreliable and that he might just as well go it alone. Others theorize that de Gaulle has had a more sinister purpose all along. The impression that United States nuclear assistance was a Sword of Damocles, rigged for its effect on internal politics in allied nations, did not improve the position of the United States in world diplomacy—a consideration of little moment to British Fabian Socialists, who were not concerned to preserve global confidence in the United States. Immediately after the Skybolt Conference so shocking to Prime Minister Macmillan, Opposition Leader Harold Wilson paid an unofficial but quietly triumphant visit to Washington, where he was greeted by men he had “known for years” as the presumptive Prime Minister of Britain.
While it was apparently Rusk’s function to execute Fabian Socialist International policy at the uppermost level, the chief advance agent of such policy seemed for some years past to have been Dr. Walt Whitman Rostow. The so-called Millikan-Rostow Report was the fruit of a study conducted under his supervision at Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for International Studies. Published in 1957 as A Proposal: Key to An Effective Foreign Policy, (54) it foreshadowed what actually became United States foreign policy in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. In The Stages of Economic Growth (55) which appeared in 1960, Rostow sketched the first dim outlines of a worldwide New Deal to be supported by the United States along Keynesian lines.
Appointed deputy adviser to President Kennedy on national security matters, Rostow had a major voice in the preparation of a secret 286 page report on Basic National Security. Following a Moscow meeting in 1960 with Deputy Foreign Minister Kuznetsov, Rostow advised that the United States should abandon offensive or “first-strike” weapons, distasteful to the Soviet Union.(56) Notably, the B-70 bomber—deemed essential by the Strategic Air Command for our future safety, but canceled by the Kenned-Johnson Administration. By the same token, the Navy was denied permission to construct a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and was restricted to building an obsolescent type vessel.
Moving to the State Department, as counselor and as chairman of its Policy Planning Council, Dr. Rostow continued to predict the shape of things to come. Reading his articles that appeared with remarkable frequency in the weekly Department of State Bulletin, the more perceptive division chiefs and foreign service officers could divine the attitudes they were expected to assume. In the February 17, 1964 issue, for example, Rostow launched a brand new slogan obviously designed to serve as a guideline for foreign policy: Freedom and Diversity! It was particularized in the March 16th issue of the same publication by Secretary Rusk, himself, in an article entitled “Why We Treat Different Communist Countries Differently.”(57)
In an address to a group of business executives reprinted in the Department Bulletin of February 3, 1964, Rostow explained that the species of world-wide New Deal envisioned for underdeveloped countries will not wholly eliminate private business. While United States aid to those nations may give their governments control over the more basic forms of capital outlay, he pointed out kindly that such developments will create new mass markets for consumers’ goods and simple agricultural tools, from which private manufacturers can benefit—at least for a while.
Prudently, Dr. Rostow refrained in that official publication from announcing the ultimate goal which he had already defined in other published works. Incredible as it might seem to most Americans, he actually looked forward to a day when the United States as a sovereign nation would cease to exist. If the question is raised as to where or how he might have acquired such ideas, it must be remembered that he, too, was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford during the crucial nineteen-thirties.
In a somewhat unexpected fashion Walt Whitman Rostow fulfilled the desire expressed in Lord Rhodes’ last will, to create in American students “an attachment to the country from which they sprang.” Rostow’s parents, as it happened, came from Russia. The fact that they named his elder brother, Eugene Victor Rostow, after the American Socialist Party leader, Eugene Victor Debs, leaves little doubt as to their political inclinations. Walt Whitman Rostow attended ancient Balliol, and can claim the distinction once ascribed to Lord Curzon:
“. . . Of course, I went to Balliol College
And what I know not, is not knowledge.”
Balliol was likewise the college of G. D. H. Cole, a mere tutor in Economics but an important wheel in the New Fabian Research apparatus, already recognized as performing the Society’s most important function. Always eager to bring “new blood” into the movement, Cole and his wife invited students of radical tendencies to their Holywell home for weekly rounds of Socialist discussion.(58) A number of British Fabians, who became prominent in public life during the forties and after, were regular guests throughout their student years at the Coles’ Monday evenings; as were some Americans who discarded the Socialist label under advisement.
Inevitably, Soviet Russia was a recurrent topic of discussion. Though admittedly not quite perfect, the Socialist Fatherland was regarded with affection and hope. Some collegians (like Howard K. Smith) even spent vacations in Moscow. No matter what the provocation, somehow those Fabian acolytes never lost hope of inducing Soviet leaders to alter their ways. The same schoolboy conviction, that Soviet Russia can eventually be persuaded to change its internal power structure and abandon its aim of world domination, suffuses the statements and positions of Walt Whitman Rostow; and in part through him, was incorporated into the foreign policy of the United States.
Rostow returned to England during World War II as a youthful Army Major attached to the U.S. Office of Strategic Services. In London he worked closely with various exiled Socialist leaders from Nazi-occupied countries, who had gathered under the sheltering wing of the Fabian International Bureau—and who hoped to assume power in their native lands at war’s end. For his mysterious services, Major Rostow was awarded the Military Order of the British Empire, presumably through the good offices of Fabian Socialists in the Cabinet. Though just eight years out of college, he was invited in 1946-47 to lecture as Harmsworth Professor of American History at Oxford. In 1949-50 he was called to Cambridge University as Pitt Professor of American History.
During the two years that intervened between his teaching sessions at Oxford and Cambridge, Walt Whitman Rostow worked in Geneva as assistant to Dr. Gunnar Myrdal, then executive secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. Myrdal was a Socialist and former Minister of Commerce in Sweden, who all but succeeded in wrecking his country’s postwar economy. As wartime economic adviser to the Swedish Embassy in Washington, he had fallen under the spell of those American Keynesians who were certain the United States would suffer an even more severe depression after the Second World War than after the first.
Believing Sweden must hedge against the predicted world slump, Dr. Myrdal and his associates applied a number of inflationary Keynesian measures. These included cheap money and expansion of credit at home and raising the value of the krone abroad. Looking to Communist Russia for new trade opportunities, Myrdal personally engineered a billion krona (280 million dollar) trade agreement with the Soviet Union. The Swedish Government agreed to underwrite five-year credits in that amount to the Russians, who could buy directly from the manufacturers—an arrangement in some respects similar to the 19B4 Soviet wheat deal with the United States.(59)
Although Sweden emerged from World War II in a very prosperous condition, the remedies prescribed by Dr. Myrdal had reduced the country, by 1948, to appealing for Marshall Plan aid. Meanwhile, Myrdal himself retired in style to Geneva, where he proceeded undisturbed to recommend economic policy for all of Europe. Fortunately, perhaps, his advice was not taken too seriously.
The reverence which Dr. Myrdal still inspires among Left liberals in the United States and England derives from a monumental fifteen hundred page work published in 1944, An American Dilemma. Despite his unconcealed Socialist affiliations, he was chosen by the tax free Carnegie Foundation to direct a $250,000 study of race relations in the southern United States. Since Sweden had never known a Negro problem, it was presumed Dr. Myrdal would be “unprejudiced.” In his report, however, he acknowledged a debt to W. E. B. Dubois, a founder of the NAACP and an early promoter of Pan-Africanism.(60) Myrdal’s repeated emphasis on the alleged tendencies to violence and disrespect for law, which he found innate in the American character, appears to have inspired, in some measure, the forms of later “civil rights” agitation in the United States.
By 1947, this massive and costly volume was already in its ninth edition. Used by NAACP lawyers, it furnished the so-called sociological background for the United States Supreme Court’s school integration decision of 1954. Incidentally, it also contained some highly disparaging remarks about the United States Constitution. Referring to the “nearly fetichistic cult of the Constitution,” Dr. Myrdal asserted that “the 150-year old Constitution is in many respects impractical and ill-suited for modern conditions …. Modern historical studies reveal that the Constitutional Convention was nearly a plot against the common people. Until recently the Constitution has been used to block the popular will.”(61)
This was the man with whom Walt Whitman Rostow worked harmoniously for two years at Geneva—so much so, that on returning to England in 1949, he left his brother, Eugene Victor Rostow, to act as Myrdal’s assistant. Eugene Victor Rostow, who later became Dean of the Yale University Law School, was reported in mid-1964 to be under consideration for an opening on the Circuit Court of Appeals in Connecticut as a preliminary to his eventual appointment to the United States Supreme Court.
Former students, who attended Dr. Walt Whitman Rostow’s lectures in England and/or later in the United States, claim that his approach to American history is strictly geopolitical. Father of the alleged science of geopolitics was the British geographer, Sir Halford Mackinder, friend of early British Fabians at the University of London. Mackinder developed the theory of a pivot or “Heartland” area deep in Eurasia, and assigned a lesser role to all lands outside it. Since it stresses the relationship between physical geography and national behavior, geopolitics has aroused some interest among military strategists, armchair and otherwise.(62) Based on a materialistic view of history, it has stirred the enthusiasm of both Socialist and national Socialist planners—and was utilized by military intelligence experts of the Black Reichswehr, notably Major General Ernst Haushofer, in drafting Adolf Hitler’s blueprint for world conquest.
Adopting geopolitical jargon, Walt Whitman Rostow described America as a mere continental island off the greater landmass of Eurasia, comprising Europe, Asia and Africa. He explained the growth of the United States to greatness as being due to no inherent virtue in its own economic and constitutional system; but solely to divisions among Eurasian power blocs, which permitted such a circumstance to occur. By converse reasoning, a future union of Eurasian power blocs could either succeed in conquering the United States outright, or in forcing America’s absorption into a globe-girdling federation of Socialist states, under a centrally controlled police force and planned economic system.(63)
Such absorption represents the Fabian Socialist plan for peaceful world revolution. It is demonstrated by the visible attempt, on one hand, to encircle the United States with a swiftly growing block of Socialist-ruled nations; and on the other, by an attempt to procure a permanent economic and political accommodation between the United States and Soviet Russia. This far-flung plan presupposes eventual world rule by an intellectual Socialist elite backed by the mass electoral power of a worldwide Socialist Labor Confederation, whose docility will be guaranteed through the device of full, state-assured employment. For more than a decade, Dr. Walt Whitman Rostow appears to have been its veiled prophet in the United States.
Couched, like the theory of Keynes, in bland, semi-technical language designed to mystify the uninitiate, the overall plan is revealed by signs to an illumined few. With some effort, however, its outlines can be discerned by any normally intelligent layman who takes the trouble to read the voluminous and cloudy writings of Walt Whitman Rostow—just as the military intentions of Adolf Hitler might have been evident from 1922 to anyone perusing the equally cryptic works of Major General Ernst Haushofer.(64) Neither Rostow nor Haushofer will ever be read for their pleasure-giving quality. Both convey the impression of talking over the reader’s head to a special audience. Since it takes talent of a rare order, however, to remain totally unintelligible for hundreds of pages, there is always, somewhere, a moment of truth.
In Rostow’s book An American Policy in Asia, for example, after a long, tortuous and frequently obscure argument, it finally becomes clear that Rostow advises granting Red China a seat in the United Nations, as well as diplomatic recognition by the United States. During the same year when this work appeared, The New York Times of October 2, l955 reported:
“A social scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology has undertaken to develop a new portrait of the United States in a world setting. Under the three year grant from the Carnegie Foundation of New York, Dr. Walt W. Rostow, a Professor of Economic History, is directing the study …. Dr. Rostow’s project will examine our role in what he calls the ‘foreign policy revolution.’”
Similar collective labor brought forth still another book over the signature of Walt Whitman Rostow, The United States in the World Arena. After attributing the remarkable development of the United States during 150 years to back the more recent strides of the USSR to phenomenal ability, he wrote: “Now brutally and directly and in every dimension, the nation is caught up in a world where its military power, diplomatic influence and ideological conformation are explicitly, relentlessly under challenge from the Soviet Union.” (65) The answer? America must “change its national style,” while retaining its “operational vigor”–and even then success cannot be assured! “Will the United States,” asks Rostow, “mobilize the strength, will and imagination to bring about the process of persuasion in the Communist bloc which, by denying all other alternatives, would permit without major war the gradual evolution and release of the forces for good in it?” (66)
The real break in the clouds, however, “so central to the author’s judgments that it appears worthwhile to state it explicitly,”(67) was reserved for the Appendix:
“. . . the urgent imperative to tame military force and the need to deal with peoples everywhere on the basis of an accelerating proximity argue strongly for movement in the direction of federalized world organization under effective international law. And, should effective international control of military power be achieved, it might prove convenient and rational to pass other functions upward from unilateral determination to an organized arena of international politics.”(68)
Or, put in another way, says Rostow:
“It is a legitimate American national objective to see removed from the United States the right to use substantial military force to pursue their own interests. Since this residual right is the root of national sovereignty and the basis for the existence of an international arena of power, it is therefore an American interest to see an end to nationhood as it has been historically defined.”(69)
An end to nationhood will be achieved, said Rostow, when “the great conference has ended and the freely moving inspectors take up their initial posts from one end of the world to the other and the nightmare passes.” (70) In a contrary vein, it may be pertinent to recall the laconic words of an old-style American who did not live to see the “No Win” policies in Korea, Vietnam and Cuba. “The United States,” remarked Will Rogers, “never lost a war or won a conference!”
The “judgments” of Walt Whitman Rostow are not personal to him, nor confined to the close-knit group of high-salaried professors in government who enjoyed the benefits of an Oxford education in the same era as he. As previously noted, an official declaration approved by the Congress of the Socialist International at Oslo in 1962 stated plainly, “The ultimate objective of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government …. Membership of the United Nations must be made universal, so that all nations, including China, may be represented by their governments in power.” (71)
The United States in the World Arena was published in 1960, and its contents (or at least, its conclusions) should have been a matter of public knowledge. Yet Walt Whitman Rostow was appointed only a few months later to an advisory post in the White House itself, and thereafter to a strategic position in the Department of State. With the great wealth of able, well-educated, and patriotic citizens available and willing to serve their country in an official capacity, how does it happen that out of 170 million Americans a man was chosen who pursues objectives common to those of the Socialist International? One thing is certain: it did not happen by accident. A domestic political group able to deliver a substantial bloc of votes and a domestic lobby of substantial weight in Washington were required to assure the predominance of such officials in the Kennedy-Johnson and Johnson-Humphrey Administrations. Both requirements were met by Americans for Democratic Action, political arm of the Fabian Socialist movement in the United States.
1. William E. Bohn, veteran American Socialist who was there, estimated the crowd at “a couple of hundred.” New Leader (April 15, 1957), p. 9.
Clifton Brock, a sympathetic historian, states it numbered “more than 400.” Clifton Brock, Americans For Democratic Action: Its Role in National Affairs. Introduction by Max Lerner (Washington, Public Affairs Press, 1962), p. 51.
Appearing before a House Committee in 1950, former Attorney General Francis Biddle, then national chairman of ADA, agreed to submit a founders’ list of 350 names, as of January 7-9, 1947. This list, when submitted and published in the record of the Hearings, contained exactly 152 names. Lobbying, Direct and Indirect. Part 6 of Hearings before the House Select Committee on Lobby Activities, House of Representatives, 81st Congress, Second Session (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, House Document 66193, 1950), “Americans for Democratic Action,” July 11, 12, 1950, pp. 19-23.
2. Interlocking Subversion in Government Departments, pp. 26-29. (See Bibliography.) Testimony of J. Anthony Panuch, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, concerning the absorption in large numbers of “un-screened personnel” by the Department of State at the close of World War II. “I would say,” stated Mr. Panuch (p. 29), “that the biggest single thing that contributed to the infiltration of the State Department was the merger of 1945. The effects of that are still being felt, in my judgment.
3. Harry W. Laidler, Socialism in the United States (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1952), p. 16. “Then came the New Deal legislation,” wrote Dr. Laidler. “Roosevelt and his followers adopted immediate demand after immediate demand from the platform of the Socialist Party . . . in the light of these developments many labor progressives and radicals swung their support from the Socialist Party to the New Deal. The socialist movement found itself in the curious position of having collectively and through individual Socialists, greater influence in molding legislation than ever before, while finding it increasingly difficult to obtain a large membership and following as a party.”
4. Brock, op. cit., p. 72.
5. Among six persons arrested, only three were indicted. Of those three, one pleaded guilty and was fined $2,500; another entered a plea of nolo contendere and was fined $500; Justice Department attorneys dropped an airtight case against the third. Overwhelming evidence obtained by the FBI was suppressed. As recently as 1962–according to the Department of State’s Biographic Register for 1961-62–one of the six, John Stewart Service, was serving as U. S. Consul in Liverpool, England. He has since been honorably retired on Government pension. . . . Hearings held by a House Committee in 1946, confirming the guilt of all six persons arrested, were withheld from publication for four years. They were finally printed in the Congressional Record, Vol. 96, Part 6, 81st Congress, Second Session (May 22, 1950), pp. 7428 ff.
6. David C. Williams, “Labour Britain and American Progressives,” Fabian Journal (March, 1947), p. 9.
7. Williams, op. cit., p. 10.
8. More recently Under Secretary of State and Ambassador to India in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration.
10. The New York Times (January 5, 1947).
11. The date for Hitler’s invasion of Russia was originally set for May 15, 1941. It was postponed six weeks, until June 22, apparently as a result of General William Donovan’s trip to Yugoslavia undertaken at the request of Britain’s Secret Service chief in the United States, William Stephenson. These facts were known at the time to top U. S. as well as Russian officials.
H. Montgomery Hyde, Room 303 (New York, Dell Publishing Co., 1964), (43print), p. 62. An authorized account of British Secret Service in the United States during World War II. Previously published in 1962 by Farrar, Straus and Co., and published in England under the title, The Quiet Canadian.
12. Officers of the committee issuing the “call” to UDA were listed in The New York Times (April 29, 1941). Chairman: Reinhold Niebuhr. Vice chairman: John L. Childs, Professor of Education, Teachers’ College, Columbia University; Franz Daniel, General Manager of the Laundry Workers’ Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing Workers, CIO; Robert Bendiner, editor of The Nation. Secretary: Murray Gross, Complaint Manager, Dressmakers Union, ILGWU. Treasurer: Freda Kirchwey, Managing Editor of The Nation. (See Appendix V for names of full committee.)
All but one of the above-named officers, and a majority of the committee members appear on the official list of League for Industrial Democracy “collaborators” and student chapter-heads, published by Mina Weisenberg. (See Appendix II.)
13. See Appendix V for official list of ADA founders.
15. William Remington, wartime U. S. Department of Commerce official, was convicted of perjury for denying Communist Party connections and for denying he had given information to a Communist espionage agent. His counsel was Joseph Rauh, Jr.
Sidney Lens–sometime director of United Service Employees Union Local 329, AFL-CIO, whose name appears on the masthead of many latter-day Socialist publications–was questioned on February 15 1963 by the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security regarding alleged connections with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee; as well as with Communist-sponsored organizations cited at the time on the Attorney General’s list. To most of the questions, he pleaded lapse of memory. Asked if he had ever belonged to a Trotskyist organization, he took the Fifth Amendment. His attorney was Joseph Rauh, Jr.
16. James Loeb, Jr., publisher of a small newspaper in upstate New York, later served briefly as Ambassador to Peru in the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. He was recalled at the request of Peruvian authorities, for alleged interference in that country’s national elections, and has since been sent as Ambassador to Guinea.
17. Other socially conscious clerics who attended the Willard Hotel Conference and are inscribed as ADA founders were: Rt. Rev. William Scarlett, Episcopal Bishop of St. Louis; Dr. A. Powell Davies, pastor of All Souls Unitarian Church, Washington, D.C.; Rabbi Milton Steinberg of the Park Avenue Synagogue, New York City; Reverend (now Monsignor) George Higgins of the Social Action Committee of the National Catholic Welfare Conference; Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam, retiring president of the Federal Council of Churches. (See Appendix V.)
18. Reinhold Niebuhr: His Religious, Social and Political Thought. A Symposium. Edited by Charles W. Kegley and Robert W. Bretell (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1956), p. 135.
20. As far back as 1926, Keynes had written: “The next move is with the head, and fists must wait.” John Maynard Keynes, Essays in Biography (New York, Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1933), p. 91.
21. See Appendix IV. As of 1964, Aubrey Williams was also national chairman of the Committee to Abolish the House Un-American Activities Committee.
22. In 1961 the three–the UAW, the UEW and ILGWU–were announced to be among the ten wealthiest labor unions in the United States, according to a list made available for the first time by the U. S. Department of Labor. Ranking second and third in annual income were the Electrical Workers and the Auto Workers, with annual incomes of $62,273,000 and $50,668,000, respectively. Fifth on the list was the ILGWU, with an annual income of $21,702,000. . .. United Steelworkers of America, which topped them all with an income in excess of $65,000,000 was also represented at the ADA founders’ conference; but withdrew its support a few years later because of alleged ADA radicalism.
23. Hearings of the Subcommittee on Internal Security of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, pp. 44-45. Statement of Colonel Igor Bogo lepov.
25. Fabian Journal, monthly organ of the Fabian Society, duly noted the formation of ADA. A footnote in its March, 1947 issue (p. 10), referring to the Union for Democratic Action, stated: “Recently reorganized under the title ‘Americans for Democratic Action’ it includes as officers and members many persons prominent in the New Deal, and in trade union and progressive organizations.”
26. In the Fabian International Review, to which David C. Williams contributed an article on the 1956 national elections in the United States, the following item appeared in a column headed “Our Contributors”: “David C. Williams is Director of Research and Education, Americans for Democratic Action.” Fabian International Review, No. 12 (September, 1956), p. 15.
In an editorial box on page 3, the same issue of the same publication stated: “Fabian International Review was launched in January 1953 to provide a serious socialist commentary of world events. Since then it has appeared every four months. It is with regret, therefore, that we announce this as our last issue.
“We have tried to maintain a good all-round quality and to contribute usefully to discussion among socialists. . . .
“The Fabian International Bureau will continue, of course, to publish pamphlets.”
27. See Appendix II.
28. Margaret Cole, The Story of Fabian Socialism (London, Heinemann Educational Books, Ltd., 1961), pop. 208-209.
29. By 1924 all University Fabian Societies had become Labour Clubs, according to the Fabian Society Annual Report, 1924-25, p. 8.
30. Howard K. Smith, Last Train from Berlin (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1942), pp. 34-38. Though he could hardly have been unaware of the fact, Smith failed to mention that the teachers and speakers whom he named were all well-known Fabian Socialists.
32. Ibid., p. 38. ADA World for February, 1964, reporting Howard K. Smith’s participation at a local ADA function, boasted he would be in charge of news coverage and analysis at the national party conventions for a nationwide TV network in 1964.
33. Edward R. Pease, The History of the Fabian Society (London, A. C. Fifield, 1916), p. 103. “In 1895,” wrote Pease, “a University Fabian Society was formed at Oxford by and for undergraduates, but maintaining continuity by the assistance of older members in permanent residence, such as Sidney Ball at St. John’s. In 1900 there were four Fabian Societies at Oxford, Glasgow, Aberystwyth and Cambridge, and their members were always elected at once into the parent society in order that the connection may not be broken when they leave the University.”
34. Cole, op. cit., p. 86.
35. Socialist International Information (December 7, 1963), Vol. XIII, No. 49.
37. Socialist International Information (August 3, 1963), Vol. XIII, No. 31-32.
38. Originals of seven wills written by Lord Rhodes between 1877 and 1899 may be found at Rhodes House at Oxford. The first five dealt with a worldwide secret society to promote the British Empire. The sixth, dated 1895, provided scholarships for “yong collegians.” The final will, drawn in 1899 and made public in 1902 after Rhodes’ death, offered scholarships to American collegians.
Rhodes trustees simultaneously took steps to form the secret society proposed by the old empire-builder. On July 24, 1902 the Pilgrims Society of Great Britain was founded, and six months later on January 13, 1903 the Pilgrims Society of the United States was organized. Thomas W. Lamont, Sr. was at one time chairman of the executive committee of the American Pilgrims.
39. Alger Hiss, long a trusted and high-ranking State Department official, was identified as having been a secret member of a Communist cell and as having given confidential Government documents to agents of Soviet Intelligence. He was convicted of perjury and sentenced to prison.
40. In a letter of June 7, 1950, Stanley Hornbeck wrote to Dean Rusk: “It was the year 1945–and not before then–that the Government of the Untied States, first having taken action inconsistent with tradition and commitment in regard to China, embarked upon what became a course of intervention in regard to the civil conflict between the National Government and the Communists, in China . . . then and thereafter . . . the Government of the Untied States brought to bear pressures, pressures upon the National Government which were not against the Communists but were on their behalf.” The Institute of Pacific Relations. Hearings before the Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act and other Internal Security Laws, of the Committee of the Judiciary, 82nd and 83rd Congress (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, 19521-52), p. 5363.
41. A few of the former Rhodes Scholars appointed to high office during the Kennedy-Johnson Administration are:
Dean Rusk (Oxford, 1934), Secretary of State; sometime professor of Government at Mills College, and former president of the Rockefeller Foundation.
Byron E. White (Oxford, 1938-39), Assistant Supreme Court Justice, formerly Deputy Attorney General.
George C. McGhee (Oxford, 1937; University of London, 1937), Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs; once coordinator of the 400 million dollar aid program to Greece and Turkey.
Robert V. Roosa (Oxford, 1938-39), Under Secretary of the Treasury for Monetary Affairs; a Keynesian economist who has taught at Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Harlan Cleveland (Oxford, 1938), Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, former chief of UNRRA’s mission to China; former director of ECA’s China program; former publisher of The Reporter, a “progressive” monthly.
Charles J. Hitch (Oxford, 1934), Assistant Secretary of Defense and Comptroller; wrote The Economics of Defense in the Nuclear Age, known as “the Bible” of Pentagon civilians.
Kermit Gordon (Oxford, 1938-39), director of the Bureau of the Budget, previously on the President’s Council of Economic Advisers; Harvard professor of the Keynesian School; former director of the economic and administrative program of the Ford Foundation.
Walt Whitman Rostow (Oxford, 1936-38), counselor of the State Department and chairman of the Policy Planning Council; former deputy to the President’s Special Assistant on National Security; former staff member, Center for International Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
42. Hearings, Joint Economic Committee, 88th Congress First Session (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, January 29, 1963).
43. Harlan Cleveland, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, formerly published The Reporter, a progressive monthly that normally followed the ADA line and to which ADA members often contributed. Editor of The Reporter, Max Ascoli, and his wife, the former Marion Rosenwald Stern, appeared for years on official ADA lists, as substantial and regular fund donors.
44. For example, see, the list of persons whose “generous assistance” is acknowledged by Walt Whitman Rostow in the Preface to his book, The United States in the World Arena (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1960), p. xiii.
45. Under Secretary of the Treasury for Monetary Affairs, Robert V. Roosa was appointed to a post comparable to that held by the late Harry Dexter White.
46. In this connection a letter of February 13, 1934 from Edward C. Carter, director of the Institute, to Selsker H. Gunn of the Rockefeller Foundation may be of incidental interest: “. . . I don’t think I told you that, when we saw Karakhan (then Assistant Commissar for Foreign Affairs) in Moscow in 1931, he told us that the Institute’s researches in China and Japan would be equally valuable whether the Far East remained capitalist or became communist.” Institute of Pacific Relations. Hearings, p. 5120.
47. Ibid., p. 2870. A letter confirming this statement was introduced into the record, but not printed.
48. Ibid., pp. 5023; 5026. A letter of September 16, 1950 (p. 5026) from William L. Holland, secretary-treasurer of the Institute to Dean Rusk stated: “May I make an urgent and probably irregular appeal to you to lend your weightiest support to the double IPR financial appeal which is to be considered by the Rockefeller Foundation on September 22. . . . Your words of support for us to the Ford Foundation were very influential, even though action on that grant has been postponed pending the forthcoming appointment of a director for the foundation.”
49. On November 6, 1950, Red Chinese troops and supplies were streaming into Korea, and Russian-built planes based in Manchuria were harassing American troops. MacArthur had ordered U. S. bombers to strike at the Yalu River bridges. A few hours before the American bombers were due to take off from their Japanese bases, an emergency meeting was called at the White House, attended by President Truman, Secretary of State Acheson, Secretary of Defense Lovett and Assistant Secretary of State Rusk. Regarding that meeting, President Truman wrote: “Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk pointed out that we had a commitment with the British not to take action which might involve attacks on the Manchurian side of the river without consultation with them. He also told Mr. Lovett that the State Department had presented MacArthur’s report on Chinese Communist intervention to the United Nations and that an urgent meeting of the Security Council had been requested. At this meeting we would try to get a resolution adopted calling on the Chinese Communists to cease their activities in Korea. . . . Mr. Rusk also mentioned the danger of involving the Soviets especially in the light of the mutual assistance treaty between Moscow and Peiping. . . . Then Lovett called the Air Force Secretary, Mr. Finletter (a staunch ADA man–ed.) and instructed him to tell the Joint Chiefs what Mr. Rusk had set forth and to tell them that he [Lovett] and Acheson both felt that this action should be postponed until they were able to get a decision from me.”
Next day some strictly limited action along the Yalu River was authorized; but the principle of the privileged sanctuary had been established. Harry S. Truman, Memoirs (Garden City, Doubleday & Co., 1956), Vol. II, p. 374.
50. Copyrighted by Hearst Headline Service, for release April 8, 1964.
51. From a speech delivered in Palm Springs, California by General Tomas S. Power, then commanding the Strategic Air Force. The Daily-Enterprise (Riverside, Calif., April 18, 1964).
52. A letter of 1952 from Michael Lindsay to the New Statesman and Nation stated: “Mr. Rusk’s recent assertions that the Chinese Government was a Russian colonial regime and that the Kuomintang really represented the Chinese people have been widely criticized.” Institute of Pacific Relations, Hearings (See Bibliography), p. 5391.
53. “Secretary’s Report (September, 1961-July, 1963) to the Eighth Congress of the Socialist International, meeting in Amsterdam, 9-12 September, 1963,” Socialist International Information (August 24, 1963), Vol. XIII, No. 34-35.
54. M. F. Millikan and W. W. Rostow, A Proposal: Key to An Effective Foreign Policy (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1957).
55. W. W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1960).
56. See article by Thomas Ross, Chicago Sun Times (March 30, 1961).
57. “Within the Soviet block,” wrote Secretary Rusk hopefully, “the Stalinist terror has been radically changed. And within the Soviet Union, as well as most of the smaller European nations, there are signs–small but varied and persistent signs–of yearnings for more individual freedom. And there are practical reasons why men must be allowed freedom if they are to achieve their best.” Department of State Bulletin (March 16 1964), p. 393.
Cf. Richard Loewenthal, “Freedom and Communism,” Socialist International Information (August 1, 1964), Vol. XIV, No. 16-17. This article by Loewenthal of the London Fabian Society and the German Social Democratic Party originally appeared as a supplement to Berliner Stimme early in 1964 and reflects the official foreign policy line of the Socialist International. Views expressed by Rusk and Rostow are similar.
58. Cole, op. cit., pp. 208-209.
59. The budget of Sweden’s Socialist Government for 1964-65 included a 768 million dollar military appropriation, although little Sweden is traditionally a neutral nation. Informed observers have suggested Sweden’s military forces anticipate assuming a key role in the world-police functions of the United Nations.
60. Gunnar Myrdal (with the assistance of Richard Sterner and Arnold Rose), An American Dilemma (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1944), (1483 pages), p. 601. (On July 6, 1966 Dr. Martin Luther King of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference received from the Swedish Consul General in New York a check for $100,000 which had been collected in Sweden for the benefit of his organization. Los Angeles Times, July 7, 1966).
62. As originally presented in 1904, Mackinder’s theory seemed designed as a warning to the British Secret Service to block Czarist Russia’s expansion in Asia. In modern times the same theory has been gratefully adopted by Soviet Russia to justify its own plan for world conquest. Rostow’s geopolitical approach can therefore be interpreted as an indirect concession to Soviet Russia.
It is interesting to note that an article on geopolitics by the U. S. Department of State’s official geographer contains the following pronouncement: “Whether we view Mackinder’s theory as fact or fancy, the whole American concept of containment is bound up with his Heartland theory presented before the Royal Geographical Society 60 years ago.” G. Etzel Pearly, “Geopolitics and Foreign Relations,” Department of State Bulletin (March 2, 1964), p. 321.
63. W. W. Rostow, The United States in the World Arena (New York, Harper and Row, 1960), pp. 543-544.
64. In 1940-41 the author of Fabian Freeway had the painful experience of reading the collected works of General Haushofer at the Library of Congress in Washington, D. C.
65. Rostow, op. cit., p. 537.
71. The World Today: The Socialist Perspective. A Socialist International Publication. (London, no date), p. 11.
Posted on November 30, 2012 by progressingamerica
There was another secret weapon valued more highly than the atom bomb by Anglo-American Fabians of the New Deal era. Namely, the university professor, who, as the British Fabian Socialist philosopher, John Atkinson Hobson, had suggested was to be the future secret weapon of national strategy. A familiar of Justice Louis D. Brandeis and of the latter’s protégée, Felix Frankfurter, Hobson merely pointed up a trend that had been gaining momentum in America since the turn of the century. With the Roosevelt Administration, the liberal-to-Left professor moved into his prescribed orbit as the planner and guide of national policies based on Fabian research, which officials and politicians would trigger.
A trio of university professors played a major part in shaping the seemingly impromptu social, fiscal, legal and diplomatic strategy of the Roosevelt Administration and other Democrat administrations to follow. Two were British nationals, closely identified with the Fabian Society of London. The third was an American citizen of European origin who had helped to found organizations in this country known to be affiliates of the (Fabian Socialist) League for Industrial Democracy, (1) and who had been rebuked by former President Theodore Roosevelt, for his radical bias, as displayed in a government report.
All three were equally at home in the lecture halls of England and the United States; and though they held forth in many localities, all left a particular imprint on Harvard University. They were brilliant conversationalists, tireless letter writers and mental gymnasts of the first order, with a talent for gaining the ear of important persons and a calculated appeal to youth that has caused their influence to outlast their times. Their names were Felix Frankfurter, Harold J. Laski and John Maynard Keynes.
It has been admitted by New Deal insiders that FDR privately agreed, more than a year before becoming President, to sponsor the Tennessee Valley Authority project; the Agricultural Adjustment, Public Works and Conservation programs; Securities Exchange and Holding Company control; and something resembling the National Recovery Act.(2) He had also agreed to sponsor a system of social insurance leading to the welfare state. (3) If no hint of those intentions appeared in the Democratic Party platform of 1932, only the public was surprised by the rapid-fire developments following Roosevelt’s accession to power. The original brain trusters, who trailed him from Albany to Washington, knew what to expect. Their immediate problem was to discover ways of writing the new program of encroaching Socialism into law.
For that purpose it seemed natural to turn to Felix Frankfurter, Byrnes Professor of Law at Harvard University, whose specialty was administrative law. Preeminent among FDR brain trusters, he was a tiny figure of a man, with a large head and keen, dark eyes behind gleaming spectacles. Endowed with exceptional brainpower and adroitness, he had championed many Socialist-approved causes at the intellectual level without ever descending into the pit of Socialist Party politics.
Born in Vienna, Felix was brought to New York City by his parents at the age of twelve, speaking only German and Hungarian. By the time he was nineteen he had mastered the English language and graduated third in his class from the City College of New York. In 1906 he took his law degree at Harvard University, tutoring less talented students to help pay expenses. That was the year when the Intercollegiate Socialist Society founded a club at Harvard, with Walter Lippmann as president. According to Lippmann’s biographer, in 1909 Frankfurter often joined the club members for happy, discursive weekends at the Chestnut Hill home of Dr. Ralph Albertson, a leading Christian Socialist of the day. (4) Characteristically, Felix Frankfurter was never named as having been a member of the club in anniversary speeches and publications of the LID.
Only a few years later, however, he was intimately associated with Walter Lippmann as a co-founder of the New Republic —the liberal weekly designed as an American opposite number of the British Fabian Socialist New Statesman. In that capacity, Frankfurter made the acquaintance of the chief stockholder of the New Republic, Dorothy Whitney Straight, who married Leonard K. Elmhirst and moved to England in 1925. As Mrs. Elmhirst, she helped to endow a Fabian Socialist-sponsored front organization in England called Political and Economic Planning or PEP, which was organized as a “charitable trust” in 1931 and helped to devise plans for the New Deal in advance of FDR’s election.
Between 1916 and 1922 Frankfurter filed briefs in several important cases involving hours of labor and minimum wages. He gave legal advice in the famous Scopes trial defended by the Socialist attorney, Clarence Darrow; in the 1926 case of the Patterson, New Jersey silk mill strikers; and in the still more controversial Sacco and Vanzetti appeals of 1927. Frankfurter used, advocated and taught the technique initiated by Justice Louis D. Brandeis before the latter’s ascension to the Supreme Court. Known as the Brandeis Brief, it involved amassing a volume of factual, historical and/or pseudo-philosophic material and presenting it with the shortest possible legal argument. Prudently, Frankfurter disclaimed any strict adherence to Brandeis’ sociological approach to the Law, leaving that reputation to his colleague and bosom friend, Dean Roscoe Pound of Harvard Law School.
Instead, he professed a deep concern for procedural regularity, a difficult point with which to take issue. By invoking the Olympian names of Brandeis and Holmes as often as possible and discoursing in the loftiest philosophic vein, he almost succeeded in diverting attention from his own radical associations and purposes. Yet, as late as 1930, Frankfurter wrote that through the use of due process the justices could read their own economic and social views into the neutral language of the Constitution. (5) As a Supreme Court Justice, he was to lean heavily on the same due process clause precisely because of its flexibility, proclaiming it “the most majestic concept in our whole constitutional system.” (6)
Although he lacked practical experience in drafting legislation, for years Frankfurter had advised his students to familiarize themselves with the legislative process. With their assistance he duly became the legal progenitor of the New Deal. At FDR’s request, Frankfurter supplied his own handpicked former students for every key legal post in the new Administration so that he controlled, in effect, both the writing and interpretation of the new legislative measures. It almost seemed as if he had been preparing for such a contingency ever since his appointment to the Harvard Law faculty in 1914, and when the moment came, he was ready.
Believing that the past is prologue and that changes in juristic concepts must be initiated through the law schools, Frankfurter had always selected his pupils with care. His classes, according to the Harvard University catalogue, were “open only to students of high standing with the consent of the instructor.” The most promising were invited on Sunday evenings to the Frankfurter cottage on Brattle Street for extracurricular discussions on law and life. For the chosen few, Frankfurter’s supervision went far beyond the classroom and into their future careers.
Each year two honor graduates of Harvard Law School had been assigned, largely on Frankfurter’s recommendation, as secretaries to the liberal Supreme Court Justices, Louis D. Brandeis and Oliver Wendell Holmes. In 1933, at least eight of those erstwhile prodigies quickly became prominent in the New Deal Administration. Brandeis’ former secretaries included Dean G. Acheson, who served briefly as Roosevelt’s Under Secretary of the Treasury and at Frankfurter’s urging was later installed in the State Department; James M. Landis, Federal Trade Commissioner and co-author, with Benjamin V. Cohen, Thomas G. Corcoran and Frankfurter himself, of the Securities and Exchange Act; William Sutherland, counsel to the Tennessee Valley Authority; and Paul Freund, a lawyer in the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, who returned to teach at Harvard. Holmes’ former secretaries accounted for Thomas G. Corcoran of the RFC; Lloyd Landau and Donald Hiss of the Public Works Administration; and Alger Hiss of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, who went on to the State Department, the Carnegie Foundation—and ultimate disgrace. All were Frankfurter’s “boys.”
When the Tennessee Valley Authority was set up and needed an executive who was also a clever lawyer, Frankfurter produced David Lilienthal, whom he had previously placed with Wisconsin’s utilities control commission in training for just such a job.(7) To Agriculture, Frankfurter sent the aggressively liberal Jerome L. Frank; to Interior, he sent Nathan R. Margold; and to Labor, he sent Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr., more recently a trustee of the Ford Foundation and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. In those days it was said— apparently with good reason—that no New Deal department nor agency would hire a lawyer unless he was on Frankfurter’s “White List.”
The professor’s influence, however, was not limited to supervising legislation and selecting legal personnel. He was consulted on every major administrative move and Presidential statement. For some six or eight months after Roosevelt took office, Frankfurter commuted each week to Washington from Cambridge, Massachusetts. The White House door was regularly open to him, and no official doors were closed. Within the first “hundred days” most of the basic New Deal legislation had been written and passed—a task that would clearly have been impossible in so short a time if not partially mapped out in advance.
With America’s first Socialist-inspired government program staffed and operating, Frankfurter left to spend a year as visiting professor at Oxford University in 1933-3~an invitation conveniently arranged by Fabian admirers in England. His parting words to exuberant New Dealers reflected the mood of the Fabian tortoise. “Go slowly,” he warned, “go slowly.” In particular, Frankfurter advised delaying as long as possible a Court test of the National Recovery Act, whose constitutionality he doubted. This was strange advice from a man whose own highest ambition was to sit on the Supreme Court, and on any grounds of principle the advice seems hard to justify.(8)
By a telltale coincidence, Frankfurter’s words were echoed before the year was out by a minor British financier, Israel M. Sieff, long regarded as one of the Fabian Society’s more able permeators. On May 3, 1934, Congressman Louis T. McFadden of Pennsylvania told the U.S. House of Representatives that a certain Israel Moses Sieff of London, England had recently declared in a public speech: “Let us go slowly for a while, until we can see how our plan works out in America.”(9) Sieff belonged to the British organization, Political and Economic Planning or PEP, and the plan to which he referred was the New Deal. Why on earth, the Congressman wondered, should a British national living in London refer to the New Deal as “our plan”? Unintentionally, Sieff had revealed a relationship between Fabian Socialist planners in England and in the United States.
Political and Economic Planning (PEP), of which Sieff was a founder, sponsored social, industrial and political “studies,” apparently with a view to influencing official action as well as “opinion-forming” groups. Some of its findings were eventually published and some were not. Its method of work, which has never varied, was described in a prospectus, About P.E.P., distributed in 1956 by the organization itself:
“The method of work is to bring together as a group a number of people who are concerned professionally with one or another aspect of the problem under discussion, as well as a few non-specialists who can ask the fundamental questions which sometimes escape the experts. This technique enables P.E.P. to bring to bear on a problem the combined experience of men and women working in different spheres including business, politics, the Government and local authority services, and the universities. The groups are assisted by a paid research stat, who act as their secretaries and drafters. The names of those who form the groups are not disclosed and the results of their work are published on the authority of the organisation as a whole. This rule was adopted deliberately from the first and has proved of great value. It enables people to serve who would not otherwise be able to d-o so; it ensures that members can contribute freely to discussion without being bound by the official views of any body with which they may be identified ….”
“For the convenience of working members, a club was also formed in 1931 with rooms im the building at Queen Anne’s Gate. The P.E.P. Trust and the P.E.P. Club are separate institutions, although there is naturally a large common membership…. As regards the subjects for study, the Council of Management tries to pick those which seem likely to have reached the forefront of public discussion at about the time when the work has been completed and the findings published …. The aim throughout has been to maintain a balanced programme of social, industrial and general economic studies, chiefly in order that the work of particular groups may be guided by an understanding of national needs and resources as a whole.
“. . . income is derived in roughly equal proportions from donations (given mainly by firms in industry and commerce); subscriptions to the broadsheets; grants from educational foundations. Many of the donations are made under covenant, thus enabling P.E.P. to claim refund of income tax paid by the donors.” (10)
The rule of secrecy, governing the activities of PEP from the start, not only concealed its sources of inspiration, but allowed American planners to participate without attracting any special notice. It also made possible an exchange of ideas and personnel with the New Fabian Research Bureau, which was organized at about the same time. Prominent members of the organization over the years have included Sir Julian Huxley, Israel Sieff, E. M. Nicholson, Kenneth Lindsay, Thomas Jones, Jack Pritchard, A. D. K. Owen, Richard Bailey, J. B. Priestley—all identified more or less intimately with the Fabian Society, which by its own definition “consists of Socialists.”
One of PEP’s first and most faithful donors was the American-born Dorothy Elmhirst, whose British spouse was to serve from 1939 to 1953 as director of the organization. At her Devonshire estate, Dorothy Elmhirst welcomed Professor Felix Frankfurter, who had visited her on Long Island with Herbert Croly during the formative days of the New Republic. Frankfurter was greeted no less warmly in 1933-1934 by his roommate of World War I years in Washington, Lord Eustace Percy, as well as by old friends at the New Statesman, the London School of Economics and the New Fabian Research Bureau. All exemplified for Frankfurter “those civilized standards of English-speaking people” which he was so eager to apply in America.
Political and Economic Planning was evidently conceived as a polite transmission belt for ideas and plans originating in the New Fabian Research Bureau. That is not to say its membership or donors’ lists were 100 per cent Fabian. On the contrary, a number of honestly liberal or conservative business firms and individuals were persuaded, at one time or another, to lend their names and to contribute funds to PEP projects. Whether they hoped to improve their own public image or were merely seeking information, they were charmed by the urbane manner, discreet privacy and studious pretensions of Political and Economic Planning. While their presence lent weight to PEP pronouncements, such persons still remained outsiders. They had little to do with selecting the subjects for survey, and no voice in the conclusions reached. For all practical purposes, the internal operations of the group were controlled by the Management Council and the permanent, paid office staff.
Political and Economic Planning was one of the earliest Fabian Socialist front organizations to employ the device of bringing together business men, public officials and professional intellectuals for planning and propaganda purposes. A forerunner of that mixed society which was to effect a “humane” transition to Socialism, the organization served the Fabians as an instrument of peaceful permeation and penetration, both in government and private industry. Its initial object was to secure coordination between Socialist planners in the United States and the United Kingdom, leaving emulation on an Empire-wide scale to come later.
A PEP document issued in 1931, under the title Freedom and Planning, had recommended setting up National Councils in Agriculture, Transport and Coal Mining—resembling the industry-wide councils afterwards set up in the United States under the National Recovery Act. The manufacturer was to be regulated through national planning. Waste in distribution was to be eliminated through a system of department and grocery store chains. The individual farmer would be told just what and how much he could plant. Large tracts of land were to be acquired by the Government, and publicly-owned electric power plants were to be administered by a government utilities trust. It was such recommendations, contained in PEP’s Freedom and Planning, that obviously emboldened Israel M. Sieff to refer to the New Deal as “our plan.”
Both in form and method of work, Political and Economic Planning was a pilot organization. Aside from the influence it boasted of exerting on the architects of the New Deal, the organization also became the model for a whole series of similar and related organizations in this country which by now have acquired almost mystic prestige. Some of the group’s present-day American offshoots specialize in economic and social studies; some in foreign affairs; some in world government schemes. All aim to affect national policy and to shape public opinion, while remaining immune from public control.
An immediate American counterpart of PEP was the National Planning Association, quietly reorganized m 1934 after Felix Frankfurter’s return to the United States. The new organization was reputedly financed by grace of Dorothy Elmhirst. It included New Deal officials, trade union leaders, business men and publicists, with a solid core of League for Industrial Democracy regulars. (11) Israel M. Sieff kept in touch during frequent trips to America. Sometimes he was accompanied by Leonard K. Elmhirst long time chairman of PEP. (12) A lineal descendant of both PEP and the National Planning Association is the Committee for Economic Development founded in 1941.
The National Recovery Act was duly declared unconstitutional in 1935 by unanimous decision of the Supreme Court. The Bituminous Coal, Agricultural Adjustment and National Labor Relations Acts suffered a similar fate by majority vote. A fresh legislative approach to the question of planned Federal control over industry and agriculture was urgently needed to salvage the main features of the New Deal program. It was supplied through the novel application of a provision in the Constitution empowering the Federal Government to regulate interstate commerce: an application that in its manifold effects is a far cry from any intention entertained by the Signers.
For this ingenious advice, FDR was obligated to Felix Frankfurter who continued to make himself available in a supernumerary capacity. Somewhat against his own better judgment, the little law professor also supported Roosevelt’s ill-fated attempt to pack the Supreme Court —though Frankfurter felt that time and new appointments could be depended upon to provide justices more nearly subservient to the Executive will. For service rendered, he was finally rewarded in 1938 with the fulfillment of his heart’s desire: a seat on the Supreme Court.
In that sheltered eminence Frankfurter could enjoy the prerogatives for which he had apparently yearned. Making some obvious concessions to the traditional aloofness of the Supreme Court, he appeared less frequently at the White House and proffered less direct advice; but when he did speak, he was listened to! (13) It was on Frankfurter’s recommendation that FDR dispatched Harry Hopkins to England even before the Lend-Lease Act had been passed. (14) And it was invariably Frankfurter who took a final, critical look at President Roosevelt’s major policy speeches and “fireside chats” before they were delivered. Frankfurters lifelong friendship and daily morning strolls with his Georgetown neighbor, Dean Acheson, whose rise in the State Department hierarchy he sponsored, are credited with having had a profound effect on American foreign policy—especially during those years when Presidents Roosevelt and Truman were delivering the hegemony of a large portion of the globe to Soviet Russia and Communist China.
Officially, the Supreme Court remained Frankfurter’s prime field of concentration until his retirement in 1961—as it had been the chief subject of his studies and published articles prior to his elevation to the Supreme Court. During his tenure, the quality and temper of that once-August body altered visibly, and its “law-making” function was emphasized at the expense of the legislative power of the Congress. Though Frankfurter’s role was conveniently veiled by the secrecy governing the Supreme Court’s deliberations, it has been a potent one. There he could contribute obliquely, whether by his own action or his influence on less learned colleagues, to the gradual decline of that separation of powers inherent in the Constitution, which has been recognized since 1898 by British Fabians as the most serious obstacle to the advance of Socialism in America.
Among the self-proclaimed liberals and progressives clustered around FDR, most of whom dissembled their Socialist purpose for reasons of practical politics, Harold J. Laski was a bird of gaudier plumage. He was the popular image of the Red Professor, who could never resist airing his views in or out of season. Laski made no secret of his Marxist beliefs and openly advocated social revolution, whether by consent or by violence. Anyone who adopted him as a pet, solicited his articles, promoted him as a teacher of American youth, or listened seriously to his ideas on national or international policy, at least had no illusions as to where Laski stood. Possibly the only fact about him not fully advertised was his connection after 1940, with the Fabian International Bureau.
Precocious child of a middle class merchant in Manchester, England, Harold Laski joined the Fabian Society at Oxford and to the end of his life remained one of its most vocal members. Declared unfit for military service in World War I, he took a teaching post at McGill University in Canada. There he was speedily discovered by Norman Hapgood, a Hearst magazine editor of Socialist leanings, who made a special trip from Toronto to Montreal to meet Laski. Hapgood described this “extraordinary, brilliant young man” to Felix Frankfurter, who obtained an instructorship for Laski at Harvard in 1915 and became his closest friend. The following summer, to supplement a minute income, young Laski was also provided a job in Philadelphia cataloguing the papers of the deceased soap magnate, Joseph I. Fels.
During the four years he taught at Harvard, Laski edited the Harvard Law Review, devoting a whole issue to Duguit, the father of Soviet law, and began studies for a doctorate which he never completed. He contributed articles frequently to the New Republic; flashed like a comet across the Left Wing intellectual scene in Boston and New York; and wrote a rather pretentious book Authority in the Modern State, which he dedicated jointly to Felix Frankfurter and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. Laski’s May-and-December friendship with the aging Holmes has been widely publicized. Disingenuously, Laski once advised him to read the History of the Fabian Society by Edward R. Pease—”rather a pleasant book in its way.”(15)
Tired, bored and seeking mental diversion, Holmes took “great pleasure” in the “dear boy’s” companionship and phenomenal display of learning. Laski, like Sidney Webb, had a photographic memory. It enabled him to quote whole passages from the most recondite works, even citing the pages on which they appeared. An inveterate namedropper, he also had a lifelong tendency to recall meetings with the great that never happened—and in which, of course, he figured to advantage. Since he told a good story, and since he actually did know a surprising number of distinguished persons for one so young, his admirers condoned that harmless mythomania. (16)
When he went to teach at Harvard, Laski was just twenty-two. Frail, undersized and looking even smaller in his dark English suits, he had the air of a preternaturally wise child, mostly head, eyes and round horn-rimmed glasses. Appearing anything but dangerous, he still managed to attract an immoderate amount of attention, as he was destined to do all his life. This was not only because of his conspicuous gifts, but also because of the opinions he felt called upon to impart on a wide range of controversial topics—particularly, the Russian Revolution.
While he had his defenders, Laski provoked a good deal of spontaneous resentment among the general student body, which devoted an entire issue of the Harvard Lampoon to attacking him. He won notoriety in Greater Boston by getting himself involved in the police strike of 1919. Though never officially asked to leave Harvard, even his best friends agreed at the time it might be wiser for him to move on.
Leading lights of the Fabian Society made a concerted effort to find the proper niche for Harold at home. His sponsors included Graham Wallas, then lecturing in New York at the New School for Social Research; Sidney Webb, supreme pontiff of the Fabian Society; and Lord Haldane, a governor of the London School of Economics, who had just allied himself publicly with the Fabians and the British Labour Party. (17) With their backing, Laski was offered a place at the London School, and in a very few years inherited Graham Wallas’ chair of Political Science. To qualify for the promotion Laski wrote a massive tome, The Grammar of Politics, which started by taking gradualist Socialism for granted and ended with a frankly Marxist position. Praised by Sidney Webb, it became a standard university textbook, replacing nineteenth century texts on political science just as it has since been replaced by more fashionable Socialist works.
Laski’s highly personalized method of teaching—a technique similar to G. D. H. Cole’s in England and Felix Frankfurter’s in the United States—gained him fervent followers among the young people who Hocked to study under him. They came not only from the United Kingdom but from Asia, Africa and America, in the decades when Rockefeller Foundation grants were helping to build the London School of Economics into a world center of Socialist instruction. Laski’s classes were filled to overflowing with students of every hue and color, and they stood in line outside his office waiting to consult him.
Consciously he strove to instill his own Marxist doctrines in future leaders of revolutionary movements from outposts of tale Empire which he hoped and schemed to dissolve. Tom Mboya of Kenya’s African National Union Party and the saturnine Krishna Menon of India were among the pupils whose contact with him outlasted their university days. At one time, it was said, most of the senior civil servants in Nehru’s government were former students of Laski’s. Of the young men indoctrinated by him at the London School, not a few occupy top posts in their own countries today—especially in the so-called developing nations.
Outside of the classroom he agitated ceaselessly in public lectures, periodicals and personal correspondence for one burning global issue after another—Freedom for India, Ethiopia, the Spanish Loyalists— and generally urged cooperation between Liberals, Socialists and Communists. He served with Leonard Woolf and John Strachey as a director of the strongly pro-Soviet Left Book Club. Though the director of the London School, Sir William Beveridge, expressed some fear that Laski’s outspoken hostility to the capitalist system might discourage the flow of contributions, such fears proved groundless. A total of $3,000,000 for buildings, research and general expenses was donated by the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Fund and the Rockefeller Foundation to the London School from 1924 through 1949, while Harold Laski served in its department of Political Science.
Like G. D. H. Cole—an equally avowed Marxist, and a pedagogue whose influence on the coming generation of Fabian Socialist leaders rivaled Laski’s—he frankly aimed to mold the minds of future government officials at home and abroad. Britain’s post World War II Foreign Minister, Socialist Ernest Bevin, who did not always see eye to eye with Laski, once told a Labour Party Conference: “If it’s the universities that are to be criticized, well, put up a vote of censure on Harold Laski, because it’s the product of the universities I have got to accept!”(18)
Laski’s influence on alumni of the mines, shipyards and factories in Britain was also considerable. Despite his reputation for intellectual snobbism, a number of trade union officials who rose to government office with the British Labour Party regularly turned to him for advice. Emanuel Shinwell of the Miners’ Union, for example, who enjoyed quite a reputation as a revolutionary agitator, wrote in his autobiography: “My mind was finally made up after a conversation with my late friend, Harold Laski . . . I lifted up my telephone and spoke to Atlee. I told him I would accept the Secretaryship of State for War.” (19)
While Laski never aspired to nor accepted political office himself, he remained an audible offstage presence, irritating at times to the old pros of the Parliamentary Labour Party but impossible to ignore. In 1932, he joined a little group of militants inside the Labour Party who called themselves the Socialist League; and, in 1937, he signed their Unity Manifesto urging a united front in Britain between Labour and the Communist Party against Fascism. Significantly, most of the Labour Party members signing that petition were intellectuals and outstanding figures in the Fabian Society.(20)
After the Popular Front movement in which he was active had been forcibly dissolved, Laski still argued in 1939-40 for a friendly attitude toward Soviet Russia, no matter how badly that country had behaved in Finland, Poland and the Baltic States.(21) In February, 1941, he initiated a correspondence with Herbert Morrison, Fabian Socialist Home Secretary in the coalition Cabinet of Winston Churchill, to make sure that the “civil rights” of Communists in wartime Britain were being protected. Following Hitler’s invasion of Russia, Laski was one of the first and most ardent spokesmen for all-out aid to the Soviet Union, with a view to securing Russian cooperation in a postwar Socialist world.(22)
From 1939, Laski sat on the Executive of the British Labour Party. Under the prevailing system of rotation, he automatically became its chairman in 1945–the year in which the Party rode to power on the strength of its deceptive promise to abolish poverty. Chairman of the Labour Party’s campaign committee and policy subcommittee in that critical election year was Herbert Morrison, by then on exceedingly close terms with Laski.
Following the Party’s victory at the polls, Professor Laski made an astounding proposal to Clement Attlee, its Parliamentary Leader since 1935. He invited Attlee to abdicate and allow the incoming parliamentary majority to elect a leader—presumably Herbert Morrison, to whose campaign aid a number of the newly elected Labour M.P.’s owed their seats and who, in Laski’s opinion, would have made a much better Prime Minister than Attlee. While not unconstitutional under British law, a more inept suggestion has rarely been offered by a political pundit.
Curtly, Attlee replied, “Dear Laski, I thank you for your letter, contents of which have been noted.” (23) When Ernest Bevin, boss of the powerful Transport Workers’ Union, learned of the “chicanery,” he moved promptly in Attlee’s behalf and no more was heard of the matter. Needless to say, this bit of backstage business did not endear Laski to Prime Minister Attlee or Foreign Minister Bevin, and effectively precluded him from becoming personal adviser-in-chief to the Labour Party Government as he so ardently longed to be.
For all that, Laski could neither be ignored nor suppressed. From 1946 to 1948 he was voted chairman of the London Fabian Society, which supplied the plans, legislation and key personnel for the Labour Government in Britain and to which over two-thirds of its parliamentary majority belonged. Moreover, Laski was idolized by foreign Socialists, a number of whom held cabinet rank in their own countries after the war—especially in France, Belgium, the Scandinavian countries and in Czechoslovakia, where Laski advised the Benes Government to cooperate with the Communists. Followers of Pietro Nenni in postwar Italy hailed him as “a figure comparable with Marx in the intellectual history of Socialism.” Despite his ineptitude in practical affairs, to the end Harold Laski remained a symbol of the International Socialist Professor, who used his connections abroad to affect the course of British policy when deterred from doing so at home.
Never admitting that a man cannot serve two masters, Harold Laski often referred to the United States as his second country. Few Americans even in his own time realized how large a part of his adult life was spent in the United States, or how deep a swath he cut in both educational and governmental circles in America. Of his thirty-odd year teaching and advisory career, it is estimated that almost one third was spent in North American colleges and universities, either as a visiting professor or special lecturer.
Following his early fiasco at Harvard, Laski was to return to this country again and again as a paid and feted guest. He gave a series of formal lectures at the Universities of North Carolina and Indiana; taught for a semester in 1939 at Columbia University Teachers’ College; lectured more briefly at Yale and at Princeton’s bicentennial, and at the State Universities of Washington, Oregon, California and Colorado; and in 1948 Laski debated Senator Robert Taft at Kenyon College in Ohio. Of course, he made numerous appearances at the New School for Social Research in New York City where he helped to organize a group of Socialist refugee professors.
After World War II he spent some time at Roosevelt University in Chicago where his disciple from the London School, Professor Herman Finer, also held forth. Laski’s final tour in the United States was made under the auspices of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, to deliver the Sidney Hillman Memorial Lectures, jointly sponsored by that Socialist-directed union and local institutions of higher learning from coast to coast.
More frankly Marxist in doctrine than some other members of the London Fabian Society, Laski’s lectures and writings conveyed a revolutionary message not necessarily couched in Marxist jargon. If it was true, as his friend Louis Fischer once wrote unkindly, that Laski lived increasingly in an “intellectual ghetto” on his visits to the United States, geographically the area was widely dispersed. Across the years he developed connections in the academic life of America enjoyed by few other foreign professors, and he recruited an army of followers among faculty and students. Though Laski seemed to cause only a passing furore at womens’ clubs and university pink teas, in the long run he built up a serious network of Socialist propagandists and Soviet sympathizers, many of whom are still active in education and politics today. In falling heir to Graham Wallas’ chair at the London School, Harold Laski also inherited Wallas’ function as the London Fabian Society’s foremost missionary to America’s colleges and universities.
In 1929, Laski contributed a significant article to The Socialism of Our Times, the symposium edited by Harry W. Laidler and Norman Thomas and issued by the League for Industrial Democracy. (24) Some of the points contained in that article had previously appeared over his signature in Harper’s magazine for June, 1928, and subsequently reappeared mor concretely in the programs of the New Deal.
Specifically, Laski urged Socialists to take the initiative in sponsoring an eventual Federal program of “social insurance” leading, as always, to the welfare state. He supported municipal ownership of public services, such as gas and electricity, street railways and savings banks, “to demonstrate the superiority of collectivism to the average voter.” He advocated for the courts in America, “reform” such as his good friend, Felix Frankfurter, was then attempting on a state-wide scale for Governor Franklin Roosevelt of New York. Above all, Laski advised Socialists to agitate endlessly in favor of taxation for social—not merely administrative—uses. “Pressure for higher taxation on unearned and larger incomes is vital,” he wrote, [with] “amounts so raised to be used as grants in aid to the States for social purposes.” (25) What Laski did not say, was that the lion’s share of any funds raised for such purposes would still have to come from the pockets of the working people—since taxes on the rich, however punitive, would never suffice to pay for the program.
In conclusion, he stated: “I feel strongly the impossibility of American political institutions today, from the angle of a movement toward Socialist measures. The separation of powers is the protective rampart of American individualism.(26) This is interesting in view of Laski’s prolonged intimacy with Felix Frankfurter, who became a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Laski was a periodic house guest of Frankfurter in Cambridge and later in Washington, and for a quarter century carried on a voluminous correspondence with his “dearest Felix” that kept the latter constantly informed on the Fabian Socialist outlook in London. Those letters, profusely quoted in Laski’s biography by Kingsley Martin, editor of the New Statesman, also included comments and recommendations on American policy which Frankfurter was in an unrivaled position to transmit to President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Professor Laski’s politico-social fellowship with Felix Frankfurter and Evans Clark of the Twentieth Century Fund cannot be discounted as a merely personal association. For Laski, like G. D. H. Cole, Graham Wallas and the Webbs, was first, last and always a professional revolutionary of the gradualist school. Every private contact he cultivated and virtually every line he wrote in his microscopic handwriting, no matter how heavily coated with endearments, was as charged with political intention as a telegraph cable is charged with electricity.
His intimacy in America with members of the original Roosevelt brain trust in Albany, plus his close connections in London with Israel Sieff and the founders of PEP, gave him a matchless opportunity to synchronize the ideas of British and American Fabian Socialists in formulating plans for the New Deal. Inevitably, he was aware that FDR would be pushed as the Democratic Party’s candidate for the Presidency, long before the American public had any knowledge of it.
Laski was in the United States in 1928-29 following FDR’s election as Governor of New York, and again in 1931, returning to deliver a Kingsway Hall lecture in London on “The American Collapse.” (27) He was in America during the fateful first “hundred days” of 1933 and reported his observations briefly at a Fabian Society evening social. (28) Soon after the National Recovery Act was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, Professor Laski spoke at a Fabian Society Friends’ Hall lecture on “The Failure of the American Experiment.” He {rayed the United States Constitution as a class document, calling it “Capitalism’s strongest safeguard on earth today”; and added that Roosevelt was America’s sole bulwark “against the Fascist form of Capitalism.” What was needed both in America and England, he claimed, was a united front of all liberal and left wing groups (including the Communists) to “save Democracy.” Either Capitalism or Democracy would prevail, he said, in America as in Europe—a strange species of political science, equating democracy with the Socialist commonwealth.(29)
Precisely when, where or how Professor Laski first met Franklin D. Roosevelt is not recorded by their official biographers. Evidently the two were introduced by a trusted mutual friend—generally believed to have been Felix Frankfurter—under casual and informal circumstances. Their original encounter could have taken place during any one of Laski’s frequent trips to the United States in the late nineteen-twenties or early nineteen-thirties. Eleanor Roosevelt was not present, for she stated in 1956 (30) that she had never met Laski but believed he was “honest”—a characteristic non sequitur! Nevertheless, it is recorded that the honestly Marxist professor paid a number of calls on FDR at his office in the White House; was acquainted with the Roosevelt daughter, Anna; and was the recipient of warm and approving personal letters from the President himself.
The extent to which Professor Laski and his ideas were persona grata at the White House from the very outset of the Roosevelt Administration can be gauged by the fact that Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr. sent his two eldest sons to study under Laski at the London School of Economics. No Marxist himself, the senior Kennedy was already several times a millionaire. The stock market crash of 1929 and the ensuing depression had shaken Kennedy’s confidence, however, in the durability of the capitalist economy, although he suffered no serious financial loss and was even reputed to have made money by selling short on the market.
During 1932 Kennedy, Sr. was quoted as saying that he would gladly sacrifice half his fortune in order to save the other half for his children—a pledge which he was, happily for him, never called upon to fulfill. In that frame of mind, he traveled aboard the original Roosevelt campaign train and contributed generously to FDR’s election. While waiting to succeed James M. Landis, Dean of the Harvard Law School, as head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Kennedy pere offered up his firstborn as an ideological hostage. During 1933-34, in the interval between his graduation from Choate School and matriculation at Harvard, Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr. was sent to study political science at the London School. He made the grand tour to Moscow under the chaperonage of Professor and Mrs. Laski. (31)
According to the Harvard College De-cennial Report on the Class of 1938, Joe’s year at the London School,
“was a tremendous experience, as it was under Professor Laski that young Joe developed his dominant ambition to devote himself to a career in public service. Indeed, referring to Joe’s interest in politics, Professor Laski speaks of his determination to be nothing less than President of the United States.” It was this interest that was to guide his studies at Harvard . . . and which dominated his whole life after graduation in 1938.”
In 1940, as a junior member of the Massachusetts delegation to the Democratic National Convention, young Joe resisted the pressures for a third term “draft” of President Roosevelt and bravely cast his vote for James M. Farley. Though he may not have realized it at the time, that vote ended Joe Kennedy, Jr.’s hopes for a political career via the Democratic Party almost as effectively as his subsequent tragic demise in a World War II bomber over Germany.
There was a second Kennedy son, however, who did almost everything that Joe did, being the understudy of his admired older brother. In 1934-35 he, too, went to learn about politics from Professor Laski in London. Imitatively he was no less affected by the experience than Joe, Jr. had been, even though he did not complete the full scholastic year owing to an attack of jaundice. When Joe, Jr. was killed in action during World War II, it was Jack who stepped into his brother’s shoes and achieved his brother’s hoped-for political role. Thus Professor H. J. Laski, British Fabian Socialist and self-proclaimed Marxist, had the rare distinction of helping indirectly to select and to educate two Democrat Presidents of the United States: Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy
Probably Laski’s most prized contribution to the domestic policies of the New Deal was the idea of using Federal tax-moneys as grants in aid to the States for social purposes. Eagerly adopted by New Deal strategists and never legally challenged to this day, Laski’s suggestion proved remarkably useful to FDR in perpetuating both himself and the Democratic Party in office.
As the apparent author of that handy device, Laski became a special favorite of President Roosevelt. In a letter of January 10, 1939, FDR wrote Professor Laski that he would be “honored and happy to have you dedicate the little book to me.” (32) The book in question was a series of essays entitled The American Presidency. Three weeks later the American President again wrote to Laski, then in Seattle, thanking him for a reprint of one of the essays and saying: “Come and see me as soon as you get East.” (33) The book was published in 1940, the year when Roosevelt ran for a third term in defiance of all previous Presidential tradition.
Complaints about Laski, no matter how valid, never reached the American people, entranced as they were by the beneficent father-image of FDR that New Deal psychologists had created. On January 14,1941, Congressman Tinkham of Massachusetts read into the House Record a warning by Amos Pinchot, disillusioned former Socialist and brother of Pennsylvania’s liberal former Governor. Somewhat belatedly, Pinchot pointed out that Laski and other English radicals were working on President Roosevelt with the object of introducing Socialism into the United States. He stated boldly: “Many young Socialists declare that what is generally called the Roosevelt Program is in reality the Laski Program, imposed on New Deal thinkers, and finally on the President, by the London Professor of Economics [sic] and his friends.”
Still the great voting public in America remained unaware of Laski’s existence: he was caviar for the intellectual elite. After Roosevelt’s death, Congressman Woodruff of Michigan published an extension of remarks in the House Record of February 6, 1946, denouncing Laski and to a lesser extent Lord Keynes. The Congressman declared that Professor Laski had for some time “had a backdoor key to the White House.” And he added, “a surprising number of us, Professor, have begun to think it is time to change the lock.”
Such rare observations, while correctly assessing the general influence of British Fabian Socialists on the New Deal and its successor, the Fair Deal, were weakened by a lack of corroborative detail. They failed to note that a number of the ideas advanced before 1940 by Professor Laski and his friends originated in the New Fabian Research Bureau, and after 1940 mirrored programs of the Fabian International Bureau and the Socialist International. Moreover, patriots of an earlier day were hampered by not having access to the Laski-Frankfurter and Laski-Roosevelt letters—which have since been quoted in part by the Professor’s friendly biographer, Kingsley Martin, although never revealed in their entirety.
Even Robert Sherwood’s heavily documented volume, Roosevelt and Hopkins, which appeared in 1948, omitted any mention of Harry Hopkins’ talks with Laski during Lend-Lease taps to England. Himself a New Deal henchman, Sherwood scrupulously avoided pointing out that Hopkins’ views on wartime aid to Russia coincided with the opinions expressed by Professor Laski both in letters and in print. (34) In fact, Harold Laski’s name was not even listed in the index of the Sherwood opus. Yet President Roosevelt, replying to a letter from Laski after America’s entry into World War II, wrote: “Dear Harold, So good to hear from you again. Hopkins has already told me of his visit with you, and everything reported to me checks with the many things you told me.”(35)
Again and again during World War II, Laski asserted that it was the duty of a popular leader to lay the foundations for postwar Socialism. (36) In that way, social revolution might be brought about by popular consent—perhaps simultaneously in many countries. (37) This Fabian Socialist design also involved preserving, at any price and any sacrifice, the friendship of Soviet Russia; for the kind of postwar world that Laski envisioned presumed something more than superficial coexistence with the USSR. The question of Allied war aims became the main burden of his articles in both British and American publications, as it was of his private correspondence.
After Hitler’s invasion of the USSR, Laski argued that the future depended on America’s and Britain’s ability to convert a temporary wartime alliance with the Soviet Union into a lasting postwar partnership. No guarantees of good faith were required from the Soviets. The immediate program of wartime assistance must be such as to convince Communist leaders that the capitalist nations were their loyal allies, and that they would only make peace on terms acceptable to Soviet Russia.(38)
The long-range program of cooperation to follow the war was more subtle. Laski contended that Soviet Russia and the Western powers might learn a great deal from each other.(39) While the USSR was more advanced in Socialist organization, possibly she could be induced to see the advantage of practicing a little more social and religious tolerance. The eternal hope of Fabian Socialists that the Soviet Union would “mellow” as a result of contacts with the West was still being echoed as recently as 1963 by spokesmen of the New Frontier, and was announced as a presumptive fact in the Fabian News of August, 1963.
About six months after Pearl Harbor, Professor Laski received a cordial invitation from Eleanor Roosevelt to address the International Students’ Congress to be held in Washington during September, 1942. Eleanor Roosevelt wrote that she would be “particularly happy” if Laski could be there to speak to the young people, and she invited him to stay at the White House—”as I know it would give my husband as well as myself a great deal of pleasure to have an opportunity to see you.”(40)
If Laski had quietly applied for a visa in the routine way, he would probably have received it. Filled with a strong sense of his own importance, however, he took the unusual step of asking Churchill’s permission. Since Laski had for months been publicly critical of Churchill, as possessing an anti-Socialist outlook and “eighteenth century mentality,” the Prime Minister quite reasonably declined to grant him an opportunity for airing such sentiments in Washington.(41) So Eleanor Roosevelt never had the pleasure of seeing him—and Laski seems naively to have lost his only chance for a face-to-face discussion with FDR concerning the shape of the postwar world to come.
He could still wield a potent pen, however, and he proceeded to do so until the end of the war. Since mail to and from the President of the United States or a Supreme Court Justice was classed as “privileged” by Allied censors, Laski could be assured of privacy when writing to Roosevelt and Frankfurter. If he preferred, he could always send letters or articles to the Washington Post and the New York Nation via the U.S. Embassy pouch. Soon after Christmas in 1942 he wrote to FDR: “…above all, I hope you will teach our Prime Minister that it is the hopes of the future and not the achievements of the past from which he must draw his inspiration.” Though Roosevelt and Frankfurter both reproved Laski for his increasingly sharp attacks on Churchill, privately they enjoyed his comments—especially FDR, who according to eyewitnesses found personal amusement in forcing Winston to play second fiddle to himself and Stalin at Big Three conferences.
Essentially, Laski’s wartime mission with reference to the United States resembled Ray Stannard Baker’s at the end of World War I. In private letters, destined to be read by the President or retailed to him, Laski discoursed on the state of the nation and the state of mind of the “common man” in England. Hints on postwar aims and “some sort of world organisation” to follow the war were interwoven with human anecdotes and the political gossip that Roosevelt loved.
Just as Baker had done, Laski reported that America’s President was the only hope of the working masses in Britain—and everywhere else—for a better life after the war. By nourishing Roosevelt’s messianic delusion, which was no less pronounced in its way than Woodrow Wilson’s had been, Laski encouraged the President to take a stand on postwar matters that coincided with the views of the Fabian International Bureau. Often it involved preferring the interests of Soviet Russia over those of the British Empire or the United States itself.
As early as December, 1941, Laski had written to Felix Frankfurter:
“At present the masses of Britain have, I think, three clear convictions. (i) Churchill is a grand war leader. (ii) The U.S.S.R. shows it has roots in popular opinion more profound than any other system. (iii) The only man who can define purposes which prevent collapse and chaos after the war is the President. Whether he will have his chance in time, whether he can find a successor to continue his policies, these are things we endlessly discuss in common, not I fear, too hopefully.”(42)
This was no simple outpouring of private hopes and fears. Coming from a member of the Fabian Executive and addressed to FDR’s foremost privy councillor, it had the quality of a succinct and far-reaching policy directive. It sheds new light on the peculiar urgency of Harry Hopkins, Frankfurter’s nominee for Lend-Lease powers, to give the USSR more than enough of everything to carry her through the fighting phases of the war; and helps to explain Hopkins’ insistence on regarding Soviet Russia rather than Britain as the “decisive factor” to be considered.(43) Moreover, it provides a clue to the otherwise inexplicable Big Three conferences, where the United States was committed to satisfying the Soviet Union’s territorial and geographic postwar aims. Historically, secret covenants between nations have sometimes preceded a war; but never before has a superior power rushed to award the fruits of victory to the greediest and most impoverished of military partners while a war was still in progress!
Fear that President Roosevelt, a willing Fabian Socialist captive, might fail to succeed himself in 1944, or might not physically survive World War II, supplied a motive for the premature concessions granted to Soviet Russia at Teheran and Yalta. The Teheran Conference of 1943, which preceded the cross-Channel invasion of Europe desired by Stalin and opposed by Churchill, in effect assured the USSR of a free hand in Eastern Europe plus confirming her hold on Poland and the Baltic countries. Roosevelt’s obviously failing health in 1945 hastened the Yalta Conference that delivered Manchuria to Soviet forces and enabled them to furnish the Chinese Communist armies with enough captured Japanese military materiel to insure Communist control over the mainland of China.
Thus a President of the United States, acting in his Supreme Court-affirmed capacity of absolute military Commander-in-chief, circumvented the postwar treaty-making powers of the Congress by presenting it with a series of accomplished facts. Even the format of the postwar United Nations was agreed upon at Teheran. The Fabian Socialist allies of Bolshevism had learned a lesson from Woodrow Wilson’s experience after World War I, and were determined not to risk a repetition. On the strength of these events it has since been alleged, with reason, that in modern times the most effective foreign agents of the Soviet Union operate as Fabian Socialists.
Before leaving Washington for Yalta, Franklin D. Roosevelt on January 16, 1945, dictated and signed what must have been his last personal letter to Harold Laski. From the broken, almost illegible handwriting that appears in the signature, one seeing it could deduce that the author was a very sick man.(44) Besides mentioning the forthcoming meeting with Marshal Stalin and Prime Minister Churchill, and FDR’s own hope of visiting England and seeing Laski in the summer to come, the letter contained this meaningful assurance: “Our goal is, as you say, identical for the long range objectives ….” (45)
Men whose goal is revolution, whether subtle or violent, have often made use of inspired charlatans—soothsayers, astrologers, numerologists, cultists of one kind or another, who could convey a revolutionary message in high-flown double talk. During the decades culminating in the French Revolution, for example, there arose a whole line of magnificent imposters, “who posed as initiators of the occult sciences, as possessors of the Great Secret and the Grand Magisterium; and there in consequence, the Higher Mysteries . . . They took root and flourished, developing an hundred splendors of romantic legends, of sonorous names and titles.”(46)
Of these the most splendid and the most successful was a self-ennobled Italian barber known as Count Cagliostro. Practicing alchemy, occultism and the healing arts, he bewitched a cultivated public in half a dozen tongues, as well as in a private jargon that had meaning for the initiate alone. Forecasting the future was his specialty. Even now, almost two centuries later, there are still scholars prepared to debate the point as to whether he was a savant or a rogue.
Cagliostro was the sensation of Paris and Strasbourg, where respectable bankers vied with one another to take advantage of his prognostications and to supply him with funds. At one time his patron was a Prince Royal, the brother of Louis XVI, sometimes called Philippe Egalite—leader of that liberal wing of the nobility who sympathized with the first stages of the French Revolution and most of whom subsequently went to the guillotine. Cagliostro’s elaborate intrigues played a well-known part in hastening the fall of the established order in France.(47) Who would have suspected him, in his heyday, of harboring such a purpose?
Spiritual heir and latter-day facsimile of that darling of the eighteenth century Enlightenment, was a Cambridge University don named John Maynard Keynes. He, too, was a magnificent figure: six feet three, and superbly tailored; an authority on wines, fine foods and beautiful women; patron of the arts, and master of the English language which he only distorted by design. He, too, posed as the possessor of elusive secrets, key to the Higher Mysteries of economics and public finance. More fortunate in his origins than Cagliostro, Keynes’ final role was as bursar of Kings College, Cambridge. There he studied the dietary habits of pigs with a view to improving the breed on the college-owned farm; and he ruled over the Political Economy Club, where his followers were made privy to the master’s techniques for apprehending and controlling future events.
An alchemist who succeeded in substituting paper for gold, a mystifier who claimed that money multiplied itself in the spending, Keynes compelled bankers to do his bidding and imposed his schemes on the highest personages in an age of political unreason. In the long run, his inspired economic gibberish and esoteric fiscal panaceas did more to promote the insolvency of English-speaking nations and speed the timetable of world-wide social revolution than any forthright revolutionary arguments could have done. It is a commentary on the moral and intellectual fiber of the times that, while Cagliostro died in poverty and disgrace, John Maynard Keynes ended his days as a self-made millionaire and authentic peer of the realm, mourned by a school of professional disciples pledged to perpetuate and update his more destructive fantasies.
The same question can be asked about Keynes that is asked about Cagliostro: Was he charlatan, adventurer, trickster, or the friend of humanity he claimed to be? Was Lord Keynes a highly polished secret weapon of the Fabian Socialist conspiracy to weaken the capitalist system progressively by consent of its beneficiaries—at the same time retaining its productive machinery intact for the benefit of the heirs? Or was he the good physician dedicated to prolonging life? The plain answer has long been obscured by the circumstance that Keynes’ reputation(48)—like the currencies he strove to manage—was systematically inflated through the efforts of a fervent Fabian Socialist claque on both sides of the Atlantic, while his ideas were usually represented as being too profound for the ordinary man and woman to grasp.
The story of his life, told by followers and friends, in some details approaches the fabulous. Dr. Seymour Harris—professor of Economics at Harvard’s Littauer School of Business Administration, who became Senior Consultant to the United States Treasury Department in 1961 (49)—gravely reaffirms that Keynes was fascinated by the theory of compound interest before he was five years old. (50) While such Gargantuan precocity can be doubted, it is true that Keynes was born to an assured future in left wing economics. His father, John Neville Keynes, was a professor at Cambridge, who published a book in 1890 entitled The Scope and Method of Political Economy For its strictures against the free enterprise system, therein called laissez faire, the book was approved by early leaders of the London Fabian Society. It was also included on reading lists of Socialist-slanted works recommended by The American Fabian magazine to its public.
The younger Keynes was educated at Eton and King’s College, Cambridge, which qualified him almost automatically for entry into the British Civil Service. Though he took no scholastic honors at the university, somehow he acquired a reputation for brilliance due to his conversational talent and his cool insolence in debate. Moreover, as he was prompt to point out, the name Keynes properly pronounced rhymed with “brains.” His gifts of persuasion were apparent to undergraduate friends who nicknamed him Pozzo, (51) after a Renaissance mercenary noted for skill in courtly intrigue as well as in administering slow poisons.
Campus political organizations gave Keynes an opportunity to test his fine Italian hand. As a freshman he joined the Liberal Club, a youthful adjunct of the Liberal Party that came to power in England not many years later. As a sophomore he also became a member of the Fabian Society’s student chapter at Cambridge (52) guided by Professor G. Lowes Dickinson, whose adepts were enjoined to capture the Liberal Club by penetration. Keynes’ college circle included Bertrand Russell and Leonard Woolf, both well-known in later life for their propaganda services to Fabian Socialism; and the poet, Rupert Brooke, whom some Fabians still claim as their own, even though he discovered the meaning of patriotism before he died as a soldier in World War I. Keynes himself—in common with many British and American Socialists—was to file as a conscientious objector.(53)
Two of his father’s associates, Professor Alfred Marshall and A. C. Pigou, groomed young Keynes for a career in economics; but even with their help, he placed no better than twelfth in his final examination. It is amusing to find Marshall and Pigou, both classified in their day as Fabian Socialist sympathizers, dismissed by present-day Keynesians as “classical economists”–(54) along with any others who preceded or failed to accept the vision of revealed economic truth ultimately vouchsafed to the world by John Maynard Keynes.
The sympathetic Professor Marshall rescued Keynes from a minor clerkship in the Colonial Office, bringing him back to lecture on economics at Cambridge University. Later the joint patronage of Marshall, Pigou and Sidney Webb (himself escaped form bondage in the Colonial Office, to become the high priest of Fabian Socialism) was responsible for making Keynes editor of the Economic Journal in 1911, and secretary of the Royal Economic Society in 1913. These posts established the young hopeful as a presumably serious economist and lent him the prestige so necessary to his future policy-making role. The Fabian Research Department, organized in 1912, was available to supply statistics and to prepare articles on request.
After the outbreak of World War I, Keynes took refuge in the British Treasury Department, where he diverted himself in spare moments by working out a foolproof method of stock market speculation. All his life he enjoyed gambling(55)—bridge, poker, roulette; but like most people, he preferred a sure thing. When the war ended, he found an opportunity for putting his system of mental wagers into practice. Beginning in 1919 with a moderate stake of four thousand pounds (less than $20,000), he parlayed it by 1937 into a neat fortune of 500,000 pounds (about 2.5 million dollars). A goodly share of his winnings resulted from the lowered interest rates that he promoted so assiduously in official quarters, and that caused the list prices of certain common stocks to rise.(56) Throughout the thirties he also speculated profitably in foreign exchange and public utilities stocks.
During the nineteen-twenties Keynes headed an investment firm in London, in partnership with former Treasury colleagues, and displayed what appeared to be an uncanny faculty for predicting politico-economic trends likely to affect the stock market. To selected clients, he gave the benefit of his insight. These included his future bade, a beauteous Russian ballerina of the Diaghilev troupe, whose investments he offered to handle and whom he married in 1925—the same year that he made a trip to Soviet Russia. It has been reported by informed sources that stock market tips, originating with Keynes, paid the expenses of the unofficial and official Soviet embassies in London from 1924 to 1932. At that period he was tireless in his demands that the British Treasury provide fuller statistics on national investment and foreign exchange.
Keynes’ international bent owed much to a friendship renewed in London with his old Fabian Socialist college chum, Leonard Woolf. Throughout his long bachelorhood (he married at forty-two) the lanky and personable Keynes was identified with the so-called Bloomsbury group revolving about Leonard Woolf and his wife, Virginia. It was composed of highly educated and magnified(57) upper middle class bohemians, talented and successful practitioners of literature or the arts. They were addicted to group-opinions and to a superficially critical, but none the less protective, attitude towards Soviet Russia.
An apparent point of difference with Russian Marxism was their belief that collectivist-minded intellectuals—rather than what Keynes called “the boorish proletariat”—were destined to become the professional rulers of an ideal future world. Bertrand Russell once described the Bloomsbury Fabians as a passionate mutual admiration clique of the elite; and there is no doubt they contributed greatly to the myth of Keynes’ unique mental powers.
It may be recalled that from 1915 Leonard Woolf was also the London Fabian Society’s leading amateur of international affairs; the author of International Government, which supplied the first blueprint for the League of Nations; head of the New Fabian Research Bureau’s international committee; a founder and for ten years chairman of the Fabian International Bureau. Woolf’s views on World Government and German reparations were faithfully reflected by John Maynard Keynes, when the latter attended the Versailles Peace Conference as a member of the British Treasury delegation.
There, as one of the younger dissidents, British and American, grouped around Colonel E. M. House, Keynes established long-lasting ties with Walter Lippmann and with Felix Frankfurter who represented the Zionist cause at the Peace Conference. (58) Returning from Paris, Keynes expressed their mutual dissatisfactions in his first book-length work, The Economic Consequences of the Peace. Lippmann and Frankfurter helped arrange for its publication in America, where it was touted and officially distributed by the League for Industrial Democracy as it was by the Fabian Society in Great Britain and the Colonies. (59) Here Keynes announced frankly that capitalism in Europe was doomed.
Not directly active in politics, Keynes retained a nominal affiliation with the Liberal Party and avoided declaring himself a Socialist. Inevitably, he sided with the Asquith Liberals, who were instrumental in handing over the reins of government to the Fabian-led Labour Party in 1924. During the election year, he delivered a famed anticapitalist lecture at Cambridge, published in 1926 as The End of Laissez Faire. There—like his father before him—he identified modern capitalism with the early nineteenth century foreign trade doctrine known as laissez faire, based on earlier and cruder forms of industrial production. Professor David McCord Wright of McGill University, Montreal—himself an admirer, in some respects, of Keynes —has noted that the “day of judgment” which Keynes predicted recurrently for capitalism was in reality purest milk of the Marxian word.(60)
In 1923, Keynes bought a controlling interest in The Nation and Athenaeum, placed it under the editorship of the well-known Fabian Socialist, Kingsley Martin; and utilized it as a vehicle of personal opinion and aggrandizement for himself and his friends. His widely-publicized attacks on the gold standard, appearing there and elsewhere, eventually persuaded the British people and certain Treasury officials as well, that the use of gold as a basis for monetary value was the chief cause of unemployment in England and the only begetter of the Great Depression. When Keynes complained in 1932 that for twelve years he had exercised no influence whatever on British Treasury policy, there was more than a touch of poetic license in his lament.
In 1929, he was named by Philip Snowden, Fabian Socialist Chancellor of the Exchequer, to an official Committee of Inquiry into Finance and Industry; and from 1930 he served on the MacDonald government’s economic Advisory Council. The unprecedented attack and public humiliation to which he subjected Sir Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England, as a witness before the Macmillan Committee in 1931, set the stage for Great Britain’s abandonment of the gold standard, so strongly advocated by Keynes.
Fiscal and economic plans of the Labour Party Government from 1929 to 1931 echoed a Keynesian formula by now grown familiar to Americans. It was estimated that a government-financed public works program, designed to increase employment by 5 per cent, would “increase” the Treasury’s income by one and one half per cent via taxes. This windfall, supplemented by a 7 percent cut in defense expenditures, would serve to launch the Labour Party’s welfare program. Deficit spending and a managed currency, both implied in these recommendations, were not stressed in the public announcement.
When politics intervened to prevent application of such a plan in England, it was exported to the United States, where it provided a basic pattern for New Deal budgets of the nineteen-thirties. The idea of “paying” for politically profitable welfare programs’ by stripping the defense establishment was a long-cherished Socialist scheme that proved agreeable to Franklin D. Roosevelt. In consequence, U.S. Army recruits hastily called up after Pearl Harbor were discovered to be drilling with dummy rifles made of wood. Shelved for almost twenty-five years thereafter, the double-barreled Fabian Socialist scheme to procure funds for the “war against poverty” by a gradual process of military disarmament was suddenly revived by the Johnson Administration in 1964, as if it were a new invention.
First public intimation that British Fabian Socialists meant to foist their largely untried fiscal remedies upon the United States Government came on December 31,1933. On that date, The New York Times printed an open letter from John Maynard Keynes to President Franklin D. Roosevelt which filled the better part of a page in the Sunday paper. The advice it contained was at once so paradoxical and so remote from the preoccupations of the average citizen that relatively few readers took it seriously. Only a handful of New Deal insiders, long allied with the London Fabian Society and its American offshoots, realized that Keynes’ open letter laid down guidelines for financial policy which the keepers of the United States Treasury would observe for years to come.
In October, the Roosevelt Administration, following the Keynes-inspired example of the British Government, had abandoned the gold standard and adopted the device of a managed currency. To avoid serious fluctuations in the value of the dollar, Keynes now advised the United States Treasury to go into the business of buying and selling bullion. He also stated flatly that a permanent program of government “investment” in public works should be contemplated to supplement the inadequacies of private investment in creating employment. As aids to economic recovery, he recommended higher wages and higher prices—the latter to be achieved through a policy of cheap money and lower interest rates, touched off by lowered interest rates on government loans.
Above all, Keynes warned the President against “that crude economic fallacy known as the quantity theory of money!” This was a delicate way of suggesting that a government’s spending need not be limited to the amount of its income, actual or anticipated. By inference, cheap money could always be borrowed to meet any threatened day-to-day deficits—leaving the long-range Government deficits a mere item of Treasury bookkeeping. In retrospect, it is obvious that every proposal made by Keynes in his open letter was subsequently adopted by the New Deal Administration.
For whatever reason, vast and still vaster sums were “invested” in public works. The United States Treasury proceeded to buy and sell silver as well as gold, at immense cost to taxpayers yet unborn and profit to the knowledgeable few. Through increased gold and silver purchases from Mexico in 1938, the New Deal Administration compensated the Mexican Government almost to the penny for loss of oil royalties incurred as a result of the latter’s expropriation of American and British-owned oil leases and related properties—a maneuver attributed to Keynes’ great friend, Harry Dexter White, then Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury.
Between 1932 and 1953, “liberal” Democratic Administrations in Washington performed the remarkable feat of borrowing 250 billion dollars at steadily declining rates of interest, accomplished in part by pressure on the banks to absorb ever-larger quantities of government bonds. While each individual bond issue was repaid as it fell due, somehow the total remained on the Government books as an ever-mounting public debt. It was frenzied finance—a prescription for hand-to-mouth government operation, via a system of double entry bookkeeping.
Keynes paid a triumphal visit to the United States in June, 1934, one of numerous visitations. At that time, he was frequently consulted by many key persons in the Government, all eager for his comments and suggestions.(61) According to Secretary Perkins, he pointed out that in every respect the New Deal was doing exactly what his own theories called for. This was not surprising, in view of the fact that Keynes had cooperated closely with the British Fabian Socialist planners of PEP in drafting the preliminary plans for the New Deal, which were transmitted to Roosevelt via Felix Frankfurter, Stuart Chase, Harry Hopkins and Frances Perkins herself. When relief and public works appropriations were cut in 1937, Keynes warned of an economic recession—as did, in fact, occur, though not entirely for the reasons he alleged.
In 1934, Keynes was personally received by President Roosevelt, who wrote to their mutual friend, Felix Frankfurter, “I had a grand talk with K. and liked him immensely.” (62) To Frances Perkins, however, the President confided: “I saw your friend Keynes. He left a whole rigamarole of figures. He must be a mathematician rather than a political economist.” (63) On the whole, Keynes’ invitation to a higher, wider and handsomer program of government spending proved a pleasant prospect to the President, even if the attempt to justify it mathematically did not. Roosevelt’s own uncomplicated attitude toward money was best revealed in a mock-serious reproof to one of his secretaries who tended to be over-generous in her use of punctuation marks: “Grace, how often must I tell you not to waste the taxpayers’ commas? (64) Dollars or commas, they were much the same to FDR: if anything, he was more averse to wasting commas!
Following his interview at the White House, Keynes took the precaution of stopping in to see Secretary Perkins at the Department of Labor. After remarking ruefully that he had “supposed the President to be more literate, economically speaking,” he rehearsed his famous theory of “the multiplier” in simple terms. The “multiplier” was actually an invention of Richard F. Kahn, (65) one of Keynes’ clever students, which the “master” appropriated as his own.
As reported by Frances Perkins (on whose economic literacy he failed to comment), Keynes said that a dollar spent on relief was a dollar given in turn to the retailer, the wholesaler, and finally to the farmer—which, as any American farmer can testify, never happens! ‘With one dollar,” Secretary Perkins enthused, “you have created four dollars worth of national income!” (66) And she added, “I wish Keynes had been as concrete when he talked to Roosevelt instead of treating him as though he belonged to the higher echelons of economic knowledge!” (67) Keynes shrewdly surmised that Secretary Perkins would convey his simplified explanations to the President. In consequence, Roosevelt soon afterwards requested—and received—a 4 billion dollar appropriation for public works from the Congress.(68)
It was not necessary to be a serious student of Keynes in order to put his preachings into practice. Marriner Eccles, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board under Roosevelt, for instance, definitely helped to promote policies based on Keynesian economics. These, as Professor Seymour Harris has mentioned approvingly, included: printing-press money, unbalanced budgets, attacks on thrift, a redistribution of national income; all leading to increased production, especially in consumers’ industries, and to a larger volume of retail sales. Yet Eccles himself declared in 1951, “I have never read Keynes’ writings except in small extracts to this day.” (69)
Evidently Eccles derived his ideas from secondary sources, including some of his own assistants who were ardent Keynesians—among them, Lauchlin Currie. It may be useful to observe that Keynes’ views were officially derided by Soviet economists, who declared with unexpected veracity that his recipes could not possibly save capitalism in the long run. Nevertheless, individuals since disclosed as agents of the Soviet conspiracy in Washington, such as Lauchlin Currie and Harry Dexter White, were among the most active promoters of Keynesian measures. That circumstance alone might lead one to suspect his policies did not coincide with the best interests of the United States.
With the appearance in 1936 of his General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, the various anti-depression remedies advanced by Keynes were codified and elevated to the status of an economic doctrine. For its influence on men and events to come, publication of the General Theory has been held comparable only to that of Karl Marx’s Das Kapital. Despite a difficult style quite unlike Keynes’ lucid journalistic prose, the burden of the work is a simple one. Employing a strange vocabulary and an authoritative manner, the General Theory undertakes to demonstrate that public investment (or government spending) must be indefinitely prolonged to correct the “deficiencies” of private capital.
It is based on two major assumptions, both of Marxist origin and both open to serious question. First, that a government is in duty bound to provide.”full employment” for its citizens: a condition only attained in the past under slave-economies. Second, that periodic slumps are inherent in the “sick” capitalist system. Regular infusions of government aid, therefore, are prescribed to insure a perpetual boom. The cure-all is attractively packaged and easy to swallow, even though the aftertaste may be bitter. If the patient eventually weakens and dies—well, that is bound to happen some day, and by then the hopeful physician will be out of reach. In the long run, as Keynes remarked, not too originally, we are all dead.
For devotees of pure English or uncluttered logic, reading Keynes’ General Theory is a painful experience. The text abounds in such stock terms as “durable consumer goods”—though clearly, nothing consumed can properly be called durable. The word which Keynes used most assiduously, however, and to which he attached the most variable meanings, is a word reminiscent of the stock market speculation: namely, “marginal.” Thus he speaks of “marginal tendency to consume”; the “marginal utility (70) of labor”; the “marginal efficiency of capital,” by which he really means “inefficiency.” All of these singular factors are measured percentage-wise and their effect on the national economy is computed.
“Liquidity preference” is the horrid phrase used by Keynes to describe the normal human impulse to keep some ready cash on hand, instead of spending or investing it at once. This, says Keynes, should be discouraged, because it takes money out of circulation. Saving is equated with hoarding, like the gold in the French peasant’s sock— even though modern savings banks often play a very useful role in private investment. In that Keynesian wonderland of topsy-turvy verbiage and distorted logic, one notes a gradual but implacable trend toward shutting off all the sources which are the lifeblood of private investment—including a campaign to dishearten the long-term investor by ever lower interest rates. Thus, in an artificially stimulated economy, which Keynes visualizes as constantly expanding, the role of private capital must inevitably shrink in proportion to the always more dominant public or government sector, until initiative fails at last and free enterprise gives up the ghost without a struggle.
Though Keynes is usually regarded, quite correctly, as the father of deficit spending, the implications of his General Theory are more far-reaching than the average American who is not “economically literate” might suppose. Public investment—so called because it allegedly reaps dividends in the shape of larger tax returns, even if the original capital outlay is never recovered—involves a great deal more than the mere act of spending.(71) It means “planning” of the nation’s economic life by invisible government planners; it means political supervision of private industry to measure its “social utility” and “efficiency” in providing jobs; it means a manipulated currency, to make certain that real wages do not rise too rapidly and that the only benefit of last week’s wage raise will be a bigger tax deduction. In other words, it means Big and Bigger Government.
Total employment itself calls for higher and higher levels of production, presumably to absorb the labor of a growing population. It means Big Industry and Big Labor, both increasingly subservient to Big Government. Moreover, total employment demands total consumption—that is, continuous and frantic personal spending without thought for the future. Whatever is not spent returns as taxes to the Government, which will care in some fashion for its carefree citizens in old age, sickness and other contingencies. The society evolving from all this combines the philosophy of the grasshopper with the community life of the ant—a synthesis never imagined by LaFontaine, that innocent of the ancien regime!
The revolutionary nature of Keynes’ New Economics was, of course, unnoticed by and unknown to the great American public. Its inner meaning was divulged only to the illumined few and has never to this day been generally acknowledged. Leaders of the international Socialist movement, however, were quick to grasp the point. The first enthusiastic review of Keynes’ General Theory by any professional economist came from the pen of G. D. H. Cole, (72) avowed Marxist, lifelong foe of the profit system and foremost Fabian Socialist doctrinaire of his time.
Whether Keynes himself remained an overt or covert member of the British Fabian Society is a purely academic question. Born, bred and nourished in the Fabian creed, he is not known to have ever forsaken it. Most of his relatives and close friends were openly connected with Fabian Socialist organizations. In 1922, his sister, Helen Keynes, revived the Fabian Educational Group, a “liberal” women’s group founded during World War I. Years later his niece, Polly Hill, became a staff member of the New Fabian Research Bureau, employed at her uncle’s request.
Although Keynes declined to join the New Fabian Research Bureau except as an Associate Member, his refusal caused no rancor and his views on economics were reflected in a majority of the forty-two “solid research pamphlets” published by the Bureau between 1933 and 1938. It was understood that his gesture had been prompted by a desire to avoid compromising his policy-making role as financial adviser to liberal statesmen abroad and Coalition governments at home. For years he continued to draw overflow crowds at lectures sponsored by the London Fabian Society. If he was not formally a member of the Society, he was still its most conspicuous ornament—and most effective secret weapon.
To disarm non-Socialist critics and to convey his true purpose to a Socialist elite, the author of the General Theory described himself blandly as an “economic nationalist.”(73) Though the term mystified many, others recognized it as a reference to the nationalism of Edward Bellamy, early prophet of the cooperative commonwealth, whose novel, Looking Backward, Keynes had read as a boy in Cambridge, England. Memories of the Bellamy Nationalist clubs, America’s first Fabian Socialist-inspired political movement, still survived in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where Keynes’ influence was to become a potent latter-day force. Elsewhere he stated delicately: “The Republic of my imagination lies on the extreme left of celestial space.” (74)
Keynes’ views on the nationalization of basic industries were more candidly disclosed in a private letter of February 1, 1938, to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. There he wrote:
“. . . If I was in your place, I should buy out the utilities at a fair price in every district where the situation was ripe for doing so, and announce that the ultimate ideal was to make this policy nationwide. But elsewhere I would make peace on liberal terms, guaranteeing fair earnings for new investment and a fair basis of valuation in the event of the public taking them over hereafter.”
That there should be no misunderstanding, he added: “I accept the view that durable investment must come increasingly under state direction.” (75)
The system promulgated by Keynes, as even his most loyal disciples admit, was in reality no system at all. It was a rationale and a tool for achieving total political control, at a gradually increased tempo, over the economic life of a nation. Specifically designed to affect public policy, it adapted the once-pedestrian methods of Fabian Socialism to an age of high-powered mass production. More than any other contrivance, Keynes’ New Economics performed the feat of lifting the Fabian tortoise off the back roads and byways, and putting it on a modern freeway in a fast car supplied by its own willing victims.
Many years earlier—back in 1909, when the British Empire was strong enough to enforce peace throughout the world—spokesmen for the Conservative Party of Great Britain had asserted that Fabian Socialists would never be able to achieve their declared aim of nonviolent social revolution—because the free enterprise system would never consent meekly to its own destruction.(76) To that taunt John Maynard Keynes, who became Lord Keynes of Tilton, supplied a delayed but deadly answer. He furnished a formula for the peaceful transition to Socialism and helped mightily to induce the United States, greatest industrial nation on earth, to adopt it as an official policy.
Dealing in broad generalities based on equally broad assumptions, the General Theory was merely a framework to which Keynes’ acolytes and heirs could add such refinements or excrescences as their fancy dictated. It bred a new scholasticism, rather than objective study: for there could be no tampering with the basic concepts. Moreover, the macro-economics of Keynes, being primarily designed to influence public policy, implied that its adepts alone were qualified to plan the economic and fiscal destiny of nations. Thus the keys to the future were delivered into the hands of an intellectual elite trained to interpret the New Economics. This perhaps was the secret of its profound appeal to students and professors of political economy, intoxicated by the vistas of power and influence which their monopoly of the Keynesian technique conferred.
In academic circles the success of the General Theory was prompt and lasting. The young took it up and their elders followed, one of the first “older” economists to promote it being Professor Alvin Hansen of Harvard and the LID. A Keynesian school of thought arose, a close-knit fraternal entity whose members supported and advanced each other professionally. As Harvard Professor A.J. Schumpeter explained, this was a well-organized group professing “allegiance to one master and one doctrine,” with “its propagandists, its watchwords, its esoteric and popular doctrine.” (77) Linked to it was a wider ring of sympathizers in public and private life, and beyond these a still wider ring of persons who had absorbed, consciously or unconsciously, some phases of the Keynesian mystique.
Harvard University, where Keynes lectured in person, appears to have been the first influential center from which those widening smoke rings of modern Fabian Socialist doctrine were wafted. Its glowing core was the Department of Economics which, by affiliation with the School of Business Administration, was even able to extend the Keynesian outlook into the industrial and managerial field. A proud example of this permeation process was Robert S. McNamara, who, after serving as an assistant professor of Business Administration at Harvard from 1940 to 1943 and flying a desk for several years in the Army Air Force, became an executive of the Ford Motor Company— and ultimately civilian czar of the United States Department of Defense. His role, as professional army men have pointed out, was to devise and execute a series of nonmilitary actions for encirclement of the military.
Anyone who studied at a leading American or British university in the middle nineteen-thirties remembers how all at once the whole character of political economy seemed to change; along with such allied subjects as sociology, history and political science. Every previous approach was suddenly found to be outdated, and the New Economics of John Maynard Keynes became the harbinger of a New Social Order. Actually, the New Economics was not quite so new as its name. It borrowed something from Jevons, the nineteenth century Briton applauded in the original Fabian Essays, and much from minor Scandinavian economists engaged in applying a type of Socialism which has been called the Middle Way. The only major economic prophet, however, whose teachings the new doctrine did not wholly contradict, was Karl Marx; for Keynes discreetly left some things unsaid.
Paul Sweezy, known today as a “brilliant” Marxist as well as an ardent Keynesian, still recalls the electric excitement, the tingling sense of power and opportunity unlimited, that swept the campus in his student days.(78) Even a nonprofessional economist like the late John F. Kennedy, who was a Harvard undergraduate in the years when the Keynesian revelation first dawned, could hardly have avoided being impressed by the newly fashionable economic gospel. Many years later, by way of a practical testimonial, President Kennedy invited a number of his old teachers to Washington to aid him in planning policies for the nation and the world. His own talk was rich in such Keynesian catchwords as the gross national product, the balance of payments, and especially National Growth, which seemed vague but full of promise to a largely untutored popular audience.
It is generally agreed today that there is hardly a political economist of prominence in America who—even when he appears critical of Keynes—has not been influenced by the Keynesian method.(79) If he had resisted seriously, it is safe to say he would not be prominent. So strong and widespread is the influence of the Keynesian School, as exerted through the American Economic Society, the American Academy of Political Science, the American Association of University Professors and other respected bodies—not to mention the League for Industrial Democracy and the Americans for Democratic Action.
A graduate student in economics at a major American university who was bold enough to attack the Keynesian method as the intellectual fraud of the century and the product of an inspired charlatan, would be surprised to receive a doctorate—and would probably have difficulty in securing either an academic or government post, or the publishing outlets needed to rise in the profession. So dominant and so exclusive has the New Economics become, that the posthumous authority of Keynes is even greater than it was in his lifetime, when he framed international monetary policy and dictated postwar trade policies for England and the United States.
For some thirty years the New Economics launched by Keynes has been potent political medicine in Washington. Deficit budgets and grandiose spending became the hallmarks not only of the New Deal, but also of its liberally permeated successors, the Fair Deal and the New Frontier. Public “investment” in public works was superseded by Lend-Lease in World War II, to be followed by the multiple forms of foreign aid and civilian-planned defense in the postwar era. A reversion to the early New Deal emphasis on welfare and public works, with some added global overtones, was evident in President Johnson’s first State of the Union message.
One of the questions that appears to have escaped Keynes, as even the faithful Professor Harris admits, was: How high can a national debt rise without resulting in national bankruptcy? (80) Spurred by advice from John Maynard Keynes and macro-economists of the Keynesian School, the architects of the official public debt of the United States caused it to soar to 305 billion dollars by July 1, 1963—some 25 billion dollars more than the combined public debts of the other 112 nations of the world. Yet the Government was still borrowing money to finance a permanent program of foreign aid, on which a substantial part of our domestic production and employment seemed to depend. Even now there are Keynesians in the United States and England who complain that our annual deficits are not high enough to assure prosperity for all!
Although Lord Keynes died peacefully in 1946 and was interred with all the pomp an admiring Labour Party Government in Britain could provide, the mischief he compounded lives on. If his influence was vast during his lifetime, it has been enormously magnified since his death. In the pantheon of Fabian Socialism, even a demigod is not irreplaceable: there are always trained heads and hands prepared to push his theories, with appropriate variations, to their unnatural conclusion.
The cult of national suicide, initiated by Keynes and known as the New Economics, is not only preserved but expanded by his sophisticated followers, operating through the twin channels of politics and higher education with the blessing of the Socialist International. An entire generation of political economists has been reared in Keynes’ image; and Keynesian cliches have become the debased tender of intellectual exchange from Washington and London to Calcutta and Damascus. As The New York Times proclaimed in a banner headline on September 9,1963: “Once revolutionary, the economics of Keynes now is orthodox.”(81)
Almost imperceptibly, John Maynard Keynes became the “prophet of the new radicalism,” as a current spokesman of that radicalism, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., has confessed. Since its goals do not differ noticeably from those of the old radicalism, little public mention is made of ultimate aims. The technical expedients for achieving them at ever-accelerated speed are stressed. Thus the methodology of Keynes has inspired a whole series of new high speed techniques and new forms of penetration for effecting a tacit transition to Socialism under the somewhat bewildering conditions of the post World War II atomic era.
Far from being defunct today, the Keynesian approach has become almost unassailable by virtue of time and repetition. The deceptively innocent slogan of “full employment,” for instance, was embodied in a Resolution passed in 1952 by the International Labor Organization in Geneva.(82) The same slogan reappears in the present-day programs of Socialist-directed trade unions and political organizations in the United States.
The Keynesian promise of a perpetual boom maintained through government spending—modern version of the Greek myth of the miraculous pitcher—was dished out as a basis for the Democratic Party’s national election campaign of 1964. In the shape of dazzling and generally unsubstantiated statistics, it has been rewarmed and served up to an uncritical public through popular magazines, (83) daily columnists (84) and news releases from official sources. All presage, often without realizing it, a transition to that Socialist way of life which the London Sunday Times once defined as “competition without prizes, boredom without hope, war without victory and statistics without end.”
The time-honored Fabian Socialist tenet, reaffirmed by Keynes, of indirect rule by an academic elite, was echoed as recently as 1963 in the Godkin Lectures delivered at Harvard by Clark Kerr, President of the University of California. The role of the professor in government, he noted, is no longer confined to Washington, but extends more and more into the fields of state and local administration as well. With the proliferation of the Federal-grant universities, that role seems destined to increase still further. Today, as never before, the campus is being drawn to the city hall and the state capitol. As Dr. Kerr explained it, the politicians need new ideas to meet new problems and the agencies need “expert” advice to handle the old problems. The professor, he asserted, can supply both.
By way of authority, he quoted the concluding sentences of Keynes’ General Theory: “. . . ‘the ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by tattle else …. I am sure that the power of vested interests is vastly exaggerated compared with the gradual encroachment of ideas.’ As for example, the ideas of Keynes.” (85)
1. Frankfurter was a founder and director of the American Civil Liberties Union; a legal counsel for the NAACP. He was also one of the original stockholders and contributors of the New Republic and a member of the board of Survey Associates, publishers of Survey Graphic. Helen Shirley Thomas, Felix Frankfurter: Scholar on the Bench (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1960), p. 21.
2. Robert Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1948), p. 47-48.
4. David Elliot Weingast, Walter Lippmann (A Study in Personal Journalism) (New Brunswick, Rutgers Press, 1949), p. 10.
5. Felix Frankfurter, “The Supreme Court and the Public,” Forum magazine, (June, 1930), pp. 332-333.
6. Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee vs. McGrath, 341 U. S. 123, 174 (1951). The Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee is cited on the Attorney General’s list of subversive organizations.
7. Frankfurter’s personal interest in public ownership of public utilities dated from 1914, when he was a member of the board of trustees of the National Bureau of Public Utilities Research.
8. Thomas, op. cit., p. 29.
9. Congressional Record, House of Representatives (May 3, 1934), pp. 8042-43.
11. Among those who have been named as members of the National Planning Association were: Frank Altschul, Chester Bowles, James Carey, Harry Carman, Norman Cousins, Felix Frankfurter, A. J. Hayes, Eric Johnston, Laird Bell, James G. Patton, Walter Reuther, Elmo Roper, Beardsley Ruml, H. Christian Sonne, Clarence E. Pickett, Wayne C. Taylor, L. S. Buckmaster, Harry A. Bullis, J. D. Zellerbach, Jacob Panken, Randolph S. Paul, George Soule. Many of these individuals later joined the Committee for Economic Development.
12. Elizabeth Edwards, The Planners and Bureaucracy (Liverpool, K. R. P. Publications, no date), p. 22. From internal evidence, this pamphlet appears to have been written in the middle nineteen-forties.
13. Sherwood, op. cit., p. 230.
14. Ibid., pp. 230 ff.
15. Holmes-Laski Letters, Mark DeWolfe Howe, ed. (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1953), p. 141. (Laski to Holmes, March 11, 1918.)
16. Kingsley Martin, Harold Laski: A Biographical Memoir (New York, The Viking Press, Inc., 1953), pp. 45-46.
17. Ibid., pp. 38-40. Lord Beveridge in his autobiography Power and Influence (New York, The Beechhurst Press, Inc., 1955), p. 181 also states: “one of my first appointments (i.e. to the faculty of the London School) was Hugh Dalton. Another was Harold Laski, urged on me by Graham Wallas to rescue him from an uncomfortable position at Harvard.)
18. Francis Williams, Ernest Bevin (London, Hutchinson & Co., Ltd., 1952), p. 237.
19. Emanuel Shinwell, Conflict without Malice (London, Odhams Press, Ltd., 1955), p. 187.
20. Williams, op. cit., p. 210. Labour Party members who signed the Unity Manifesto included Stafford Cripps, Harold Laski, Aneurin Bevan, John Strachey, William Mellor. It was also signed by such leaders of the British Communist Party as Harry Pollitt, William Gallacher, James Maxton, Tom Mann.
21. Martin, op. cit., p. 130.
23. Williams, op. cit., pp. 238-239.
24. The Socialism of Our Times. A Symposium. Harry W. Laidler and Norman Thomas, eds. (New York, The Vanguard Press, Inc.,–League for Industrial Democracy, 1929), pp. 131 ff.
27. Fabian News (October, 1931). Announcement of forthcoming lecture on Thursday, November 19, 1931 by Professor H. J. Laski.
28. “The Fabian Social,” Fabian News (June, 1933). This item states: “The Social evening party held at the Livingstone Hall on Thursday, May 4 was very successful. About 200 members and friends assembled and an enjoyable evening was spent. Short speeches were given by Sir Stafford Cripps, K. C. M. P., G. Bernard Shaw, Professor H. J. Laski and S. K. Ratcliffe, the last three having just returned to this country from America.”
29. “Friends Hall Lectures,” Fabian News (December, 1935). Review of Professor H. J. Laski’s speech of November 14 on “The Failure of the American Experiment.”
30. In a personal letter from Eleanor Roosevelt to M. P. McCarran.
31. Mrs. Laski was a well-known advocate of birth control clinics in England.
34. Cf. Articles by J. H. Laski, New Statesman, July 5, 1941 and September 13, 1941.
35. In this letter to President Roosevelt, Laski had expressed gratitude for the “noble appointments” of John Winant and Benjamin V. Cohen, as Winant’s adviser at the U. S. Embassy in London. He had also written: “[It is] exhilarating . . . when you believe that the two nations, after we’ve won, hold the fate of the world in their hands. If liberal America makes England speak the right words and do the right acts, even this may in the end be worth the blood and tears that have been shed.” Martin, op. cit., p. 141.
36. Ibid., p. 141. (Footnote)
37. Cf. President Roosevelt’s Message to Congress of January 6, 1941.
38. Martin, op. cit., pp. 141-142.
39. Apparently this has become a standard Fabian Socialist cliche. “We saw much and learned much,” wrote John Parker in Fabian News for October, 1963, describing a recent Fabian Society tour to Russia which he conducted. A long time member of the Fabian Executive, John Parker has been making “educational” visits to the USSR since 1932, when he accompanied Margaret Cole and the original New Fabian Research Bureau delegation on a study trip.
41. On March 25, 1942 Churchill had written Laski: “I certainly should think it very undemocratic if anyone were to try to carry socialism during a party truce without a parliamentary majority.”
43. Sherwood, op. cit., pp. 748-749. Sherwood states that Hopkins had with him at the Quebec Conference, which set the stage for the Teheran Conference of 1943, a document that contained the following estimate: “Russia’s post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces. It is true that Great Britain is building up a position in the Mediterranean vis-a-vis Russia that she may find useful in balancing power in Europe. However, even here she may not b able to oppose Russia unless she is otherwise supported.
“The conclusions from the foregoing are obvious. Since Russia is the decisive factor in the war, she must be given every assistance and every effort must be made to obtain her friendship. Likewise, since without question she will dominate Europe on the defeat of the Axis, it is even more essential to develop and maintain the most friendly relations with Russia.
“Finally, the most important factor the United States has to consider in relation to Russia is the prosecution of the war in the Pacific. With Russia as an ally in the war against Japan, the war can be terminated in less time and at less expense in life and resources than if the reverse were the case. Should the war in the Pacific have to be carried on with an unfriendly or negative attitude on the part of Russia, the difficulties will be immeasurably increased and operations might become abortive.
This remarkable document, headed “Russia’s Position,” was alleged to have been quoted from “a very high level United States military strategic estimate.” It reflected with singular fidelity estimates published in the Fabian Socialist New Statesman by that high level nonmilitary expert, Professor H. J. Laski.
44. Martin, op. cit., This letter is reproduced on the page opposite, p. 135.
46. William R. H. Trowbridge, Cagliostro (Savant or Scoundrel?) (New Hyde Park, University Books, 1961), p. x.
47. Cagliostro is best known for having engineered the notorious affair of the Diamond Necklace, in which a Cardinal and a Queen of France were unwittingly entangled. The scandal touched off by that incident rocked the country and helped bring about the end of the monarchy.
48. In an editorial note, The New York Times (Western edition) of September 9, 1963 stated concerning Keynes: “. . . the greatness of his reputation is unassailable.”
49. Dr. Seymour E. Harris worked with Presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson on his press campaign and two-day seminars in 1954. He was also a member of his task force on the economy. Harris has served as consultant to a dozen federal departments. As of 1962 he was Senior Consultant to the Secretary of the Treasury and to the Council of Economic Advisors; a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Research Council, the Committee on Textile Research, and the Public Advisory Committee on Area Development. Seymour E. Harris, The Economics of the Political Parties, With Special Attention to Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy. (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1962). Dedication reads: “For Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. and John Kenneth Galbraith,” p. vii Introduction.
50. Seymour Harris, John Maynard Keynes: Economist and Policy Maker (New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), p. 19.
51. R. F. Harrod, The Life of John Maynard Keynes (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1951), p. 180.
54. Seymour E. Harris, John Maynard Keynes: Economist and Policy Maker (New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), p. 5, et al.
57. Cf. L. Frank Baum, The Wizard of Oz. (“The Highly Magnified Woggle-bug, H. E.”)
58. Thomas, op. cit., p. 17.
59. Fabian News (March, 1920).
60. David McCord Wright, “Mr. Keynes and the ‘Day of Judgment’,” Science, November 21, 1958, Vol. 128, No. 3334, p. 1259. Published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
61. Frances Perkins, The Roosevelt I Knew (New York, The Viking Press, 1946), p. 225.
62. Harrod, op. cit., p. 448.
63. Perkins, op. cit., p. 225.
64. Sherwood, op. cit., 217.
65. Harris, op. cit., p. 51.
68. T. R. B., “Washington Letter,” New Republic (June 17, 1934).
69. Marriner Eccles, Beckoning Frontiers (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1951), pp. 37-39; 78-79; 132.
70. A term borrowed from Jevons and used as a replacement for the Marxian theory of surplus value.
71. Some followers of Keynes assert that if sufficiently large sums are invested by government, the entire amount will return in taxes–thanks to the operation of the “multiplier.” To date, this phenomenon has not occurred.
72. Seymour E. Harris, John Maynard Keynes: Economist and Policy Maker (New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), p. 206.
73. In his later years, Keynes also described himself solemnly as a “mercantilist”–referring to the eighteenth century mercantile theory, when foreign trade was under State control!
74. Nation and Athenaeum (February 20, 1926).
75. Franklin D. Roosevelt, Papers, Keynes to Roosevelt (February 1, 1938). Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park, New York.
76. The Case Against Socialism, A Handbook for Speakers and Candidates. With prefatory letter by the Rt. Honourable A. J. Balfour. (London, George Allen & Sons, 1909), p. 90.
77. The New Economics: Keynes Influence on Theory and Public Policy. A Symposium, Seymour E. Harris, ed. (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1947), p. 339.
81. The New York Times (Western edition), (September 9, 1963). Article by British economist George Schwartz.
82. The Resolution referred to included the following significant sentence: “The Conference draws attention to the possible advantages of an international Convention which would provide for the assumption by Governments to accept full employment as a primary objective of social and economic policy, and to establish or designate appropriate national authorities which would be responsible for studying continuously the evolution of the employment situation and for making recommendations concerning the action to be taken to maintain full employment.” (From a Report on the 34th Conference of the International Labor Organization, by William L. McGrath, Adviser to Charles P. McCormick, Employer Delegate on the United States Delegation, p. 10).
83. See special Report: “$50 Billion Worth of Good News,” Life magazine (January 10, 1964).
84. See nationally syndicated column by Sylvia Porter, published January 23, 1964 in the Riverside, California Daily enterprise.
85. Clark Kerr, The Uses of the University (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1963). Chapter III, “The Future of the City of Intellect,” p. 116.
“It may be called by some other name!” Those words run like a refrain through the literature of Fabian Socialism, from the movement’s modest beginnings to the present day. Again and again they recur in the writings and speeches of Fabian publicists, from George Bernard Shaw to Harry W. Laidler (1) to Upton Sinclair to Mark Starr (2) to Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. Meeting the identical statement so many times over, one can hardly fail to realize that it is a clue to Fabian tactics, past and present. So clear a warning, so frequently repeated, is obviously designed to alert friends of the movement to the stealthy procedure of encroaching Socialism—on the assumption that, like any other oft-announced plan of attack, it will be ignored or discounted by the prospective victims.
In 1932 a seemingly impromptu but in fact carefully researched program for advancing social revolution by peaceful means was called The New Deal. Both the name and the program were first unveiled in a book by Stuart Chase entitled A New Deal. Never very widely circulated and soon conveniently buried, it was meant for a select coterie of prospective public servants—and for the eyes of one man in particular, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. For all practical purposes, this volume soon replaced the moderate 1932 platform of the Democratic Party, which pledged thrift and a curb on Federal spending.
Appearing in a critical election year, its publication like that of other books by Stuart Chase was financed by the Twentieth Century Fund, an allegedly educational foundation set up for purposes of “public service” by Edward A. Filene of Boston. Director of the Twentieth Century Fund from 1928 to 1953 was Evans Clark, a former president of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society and vice president of the League for Industrial Democracy. (3) In 1920 Clark had been employed as Director of Information for Ludwig Martens, the unofficial Soviet ambassador who was expelled for conspiratorial activities. (4) Both Clark and his wife, Freda Kirchwey, (5) long time editor of the leftist weekly, The Nation, were intimates of the British Fabian Socialist and avowed Marxist, Harold Laski, whose articles were featured from time to time in The Nation and whose ideas strongly influenced certain leaders of the incoming administration.
Stuart Chase had graduated from Harvard in 1910 and joined the Fabian Society of London the same year. He was a certified public accountant and an equally certified Socialist, with a flair for popularizing borrowed ideas in a smooth and painless style. In Boston he was one of the circle revolving around Mrs. Glendower Evans, which included Florence Kelley, Louis D. Brandeis and. Upton Sinclair. During World War I he worked from 1917 to 1919 as an official of Wilson’s War Food Administration in Chicago. There he became vice president of the Socialist-sponsored Public Ownership League, an organization dedicated to promoting public ownership of electric power and related industries. Moving to New York, he served as treasurer of the LID, was a frequent lecturer at the Rand School, an editor of the New Republic and a featured contributor to The Nation.
Admittedly, Chase sympathized with the idea of violent revolution as a cure for social ills, holding it to have been absolutely “necessary and inevitable” in Russia. “It may some day be inevitable in this country,” he warned, and added coolly: “I am not seriously alarmed by the sufferings of the creditor class, the trouble which the church is bound to encounter, the restrictions on certain kinds of freedom which must result, nor even by the bloodshed of the transition period. A better economic order is worth a little bloodshed. But I am profoundly disturbed by the technological aspects of this method of solving the problem of distribution in a highly mechanized society such as ours. In the attempt, production might be shattered beyond repair.” (6)
Except as a last resort, Chase did not advise catastrophic action in the United States. In the long run, said he, similar collectivist results could be achieved through national planning, regulation and control by government agencies operating more or less within the framework of the Constitution. To that end, he outlined a broad program—based in part on Sidney Webb’s Labour and the New Social Order and in part on the monetary nostrums of John Maynard Keynes —guaranteed to lead in due time to a nonprofit system. For the next few years, he proposed merely three major steps:
1. A managed currency, to prevent accidental inflation and deflation.
2. Drastic redistribution of the national income, through income and inheritance taxes.
3. A huge program of public works, to become a continuing program especially in the fields of housing and rural electrification.(7)
All three of these prescribed remedies were adopted in 1933, and after, by the Roosevelt Administration, whose program became officially known as the New Deal.
Undeniably, Socialism’s first major, Fabian-planned opportunity in the United States came about through the Democratic Party’s landslide victory in 1932. It followed in the wake of a financial panic of unprecedented severity, provoked by the stock market crash of October, 1929. Few Americans alive today recall that the Great Depression, which somehow lasted longer in America than anywhere else, was a world-wide phenomenon of European origin, touched off by the failure of the Creditanstalt bank in Vienna. Through their contacts with foreign Socialists, American Fabians were able to predict the impending day of doom in the United States with some certitude, and they were prepared to take advantage of it.
Some months before the crash H. Stephen Raushenbush—secretary of the Socialist-fostered committee on coal and giant power—referred to a period of low wages, high prices and general unemployment as if it were already a fact.(8) He viewed the prospect optimistically, saying, “We can see more clearly the function which liberals and socialists—both those who are essentially scholars and students and those who are politicians—can have in changing the social order.”(9) Raushenbush invited young Socialists graduating from college to enter the Government service, especially the Interior and Treasury Departments, as a means of developing techniques and obtaining necessary information for gaining control over private industry. And he asserted confidently: “Within the next ten years we are going to have a chance such as we have not had in the last forty.”(10)
Within the next few years private American investments previously valued at 93 billion dollars shrank to a mere 14 billion dollars. The unemployed in the United States were estimated to number twelve to fourteen million. For the first time in its existence, the nation cried out for a political savior. He descended like a god from the machine and he offered the people something that, with a flash of psychological insight, was cleverly termed “relief.”
As A. Susan Lawrence, M.P.—member of the Fabian Executive and friend of Frances Perkins, Jane Addams and Eleanor Roosevelt —reported at a Livingstone Hall lecture in London: “By one of history’s strangest freaks, the elaborate system of checks and balances devised in the American Constitution, has resulted for the moment at any rate, in the complete personal ascendancy of Franklin Roosevelt.” (11) On that occasion, the chairman was Helen Keynes, sister of the left wing financial oracle, John Maynard Keynes who had contributed so liberally to the strange new fiscal policies of the Roosevelt Administration. Helen Keynes stressed the “supreme importance,” for the “survival of democracy,” of what was happening in the United States. Susan Lawrence dwelt upon the practical opportunities it offered for Socialism and Socialist-led labor groups.
The dramatic emergence of Franklin Delano Roosevelt at that precise moment in history was neither as providential nor as fortuitous as it may have seemed to the general public. On the contrary, it had been painstakingly planned and prepared far in advance. Almost twenty years before, as a crisp young Assistant Secretary of the Navy under Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt had been briefed on the career of Philip Dru, Administrator—that fictional personage who devised a formula for centering power in the administrative branch of government, as a means of imposing sweeping social changes. At least as early as 1920, Roosevelt was marked for future greatness by Philip Dru’s creator, Colonel Edward Mandell House.
It is noteworthy that in a lifetime of political observation Colonel House backed only two candidates for the Presidency. The first had been Woodrow Wilson. The second was Franklin Roosevelt, whose family name and humanitarian pretensions could be counted upon to rally such leftward Progressives of the defunct Bull Moose Party as Senators La Follette, Norris and Hiram Johnson and Governor Gifford Pinchot of Pennsylvania; while his own record of Democratic Party regularity rendered him acceptable to old-line Democrats. The timely support Roosevelt had given A1 Smith, whose name he placed in nomination at the 1928 Democratic Convention, gained him the governorship of New York and the uncritical good will of Irish and Italian voters throughout the country.
At the same time, Roosevelt’s experiments in “social reform” at Albany, where he appointed former social settlement workers to administer his new unemployment and emergency relief programs, recommended him to professional liberals everywhere. As Governor, he activated the State Employment Service along lines which American Fabians had been urging since the eighteen-nineties and he made other innovations likely to find favor with the leaders of New York City’s garment workers. True, his old classmates at Groton and Harvard—while conceding that Franklin was a gentleman—rated him something less than a mental giant; but even this might be viewed as an advantage in politics, where the too conspicuous exercise of brainpower did not necessarily insure popularity.
To compensate for any possible cerebral shortcomings, he was thoughtfully provided with a “brain trust”’—a term of British Fabian origin—whose traveling expenses to Albany were reputedly paid by the Twentieth Century Fund. Among others, Felix Frankfurter, whom Roosevelt had known ever since the former served on Wilson’s War Labor Policy Board, and such polite former Wilsonian Socialists as Stuart Chase and Fred C. Howe met with the Governor both before and after his nomination as President. Once in office, he could be expected to put into practice plans that Woodrow Wilson had merely been able to foreshadow.
A no less vital factor in the progressive education of the President-select was his energetic and ambitious wife, Eleanor. While Franklin served his country during World War I from a desk in the Navy Department, Eleanor had joined the National Consumers League in New York. (12) Inspired and directed by the Quaker-Marxist, Florence Kelley, (13) the Consumers League was a prime medium through which American Fabians captured the leadership of social reform activities during the first three decades of the twentieth century. Ostensibly it crusaded against sweatshops, child labor and excessive hours of work for women, and lobbied for standards of industrial safety. Many public-spirited citizens were naturally moved to support such worthy and emotionally appealing causes. In fact, Newton D. Baker, Secretary of War under Woodrow Wilson, once served as president of the Consumers League without suspecting its long-range Socialist objectives.
The Consumers League was only the first in a long list of Socialist-inspired organizations with which Eleanor Roosevelt was to affiliate herself during a long and active life. Through it she was introduced to that curious demi-world of social settlement workers, left wing labor organizers and assorted academic, literary and political crusaders that Robert Hunter has described. Their channels of communication extended from Toynbee Hall in London to Hull House in Chicago to the Henry Street Settlement in New York and Hale House in Boston.
Thus Eleanor came to know Lillian Wald, Jane Addams and Frances Perkins who, like Florence Kelley, had spent some years at Hull House. Through these and other new friends, Eleanor Roosevelt met and fraternized with female leaders of the Fabian Society on post-World War I trips to England. She had been educated in England as a girl, and in the nineteen-twenties she had attended and lectured at Fabian Summer Schools there. The genteel, high-minded tone of British Fabian Socialism impressed her, as well as the fact that it had achieved political power in the name and with the support of labor.
After 1921 Eleanor brought two New York organizers of the Women’s Trade Union League—now the International Ladies Garment Workers Union—to see her husband and to tutor him in the theory and background of the trade union movement as they knew it.(14) One was Rose Schneiderman, a red-haired firebrand who had organized the shirtwaist workers in bygone days and who in 1920 became, with Felix Frankfurter, a founder of the Civil Liberties Union and a member of its board of directors.(15) The other was Maude Schwartz, an Anglo-Irish woman, active in the Fabian-led British labor movement for many years before coming to this country.
Both were practicing Socialists, adept at winning converts through heart-appeal rather than dogma. They told their host about the English cooperatives, developed with the help of Socialist trade unions, which had their imitators in some sections of America thanks to the early efforts of James Warbasse. (16) They fired his sympathy with tales of ancient wrongs corrected as a result of union action and stirred his mind with the practical possibilities of an expanded and politicalized trade union movement in America. The seeds they sowed, in the course of various sickroom visits during the early nineteen-twenties, later bore fruit in the National Recovery Act, the purpose of which was not only to raise wages and prices according to a Keynesian formula, but also to foster the growth of labor organizations bound to Roosevelt by ties of personal loyalty.
Never a serious student, Franklin Roosevelt had been accustomed since boyhood to deriving his ideas from conversations with trusted intimates and members of his family circle, while retaining a superficial air of jaunty independence. It was not surprising, therefore, that his mother’s old friend, Colonel House, (17) should have been the very first Fabian planner to perceive that young Franklin was a rare jewel, to be polished, placed in the proper setting and flashed with dazzling effect upon the world at an appropriate moment.
Above all, House recognized that Roosevelt possessed a certain adaptability, both personal and political, which the unbending Woodrow Wilson had lacked. The Squire of Hyde Park—inclined as a young man to look down his nose through his pince-nez at ordinary folk—had succeeded in developing a genial, outgoing personality, marked by high good humor, which would enable him to adjust the most arrant Socialist novelties to the realities of machine politics. “Mr. Sinclair, I cannot go any faster than the people will let me,” he told the admiring Upton Sinclair in an interview soon after his election.(18)
Even an infantile paralysis attack in 1921 that left him a cripple failed to disqualify Franklin Roosevelt for the historic role he had been chosen, possibly unawares, to fill. A fine head, a triumphant smile, and a golden voice on the air, with radio just then becoming a potent political factor, (19) could be deployed to distract popular attention from the fact that he had suffered physical impairment. As Frances Perkins, his devoted associate for many years, pointed out, one political advantage of his infirmity was that it obliged him to suffer bores cheerfully. He could no longer walk away from them, as he had been apt to do in his more impatient youth.
In 1932 Colonel House lived just two blocks from the Roosevelt home on East Sixty-fifth Street in New York City. Early that year, the small gray master-marplot slipped in and out of the Governor’s town house almost ‘daily to proffer advice and tactical suggestions. Despite his advanced age—he was then seventy-four—House still had a national network of politically influential friends who knew what was happening in State politics and could sway the votes of State delegations. And despite his own depression-shrunk fortune, he was said to be one of four men who contributed $10,000 to Roosevelt’s pre-convention campaign. The others were: Jesse I. Straus of Macy’s, who had originally headed the Governor’s emergency relief organization in Albany and who was afterwards named Ambassador to France—a precedent-shattering appointment; William Woodin, who became Roosevelt’s first Secretary of the Treasury; and Frank Walker, later Postmaster General, an anti-Smith Catholic from the Midwest who had just sold a chain of motion picture houses to Paramount and who, like another early Roosevelt backer, Joseph P. Kennedy, enjoyed the confidence of West Coast movie moguls.
In those months, the radical-minded Colonel proclaimed to still solvent Wall Street acquaintances that the capitalist system as they had known it was finished and that Franklin Roosevelt was the man picked by experts to salvage the remains. For services rendered, House was modestly rewarded by being permitted to choose Roosevelt’s first Ambassador to Britain, Judge Robert Worth gingham of Louisville, Kentucky—whose son, Barry gingham, in 1947 became a founding member of the Americans for Democratic Action.(20)
The Colonel’s own days of White House authority were over, never to be revived. Somewhat wistfully, he saw his former guest room privileges and direct telephone wire conferred on younger favorites whose radical bias was as unsuspected by the electorate as his own had been. He had set the stage, however, for a new breed of informal Presidential advisers—more potent, more elusive and more definitely committed to policies of Fabian Socialist origin than any mere Kitchen Cabinet of the past. The extra-constitutional method devised by House for relieving a Chief Executive from the burden of independent decision has become accepted practice today.
Other leading pre-convention strategists were Roosevelt’s former New York State campaign manager, Louis M. Howe, and U.S. Senator Cordell Hull. As a congressman, Hull had written the first Federal Income Tax Law of 1913, as well as the revised Federal Income and Inheritance Tax Laws of 1916–omitting to place a permanent ceiling on either of them. It is unlikely that the homespun statesman from the Tennessee hills ever dreamed that the rather moderate bills he drafted might provide a basis at some future date for a “redistribution of the national income,” as proposed by Fabian Stuart Chase in 1932–and as included since 1918 in the Fabian-dictated program of the British Labour Party. (21) The fact that an old-line southern Democrat had been induced to sponsor the basic legislation so ardently desired by all spokesmen of gradual Socialism was an early and notable example of success for the Fabian technique known as permeation.
Personally conservative but politically regular, Hull was appointed Secretary of State by Roosevelt at a moment when brain trusters did not regard that department as of primary importance to their plans. Just then the sole foreign policy issue that stirred them was the diplomatic recognition of Soviet Russia, a project in which American as wel1 as British Fabian Socialists took a lively interest.
As in Britain, this move was described as offering vast foreign trade possibilities—if sufficiently lenient long-term credits could be arranged for the nearly bankrupt Russians. The Soviets’ well-publicized intent to purchase huge quantities of cotton in the southern United States (a promise that came to little) helped win Hull’s consent to the establishment of diplomatic relations with that Ishmael among nations. It was the first outstanding misstep of the Roosevelt Administration in the field of foreign policy.
At a later date—as The New York Times’ well-informed Washington bureau chief, Arthur Krock, reported—Hull’s authority was repeatedly circumvented by assistants having a direct pipeline to the White House. Many of his policy-making functions were also preempted by specially appointed presidential envoys and by Roosevelt’s preference for acting as his own Secretary of State in crucial negotiations. That type of personal diplomacy, originally commended to Woodrow Wilson by Colonel House and enthusiastically practiced by each succeeding Democratic President, tended to nullify the advisory roles of the Senate and the Cabinet as defined in the Constitution.
Instead, something vaguely resembling the British Privy Council system came into being—the difference being that the Washington version was unsanctioned by custom or law or tradition, and that the identity of the White House counselors was often unknown to the general public and subject to change without notice. If bystanders wondered why Cordell Hull, an old style American in the mold of Andrew Jackson, submitted so long to such indignities, they concluded charitably that he remained at his post some twelve years in order to avert a mass invasion of the State Department by hungry New Dealers and One Worlders—as occurred, in fact, after his retirement.
From the outset, however, Secretary Hull was obliged to tolerate the presence of a select number of Harvard-trained Frankfurter proteges in key State Department positions. On his arrival, Hull found Herbert Feis already ensconced in the economic section. Feis was assisted from 1933 to 1935 by Professor Alvin H. Hansen, public speaker and occasional pamphleteer of the LID, the first of the older Harvard economists to embrace the doctrines of John Maynard Keynes.(22) Alger Hiss, who had begun his career as the law clerk of Supreme Court Justice Holmes, rose to become director of the State Department’s Political Affairs Section and secretary of the Postwar Policy Planning Committee.
Secretary Hull evidently disliked having members of the Frankfurter coterie foisted upon him and managed to divest himself of some from time to time. But, apart from an occasional delaying action engineered by his supporters on Capitol Hill, there was not a great deal he could do to stem the tide of encroaching Socialism—or to discourage its covert Communist beneficiaries.
Soon after his election to the Presidency in 1932, Franklin Roosevelt met privately in Washington with a group that included Felix Frankfurter, Fred C. Howe and some dozen members of Congress. With the notable exception of Congressman Fiorello La Guardia of New York City, the legislators came chiefly from the western states. Strangely enough, they did not belong to the Democratic Party, but styled themselves Progressive Republicans. All had bolted to Roosevelt in 1932 and sought assurances that their aid would be suitably requited.
Politically, they were a hybrid species. The elders among them, Senators George C. Norris of Nebraska and Hiram Johnson of California, dated from the Bull Moose era, as did Frankfurter and Howe. After helping to split the Republican Party in 1912, they threw their weight behind the Wilson Administration. From 1924, they had enjoyed the somewhat eccentric backing of the Conference for Progressive Political Action, precursor of the modern-day Americans for Democratic Action. “Conservation of natural resources” was the high-sounding slogan by which these solons maintained themselves in office and justified their emancipation from such routine concerns as party loyalty. They joined or supported the Public Ownership League of America; (23) nominally a nonpartisan organization,(24) whose perennial secretary and guiding spirit, Carl D. Thompson, was a former national campaign manager and information director of the Socialist Party.(25)
As early as March, 1924, Senator Norris had introduced a bill providing for a nationwide government-operated system of electric power. Admittedly, it was conceived by the Public Ownership League and promoted at a so-called superpower conference held on January 16-17 at the Hotel Hamilton in Washington, D.C. (26) Senator Norris registered at the opening session and addressed the conference, pledging all-out support. A committee was named to assist him in drafting a superpower bill. Heading that committee was Father John A. Ryan, (27) later known as the padre of the New Deal—and once identified by the Washington Star, in a renowned typographical error, as chairman of the “Socialist Action Committee” of the National Catholic Welfare Conference.(28)
The original Federal power bill (S-2790) was a bold one, clearly transcending mere government ownership and distribution of electric power. As Carl Thompson had stated from the first, the purpose of the Public Ownership League was not only to secure public ownership of utilities but also Federal control of railroads, coal and “all industrial forces depending upon electric power for their successful operation.” (29) As if by some process of thought transference, the introduction of America’s first public power bill coincided with a move in England to electrify the railroads, (30) and with proposals initiated by British Fabian Socialists to install the grid system of public power. In Russia, Lenin’s mammoth (and even now only partially completed) scheme for electrification of all Soviet industries and farms under State control had just been announced.
At that date, as might have been expected, the public superpower bill failed on Capitol Hill. So did a subsequent bill (S-2147) of 1926 providing for a Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and a joint resolution (SJ-163) the following year—both filed by Senator Norris at the request of the Public Ownership League. By that time, however, the true mastermind of the public ownership movement in America, H. Stephen Raushenbush, second-generation Fabian Socialist and onetime secretary of the LID, had developed a more cautious plan for what he termed “encroaching control” designed to lead to “ultimate abolition of the profit system.”(31) Champions of direct revolutionary action complained that his “Program for the Gradual Socialization of Industry”(32) resembled the formula for achieving chastity a little bit at a time prescribed by Leo Tolstoi in The Kreutzer Sonata. In the booming United States of 1927, both methods appeared equally unlikely to succeed.
The central feature of the Raushenbush program was a government-operated Power Authority, a term he seems to have coined. It was to serve as a “yardstick” for private industry and, by demonstrating superior virtue, lead to the eventual extinction of the private sector. From a book entitled The Public Control of Business by Keezer and May, (33) Raushenbush unearthed a pertinent item, namely, that there appeared to be no constitutional obstacle to the Government’s operating a business or industry, provided such action was declared to be in the public interest. Indeed, as numerous court decisions seemed to confirm, it was easier for the Government to go into business than to “regulate” existing enterprises. That handy loophole, publicized by Stephen Raushenbush, provided the legal sanction for a whole series of business ventures soon to be undertaken by the New Deal Administration—not only in the field of electric power production, but also in housing, rural electrification, farm mortgages and agricultural products, storage, insurance and general banking.
With the onset of the Great Depression, the Public Ownership League’s scheme for a so-called Tennessee Valley Authority was once more revived. This time, however, it was offered on the pretext of providing employment and stimulating recovery. Electric power was not so much as mentioned in Senator Norris’ TVA bill of 1933. Other features were added piecemeal through a series of supplementary bills, until at last the plan emerged full-blown. In March, 1935, David Lilienthal, director of the TVA, finally felt it safe to announce: “These dams are not being built for scenic effect, these millions of dollars are not being spent merely to increase business activities in this area. These dams are power dams, they are being built because they will provide electric power.”(34)
It was not until 1937, however, that the actual scope of the TVA was disclosed to the American public. The assembled blueprint, showing a whole chain of dams linked together under the grid system to form a gigantic nationwide public power complex, (35) closely resembled the original sketch drafted by the Public Ownership League between 1923 and 1925. Both the plan itself and the gradual means by which it was achieved illustrate the strategy of Fabian Socialism more clearly than any other of the numerous schemes which devotees of that revolutionary faith have launched in this country.
Begun on a small local scale, its slow encroachment mirrors the origins and progress of the Fabian Socialist movement in the United States. It would seem, therefore, a coincidence that the first municipally owned power plant in America should have been established in 1896, at a time when British instigators of the American Fabian League were actively promoting municipal ownership of public utilities at home; and that America’s first city-owned electric plant was located in Chicopee Falls, Massachusetts (36) home town of Edward Bellamy!
Over a quarter century of patient penetration and permeation was required before the public-power movement was able to entrench itself in the national government, securing the potent aid of Federal tax money. At the time, only a handful of non-Socialist observers discerned the implications. One was The New York Times’ ever-vigilant Arthur Krock. On December 21, 1933, Krock reported that the TVA, “while not very expensive as things go under President Roosevelt,” had spent over forty millions of a fifty million dollar appropriation in less than a year of initial activity. And he commented shrewdly, “It is, even more than NRA or AAA, a social and economic laboratory.” With the great mass of Americans numbed by the hurricane-like effect of the Depression and a Socialist camarilla riding high in Washington, such discreet warning passed largely unnoticed.
The TVA has now been in operation some thirty years, quietly but steadily expanding its empire and accepted almost as a natural phenomenon by a new generation. The ultimate step, total control over all key industries, appears to have been necessarily postponed. But not forever. TVA was and still remains, as Norman Thomas revealed, (37) the enterprise nearest and dearest to the hearts of American Fabian Socialists and the one most central to the accomplishment of their long-range plans for making (and taking) over America.
President-elect Franklin D. Roosevelt’s meeting with Felix Frankfurter, Fred C. Howe and Republican Progressives in Congress preceded by only a few months the revival of the Tennessee Valley Authority project, disguised as an anti-depression measure. It was one of the earliest bills to be rubber-stamped for passage under the New Deal, and there is no reason to suppose its intent was unknown to the President. Naturally, its champions wished to be assured in advance of the incoming Executive’s blessing, as well as to be certain they would have a voice in naming officials charged with the administration of TVA and allied programs.
From that meeting of minds, there emerged a novel type of patronage, based more on ideology than constituencies, which for a time baffled political experts and continues to trouble many loyal Democrats today. Several seemingly mysterious Cabinet appointments, announced soon afterwards by Roosevelt, were traceable to recommendations by Republican Progressives. Felix Frankfurter, who had organized the Progressives-for-Roosevelt, became a kind of one-man employment service for placing liberal lawyers and economists in the Executive departments and agencies. The new order of precedence provoked Alfred E. Smith in 1936 to a pained and picturesque outburst. “Who is Ickes?” he cried. “Who is Wallace? Who is Hopkins, and in the name of all that is good and holy, who is Tugwell and where did he blow from? . . . If La Guardia is a Democrat, then I am a Chinaman with a haircut.” (38)
A little field research along the sidewalks of New York might have given A1 Smith a clue. For in 1934, two years after Roosevelt’s election, several persons influential in the formation of the New Deal were listed as teaching at the Rand School of Social Science, which A1 Smith once helped inadvertently to preserve. They were Stuart Chase, Rexford G. Tugwell and Raymond V. Moley.(39) In 1930 and 1931, institutes on unemployment, social insurance and public power had been held at the Rand School to prepare the Socialist faithful for the shape of things to come. The superpower movement, which claimed Governor Smith as a supporter,(40) acted in close understanding with leading British Fabians—as indicated by a letter of November 13, 1930, printed in Fabian News, from the Public Ownership League’s Carl D. Thompson to Alderman A. Emil Davies, later chairman of the London Fabian Society.(41)
It would have shaken quite a few unsuspecting Democrats to know how many major and minor officeholders under the New Deal had been connected for years with organizations pledged to further the programs of Fabian Socialism in America. Such attachments ranged from the Rand School and the League for Industrial Democracy to the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Consumers League, the Public Ownership League, the New School for Social Research, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Government Planning Association, the Public Affairs Council and other social democratic concoctions—up to, and including, the Fabian Society of London. If the great majority of officials who formed the intellectual core of the New Deal were Democrats, in the sense that the average American understood the term, then Al Smith certainly was a “Chinaman with a haircut!”
Of course, Smith must have known that Henry Agard Wallace, the New Deal Secretary of Agriculture who later became Vice President and in 1944 only missed by a phone call becoming a future President, had supported his (Smith’s) candidacy in 1928. Wallace was the son of Henry Cantwell Wallace, a leading Midwestern Republican who had been Secretary of Agriculture under Presidents Harding and Coolidge. He was the grandson of still another Henry Wallace, a member of President Theodore Roosevelt’s Country Life Commission. Henry the third, however, was a Republican Progressive who had jumped early aboard the Democratic bandwagon.
As editor of the family newspaper, the Iowa Farmer, young Henry by his articles and speeches helped to carry the traditionally Republican Corn Belt for Franklin Roosevelt. In that campaign Wallace was aided by the Socialist-led National Farmers Council, whose organizer, Ben Marsh, openly supported the aims of the Public Ownership League. (42) For eighteen months before the election Wallace had also been calling for a reduction in the gold content of the dollar, combining the old dream of the Bryan bimetallists with John Maynard Keynes’ seductive vision of a managed currency. Though a country boy, Wallace was not unsophisticated.
While he cultivated a dreamy and mystical air and a friendship with the well-known Irish poet, “A. E.,” who brought news of the Fabian-led British cooperative movement to American farmers,(43) Wallace also had a taste for scientific experiment. In his spare time he had developed a special strain of hybrid corn which made possible higher crop yields. Through its American grain agent, Dr. Joseph Rosen (who had himself crossbred a new and hardy variety of rye seed), the Soviet Government during the nineteen-twenties displayed an interest in Wallace and his hybrid corn experiments.
The communications and transactions that ensued, in turn, aroused Wallace’s friendly interest in what American liberals used to call the Soviet experiment—where a surplus of foodstuffs has never been a political problem. Given the tolerant attitude toward Russian Communism that Wallace took with him to Washington, it is not surprising that the Department of Agriculture became in 1934 under Harold Ware the center of the first identified Communist cell in the United States Government.(44)
By 1936 many sober citizens were inclined to agree with Fabian Socialist Stuart Chase that “Henry Wallace had lifted American agriculture bodily out of the free market system. . . .(45)
Wallace’s chief lieutenant in Agriculture was Rexford Guy Tugwell, another poetaster and rapt observer of the Soviet economy. In 1915, at the age of twenty-four, he had published a Whitmanesque effusion that read:
We begin to see richness as poorness; we begin to dignify toil.
I have dreamed my great dream of their passing,
I have gathered my tools and my charts;
My plans are fashioned and practical;
I shall roll up my sleeves—make America over.
A free verse paraphrase of the Victorian quatrain so popular among early British Fabians, those lines expressed the credo that was to guide Tugwell and his friends through life. “Why should Russians have all the fun of remaking a world?” wrote his Rand School colleague, Stuart Chase, in A New Deal.(46)
Tugwell blew into Washington from the economics department of Columbia University, having previously taught at the University of Pennsylvania and Washington State. One of the first Socialist-minded economists allowed to translate his theories into government practice, he made the most of the opportunity. There was little in the application of the early New Deal in which Tugwell did not have a finger. Besides abetting Wallace in a forlorn attempt to transform abundance into scarcity by ploughing under crops and killing suckling pigs, Tugwell also sat on the Housing Board, the Surplus Relief Administration, the Public Works Board, the President’s Commercial Policy Committee and other newly created bodies. He fathered the thought, seconded by the President’s Commercial Policy Committee, of grading all industries according to their efficiency and utility and denying tariff protection to those judged a “burden” on the United States.
It was Tugwell who proposed that consumers be represented, in addition to labor unions and employers, on the twenty-seven industry boards to be set up under the National Recovery Act. The object of this seemingly benevolent move was to cut prices and profits, while increasing wages—a prelude to the disappearance of the profit system, which a number of early New Dealers believed to be close at hand. Like some other impatient neo-Fabians, Tugwell was chagrined at the New Deal’s failure to abolish the profit system at once; and like Wallace, he moved leftward with the years. His last fling in public office was as Governor of Puerto Rico from 1945 to 1948, during a period when thousands of islanders were being airlifted via non-scheduled planes to New York City,(47) there to find themselves enrolled on the public welfare and registered as voters for the Communist-line Congressman, Vito Marcantonio.
Hand in hand with Tugwell, two other early New Deal enthusiasts pushed through the scheme for giving consumers’ groups the decisive voice in fixing wages and prices under the National Recovery Act. They were Fred C. Howe and Mary Harriman Rumsey. Still a Fabian Socialist at sixty though calling himself a Progressive, Fred Howe was a relic of the old muckraking era and a veteran member of the League for Industrial Democracy. (48) Named to the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA), he soon moved to the NRA Consumers Advisory Board where Mary Rumsey flourished. One of the wealthiest women in America, Mary Rumsey was the sister and mentor of W. Averell Harriman, Administrator of the NRA in 1934-35. (49)
An intimate of Eleanor Roosevelt and Frances Perkins, Mary Rumsey shared their social outlook, having veered a good deal toward the Left since her debutante days when she founded the Junior League. Frances Perkins described her fondly as “a convinced and advanced liberal.”(50) The Rumsey estate in the fox hunt country near Middleburg, Virginia became a happy hunting ground for spokesmen of cooperative agriculture and nonconformist economics. Mary Rumsey had struck up a close friendship with the Irish poet-economist, “A. E.,” the London Fabian Society’s gift to American farmers; and she was feted in top level Fabian-Labour Party circles on her periodic trips to England. Long a supporter of the National Consumers League (NCL), Mary Rumsey saw to it that the so-called consumers’ representatives appointed to NRA boards were drawn from lists approved by the NCL. A two-to-one vote against industry was normally the result.
Outstanding among the lady politicos who stamped their features and foibles indelibly on the New Deal was Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins. A professional social worker, Frances Perkins had been trained at Hull House in Chicago, merely transferring the views and enlarging the contacts acquired there when she moved on to New York. Her first assignment in Albany was as a lobbyist for the National Consumers League and the Women’s Trade Union Council. (51) She specialized in reforms having an emotional appeal for intellectuals and a vote-getting appeal among labor organizations.
As Industrial Commissioner of New York State under Franklin D. Roosevelt, she had imported a promising young LID economist, Paul H. Douglas, from Chicago to draft the Governor’s unemployment and relief program. (52) Commissioner Perkins proved so useful in gaining the support of New York City’s garment workers and other Socialist-led labor bodies, that FDR took her to Washington as the first female Cabinet member in history—an appointment warmly urged by Eleanor Roosevelt, Felix Frankfurter and the fast-fading Colonel House. Her personal influence with the President was exceeded only by that of her bosom friend, Eleanor Roosevelt, and her protégée and fellow social worker, Harry Hopkins. Certainly, her quiet but adroit contribution to the labor politics of the New Deal was highly prized.
Secretary Perkins’ twelve-year tenure in the Department of Labor was marked by an influx of Socialist-recommended economists, analysts, statisticians, investigators and legal experts that to this day has never ceased. They were following the advice of Stephen Raushenbush to infiltrate government offices at every level. Some were so reticent and mouse-like that their entry into the Federal service was tantamount to a disappearing act, and a full-dress congressional investigation would have been required to discover them. One of the more prominent examples, however, was Dr. Isadore Lubin, a lifelong collaborator of the LID, who served his apprenticeship as president of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society at Clark and Missouri.(53) Provided with some protective coloration by a recent tour of duty at Brookings Institute, Dr. Lubin was triumphantly ushered into the Department of Labor by Frances Perkins.
There, with immense industry and true Socialist zeal, Lubin reorganized the Bureau of Labor Statistics whence official indices on employment and unemployment still issue, often at moments best calculated to create political effects. Dr. Lubin developed the oracular Consumer Price Index, which remains a constant but invisible factor in the inflationary spiral—although its underlying assumptions have seldom been questioned and never checked. He is one of the few Americans who could claim to have improved on the statistical methods of the British Fabians.
Dr. Lubin’s talents were not restricted to his job as Commissioner of Labor Statistics. In May, 1940, when FDR revived the National Defense Council in the confident anticipation of America’s entry into World War II, (54) the President insisted on naming Sidney Hillman, LID official and president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, as the labor member of that council. Roosevelt asked Secretary Perkins to help her old friend Hillman; so she loaned him Dr. Lubin’s services.
Thereafter, Dr. Lubin became a kind of resident statistician to the White House, incidentally conveying to the President his own and Hillman’s views on preferential aid to Russia. From 1940 Isadore Lubin was “constantly available and incalculably valuable . . . in checking every decimal point” (55) on figures used in the President’s speeches and presentations. Since Lubin’s staff had access to the files and conferences of business people throughout the country, he was also able to keep the White House informed on the most private thoughts of management. A personal note from Lubin to Hopkins in 1941 read:
“I thought you might be interested in the following statements which are the summary of the report of one of my men who attended the recent meeting of the American Management Association….”(56)
Frances Perkins sparked the Administration’s move for nationwide unemployment insurance and old age pensions. At FDR’s request, she headed a behind-the-scenes committee to draft the Social Security Act, whose title was a masterpiece of applied psychology. (57) Like TVA this was a project designed for permanence though pushed through under the impact of the Depression. It was part of a long-range program particularly cherished by the Secretary and her chums. Early in 1933, visitors to the White House reported that Eleanor Roosevelt was urging all and sundry to read a book called Prohibiting Poverty, by Prestonia Mann Martin, then an old lady in semi-retirement but once the angel of the American Fabian League.
Even before his inauguration, Franklin Roosevelt had agreed to take steps toward setting up a system of compulsory social insurance. (58) It reflected proposals which the English Fabian Socialist, Sidney Webb, had written en bloc into the 1918 platform of the British Labour Party and which American Socialists had been urging ever since. In Britain that plan was eventually presented to the electorate as an overall scheme to abolish poverty by fostering dependence on State-operated agencies. Undertaken ten years earlier in America, however, it could not conveniently be offered in package form.
Thus the pattern of the welfare state, which England’s Fabian Socialists (59) frankly describe as “the transition from capitalism to Socialism,” was not immediately revealed to Congress or the public. As in the case of TVA, it unfolded a little at a time, through a series of gradual but cumulative measures. By now the Social Security Act has been expanded to include death benefits, widows’ pensions and some disability features. Its payments are based not upon need but upon “right.” With the addition of public medical care for the aged (which, in Russia at least, helps to speed the demise of elderly pensioners) and eventual bonus payments for childbearing, the cradle-to-grave cycle of public benefactions will be complete.
Although the New Deal’s welfare program was largely derived from British Fabian sources—having been transmitted to this country by American Fabian Socialists and such allies as Father John A. Ryan— Roosevelt chose to regard it as peculiarly his own idea. Not long before his death, he complained to intimates that England’s much touted Beveridge Plan should by rights have been called the Roosevelt Plan. (60) He pointed out that Sir William Beveridge had visited him in Washington in 1934. Like the Fabian leaders of the British Labour Party, FDR never scrupled to use welfare for electioneering purposes. Indeed, he once begged Secretary Perkins and her group to speed their initial work on the Social Security Act, saying he could not otherwise go before the voters in 1936. (61)
The legal difficulties involved in preparing the bill were considerable. There was no precedent for such action in America and no apparent justification for it under the Constitution. Help came, however, from an unexpected quarter. At a dinner party in Washington, Secretary Perkins found herself seated beside Justice Harlan F. Stone, then classed with Brandeis and Cardozo, as a liberal on the Supreme Court Bench. She confided to the Justice that she was trying to work out some plan for social insurance but could discover no way of doing so that would be approved by the Court. Significantly, he whispered to her: “The taxing power of the Federal Government, my dear; the taxing power is sufficient for everything you want and need!”(62)
So Secretary Perkins advised her committee that the taxing power could be used as a means of building up funds for future unemployment and old age payments. She told no one, except the President, the source of her superior legal wisdom. Yet, somehow, the intelligence so liberally volunteered by Justice Stone ran like quicksilver throughout the Administration, rapidly becoming a part of its operational philosophy. While the propriety of Stone’s conduct may be questioned, his informal words proved more potent than any official opinion he ever penned. They furnished the key to that magic New Deal formula which enabled Roosevelt to remain in office for the rest of his natural life and which was described in a phrase attributed to Harry Hopkins as “tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect!” (63)
To head the new Social Security Administration, which Congress ruled must be bipartisan, Secretary Perkins proposed John Gilbert Winant, former Governor of New Hampshire. He was one of the first important Republicans from the Eastern seaboard to be invited into the New Deal-Fabian Socialist parlor, and he stayed there to the bitter end. A year or two later, after Secretary Perkins had prevailed on Secretary Hull and congressional leaders to support a bill permitting the United States to join the International Labor Organization, she succeeded in having Winant made director of that body.
There the craggy man from the Green Mountains was exposed to the tutelage of such adroit Socialist diplomats of labor as W. Stephen Sanders and Philip Noel-Baker, (64) pillars of the London Fabian Society at Geneva. He displayed so much willingness to learn, that the British Fabian Socialist leader, Harold Laski, finally suggested to President Roosevelt that Winant be appointed wartime Ambassador to the Court of St. James. (65) In this capacity, “Gil” Winant kindly consented to address a Fabian Society Luncheon (66) and entertained the Executive of the British Labour Party at the Embassy well before that party came to power. He allowed the charming but undeniably radical Laski to write speeches for him, recommend reading matter and personal contacts, and generally “set him straight.” (67)
The International Labor Organization ( ILO ), through which Winant was able to attain those social and diplomatic heights, had been set up under the League of Nations charter, pursuant to a resolution introduced by British Fabian-Labour Party delegates at Versailles. Since that time, British Fabian Socialists have played a dominant part in its deliberations, both directly and indirectly via the Socialist International. Through the ILO machinery officials of many countries, who could not afford to be openly linked either with the Fabian Society or the Socialist International, were able to maintain discreet contacts with both. The measure of Secretary Perkins’ prestige in such circles can be inferred from the fact that she was able to get her protégé, “Gil” Winant, elected director.
Surviving the League of Nations that spawned it, the ILO operates today from Geneva under the banner of the United Nations. Labor, government, and “employer” delegates from the Soviet Union and the satellite nations as well as from the so-called free world attend its congresses, where labor and government representatives jointly vote down the representatives of free enterprise with somewhat monotonous regularity. There unheralded spokesmen of the Socialist International and the Cominform can meet and mingle unobtrusively; and there British Fabian Socialists and their allies, Scandinavian, French, Belgian and others, are seen to be in command. For that reason, United States business has refused for several years to send representatives to ILO gatherings. While the actual role of the ILO remains obscure at this point in world history, the suggestion has been made that its Geneva offices may well provide a discreet point of contact between the apparently hostile but mutually complementary Socialist and Communist Internationals. (67a)
There were only two members of Roosevelt’s Cabinet who remained from the first to the last day of his extended reign: Frances Perkins and Harold L. Ickes. Secretary Perkins has told how the President-elect, before moving to Washington, called her to his home on Sixty-fifth Street to apprise her of her new estate. Ushered into his study, she found him talking to a stocky, fair-haired man with the blunt features of a Pennsylvania Dutchman. “Frances, do you know Harold?” asked FDR. That was her introduction to Harold L. Ickes, variously known to historians as the strong man, the hatchet man and the curmudgeon of the New Deal.
If Frances and Harold did not know each other, they had friends in common in Felix Frankfurter, Jane Addams and Paul Douglas. During the campaign—then just passed—Ickes had served on the national committee of the Progressive League, whose chairman was Senator George C. Norris, chief spokesman on Capitol Hill for TVA. The League’s secretary was Fred C. Howe and its national committee included Felix Frankfurter, Henry Wallace and Donald R. Richberg, a former law partner of Ickes and later named counsel for the NRA. Formed in September, 1932,(68) just two months before the national elections, the Progressive League could only have hoped to exert a decisive influence at the polls by attracting so-called independent voters and by splitting the Republican Party through an appeal to its liberal wing. With a Roosevelt landslide seemingly in the offing, the Progressive League was also prepared to snatch the fruits of victory from the triumphant Democrats. It contrived to secure for those “progressive” elements—who had been faithful, in their fashion, to the aims of the London Fabian Society and its provincial offshoots in America(69)—a controlling voice and hand in the new administration.
Harold Ickes, technically a Democrat since 1928, boasted a long and unsuccessful career in progressive politics. A Chicago attorney, scrappy and embittered, he had won scant distinction in his profession. Instead, he made a living of sorts as a fund-raiser and campaign manager for a whole series of defeated “reform” candidates, local and national. He ran the losing mayoralty campaigns of John M. Harlan in 1905 and Professor Charles E. Merriam in 1911. From 1912 to 1914, he was Bull Moose chairman for Cook County. During the next two years he was chairman of the Bull Moose’s organization in Illinois and a member of the Progressive Party’s national committee. In 1920 and 1924 he handled the bids of Senator Hiram Johnson for the Republican Presidential nomination, then backed the elder La Follette in his third-party effort. In 1926 he managed the Illinois campaign of a defeated “independent” Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate.
Since his student days at the University of Chicago, where he graduated in 1897 and took his law degree ten years later, Ickes had been involved with a group of scholarly reformers and academic planners headed by Professor Charles E. Merriam—afterwards a potent figure in the councils of the big tax free foundations. This group read the early publications recommended by the American Fabian League and the London Fabian Society on municipal government, public ownership of public services, and city and national planning. Its leaders conferred solemnly with Sidney and Beatrice Webb in 1898 when that oddly matched couple visited Jane Addams in Chicago. Thereafter, on the pretext of battling graft and corruption in government— always a handy issue in Chicago—a number of its members permeated civic and national organizations with a view to promoting Fabian Socialist objectives, but avoided direct identification with the American Socialist Party.
Thus Ickes, from the turn of the century, had been active in the nationwide conservation movement. He helped organize the Illinois League of Municipalities, which after 1917 supported the program of the Public Ownership League. In the natural course of events he came to know Alderman A. Emil Davies, a regular postwar visitor from London who was a charter member of the International Union of Cities as well as an honorary vice president of the Public Ownership League of America. From 1931, Ickes also belonged to an elite corps calling itself the Government Planning Association, (70) which drafted the tentative blueprint for the New Deal in consultation with a Fabian-sponsored group in London known as PEP (Political and Economic Planning ).
Recommended by Senator Hiram Johnson to be chief of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Ickes surprisingly walked away with what left-wingers of his time considered the prize post in the Cabinet. As Secretary of the Interior, he had the major responsibility for coordinating and enforcing the Public Ownership League’s superpower program. Ickes also persuaded Roosevelt to place the huge Public Works Administration under the Interior Department, arguing that he was an old hand at discouraging graft. Thus Ickes had the rare pleasure during his first year as Secretary of being authorized to spend $3,300,000 on public works, then the largest sum ever handed over to any Federal department in peacetime. And it was only the beginning!
Written into the Public Works Act by the Department of the Interior’s legal wizard, Benjamin V. Cohen, was a provision giving “cities, counties, districts and other political subdivisions” a free gift of 30 per cent (later 45 per cent) towards the cost of building publicly operated electric plants. To speed distribution of this largesse, Ickes created a special three-man Power Board to review applications. In 1935, he appointed Carl Thompson, secretary of the Public Ownership League and erstwhile Socialist Party official, to the Power Review Board.71 He named H. Stephen Raushenbush, philosopher of “encroaching Socialism” and chairman of the Socialist-sponsored coal and giant power Committee, to a spot in the Bituminous Coal Division, later making him “coordinator of compliance.” In 1941, Raushenbush was quietly transferred to the Economics and Statistical Branch of the Interior Departments Division of Power, retiring as chief of that strategic service in 1947.(72)
First or last, a rather remarkable array of well-known and lesser known advocates of gradualist Socialism turned up on the Interior Department payroll. Ickes sent Ernest Gruening to Alaska and Robert Morss Lovett to the Virgin Islands—two of many LID notables with whom the Secretary shared his tax-supported good fortune. He put John Collier, who later wrote a pamphlet for the Fabian International Bureau, in charge of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, with Felix Cohen of the LID as Assistant Solicitor. Ickes’ own testy speeches and writings, which gained him a reputation for mordant wit and enabled him to wage a one-sided vendetta with the stricken business community of the thirties, were reputedly the work of Saul Padover, an angry young man who in after years became a founding member of the Americans for Democratic Action.(73)
Endowed with the power to allot large chunks of Federal money for public construction in cities and states, Ickes dispatched a small army of scouts from Washington (sometimes referred to as Harold’s Gestapo) to spy out the land. Obviously, they were in a position to exert substantial pressure on city, state and county political organizations, which duly returned the New Deal to office in four successive national elections. It would be naive to suppose that Ickes, an old campaigner tasting the sweets of power at last, failed to take full advantage of his opportunities. Apart from personal loyalty to Roosevelt, Harold loved his job and was determined to make both the New Deal and himself permanent fixtures in Washington. He was the first member of the Cabinet to greet FDR’s suggestion of a third term with eager approval, challenging an unwritten law respected since the days of George Washington.
Nearly a billion dollars from Ickes’ original public works appropriation—and more at later dates—was diverted by President Roosevelt to temporary works-projects, set up to provide direct Federal relief for the nation’s unemployed. (74) As an emergency measure, this unconventional step might be justified by the real and widespread human need existing in 1933. There is evidence, however, that the temporary emergency was unnaturally prolonged by other administration policies which delayed industrial recovery. Three and a half years and six billion dollars later, unemployment relief was still being administered on an emergency basis—with the most vocal pressure groups, organized by Communist unemployed councils, getting a disproportionate share. While consumer industries revived somewhat, mining and manufacturing, which constituted the real strength of the country, declined. It was not until the outbreak of war in Europe, when the United States was called upon to fill military orders for the French and British, that America’s basic industries were finally able to restore production lines on a nationwide scale.
The man whom Roosevelt placed in charge of distributing Federal unemployment relief was one of the oddest bits of human flotsam to be washed up by the Great Depression on the shifting sands of American history. Harry Hopkins was a courtier from the Corn Belt. In later years he had the look of an emaciated scarecrow in a battered gray fedora. His great talent lay in pleasing and impressing just the right people in his chosen sphere. Nominally devoted, during most of his career, to improving the condition of the poor, he escaped as often as possible to the diversions of racetracks, theaters and nightclubs and showed a marked preference for the company of the fashionable, the rich, the powerful (75)—providing they were “liberally” inclined.
No king’s almoner of old ever had access to such resources as were placed at Harry Hopkins’ command, nor more freewheeling liberty of action in dispensing them. Whether it was love of spending, personal ambition, a fanatical devotion to “the Chief,” a Socialist creed, or some strange combination of all these that impelled him, even his best friends agree that patriotism was not his ruling passion. Frances Perkins once described him as “a shrewd man who had become acquainted with a lot of Democratic politicians while administering relief and the WPA.”(76) So well acquainted, indeed, had Hopkins become with them that (though not even an official delegate) he was placed in charge of Roosevelt headquarters at the rigged 1940 Democratic Convention where FDR was nominated for the third time.
The pragmatic principle which guided Harry Hopkins as director of Federal Emergency Relief, afterwards called the Works Progress Administration, was expressed by his principal aide, Aubrey Williams, speaking at a relief conference in Washington: “We must stick together. We must keep our friends in power.” (77) When seeking the approval of a Senate Committee in January, 1939 to his appointment as Secretary of Commerce, Hopkins admitted that statement had been made; but pleaded a man’s right to “one indiscretion. (78) For American Fabian Socialists, as for their comrades in Britain, power was the goal!
Harry Hopkins, who ultimately acquired a degree of personal power second only to the President’s, began his career as a social settlement worker at a salary of $5 per month—and disbursed over $5,000,000 during his first two hours as a Federal official. (79) With a kind of inverse snobbery, he liked to refer to himself as the son of an Iowa harness-maker; though the truth was, the elder Hopkins applied himself for only a few years to that fast-failing trade. While Harry was growing up the family subsisted mainly by selling candy, magazines, soft drinks and sundries to college boys from the nearby Grinnell campus.
As a student at Grinnell College, Hopkins was deeply influenced by two of his teachers, Dr. Edward A. Steiner and Professor Jesse Macy. Dr. Steiner, Austrian-born and a convert from Judaism, had once visited Leo Tolstoi in Russia and written a book about it. At Grinnell, Steiner occupied the chair of Applied Christianity endowed by Elizabeth Rand and held not many years before by Dr. George Herron, original chairman of the American Socialist Party. Professor Macy, who taught one of the first political science courses in America, had spent some time in England during the formative years of the London Fabian Society. He had imbibed its social and economic outlook and regaled his pupils at Grinnell with firsthand recollections of Sidney and Beatrice Webb.
After Hopkins’ graduation, Steiner found an opening for the young man on the staff of a small social settlement house in New York. Though not much attracted to social work as a calling, Harry took the virtually unpaid job because it afforded him a chance to get to the big city.(80) Once there, he stayed and did what was expected of him, moving as rapidly as possible, however, into the administrative realm of organized charity. By 1924 he was Executive Director of the New York Tuberculosis and Health Association, which had built up a reserve of $90,000 and which Hopkins left with a deficit of $40,000. (81) His political leanings can be inferred from the fact that he voted the Socialist Party ticket in 1917, and in 1924, like many Socialist intellectuals, went progressive with La Follette. (82)
During the summer of 1928, Hopkins took an expense-paid trip to London to study municipal health administration. This was a field long preempted by British Fabian Socialists operating through the London County Council, and his field trips inevitably brought Hopkins into touch with members of the Fabian Society. To his wife he wrote that he found the British program superior to anything in America. Hopkins’ meteoric rise, that began soon after his return from England, is suggestive of the manner in which the London Society rewards its approved and faithful permeators. From the autumn of 1928, Hopkins came more and more to the attention of Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt’s intimates, especially Eleanor Roosevelt, (83) interested as always in the social welfare approach to politics.
In 1931, the merchant prince Jesse I. Straus invited Hopkins to Albany to assist in administering a program of State unemployment relief. A year later Straus withdrew, leaving Hopkins in full charge. At Albany, as later in Washington, Hopkins introduced a species of work relief first suggested in this country by Father John A. Ryan in his so-called Bishops Report and based on proposals made by a Quaker group in England after World War I. Actually, the idea of work relief for the unemployed had been developed in Britain at the turn of the century by Joseph I. Fels, the American soap magnate who joined the London Fabian Society. Fels’ experiments were reported by the American Fabian Socialist, W. D. P. Bliss, (84) in his New Encyclopedia of Social Reform in 1908.
To win approval of New York labor organizations for his work relief scheme, Hopkins was obliged to work closely with Frances Perkins, Industrial Commissioner for the State. In less than two years he supervised expenditures of some 60 million dollars from bond issues, without scandal and with evident benefit to Roosevelt in the campaign of 1932. The new State relief agency received sympathetic press treatment from such Harvard alumni as Heywood Broun, then a popular columnist on the New York World and always a warm friend of Hopkins.
Within a remarkably short time Hopkins had endeared himself permanently to Eleanor Roosevelt, who adopted him into the family and sponsored him in every future endeavor. Soon after being elected to the Presidency, FDR also received an exceptional commendation of Hopkins from Jane Addams, dean of social welfare workers in America. That is how a harness-makers son from Iowa, with a private taste for high living, managed to get to Washington in May, 1933.
There he dispensed a total of nine billion dollars in direct Federal relief over five years, until new laws were finally written and the Works Project Administration was abolished. Though such sums have come to seem almost routine today, at that date they were rated astronomical. Hopkins’ activities as Federal Relief Administrator won the unqualified approval of so ardent a Fabian Socialist as Stuart Chase, who observed hopefully that historians of the future might very well regard Harry Hopkins as one of the world’s greatest administrators.(85)
While it lasted, the WPA was easily the most controversial agency in government, not only because of its informal bookkeeping methods, but because it became a sounding board for much radical propaganda of the period. That was the decade of the so-called Popular Front against Fascism, in which Socialists and Communists throughout the world collaborated openly. In 1934, the eminent British Fabian Socialist and pacifist, Sir Norman Angell, (86) visited Washington and toured the country as a member of “le comite mondiale contre la guerre et le fascisme,” (87) the world-wide Popular Front organization headed by Henri Barbusse, renowned French novelist and identified Communist. Youth, professional and cultural groups were its special targets, and its success was conspicuous in branches of the WPA that catered to such groups.
Some critics were inclined to blame Hopkins’ principal aide, Aubrey Williams for the fact that left wing agitators flourished on WPA time, notably in theater, motion picture, art and waters’ projects. There is evidence, however, that Williams was encouraged by persons more highly placed than himself. Far from being reproved, he was made director of the National Youth Administration. In July, 1941, Williams joined Eleanor Roosevelt, Justice Felix Frankfurter and Librarian of Congress Archibald MacLeish in sponsoring the American Youth Congress at Campobello. (88) This congress was organized on the initiative of the British Fabian Socialist, Betty Shields-Collins, secretary of the London Fabian Society’s Anglo-American group and prewar secretary of the World Youth Congress movement.(89) Prominent at the Campobello rally was the perennially youthful Joseph P. Lash—a particular pet of Eleanor Roosevelt—who had been a leader of the Student League for Industrial Democracy and had also confessed to Young Communist League affiliations.(90)
A dangerous by-product of the tolerance towards Communists which top-level American Fabian Socialists practiced as consistently as their British brethren, was disclosed some years later. After long and painstaking inquiry, the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security concluded that the National Research Project of the WPA had served “as a kind of trapdoor through which underground Communists gained access to the Government” in the middle nineteen-thirties.(91) A number of individuals since identified as Communist agents entered the Federal service through that handy trapdoor, some rising to posts of major responsibility under the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations. Transferring from department to department by a kind of mutual aid agreement with like-minded colleagues, they were not only able to supply information but also to affect the policies of government itself. (92)
Eleven persons linked with Communist spy rings were discovered by the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security to have entered the Federal Government via the WPA. An overall total of eighty persons in Federal service, thirty-seven of whom attained posts of high importance, were unmasked by the Subcommittee as connected with Communist spy rings. All were directly or indirectly linked with the group in the WPA. It has since been confirmed that appropriate authorities, up to and including the White House itself, were duly apprised of the facts by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; but continued to protect and promote the offenders. (93) As a result, a small but well-placed network of covert Communists in Federal service enjoyed a field day which lasted for years, rising the most secret files with impunity and “sharing all that we have and are” (94) with Soviet Russia.
Incredible as it seems, the lenience that made such things possible originated at the uppermost level of government. Franklin Roosevelt’s personal attitude was revealed when he ignored repeated warnings from FBI and other sources concerning Communists in the U.S. Government. In 1942, in wartime, he blocked removal from merchant ships of radio operators “whose only offense was in being Communist.” (95) The President’s stand was officially conveyed by Secretary of the Navy, Frank Knox, at a meeting with naval officers on May 19, 1942. According to the minutes of that meeting:
“. . . The Secretary then spoke and said that he held no brief for the activities of the Communist Party; but that the President had stated that, considering the fact that the United States and Russia were allies at this time and that the Communist Party and the United States efforts were now bent towards winning the war, the United States was bound not to disapprove the activities of the Communist Party, and specifically not to disapprove the employment of any radio operator for the sole reason that he was a member of the Communist Party or that he was active in Communist Party affairs. The Secretary further stated that this was an order and must be obeyed without mental reservations.” (96)
Soon afterwards a Naval Intelligence Unit in New York City, set up to control Communist espionage and propaganda, was dissolved by the Bureau of the Budget, (97) which had been transferred from the Treasury to the White House by an historic Executive Order of 1939. Instructions were issued requiring Army Intelligence to destroy its files on Communists, similar to the demand made by Woodrow Wilson after World War I. Only prompt action by members of Congress saved the Army records from destruction in World War II.
If some members of Roosevelt’s wartime Cabinet held no brief for the Presidential policy of being kind to Communists, and if most government officials were either unaware of it or accepted it with mental reservations, the same could not be said for the President’s more intimate circle. FDR’s strict concept of personal loyalty required that any individual whom he fully trusted must see eye to eye with him on matters he considered basic. And once having adopted an idea, he regarded it as peculiarly his own, often forgetting the source from which it came.
Roosevelt believed, for instance, that by giving Stalin everything he asked for during the war, no matter how excessive the request, the proletarian dictator would be bound by some principle of noblesse oblige to cooperate loyally in setting up a postwar world of peace and plenty. How did FDR know this? He had a hunch! And besides, Harry “The Hop” Hopkins had told him so.(98)
This is not to say that Roosevelt was himself a Communist, as has sometimes been loosely suggested. Having been trained and dominated for a good many years by Fabian Socialist advisers, perhaps he simply demonstrated the same protective attitude towards Soviet Russia and its agents as did those British Fabians whose road in the end has always led toward Moscow. Only convinced Fabian Socialists and liberals at the very pinnacle of political power in Washington could do for the Soviet Communists what they were unable to do for themselves, both at home and abroad.
Hitler’s invasion of Russia on June 22, 1941 had aroused intense but mixed emotions among Anglo-American Fabians. If it restored fraternal bonds previously strained by the Stalin-Hitler pact, the joy of feeling together again (99) was shadowed by anxiety for the future of the Soviet Union. As usual, American liberals and progressives, who shunned the Socialist name while faithfully playing the game, echoed the sentiments of their British tutors with a special urgency of their own. They could hardly wait to pour out the products of American industry and skill in defense of the threatened Socialist Fatherland.
On July 27, FDR dispatched Hopkins as his confidential messenger to Stalin with an immediate offer of Lend-Lease aid, even though Soviet Russia was not yet an Ally of the United States. At that time public opinion in America was strongly opposed to this country’s entering the war, and few persons outside the President’s official family realized the extent of his private commitments, not only to Churchill but also to Stalin. Less than a year before, Roosevelt had won election for the third time by virtue of his promise to the mothers and fathers of America: “I am not going to send your sons into any foreign war.” That meant he could not ask the Congress to declare war against the Axis powers, unless the United States were attacked. In such case, as FDR pointed out to intimates, it would no longer be a “foreign” war!
Hard upon Hitler’s invasion of Russia, the New Deal Administration proceeded to exert such diplomatic pressure on Japan as could hardly fail to provoke an open breach. It is interesting to find that Vice President Henry Wallace, by then an outspoken friend of Soviet Russia, took the initiative of writing to his Chief: “I do hope, Mr. President, you will go to the absolute limit in your firmness in dealing with Japan.”(100) By November, 1941, if not before, it was apparent to such informed persons as Harry Hopkins that war in the Pacific would come at the convenience of the Japanese(101)—the only question being where and when. Soviet Russia, it has since been learned from captured Japanese police records, thoughtfully arranged to help bring about the required incident.
Through the intrigues of a Dr. Richard Sorge, Red Army Intelligence operative, Japanese militarists were persuaded, during the summer and fall of 1941, to strike southward at American, French, Dutch and British possessions, instead of northward at Soviet territory. (102) Sorge, a German citizen but a member of the Russian Communist Party, (103) had managed to entrench himself as press attache at the Nazi Embassy in Tokyo. Because his nine-year old spy ring also had contacts with influential and high-ranking Japanese, he succeeded in engineering the desired coup.
On October 15, just a day or two before his arrest in a general police roundup, Sorge was able to radio Moscow that his mission had been accomplished and that Japan would strike to the South. The blow fell at Pearl Harbor on December 7. More than two thousand Americans lost their lives, the U.S. Pacific Fleet was crippled, and the United States became an Ally of Soviet Russia.
Thereafter aid unlimited would flow from America to the Workers’ Fatherland. In a letter of March 7, 1942 to United States war agencies, Roosevelt ordered that priority in munitions be given to the Russians above all other Allies and even above the armed services of the United States. Technically, the Lend-Lease Act of 1941 had stipulated that war materiel could only be sent abroad if the Army and Navy Chiefs of Staff certified it was not required for American military forces. This posed no problem, however, for the Commander-in-chief or his personal Lend-Lease representative, Harry Hopkins. According to Hopkins’ biographer, General George C. Marshall expressed the belief that he originally owed his appointment as Army Chief of Staff to Harry Hopkins. (104)
From beginning to end, it was Hopkins to whom Roosevelt entrusted the task of dispensing weapons, equipment, machinery and raw materials to our overseas Allies on a scale never seen before in history. Comparatively, the amounts that had been expended on the WPA were mere small change. Under the impetus of the war emergency, 60 billion dollars worth of assorted supplies were freely given away, with little if any ever refunded or expected to be. “Let’s forget the silly, foolish old dollar sign!” President Roosevelt gaily told the American people in one of his more famous “fireside chats.”
Of the total, a recorded 11 billion dollars went to Soviet Russia, though the real value has never been accurately assessed. Such munificence not only insured the salvation of the Bolshevik Government, whose pact with Adolf Hitler had touched off World War II. It also made possible those secret postwar stockpiles (105) which enabled the Red Army to annex its Baltic and Balkan neighbors as well as Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia and East Germany in the years immediately following World War II.
By contrast, only a trickle of warplanes went to Chiang Kai-shek’s China, ostensibly an Ally, whom we should aid, at a time when the capital, Chungking, was being bombed daily, on a twelve-hour schedule. Of the materiel that did reach Chiang Kai-shek, some lacked spare parts and some was unfit for combat use.(106) Hopkins never found time to get to Chungking himself, though he made several trips under almost equally hazardous conditions to London and Moscow. For the most part, he left the mangled details of China aid to his assistant, Lauchlin Currie—later named by Elizabeth Bentley testifying before the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security as a “full-fledged member of the Silvermaster [Communist] group” (107) and a prime collaborator of wartime Soviet espionage groups in Washington.
As the undisputed czar of Lend-Lease, operating sometimes with and sometimes without portfolio, Hopkins was in his element. Temperamentally, there was nothing he enjoyed more than spending money, and no one ever had more to spend. Caring little for titles or personal wealth, he was entranced by the perquisites and the sense of power—a point of view that he seems to have shared with many Socialist and Communist leaders.
Warned by the experience of an earlier White House confidant, Colonel House, Hopkins was careful not to overplay his hand. Prudently he described himself as no more than an office boy, and he displayed such intense devotion to the President that newsmen remarked that Hopkins would have jumped off the Washington Monument if FDR had happened to suggest it. Yet in the area of wartime production and distribution, Harry Hopkins was in effect the Deputy President of the United States, a function quite unforeseen by the framers of the Constitution.
In matters of the gravest consequence, he was both intermediary and adviser to the President, making his headquarters at the Executive Mansion and actually residing for several years in the Lincoln bedroom. Chronically ill with a nutritional ailment following an operation for stomach cancer, Hopkins summoned from some mysterious reserve the energy to serve as expediter and hidden persuader for the duration of the war.
Besides the ever present Dr. Isadore Lubin, Hopkins’ own preferred aides included Leon Henderson of the Office of Price Administration and Sidney Hillman and Robert Nathan of the Office of Production Management. (108) Of these, Lubin and Hillman were long time officers of the (Fabian Socialist) LID; while Henderson became a founding member of the postwar Americans for Democratic Action.
At the American Embassy in London, where John Winant reigned and Benjamin V. Cohen acted as wartime counsel, Hopkins could fraternize unseen with top British Fabian Socialists, among them Herbert Morrison, Home Secretary and Minister of Home Security in Churchill’s coalition Cabinet. (109) As early as 1940, Hopkins had written to Roosevelt, ‘We must marshal our complete economic strength for the task of defense,” adding in approved Fabian Socialist vein: “This means that instead of retreating from our social and economic objectives, we should push forward vigorously to abolish poverty from the land.” (110)
It was through Hopkins that the apparently nonpolitical Dr. Vannevar Bush, then Dean of Engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, felt constrained to submit his now famous memorandum to the President on new weapons research, notably in the field of atomic fission. Together with Hopkins, Dr. Bush prepared a letter of authorization for FDR’s signature, setting up the organization that led to development of the atom bomb. In conversations at Casablanca during January, 1943, Winston Churchill discussed atomic matters with Roosevelt in Hopkins’ presence. A month later Churchill initiated a lengthy cable correspondence on the subject with Hopkins. The Prime Minister protested because the United States had suddenly ceased pooling information on atomic research with its British Ally. (111)
The reason was that in December, 1942, at a secret laboratory located under the stands of the University of Chicago’s Stagg Field, a team of American scientists had finally succeeded in splitting the atom. At this point the project moved from the research stage into the field of weapon design and construction, under control of the War Department. Dr. Bush spelled out the revised information policy in a memorandum of March 31 to Hopkins, which concluded: “To step beyond it would mean to furnish information on secret military matters to individuals who wish it either because of general interest or because of its application to non-war or postwar matters. To do so would decrease security without advancing the war effort.” (112)
Clearly, Hopkins was one of a very few persons who were conversant from the start with the atom bomb project in America. He was also precisely informed on the policy called for by military security. If he chose to ignore or override such precautions, it could only be attributed either to an incurable lightness of mind or a well developed tendency to favor other interests above those of the United States.
Not until late in 1949 was it definitely proved, on the strength of reliable records and equally reliable United States Army witnesses, that wartime Federal agencies had shipped to Soviet Russia rare chemicals and minerals suitable for use in atomic research, along with miles of alloy tubing and pipe that could be used in construction of an atomic pile. At least three-quarters of a ton of uranium chemicals were found to have been delivered through Lend-Lease channels to Russia in March and June, 1943, and in June, 1944. It was further confirmed that 2.2 pounds of pure uranium was sent from this country to the Soviet Union at a moment when the entire American stock amounted to 4.5 pounds.(113)
Such forbidden items could not possibly have moved through the Lend-Lease pipeline without official United States certificates of release, (114) issued by order of Harry Hopkins. Responsible testimony was given to a committee of Congress indicating that Hopkins was not merely aware of these transactions but took a keen interest in pushing them through. In March, 1943, when information on atomic matters was apparently being withheld from Churchill, an official but apparently purloined map of the Oak Ridge atomic plant and a report on details of its construction went forward to Russia by plane via Great Falls, Montana. Clipped to the documents was a covering letter on White House stationery, signed simply H. H. and addressed to A. I. Mikoyan, then Soviet Deputy of Foreign Trade in charge of Lend-Lease at the receiving end.(115) Here was the supreme example of what Soviet Purchasing Commission employees in New York referred to ironically as Super-Lend-Lease!
The Fabian face cards in the New Deal have been exposed. For the first time in history a program of gradualist Socialism, backed by political power and perpetuated by every trick of applied psychology, was put into effect. Instigated by the foremost brains of the London Society, it was implemented by Fabian Socialist intellectuals and welfare workers in the United States who used many well-meaning or accommodating citizens as unconscious tools. Above all, its leaders had access to the apparently limitless industrial and financial resources of the greatest capitalist nation on earth. Thus the Fabian Socialist movements in America and England moved into a new phase, in which nomenclature did not matter and where dealings between governments were manipulated on instructions from International Socialists in London. Without the combined efforts of highly placed Fabian Socialists both in England and America, the apparently uneasy but none the less recurrent coalition of the Second and Third Internationals could never have come about.
1. Harry W. Laidler and Norman Thomas, Editors, The Socialism of Our Times. A Symposium by Harry Elmer Barnes, Stuart Chase, Paul H. Douglas, Morris Hillquit, Harold J. Laski, Roger N. Baldwin, Paul Blanshard, H. S. Raushenbush and others. (New York, The Vanguard Press, Inc.–League for Industrial Democracy, 1929). “Introduction,” by Harry W. Laidler, pp. Xi ff. “It may be called by some other name.”
2. Mark Starr, “Cheer Up Comrade cole!” Institute of Social Studies Bulletin, Rand School, (Summer, 1952), p. 68. Starr wrote: “As Socialism, collectivism, public ownership and control become necessary in the United States, they will be adopted in specific instances and cases. It may be called by some other name, but, as in the case of the Tennessee Valley Authority, public ownership will be applied after appropriate discussion and debate if the need is demonstrated; and there will be no quibbling about whether Marx, Stalin or Cole would okay that action.”
3. See Appendix II.
4. According to testimony given in 1952 before the Reece Special Committee of the House of Representatives to Investigate Tax-exempt Foundations.
5. See appendix II. For Freda Kirchwey’s friendship with Laski, see Kingsley Martin, Harold Laski: A Biographical Memoir (New York, The Viking Press, Inc., 1953), p. 128. “Freda Kirchwey, editor of the New York Nation, an old friend . . . whose political opinions had developed similar lines to his own [Laski’s].”
6. Stuart Chase, A New Deal (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1932), pp. 155-156.
8. H. S. Raushenbush, “Some Measures in Transition,” The Socialism of Our Times. A Symposium. Harry W. Laidler and Norman Thomas, eds. (New York, The Vanguard Press, Inc.–League for Industrial Democracy, 1929), p. 42.
9. Ibid., p. 40. “Yet the problem of government officials is a major problem of immediate socialism. In Germany, after the revolution, the bureaucracy was nationalist and nearly sabotaged the republican government until it had been replaced. One good man with his eyes, ears and wits about him, inside the department–whether it be the Interior where the oil scandal started and the Boulder Dam Bill received most active support, or the Treasury where the taxation scandals breed and the government tax policies originate–can do more to perfect the technique of control over industry than a hundred men outside.”
11. “Livingstone Hall Lectures.” Fabian News (May, 1934).
12. Frances Perkins, The Roosevelt I Knew (New York, The Viking Press, 1946) p. 18.
13. In 1920 Florence Kelley was also president of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, and after 1921 a vice president of the League for Industrial Democracy.
14. Perkins, op. cit., pp. 30-32.
17. House was responsible for naming young Roosevelt, as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, to the Advisory Interdepartmental Committee. There Roosevelt’s friendship with Felix Frankfurter, then counsel for the War Labor Policy Board, seems to have begun.
18. Forty Years of Education (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1945), p. 16.
19. In her Livingstone Hall lecture, reported in Fabian News of May, 1934, A. Susan Lawrence, M. P. said that, while the tone of the New York press was comparatively critical, an “American expert” (who was evidently a Briton) had remarked to her: “The Wireless can whip the Press al the time.”
20. See Appendix V.
21. A sharply graduated system of income and inheritance taxes had been advocated by the American Fabian League in the eighteen-nineties. In 1928 it was still a plank in the official program of the American Socialist Party. Members of the Socialist National Campaign Committee, which issued the 1928 handbook containing that program, were listed on the cover as follows: “W. E. Woodward, Norman Thomas, Freda Kirchwey, McAllister Coleman, Paul Blanshard, James O’Neal, Harry Elmer Barnes, James H. Maurer, Lewis Gannett, Victor Berger, Louis Waldman.” All, without exception, have been officers and/or directors of the League for Industrial Democracy.
22. Seymour E. Harris, John Maynard Keynes. Economist and Policy Maker (New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), p. 208.
23. Public Ownership. A Monthly Journal Published by the Public Ownership League of America. Carl D. Thompson, Editor. (Chicago, December, 1923), p. 53. Eleven members of Congress, including Senator Norris and Congressman Fiorello La Guardia, were named as supporting the Public Ownership League. The same journal stated in June, 1935 p. 72: “The Public Ownership League now has some ten or fifteen members of Congress who are also members of the Public Ownership League.”
24. The Call Magazine (July, 1917), p. 7. This magazine, a Socialist publication, described the Public Ownership League as “strictly non-partisan,” and added: “Many noted and prominent members of the Socialist Party, including two members of the present Executive Committee, are members of the League.”
25. The name of Carl D. Thompson appeared on Socialist Party letterheads and campaign leaflets from 1912 to 1916.
26. Public Ownership (February, 1924), pp. 54-55.
27. Ibid. Other members of the committee included: James P. Noonan, International President of the Electrical Workers; Ben Marsh, Executive Secretary of the National Farmers’ Council; Jennie Buell, Michigan State Grange; Charles K. Mohler, consulting engineer, Chicago.
28. Washington Star (November 8, 1931).
29. The Call Magazine (July, 1917), p. 7.
30. Public Ownership (February, 1924), p. 58.
31. H. Stephen Raushenbush, “Cataclysmic Socialism or Encroaching Control,” New Leader (March 5, 1926).
32. H. Stephen Raushenbush, “Program for the Gradual Socialization of Industry,” New Leader (March 12, 1927).
33. Dexter M. Keezer and Stacy May, The Public Control of Business. A Study of Anti-Trust Law Enforcement, Public Interest Regulations, and Government Participation in Business (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1930 edition).
34. Chattanooga News (March 1, 1935).
35. The New York Times (June 6, 1937). “Our Dreams Come True. Our plan for a Public Power System for the United States Slowly but Surely Being Realized,” Public Ownership of Public Utilities (September, 1937).
36. Public Ownership of Public Utilities (September, 1937), p. 76.
37. Norman Thomas, Democratic Socialism: A New Appraisal, (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1953), p. 6. “Of recent years the majority of American Socialists have been–I think correctly–insistent that the model for what is socially owned is not the Post Office Department but the Tennessee Valley Authority, with provision for direct representation of workers and consumers on it.”
38. Quoted in the New Republic (September 15, 1958).
39. Rand School Bulletin, 1934-35.
40. Public Ownership (December, 1923), p. 53.
41. Other issues of Fabian News show Davies to have been a frequent visitor to the United States in the nineteen-thirties. His biography in Who’s Who describes him as follows: Alderman and past Chairman of the London County Council; Fellow, Royal Economic Society; former lecturer in Economics, University of Leeds; Member, Permanent Bureau International Union of Cities; Chairman, City and Commercial Investment Trust, London, England. In 1923 his son, Ernest Davies, who succeeded his father on the Fabian Executive, worked for the New York Globe.
43. A. E.’s real name was George William Russell. Born an Orangeman in Lurgan County, Ireland, he discovered Theosophy in 1898 and the Fabian Society soon afterwards. In 1930-31 he spent a year in the United States lecturing on agricultural cooperatives to farmers from Maine to California. In 1934 he made another lecture tour, linking the New Deal’s rural electrification schemes with his own cooperative farm propaganda. He contributed to Commonweal, Catholic World, The Nation, The New Republic, etc. See Biography of Twentieth Century American Authors (New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1954).
44. Harold Ware was the son of Communist Ella Reeve Bloor. He had previously been decorated with the Order of Lenin for his work on State farms in the USSR. Members of the original cell included Alger Hiss, Lee Pressman, John Abt and Nathaniel Weyl, according to testimony given before the Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate judiciary Committee.
45. Stuart Chase, Rich Land, Poor Land (New York, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1936), p. 246.
46. Stuart Chase, A New Deal (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1932), p. 252.
47. R. L. Martin, American Aviation (May, 1948). First report of that curious population movement appeared in American Aviation. Its scope and purpose were revealed in a subsequent investigation by the New York World Telegram.
49. W. Averell Harriman has held many diplomatic and administrative posts under the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations. He was Governor of New York from 1955 to 1959. In the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations he has served as Assistant Secretary and Under Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, and finally Roving Ambassador.
50. Perkins op. cit., p. 206.
51. Ibid., p. 10 ff.
52. Ibid., pp. 104-105.
55. Robert Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins, An Intimate History (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1948), p. 216.
56. Ibid., p. 286. (Author’s Note: Isadore Lubin was posted after the war to the United Nations. As U. S. Delegate to the UN Social and Economic Council in 1951, he joined British Socialist delegates in pushing through a resolution to set up the Ad Hoc Committee on Restrictive Business Practices. This would have exposed American firms doing business abroad to surveillance and prosecution by a proposed International Trade Organization operating under the Havana charter which accepted State owned monopolies and cartels as benign. It was not until 1955 that the U. S. Delegation ceased officially to collaborate in this project. As of 1962, Dr. Lubin was listed as Professor of Public Affairs at Rutgers University.)
57. The lengths to which research in Applied Psychology, as a means of molding public opinion, was being carried at that time can be inferred from an article appearing in the Journal of Social Psychology (February, 1934). Written by A. D. Annis and N. C. Meier, it was solemnly entitled: “The Induction of Opinion Through Suggestion, by Means of Planted Content.”
59. Michael Stewart, M. P., “Labour and the Monarchy,” Fabian Journal (March, 1952).
60. Perkins, op. cit., pp. 283-284.
63. Frank R. Kent of the Baltimore Sun claimed Hopkins had made this statement to a mutual friend, Max Gordon, at the Empire racetrack in New York. Hopkins naturally disavowed it.
64. The late Philip Noel-Baker, a recipient of the Socialist-controlled Nobel Peace Prize, was a Quaker who succumbed to the lure of Fabian “peace” propaganda. As a youth he attended Haverford College in Pennsylvania, and until his death continued to cultivate many friendships in the United States.
65. Kingsley Martin, Harold Laski: A Biographical Memoir (New York, The Viking Press, Inc., 1953), p. 139.
66. “Luncheon to the American Ambassador,” Fabian News (October, 1941).
67. Martin, op. cit., pp. 139-141. Following the Allied victory in Europe, Winant served on the European Advisory Council, being himself advised by George F. Kennan and Philip E. Mosely. Winant was later reported to have died a suicide.
67a. In June, 1966 George Meany led an AFL-CIO labor delegation out of the International Labor Organization, because a Polish Communist had been elected that year to head the ILO. Meany had never protested in other years, however, when international Socialists were chosen to fill the same post.
68. Helen Shirley Thomas, Felix Frankfurter: Scholar on the Bench (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1960), p. 23.
69. Under the heading, “Provincial Societies,” Fabian Society Annual Reports for 1925 through 1930 listed “the league for Industrial Democracy of New York.” Organizations like the Civil Liberties Union, the National Farmers Council, and the Public Ownership League were in turn offshoots of the ISS-LID.
70. Reorganized in 1934 as a quasi-official body, it was later called the National Planning Association.
71. Public Ownership (June, 1935). In 1939-1941 Carl Thompson was employed as a consultant to the Bonneville Power Administration, according to testimony given by its director at hearings before the Subcommittee on Appropriations, 76th Congress, Third Session.
72. Washington Post (January 16, 1947).
74. Sherwood, op. cit., p. 52.
75. Ibid., p. 5.
77. Williams has been identified as a Communist before congressional committees; but denies this.
79. Ibid., pp. 23; pp. 44-45.
81. Ibid., p. 27. (Author’s Note: Hopkins remained some seven years with the New York Tuberculosis and Health Association. As late as September 8, 1932 (ibid., p. 32) he wrote his brother, Lewis, that he was still being carried on the organization’s staff. Robert Sherwood, Hopkins’ biographer and friend, says (ibid., p. 28) that Hopkins greatly increased the Association’s income, principally through the sale of Christmas seals. Soon after Hopkins resigned, a letter from New York City Health Commissioner to The New York Times of June 8, 1932 stated that not one penny of the funds raised form the sale of Christmas seals ever went to the relief of a person with tuberculosis or to an institution for his care. It was subsequently charged that “all its money had been expended for salaries and overhead.”)
83. Ibid., p. 30. (Author’s Note: Hopkins’ contact with Eleanor Roosevelt was initiated through Dr. John A. Kingsbury of the Association for Improving the Condition of the Poor, who had known Eleanor Roosevelt for years as a co-member of the Association for Labor Legislation. Dr. Kingsbury had befriended Hopkins from the time of the latter’s arrival in New York and had employed him as an assistant. Hopkins subsequently took Dr. Kingsbury to Washington as one of his own assistants on WPA.)
86. Fabian News (December, 1934).
87. Sir Norman Angell, After All: Autobiography of Sir Norman Angell (New York, Farrar, Straus and Young, 1951), p. 264.
88. Perkins, op. cit., p. 110. (Illustration.)
89. Fabian News (November, 1941). In this issue it was announced that Betty Shields-Collins, just returned from America, would lecture November 17 at an International Affairs Group “snack luncheon meeting” on “The U. S. A. and the U. S. S. R.” She was described as “General Secretary to the World Youth Congress Movement until the outbreak of war; has visited America both before the war and since; is secretary to the Society’s Anglo-American group; organized the recent International Youth Rally.”
90. Martin Dies, The Martin Dies Story (New York, The Bookmailer, 1963), pp. 150-151.
91. Interlocking Subversion in Government Departments, Report and Hearings of the Subcommittee on Internal Security of the Committee on the Judiciary. U. S. Senate, 83rd Congress (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953-54), p. 10.
92. Ibid., pp. 10-14 ff.
93. Associated Press dispatch, November 6, 1953. Chicago speech by Attorney General Herbert Brownell. (See also testimony of J. Edgar Hoover before Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security, November 17, 1953.)
94. The New York Times (June 23, 1942). This phrase is from a speech delivered by Harry Hopkins at a Russian Aid Rally in Madison Square Garden, June 22.
95. Robert Morris, No Wonder We Are Losing (New York, The Bookmailer, Eighth Edition, 1961), pp. 38-45. Memorandum for the Secretary of the Navy, signed FDR, quoted on p. 41.
98. Life magazine (June 30, 1949). Report of conversation with FDR by former Ambassador to Moscow, William G. Bullitt.
99. Margaret Cole, The Story of Fabian Socialism (London, Heinemann Educational Books, Ltd., 1961), p. 270.
100. Robert E. Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins (New York, Harper and Brothers, 1948, 1950), p. 357. Letter from Wallace to FDR.
101. Ibid., pp. 426-427. Testimony of commander L. R. Schulz to Joint Committee on the Investigation of Pearl Harbor.
102. Cf. The Sorge spy Ring. Section of CIS Periodical Summary No. 23, December 15, 1947, Department of the Army (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office).
103. Ibid., (Sorge’s sponsors to the Russian communist Party included Dimitri Z. Manuilsky, member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and more recently a representative to the United Nations from the Ukraine.)
104. Sherwood, op. cit., p. 101.
105. Hearings Regarding Shipments of Atomic Materials to the Soviet Union During World War II, House of Representatives Committee on Un-American Activities (Washington, 1950), U. S. Government Printing Office, pp. 947-950. Testimony of Major General Leslie R. Groves, “I am sure,” said General Groves, “if you would check on the pressure on officers handling all supplies of a military nature during the war, you will find the pressure to give to Russia everything that could be given was not limited to atomic matters. . . . That particular plant was oil refinery equipment, and in my opinion was purely postwar Russian supply, as you know much of it was.”
106. Sherwood, op. cit., p. 406 ff.
107. Interlocking Subversion in Government Departments. Report and Hearings of the Subcommittee on Internal Security of the Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate, 83rd Congress (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953, 1954).
109. Ibid., p. 351. In 1941 Hopkins wrote a cordial note to Herbert Morrison: “I have your tin hat for La Guardia and shall give it to him with your warmest greetings. I much regretted not seeing you and having a discussion over a high-ball. We shall do that yet.”
110. Ibid., p. 180.
111. Ibid., pp. 154-155; 703-704.
113. Hearings Regarding Shipments of Atomic Materials to the Soviet Union During World War II. Testimony of Major George Racey Jordan, pp. 930 ff.
114. Ibid., p. 90. Major General Leslie R. Groves, in charge of the Manhattan Project, stated there was no way for the Russians to have gotten uranium products in this country “without the support of U. S. authorities in one way or another.”
115. Ibid., p. 930 ff. Testimony of Major Jordan.
Despite some disillusioning experiences, the Socialist-inspired American Civil Liberties Union has never to this day ceased its efforts in defense of the catastrophic Left. Such consistent activity in behalf of the militants and expendables of the revolutionary movement has naturally exposed the ACLU to what its friends term “misinterpretation.” During the nineteen-twenties it was occasionally described by opponents as a legal branch of the Communist Party.(1) In 1940, it finally barred “totalitarians” from membership, a decision resulting in the protest-resignation of Dr. Harry F. Ward, its original chairman. At a later date, the ACLU took further steps to neutralize criticism by denouncing as legally untenable the principle of “guilt by association.”
In view of its origins and history, one might reasonably doubt the depth of ACLU devotion to the Flag and the Constitution. It does not necessarily follow, however, that preservation of the Communist Party is the main purpose of the ACLU. In protecting the shock troops of social revolution it has successfully deflected or blunted any incipient attack on the big guns in the rear: the intellectual leaders of the Socialist movement in America, a number of whom served on the original board and national committee, and whose modern counterparts still serve there today.(2)
This tactic of defense in depth has been employed with little or no variation from the experimental beginnings of the ACLU in 1920 to its more smoothly organized operations of the present day. In a tear sheet circulated with its 35th Anniversary appeal, the ACLU outlined its mid-century program as follows:
“Against those indiscriminate federal, state and local measures which, though aimed at Communists, threaten the civil liberties of all Americans; to make an effective civil rights program the law of the land; against both governmental and private pressure group censorship of movies, plays, books, newspapers, magazines, radio and television; to promote fair procedures in court trials, congressional and administrative hearings.”
Acting on the novel premise that good citizens are imperiled whenever sedition is curbed or obscenity is discouraged, the American Civil Liberties Union often finds itself in the position of defending both subversion and pornography on narrowly technical grounds. At the same time, it seeks a broad interpretation of the Constitution in the area of civil rights. In its Annual Report for 1961-62, the organization applauds decisions which underscore the power of the Federal Courts to impose change (3)–power not visibly allotted to the Judiciary by the United States Constitution.
Of late years, the American Civil Liberties Union has also enlarged the range of its propaganda to admit lobbying by approved private pressure groups. Moreover, a certain emphasis on its own highly specialized concept of civil liberties appears to have crept into the field of mass entertainment. Wizard television lawyers, who seldom (if ever) lose a case, dramatically “sell” the ACLU point of view to nationwide audiences without identifying it.
A liberal sampling of its latter-day activities discloses that the ACLU, while extending itself geographically and greatly multiplying its routine tasks, has never veered from its original course. In 1950, the Pittsburgh branch of the ACLU upheld the right of Communists to serve on grand juries.(4) In 1951, the national office announced its intention of challenging all future cases brought under the Smith Act, which required Communist Party officials to register.(5) In 1961, while protesting its opposition to Communism, the organization filed a brief as a friend of the court in the Communist Party’s appeal under the McCarran Internal Security Act.(6)
Public support for repeal of the McCarran Act itself was solicited by the counsel for American Civil Liberties Union in Southern California. Speaking at the First Unitarian Church in Los Angeles, he flayed the McCarran Act as being the gravest danger to the Bill of Rights in~the nation’s history.(7)
At about the same time, the chairman of the Marin County chapter —one of twenty-four Civil Liberties branches in California—questioned the legality of a Christmas crib on the courthouse lawn in San Rafael, suggesting it violated the principle of Church-State separation.(8) On the spiritual front, the ACLU’s Niagara Falls chapter also backed a test case in Federal court on behalf of the Black Muslims, who claimed that their “right to practice their religion” was obstructed in Attica State Prison; and the St. Louis ACLU Committee investigated a charge that prisoners were being denied the right to buy anti-religious books and pamphlets.(9) After praising the Supreme Court’s decision which held the nonsectarian Regents’ Prayer in New York schools to be unconstitutional, the ACLU’s Annual Report for 1961-62 predicted: “We are confident that when more sectarian religious practices (in the schools) are brought to the Court’s attention, they . . . will be declared unconstitutional . . . Christmas and Chanukah observance, Bible reading, recitation of the Lord’s Prayer and baccalaureate services.” (10) With the aid of ACLU lawyers, that impious hope has since been fulfilled.
As might also have been predicted, the ACLU filed a friend-of-the-court brief in behalf of Dr. Robert Soblen, the convicted Soviet spy, who for years had headed New York State’s largest public mental health institution. It appealed a Federal District Court decision holding that American-born Herman Marks had forfeited citizenship rights by serving in the Cuban rebel army of Fidel Castro.(11) In February, 1962, it petitioned the Senate’s Post Office and Civil Service Committee to reject an amendment to the postal-rate bill, banning the distribution of Communist propaganda.(12)
While upholding freedom of agitation for Communists and even for crypto-Nazi agents provocateur, the ACLU sought to deny military commanders the right to arm their personnel against the fallacies of Communist propaganda, though the lack of such instruction had caused an undisclosed number of soldiers and junior officers to yield to brainwashing by Chinese Communists during the Korean War. In March, 1962, the civil liberties group submitted a memorandum to the special preparedness committee of the Armed Services Committee, asserting that restriction of free speech for the nation’s military leaders “raises no civil liberties issue.”(13)
Many of the ACLU’s views sooner or later have found expression in political action. On August 17, 1963, for example, members of ACLU college chapters, acting jointly with the Students for Democratic Action, induced the Western States Conference of Young Democrats in Berkeley, California, to pass a resolution calling for repeal of the McCarran Internal Security Act.(14) It is noteworthy that in California alone, branches of the ACLU existed in 1962 at the University of California, California Institute of Technology, Long Beach State College, Los Angeles City College, Los Angeles State College and San Diego State College.(15) These are among the long-term fruits of the organizing Committee on Academic Freedom, one of its most significant and least publicized activities.
The Committee on Academic Freedom was formed in 1924, at a time when teachers and college professors were being urged to express themselves openly about the Sacco-Vanzetti case and to participate in Progressive Political Action. The original statement of the Committee was prepared by Dr. Harry F. Ward, chairman of the ACLU, and Dr. Henry R. Linville, president of the Teachers’ Union. Nominally created to aid teachers and college professors threatened with dismissal for unorthodox views, this committee progressively opened the way for the free and ever freer dissemination of radical ideas in schools and colleges. Through its ties with the American Federation of Teachers, the American Association of University Professors and various “progressive” educational bodies, it was eventually able to exert a potent influence not only on the formulation of academic policies but on the type of individuals accepted for employment.
By 1938 the members of this committee were described as being “among the outstanding leaders in American education.” (16) The Committee included three college presidents—of Vassar, Wisconsin and Mt. Holyoke. All but one of the group were listed in Who’s Who in America or Who’s Who in New York. A biographical breakdown by Dr. David E. Bunting, Dean of the University of Tampa, revealed that the typical committee member was then fifty-eight years old, had a doctor’s degree, and was a full professor in a major American university. Though economically comfortable, he was not wealthy. Politically, he either voted “independently” or for the Democratic Party. He belonged to at least four organizations espousing a “liberal” point of view, was a member of the Progressive Education Association and (usually) of the American Federation of Teachers. He was the author of at least three books, either on education or branches of the social sciences. Obviously, he was neither an average American nor an ordinary teacher, but a recognized expert in his chosen field, whose opinions were listened to with respect.(17)
What Dr. Bunting failed to mention was that fully half of the Committee’s twenty-eight members were also long time “cooperators” of the League for Industrial Democracy,(18) the key organization for the advancement of Fabian Socialism in America. They subscribed and/or contributed to the publications of the American Council on Public Affairs, which “encouraged properly qualified scholars to give greater attention to the background, analysis and solution of contemporary problems.”(19) Thus social, economic and political views considered acceptable by the League for Industrial Democracy and the American Civil Liberties Union were transmitted indirectly to the nation’s educators, who were “encouraged” to apply them not only as teachers but also in the field of public affairs.
Unobtrusively, the Committee on Academic Freedom in New York, working intimately with the LID-sponsored Council on Public Affairs in Washington, also promoted and accelerated a movement to bring “properly qualified scholars” into Washington, as well as into State and municipal governments—there to steer as far as possible the affairs of the nation. As the British Fabian philosopher, John Atkinson Hobson, had foretold, the university professor would become the secret weapon of Socialist strategy on a broader scale than ever before. The Doctor of Philosophy, with a certified “progressive” and “democratic” outlook, was being groomed to invade the administrative branches of government, no longer singly but en masse.
The specialized meaning concealed in such terms as “progress” and “democracy” was disclosed by Roger Baldwin, chief spokesman for the ACLU, who now addressed himself with increasing frequency to academic audiences. In his book, Civil Liberties and Industrial Conflict, written jointly with C. B. Randall and published by the Harvard University Press, Baldwin admitted frankly that while many persons regarded civil liberties as ends in themselves, he believed them to be “means f or non-violent progress.” (20) Progress, he said, meant “the extension of the control of social institutions by progressively larger classes, until human society ultimately abolishes the violence of class conflict.” (21) If not quite orthodox Marxist doctrine, this was a mere variation on it in terms of the fluid classes existing in American society.
Speaking at the 1936 Spring Conference of the Eastern States Association of Professional Schools for Teachers, Baldwin had also explained that by “progressive” he meant “the forces working for the democratization of industry by extending public ownership and control, which alone will abolish the power of the comparatively few who own the wealth.” (22) “Real democracy,” he stated on another occasion, “means strong trade unions, government regulation of business, ownership by the people of industries that serve the public.” (23)
That, of course, was not at all what “progress” and “democracy” implied to the average American. But Roger Baldwin was no average American, nor were the educators whom he was educating. They belonged to a rapidly expanding, carefully controlled intellectual elite, who by habitually using familiar terms to convey something quite different to each other than these terms meant to the general public, would guide America unawares along the road to that cooperative commonwealth which British Fabians also called Industrial Democracy.
Imitative in matters of basic policy, the League for Industrial Democracy outstripped its British Fabian tutors in techniques of deception. For more than half a century, the Fabian Society of London had solemnly required every member to subscribe to the Basis. When that strange document was finally replaced by a modern constitution, the first line of the latter still read: “The Fabian Society consists of Socialists.” (24)
True, the Society also had its prized semi-undercover collaborators—among others, such personages as Sir William Beveridge and John Maynard Keynes, who retained nominal membership in a virtually extinct Liberal Party. Nevertheless, anyone known to belong to the Fabian Society of London or its affiliates could automatically be termed a Socialist.
For reasons of expediency, this relatively forthright practice was abandoned by the Fabian Society’s American counterpart, the LID. Members were not only encouraged to conceal the fact of the LID’s British Fabian inspiration (as though it were a bar sinister) but even to deny publicly that they were Socialists, if in doing so they could more effectively promote Socialist policies. As Upton Sinclair noted, some old-timers were displeased when the organization ceased in 1921 to call itself a Socialist Society.(25) Yet the advantage of that fraudulent gesture became increasingly apparent as individual members of the LID were propelled to eminence in their chosen fields.
Climbers, as well as those who had already arrived, were shielded by the League’s failure to publish annual membership lists. Confronted with evidence that he had once held office in the Intercollegiate Socialist Society or the Students’ League for Industrial Democracy, a public figure often dismissed it blandly as a folly of youth, long since outgrown. That convenient loophole has been employed by such widely disparate characters as Walter Lippmann and Walter Reuther, president of the United Automobile Workers union and a vice president of the AFL-CIO; as well as by a number of equal and lesser luminaries. A glance at the record, however, demonstrates that remarkably few of the persons admitted to the League’s charmed circle of social and professional benefits have actually fallen away. The complacent truism, “Join for one year, join for fifty,” has proved to be as true of the League for Industrial Democracy as of its senior partner the London Fabian Society.
In 1943, the League modified its constitution, not solely for reasons of tax exemption but also for the sake of improved wartime camouflage. Its purpose was now asserted to be education for increasing democracy in our economic, political and cultural life. Knowledgeable insiders, of course, understood democracy to mean what Roger Baldwin and others had already defined it to mean. Namely, government regulation of business leading eventually to public ownership and/or control of industry, chiefly accomplished through the pressure and voting power of strong Socialist-controlled unions. Socialism was the “true democracy,” to be attained by anesthesia rather than violence. What final consolidation might mean was another matter, never mentioned. If anyone was deceived by the new terminology, it was only the general public.
Somewhat indiscreetly, however, British Fabians still continued to acknowledge the LID as the leading Socialist society in America. In Fabian Society Annual Reports of 1925-1930, it was even patronizingly referred to as “one of our provincial societies.” As late as 1962, Margaret Cole, while carefully minimizing its importance, recognized the LID to be among the principal overseas affiliates of the Fabian Society.(26) Its value in complementing the plans of British Socialists was indicated by Norman Thomas, head of the American Socialist Party, when he stated in a pamphlet published by the LID in 1953: “Britain’s problems admit no solution on a purely nationalist level.”(27)
Past or present, it thus becomes difficult for the LID to deny its relationship with the leading Socialist Society of Great Britain. Files of Fabian News reveal that for years League members attended or lectured at Fabian Summer Schools. Articles by LID publicists have consistently appeared in Fabian periodicals. When a League official enhanced his prestige by joining the Fabian Society of London, the item was occasionally reported in England, if not in America. Over thirty years ago, for example, Clarence Senior, long a national director of the LID and from 1961 a White House consultant on Latin American affairs, was received into the London Society. Fabian News innocently reported the event in its issue of July, 1929. Lately, however, the Society has refrained from printing the names of American members or even guests, because this tends to brand them ipso facto as Socialists.
To the LID’s 45th Anniversary event, Lady Dorothy Archibald, Fabian Socialist member of the London County Council, sent the following cautious tribute:
“. . . I have come to the conclusion that there are no short cuts to progress, but that the long and arduous road of education is the only certain way. This is the road you have followed for forty-five years and, knowing your country a little, I feel that your work as necessary as the work of the Fabian Society in the country.
“When I was directing a Fabian Summer School this last year, I had the great pleasure of having several young Americans as students. Their contribution to the School was outstanding and I was happy to discover that they were members of the L.I.D.
“It is my profound hope that the field of your work may extend every year so that the younger generation in America may receive an education in real democracy.(28)
“Greetings from Home” on the same occasion included telegrams from Senator Hubert Humphrey and the then Congressman Jacob K. Javits, Harry A. Overstreet, Upton Sinclair, Robert Morss Lovett and the Reverend John Haynes Holmes.(29) Leading all the rest, however, was a wire from Eleanor Roosevelt. As a long-standing “cooperator” and sponsor of the LID, she could hardly have failed to be familiar with its definition of “democracy.” Her message, though confounding to purists in political science, was readily grasped by persons attending the League’s anniversary luncheon. It read:
“I hope you will have a successful conference and will stress the need for making democracy work for all people as a form of government and a way of life.” (30)
To the day of her death, Eleanor Roosevelt supported the League for Industrial Democracy and half a dozen closely related organizations, a fact which she never troubled to conceal. She was introduced to it through her good friends Florence Kelley, Paul Kellogg of Survey magazine and Lillian Wald of the Henry Street Settlement, all of whom served as officers and/or directors of the organization. As her telegram suggests, Eleanor Roosevelt’s attachment to the LID was based on practical as well as idealistic considerations.
Through another close friend and early social worker, Frances Perkins, who had served as Governor Roosevelt’s New York State’s Commissioner of Labor, Eleanor Roosevelt was well informed about the potential ability of the needle trades unions in New York City to deliver the margin of victory in State elections. Top officials of both the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America and the International Ladies Garment Workers Union served routinely as officers and directors of the LID. Delegates to the 1944 Democratic Party convention in Chicago still recall the cryptic remark attributed at that time to Franklin Delano Roosevelt: “Clear it with Sidney.” Sidney, of course, was Sidney Hillman, then president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers.
Survivors of the Roosevelt era will also remember Joseph Lash, a controversial young protégée of Eleanor Roosevelt, whom she invited occasionally to the White House and aided in obtaining a military commission during World War II. Few are aware, however, that Joe Lash was a leader of the Students’ League for Industrial Democracy (31) (SLID) in the nineteen-thirties, when it boasted over a hundred chapters and collaborated with Communist-led youth groups. It published a magazine called Revolt, later known as The Students’ Outlook. Nominally, SLID was working for “peace.” To that end, it opposed Reserve Officers Training Corps drill in high schools and colleges and urged severe limitations on military preparedness.
In those years the Students’ League also urged its members to aid professed anti-fascist movements in Europe and agitated actively in favor of what it termed “civil rights” for American strikers. Student chapters assisted the LID Emergency Committee for Strikers’ Relief, whose chairman was Norman Thomas and whose secretary was theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, with John Herling, present-day labor columnist for the Washington Daily News, serving as their assistant.(32)
Among the more promising junior Leaguers of that day were two sons of an old-fashioned Marxian Socialist of German extraction who had settled in the American Midwest. The boys were Walter and Victor Reuther, potent names in American labor today. As president in 1932 of the SLID chapter at Wayne University, red-haired Walter led a student delegation on the picket line at the Briggs Body plant in Detroit. In 1933, the two eager young Socialists spent a summer running errands for the anti-Hitler underground in Germany and then were employed for about eighteen months at the Ford automobile plant in Soviet Russia, sending back glowing reports on the Workers’ Fatherland.
Schooled in the newer techniques for capturing union leadership, Walter and Victor returned home in time to help lead the Automobile Workers Industrial Union (originally a part of the Red trade-union apparatus) into the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). The reorganized and expanded mass union, known as the United Automobile Workers union (33) ( UAW), subsequently ejected the better known Communists from its midst; and control of that increasingly powerful labor body passed into Socialist hands. The only difficulty then was and still is that no one has ever been sure how many of those undercover Socialists still remained Communists at heart.(34)
The maneuver was not generally understood at the time, and is less understood today. When it became obvious even to the Communists that American working people would not accept Communist direction, but might follow social democratic leaders as long as they did not frankly call themselves Socialists, younger men carefully trained for such a contingency took over. The Reuther brothers, who always had a foot in the Socialist camp, were ideally prepared for the role. They have been long time collaborators and directors of the adult League for Industrial Democracy and at present hold membership in a number of its loftier latter-day offshoots.
From 1933, SLID cooperated with various “direct action” youth groups and in 1835 merged openly with them to form the American Student Union (ASU). According to Mina Weisenberg, a historian and director of the LID, the ASU “became [sic] deeply infiltrated with Communists.” After five years, the Students’ League split away, not because it had any real quarrel with the Marxist philosophy of its associates, but because—as Mina Weisenberg states—it found some difficulty in justifying the Soviet Union’s invasion of Finland.
Owing to the red cloud which had dimmed its name, SLID did not publicly reestablish its college chapters until after World War II. The paid staff then included James E. Youngdahl, a nephew of the liberal Republican Washington jurist who dismissed the Owen Lattimore case, and James Farmer,(35) who went on to become national director of the Negro Council on Racial Equality (CORE). It was not until 1947 that the Students’ League took the precaution of barring known Communists from membership. Throughout the entire decade of the nineteen-forties, however, a six-week summer course, resembling certain Fabian Summer Schools in England, was held annually by the League for Industrial Democracy, to train young college people for organizing and for other union work.
According to official League historians, SLID had allegedly acted against the advice of the senior body, when it merged with the National Student Union in 1935 and for five years appeared to have severed its connection with the adult LID. Actually, SLID members were only following the example of their elders, many of whom drifted farther and farther leftward during the same period—as their Fabian counterparts in Britain were likewise doing in the nineteen-thirties. A singular predilection for Communists was evinced in that era of the united front. It was confirmed by the fact that many high ranking LID officials lent their names to organizations and committees since identified as Communist controlled.
The very amiable Robert Morss Lovett, who personally aided the National Student Union in his final years as president of the League, (36) is alleged to have held membership during his lifetime in some fifty Communist front organizations. A. Philip Randolph, long time LID official and a Socialist leader in the present-day agitation for Negro civil rights, has been connected with numerous organizations (or their ad hoc committee offshoots) which were cited as Communist fronts by Federal authorities and/or state or territorial investigating committees.(37)
In the cloud cuckoo-land of Fabian Socialism’s many cooperative ventures, individuals later cited in connection with Soviet espionage were also recruited, among others, Frederick Vanderbilt Field.
Undeniably united front activities, in which Communists, Socialists and an undetermined number of innocents were involved, flourished in America as in Britain prior to the outbreak of World War II. By some irony of fate, however, it proved a saving grace for the LID that certain outstanding figures in its New York City chapter decided at the same time to champion the cause of the exiled and subsequently murdered Leon Trotsky. This very vocal group included John Dewey, professor of Philosophy at Columbia University; Sidney Hook chairman of the department of Philosophy at New York University; officials of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU); editors of the Social Democratic New Leader, and others. By virtue of being anti-Stalinist, they were presumed to be anti-Marxist and pro-American. As late as 1952, some of them were regarded as allies and editorial outlets by supporters of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy. Once again, as in the bygone twenties, the LID was able to sidestep unwelcome notoriety and avoid being stigmatized as the effective leadership group of international Socialism in America.
The radical nature of the League for Industrial Democracy should have been obvious from the start, since its original officers and directors included such well-known early Socialist Party leaders as Morris Hillquit, August Claessens and Eugene V. Debs. In the 1924 national elections, however, the majority of LID members and friends promoted the Conference for Progressive Political Action and supported the Presidential candidacy of Senator Robert M. La Follette. Since 1928, they have thrown their weight behind the Democratic Party’s top candidate in New York State, and, from 1936, they have done the same for the national ticket. Nevertheless, the Socialist Party continued to run a nominal candidate for the Presidency, who was invariably a permanent officer of the LID.
In six national elections, that token candidate was Norman Thomas, a former Protestant clergyman, who had once headed the LID student chapter at Princeton. A native American of Anglo-Saxon stock, Thomas possessed a mellow voice, a booming laugh, and a sophisticated low-pressure approach which proved highly attractive to educators and professionals. While he never entertained the faintest hope of being elected, Thomas had reasons for keeping his name on the ballot. Among other things, his position as titular head of the Socialist Party carried with it the right of representation in the Fabian-dominated Socialist International.
Until his “retirement” in 1962, it was usually Norman Thomas who headed United States delegations to congresses of the Socialist International, and transmitted the ensuing directives to interested groups in the United States. The “restatement” of Socialist aims emerging from the International’s Frankfurt Congress in 1951—which found expression in the New Fabian Essays in Britain—was duly interpreted for Americans by Norman Thomas in a significant pamphlet entitled Democratic Socialism. Published in 1953 by the LID, his statement served as a lodestar for all domestic Fabian Socialists, avowed or unavowed.
For the edification of any innocents who still persist in regarding Norman Thomas as a true-blue American, distinguished for his apparently selfless advocacy of a broad program of social reform, (38) it may be noted that he declared in this pamphlet:
“My definition of modern socialism . . . accords with the socialist statement on ‘Aims and Tasks’ which was adopted by the Congress of Socialist Parties at Frankfurt, Germany, in 1951. It closely parallels ‘Socialism, a New Statement of Principles,’ presented in 1952 by the British Socialist Union.(39)
Like the British comrades, Thomas frankly advocated “the social ownership of such key industries as steel”—while “refusing to discuss democratic socialism in such misleading terms as total social ownership vs. total private ownership.” (40) He explained that some followers of Karl Marx—for example, Karl Kautsky—”never insisted on the need for social ownership of all means of production and distribution.” (41) Neither, as a matter of fact, did the Fabian Basis. The Machiavellian foresight of Sidney Webb, disclosed long before in Labor and the New Social Order, was tacitly reflected in Thomas’ declaration:
“. . . We have learned that it is possible to a degree not anticipated by most earlier Socialists to impose desirable social controls on privately owned enterprises by the development of social planning, by proper taxation and labor legislation, and by the growth of powerful labor organizations.”
Still more significantly, Thomas added:
“For some years American Socialists have been fairly well agreed that ‘social ownership should be extended to the commanding heights’ of our economy which include our natural resources, our system of money, banking and credit, and certain basic industries and services …. I have already argued the specific reason for public ownership of the steel industry. It meets all the tests which I have earlier suggested.” (42)
An identical program for Britain was urged at virtually the same time by the late Parliamentary Leader of the British Labour Party, Hugh Gaitskell, in Fabian Tract No. 300, Socialism and Nationalisation. (43) It has since been reaffirmed by his successor, Harold Wilson, who pledged himself to carry out the policies of Gaitskell.
In defining the relationship of “Democratic Socialism” to Communism, Norman Thomas made a plea for “non-orthodox” Marxism— especially in the United States, where “we still have a middle class in a true economic sense, while those who think of themselves as belonging to the middle class are even more numerous.”(44) Pointedly, he criticized Russian Communism as being “a betrayal of Socialism” and a subversion of true Marxism. He condemned “statism” and questioned “the necessity of a dictatorial elite in Russia”—without referring to the invisible Socialist elite in America that proposed to utilize the outward forms of democracy in order to impose a gradually frightening system of centralized controls. While deploring Soviet deceit and violence, at no point did Thomas recommend hostility towards Communism.(45) “Other associations of men,” said Thomas, improving on the Natural Law, “have an inherent right to exist.” (46)
Conscious, however, of the adverse effect which identification with an unpopular cause might have on Socialists in America, Thomas uttered a clear warning to followers and friends. Russian Communism, said he, “in its march to power has so successfully claimed Marx for its own, it has so persuaded men that Lenin and Stalin are the true successors of Karl Marx, that the socialist who rests his case upon Marx, as upon a Bible, has to fight an uphill battle. Marxist orthodoxy does not give the democratic socialist the best vantage point for his struggle.”(47) Almost verbatim, Thomas echoed the sentiments expressed by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels during their lifetime, concerning the most effective way to social revolution in the United States.
Through Norman Thomas the past and present leaders of international Socialism spoke to the New World. Thus the importance of his remarks cannot be measured in terms of the trifling vote which he commanded as the American Socialist Party’s candidate. One apparent reason for keeping that Party alive has been to mislead the American public as to the true strength of the Socialist movement in the United States, by conveying the impression it is far too tiny to represent a serious threat. Even Thomas himself admitted as recently as July 13, 1963, in a television interview with Paul Coates carried over California stations, that Socialists in this country who do not vote for the Socialist Party “have usually found it better to vote Democrat.” Many are so-called independents, committed to a program rather than a party, who forever tease aspiring Republicans with the hope they can be wooed and won.
Nor should the influence of Thomas’ statement be gauged by the limited size of the League for Industrial Democracy, which circulated the pamphlet. While the official membership of the adult LID never claimed more than four or five thousand at any time, like the Fabian Society it was a pilot organization, whose members already commanded the heights in many sectors of American life—political, educational, religious, trades union and cultural. Bishop Francis J. McConnell, for example, a former president of the Federal Council of Churches,(48) who signed the so-called Bankers’ Report of 1933 advocating recognition of Soviet Russia, was long a vice president of the League.
As vice president of Union Theological Seminary, the patriarchal Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr had also helped to shape the social thinking of generations of young seminarians. Former president of the LID New York chapter and former treasurer and board member of the national body, Niebuhr probably lent his name to more Socialist-inspired committees and organizations than any other living American. Nor did age diminish the old master’s skill in attracting highly placed sympathizers. As late as September, 1963, Attorney General Robert Kennedy announced that one of the ten books he would take with him, if going to the moon, would be Reinhold Niebuhr’s book with the oddly Manichean title, Children of Light and Children of Darkness—an unusual choice for a Catholic! (49)
In the field of labor, the League’s officers and national directors have included some of the most commanding figures in recent industrial union history: among others, David Dubinsky of the International Ladies Garment Workers; Jacob Potofsky of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers; Walter Reuther of the Automobile Workers; Arthur J. Hayes of the Machinists; James Carey, erstwhile head of the Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers; A. Philip Randolph of the Pullman Car Porters; and Boris Shishkin, former educational director of the American Federation of Labor. (50) William Green and his more liberal successor, George Meany, president of the AFL-CIO and recipient of a League award, seldom ventured to refuse an invitation to address LID conferences. While LID control of trade union machinery was not all-embracing, and was certainly far less obvious, than that of the Fabian Society in Britain, at least it provided a firm base of political and financial support for internationally derived Socialist programs in several key electoral states, notably New York New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Illinois.
A small galaxy of United States Senators has been listed among the LID veteran collaborators. That senior legislative group includes: Paul H. Douglas of Illinois, Wayne Morse of Oregon, Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota, the late Richard Neuberger and his widow, Maurine Neuberger of Oregon, the late Herbert Lehman of New York, and Jacob K. Javits, who as a congressman was for years a regular and applauded speaker at League conferences. It was Senator Lehman, however, who distinguished himself at the League’s 45th Anniversary symposium on “Freedom and the Welfare State” by saying:
“A hundred and seventy years ago the welfare state concept was translated into the basic law of this land by the founders of the republic …. The founding fathers were the ones who really originated the welfare state.” (51)
An astounding misuse of the measured phrase in the Preamble to the Constitution, “to create a more perfect union and to promote the general welfare”—all the more so, because the definition of “welfare” has suffered several changes since 1787!
The weight exerted to this day by individual LID members and their trainees in education, government administration, the United Nations, and the private “research” foundations, is subject matter for separate study. A whole chain of interlocking organizations, aspiring to mold the outlook of public opinion makers and to draft the policies of United States Government agencies, has quietly come into being, each with a solid core of LID elder statesmen and their younger disciples. By no means have all of the League’s tried and true supporters found it necessary to choose “the hard way.”
In adapting the tactics and programs of British Fabianism to our native scene, the small, once struggling and always reticent League for Industrial Democracy fulfilled its mission of penetrating and permeating the fabric of American life. Its peculiarity stemmed from the fact that it was from first to last a Socialist creation. Although the accent might be American, its voice was the voice of international Socialism controlled by British Fabians.
The surprising thing is that anyone should ever have doubted the Socialist intentions of the officers, members and conscious collaborators of the League for Industrial Democracy. Successive presidents, from Robert Morss Lovett to Nathaniel M. Minkoff, have made no secret of their radical beliefs. There was the venerable philosopher John Dewey, father of Progressive Education, who was said to have inherited the pragmatic mantle of William James, yet permitted himself to be identified with the Trotskyite or Lovestoneite wing of American Marxism.
Next president of the LID was Elizabeth Gilman, wealthy and socially prominent spinster, a leader of the Urban League and perennial chairman of the Socialist Party in Maryland. She was followed by Bjaarne Braatoy, former professor of Government at Haverford College, who served in the World War II Office of Strategic Services, working intimately all the while with the Fabian International Bureau. At war’s end he was employed as tutor and “technical assistant” to the German Social Democratic Party and thereafter became world chairman of the Fabian-dominated Socialist International.
Not least, there was Mark Starr, British-born and Fabian-bred, a pet pupil of G. D. H. and Margaret Cole. For some thirty years he proved to be a strong, indisputable link between the New Fabian Research Bureau in London, where the modern leadership of the Fabian Society was centered, and the Fabian Socialist movement in the United States. No product of ivied halls, Mark Starr nevertheless became president and board chairman of the foremost society of intellectual Socialists in America. From 1935 to 1961 he also served as educational director of the ILGWU—perhaps the most internationally minded labor union in America, with a membership of 450,000 and declared assets of some 425 million dollars (as of June, 1962).
Through Mark Starr, the G. D. H. Cole brand of Marxism tinged with Syndicalism was transmitted to a potent sector of American labor. It was Starr who institutionalized a good many of the Coles’ special ideas on labor politics, labor education and politico-labor research in the United States. As late as 1952, he asserted that education for the abolition of private profit was the prime purpose of all education.(52) In 1949, according to a report issued over his own signature by the ILGWU educational department, Mark Starr “wrote Labour Politics in the U.S.A. for the British Fabian Society, and a pamphlet for the United World Federalists.” (53) Published by the Fabian Society-Victor Gollancz in England, Labour Politics in the U.S.A. was issued as a fifty-six page pamphlet by the LID.
Son of a miner, Mark Starr had worked in the coal mines as a boy and served during World War I as local officer of the South Wales Miners Federation. Referring to his origins, Starr remarked many years later in a personal letter that if he had not been a radical, he “would have been a moron.” Possibly this view was colored by the fact that from the age of fourteen he was educated at Fabian-operated workers’ schools and the London Labour College.
Before emigrating to America in 1928, Starr was for seven years a division officer of the National Council of Labour Colleges in Britain. He belonged to the little Independent Labour Party, headed by some of the more stridently left wing Fabians and openly sympathetic to the Communist cause. During that period he was also associated with Margaret Cole—a founder of New Fabian Research who was elected president of the Fabian Society in 1963 and who took a lively interest in promoting a species of Socialist indoctrination for working people broadly termed “further education.” (54)
On reaching New York, Starr was promptly hired to teach at Brookwood Labor College, which between 1925 and 1928 had received an outright grant of $74,227 from the Garland Fund.(55) Soon he was placed in charge of Brookwood extension courses. Despite his own very sketchy academic background, in 1941 Starr became vice president of the American Federation of Teachers. In 1944, he was appointed labor consultant to the Office of War Information, whose Director, Elmer Davis, was once a fellow director of the LID.(56) By that time, of course, Starr had taken out American citizenship— though he preferred to consider himself a “citizen of the world”—and in March, 1949, organized an ILGWU symposium on “World Government.”(57)
In 1948, President Truman named Mark Starr to the United States Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, where he remained until 1952. This commission was authorized under Public Act 402 to advise the State Department and the Congress on the operation of information centers and libraries maintained by the United States Government in foreign countries, as well as on the exchange of students and technical experts. In June, 1949, Starr headed the U.S. delegation to the first Adult Education Conference organized by UNESCO at Elsinore, Denmark,(58) where the shades of Marx, Engels and Kautsky rather than the ghost of Hamlet’s father stalked. A month later he was lecturing at a British Labour Party Summer School in Durham, England. (59) That year the New York City Board of Education conferred its annual Adult Student’s Award on Mark Starr as their prize specimen of an adult student who had made good.(60)
As educational director of the ILGWU, Starr helped to instill the Fabian Socialist approach in a labor union whose early history had been marked by episodes of physical violence and the politics of left wing revolt. He advised that “instead of arousing antagonism, as the old-time agitator had to do, now the union leader must be capable of skillful negotiation and of winning over public opinion to support the claims of his organization.” (61) In cooperation with the Federal Council of Churches and other religious bodies, he arranged visits to garment shops and union headquarters for groups of clergymen and presented them with an adroit propaganda pamphlet, What the Church Thinks of Labor. (62)
Through LID connections and the Public Affairs Committee which he chaired in 1949, Starr also developed fruitful contacts between the ILGWU and liberal professors throughout the country—but particularly at the Harvard School of Business Administration. Speaking with a lingering trace of a Welsh burr, Starr delivered the Ingliss lecture at Harvard on “Labor Education.” In August, 1949, the Harvard Business Review carried an article by Willard A. Lewis of the ILGWU legal department,(63) and in 1952 Starr addressed the Harvard Business School Club.
It is interesting to note that in April, 1953, Starr’s department organized an ILGWU panel discussion, where the subject of “Planning and Personal Freedom” was discussed by such “eminent experts” as Dr. George Soule of Columbia University and the New Republic, and Dr. J. Kenneth Galbraith and Dr. Seymour E. Harris of Harvard (64)—the latter pair to become controversial figures seven years later as advisers to the Kennedy Administration. In 1951 Clarence Senior—another future Kennedy adviser—addressed a weekend institute at Hudson View Lodge on the Puerto Rican problem.(65) During such sessions, the learned gentlemen both received and imparted instruction, as preliminary grooming for the future demands of public life.
University and public libraries were generously supplied by Starr with union literature. In one case, a pamphlet giving the union’s view on Trends and Prospects in the Garment Industry was sent to the economics departments of 650 colleges. Labor attaches of United States Embassies abroad, in whose selection union endorsement often played a part, were furnished on request with union-produced pamphlets, phonograph records and propaganda films; and similar “assistance” was given to Occupation Forces in Japan and Europe.(66) All “educational” material distributed by the union was based, directly or indirectly, upon the Fabian Socialist premise formulated by G. D. H. Cole and promoted by Mark Starr as “dean of American labor educators.” Namely, that “education must build new incentives other than those of private gain!”
Under the watchful eye of Starr, research and political activities of the ILGWU were vastly expanded. Both departments were headed and staffed by trusted officials of the LID. Throughout that period of mutual growth, the ILGWU’s research director was Dr. Lazare Teper, who had joined SLID at Johns Hopkins and served for years as a director of the adult LID. In 1951 and after, Dr. Teper lectured at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, evoking no protest whatever from the Socialist Party or its allies. (67)
Political director of the ILGWU under Starr’s command was Gus Tyler, a product of SLID at City College of New York.(68) According to an article in The New York Times, it was Tyler who in 1949 introduced political stewards or “commissars” into union locals.(69) That same year he gave a course on politics at the City College of New York, and in 1950 conducted a course in Political Action at the New School for Social Research. Since 1961, Gus Tyler has been overall educational director of the ILGWU, succeeding Mark Starr but following loyally in his footsteps. Starr’s permanent secretary was the Russian-born Fannia M. Cohn, nominally responsible for arranging “panel discussions.” Veteran member of the LID from the days when it was known as the ISS, she served on the executive committee of the League’s New York chapter.
Through the combined efforts of such “democratic” Socialists, the ample research facilities of the ILGWU were made available in a more or less guarded fashion to the LID. Thus, from 1935, the ILGWU’s research department stood in somewhat the same relation to the LID as the New Fabian Research Bureau did to the British Fabian Society.(70) At Starr’s invitation, the redoubtable Margaret Cole herself often flew from London to address union groups (71) and presumably to synchronize “research” operations with those of the British comrades.
Even today, when the widely diffused “research” activity of the Fabian Socialist movement in America is parceled out among various specialized fringe organizations, as well as university centers for “advanced study,” the research department of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union continues to function as a control center and guiding force in the politico-labor field. Allegedly it is acting for the benefit of its members and those of sister unions, domestic and foreign, which it aids.
During Mark Starr’s prolonged and well-paid term as educational director, the union probably became better known abroad than any other American labor organization. More and more, its New York headquarters were a port of call for labor delegates coming from Germany, Japan, Italy, Korea, and especially from Latin America. (72) Educational assistance and political advice were freely given to budding labor unions, all the way from Ireland to New Zealand, from Ghana to Chile and Brazil. In some instances, the freshly organized unions actually preceded the establishment of industries in which they hoped to set labor standards. Nevertheless, they provided bases for political agitation in backward countries seeking to install Socialist-oriented governments, and in new nations emerging from the Fabian-shattered remnants of once-flourishing colonial empires.
Starr’s services to Fabian Socialism on a world-wide scale appear to date from 1948, when his opportunities as a member of an official government commission dovetailed neatly with his union duties. That was the same year David Dubinsky, freewheeling president of the ILGWU, helped to launch the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU),(73) labor adjunct of the Socialist International. In 1949, Dubinsky addressed the Fabian Society in London while attending the first annual meeting of the Confederation.(74)
Effective organizer of the Free Trade Union Committee in America was Jay Lovestone, international director of the ILGWU. A brilliant, if mercurial character, Lovestone had received his baptism in Socialism as student president of the ISS chapter at the City College of New York. Veering leftward, he became a top functionary of the Communist Party but was expelled for “left deviationism.” Thereafter, he headed a group of American Marxists who supported the exiled Leon Trotsky and his doctrine of permanent revolution. As such, Lovestone was welcomed back into the Fabian Socialist fold and entrusted with far-flung international missions in the name of labor. Together with his assistant and faithful shadow, Irving Brown, he has since visited trouble spots in Europe and the Orient on all-expenses-paid union tours as a labor statesman and traveling inspector general.
If anyone wonders what possible influence such an internahona1 labor body could have on domestic events in the United States, at least one example can be cited. On March 11-13, 1963, the Railwaymen’s Section Committee of the International Transport Workers Federation met in Brussels. According to the International Trade Union News of April 1, 1963, issued fortnightly by the ICFTU:
“The Committee expressed deep concern at the very serious position in which railwaymen of many countries in all parts of the world found themselves, as the result of transport policies directed against the railways or the ruthless rationalization plans of management, or both. These developments were jeopardizing the livelihood of many railwaymen, and in some cases the obstinate attitude of the employers was forcing the railway unions to take militant action ….”(75)
Based on “research” by a Fabian Socialist-controlled international labor group, decisions were reached in Brussels identical to those leading to the renewed call for a nationwide railroad strike in America not many weeks later.
Just as the Transport and General Workers Union in Britain has long been the chief bulwark of the London Fabian Society, so the ILGWU and the closely related Amalgamated Clothing Workers Union have been twin pillars of strength to the LID. From 1935 to 1952, the ILGWU donated 21 million dollars to alleged worthy causes, (76) including political campaigns. From 1951 to 1953 alone, its benefactions exceeded five million dollars (77)—of which the greater part was extracted from the pay envelopes of working people and spent at the discretion of union officials. With financial angels of such stature in the offing, it is little wonder that the Fabian Socialist movement in America prospered and that its influence grew out of all proportion to the modest size of its directive body: the League for Indushia1 Democracy.
At the present fume, the LID enjoys the positron of an elder statesman, having delegated many of its more active functions to kindred organizations colonized and steered by certified Socialist “collaborators,” past and present. Its own list of officers and directors for 1963 discloses a stable handful of old-timers plus a number of youthful newcomers, among them children and grandchildren of original members. For the moment, the League appears to be hardly more than an appendage of the needle trades unions, as it once seemed a mere pensioner of the Rand School. Nevertheless, it is still the senior body of Fabian Socialism in America, from which future dictates on Socialist fashions may be expected to issue. At any desired instant, it can spring to new life again, even though its current status may appear to some to be that of a has-been. Like the Fabian Society of London, the League for Industrial Democracy has always been one of the most underrated Socialist leadership groups in the world.
The fact is that the LID has been preparing ever since the end of World War II for what seems to be virtual retirement. Its star studded anniversary meetings of the nineteen-fifties were a series of premature swan songs. Already every one of those successor organizations had been founded and activated that were to adapt Fabian Socialism to the grandiose dimensions of the space age. These would transport the United States, by fast freeway, toward a shimmering goal which present-day Socialists call “total democracy” but which earlier, undisguised Marxists admitted was world-wide social revolution.
Appropriately, the LID conferred its 1963 award for distinguished service upon the aged Upton Sinclair, last surviving member of the group that issued the original call to the ISS in 1905. With his usual happy faculty for letting the radical cat out of the bag, it was Upton Sinclair who on another occasion revealed the tried-and-true route by which Fabian Socialism must travel to power in the United States. Experience had already shown, said he, that it would be done via the two-party system, rather than through any third party. “So I know,” announced Sinclair, “that it will be the Democratic Party and not the Socialist Party which will bring this great change to America. It will not be called socialism; its opponents will insist that it is communism, while its friends will know that it is industrial democracy.” (78)
1. In 1928 Roger Baldwin, longtime Executive Director of the ACLU, stated flatly: “I believe in revolution–not necessarily the forcible seizure of power in armed conflict, but the process of growth of class movements determined to expropriate the capitalist class and to take control of all social property. Being pacifist–because I believe non-violent means best calculated in the long run to achieve enduring results, I am opposed to revolutionary violence. But I would rather see violent revolution than none at all, though I would not personally support it because I consider other means far better. Even the terrible cost of bloody revolution is a cheaper price to humanity than the continued exploitation and wreck of human life under the settled violence of the present system.” Roger Baldwin, “The Need for Militancy,” The Socialism of Our Times, edited by Harry W. Laidler and Norman Thomas, A Symposium. (New York, The Vanguard Press, Inc., 1929.) For the League for Industrial Democracy (based on a Conference of the League for Industrial Democracy held at Camp Tamiment in June, 1928), p. 77.
2. See Appendix IV.
3. Freedom Through Dissent, 42nd Annual Report, July 1, 1961 to June 30, 1962 (New York, American Civil Liberties Union, 1962), p. 51.
4. Daily Worker (April 20, 1950).
5. Ibid. (December 13, 1961).
6. The Worker (July 16, 1961).
8. The Wanderer, St. Paul, Minnesota (December 14, 1961).
12. Los Angeles Times (February 12, 1962).
13. Associated Press dispatch (March 5, 1962).
14. San Francisco Chronicle (August 19, 1963). This Conference also passed resolutions calling for diplomatic and trade relations with Castro’s Cuba.
15. Freedom Through Dissent, 42nd Annual Report, July 1, 1961 to June 30, 1962 (New York, American Civil Liberties Union, 1962), p. 80.
16. David Edison Bunting, Liberty and Learning (Washington, American Council on Public Affairs, 1942), p. 11.
18. Members of the Committee on Academic Freedom were: Edward C. Lindeman. chairman, New York School of Social Works; Ellen Donohue, secretary, Ethical Culture School, New York; John L. Childs, Columbia University; Morris R. Cohen, City College of New York; George S. Counts, Columbia University; Charles A. Elwood, Duke University; Frank P. Graham, University of North Carolina; Sidney Hook, New York University; Horace M. Kallen, New School for Social Research; William H. Kilpatrick, Columbia University; K. N. Llewellyn, Columbia University; A. O. Lovejoy, Johns Hopkins University; Kirtley F. Mather, Harvard University; Alexander Meiklejohn, University of Wisconsin; Felix Morley, Haverford College; Alonzo F. Meyers, New York University; William A. Neilson, Smith College; Reinhold Niebuhr, Union Theological Seminary; James M. O’Neill, Brooklyn College; Frederick L. Redefer, Progressive Education Association; Vida D. Scudder, Wellesley College; L. L. Thurstone, University of Chicago; Mary E. Wooley, Mt. Holyoke College. Bunting, op. cit. (Starred names are cited by Mina Weisenberg as League for Industrial Democracy stalwarts. See Appendix II.)
19. Statement of American Council on Public Affairs, 1942.
20. R. N. Baldwin and C. B. Randall, Civil Liberties and Industrial Conflict (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1938), p. 3.
22. R. N. Baldwin, “Freedom to Teach.” Proceedings of the 1936 Spring Conference of the Eastern States Association of Professional Schools for Teachers (New York, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1936), p. 324.
23. Roger N. Baldwin, “What Democracy Means to Me.” Scholastic (December 18, 1937), Vol. XXXI, p. 27.
24. Italics had been added, but is now removed.
27. Norman Thomas, Democratic Socialism, A New Appraisal (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1953), p. 4.
28. Freedom and the Welfare State. A Symposium by Oscar R. Ewing, Herbert H. Lehman, George Meany, Walter P. Reuther and others. Harry W. Laidler, ed. On the Occasion of the 45th Anniversary of the League for Industrial Democracy (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1950), p. 34.
29. Ibid., p. 35. Among others sending greetings or serving as sponsors in addition to the LID’s Board of Directors, were: Premier Einar Gerhardsen of Norway, Norman Angell, Stuart Chase, Helen Gahagan Douglas, Senator Paul H. Douglas, David Dubinsky, Quincy Howe, William A. Kilpatrick, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr., Mary K. Simkhovitch, Channing H. Tobias and Jerry Voorhis. Ibid., p. 37.
31. Joseph Lash, together with Monroe Sweetland, later editor of the Oregon Democrat, and George Edwards, a future member of the bench in Detroit, were named by Mina Weisenberg in The League for Industrial Democracy: Fifty Years of Democratic Education (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1955), as leaders of the SLID during that period.
32. Congressional Record, House of Representatives (October 16, 1962), pp. 22124-22125.
33. Now the United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers Union of America, with a membership said to exceed 1,000,000.
34. In Left Communism, an Infantile Disease, V. I. Lenin advised his followers: “It is necessary to agree to any sacrifice, to resort to all sorts of devices, maneuvers and illegal methods, to evasion and subterfuge, in order to penetrate the trade unions, to remain in them and to carry out Communist work in them at all costs.”
35. As recently as 1963, James Farmer was a member of the board of the adult League for Industrial Democracy.
36. Although a National Student Association report of September, 1953, stated that the Students’ League for Industrial Democracy was defunct, an official League brochure published in 1955, The League for Industrial Democracy At Mid-Century, reported that in June, 1954 the Students’ League held a conference on “The Patterns of Social Reform in North America” at the International Center of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in New York. There a Canadian Member of Parliament addressed them from the same rostrum as C. Wright Mills, sociology professor from Columbia; Daniel Bell, labor editor of Fortune magazine; Felix Gross, sociologist from Brooklyn College and mark Starr, labor educator. (Speakers cited are listed by Mina Weisenberg as “collaborators” of the adult League.)
37. See Investigation of Un-American Propaganda Activities in the U. S., Special Committee on Un-American Activities, 78th Congress, Second Session. (Appendix, Part IX, Communist Front Organizations.) (Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1944); also, Cumulative Index to Publications, 1938-1954 (January, 1955); Supplement to Cumulative Index, 1955-1960 (June, 1961).
38. See statement at the League’s 40th Anniversary dinner by the Hon. Newbold Morris, President, New York City Council. Forty Years of Education (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1945), pp. 39-40. In this speech Morris said: “Norman Thomas is a Socialist. Yet I don’t believe that there are very many principles which would remove Norman Thomas from a liberal in any party, and I suppose he chose the hard way. . . . He might have climbed the ladder by enrolling in either one of the major parties and going from Alderman to Sheriff, to Borough President, to Congressman, to United States Senator and so on all the way up. . . . There are a lot of others around here who have chosen the hard way and I admire them for it.”
39. Thomas, op. cit., p. 5.
43. Hugh Gaitskell, M. P., Socialism and Nationalisation, Fabian Tract No. 300 (July, 1956). In the foreword, Gaitskell states he wrote the essay in 1953 (the same year that Democratic Socialism appeared) but did not publish it until 1956.
46. Ibid., p. 34. The Natural Law, implicit in the United States Constitution, recognizes the inherent right of human creatures to exist. Associations, being manmade, have no inherent rights and only exist permissively.
48. Later The National Council of Churches, and affiliated today with the World Council of Churches.
49. Hearst Headline Service dispatch by David Sentner. Published September 1, 1963. Children of Light and Children of Darkness, published in 1945, is a collection of the West Foundation lectures delivered by Dr Reinhold Niebuhr at Stanford University in 1944. It is an argument for the “mixed economy” and “the open society,” regarded by Socialists as a transitional stage to Socialism. Only ten years earlier, in Reflexions on the End of an Era, (New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1934). Dr. Niebuhr had said that the sickness of capitalism was “organic and constitutional”–rooted in “the very nature of capitalism . . . in the private ownership of the productive process.” He predicted that “the end of capitalism will be bloody rather than peaceful,” and considered Marxism “an essentially correct theory and analysis of the economic realities of modern society.” (See Reinhold Niebuhr: His Religious, Social and Political Thought, edited by Charles W. Kagley and Robert W. Bretall (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1956), p. 137.)
50. See Appendix II. See also annual lists of League for Industrial Democracy’s officers and board of directors.
51. Freedom and the Welfare State (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1950), pp. 7ff. British Fabian speakers on that occasion included Corley Smith, Economic and Social Counselor, United Kingdom Delegation to the United Nations; Margaret Herbison, M. P., Under Secretary for Scotland; Toni Sender, Representative of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions to the United Nations, G. D. H. and Margaret Cole and Morgan Phillips of the Socialist International sent greetings.
52. Mark Starr, “Corruption in a Profit Economy,” A Moral Awakening in America, A Symposium (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1952), p. 22.
53. Report of Education Department, ILGWU (June 1, 1948-May 31, 1950), p. 15. During that period, Mark Starr also helped to revise a new edition of Labor in America, a senior high school text, ibid., p. 15.
54. “Adult education” was a field in which Margaret Cole and her husband were active for years. It became her chief public function in 1951-1960, when she was chairman of the Further Education Committee of the London County Council, Fabian News (January, 1963).
55. Report of the American Fund for Public Service, popularly called the Garland Fund, 1925-28, states, “For the three-year period covered by this report, the enterprises to which we have given outright the largest amounts of money were: Vanguard Press, $139,453; Brookwood Labor College, $74,227; Rand School, research department, $16,116; League for Industrial Democracy, $10,500.” Cf. testimony of Walter S. Steele before the House of Representatives, Special Committee to Investigate Communist Activities in the United States, Report of Committee (December, 1930), p. 226.
Steele’s testimony continues, as follows: “The Vanguard Series, issued by The Vanguard Press, was organized and financed by the American Fund for Public Service, Inc. and distributed by the Rand Bookstore. (The Vanguard Press was set up by the communist-socialist controlled American Fund for Public Service, Inc. It publishes communist-socialist literature for distribution. Its publications are also distributed by the Rand Press.”
Authors listed in the Steele testimony include: Karl Marx, V. Lenin, Peter Kropotkin, Franz Oppenheimer, Henry George, Benjamin R. Tucker, Robert Blatchford (British Independent Labour Party), Clarence L. Swartz, James Peter Warbasse, Jesse W. Hughan, Alexander Berkman, Charles H. Wesley, Coleman Hayes-Wood, A. S. Sachs, Scott Nearing, Robert W. Dunn, Upton Sinclair.
56. See Appendix II. Also annual lists of LID officers and directors.
57. Report of Education Department, ILGWU (June 1948-May 1950), p. 28.
67. Report of Education Department, ILGWU (June 1951-May 1953), p. 27. (See also report, The Ultra Right and the Military Industrial Complex, published by the Socialist Party-Social Democratic Federation and submitted with a covering letter by Norman Thomas to the Special Preparedness Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Armed Services. Hearings before the Subcommittee, Part 6, 1962, pp. 3016 ff. In this document, Socialists protest against permitting conservative speakers to address the Armed Services.)
70. Loc. cit., pp. 58-64. (See account of functions of New Fabian Research Bureau in Part I, Fabian Freeway.)
71. Report of Education Department, ILGWU (June 1948-May 1950), p. 10. Numerous other visits by Margaret Cole and members of the London Fabian Executive are unrecorded in union publications.
76. Report of Education Department, ILGWU, (June, 1951-May, 1953), p. 27. (In this connection, Herald Tribune article of January,1952, is cited.)
77. Mark Starr, “Garment Workers: Welfare Unionism,” Current History, July, 1954. Reprint by ILGWU, pages unnumbered.
In the future as in the past, the continuing leadership of the Socialist movement in the United States resided in America’s Fabian Society, (1) the polite but persistent Intercollegiate Socialist Society, which changed its name but not its nature in 1921. Discarding the Socialist title, that by now had become a liability, it called itself the League for Industrial Democracy—the name under which it survives today.
This alias implied no break with the destructive philosophy and goals of international Socialism. It was rather a device for pursuing them more discreetly, at a temporarily reduced speed. Few outsiders connected the term Industrial Democracy with those archetypes of Fabian Socialism, England’s Sidney and Beatrice Webb, who had used it as the title for one of their earliest propaganda books. The slogan adopted by the LID, “Production for use and not for profit,” originated with Belfort Bax, another vintage British Socialist. It was a handy formula for expressing Marxist aims in non-Marxist language.
Although most of its members and friends now described themselves publicly as liberals, basically the American society remained the same. As ever, its self-appointed function was to produce the intellectual leaders and to formulate the plans for achieving an eventual Socialist State in America. Like its British model, the LID proposed to operate from the top down and meet the working masses halfway. Voting power and financial support would come from labor, which was to be organized as far as possible into industry-wide, Socialist-led unions.
As the Lusk Committee only vaguely surmised, (2) British Socialists, not Russian nor German, had set the pattern for gradual social revolution to be followed in America and other English-speaking countries. The development of an elite, and research for planning and control purposes, were its primary tasks. Penetration and permeation of existing institutions, indirect rather than direct action, were its recommended procedures.
Owing to the greater expanse and complexity of the United States as compared to England, and to the wide variety of opinions due to the varied national origins of its people, special emphasis had to be placed on the formation of opinion-shaping and policy-directing groups at every level—particularly in the fields of education, political action, economics and foreign relations. While as yet such groups existed only in embryo, and Socialist programs were in public disrepute, sooner or later the opportunity for a breakthrough would come. The way of the turtle was slow but sure.
Superficially, some changes in LID operations were made in deference to the times. Adults were now frankly admitted to membership in an organization which they had always dominated. Student chapters, disrupted by the war, had almost disappeared; but until 1928 no direct effort was made to revive them in the name of the Students’ League for Industrial Democracy. For the moment, it seemed more prudent to operate through the new Intercollegiate Liberal League, formed in April, 1921, at a Harvard conference attended by 250 student delegates from assorted colleges.(3)
Keynote speakers at this conference included such trusty troupers of the old Intercollegiate Socialist Society as Walter Lippmann, Henry Mussey, Charlotte Perkins Gilman and the Reverend John Haynes Holmes (4)—all billed as liberals rather than Socialists. The objectives of the organization, as stated in the prospectus, were even more carefully understated than those of the former ISS. They were: The cultivation of the open mind; the development of an informed student opinion on social, industrial, political and international questions. (5) Due to the reassuring tone of the prospectus and the psychological appeal of the word liberal, three presidents of leading Eastern colleges actually consented to address the organizing conference. (6)
In his speech on that occasion, the Reverend Holmes invited students to “identify themselves with the labor world, and there to martyr themselves by preaching the gospel of free souls and love as the rule of life.” Vaguely, he predicted a revolution and added, “If you want to be on the side of fundamental right, you have got to be on the side of labor.” A militant advocate of pacificism during the war, Reverend Holmes had frequently been under surveillance by Federal agents. Intelligence sources reported that his speeches were used as propaganda material by the German Army in its efforts to break down the morale of American troops.
Subsequent meetings of the Intercollegiate Liberal League dealt with what British Fabians of the period often referred to as “practical problems of the day.” Speakers were provided through the cooperation of the New Republic, whose literary editor, Robert Morss Lovett, was also president of the LID. Both English and American Fabian Socialists responded to the call. In January, 1923, the Fabian News of London announced:
“W. A. Robson has gone to America for about six months, as a member of a small European mission which will lecture at the leading universities under the auspices of the Intercollegiate Liberal Union [sic].”
Evidently a touch of Fabian elegance was needed, for the Liberal League’s Socialist slip was already showing. In 1922, that outspoken American Socialist, Upton Sinclair, making a tour of the universities, had delivered several lectures sponsored by the Intercollegiate Liberal League(7)—and very nearly succeeded in exposing its Socialist origin. Concerning such incidents, a committee of the American Association of University Professors reported tolerantly: “The Intercollegiate Liberal League suffered from misinterpretation, and somewhat at the hands of ‘heresy hunters.’” (8) In 1922, it merged with the Student Forum and its membership numbered a select 850 on eight college campuses.
Like the young people whom it was schooling in duplicity, the parent LID cultivated a liberal look and an air of candid innocence. This pose was rendered more credible by the fact that certain troublesome “cooperators” had voluntarily withdrawn from the ISS. Gone but not forgotten were firebrands like Ella Reeve Bloor, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, William Z. Foster and Robert Minor, who had been active in the violent IWW-led strikes of other years and who later became top functionaries in the Communist Party.
No suspicion of Communist ties could be permitted to cast its shadow upon the League for Industrial Democracy, on which the future of the Socialist movement in America depended. Yet individual members and even ranking officers, acting independently or through subsidiary organizations, continued to display a puzzling solicitude for the well-being of illicit Communists. To an outsider it sometimes looked as if the chief concern of open-minded League members in the nineteen-twenties was to procure the survival of the illegal Communist Party, then calling itself the Workers’ Party, with whose methods they were officially in disagreement.
In this connection, it may be pointed out that the role of the renovated LID was from the start a defensive one. After 1917, both public officials and the American public at large regarded Communism very much as Anarchism had been viewed in the eighteen-eighties and nineties. Since virtually all members of Communist parties here and abroad were former Socialists, and since a good many avowed Socialists (9) had now one foot in the Communist camp, the average American could hardly be expected to make much distinction between them. A respectable front was urgently needed.
Like the Bellamy clubs of a previous era, the LID was called upon, not only to make Socialism acceptable under other names, but to preserve the whole social revolutionary movement in this country from possible extinction. “Left can speak to left”—a principle later voiced by the British Fabian, Ernest Bevin, at Potsdam—was its undeclared but pragmatic rule of action.
There is no doubt that radicals of every kind were highly unpopular in the United States after World War I—and no doubt there were good reasons. Information had been received linking a number of left wing publications in this country with the Communist International’s propaganda headquarters in Berlin. As a result, the Department of Justice launched an all-out drive to immobilize centers of seditious propaganda in America. A series of raids was conducted in 1919-20 by order of Attorney General Mitchell Palmer, which led four Harvard Law School professors headed by Felix Frankfurter to file a protest with the Justice Department. (10) Socialist-liberal writers—enjoying themselves hugely, as Walter Lippmann recalls—joined forces to taunt and harass the earnest if unsophisticated officers of the law.
When steps were also taken in 1919-20 to close the Rand School of Social Science on grounds that it harbored known Bolsheviks, (11) there was some fear that even the Intercollegiate Socialist Society itself might soon be exposed to summary action. Not only August Claessens, but a whole flock of ISS valued “cooperators” were listed as instructors and lecturers at the Rand School in June, 1919, (12) when the New York State Legislature appointed a committee headed by Senator Clayton R. Lusk to investigate radical activities. The Senator’s methods were of a classic simplicity. He issued a search warrant and called for State Troopers to escort the investigators who descended suddenly on the Rand School, impounding records and files.
On the basis of evidence so obtained, the Committee took steps to close the school by court injunction and throw it into receivership. With the help of Samuel Untermeyer, a prominent New York attorney whose brother, Louis, taught Modem Poetry at the Rand School, the injunction was lifted and the school’s records were returned. Thereupon the so-called Lusk Laws were passed,(13) requiring all private schools in New York State to be licensed. The purpose was to close the Rand School on grounds that it did not meet the necessary qualifications.
Here the hidden source of Socialist power in New York hinted at by August Claessens, suddenly revealed itself. The attorney for the Rand School, Morris Hillquit, was backed by the mass indignation and voting power of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers and other Socialist-led trade unions. Prudently the Lusk Laws were vetoed in 1920 by that happy warrior, Governor Alfred Emanuel Smith, in what has been described as the most brilliant veto message of his career. The episode is significant because it marked the first step in an unholy alliance between the New York State Democratic organization and the Socialist-led needle trades unions: an alliance that was to put Franklin D. Roosevelt into the Governor’s mansion and eventually into the White House, and bring “democratic Socialists” into the highest councils of Government.
Governor Smith’s veto of the Lusk Laws also offered a striking example of the uses of Fabian Socialist permeation in America—the technique recommended so warmly by Beatrice Webb, explained so clearly by Margaret Cole (14) and employed so successfully by British Fabians operating inside the Liberal Party in England. It is a technique of inducing non-Socialists to do the work and the will of Socialists. No one supposes for a moment that Governor Al Smith was himself a Socialist; nor does anyone imagine he drafted that very brilliant veto message personally. Besides being an astute politician of the Tammany Hall stripe, Smith was a devout Catholic layman. To reach him required not only permeation at first hand, but permeation at second hand as well.
In this instance, it may be noted that one of Governor Smith’s counselors on matters involving “social justice” was Father (later Monsignor) John Augustin Ryan of the National Catholic Welfare Council, (15) who in 1915 founded the Department of Social Sciences at the Catholic University of America. In an objective analysis entitled The Economic Thought of John A. Ryan, Dr. Patrick Gearty has revealed that much of Father Ryan’s thinking on social and economic matters was derived from John Atkinson Hobson, the British Fabian Socialist philosopher and avowed rationalist.
In 1919, Father Ryan had already unveiled the draft of a postwar “reconstruction” plan, in an address delivered in West Virginia before the conservative Knights of Columbus. The Ryan plan has since been known by the somewhat misleading title of “The Bishops’ Program of Social Reconstruction,” because it was printed over the signatures of four Bishops who formed the National Catholic Welfare Council’s Executive Committee. It was reprinted in 1931, just prior to the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt as President.
An illuminating fact about the plan was that it took special note of “the social reconstruction program of the British Labor Party”—a program written by Sidney Webb and published as Labour and the New Social Order. Father Ryan specifically cited the “four pillars” of the Webb opus. Concerning them, he stated, “This program may properly be described as one of immediate radical reforms, leading to complete socialism …. Evidently this outcome cannot be approved by Catholics.”(16) True to Catholic orthodoxy, “complete Socialism” must be rejected; but not the bulk of the ill-begotten Fabian “reform” program. Illogically, Father Ryan praised the means while rejecting the end. Although his views certainly cannot be regarded as typical of the Catholic leaders of his day, he left disciples behind him and founded a school of thought which has since come to be accepted unquestioningly by many otherwise devout Catholic teachers and students of the social sciences.
More concretely, Father Ryan defended in speeches and articles the right of the five expelled Socialist Assemblymen to be seated in the New York State Legislature. In 1922, his name appeared on the letterhead of the Labor Defense Council, a joint Socialist-Communist construct, set up to obtain funds for the legal defense of illegal Communists arrested at Bridgman, Michigan, whose attorney of record was Frank P. Walsh.
Although controversial Catholic clerics of conservative economic views have occasionally been silenced, somehow John Augustin Ryan contrived to do very much as he pleased. At a later date he was frankly known as the padre of the New Deal; and for services rendered was honored in 1939 with a birthday dinner attended by more than six hundred persons. The guests included Supreme Court Justices Frankfurter, Douglas and Black, Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins, Secretary of the Treasury Henry A. Morgenthau, Jr., plus a liberal assortment of left wing trade union leaders, progressive educators and New Deal congressmen.
There is no question that the moral influence of Father Ryan, coupled with considerations of practical politics, led Governor Smith in 1920 to intervene on behalf of the Rand School. In other respects, also, Smith anticipated that tolerance for Socialist programs and personalities which characterized his successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt. During Smith’s campaign for the Presidency in 1928, most of his eager supporters scarcely noticed it when he announced “over the radio” that he favored “public ownership of public power.”
The Lusk Laws were briefly revived in 1921 under Governor Nathan Miller, but the Rand School continued to operate happily without a license. It even collaborated in opening a summer school at Camp Tamiment vaguely patterned after Fabian Summer Schools in Britain. There New Republic regulars George Soule and Stuart Chase, Mary Austin, Evans Clark and other LID pundits (17) tutored the humbler Rand School rank-and-file in Socialist politics, economics and general culture.
With time and patience, the school settled its legal difficulties and has survived to the present day as a teaching, research, publishing and propaganda center of “peaceful” Marxism known as the Tamiment Institute. It has lived to enjoy 40th, 45th, 50th and 55th anniversary dinners, complete with souvenir booklets celebrating old times and old-timers. During its lifetime, it has been regularly favored with visits by leading British Fabians: from Bertrand Russell, John Strachey, M.P. and Norman Angell to Margaret Bondfield, M.P., Margaret Cole and Toni Sender, (18) representative of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions at the United Nations. While no change in the Rand School’s outlook has ever been recorded, so far has Socialism been rehabilitated, that the present Taminent Institute now wears an aura of respectability in some academic circles.
In the same year that the Lusk Laws were revived and every known radical organization in the country seemed to be under fire, the LID chose Robert Morss Lovett, professor of English at the University of Chicago, as its president, a post he was to hold for seventeen years. He was a man of keen intelligence, quiet charm and unfailing courtesy, with a thorough knowledge of nineteenth-century English prose sometimes called the literature of protest. To paraphrase Henry Adams, Lovett had been educated for the nineteenth century and found himself obliged to live in the twentieth, a situation to which he was never quite reconciled.
Born on Christmas Day to thrifty, pious New England parents, he came of pilgrim stock but never referred to it. He had graduated summa cum laude from Harvard in the days when Bellamy-type Socialism, adorned with touches of John Ruskin and William Morris, was attracting young Cambridge intellectuals; and he made connections there that lasted until his death at the age of eighty-four. During the eighteen-nineties, Lovett went to Chicago to assist University President John Rainey Harper in bringing culture and scholarship to the booming Midwest. Soon he became a sort of campus legend by virtue of his wit, audacity, kindly disposition and practically unshakable aplomb. An inveterate diner-out and something of a bon vivant, he was punctual in keeping appointments and punctilious in meeting his commitments, academic or social. Because of a certain engaging simplicity of manner, all his life people were eager to protect him and insisted he was somehow being taken advantage of—though the fact was that he invariably did as he chose, without excuses or explanations.
Through his wife, a close friend of Jane Addams and Florence Kelley, Lovett was drawn into the circle of settlement workers, social reformers, pacifists, American Socialists and visiting British Fabians that revolved around Hull House. Due to his own pacifist activities during World War I, he became a scandal to patriots and a hero to Socialists. The event that transformed the rather aloof university professor into a public figure was a mammoth peace meeting in Chicago which ended in a riot.
The circumstances under which Lovett happened to preside at that gathering shed some light on his subsequent career. At the last minute, the original chairman of the meeting failed to appear, and other possible substitutes evaporated. Nobody of prominence could be found willing to take the responsibility for an event almost sure to provoke a public scandal. Obligingly and with a certain amused contempt for the absentees, Lovett agreed to act as chairman, thereby inaugurating a long and tangled career as front man for a legion of left wing organizations and committees. At moments when no one else of established reputation cared to expose himself, Lovett was always available. After the heat was off, others were pleased to take over.
In 1919, Lovett was invited to New York to become editor of The Dial, a literary monthly attempting to endow radicalism with a protective facade of culture and to provide an outlet for the talents of young college-trained Socialists then beginning to throng to the great city. Among his youthful staff assistants on The Dial were Lewis Mumford, (19) who has since become something of an authority on civic architecture and city planning, and Vera Brittain, who later married Professor George Catlin, a prime architect of Atlantic Union. In a year or two, Lovett was made literary editor of the New Republic, a position he occupied six months of the year while retaining his chair at the University of Chicago. He was also named to the Pulitzer prize fiction awards committee. These vantage posts not only provided liberal cover for a confirmed Fabian Socialist, but enabled him to promote the new literature of protest, with its emphasis on “debunking” American institutions, that became popular in the nineteen-twenties and thirties.
Through S. K. Ratcliffe, the New Republic’s long time London representative, and through that magazine’s opposite number in Britain, the New Statesman, it was easy enough to keep regularly in touch with the fountainhead of Fabian Socialism. So many eminent British Fabian authors and educators were busily traveling back and forth across the Atlantic, to share in the wealth of a country whose crassness they deplored, that they passed each other in transit on the high seas. Scarcely a one missed being entertained at the New Republic’s weekly staff luncheons, and Lovett and his associates were helpful in booking many on the lucrative university lecture circuit. As he confided to friends, Lovett longed to visit England; but was blacklisted by the British Foreign Office because he had aided some Hindu revolutionaries, only incidentally financed by German agents, during the war. Thus contacts between the Fabian Society of London and the titular head of its American affiliate necessarily remained indirect. For the time being, perhaps it was better so.
Throughout the nineteen-twenties—while the United States was enjoying a giddy whirl of industrial growth and paper profits, and the outwitting of Prohibition agents became a major national pastime—there was always that same small, close-knit core of studious men and women bent on remaking the country according to a more or less veiled Marxist formula. Bitterly disappointed that world war had not produced a world-wide Socialist commonwealth, they still found much to console them in the international picture. The predominance of the Social Democratic Party in Germany; the existence of a somewhat crude but frankly all-Socialist State in Soviet Russia; and the emergence of the Fabian Socialist-controlled Labour Party as the second strongest political party in Britain: these developments gave them hope of being able some day to bring the unwilling United States to heel.
True, the Socialist movement in America still seemed a comparatively small affair, foreign to the great majority of average Americans. Its appeal was still confined chiefly to social workers, rebel college professors and students, a handful of ambitious lawyers and wealthy ladies, and a few militant Socialist-led unions that were far from representing a majority in the ranks of American labor. The postwar scene, however, was enlivened by the addition of many college-trained young people, cut adrift from family discipline and religious moorings, who found companionship, a faith and ultimately well paid careers within the reorganized Socialist movement. The prestige of British Fabian authors in New York publishing and book review circles helped to open doors for their liberal brethren in the United States. Superficially, the American version of the British Fabian Society almost looked, as it had in England, to be a species of logrolling literary society.
Political power, however, was the prize for which it secretly yearned, insignificant as its efforts in that direction might appear at the moment to be. Socialist intellectuals already aspired to influence the military and foreign policy of the United States and continued to plan quietly for the creation of a Socialist State in America within a world federation of Socialist States. Their postwar aspirations had been foreshadowed in a “Wartime Program” issued early in 1917 by the American Union Against Militarism: a program that in a small way echoed the British Fabian Socialist plan contained in Leonard Woolf’s International Government. The “Wartime Program” stated:
“With America’s entry into the war we must redouble our efforts to maintain democratic liberties, to destroy militarism, and to build towards world federation. Therefore, our immediate program is:
“To oppose all legislation tending to fasten upon the United States in wartime any permanent military policy based on compulsory military training and service.
“To organize legal advice and aid for all men conscientiously opposed to participation in war.
“To demand publication by the Government of all agreements or understandings with other nations.
“To demand a clear and definite statement of the terms on which the United States will make peace.
“To develop the ideal of internationalism in the minds of the American people to the end that this nation may stand firm for world federation at the end of the soar.
To fight for the complete maintenance in wartime of the constitutional right of free speech, free press, peaceable assembly and freedom from unlawful search and seizure. With this end in view the Union has recently established a Civil Liberties Bureau ….” (20)
Founders of the organization issuing that statement were described as “a group of well-known liberals. (21) Closer inspection, however, reveals that virtually every member of its founders’ committee was a long-standing “cooperator” of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, later the League for Industrial Democracy. (22)
When it became evident after the war that the Union’s dream of world federation must be postponed, the LID remained the directive and policy-making body behind a gradual Socialist movement soliciting public support on a variety of pretexts. Its aims were promoted through a handful of closely related organizations, invariably staffed at the executive level by directors and officers of the League. Chief among them were the American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU ), the Federated Press, and the American Fund for Public Service, also known as the Garland Fund, a self-exhausting trust which helped to forestall deficits in the other organizations and even contributed charitably to the subsistence of masked Communist enterprises.
Through such organizations, the Socialist movement maintained discreet contacts with illegal Communist groups in the nineteen-twenties. William Z. Foster, identified then and later as a leader of the Communist Party, was both a director of the Federated Press and a trustee and indirect beneficiary of the Garland Fund. As late as 1938, four acknowledged Communists served on the national committee of the ACLU. (23)
While the LID stood aloof, taking no responsibility for the actions of its subsidiaries, their unity was visibly confirmed by the fact that Robert Morss Lovett held top posts in all four organizations. He was not only president of the LID, but a director of the A(:LU and the Federated Press, which served a number of labor papers and left wing publications, both Socialist and Communist. Lovett also sat on the board of trustees of the Garland Fund, and he chaired a host of ephemeral committees. In fact, he appeared in so many capacities at once that he was sometimes compared to the character in W. S. Gilbert’s ballad who claimed to be the cook, captain and mate of the Nancy brig plus a number of other things.
Obviously, Lovett could not really have directed all the organizations and committees over which he presided in the twenties and after. The administrative and editorial work of the League was handled by Harry Laidler, aided after 1922 by the former clergyman Norman Thomas in the sphere of Socialist politics and by Paul Blanshard as LID organizer. Paul Blanshard later directed the Federated Press. (24) More recently, he has been identified with an organization known as “Protestants and Other Americans United for the Separation of Church and State,” dedicated to expunging all references to God from public schools and public life in America. He anticipated G. D. II. Cole, the president of the London Fabian Society, who smilingly advocated “the abolition of God”!
Though Lovett’s actual duties—aside from his work as an editor, teacher and public speaker—always remained somewhat mysterious, he appears to have acted mainly as a liaison between top-level Socialists and Communists as well as academic and moneyed groups. During the Socialist movement’s period of temporary regression, he was in his glory. His contacts were numerous, and his personal amiability combined with discretion, made him acceptable to all. “Let one hand wash the other” and “recoil, the better to spring forward” (Reculer pour mieux sauter) were the private maxims that guided him on his variegated rounds. It was hard to believe that so delightful and considerate a dinner guest, as Felix Frankfurter has described in his autobiography, and so informed and sober a classroom figure could be so dangerous a radical.
Yet an old friend, who never shared his political views, still recalls how the normally serene Robert Morss Lovett once remarked with sudden intensity: “I hate the United States! I would be willing to see the whole world blow up, if it would destroy the United States!” His startled companion dismissed the incident as a momentary aberration —and refrained from mentioning to Lovett that his words were much the same as those of Philip Nolan in The Man Without a Country.
Most conspicuous of the postwar organizations manned by League for Industrial Democracy members was the American Civil Liberties Union. Like the LID, the ACLU has survived to the present day, acquiring a patina of respectability with the passage of time and the decline of old-fashioned patriotism, for which both bodies cherish an ill-concealed contempt.
Formed in January, 1920, the ACLU was a direct outgrowth of the wartime Civil Liberties Bureau, a branch of the American Union Against Militarism. The Bureau assumed “independent” life in 1917 when a young social worker from St. Louis named Roger Baldwin moved to New York to direct the work of its national office. (25) During the war, it furnished advice and legal aid to conscientious objectors, thus gaining the support of some quite reputable Quakers. When it was reorganized on a permanent basis after the war as the ACLU, Roger Baldwin, who had just finished a prison term for draft-dodging, returned as its executive officer. For all practical purposes, he ran the organization for approximately forty years.
While the ACLU was still in the process of formation, Baldwin wrote in an advisory letter: “Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise. We want also to look patriots in everything we dot-We want to get a good lot of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to make of the country, and to show that we are really the folks that really stand for the spirit of our institutions.” (26) Such deceptive practice was in the classic Fabian tradition—symbolized by the wolf in sheep’s clothing that decorates the Shavian stained-glass window at a Fabian meetinghouse in England. Promptly adopted by Baldwin’s associates, this tactic has succeeded in deluding not a few well-intentioned Americans.
The immediate function of the American Civil Liberties Union in 1920 was to combat the postwar flurry of arrests, deportations and court actions against Communists and other seditionists, many of whom were foreign born. Baldwin had previously described such individuals “as representing labor and radical movements for human welfare,” and contended they were being “insidiously attacked by privileged business interests working under the cloak of patriotism.” (27) Twin weapons of the quasi-forensic ACLU were legal aid and a species of propaganda designed to arouse public sympathy for the “victims” of the law—an expedient normally frowned upon by the American bar.
If it was Roger Baldwin who defined the propaganda line, another founder of the ACLU,(28) Harvard Law Professor Felix Frankfurter, provided the legalistic approach. In his protest of 1920 to the Department of Justice; in his argument as amicus curiae before a federal court in Boston, where he assured the right of habeas corpus to criminal aliens awaiting deportation; (29) and earlier, in two reports submitted as counsel for President Wilson’s Mediation Commission, Frankfurter initiated the mischievous practice of invoking the Constitution for the benefit of its avowed enemies.
Perhaps more than any other American, Frankfurter helped to establish the fiction that it is somehow unconstitutional and un-American for the United States to take measures to defend itself against individuals or groups pledged to destroy it. His reports on the Preparedness Day bombings and the Bisbee deportations won him a sharp rebuke from that forthright American, former President Theodore Roosevelt, who wrote in a personal letter to Frankfurter:
“I have just received your report on the Bisbee deportations …. Your report is as thoroughly misleading a document as could be written on the subject . .
“Here again you are engaged in excusing men precisely like the Bolsheviki in Russia, who are murderers and encouragers of murder, who are traitors to their allies, to democracy and to civilization . . . and whose acts are nevertheless apologized for on grounds, my dear Mr. Frankfurter, substantially like those which you allege. In times of danger nothing is more common and more dangerous to the Republic than for men to avoid condemning the criminals who are really public enemies by making their entire assault on the shortcomings of the good citizens who have been the victims or opponents of the criminals …. lt is not the kind of thing I care to see well-meaning men do in this country.”(30)
One of the more sensational events in which early leaders of the American Civil Liberties Union took a hand was the case of the “Michigan Syndicalists.” The circumstances leading up to it were peculiar, to say the least. In August, 1922, a Hungarian agent of the Communist International, one Joseph Pogany, alias Lang, alias John Pepper, arrived illegally in the United States. Having assisted in setting up the short-lived Bela Kun Government in Hungary, he was presumed to be something of a specialist in the bloodier forms of revolutionary behavior. Pogany brought with him detailed instructions for organizing both legal and illegal branches of the new Communist Party USA. Those instructions were to be divulged by him at a secret Communist convention, held at a camp in the woods near Bridgman, Michigan, which was duly raided by the authorities.
As a result, seventeen Communists—including William Z. Foster, then editor of the Labor Herald–were arrested and arraigned under Michigan’s anti-syndicalist laws. At his trial in Bridgman, Foster, who later openly headed the Communist Party, testified under oath that he was not a Communist, thereby escaping conviction. Many others attending the conclave had prudently slipped away the night before the raid, leaving a mass of records and documents behind. In sifting this material, it was discovered that several of the delegates were connected with the Rand School of Social Science. Some, like Rose Pastor Stokes and Max Lerner, have since been listed as “cooperators” of the LID. (31)
Max Lerner, a bright young intellectual who had been a student leader of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society at Washington University in St. Louis, was among the seventeen persons arrested in or near Bridgman. Like Foster, he claimed to have attended that secret convention in an editorial capacity. What his other motives may have been are not recorded, since from that time forward Lerner appeared to operate strictly within the framework of the Fabian Socialist movement. For years he continued to write articles for The Nation, The Call and The New Leader, and to lecture on economics at the Rand School, the New School for Social Research and more conventional institutions of learning. He was a lifelong admirer of the self-proclaimed Marxist, Harold Laski, who found Lerner’s political outlook close to his own.(32)
When Laski was quoted in 1945 by the Newark Advertiser as condoning bloody revolution, he sued for libel in a London court—and lost the case. It was Max Lerner (together with Harvard Professor Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr.) who took the initiative in collecting an American “fund” for Laski,(33) to help defray the latter’s court costs of some twelve thousand pounds. More recently, we find an unreconstructed Max Lerner writing a widely circulated column for American newspapers. In an article sent from Switzerland in August, 1963, he deftly exploited the malodorous Stephen Ward pandering case (forced into prominence by the Fabian Harold Wilson, M.P.) as a means of promoting sympathy for Socialism.(34)
The pained outcry that the Bridgman case evoked in the twenties from Socialist-liberal writers and publicists was symptomatic of a curious phenomenon never explained by medical science: Wound a Communist, and a Socialist bleeds! A circular letter of April G, 1923, soliciting funds for the legal defense of the arrested Communists, described them plaintively as a “group of men and women met together peacefully to consider the business of their party organization.” This letter appeared on the stationery of the Labor Defense Council, whose national committee included the names of well-known Communists. It was signed by eight equally well-known members of the LID and/or ACLU. (35) At about the same time, Robert Morss Lovett persuaded the wealthy wife of a University of Chicago professor, to post securities valued at $25,000 as bond for the Bridgman defendants. The securities were subsequently forfeited when several of the accused jumped bail and fled to Moscow.
A more enduring cause celebre, in which both Socialist- and Communist-sponsored “defense” organizations battled jointly to reverse the course of justice, was the Sacco-Vanzetti case. Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were Italian immigrants of admitted Anarchist views (36) who were arrested in 1920 for the robbery and murder of a paymaster and paymaster’s guard in South Braintree, Massachusetts. Found guilty and sentenced to die, they were finally executed in 1927. Since several million words have already been written about the case in the form of legal briefs, editorials, articles and books, it would be superfluous to review the matter in detail. Some $300,000 was contributed for the legal defense of those “two obscure immigrants about whom nobody cared”—as Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. has described them sentimentally in The Age of Roosevelt.
Left wing leaders had apparently promised Sacco and Vanzetti they would be saved at any cost, and a mighty effort was made to that end. All the available propaganda stops were pulled out. The whole spectrum of leftist literary lights, from Liberal to Socialist to Communist, was brought into play. Academic Socialism’s foremost figures were enlisted to dignify the campaign, and student organizations were rounded up. Among the legal scholars who helped to prepare documents on the case was Harvard Law Professor Francis B. Sayre, son-in-law of Woodrow Wilson and a relative of the Reverend John Nevin Sayre. (37) The Brandeis family became so emotionally involved in the cause of the two allegedly persecuted immigrants that Justice Brandeis felt obliged to disqualify himself when the question of reviewing the case reached the Supreme Court.
For several years the Harvard campus was split down the middle on the issue of Sacco and Vanzetti’s guilt or innocence. Professors Felix Frankfurter and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr. rallied the innocence-mongers. They were supported by Roscoe Pound, Dean of the Law School and a disciple of Brandeis in the field of sociological law. On the other hand, University President A. Lawrence Lowell urged moderation and suggested that some credence be placed in the good faith and common sense of Massachusetts’ judges and law enforcement officers. So vehemently did Felix Frankfurter denounce his academic superior that it was suggested the little law professor resign. “Why should I resign?” asked Frankfurter, adding insolently, “Let Lowell resign!” When it was all over, the long-suffering President Lowell wrote in mild exasperation to Dean Pound that he thought “one Frankfurter to the Pound should be enough.”
Not only The Nation and New Republic, but at least two respected New York dailies, insisted to the end that Sacco and Vanzetti were the blameless victims of a Red scare or public witch hunt. So impassioned and so confusing was the public debate that some Americans today are still under the impression that Sacco and Vanzetti were somehow “framed” or “railroaded” to their death. Only recently a final confirmation of their guilt has come to light. It was contained in a quiet announcement by Francis Russell, a man who has spent the better part of his life seeking to demonstrate Sacco and Vanzetti’s innocence.
In the June, 1962, issue of American Heritage Russell told how he finally traced the long-missing bullets found in the body of the paymaster’s guard, Berardelli, to a police captain, now deceased. Two ballistic experts, using modern techniques, analyzed the bullets and testified they had unquestionably been fired from the .32 caliber pistol which Sacco was carrying at the time of his arrest. Thus Francis Russell was forced to conclude that Sacco wielded the murder weapon and that Vanzetti was at least an accessory.
Oddly enough, a similar conclusion based on less objective evidence was made public by Upton Sinclair in 1953. In a memoir published serially in the Rand School’s quarterly Bulletin of International Socialist Studies, (38) Sinclair quoted Fred A. Moore, an attorney for Sacco and Vanzetti, as saying he believed Sacco to be guilty of the shooting and Vanzetti to have guilty knowledge of it. Sinclair further relates how Robert Minor, a Communist Party official, telephoned him long distance in Boston and begged him not to repeat the attorney’s opinion. “You will ruin the movement! It will be treason!” cried Minor.
From that indiscreet telephone call, it is inferred that Sacco and Vanzetti may have robbed and killed to fill the Party’s underground treasury, as Stalin and his Bolshevik comrades are known to have done in Russian Georgia during 1910-11. At any rate, the missing payroll funds, amounting to nearly $16,000, were never recovered. A third man, reported by witnesses to have assisted at the South Braintree crime, vanished coincidentally with the cash. This, however, is not the “legacy” referred to by Professor Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr., who in 1948 wrote the introduction to an emotion-packed volume perpetuating the martyr legend of “the poor fish-peddler and the good shoemaker.” (39) As of 1962, Schlesinger’s son, Arthur, Jr., was a member of the national committee of the American Civil Liberties Union, which had handled the appeals and coordinated the propaganda in the historic Sacco and Vanzetti case.(40)
1. Forty Years of Education (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1945), p. 56. A telegram to the League on its fortieth anniversary from Mandel V. Halushka, a Chicago schoolteacher, read, “Birthday greetings to America’s Fabian Society!”
2. Only two direct references to the Fabian Society occur in the Lusk Report, and the first is misleading:
“In England during the ‘80’s the Fabian Society was formed which remains an influential group of intellectual Socialists, but without direct influence on the working man or Parliament.” Revolutionary Radicalism, Vol. I, p. 53.
“We have already called attention to the Fabian Society as an interesting group of intellectual Socialists who engage in a very brilliant campaign of propaganda.” Ibid., p. 145.
Obviously, the Lusk Committee underestimated both the current and potential influence of the Society.
3. Depression, Recovery and Higher Education. A Report by (a) Committee of the American Association of University Professors. Prepared by Malcolm M. Willey, University of Minnesota, (New York, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1937), p. 317.
4. Ibid.
5. Italics originally added, now removed.
7. At other colleges and universities Upton Sinclair’s lectures were sponsored by local units of the Cosmopolitan Club–an organization similar in character and inspiration to the Intercollegiate Liberal League.
9. Algernon Lee, author of The Essentials of Marxism, said: “A large proportion in the early nineteen-twenties went Communist, and of these only a few have found there way back.” Quoted in August Claessens’ autobiography, Didn’t We Have Fun? (New York, Rand School Press, 1953), p. 20.
10. Helen Shirley Thomas, Felix Frankfurter: Scholar on the Bench (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1960), p. 19. Distributed in England by the Oxford University Press.
11. Who’s Who in New York for 1918 lists A. A. Heller as a director of the Rand School. Treasurer and general manager of the International Oxygen Company, which had benefitted from wartime contracts, the Russian-born Heller served as commercial attache of the unofficial “Soviet Embassy,” whose chief, Ludwig Martens, left the United States under pressure.
12. In 1919, instructors and lecturers at Rand School included: Max Eastman, Charles Beard, Elmer Rice, Oswald Garrison Villard, John Haynes Holmes, Harry Laidler, Lajpait Rai, Joseph Scholossberg, August Claessens, Harry Dana, Henrietta Epstein, E. A. Goldenweisser, James O’Neal, Eugene Wood, A. Philip Randolph, I. A. Hourwich, Henry Newman, Harvey P. Robinson and Joseph Slavit. Bulletin of the Rand school, 1918-19. See Appendix II.
13. The year that the Lusk Laws were passed and vetoed by Smith, 1920, the School heard Louis Lochner on Journalism, Gregory Zilboorg on Literature, Leland Olds on American Social History, Frank Tannenbaum on Modern European History, and James P. Warbasse on the Cooperative Movement, Bulletin of the Rand School, 1919-20. See Appendix II.
14. Margaret Cole, The Story of Fabian Socialism (London, Heinemann Educational Books, Ltd., 1961), pp. 84 ff.
15. Renamed in 1923 The National Catholic Welfare Conference.
16. Italics originally added, now removed.
17. The year after the Lusk Laws were repassed in 1921 marked the opening of Camp Tamiment. Evans Clark taught Political Science, William Soskin, Modern Theatre, Mary Austin, American Literature, Otto Beyer, Industrial Problems. Robert Ferrari lectured on Crime, Taraknath Das on the Far East. The roster of lecturers also included Clement Wood, Arthur W. Calhoun, George Soule, Joseph Jablonower, Norman Thomas, Solon DeLeon, Jessie W. Hughan and Stuart Chase. Bulletin of the Rand School, 1920-21. See Appendix II.
18. Toni Sender’s salary was partially paid by the AFL-CIO, an item regularly reported in its annual budget.
20. David Edison Bunting, Liberty and Learning. With an Introduction by Professor George S. Counts, President, American Federation of Teachers. (Washington, American Council on Public Affairs, 1942), p. 2.
22. This committee was composed of Lillian D. Wald, of the Henry Street Settlement; Paul U. Kellogg, editor of Survey Graphic; the Reverend John Haynes Holmes; Rabbi Stephen S. Wise; Florence Kelley, president of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society and head of the Consumers League of America; George W. Kirchwey; Crystal Eastman Benedict; L. Hollingsworth Wood, a prominent Quaker attorney; Louis P. Lochner, afterwards of The New York Times Bureau in Berlin; Alice Lewisohn: Max Eastman; Allen Benson and Elizabeth G. Evans. Ibid. See Appendix II.
23. Ibid., p. 10. See chart of political affiliations of national committee, American Civil Liberties Union.
24. Paul Blanshard was a contributor to the official 1928 Campaign Handbook of the Socialist Party, entitled The Intelligent Voter’s Guide and published by the Socialist National Campaign Committee. Other contributors were: W. E. Woodward, Norman Thomas, Freda Kirchwey, McAllister Coleman, James O’Neal, Harry Elmer Barnes, James H. Maurer, Lewis Gannett, Victor L. Berger, Harry W. Laidler and Louis Waldman. All were officials of the League for Industrial Democracy. See Appendix II.
25. Bunting, op. cit., p. 2.
26. Revolutionary Radicalism, Vol. I, p. 1087.
30. Roosevelt to Frankfurter, December 19, 1917, The Letters of Theodore Roosevelt, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, VIII, 1262.
32. Kingsley Martin, Harold Laski: A Biographical Memoir (New York, The Viking Press, Inc., 1953), p. 86. “Among the younger men, including, for instance, Max Lerner, he [Laski] found intellectuals whose political outlook was close to his own.”
34. San Francisco Examiner (August 11, 1963). “We underestimate,” writes Lerner, “how deeply most people need a rebel-victim symbol. There is a lot of free-flowing aggression in all of us, and one of the functions of a cause celebre is to give us a chance to channel some of it. . . . This brings us back to Ward as the rebel against society, and the victim of its power-groups.”
35. Signers of this letter were: Freda Kirchwey, editor of The Nation; Norman Thomas, leader of the Socialist Party; The Reverend John Nevin Sayre; Mary Heaton Vorse, contributor to The Nation and the friend and inspirer of Sinclair Lewis; Roger Baldwin, director of American Civil Liberties Union; The Reverend Percy Stickney Grant: The Reverend John Haynes Holmes; Paxton Hibben, director and solicitor of funds for the “Russian Red Cross” in the United States. All are listed by Mina Weisenberg as “cooperators” of the League for Industrial Democracy. See Appendix II.
36. In this connection, it is interesting to note that in June, 1919, the first issue of Freedom–a paper published by the Ferrer group of Anarchists at Stelton, New Jersey–stated editorially: “It may well be asked, ‘Why another paper?’ when the broadly libertarian and revolutionary movement is so ably represented by Socialist publications like the Revolutionary Age, Liberator, Rebel Worker, Workers’ World and many others, and the advanced liberal movement by The Dial, Nation, World Tomorrow and to a lesser degree, the New Republic and Survey. These publications are doing excellent work in their several ways, and with much of that work we find ourselves in hearty agreement.” (Author’s note: One of the founders of the Ferrer School, Leonard D. Abbott, was also a founder of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society. He was associate editor of Freedom. Members of that short-lived paper’s editorial staff were teachers at the Rand School.)
37. The Reverend John Nevin Sayre was a founder of the ACLU and signed the appeal for funds in the Bridgman case.
38. Upton Sinclair, “The Fishpeddler and the Shoemaker,” Bulletin of International Social Studies (Summer, 1953).
39. Cf. Louis G. Joughlin and Edmund M. Morgan, The Legacy of Sacco and Vanzetti. With an introduction by Arthur M. Schlesinger (New York, Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1948).
40. Freedom Through Dissent, 42nd Annual Report, July 1, 1961 to June 30, 1962, American Civil Liberties Union, New York, 1962. (List of officers, directors, national committee members, etc. Page not numbered, opposite p. 1.)
Chapter 2–Sowing the Wind | ProgressingAmerica on Chapter 1–Make Haste Slowly!
Chapter 1--Make Haste Slowly! on Chapter 2–Sowing the Wind
David Veksler on Foreward and Preface
FabianFreeway
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1580
|
__label__wiki
| 0.549593
| 0.549593
|
Budget Setting 2020/2021
Keynsham Town Council finalised the Annual Budget for 2020/2021 at its meeting on Tuesday 14th January, and in doing so also set the council tax precept to cover a proportion of the forecast £870,173 expenditure. The Town Council is forecasting an income of £144,745 which includes for £55k of Community Infrastructure Levy receipts and has set a precept (amount levied on council tax payers) this coming year of £607,778 which equates to £93.12 per Band D Equivalent (BDE) household. This represents a 2% increase (3.52p per week) on last year’s amount of £91.29 to £93.12 per annum per BDE . The Town Council has released £172,241 from ear-marked reserves to fund the remaining shortfall.
Dr Cheryl Scott, Town Clerk, commented: "Although the tax base for Keynsham (no of households) has increased by 2.7% the Town Council’s forecast expenditure of £870,173 represents a 16.7% increase on last year’s budget of £745,115. This sounds an irresponsible increase but the figures are skewed by the receipt and expenditure of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) monies from Keynsham development together with the use of ear marked reserves for capital projects to maintain/improve asset infrastructure amounting to some £110,000. As examples, the Council will be contributing £40,000 towards the High Street Heritage Action Zone Project, £15,000 towards the refurbishment of Kelston Park Play Area and is hoping to spend up to £20,000 of s106 monies to improve the existing allotments in the coming year.
In terms of day to day running costs, the Council will be saving almost £19,000 on staff pensions next year and part of the ear marked reserves being brought down to support next year’s expenditure is the result of saving £40k on this year’s budget in respect of staff costs by delaying recruitment and deferring £33k of capital project expenditure to next year.. Unfortunately the forecast £55k Community Infrastructure Levy income, must be spent on improving infrastructure so cannot be used to fund revenue expenditure. Like many other Councils up and down the country, Keynsham Town Council has to think very carefully when making decisions about whether to take on more responsibilities, projects and activities that would incur more cost".
Chairman Councillor Andy Wait continued: "The Town Council continues to experience significant pressure to either take on or contribute to assets, services and projects which would in the past have been funded totally by B&NES. After 18 months of protracted negotiation with the developers, the Town Council has finally agreed to accept the transfer of Holmoak Play area at Bilbie Green to manage/maintain in perpetuity. We are therefore currently developing a joint strategy with B&NES on the future management and maintenance of all recreational and green spaces in Keynsham. This will include taking account of the results of the recent Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) Recreational Spaces survey and, most importantly, the use of s106 and CIL monies collected by B&NES from developments in Keynsham towards supporting future Keynsham infrastructure projects.
It is very clear that the management of our environment, both local and global, is of increasing concern to our residents. The first meeting of the new Council last May declared a Climate Emergency and as part of this new initiative the Council has allocated an additional £10,000 to the existing £20,000 available as grants to community organisations that will be ring-fenced to support environmental projects. The Annual awards application process will be opening shortly. In addition, it has allocated a further £10,000 of CIL money per year for the next 3 years for small community infrastructure projects and will be launching a call for suggestions at the Annual Town Meeting on Thursday 23rd April at 7.30pm in The Space. As the new Environment & Sustainability Working Party gathers momentum under the Chairmanship of Cllr Alan Greenfield, there will be further initiatives and information to support both the Town Council and residents in their aims towards reducing carbon emissions and single use plastics".
Councillor Wait concluded: "With Brexit about to happen and the impact social care continues to have on Local Authority budgets, as a small Town Council we still have a responsibility to consider the costs associated with taking on new assets and services against the increase in council tax that would be necessary to cover the additional resourcing and maintenance costs.
In recognition of this, the last Council introduced long term financial planning as part of the budgetary process and this Council will continue with its duty to all residents of Keynsham to exercise responsible stewardship of the current assets and services and ensure we have the finances in place to do so”.
For further information please visit the Town Council’s website www.keynsham-tc.gov.uk or contact: Dr Cheryl Scott, Town Clerk at Keynsham Town Council, 15-17 Temple Street, Keynsham, Bristol BS31 1HF, telephone 01225 395951 or e-mail: townclerk@keynsham-tc.gov.uk
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1587
|
__label__cc
| 0.627376
| 0.372624
|
Boran Berčić
Philosophy of the Vienna Circle
# Description
“Boran Berčić's book analyses philosophy of the Vienna Circle as a whole. It is an ambitious endeavor. Central thesis of the book is that Logical Positivism is systematic and complete philosophy which contains Semantics, Epistemology, Ontology, Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics, Philosophy of Empirical Sciences, Ethics, Philosophy of Religion and comments on other philosophies. Berčić has shown that, regardless of individual differences among its members, the Vienna Circle as a whole has its relevant standing against most traditional philosophy disciplines - either by contributing and developing them or by disputing them. This book is an original contribution to philosophy as well as valuable information about an important philosophy movement which significantly stamped Twentieth Century Philosophy.” (Goran Švob)
Boran Berčić was born 1964. in Zagreb, Croatia. He graduated Philosophy and Comparative literature at the Faculty of Science and Arts, University of Zagreb (1990). At the same Faculty he obtained MA (1994) and PhD (1998). He studied at the Karl-Franzens University in Graz, Austria, Universita degli Studii in Trieste, Italy and as a Fulbright scholar at the University of California at Irvine, CA, USA. He published several articles and two books: Science and Truth (1995) and Realism, Relativism, Tolerance (1995). He is full professor at the Philosophy Department of the University of Rijeka, Croatia, where he teaches Introduction to Philosophy, Ontology and Philosophy of Science.
# Reviews
http://www.vjesnik.hr/pdf/2002%5C05%5C29%5C17A17.PDF
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1589
|
__label__wiki
| 0.579076
| 0.579076
|
Stories written by Emilio Godoy
Emilio Godoy is a Mexico-based correspondent who covers the environment, human rights and sustainable development. He has been a journalist since 1996 and has written for various media outlets in Mexico, Central America and Spain. | Twitter |
Mexico Sticks to Natural Gas, Despite Socioenvironmental Impacts
By Emilio Godoy
In his community of small farmers and ranchers in northern Mexico, Aristeo Benavides has witnessed the damage caused by the natural gas industry, which has penetrated collectively owned landholdings, altering local communities' way of life and forms of production.
In the Face of a Pandemic, the World Turns to Trade
Greatly affected by the coronavirus pandemic, international trade can play a key role in the economic recovery, but it must overcome obstacles, such as protectionism and commercial disputes, especially between the United States and China.
Capture of CO2 and Hydrogen as Part of Latin America’s Energy Future
While struggling to increase the generation and consumption of renewable energy, Latin America is beginning to see the rise of new technologies, such as the capture and storage of carbon and hydrogen from fossil fuels or wind and solar energy.
Energy Transition and Post-Covid Recovery, a Challenge for Latin America
The way forward for energy transition and its link to an economic recovery after the depression caused by the covid-19 pandemic is focusing attention in Latin America and Europe, according to the 2nd Madrid Energy Conference (MEC), which concluded this Friday 2.
Intercontinental Energy Forum to Discuss Post-Covid Challenges
The economic recovery after the covid-19 pandemic, renewable energy, the gas situation, regulations and investment; mobility and transport, as well as new technologies and the progress of the Paris Agreement will be discussed at the Madrid Energy Conference from 28 September to 2 October.
Energy Cooperatives Swim Against the Tide in Mexico
A Mexican solar energy cooperative, Onergia, seeks to promote decent employment, apply technological knowledge and promote alternatives that are less polluting than fossil fuels, in one of the alternative initiatives with which Mexico is seeking to move towards an energy transition.
Mayan Train Threatens to Alter the Environment and Communities in Mexico
Mayan anthropologist Ezer May fears that the tourism development and real estate construction boom that will be unleashed by the Mayan Train, the main infrastructure project of Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, will disrupt his community.
Crisis Hits Oil Industry and Energy Transition Alike
While it attempts to cushion the effects of the coronavirus pandemic, the Latin American and Caribbean region also faces concerns about the future of the energy transition and state-owned oil companies.
Mexico’s Development Banks Fuel the Fossil Energy Trade
Since 2012, Teresa Castellanos has fought the construction of a gas-fired power plant in Huexca, in the central Mexican state of Morelos, adjacent to the country's capital.
Coronavirus, New Threat for Mexican Migrant Workers in the U.S.
As the high season for agricultural labour in the United States approaches, tens of thousands of migrant workers from Mexico are getting ready to head to the fields in their northern neighbour to carry out the work that ensures that food makes it to people's tables.
Bioenergy, the Ugly Duckling of Mexico’s Energy Transition
Rosa Manzano carefully arranges pieces of wood in a big mud igloo that, seven days after it is full, will produce charcoal of high caloric content.
Mexico’s Plan to Upgrade Hydropower Plants Faces Hurdles
Water security and profitability are the Achilles heels of the plan to modernise 60 hydroelectric plants in Mexico, drawn up by the administration of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
Social Summit Demands Stronger Commitments in Climate Talks
As the COP25 deliberations enter the decisive final week, representatives of environmental and social organisations gathered in a parallel summit are pressing the governments to adopt stronger commitments in the face of a worsening climate emergency.
Climate Summit Kicks Off, Caught Between Realism and Hope
Tens of thousands of delegates from state parties began working Monday Dec. 2 in the Spanish capital to pave the way to comply with the Paris Agreement on climate change, while at a parallel summit, representatives of civil society demanded that the international community go further.
IDB Modernises Crucial Social and Environmental Safeguards
The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) is in the process of modernising the social and environmental safeguards that govern the financing of projects considered vital for the construction of sustainable infrastructure in the Latin American region.
Solar Cookers Produce More Than Food for Mexican Women
The sun's rays are also used to cook food and thus replace the burning of firewood and gas, improve the health of local residents and fuel the energy transition towards the use of renewable sources - the objectives of an enterprise in the southern Mexican state of Oaxaca.
Mexican Women Use Sunlight Instead of Firewood or Gas to Cook Meals
Reyna Díaz cooks beans, chicken, pork and desserts in her solar cooker, which she sets up in the open courtyard of her home in a poor neighborhood on the outskirts of this town in southwestern Mexico.
Migrant Farm Workers, the Main Victims of Slave Labour in Mexico
"They mislead the workers, tell them that they will be paid well and pay them much less. The recruiters and the employers deceive them," complained Marilyn Gómez, a migrant farm worker in Mexico.
Minerva Montes lost her home on Holbox Island in 2005 when Hurricane Wilma hit the Yucatan Peninsula in southeastern Mexico. Rebuilding her home was quicker and easier than overcoming the psychological aftermath of the catastrophe.
Attacks on Human Rights Defenders: A Daily Occurrence in Latin America
"We're in a very difficult situation. There is militarisation at a regional level, and gender-based violence. We are at risk, we cannot silence that," Aura Lolita Chávez, an indigenous woman from Guatemala, complained at a meeting of human rights defenders from Latin America held in the Mexican capital.
Mexican Village Wants to Turn Thermoelectric Plant into Solar Panel Factory
Social organisations in the central Mexican municipality of Yecapixtla managed to halt the construction of a large thermoelectric plant in the town and are now designing a project to convert the installation into a solar panel factory, which would bring the area socioeconomic and environmental dividends.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1591
|
__label__wiki
| 0.54496
| 0.54496
|
Bedface
Bedface are a 5 piece Alternative Indie band from the depths of the South Wales jungle known as ‘The Valleys’. Described by Adam Walton BBC Radio Wales as “A hybridised Los Campesinos! And Fleetwood Mac... And a bit of The Go-Betweens”.
They recently recorded their debut album with Nick Brine (Oasis, The Darkness, Teenage Fan Club, and Thunder) which was released in November 2018 to a sell-out crowd in Ten Feet Tall Cardiff.
Bedface have an eclectic range of musical influences from folk to jazz and everything in between, bringing a festival vibe to every gig.
For Fans of: Fleetwood Mac, The Eagles, Paolo Nutini, The Beautiful South, Bob Dylan, Ben Howard, Los Campesinos!, Foster the People, Pavement, Jake Bugg, Super Furry Animals.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1597
|
__label__cc
| 0.637216
| 0.362784
|
“Little Women” and “Dolittle” Are Among This Week’s New Releases!
04.07.20 | Chris Cummins | Tags: Bebe Neuwirth, Bob Odenkirk, Chris Cooper, Eliza Scanlen, Emma Thompson, Emma Watson, Ernst Lubitsch, Franchot Tone, Fred MacMurray, Gary Cooper, Greta Gerwig, Helen Hunt, Henry Winkler, John Cena, John Goodman, John Leguizamo, Johnathon Schaech, Kumail Nanjiani, Laura Dern, Louis Garrel, Louisa May Alcott, Marion Cotillard, Marjorie Main, Marlene Dietrich, Meryl Streep, Octavia Spencer, Ralph Fiennes, Rami Malek, Robert Downey Jr., Sally Field, Saoirse Ronan, Selena Gomez, Tea Leoni, Tim Daly, Timothée Chalamet, Tom Holland, William Frawley, Zeljko Ivanek | no comments
We’re back with another week of you releases. There’s a lot of great DVDs and Blu-rays to choose from that are now available, including several classic films that are making their high-def debuts. Check em’ out, we know you’ll want…
“Aladdin,” “John Wick: Chapter 3: Parabellum,” and More Magical New Releases!
09.10.19 | Chris Cummins | Tags: 3-D movies, Adam Driver, Alfred Hitchcock, Beau Bridges, Bill Murray, Brooke Shields, Caleb Landry Jones, Carol Kane, Cecil B. DeMille, Chloë Sevigny, Christopher Lee, Cole Porter, Danny Glover, Donald Pleasence, Flower Shop Mystery, George Kennedy, George Segal, Glenda Jackson, Grace Kelly, Gregory Peck, Halle Berry, Hallmark Channel, Hammer Horror, Hanna-Barbera, Howard Keel, Ian McShane, Iggy Pop, Jim Jarmusch, John Wayne, Kathryn Grayson, Keanu Reeves, Kevin McCarthy, Laurence Fishburne, Marlene Dietrich, Mena Massoud, Patrick Troughton, Paul Sorvino, Ray Milland, Raymond Massey, Robert Preston, Rosie Perez, RZA, Selena Gomez, Steve Buscemi, Susan Hayward, The Jetsons, Tilda Swinton, Tom Waits, Walter Matthau, Will Smith | no comments
Whoa. Some weeks there are so many new releases making their debut that it is mind-boggling. This is one of them. Whether you like contemporary stars like Will Smith and Keanu Reeves to classic Hollywood figures like John Wayne, there’s…
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1601
|
__label__wiki
| 0.666079
| 0.666079
|
British explorer sets out on treasure hunt
In Expeditions
From UPI
A British fortune hunter is heading to a Pacific island in search of more than $250 million worth of treasure supposedly buried there by 19th century pirates.
Shaun Whitehead is leading an expedition to Cocos Island in hopes of discovering treasure allegedly buried there by a British trader, Capt. William Thompson, in 1820, The Daily Telegraph reported Sunday.
The British newspaper said as the story goes, Thompson stole gold, silver and jewelry amassed by Spanish authorities in Lima, Peru, that he was entrusted to transport to Mexico.
Thompson and his crew allegedly killed Spanish sailors on their ship and headed for Cocos Island, off the coast of Costa Rica, to bury their loot, which included 113 gold religious statues, 200 chests of jewels, 273 swords with jeweled hilts, 1,000 diamonds, solid gold crowns, 150 chalices, and hundreds of gold and silver bars.
Whitehead and a team of about 15 will scour the island over the 10-day expedition using non-invasive technology not used in previous expeditions to the island.
"This is a scientific survey, including archaeological, geological and biodiversity aspects," Whitehead said.
"Unlike previous trips, we are not going to dig vast holes or do anything destructive at all.
The real treasure of the island is its natural beauty.Anything else we find there is simply a bonus."
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1603
|
__label__cc
| 0.636866
| 0.363134
|
Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)
Imagine No Religion
Entry 426, on 2006-11-14 at 18:10:29 (Rating 4, Comments)
Today I read an opinion in our local paper from their commentator on religion. He was attacking the claim that religion causes all wars. Before I comment further I would first say that this is a straw man fallacy. No one I know of has ever claimed that religion causes all wars, but many people would say religion makes a major contribution to many wars. That opinion would be a lot harder to attack.
Apparently people who dare to criticise religion must be starting to get through to supporters of religion. In the article Richard Dawkins is referred to as a "high priest" of simplistic nonsense. A bit touchy, I would say! Christians aren't used to their beliefs being subject to critical appraisal, but its something we really need so I hope they can accept it a bit more gracefully in future.
Whether the world would be a better place without religion is hard to assess. There is no doubt that a major cause of war and other conflict would be removed, but would it not just be human nature to find another reason to fight? I think it would to some extent, but without an organised system of indoctrination, which is all most major religions are, it would be a lot more difficult to motivate people sufficiently to engage in war. So, on balance, I think a lot of wars could be avoided.
So what other advantages would there be to abolishing religion? Well, we could eliminate mindless religiously motivated attacks against science - for example attacks on evolution, cloning, stem cell research, etc. Elevating the status of science and reducing attacks on it should increase the rate of scientific progress. We could stop so much money disappearing into the coffers of the big churches and maybe it could be used for something more useful. People could do something productive instead of spending their time at church and engaging in other religious activities. Yes, it seems like a good idea.
But what would the disadvantages be? We would lose an important part of our cultural heritage, a source of fascinating mythology, a moral system for some people who need that kind of support, and a major source of charitable work.
So, who knows what the final balance would be like. I think we would be better off in general, but since it is never likely to happen anyway I am really just idly speculating, so we should get used to more religiously motivated wars in future!
Comment 1 (286) by SBFL on 2007-01-10 at 20:46:12:
Previously I have already put my case that most wars are caused over mans insatiable need for power (and land = money = power). Religion is rarely the root cause, but is mostly used as an excuse, especially by the mainstream media (but also politicians and warmongers). You criticise your mate for ignorance in the ‘Blind faith’ post but with comments like “So, on balance, I think a lot of wars could be avoided [in a world free of religion]”, clearly you’re the one who ‘can’t see the woods for the trees’.
You say: “Christians aren't used to their beliefs being subject to critical appraisal,” I disagree with this. Christians have received both constructive and egregious criticism relentlessly in the past 50 years, particularly in the West. In your paragraph you specify Christianity (after starting off taking about religion in general). I think your sentence would have more truth if applied to Judaism or Islam, but it is cool to knock a Christian in today’s society (e.g. Southpark).
You say: “We could stop so much money disappearing into the coffers of the big churches and maybe it could be used for something more useful.” Did you just say this to deliberately be controversial? The Christian Church is the biggest provider of aid and charitable work in the world. Time you stepped out of Dunedin, my friend. Go and buy yourself a knapsack. In fact later you say a disadvantage of no religion would be the loss of “a major source of charitable work.” A bit contradictory don’t you think? May I suggest you think some more before presenting your argument in this post (as you also say ‘I am really just idly speculating”).
Comment 2 (295) by OJB on 2007-01-11 at 17:36:42:
I have done some research on this, and every neutral source seems to suggest that religion is a major cause of war. Just because it isn't the only cause (no doubt economics, power, etc are also important) doesn't mean it isn't significant. I don't know whether its the most important cause, but that isn't what I said anyway.
I can't see that there is anything too controversial in suggesting that some wars could be avoided if religion was removed as an element of the conflict. Do you think that its not a major cause of conflict in the Middle East, for example?
There is a hesitation to criticise religious beliefs, partly because of the political correctness you have accused me of in the past. I know that sources on "the edge" do criticise it (Southpark is hilarious on the topic) but in the mainstream criticism is rare in my experience.
This is a blog. I often say things to be deliberately controversial. But I don't say anything I don't believe. Look at the total value of churches in comparison to how much charitable work they do. Its not that impressive compared with the billions worth of assets they have. Also, a lot of what they call charity is somewhat debatable. Is converting suckers to believe your religion really charity? No, I don't think so.
You can leave comments about this entry using this form.
Enter your name (optional):
Enter your email address (optional):
Enter the number shown here:
Enter the comment:
To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.
Contact Info: OJB, OJB@mac.com. Site Features: Blog, RSS Feeds, Podcasts, Feedback, Log. Modified: 03 Mar 2007. Hits: 36,281,324 ....................
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1604
|
__label__wiki
| 0.678028
| 0.678028
|
Home > Goodbye Go > LINDSAY LAWLER RELEASES DEBUT SINGLE, “GOODBYE GO”
Though the singer-songwriter may seem new to country music fans, Lawler’s already amassed a following in her niche market: the trucking industry. She recently kicked off her third consecutive Highway Angel Truck Stop Tour, hosted by TravelCenters of America (TA), sponsored by Schneider, Wholesale Truck and Finance (WTF) and EpicVue, and in support of TCA’s Highway Angel program, which recognizes drivers for their extraordinary acts on the road.
“We’ve been fortunate to provide drivers entertainment out on the road for the past two years,” said Lawler. “Releasing a single to radio offers a whole new element to this year’s tour. It gives me the chance to share my music with a new demographic, as well as provide a voice for those hard working men and women in the trucking industry.”
With the release of Two Peaches Six Cookies, Lawler introduced listeners to a sound she’s dubbed “Countrihanna” – an infections, beat-driven mix of club and country music inspired by one of her favorite artists.
“I’m a huge fan of Rihanna and realized one day that I listen to a lot of her music, so why wouldn’t I make a record inspired by that? I love that music can be whatever it wants these days. Instead of putting my new music into a category or genre, I’m just calling it Countrihanna. It’s club music that has driving grooves, which makes it great to dance or drive to… But then it also features fiddle, steel and banjo, cementing that country vibe.
“I’ve wanted to achieve this sound for a long time now. This sound is me, and I’m excited to share it with the world of country music.”
Lawler’s next tour stop will take place Thursday at the TA in London, Ohio. To learn more about this year’s Highway Angel Truck Stop Tour, visit truckstoptour.com.
Goodbye Go was co-written by Lawler, Catch This Music writer and producer Chris Roberts and engineer and producer Greg Bieck.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1605
|
__label__wiki
| 0.759547
| 0.759547
|
Most Popular Files Newest Files
Home File Sources FAQ Contact Privacy Policy
Public Domain Picture: Marching on
By: U.S. Air Force photo by Kenn Mann, Courtesy: US Air Force
This work, identified by PublicDomainFiles.com, is free of known copyright restrictions.
Marching on
NEW YORK (AFPN) -- Airmen with the 514th Air Mobility Wing elite honor guard from McGuire Air Force Base, N.J., march down 5th Ave. in the 87th annual New York City Veterans Day Parade.
U.S. Air Force photo by Kenn Mann
Download: Largest
Download: Small
Size: 958 x 1442
Why is this picture in the Public Domain?
Produced by United States Government
The file available on this page is a work of the United States government. A work of the United States government, as defined by United States copyright law, is "a work prepared by an officer or employee of the U.S. government as part of that person's official duties." In general, under section 105 of the Copyright Act, such works are not entitled to domestic copyright protection under U.S. law.
Where is this picture from?
World War II had been over for two years and the Korean War lay three years ahead when the Air Force ended a 40-year association with the U.S. Army to become a separate service. The Department of the Air Force was created when President Harry S Truman signed the National Security Act of 1947.
View more information & files
How may I use a Public Domain picture?
The file available on this page in the Public Domain. Files in the public domain have no restrictions on use and may be used for any purpose, without any conditions, commercial or not, unless such conditions are required by law.
Possible Prohibited Uses
Although a file is in the public domain, the work may still have some restrictions for use if it contains any of the following elements:
File contains an identifiable person and such person has not provided a model release.
File contains an identifiable building or structure and the owner of such building has not provided a property release.
File contains a registered corporate logo or trademark.
Files containing any of the above elements that do not also have a provided release would generally fall under editorial uses only and may not be used for commercial purposes. Users downloading files that are designated as "editorial use" assume full responsibility for their use of the file(s). Depending on your use, the use of editorial use files may require additional rights that publicdomainfiles.com or the copyright owner may or may not be able to provide. You should consult with your legal counsel to be sure your use is legal.
By downloading this file, you indicate that you understand and agree to all of these terms and assume full liability for your use of the file(s) and agree to hold publicdomainfiles.com harmless should any liability arise.
Home | File Sources | Frequently Asked Questions | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | © 2012-2014 publicdomainfiles.com
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1609
|
__label__wiki
| 0.833898
| 0.833898
|
Russophobia, a WMD (Weapon of Mass Deception)
We’ve become trapped in a contrived “reality” promulgated by neo-conservative warriors under cover of neo-liberal “democracy-spreading-humanitarian-interventionists” to justify an American Empire promoting itself as the indispensable “Liberal World Order”.
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/04/13/russophobia-wmd-weapon-mass-deception/
Resume: Russophobia, as psycho-social-political pathology, is diagnosed as a disorder in The West since before the 1000-year-old Roman-Orthodox religious schism and most recently manifested with a vengeance in the course of the 2013-14 with Edward Snowden’s revelations of mass surveillance by the US and its covert activities leading to the Ukraine coup with Russophobia used thereafter as a weapon of mass deception to inflame this latent pathology in the public.
After more than a year since we first heard the BBC “breaking news” about the “Russians Poisoning the Skipals”, all we have are allegations, but there is still no real evidence to present before a judge and jury for a just trial, only media propaganda which has provoked even more fear and hysteria meant to distract people from the government’s bungling and high level of anxiety over Brexit by once again blaming Russia. Never-the-less, it prompted politicians to administer instant sanctions against Russia as punishment. That first day, the “evidence”, presented in the usual clipped, “authoritative” British accents, included interviews with a conservative British MP, then the former US Ambassador to Russia, Alexander Vershbow (2001-05), now with the notoriously hawkish US-based think tank, the Atlantic Council. Thus, the three of them: the BBC “journalist” and the two “experts”, colluded to transform false allegations into “facts”… fueled, as always, by their perpetual prejudice, RUSSOPHOBIA, in the course of their propaganda war to force Russia to surrender to American-led Western Domination or else: have their economy destroyed & their people suffer. Indeed, it is a threat to the whole world played to the discord of rattling nuclear swords with a chorus of vindictive Russian oligarchs, whom Putin expelled for robbing the Russian people. So, now living in London as expats, they would seem to be the more likely culprits. All the while elsewhere in London, thanks to our “special US-UK relationship”, Julian Assange has been excommunicated and imprisoned in a tiny “cell” at the Ecuador embassy for revealing embarrassing American secrets via Wikileaks.
There we have it: the poisoning of our minds by the media and politicians which are owned and controlled by the US-UK-EU 1%, who benefit from Western Hegemony. So, these deluded few are now desperately defending it from the rising powers led by Russia and China with India not far behind demanding a multi-polar, democratic world order.
My search for the roots of this particularly vicious and extremely dangerous hate campaign began in a Dartmouth College Russian Foreign Policy course, which led me to the book, “Russophobia: Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy” by San Francisco State University Professor Andrei P. Tsygankov (2009). And there, the detoxification of my mind began as I studied his deft, well-documented deconstruction of the political propaganda disseminated “by various think tanks, congressional testimonials, activities of NGOs and the media” (preface p. XIII)
Then in Italy the following winter, I discovered the work of the Swiss journalist, Guy Mettan, in the Italian geopolitical journal, LiMes: an excerpt from his book, “Creating Russophobia: From the Great Religious Schism to Anti-Putin Hysteria” (2017). There, Mettan informs us that this psycho-social pathology in Western Civilization” goes back more than 1000 years: to the division of Christendom between the Orthodox and Roman churches. Indeed, his research into the depths of history confirms the diagnosis by our renowned American psychiatrist, Robert Jay Lifton, in his 2003 book, “Superpower Syndrome: America’s Apocalyptic Confrontation with the World”. Therein, Lifton states: “More than merely dominate, the American superpower now seeks to control history. Such cosmic ambition is accompanied by an equally vast sense of entitlement, of special dispensation to pursue its aims.” (p.3) And Mettan’s analysis of Russophobia also underscores the work of University of Chicago Professor John J. Mearsheimer, our leading international relations “realist” in his three Henry L. Stimson lectures at Yale University November 2017: “The Roots of Liberal Hegemony”, “The False Promises of Liberal Hegemony” and “The Case for Restraint”: https://macmillan.yale.edu/news/john-j-mearsheimer-liberal-ideals-and-interntional-realities with his book, “The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams, International Realities” published in 2018.
But what about “Russian Aggression” in Ukraine & Crimea?
In the first place, it was the astute Mearsheimer, who, in the Sept-Oct 2014 Foreign Affairs, informed us “Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin” (pp 77-89), but the American foreign policy establishment, together with ambitious politicians and the me-too media, paid no heed and continues to repeat its fabricated “facts”.
Never-the-less, Mearsheimer is backed up by Richard Sakwa, Professor of Russian and European Politics at the University of Kent. In Sakwa’s book, “Russia Against the Rest: The Post-Cold War Crisis of World Order”, 2017, we turn to the section on “Reality Wars and American Power” on p. 217 to read: “It does indeed seem that Russia and Western elites live in totally different worlds, divided by different epistemological understandings of the nature of contemporary reality. The Ukraine crisis crystallized the profound differences between Russian and Atlanticist understandings of the breakdown and its causes.” And he continues on p. 218: “Elite and policy-maker perceptions and attitudes forged in the Cold War years sustain these legacies and frame the discussions of such crucial issues as NATO enlargement, democracy promotion in the post-Soviet area, and strategic arms talks.” Adding that these “are no longer so much legacies as self-regenerating narratives and modes of discourse that preclude a more open-ended understanding of the dynamics and concerns of Russia today.”
Karl Rove: “We’re an empire now; we create our own reality.”
[In 2004, journalist Ron Suskind wrote in The New York Times magazine that a top White House strategist for President George W. Bush—identified later as Karl Rove, Bush’s Deputy White House Chief of Staff—told him, “We’re an empire now, we create our own reality.”]
Thus, we’ve become trapped in a contrived “reality” promulgated by neo-conservative warriors under cover of neo-liberal “democracy-spreading-humanitarian-interventionists” to justify an American Empire promoting itself as the indispensable “Liberal World Order”. However, under that global order, as Sakwa points out on p. 219: “If a foreign power is considered to have violated ‘international order’, then it can be overthrown” as a rationale for American “regime change” anywhere around the world: whether to control the supply of copper in Chile or oil in Iran. And, with its eye on Russia’s vast oil, gas and other natural resources, America claims the right to threaten Russia by ringing it with weapons which we would not abide were the Russians to place missiles in Mexico…as the Soviets did in Cuba to defend it after our “Bay of Pigs” invasion that brought humanity to the brink of nuclear war. Thus, Russia was defending itself in Ukraine against further NATO expansion while Crimean citizens, by majority vote in a democratic referendum, chose to rejoin Russia as they had been one country ever since Catherine the Great…except for an interval in the ’50s when Crimea was” gifted” to Ukraine while they were all members of the Soviet Union.
“Ditching Solzhenitsyn, Defender of Russia”
And not to forget that in 1974, after being expelled from the Soviet Union, Alexandr Solzhenitsyn and his family fled first to Zurich then to Vermont in 1976 and lived on a farm near Cavendish, where he continued to write and publish his work. Meanwhile, Mettan, as a journalist covering events related to Russia, became quite distressed over “the widespread prejudices, cartloads of clichés and systematic anti-Russian biases of most western media.” And he went on to say that “the more I traveled, discussed and read, the wider I perceived, the more the gap of incomprehension and ignorance between Western Europe and Russia became evident.
“That was why, during the 1990s, I was shocked by the way the West treated Solzhenitsyn. For decades, we had published, celebrated, and acclaimed the great writer as bearing the torch of anti-Soviet dissidence. We had praised Solzhenitsyn to the skies as long as he criticized his native country, communist Russia. But as soon as he emigrated, realizing that he preferred to isolate himself in his Vermont retreat to work rather than attending anticommunist conferences, western media and academics began to distance themselves from the great writer.
“The idol no longer matched the image they had built and was becoming a hindrance to their academic and journalistic career plans. And once Solzhenitsyn had left the United States to go back to Russia and defend his humiliated, demoralized motherland that was being sold at auction, raising his voice against the Russian ‘Westernizers’ and pluralist liberals who denied the interests of Russia to better revel in the troughs of capitalism, he became a marked man, an outdated, senile writer, even though he himself had not changed in the least, denouncing with the same vigor the defects of market totalitarianism as those of communist totalitarianism.
“He was booed, despised, his name was dragged through the mud for his choices, often by the very people who had praised his first fights. Despite that, against all odds, against the most powerful powers that were trying to dissuade him, Solzhenitsyn defended his one and only cause, that of Russia. He was not forgiven for having turned his pen against that West that had welcomed him and felt it was owed eternal gratitude. A dissident today, a dissident wherever truth compelled, such was his motto. This deserves to be remembered.” Mettan, pp. 15-16 in “Creating Russophobia”.
Russophobia: akin to Racism
From another perspective: Mettan’s chapter on “German Russophobia” set me thinking that this “Western Supremacy” political-cultural pathology known as Russophobia is like the racism which I knew growing up in totally segregated Oklahoma. Until in high school, I became so perplexed and appalled by the curtain of hate and “justifications” in which we were smothered: the Negro schools on the other side of town? and why were there separate waiting rooms, drinking fountains & restrooms in bus and train stations?…that I began poking holes in the curtain to see what was outside…and found a book in the library: “South of Freedom” by Carl Rowan, an African-American Minneapolis Star Tribune journalist, describing his journey from South to North. So, thanks to what I learned from Rowan, I began to tear the whole damned curtain down…at least in my mind.
Whom the Gods would destroy, they first drive mad?
So, here’s a Swiss journalist punching a hole in this wall of Russophobic Western Supremacy… and through that gaping hole, we are reminded that the Russians are Europe’s neighbors who sacrificed more than 26 million of their own lives to save Europe, America and Russia from the Nazis. These are not poor “niggers” from the Eurasian ghetto we’ve been trying to club into submission as second-class citizens of “The Liberal World Order” dominated by US; they’re nuclear-armed and no longer willing to sit at a separate, inferior table with no vote and no voice over who makes the rules…nor are China, India and Brazil. And last year, while the wave of Russophobic hysteria over alleged “Russian poisoning” was rolling out of the UK and engulfing the Western world in the latest siege of mass madness…with only Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the British Labor party, having the courage to stand up in Parliament on the Ides of March and demand Evidence! only to be pilloried by the mindless politicians and media…led by the once esteemed BBC. And the week following the August 7, 2018 Trump-Putin Helsinki summit, will surely go down in psychiatric circles as another case of mass media-political delusions led by cheer-leader-in-chief, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC.
Meanwhile, not to forget that it was Hearst newspaper propaganda that whipped the American public into a war frenzy to support our first step in empire-building: our 1898 intervention in Cuba’s war for independence from the Spanish Empire which had dominated all of Latin America for 500 years. As the former NYTimes journalist/bureau chief in Istanbul, Berlin & Central America, Stephen Kinzer reminds us in his latest book “The True Flag: Theodore Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of American Empire”, Twain, Booker T. Washington and even Andrew Carnegie leading a handful of other anti-imperialists…were not able to prevail against Roosevelt with his Rough Riders and the Hearst newspapers’ war propaganda.
Regime Change Comes Home
Never-the-less, after a very long run of American “regime change” abroad leaving a bloody trail of destruction, dictatorships and chaos from Iran in 1953, when we joined with the British to overthrow the democratically-elected President Mohammad Mossadegh to maintain the Brit-US control of its oil…on through Guatemala, Vietnam and Chile…to name a few of our interventions…we were back for a second round with “coalitions of the willing” or not? in the Middle East where our regime-change machine managed to plow its way through Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya…before breaking down in Syria. Until now it’s been brought home again, renovated and renamed “RussiaGate” for another attempt at removing a President for trying to mend US relations with Russia. Though even after more than a year of Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigations accompanied by such cinematic support as the movie, “Felt”, another “Watergate” re-run. Did anyone else notice the resemblance between “Felt” and Mueller? And despite the media’s commemoration of its 44-year-old “moment of courage” with the movie “The Post” to promote Trump’s ouster, our democratically-elected President, as of this writing, remains in power. However, in this rush to “regime change”, didn’t the our “ruling elite” read Jane Mayer’s “The Danger of President Pence” in the 10/23/17 New Yorker? At least the 70s’ “ruling class” was smart enough to remove an unqualified Vice President Spiro (who?) Agnew…before “regime changing” Nixon and replacing him with the more or less benign Gerald Ford.
A Florentine Epiphany
But back to last January in Florence, Italy, when I was hiking in the hills beyond the Piazzale Michelangelo, with its spectacular view of that Renaissance city and its centerpiece, the Duomo, I came across the Villa Galileo, which had been his last home after his trial as a “heretic”, during which to save himself from torture and execution, he was forced to deny his helio-centric vision and henceforth lived under “villa arrest”, from 1631 until his natural death in 1642. While pondering his fate, I continued walking along the gently rising, ever-narrowing road between ancient stone walls overlooking villas and olive groves until I reached the peak, where I felt as if I were standing on top of the world as I contemplated both the Arno and Ema river valleys far below and where I swear I heard Galileo declare: “The world does not turn on an American axis!”
The 21st Century Inquisition
So how is it that we now have contemporary Inquisitors persecuting so many truth tellers…such as Edward Snowden, our electronic age “Solzhenitsyn?” in Russian exile; Chelsea Manning, imprisoned some 7 years for revealing US brutality in Iraq; Julian Assange confined to his Ecuadorian Embassy exile in London since August 2012; Katharine Gun, a whistleblower attempting to stop the Iraq invasion, who faced 2 years of British imprisonment before her case was dropped; James Risen, former New York Times journalist who was persecuted by our “justice” system for revealing our government’s surveillance of US!
Any Good Sense Left?
So, do we the people have enough good sense & independent thinking left to follow the advice of Henry David Thoreau?
“Let us settle ourselves, and work and wedge our feet downward through the mud and slush of opinion, and prejudice, and tradition, and delusion, and appearance, that alluvion which covers the globe, through Paris and London, through New York and Boston and Concord, through church and state, through poetry and philosophy and religion, till we come to a hard bottom and rocks in place, which we can call reality.” - “Walden” 1854
If not, the Doctor prescribes Shock Therapy:
For a week, a month, or however long it takes to cleanse and open the mind, one must adhere to strict abstinence from Mainstream Media propaganda, junk news, pseudo analysis, fake photos, TV & videos including absolutely NO phony “for, by & of the people” NPR, PBS, BBC or other Government-funded Neo or LibCon Imperial tranquilizer.
© Jean Ranc | 2019
All statements in this report are an opinion of the author. Act at your own risk. Russia & America Goodwill Association (RAGA) is not responsible for the content of the article. Any views or opinions presented in this report are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RAGA. Any liability in respect to this communication remain with the author.
RAGANEWS
Strengthening ties between Russia
and America
Subscribe to RAGA Antiwar Newsletter
RAGA's BOOKS
ORDER on LABIRINT
ORDER on RAGA
Analytical Articles
Anna Tolstoyevskaya
Charles Bausman
Chip Hodgkins
Dmitry Tamoikin
Dr. S. Sniegoski
Edward Lozansky
G. Doctorow Ph.D.
G. Tarpley Ph.D.
J. J. Mearsheimer
Michael Brenner
Prof. James Petras
Raymond Zwarich
Shout Out UK
Stephen Cohen
V. Krasnov Ph.D
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1610
|
__label__wiki
| 0.693179
| 0.693179
|
Delray House
Hamtramck Center
EPIC Youth Program
EPIC Summer Program
Food Commodities
Food & Friendship
Environmental Group
Neighborhood Development
Neighborhood Centers
Neighborhood centers developed from settlement houses that emerged in the mid to late 1800's when committed volunteers would "settle" into low income neighborhoods to be a neighbor to all. Settlements started in England, then migrating to Chicago via Jane Addams and then other cities. A settlement house would be opened in an urban slum area and trained workers would endeavor to improve social conditions, particularly by providing community services and promoting neighborly cooperation. These "Settlers" would become neighbors to all and live and work with the families to strengthen family life and develop better neighborhoods. This movement was the incubator for service groups, senior services, cultural and arts classes, and activism on social issues.
Our Early Years
People’s Community Services was founded in 1955 when several Protestant faith-based settlement houses/community centers merged to form our present day organization. These centers included the Delray Neighborhood House (founded in 1920), which is the agency’s oldest, continuous operation and the Dodge Community House (founded in 1923), which was the precursor to the agency’s present day Hamtramck Neighborhood Center. The Centers provided services for youth, senior citizens, and community development, which still form the core of our present day program. In 1977, the agency's Senior Day Time Center was founded.
People’s Community Services has been a participant in the Settlement House/Neighborhood Center movement since its founding. We continue in this rich history by not dispensing charity, but by working with neighbors to help other neighbors to enrich life and build community.
Purpose of Settlement Houses
Settlements serve as community, education, and recreation centers, particularly in densely populated immigrant neighborhoods. Sometimes known as social settlements, they are also called neighborhood houses, neighborhood centers, or community centers.
The settlement house differs from other social welfare agencies; the latter provide specific services, while the former is aimed at improving neighborhood life as a whole. Its role has gradually altered as some of its varied functions have been assumed by state and municipal authorities and by other organizations. Kindergartens, formerly an important adjunct of the settlement house, are now operated by public schools; municipal health departments have taken over its clinical services; and labor unions now sponsor educational and recreational activities for workers.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1611
|
__label__cc
| 0.56516
| 0.43484
|
2016 Tour: Iceland
In May 2016, the Glee Club will embark on a great adventure to Nordic island nation of Iceland. Defined by its dramatic volcanic landscape of geysers, hot springs, waterfalls, glaciers and black-sand beaches, Iceland provides the perfect backdrop for the Glee Club to share our 2015-2016 season repertoire. From May 16th – 24th, and with a home base in the capital city of Reykjavik, the Glee Club will be performing a variety of concerts, throughout the city and countryside. As is the mission of the Glee Club, we will also be leading a number of school workshops in Reykjavik and Akureyri.
2015 Tour: New England
In March 2015, 48 members of the Glee Club took to the road for a one-week tour of New England, performing in 4 different cities in Massachusetts and Connecticut. What New England lacked in sunshine and the chance to escape the Polar Vortex, it made up for in some unforgettable experiences.
Without a doubt the musical highlight of our excursion to the north was a joint performance of Felix Mendelssohn’s immortal oratorio Elijah with the Smith College Glee Club in Northampton, MA. Performing in the historic John M. Greene Hall to a packed house, the Glee Club delighted in the drama and emotion of one of the great works of choir music. It was a pleasure to collaborate with such a fine ensemble as the Smith College Glee Club and their director Jonathan Hirsh.
After our visit to Northampton, the Glee Club traveled to Bean Town itself to conduct several workshops and informal concerts with local Boston schools. Since one of the primary missions of the Glee Club is to extend the love of singing to the schools and the community at large, it is always a thrill to interact with kids of all ages and share our music with them. Our sojourn in Boston also allowed the members of the Glee Club to explore all the great city has to offer.
On the road back home, we stopped in New Milford, Connecticut for a formal concert at St. John’s Church. We were excited to share the concert with local choir, “The Kent Singers” who are directed by former Glee Clubber and Penn State alumnus Matthew Travis. The group returned to State College exhausted, but filled with memories that will last a lifetime and a renewed sense of camaraderie. A special thanks to our Tour Manager, Joseph Helinski for organizing and executing a seamless trip.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1612
|
__label__wiki
| 0.843174
| 0.843174
|
Named Entity Results, Rhegium (Italy)
Polybius, Histories 46 0 Browse Search
Strabo, Geography 34 0 Browse Search
Pausanias, Description of Greece 28 0 Browse Search
Diodorus Siculus, Library 20 0 Browse Search
Herodotus, The Histories (ed. A. D. Godley) 12 0 Browse Search
M. Tullius Cicero, Orations, for Quintius, Sextus Roscius, Quintus Roscius, against Quintus Caecilius, and against Verres (ed. C. D. Yonge) 10 0 Browse Search
P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphoses (ed. Brookes More) 4 0 Browse Search
Plato, Letters 2 0 Browse Search
Aristotle, Rhetoric (ed. J. H. Freese) 2 0 Browse Search
C. Suetonius Tranquillus, The Lives of the Caesars (ed. Alexander Thomson) 2 0 Browse Search
Browsing named entities in Diodorus Siculus, Library. You can also browse the collection for Rhegium (Italy) or search for Rhegium (Italy) in all documents.
Diodorus Siculus, Library, Book XI, Chapter 48 (search)
archon in Athens, the Seventy-sixth Olympiad was celebrated, that in which Scamandrius of Mytilene won the "stadion," and in Rome the consuls were Caeso Fabius and Spurius Furius Menellaeus.This should probably be Medullinus. In the course of this year Leotychides, the king of the Lacedaemonians, died after a reign of twenty-two years, and he was succeeded on the throne by Archidamus, who ruled for forty-two years. And there died also Anaxilas, the tyrant of Rhegium and Zancle,The earlier name of Messene in Sicily. after a rule of eighteen years, and he was succeeded in the tyranny by Micythus, who was entrusted with the position on the understanding that he would restore it to the sons of Anaxilas, who were not yet of age. And Hieron, who became king of the Syracusans after the death of Gelon, observing how popular his brother Polyzelus was among the Syracusans and believing that he was waiting to seizeAs of a third competitor wait
ere their allies. A fierce battle took place and many fell on both sides, but in the end the Iapygians were victorious. When the defeated army split in the flight into two bodies, the one retreating to Tarentum and the other fleeing to Rhegium, the Iapygians, following their example, also divided. Those who pursued the Tarantini, the distance being short, slew many of the enemy, but those who were pressing after the Rhegians were so eager that they broke into Rhegium togethell on both sides, but in the end the Iapygians were victorious. When the defeated army split in the flight into two bodies, the one retreating to Tarentum and the other fleeing to Rhegium, the Iapygians, following their example, also divided. Those who pursued the Tarantini, the distance being short, slew many of the enemy, but those who were pressing after the Rhegians were so eager that they broke into Rhegium together with the fugitives and took possession of the city.
comparable to his? Who, when a gigantic war enveloped his state, brought it safely through and by the one single ruse of the bridgeCp. chap. 19.5-6. reduced the land armament of the enemy by half, so that it could be easily vanquished by the Greeks? Consequently, when we survey the magnitude of his deeds and, examining them one by one, find that such a man suffered disgrace at the hands of his city, whereas it was by his deeds that the city rose to greatness, we have good reason to conclude that the city which is reputed to rank highest among all cities in wisdom and fair-dealing acted towards him with great cruelty. Now on the subject of the high merits of Themistocles, even if we have dwelt over-long on the subject in this digression, we believed it not seemly that we should leave his great ability unrecorded.While these events were taking place, in Italy Micythus, who was ruler of Rhegium and Zancle, founded the city of Pyxus.
he benefactions Gelon had rendered their father, and advised them, now that they had come of age, to require an accounting of Micythus, their guardian, and themselves to take over the government of Zancle. And when they had returned to Rhegium and required of their guardian an accounting of his administration, Micythus, who was an upright man, gathered together the old family friends of the children and rendered so honest an accounting that all present were filled with nduct the affairs of the state with a father's power and position. Micythus, however, did not accede to the request, but after turning everything over to them punctiliously and putting his own goods aboard a boat he set sail from Rhegium, accompanied by the goodwill of the populace; and reaching Greece he spent the rest of his life in Tegea in Arcadia, enjoying the approval of men. And Hieron, the king of the Syracusans, died in Catana and received the honour
Diodorus Siculus, Library, Book XII, Chapter 54 (search)
won the supremacy over all Greece, to lay hands on Sicily. These, then, were the reasons why the Athenians voted to give aid to the Leontines, and they sent twenty ships to Sicily and as generals Laches and Charoeades. These sailed to Rhegium, where they added to their force twenty ships from the Rhegians and the other Chalcidian colonists. Making Rhegium their base they first of all overran the islands of the LiparaeansThe group of small volcanic islands west of the toe of Rhegium their base they first of all overran the islands of the LiparaeansThe group of small volcanic islands west of the toe of Italy; cp. Book 5.7. because they were allies of the Syracusans, and after this they sailed to Locri,Epizephyrian Locris on the east shore of the toe of Italy. where they captured five ships of the Locrians, and then laid siege to the stronghold of Mylae.On the north coast of Sicily west of Messene. When the neighbouring Sicilian Greeks came to the aid of the Mylaeans, a battle developed in which the Athenians were victorious, slaying more than a thousand men a
Diodorus Siculus, Library, Book XIII, Chapter 3 (search)
Corcyra, since they were under orders to wait at that place and add to their forces the allies in that region. And when they had all been assembled, they sailed across the Ionian Strait and came to land on the tip of Iapygia, from where they skirted along the coast of Italy. They were not received by the Tarantini, and they also sailed on past the Metapontines and Heracleians; but when they put in at Thurii they were accorded every kind of courtesy. From there they sailed on to Croton, from whose inhabitants they got a market, and then they sailed on past the temple of Hera LaciniaCape Lacinium is at the extreme western end of the Tarantine Gulf. and doubled the promontory known as Dioscurias. After this they passed by Scylletium, as it is called, and Locri, and dropping anchor near Rhegium they endeavoured to persuade the Rhegians to become their allies; but the Rhegians replied that they would consult with the other Greek cities of Italy.
postponing a reply to the request for an alliance; but the Himeraeans, Selinuntians, Geloans, and Catanaeans promised that they would fight at the side of the Syracusans. The cities of the Siceli, while tending to be favourably inclined toward the Syracusans, nevertheless remained neutral, awaiting the outcome. After the Aegestaeans had refused to give more than thirty talents,Cp. Book 12.83. the Athenian generals, having remonstrated with them, put out to sea from Rhegium with their force and sailed to Naxos in Sicily. They were kindly received by the inhabitants of this city and sailed on from there to Catane. Although the Catanaeans would not receive the soldiers into the city, they allowed the generals to enter and summoned an assembly of the citizens, and the Athenian generals presented their proposal for an alliance. But while Alcibiades was addressing the assembly, some of the soldiers burst open a postern-gate and broke into t
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1613
|
__label__wiki
| 0.908646
| 0.908646
|
I Honestly Love You - Olivia Newton-John piano sheet music
Stay tuned to the latest piano sheets. Follow us on
I Honestly Love You - Olivia Newton-John Free Piano Sheet Music
I Honestly Love You description
"I Honestly Love You" (first released in Australia as "I Love You, I Honestly Love You", per its chorus) was a worldwide pop hit single for Olivia Newton-John in 1974. The song was Newton-John's first number-one single in the United States and Canada, thus cementing her as a household name in North America. Show I Honestly Love You piano sheet
Olivia Newton-John description
Olivia Newton-John, is an English-born Australian singer, songwriter and actress. She is a four-time Grammy award winner who has amassed five No. 1 and ten other Top Ten Billboard Hot 100 singles and two No. 1 Billboard 200 solo albums. Eleven of her singles (including two platinum) and 14 of her albums (including two platinum and four double platinum) have been certified gold by the RIAA. Her music has been successful in multiple formats including pop, country and adult contemporary and has sold an estimated over 100 million albums worldwide. She co-starred with John Travolta in the film adaptation of the Broadway musical Grease, which featured one of the most successful film soundtracks in Hollywood history.
Newton-John has been a long-time activist for environmental and animal rights issues. Since surviving breast cancer in 1992... More piano sheets by Olivia Newton-John
Other free piano sheets
Olivia Newton-John - Look at Me, I'm Sandra Dee (Grease)
Earth, Wind & Fire - After the Love Has Gone
Avril Lavigne - Complicated (V2)
Ludwig van Beethoven - Moonlight Sonata (Piano Sonata No. 14)
Barry Manilow - Can't Smile Without You
Sarah McLachlan - Angel
Backstreet Boys - No One Else Comes Close
Maroon 5 - One More Night
Hear and Play: The Gift of Playing the Piano by Ear
Have you ever heard a really nice song that got you so captivated that you just wish you can play it in the piano right away? Playing the piano by ear appears to be a gift, a talent of hearing music once or twice, and then once you have your hands on the keys, the magic begins. As easy as it may sound, hearing the music and playing it at once is...Continue reading Hear and Play: The Gift of Playing the Piano by Ear
Home | Free music sheets | Piano for beginners | Play piano by sheet music | How to read piano notes | Songs | Artists | Articles | Contact Us
Copyright 2012-2019 PianoHelp.net. All Rights Reserved
DISCLAIMER: Pianohelp.net is not storing or holding any files or copyrighted material on any of it's servers. We are only indexing and embeding legal content shared by users over the Internet using public sites such as youtube.com, docstoc.com, scribd.com, etc. These websites follow all the legal guidelines for searching and storing content. All the files hosted on these sites are in no way hosted or copied on pianohelp.net servers. The material on this site is copyrighted to their respective owners and it is shared for educational purposes only.
Receive all updates via Facebook. Just Click the Like Button Below...
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1614
|
__label__wiki
| 0.966153
| 0.966153
|
Get Kenny Smith essential facts below. View Videos or join the Kenny Smith discussion. Add Kenny Smith to your PopFlock.com topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
American basketball player and sports commentator
Kenny Cornelius Smith
Smith in 2015
(1965-03-08) March 8, 1965 (age 55)
170 lb (77 kg)
Archbishop Molloy
(Queens, New York)
North Carolina (1983-1987)
1987 / Round: 1 / Pick: 6th overall
Selected by the Sacramento Kings
Point guard
2× NBA champion (1994, 1995)
Consensus first-team All-American (1987)
First-team All-ACC (1987)
2× Second-team All-ACC (1985, 1986)
No. 30 honored by North Carolina Tar Heels
Second-team Parade All-American (1983)
McDonald's All-American (1983)
9,397 (12.8 ppg)
Representing United States
Kenneth "The Jet" Smith (born March 8, 1965) is an American sports commentator and former professional basketball player in the National Basketball Association (NBA). He played in the NBA from 1987 to 1997 as a member of the Sacramento Kings, Atlanta Hawks, Houston Rockets, Detroit Pistons, Orlando Magic, and Denver Nuggets.[1] He won two NBA championships with Houston.
Smith played college basketball with the North Carolina Tar Heels, earning consensus first-team All-American honors as a senior in 1987. He was selected by Sacramento in the first round of the 1987 NBA draft with the sixth overall pick, and was named to the NBA All-Rookie First Team with the Kings. After retiring from playing, Smith became a basketball commentator for the Emmy Award winning Inside the NBA on TNT. He also works as an analyst for CBS/Turner during the NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament.[2]
Smith was born in Queens, New York City and grew up in LeFrak City. He played some of his earliest basketball at New York's Riverside Church. Smith attended Archbishop Molloy High School where he was coached by Jack Curran, the winningest high school coach in New York City and New York State history.[3] Smith was named a McDonald's All-American in 1983, then played basketball at the University of North Carolina for Dean Smith.[1][4] Smith credits former South Carolina State star Bobby Lewis with his development as a shooter and ballhandler. Lewis averaged 30.9 points per game and was a First Team Division II All-American as a senior at South Carolina State. He later developed the Bobby Lewis Basketball Skills Development Program, a training regimen that he presented at basketball camps around the country. Smith attended several of his lectures while in high school, and continued to use Lewis's drills throughout his basketball career, and teaches them at his own basketball camps. Of Lewis, Smith said, "He's the best lecturer ever. He had the best influence in terms of my workout regimen without question."[5]
Kenny Smith joined Michael Jordan as a freshman on a North Carolina team that was a pre-season #1 and finished the season ranked #1 with a 28-3 record. Smith averaged 9.1 points and 5.0 assists per game, and the Tar Heels lost to Indiana University in the Regional Semifinals of the 1984 NCAA Tournament.[6][7] He led North Carolina to the Elite Eight in 1985, losing to eventual National Champion Villanova Wildcats. Smith was named a Consensus All-American (1st Team) as senior in 1987, averaging 16.9 points, 6.1 assists per game while helping North Carolina to return to the Elite Eight. Playing in a game that featured eleven future NBA players, Smith led the Tar Heels with 25 points and 7 assists but they lost to Syracuse University, 79-75.[8][9]
During his career at North Carolina, Smith averaged 12.9 points and 6.0 assists per game, while shooting .512 from the field, and .823 from the free throw line. In 1986-87, the first season the NCAA added three-point field goals, Smith shot .408.[6] As of 2016, he ranks second in school history in total assists (768), fourth in total steals (195), and fifth in assists per game.[9] Smith helped North Carolina to a record of 115-22 from the 1983-84 to 1986-87 seasons, including two Elite Eight appearances (1985 and 1987) and a Sweet Sixteen appearance in 1986. They won the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) regular season conference championships in 1984 and 1987, and tied for first in 1985. North Carolina never finished lower than 8th in the national polls during Smith's four years at the school.[9]
International career
Smith represented the United States in the 1986 FIBA World Championship, on a team that included David Robinson, Muggsy Bogues and Steve Kerr. He was second on the team in scoring behind Charles Smith with 14.7 points per game. Smith scored 23 points to lead the US to an 87-85 win and the Gold Medal over a Soviet Union team that featured Arvydas Sabonis.[10][11]
NBA playing career
Smith was selected as a 6'3" 170 lb point guard by the Sacramento Kings with the sixth pick of the 1987 NBA draft. He was named to the NBA All-Rookie Team (1st Team) after averaging 13.8 points and 7.1 assists per game for the Kings. Smith began his NBA career playing for Hall of Famer Bill Russell, who was head coach for Kings until he was fired 58 games into the '87-88 season.[12] Smith was traded to the Atlanta Hawks midway through the 1989-90 season, where he was a reserve player for the first time in his career, averaging 7.7 points per game while only starting five of thirty-games he played for the Hawks.[1]
After the 1989-90 season, Smith was traded to the Houston Rockets where he would spend the next six seasons. In 1990-91 Smith averaged 17.7 points per game while leading the Rockets in assists per game (7.1) and free throw percentage (.844).[13] He helped the Rockets to a 52-30 record, the best regular season in franchise history at the time. They were swept by the Los Angeles Lakers in the first round of the playoffs.[14] Smith finished 17th in voting for the NBA Most Valuable Player Award, just ahead of teammate Hakeem Olajuwon.[15]
Head Coach Don Chaney was fired after posting a record of only 26-26 in the 1991-92 season. He was replaced by former Rocket player Rudy Tomjanovich, who went 16-14 to close out the season, missing the playoffs by one game. The Rockets then went 55-27 in 1992-93, losing to the Seattle SuperSonics in the second round of the playoffs in seven games. Smith helped to force a game seven against Seattle by scoring 30 points, shooting 4-6 from three-point range, in a Game 6 victory for Houston.[16][17] The Rockets won back-to-back championships in 1993-94 and 1994-95. From the 1992-93 to 1994-95 seasons, Kenny Smith averaged 11.7 points and 4.5 assists per game, with a three-point percentage of .425. In 57 playoff games during the same period, Smith had nearly identical averages of 11.6 points and 4.3 assists, shooting .456 from three-point range.[1] In the first game of the 1995 Finals against the Orlando Magic, Smith had 23 points, 9 assists and made seven three-pointers, including the game-tying shot which sent the game into overtime. Kenny Smith's 7 three pointers in the first game of the 1995 NBA Finals was an NBA record at the time. The Rockets won the game 120-118, and went on to sweep the Magic in four games.[18][19]
Smith had been gradually losing playing time to Sam Cassell,[20] but he continued to be the Rockets' starting point guard through the 1995-96 season. Although Smith's points, assists, steals and minutes per game declined for the fifth straight season, he was still productive in 1995-96. He averaged 8.5 points and 3.6 assists per game, and shot .382 from three-point range and .821 from the free throw line.[1] The Rockets finished fifth in the NBA Western Conference with a 48-34 record, upsetting the fourth-seeded Los Angeles Lakers in the first round before being swept in the second round by eventual Finals runner-up Seattle SuperSonics.[21] In game four of the series against the Lakers, Smith had 17 points, 6 assists and was 4-4 from three-point range to help the Rockets win the series clincher 102-94. The win against the Lakers also marked the final NBA game for Magic Johnson, who returned to the NBA that season after a five-year absence.[22][23]
The Rockets released Smith after the 1995-96 season, and he signed with the Detroit Pistons. He played only nine games with the Pistons before he was waived and signed by the Orlando Magic, who released Smith after only six games. Smith then signed with the Denver Nuggets, where he would finish his career as a player.[1] Smith played sparingly for the playoff-bound Pistons and the Magic, but got the last meaningful playing time of his career with the Nuggets, a team that won only 21 games that season. Smith averaged 7.9 points and 3.1 assists while playing just under twenty minutes per game. Overall, Smith averaged 6.3 points and 2.4 assists per game, the lowest averages of his career, while his three-point percentage of .437 (59/135) was the second highest of his career, and the fourth season in which he shot better than 40 percent on three-pointers.[1]
In his professional career, Smith scored 9,397 points (12.8 avg.), recorded 4,073 assists (5.5 avg) while shooting .480 from the field, .399 from three-point range, and .829 from the free throw line.[1] He finished in the NBA top ten in three-point percentage three times (1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95), and top ten in free throw percentage twice (1992-93 and 1993-94). In the 1988-89 season Smith was fifth in the league in minutes played, seventh in minutes per game, and tenth in total assists. Smith's career three-point percentage of .399 still ranks 42nd in NBA history.[1] Smith holds the Denver Nuggets franchise record for career three-point percentage (.425), and he continues to rank among the all-time leaders in several categories for the Sacramento Kings and the Houston Rockets.[24][25][26][27]
1987-88 Sacramento 61 60 35.6 .477 .308 .819 2.3 7.1 1.5 .1 13.8
1989-90 Atlanta 33 5 20.4 .480 .167 .846 1.1 4.3 0.7 .0 7.7
1990-91 Houston 78 78 34.6 .520 .363 .844 2.1 7.1 1.4 .1 17.7
1993-94+ Houston 78 78 28.3 .480 .405 .871 1.8 4.2 0.8 .1 11.6
1995-96 Houston 68 56 23.8 .433 .382 .821 1.4 3.6 0.7 .0 8.5
1996-97 Detroit 9 0 7.1 .400 .500 1.000 0.6 1.1 0.1 .0 2.6
1996-97 Orlando 6 0 7.8 .462 .600 1.000 0.3 0.7 0.0 .0 2.8
1996-97 Denver 33 3 19.8 .422 .425 .854 1.1 3.1 0.5 .0 7.9
Career 737 650 30.1 .480 .399 .829 2.0 5.5 1.0 .1 12.8
1991 Houston 3 3 37.7 .474 .500 .889 2.7 8.0 1.3 .3 15.3
1993 Houston 12 12 32.6 .492 .500 .778 2.0 4.2 0.8 .1 14.8
1994+ Houston 23 23 30.3 .455 .447 .808 2.3 4.1 .96 .17 10.8
1996 Houston 8 8 23.9 .434 .387 1.000 1.5 4.8 0.6 .0 8.9
Career 68 68 30.0 .457 .448 .847 2.2 4.5 0.8 .1 11.5
Smith (second from right) with the Inside the NBA crew in 2015
Smith joined Turner Sports in early 1998, working as a studio analyst for end of the NBA regular season and the playoffs.[28] Smith works with Ernie Johnson Jr., Charles Barkley, and Shaquille O'Neal on Inside the NBA, a winner of the Sports Emmy Award for Outstanding Studio Show.[29] Smith covered basketball for the 2001 Goodwill Games,[28] and he occasionally appears on NBA TV as an analyst. Smith provided commentary for the MSG Network's broadcasts of New York Knicks games from 2005-08, and works as an analyst for CBS/Turner during the NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament.
During the 2010 NBA All-Star Weekend, Smith was a member of the Texas team that won the Shooting Stars Competition.[30]
While on the Scoop B Radio Podcast in 2017, Smith told Brandon Scoop B Robinson that the 1994 Houston Rockets would have beaten Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls had they faced each other in the NBA Finals.[31]
On the August 26, 2020 edition of Inside the NBA, Smith left the set as a show of solidarity with the six teams that elected to boycott the day's games in response to the shooting of Jacob Blake. The live broadcast, originally scheduled to lead into a double-header, was turned into a panel discussion of racial injustice in America after the announcement of the games' postponements.[32]
Smith has four children: Kayla Brianna, Kenneth Jr. (K.J.), Malloy Adrian, and London Olivia, as well as a step-daughter Monique.[33]
His first marriage was to Dawn Reavis[34] and they have two children. Smith's daughter Kayla is an R&B singer[35] and son K.J. is a basketball player at the University of North Carolina, his father's alma mater.[36]
After his divorce from Reavis, Smith met English model Gwendolyn Osborne in 2004 at a charity event.[37] They married in September 8, 2006. They have two children together, a son Malloy in 2008 and a daughter London in 2012.[37] Smith is also step-father to Osborne's daughter Monique from a previous marriage.[38] Osborne is a former model on The Price Is Right.[39] Gwendolyn Osbourne filed for divorce in 2018.[40]
^ a b c d e f g h i "Kenny Smith". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
^ "Famous Stanners: Kenny Smith, Class of 1983" Archived May 5, 2016, at the Wayback Machine. www.molloyhs.org. Retrieved June 16, 2016.
^ Weber, Bruce. "Jack Curran, a Mentor in Two Sports, Dies at 82". New York Times, March 14, 2013. Retrieved June 16, 2016.
^ "Boys Alumni: Kenny Smith (1983)". www.mcdonaldsallamerican.com. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ Hunt, Donald. "Kenny Smith recognizes former Bartram High star Bobby Lewis". The Philadelphia Tribune, April 1, 2016. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ a b "College Basketball: Kenny Smith". www.sports-reference.com. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ "1983-84 UNC Tar Heels Roster and Stats". www.sports-reference.com. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ "Syracuse vs North Carolina, March 21, 1987". www.sports-reference.com. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ a b c "Carolina Basketball: 2015-16 Fact & Records Book" Archived August 10, 2016, at the Wayback Machine. www.goheels.com. 37-52. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ Jackson, Tim W. Gone Pro: North Carolina: Tar Heel Stars Who Became Pros. Covington, Kentucky: Clerisy, 2014. ISBN 1578605458. Google Books. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ "1986 World Championship for Men. July 20, 1986". www.fiba.com. Retrieved June 19, 2016.
^ Poindexter, Bill. "Sacramento Fans Have No Problem With Dumping Bill Russell". Los Angeles Times, December 24, 1989. Retrieved June 22, 2016.
^ "1990-91 Houston Rockets Roster and Stats". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved June 24, 2016.
^ "Houston Rockets Franchise Index". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved June 24, 2016.
^ "1990-91 Awards Voting". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved June 25, 2016.
^ "Seattle SuperSonics at Houston Rockets Box Score, May 20, 1993". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved June 29, 2016.
^ "Smith Lifts Rockets Into Game 7 : NBA playoffs: Guard scores 30 points as Houston pulls away from Seattle in third quarter for a 103-90 victory". Los Angeles Times, May 21, 1993. Retrieved June 29, 2016.
^ "The 60 Greatest Playoff Moments: Honorable Mention". www.nba.com. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
^ "Houston Rockets at Orlando Magic Box Score, June 7, 1995". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved June 26, 2016.
^ Howard, Johnette. "SAM I AM WITH TEAMMATES, FOES AND REFS, HOUSTON ROCKET POINT GUARD SAM CASSELL LIKES TO TALK THE TALK-- AND HE'S HAPPY TO BACK IT UP COME CRUNCH TIME. Sports Illustrated, November 13, 1995. SI Vault. Retrieved June 28, 0216.
^ McGuire, Paul. "History in Hindsight: The Houston Rockets, The Seattle SuperSonics, and Hakeem Olajuwon's greatest foe". www.red94.net, July 28, 2014. Retrieved June 28, 2016.
^ "Los Angeles Lakers at Houston Rockets Box Score, May 2, 1996". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved June 30, 2016.
^ Hansford, Corey. "Throwback Thursday: Magic Johnson Makes A Comeback In 1996". www.lakersnation.com, December 12, 2013. Retrieved June 30, 2016.
^ "Denver Nuggets Career Leaders". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved July 1, 2016.
^ "Sacramento Kings Career Leaders". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved July 1, 2016.
^ "Houston Rockets Season Leaders". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved July 1, 2016.
^ "Houston Rockets Career Leaders". www.basketball-reference.com. Retrieved July 1, 2016.
^ a b "Kenny Smith: Inside the NBA Analyst" Archived August 18, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. www.nba.com. Retrieved on January 28, 2010.
^ Cherner, Reid. "Chemistry, characters carry NBA show above pack". USA Today, April 8, 2007. Retrieved on January 29, 2010.
^ "NBA All-Star Shooting Stars Winners". NBA.com. August 24, 2017. Archived from the original on February 24, 2018.
^ Rapp, Timothy. "Kenny Smith Says His Rockets Team Would've Beaten '94 Bulls with Michael Jordan". Bleacher Report. Retrieved 2018.
^ "Kenny Smith walks off 'NBA on TNT' set in solidarity with player strike". sports.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2020.
^ "K.J. Smith - Men's Basketball". University of North Carolina Athletics. Retrieved 2019.
^ "Dawn Reavis (@Sold_by_Dawn) | Twitter". twitter.com. Retrieved 2019.
^ Minnis, Glenn. "Daddy's Little Girl: Kenny Smith and Daughter Kayla Brianna Look to Rock Music Industry". Vibe, February 7, 2012. Retrieved on March 5, 2015.
^ a b "Awesome Basket Player Kenny Smith: Once Divorced, Now Happy With Wife Gwendolyn and Kids". LIVERAMPUP. October 26, 2016. Retrieved 2019.
^ Ho, Rodney (April 3, 2015). "TBS's 'Meet the Smiths' gives NBA analyst Kenny Smith the spotlight". Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Retrieved 2017.
^ 'Gwendolyn Osborne, a Barker beauty on the Price is Right, wed former NBA Star Kenny "the Jet" Smith.' www.prweb.com, September 8, 2006. Retrieved March 28, 2010.
^ https://theblast.com/c/kenny-smith-ex-wife-garnishing-paychecks
Career statistics and player information from Basketball-Reference.com
Kenny Smith on Devinci
Kenny Smith at UNC!!
AVID Chasing Trail Kenny Smith
Kenny Smith on Highly Questionable
GameTime: Kenny Smith On Griffin Trade
Kenny Smith copies Kobe's car jump
Chasing Trail - Kenny Smith - MTB - 2013
Kenny Smith on the NCAA Tournament
Kenny Smith is Terrified of Cats
Kenny Smith - Hail Storm - KSR Records
NYC Cabbie to Kenny Smith -- Nope.
Kenny Smith: Preparing for March Madness
Dr Kenny Smith: Research in a Nutshell
Kenny Smith -- 76ers Will Likely Suspend Okafor
Chris Webber impersonates Kenny Smith & talks basketball.
TNT's Kenny Smith Asked About Rockets Job
Kenny_Smith
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1615
|
__label__cc
| 0.656003
| 0.343997
|
S&P Credit Rating
We are pleased to announce that on September 15, 2017, Standard and Poor’s Rating Services has affirmed the City’s long term rating of AA-.
Summary: Prattville, Alabama; General Obligation
We are proud to announce that on July 25, 2014, Standard and Poor's upgraded the City's credit rating from A to AA-.
Standard & Poor's RatingsDirect® Summary: Prattville, Alabama; General Obligation
The City of Prattville is pleased to announce that Standard & Poor's Rating Services has raised its underlying rating from an "A-" to an "A" on the City's general obligation debt and also on our general obligation refunding warrants. Their outlook on all the ratings shows the City of Prattville as being "stable."
This upgraded rating speaks to the credit-worthiness of the City of Prattville. S&P's summary letter states: "the upgrade reflects the city's improved financial position following the implementation of improved budgeting practices and expenditure reductions."
"I could not be prouder of the hard work that has been accomplished in the past couple years," said Finance Director Doug Moseley. "It has been a tough road, but the City's leaders and employees have met those challenges head on as a team. We still have a good ways to go, but I am confident that we can continue to move forward together. We are working diligently to build on our successes to continue the reduction of expenses and increase efficiencies."
"This approval rating in these difficult times by S&P proves that teamwork coupled with a business-type approach pays off," stated Mayor Bill Gillespie, Jr.
Standard & Poor's RatingsDirect® Summary document is provided for our residents' review.
If you have any questions regarding the S&P summary document, rating or any other financial information, please contact Finance Director Daniel Oakley at or (334) 595-0150.
Standard & Poor's RatingsDirect® Summary
Sales Tax Online Payment
Sales Tax Revenue
Current Awarded Grants
Debt Service Info
Debt Schedules
A/P & Debt Balances
Monthly Expense, Revenue
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1617
|
__label__wiki
| 0.659173
| 0.659173
|
But Just a Little Bit
There are a lot of great blogs with a lot of great writing, but a very lucky few have the good fortune of having comments sections as worthwhile as the posts that bore them. Recently, I was skimming comments on one of Jim Emerson's Inception posts, where I found this note by OMG:
To be honest, there have even been some truly classic movies--and I mean really groundbreaking, monumental stuff--that have bored me to death even as I appreciated them. But then getting together to talk about them, such as in a film class run by an inspiring teacher...yeah, now that's fun.
It got me thinking not so much about the age-old topic of films that are more fun to talk about than they are to watch, but rather about films that you love in spite of the fact that they're kind of a drag to watch. And I'm not talking about movies you "appreciate" or "can recognize the value of" or whatever the latest euphemism is for "I didn't like it, it bored me, but a lot of other people seem to like it, and I can't really find anything bad to say about it." I'm talking about movies you flat-out love, that touch you deeply and opened the world to you and everything else great art is supposed to do, even if experiencing that particular work of art is just a drag.
I first experienced this with Stanley Kubrick. Seeing A Clockwork Orange for the first time was a marathon of frisson, but when I sat down to watch 2001: A Space Odyssey, I wanted to tear my hair out even though, as the screen went black and the credits rolled, I knew I had experienced something of terrifying majesty. The experience was intensified in both directions when I saw Barry Lyndon, which is now my favorite both in terms of Kubrick's work and any film from the 1970s.
But even that's not quite what I'm after here - in subsequent viewings of each, I've come to adore every second of them (the difference between seeing Barry Lyndon on my 19-inch tube TV and projected in 35mm was certainly edifying in this regard). There are still films that, even after watching them a handful of times, are still a bit of a chore.
The first two that came to mind are Frederico Fellini's 8½ and Alain Resnais' Last Year at Marienbad. Once again, let me reiterate - I love these films. Especially Marienbad, which means about as much to me as a film can to a person. I'm more of a La Dolce Vita man, but I do still deeply love 8½. And yet every time I see them, they hit a point about midway where I go "man, there's a lot of movie to this movie, isn't there?" Same with L'Avventura, 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her, or The Seventh Seal.
And it's not just great classic works of foreign cinema. I've seen Bringing Up Baby four times, it's my favorite Howard Hawks film and Howard Hawks is one of my five or so favorite directors. But only once was I consistently elated by it - watching it in a film class, in which every single person in the class was completely in tune with it (and man, what a way to watch that one). I never told a single person Che wasn't the longest damn film they'd ever see, and not only because statistically it almost certainly was. Anybody who says there aren't dead spots to Raging Bull is lying to themselves. And don't get me started on Robert Altman...
But, when taken in whole, these works are absolutely electrifying. Altman's and Godard's films are as galvanizing as ever, and the last shot of Nashville still stands as one of the most transcendent, fascinating moments in all of cinema (ditto the last shot or sequence of any Antonioni film), but...good Lord, it's a three-hour movie about people talking. What are they talking about? Oh, nothing in particular. And don't get me wrong, Nasvhille (which I love) also runs the gamut of being wildly hilarious, totally captivating, achingly awkward, and heartbreaking, but it's only when put in this huge canvas that any of it means anything, but as a result, those moments come to mean everything.
Jeffrey Wells has this bit that "quality movies flirt with being boring from time to time." He couches his stance, using words like "a little bit" to describe the level of boring, but I'll just say it - there are sections many films that I absolutely adore that bore me. It just blows my mind that so much of the film industry in constructed to prevent this feeling when, and I would agree with Mr. Wells here, it is so often (though not always) the mark of quality. A good film will usually take its time, let us ruminate on it, and on ourselves. It's necessary.
Posted by Scott Nye at 1:47 PM
I love this. There are quite a few films I watched early in my film student career that were such drags to watch but I loved them immediately afterwards. Chief among them: Sunrise, The Bicycle Thieves, Brief Encounter. I also thought Citizen Kane was a total drag, but I'd say I appreciate that rather than love it, it's not close to my heart. Bringing up Baby - agreed!
Scott Nye said...
As it happens, so does Peter Bogdanovich - on the commentary track for Bringing Up Baby, he said to hang in there, 'cause it plays a lot slower on video than on film. I'm sure he chiefly means sitting at home by yourself versus seeing it with a crowd, though.
Welcome to The Rail of Tomorrow
Scott Nye loved movies so much, he spent four years at Emerson College earning a career-free degree in Media Studies. Now living in Los Angeles, he's trying to put that to some sort of use.
railoftomorrow@gmail.com
Read Me At...
Shadowlocked
Yidio
I'm on Twitter!
Big Media Vandalism
DVD Beaver
Hollywood Elsewhere (Jeff Wells)
Jim Emerson's Scanners
Kim Morgan
Little Worlds
Misfortune Cookie Blog
Only the Cinema
Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule (Dennis Cozzalio)
Some Came Running (Glenn Kenny)
The Cooler (Jason Bellamy)
The Digital Bits
The Film Doctor
The Fine Cut (Steven Santos)
The Kind of Face You Hate
Films I Saw in 2010
Much Ado About Nothing - Alain Resnais' Wild Grass
Winter's Bone (dir. Debra Granik)
Runnin' Down a Dream, Pushing Through the Cobbwebs...
Squeaky-Clean Fun
Solitary Man (dir. Brian Koppelman & David Levien)
Five Great Criterion Blu-Rays
Fun With Miis!
Cyrus (dir. Jay & Mark Duplass)
Knight and Day (dir. James Mangold)
Eighty Thirty Next Saturday...
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1624
|
__label__wiki
| 0.531369
| 0.531369
|
Religion Online
Inadvertent Ministry
by Belden C. Lane
Belden C. Lane is professor of theological studies and American studies at Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri.
This article appeared in the Christian Century November 7, 1984, p.1030. Copyright by the Christian Century Foundation and used by permission. Current articles and subscription information can be found at www.christiancentury.org. This material was prepared for Religion Online by Ted & Winnie Brock.
“There are only stories and each of us gets to carry one of them for a little while.” This statement summarizes the whole mystery of ministry. In the final analysis, there aren’t any polished and professional manipulators of the Word, there are only stories that seek out their own hearers and tellers, in their own time.
Every minister is a Calvinist come Monday morning. Shuddering to think how little of one’s carefully aimed ministry has hit the mark the day before, one feels the truth come thundering home that often the most effective ministry is altogether unplanned, unintentional, even accidental. Were it not for the hope of such inadvertent ministry, many of us would despair altogether.
In 1737 Jonathan Edwards spoke of “the Surprising Work of God at Northampton” and, in the process, penned a classic in the annals of inadvertent ministry. By contrast, I’m exhausted by my own efforts at carefully programmed effectiveness and long to stumble into the serendipitous grace of which he spoke. In those rare moments of unpremeditated ministry when I do happen upon the holy, there is a Zenlike freedom and ease which characterize my best work. It flows without the constant interruption of my ego’s trying to imprint itself on all that is accomplished. How to get out of the way of what would exercise itself through me if I let it?
Something of an answer presented itself this past spring at the Fifth Annual St. Louis Storytelling Festival at the Arch. I had been invited to be one of the tellers. Though I use story a great deal in teaching, I’d seldom worked in a performance setting. So while I was excited, I was also terrified. But Laura Simms, a superbly gifted story-teller from New York City, was also at the festival. I told her how frightened I was, saying that I didn’t feel like a “real story-teller.” She then said something that I’ll never forget: “You know, I don’t think there are any story-tellers. There are only stories and each of us gets to carry one of them for a little while.” In that one stroke, she not only greatly eased my fears, but also summarized the whole mystery of ministry. In the final analysis, there aren’t any polished and professional manipulators of the Word, there are only stories that seek out their own hearers and tellers, in their own time. One never knows, then, who might be a bearer of the Word. Laura Simms had thus opened for me a way of being a vehicle for the gift without having to pretend mastery over it. She also had given me the perfect conclusion to a story I was to tell the next day.
The story was one whose skeleton I had found in a collection of Legends of the Hasidim, by Jerome Mintz (University of Chicago Press, 1968). It’s strange how the bones of a story will sometimes leap off the page, demanding to be put into flesh. This story was like that. It was set in Eastern Europe at the end of the 18th century. There in the village of Bobov, in the region of the rich, black earth of Galicia north of the Carpathian Mountains, a rebbe lived and prayed among his small community of poor, Hasidic Jews. One day a couple came to the rebbe to ask him to pray for them, explaining that they had never had a child, though they had waited in patient silence for years. They knew the prayers of the rebbe were able to shake the very gates of heaven itself. So they were jubilant when he said that not only would he pray for them, but he would tell them a story as well. That was better yet!
He spoke of three Hasidim who one year had longed to spend the High Holy Days with the great Lubliner rebbe, Reb Yaakov-Yitzhak of Lublin, also known as the Holy Seer. This fascinating rebbe, blind in one eye but steeped in the wisdom of Talmud and Kabbala, could see, it was said, “from one end of the world to the other.” People came to Lublin to study, to meditate, to sit in the shadow of the great seer. Anxious to join this company, the three Jews set out early one fall morning. Without food, without money, they determined to walk all the way to the Polish border and beyond. But after several days without eating, they grew weak with hunger. “Listen,” one of the three finally said, “it’s no great mitzvah that Jews should die of starvation on their way to see the Holy Seer of Lublin! We’ve got to do something! According to Torah, anything may be done to save a life.” Another suggested that one of them disguise himself as a rebbe. Then whenever they came to a village, people would welcome them warmly, thinking it an honor they should be visited by a rebbe. In this way, at least they’d be fed. None of them wanted to practice deceit, but reluctantly they drew straws and the unfortunate one became the pretending rebbe A second one dressed up like his gabbai, an assistant working in the house of study; and the third would simply be a Hasid from the community.
On they walked until they came to the next village. There they were greeted with cries of delight: “A rebbe is coming! A rebbe is coming!” They were taken to the inn, and the innkeeper, after seeing to their needs, spoke with great anguish. “Rebbe,” he said, “you must pray for my son. He lies dying on his bed at this moment: the doctors say there’s no hope. But the Holy One, blessed be His name, may at last respond to your prayers, now that you’ve come. The “rebbe” looked at his companions to ask what he should do. They motioned him to go with the father. “Don’t talk,” they said. “Just go with him.” There was nothing else to do. Having begun pretending, one had to finish.
That night the three slept restlessly. The next morning the grateful father, hoping the prayer might yet be heard, sent away the rebbe and his retinue, having loaned them a carriage and a matched pair of sable horses for the remainder of their trip. On they went to Lublin, where they spent the days following Rosh Hashana in glorious study and prayer, under the spell of the Lubliner rebbe. With his words the spiced wine of Talmud flowed through their minds and veins. But then came the end of Yom Kippur and the time to return home -- back the way they had come, back through the same village once more, back to return the carriage and matched sable pair they had borrowed. The rebbe pretender was especially fearful. His heart was in his throat as he approached the village and saw the innkeeper running toward them, furiously waving his arms in the air. But, to the “rebbe’s” joy and relief, the father embraced him, crying, “Rebbe, thank you for your prayers! One hour after you left, my son got out of bed and has been perfectly well ever since! The doctors say it is impossible, but he lives!” The other two Jews looked strangely at the pretending rebbe. Had he really been a rebbe all along, without telling them?
Later he explained that he had gone to the bedside of the child and stood there in silence, as they had told him to do. Then he started to think, “Master of the Universe, this man and his child ought not to be punished because they think I’m a rebbe. What am I? I’m nothing! Just a pretender! After I leave, the child will probably die and the father will be tempted to think that a rebbe can do nothing. So, Ribbono Shel Oloim Master of the Universe, not because of me, but because of the man and his faith, can it hurt that the child be healed?” He had done nothing more than that, he said. Strange that such an artless and inadvertent prayer should be heard and answered.
Having finished his story, the rebbe who had been speaking to the couple then said he would pray for them as he had promised. With tired eyes he looked to heaven and, taking upon himself the anguish of every childless couple in the world, he prayed, “Master of the Universe, this man and his wife ought not to be punished because they think I’m a rebbe. What am I? I’m nothing! Just a pretender. We all are pretenders! So, not because of anything that I am, but because of the couple and their patient faith, can it hurt that they be given a child?” The people of the village of Bobov swear that a year later the man and his wife brought their eight-day-old son to the rebbe for bris, for circumcision -- the son who had been born in answer to a story that was told and an even stranger prayer that was said.
I told this story under the Arch that Sunday morning, moved by the uncalculated ministry of both pretending rebbes. I added a postscript: I suggested that there’s a sense in which every story-teller -- everyone who ministers, in whatever medium -- can and must pray: “Master of the Universe, these people ought not to be punished because they think I’m a story-teller. What am I? I’m nothing, Just a pretender. We all are pretenders. So, not because of what I am, but because of the power of the story itself and their faith in it and in You, let them be healed.” Such a prayer, I suspect, is one God simply can’t resist.
A friend who is both student and teacher to me told me that he does very well at serving as host; it’s learning to be a guest that comes harder for him. He can direct and lead; he can make people feel at home and manage others quite readily. But it’s receiving and accepting, the gracious and humble posture of not being in control, that he finds more difficult. That’s precisely the dilemma of planned as opposed to inadvertent ministry. Perhaps the problem with most training for ministry today is that it teaches us to be effective hosts, while offering very little about learning to be joyous guests.
Yet being a guest at one’s own inadvertent ministry is a graced event, one of the most exultant we may discover. Maybe it happens most often on a Monday, when conscious ministry has been exhausted and we find ourselves seeking once again the back-road villages on the way to Lublin.
Previous PostPrevious For the Sake of Ten (Gen. 18:24)
Next PostNext Mousetraps (2 Sam. 11:26-12:10, 13-15; Lk.7:36-8:3)
Religion Online is designed to assist teachers, scholars and general “seekers” who are interested in exploring religious issues. Its aim is to develop an extensive library of resources, representing many different points of view, but all written from the perspective of sound scholarship.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1626
|
__label__wiki
| 0.726929
| 0.726929
|
Home Naval 1/144 Ships & Submarines Revell 1/144 German U-Boat Type VIID "Minenleger"
Revell 1/144 German U-Boat Type VIID "Minenleger"
One of the most important weapons used in marine warfare was the mine. In order to bring this weapon close to the enemy shipping lanes, the German Navy used special submarines. The Type VIID U-Boat was a lengthened version of the successful Type VIIC U-Boat. To enable it to transport and lay type SMA moored mines a section with five mine silos each holding 3 SMA mines was incorporated behind the conning tower. This extended the overall length by 9.80 m. As these submarines were otherwise the same as the type VIIC, unlike the large mine layers, they could be used against enemy vessels in the Battle of the Atlantic.
The six U-Boats (U-213 - U-218) were built at the Germania shipyard at Kiel and engaged in a total of 31 operations against the enemy, in which they sank 10 ships. By the end of the war five of these submarines had been sunk and became iron coffins for 241 submariners. Only U-218 survived the war and arrived in Bergen, Norway on 8.5.1945. This one finally sank during Operation Deadlight on 4.12.1945 while towing HMS Southdown.
53cm in length.
Detailed conning tower.
Mine silo section behind tower.
Highly detailed hull with representations of with rivets and welds.
Long hull version with mine release area.
Detailed deck, rudder and propellers.
Periscope can be extended and retracted into different positions.
Detailed conning tower bridge and side walls.
Decals for 6 submarines.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1627
|
__label__wiki
| 0.771297
| 0.771297
|
Home Military 1/48 Military Tamiya 1/48 British Universal Carrier Mk.II
Tamiya 1/48 British Universal Carrier Mk.II
CODE: TA32516
During World War II, the British and Commonwealth armies used a vast number of small sized, fully-tracked weapons carriers, chief among which was the Universal Carrier Mk.II. This compact, open top vehicle served in a variety of roles on the North African, Italian and West European fronts. A number of variants were constructed, including models mounted with mortars and flamethrowers, however, most machines typically carried a Bren light machine gun. Over 65,000 models were manufactured in Britain, Canada and other Commonwealth countries, making it one of the most numerous armoured vehicles built during WWII.
Tracks and roller wheels made from single piece for ease of assembly.
Suspension coil spring made from separate part for extra realism.
Replicates the Mk.II's distinctive box-like shape and open top style.
Includes perfectly detailed accessories like the Bren gun, Enfield rifle and ammo boxes.
Choice of 4 different markings of Universal Carriers serving in Europe and North Africa.
Includes 2 figures.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1628
|
__label__wiki
| 0.97726
| 0.97726
|
Home Latest Emily Poznanski Named Director of CEU Press
CEU President and Rector Michael Ignatieff, announced today that Emily Poznanski, current Director of Strategy at the highly respected academic publishing house, De Gruyter in Berlin, will join CEU Press as its new director on February 15th 2021.
Founded in 1993, the Central European University Press (CEU Press) established itself as leader in the history of communism and the transitions to democracy. It is widely seen as the most important English language publishing institution dedicated to research coming out of Central and Eastern Europe. With authors from around the world, CEU Press covers a wide range of subjects in the Humanities and Social Sciences while also bringing to the world books a distinctive regional flavour.
As Strategic Director, Emily Poznanski played a pivotal role in developing De Gruyter’s Open Access (OA) policies and investment strategies. She has worked with universities and funders worldwide to enable new partnerships for De Gruyter. Poznanski contributed to policy developments across the Open Access landscape, especially in promoting Humanities and Social Science interests in Europe’s Plan S. Prior to working at De Gruyter, she managed a team of editors, building up a multi-disciplinary OA book and journal program at the Polish digital start-up Versita (later bought by De Gruyter).
CEU President and Rector Michael Ignatieff said, “Emily Poznanski brings a host of new skills and experience to CEU Press, especially in the area of Open Access. Under her guidance, we look forward to an expanded CEU Press continuing to impact on a new generation of scholars, policy makers and activists, and to a further era of engagement with, and support for the values of open societies everywhere.”
CEU Press’s Executive Chair, Dr Frances Pinter said, “I’m thrilled that someone with Emily’s talents and perspective is joining the CEU Press. Her vision, creativity and ability to deliver will be a great asset to the CEU Press and to CEU during a time of profound changes in scholarly communications and academic publishing.”
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1633
|
__label__wiki
| 0.514767
| 0.514767
|
You are here: Home » Archives for Advertising
Tag: "Advertising"
Monday Memo: Podcasting’s Prime Time
By Holland Cooke
BLOCK ISLAND, RI — Dawn Ostroff says “a lot of people recognize that this is the next big medium.” The former 20th Century Fox/Lifetime/UPN/CW/Condé Nast exec and TV and film producer is Spotify’s chief content officer & advertising business officer, and she keynoted the latest installment of CNBC’s Evolve webcast series: “The Evolution of Content & Consumption.”
Pending Business: Minimizing Risk. Sales and marketing pro Steve Lapa, president of Lapcom Communications Corp, says that for local business owners, the biggest obstacle to overcome (beyond the pandemic) is the high risk of advertising. In today’s column, he offers seven points to help radio sellers combat this risk anxiety. Read it here.
COVID-19 and Holiday Travel, Biden Transition, Trump Post-Election, Georgia Runoff Elections, Iran Scientist Assassinated, Record Dow/Joblessness, and Utah Monolith Disappears Among Top News/Talk Stories Over the Weekend. The current pace of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. and abroad and concerns about Thanksgiving holiday travel spreading the coronavirus; the Joe Biden administration goes forward with transition activities as officials are named; Donald Trump continues to argue that the election was fraudulent; the January runoff elections for Georgia’s two U.S. Senate seats; the aftermath of the assassination of Iran’s top nuclear weapons scientist; the Dow holds its record level as economists express concerns about potential mass joblessness as a result of the pandemic; and the bizarre metal monolith found in remote Utah disappears were some of the most-talked-about stories on news/talk radio over the weekend, according to ongoing research from TALKERS magazine.
Monday Memo: Last Chance for Christmas Cash. Unsurprisingly, consumer research forecasts a very different holiday shopping season. In this week’s column, consultant Holland Cooke says “steal this line” for a local advertiser’s copy. Read it here.
Cox Media Group’s Bill Hendrich to Retire. Although today’s announcement says Bill Hendrich will remain with Cox Media Group in an advisory capacity, the company announces that he’ll retire from his executive vice president of radio position. During his three-decade career with Cox Media Group, Hendrich has served as EVP, radio, overseeing programming, operations and sales for the company’s radio stations. He also has oversight of CMG’s Radio Revenue team and Radio Digital team. CMG president and CEO Dan York says, “Bill’s retirement comes with a wealth of gratitude and mixed emotions. In the time I have known him, he has shared his exceptional passion, focus, and leadership from which our company, and our industry, has immeasurably benefited. Bill’s legacy of decisive leadership, his personal style and his deep experiences in radio and beyond will inform our work well into the future.” Hendrich comments, “Although I’m retiring from CMG, I will remain an active and passionate supporter of this great company. For the past 31 years, I have been able to work with the best and most talented team in the radio industry. With NewCity Communications, Cox Enterprises and Apollo, I have been a part of three outstanding companies – each bringing valuable and innovative ideas to keep radio viable in today’s media landscape. I look forward to continuing our work together in an advisory capacity to help the team at CMG serve their audiences, customers, and communities with best-in-class services. I joined a great company in 1989 and I get to leave that same great company with pride 31 years later. I am a lucky man.”
Round Three of November PPM Takeaways. TALKERS magazine managing editor Mike Kinosian presents his Takeaways from the third round of Nielsen Audio’s November PPM survey that covered October 8 to November 4. This group of markets included Portland, Charlotte, San Antonio, Sacramento, Pittsburgh, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Orlando, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Kansas City, and Columbus. Some moves of note include Entercom’s WBT-AM/FM, Charlotte rising to the #2 spot after climbing a half share to finish with a 7.4 share. iHeartMedia’s WOAI, San Antonio rises to the #1 rank on the strength of a 1.4 share increase for a 7.7 share. iHeartMedia’s KFBK, Sacramento keeps its #1 rank for the third straight month after posting a 9.1 share (+0.6) and the company’s KNRS-FM, Salt Lake City adds 1.9 shares during the survey to achieve a 9.5 share and its second straight #1 rank. Entercom’s KMBZ-FM, Kansas City climbs into the #6 spot after posting a 5.7 share (+0.7). You can see Mike Kinosian’s complete Ratings Takeaways here.
FOX Sports Radio Launches New Weekend Show. The new “Up On Game” show that debuts this Saturday (12/5) from FOX Sports Radio is co-hosted by former NFL stars LaVar Arrington, TJ Houshmandzadeh, and Plaxico Burress. Arrington says, “I’m super excited to team up with my brothers to host this new show. TJ and Plaxico are sports cultural icons and legends. Not only do they have incredible knowledge and experience as former pro athletes, but they also understand how to mentor players. This show will break the mold and create a new way of thinking about athletes and sports topics.” FSR VP of sports programming Scott Shapiro adds, “LaVar, TJ, and Plaxico have such unique perspectives, which will make for a truly refreshing and entertaining listen. This is not going to sound like any other sports talk show. When these three star football players take the mic, all with strong points of view, watch out!”
Can Trump Be the ‘Next Limbaugh?’ There’s buzz aplenty about Donald Trump’s post-presidency role in the media. Talk radio consultant and RT America TV host Holland Cooke thinks the time is opportune: “FOX News has a problem. When they reported election results, viewers damned them on social media and the ratings tanked. Talk radio has a problem. Its biggest star has advanced cancer. Will Trump supporters flee mass media entirely? And could Citizen Trump herd them past his own media paywall?” In the segment you can see here, TALKERS publisher Michael Harrison weighs in.
Ajit Pai Announces He’ll Leave FCC in January. After three years as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Ajit Pai announces that he intends to leave the Commission on January 20, 2021. Pai issued the following statement: “It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve at the Federal Communications Commission, including as chairman of the FCC over the past four years. I am grateful to President Trump for giving me the opportunity to lead the agency in 2017, to President Obama for appointing me as a commissioner in 2012, and to Senate Majority Leader McConnell and the Senate for twice confirming me. To be the first Asian-American to chair the FCC has been a particular privilege. As I often say: only in America.” He added, “I also deeply appreciate the chance to have worked alongside the FCC’s talented staff. They are the agency’s best assets, and they have performed heroically, especially during the pandemic. It’s also been an honor to work with my fellow commissioners to execute a strong and broad agenda. Together, we’ve delivered for the American people over the past four years: closing the digital divide; promoting innovation and competition, from 5G on the ground to broadband from space; protecting consumers; and advancing public safety. And this FCC has not shied away from making tough choices. As a result, our nation’s communications networks are now faster, stronger, and more widely deployed than ever before. I am proud of how productive this Commission has been, from commencing five spectrum auctions and two rural broadband reverse auctions in four years, to opening 1,245 megahertz of mid-band spectrum for unlicensed use, to adopting more than 25 orders through our Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative, to aggressively protecting our communications networks from national security threats at home and abroad, to designating 988 as the three-digit number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, and much, much more. I’m also proud of the reforms we have instituted to make the agency more accountable to the American people. In particular, for the first time ever, we’ve made public drafts of the proposals and orders slated for a vote three weeks before the agency’s monthly meetings, making this the most transparent FCC in history.”
Jim Bohannon Helps Kick Off the Holiday Season. Pictured here in fill Santa Claus regalia – complete with golf cart sleigh – is Westwood One nationally syndicated late-night talk host Jim Bohannon. He’s in Chickasaw Point, South Carolina helping the community kick off the holiday season.
Music Radio News and Career Moves. The new radio station from Nashville Public Radio launches today at 3:00 pm local time. WNXP-FM, Nashville “91.ONE, WNXP, Nashville’s Music Experience” is a “new music discovery station” that “will serve as a platform for new and emerging artists from Nashville and beyond plus incorporate a unique fusion of indie rock, urban alternative, electro pop and pop alternative.” Station program director Jason Moon Wilkins says, “WNXP is focused on being an ally to the Nashville music scene by providing opportunities that stretch beyond our city. The Nashville Artist of the Month feature is a great example of how we’ll use every tool and relationship from radio to social media to NPR Music to bring music like [rapper] Namir [Blade]’s to new audiences.” WNXP’s full-time staff consists of music director and midday host Jewly Hight, APD and evening host Mickey Parks, production coordinator and morning host Marquis Munson, and engagement coordinator Paige A. Jack…..In order to sate the appetite of live music fans, SiriusXM is launching the “Next Wave Virtual Concert Series” in which it will present six new virtual concerts over three consecutive weeks. The Octane Accelerator Virtual Concert will feature new, live performances from three explosive new hard rock bands, Saul, Any Given Sin, and AVOID, hosted by Jose Mangin. Coffee House Live: At Home Edition will include exclusive sets from singer-songwriters Phoebe Bridgers, Sam Fischer, and Ruth B. Alt Nation’s Virtual Advanced Placement Concert will feature breaking alternative artists Royal & The Serpent, beabadoobee, and Holly Humberstone. Hip Hop Nation: Nation’s Next Virtual Concert will hand the mic to Mulatto, Tyla Yaweh, and Yella Beezy. Highway Finds Tour: Quarantine Edition will showcase new performances from Drew Parker, Parker McCollum, Priscilla Block, Angie K, and Shy Carter. Liquid Metal Hard Attack Virtual Concert will feature performances with Slaughter To Prevail, Spiritbox, and Tetrarch.
Pending Business: Minimizing Risk
By Steve Lapa
Lapcom Communications Corp
PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. — Beyond the pandemic, what do you think is the single biggest obstacle to overcome in the mind of any local business owner?
I first came across the research when I was educating my teams on how competitive media sells. Back then the research was clear that 52% of local business owners considered advertising high risk. Imagine how the local business owner feels today.
Monday Memo: Blue Christmas, Bleak January, Big Opportunity
BLOCK ISLAND, RI — Sad prediction: On Thursday, we will blow it. We, not The Grinch, will steal Christmas.
Dr. Fauci and the Biden transition team’s pandemic advisers and state governors are pleading with us to skip Thanksgiving this year. It doesn’t take a rally. Contact tracing pinpoints “small social gatherings” as significant spreader events. We’re begged to Zoom instead of hugging those we only get to hug once a year.
Predictably, we won’t. United Airlines alone added 1,400 flights. Then do the math. Figure 2-3 weeks, like after Easter/Passover, then after The Fourth, then after Justice Coney Barrett’s Rose Garden introduction. Hug grandparents on Thanksgiving and you might not be able to on Christmas.
Consensus forecasts: At present rates, another hundred thousand Americans will die before the Inauguration; and January will be worse than April was.
Pending Business: A Secret of Success
TALKERS | October 26, 2020
PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. — It’s the greatest feeling in the world.
Your station dominates the news/talk niche in a market and there is no real competitor in sight. Maybe that’s been the case for weeks, months, or years. Are you practicing the secret that makes competing with your dominance fruitless? There are precious few media or business niches that can continue to be dominant long term as new, well-funded initiatives are constantly being developed. Yes, there will always be exceptions, but competitive determination is always lurking.
Monday Memo: Listeners’ Mindset, Advertisers’ Message
BLOCK ISLAND, RI — Underway now: “10 Days. Infinite Possibilities.” It’s the NAB/New York convention, perennially packing the Javits Center; but – like other events – now gone-virtual, at nabshow.com/ny2020/ . And if you’re just finding out about this, you’re not late. Sessions are available on-demand.
You might not know of NAB/New York, because it’s not a radio show per se. It’s about where-the-puck-is-going in an increasingly crowded media mix where 100-year-old radio needs to remain nimble.
Pending Business: Competitors Aren’t Dumb
TALKERS | August 24, 2020
PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. — Write this down and study it: Competitors Aren’t Dumb.
Why put that in writing? No less review it every Sunday, Monday, and Friday? Sunday -helped me plan meetings, Monday – helped me steer the countless decisions to be made, Friday – to gain perspective to weekly performance.
TALKERS | April 27, 2020
Monday Memo: Freebie-of-the-Year? Commercial broadcasters subsist on advertising by businesses, most-of-which are OUT of business now. In this week’s column, consultant Holland Cooke points to a research report “that recommends specific, tested guidance for crafting messages to convey our clients’ – and our stations’ – concern for listeners in a way that will resonate long after the pandemic passes.” Read it here.
The U.S. Coronavirus Cases and the Death Toll, Weekend ‘Reopening’ Activities, Presidential Race/Biden Accuser, CCP’s Coronavirus Response, ‘SNL,’ and NFL Draft Among Top News/Talk Stories Over the Weekend. The number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in the U.S. and the death toll from the pandemic; the “re-opening” activities taking place in some states; the November presidential election and case of former Joe Biden senate staffer Tara Reade who claims Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993; scrutiny of the Chinese Communist Party’s handling of the coronavirus epidemic; Brad Pitt plays Dr. Tony Fauci on “Saturday Night Live”; and the 2020 NFL Draft were some of the most-talked-about stories on news/talk radio over the weekend, according to ongoing research from TALKERS magazine.
Pending Business: Seven Simple Steps. Sales and marketing consultant Steve Lapa, president of Lapcom Communications, writes in today’s column that it’s not easy doing business in this uncertain time. Yes, audience levels for news/talk are up! But, “you know ad sales are down. More listeners are tuning in, yet co-workers are getting laid off. Fear is dominating the content and fear is the most difficult business condition to sell through. All markets hate fear and uncertainty. Adapting to this pandemic environment challenges everything we know.” Read Lapa’s suggestions for helping you adapt here.
Investor Leases XEPRS; Will Launch ‘The Mightier 1090’ This Summer. The San Diego Union Tribune reports that Flagstaff, Arizona ad agency owner Bill Hagen is signing a five-year lease with XEPRS, Rosarito, Mexico owner Interamericana de Radio to operate the station. The signal – for some 16 years a San Diego sports talk station branded “The Mighty 1090” – stopped airing sports talk after previous lessee Broadcasting Company of the Americas was unable to renegotiate its lease. Hagen tells the paper that former “Mighty 1090” sports talk host Scott Kaplan will rejoin the station but the soon-to-be-rebranded “The Mightier 1090” will not be 24/7 sports talk. Hagen says the station will be about “lifestyle.” He has no specific date for launching the format but tells the Union Tribune, “We have a ton of work to do.”
PodcastOne Subscribes to Nielsen’s Podcast Listener Buying Power Service. Podcasting firm PodcastOne announces that it has entered into a deal with Nielsen to use the ratings giant’s Podcast Listener Buying Power service. As part of the deal, PodcastOne will “have access to podcast insights spanning 18 genres and numerous listening preferences that can be cross-referenced among a variety of consumer purchase behavior patterns and services usage.” Nielsen says its Podcast Listener Buying Power Service (launched last August) allows clients to see the qualitative profile of their shows using program titles collected from subscribers in order to connect specific types of listeners with advertisers and key brand categories. PodcastOne EVP of sales Sue McNamara says, “Nielsen represents the addition of another powerful tool to our arsenal of research resources. With these insights, we’ll be able to use podcast listener analytics to provide ourselves and our clients with information that will accelerate monetization opportunities. With programming in virtually every content category, this information will provide us invaluable research to communicate our importance to podcast advertisers, as well as our partners.”
Emmis to Voluntarily Delist from Nasdaq. The company says in a statement that it plans to voluntarily delist its Class A Common Stock from the Nasdaq Stock Market, and based upon ownership of its shares by fewer than 300 holders of record, deregister its Class A Common Stock and suspend its public reporting obligations. Emmis Communications CEO Jeff Smulyan says, “We’ve undertaken a detailed and thoughtful review of the costs and benefits associated with being a Nasdaq-listed and SEC reporting company. After careful consideration, our board of directors unanimously decided to voluntarily delist from Nasdaq and deregister with the SEC as we believe the expected savings of more than $1 million per year outweigh the advantages of continuing as a Nasdaq-listed and SEC reporting company.” After the delisting takes place, Emmis’ Class A Common Stock is eligible for trading on an over-the-counter market, if one or more brokers choose to make a market for the Company’s Class A Common Stock, however, there can be no assurances regarding any such trading.
BIA Advisory: Radio to Take $1.7 Billion Ad Hit Due to COVID-19. Revising its advertising revenue projections for 2020 that were originally laid out in November of last year, BIA Advisory Services now expects the total for all U.S. local advertising across all platforms to be $144.3 billion, down 10.6% from its November 2019 projection of $161.3 billion. Over the air radio is expected to lose $1.7 billion as it and local television are being hit hard by “decreased ad spend by Leisure and Entertainment, Restaurants and Retail companies, as well as sports cancellations.” The report goes on to say, “One encouraging element is that political advertising will keep the decrease in both local cable and local OTA television smaller than other media. Other media, without that buffer, will see larger percentage decreases from what BIA originally projected for 2020.” For radio, political advertising is situational – stations in swing states tend to get more presidential advertising than those in non-swing states.
TALKERS News Notes. Some of the hosts of the New Hampshire-based, nationally syndicated “Free Talk Live” talk radio program attended a rally at the state house in Concord to protest the social distancing measures in place. Hosts including show founder Ian Freeman, Nobody, Vincent, and Captain Kickass were there. Freeman reports that the local police ignored the event. He was quoted by the Associated Press in its national coverage, saying, “Even if the virus were 10 times as dangerous as it is, I still wouldn’t stay inside my home. I’d rather take the risk and be a free person.”…..This Thursday (4/30), a national radiothon will take place to raise funds for Feeding America and its 200-member network of local food banks across the U.S. It’s called, “Radio Cares: Feeding America Emergency Radiothon,” and is open to any radio station wishing to join……Condolences to the family and friends of WNYC, New York personality Richard Hake, who passed away on Friday (4/24) at age 51 from natural causes. He as most recently serving as the local host of WNYC’s “Morning Edition.” He also worked on the national; editions of NPR programs “Weekend Edition” and “All Things Considered.”
Talk Host Wayne Allyn Root Organizes Las Vegas Protest Parade. Pictured above is Las Vegas-based, nationally syndicated talk show host Wayne Allyn Root thanking participants in Friday’s “Open Nevada, Unleash Prosperity, Save America Patriot Caravan.” Root organized the parade of vehicles that drove down Las Vegas Boulevard to protest the business shutdowns due to social distancing that has all but shuttered the tourist-reliant economy there. The Las Vegas Sun estimates 500 cars took part in the event but Root says there were “thousands and thousands of cars!”
PPM Analysis: Rock. TALKERS magazine managing editor Mike Kinosian presents a look at the performances of radio stations based on data from Nielsen Audio’s March 2020 PPM survey, today focusing on the rock format. In this report, you can see which stations improved from the February survey, how their weekly, 6+ AHQ shares changed from a year ago, and how some of the format’s best performers ranked in their local markets. See it all here.
More Music Radio News and Career Moves. In Philadelphia, “Lady B in the Afternoon” debuts on Radio One’s rhythmic oldies WPPZ-FM “Classix 107.9” today (4/27). Station program director Jay Dixon says, “Afternoons is where Lady B shines. Philly radio grew up on Lady B. We’re so happy to have her back in this time slot – bridging music, the community, and people – every weekday. With her team, DJ Touchtone and Roxi Fab, Lady B is like medicine for the soul.”…..Alpha Media’s country KGNC-FM, Amarillo, Texas adds the “Big D & Bubba” show for mornings, starting today (4/27). The duo say, “It is such an honor to be given the reigns of such a legendary station! We appreciate Alpha and their leadership giving us this opportunity.” The “Big D & Bubba Show” is distributed nationally via a partnership between Silverfish Media and Compass Media Networks…..This Wednesday (4/29) “The iHeartRadio Living Room Concert Series Presented by State Farm” will launch, featuring some of the biggest artists in music. The series will video stream and broadcast every Wednesday to celebrate the importance of community and being a “good neighbor” through the power of music during the COVID-19 pandemic. Wednesday’s performance will feature country artist Thomas Rhett. It will stream on iHeartRadio’s YouTube Channel and broadcast across iHeartRadio stations nationwide at 7:00 pm local time. iHeartMedia Entertainment Enterprises president John Sykes says, “The living room has become the new stage. Until our live music events return, this is a way for millions of fans to stay connected to their favorite artists, while staying safe at home. We are excited to partner with State Farm on this new music series.”
TALKERS | March 16, 2020
CORONAVIRUS PERSEPCTIVE: RAB President/CEO Encourages Radio Sellers to Proactively Draw Upon Relationships with Clients and Take Leadership Role. In an exclusive conversation conducted early this afternoon (3/16), TALKERS publisher Michael Harrison tapped into the perspective of Radio Advertising Bureau (RAB) president/CEO Erica Farber about the challenges facing radio sales during the current crisis. She tells TALKERS, “This crisis shows just how important relationships are in radio sales.” Farber advises radio sales reps to take a proactive role in reaching out to clients before they contact the stations and enquire as to their well-being and current business practices during this time when it is no longer business as usual. Farber also encourages stations to revamp existing production and copy not just to add new messaging but to update the tone of commercials, both live and produced, to reflect the current environment. She points out that radio has an advantage over TV in this regard because “entire spots don’t have to be re-shot… just re-written which people can do working from home.” To listen to the entire conversation between Harrison and Farber, please click
Monday Memo: Coronavirus, Mental Health Crisis. Because the pandemic story is nearer the beginning than the end, consultant Holland Cooke reckons that “‘Wash your hands’ now sounds old and condescending and remaining political talk media deniers validate a tired caricature. At this stage, news-your-listeners-can-use most is coping advice.” HC recommends interviewing a local mental health professional; and in this week’s column, he recommends questions and talking points. Read it here.
Coronavirus Hits the U.S., Fed Slashes Interest Rates, Trump Flight Ban Effects, Biden-Sanders Debate, Turkish and Russian Action in Syria, and Israeli Government Among Top News/Talk Stories Over the Weekend. The coronavirus pandemic causes states across the nation to limit social contact, closing schools and shutting down bars and restaurants; the Fed cuts interest rates to almost zero to counter the panic selling caused by the coronavirus; President Trump’s ban on flights into the U.S. from Europe and the logjam at airports as incoming international travelers require virus screenings; Sunday night’s debate between Democrats Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders; the coordinated Turkish and Russian military strikes in Syria; and Benny Gantz’s attempt to form a coalition government in Israel were some of the most-talked-about stories on news/talk radio over the weekend, according to ongoing research from TALKERS magazine.
Townsquare Media Q4 2019 Net Revenue Up 2.9%, Full Year Up 5.7%; CEO Wilson Addresses Coronavirus. The company reports its 2019 fourth quarter and 2019 full-year financial data and in addition to providing data for the entire company, it also breaks its data into three segments: Advertising, that includes broadcast and digital advertising products and solutions; Townsquare Interactive, the digital marketing solutions business; and Live Events, the company’s live events, including concerts, expositions and other experiential events. For the company as a whole, Townsquare Media’s Q4 2019 net revenue was $112.1 million, up 2.9% over the same period in 2018. For the full year of 2019, net revenue was $431.4 million, up 5.7% over all of 2018. Looking at just the Advertising net revenue, it was $93.9 million, up 0.9% from the same period in 2018. However, excluding political advertising from the mix, advertising net revenue was up 5.6%. For the full year of 2019, Townsquare’s advertising net revenue was $352.8 million, up 4% over the full year of 2018. Ex political, advertising net revenue was up 6.2% over 2018. Townsquare CEO Bill Wilson says, “As we look forward, we are excited about the future of our company. We believe that our talented teams, broad multi-platform marketing and advertising product suite and in particular, our robust digital solutions, led by Townsquare Interactive and Townsquare Ignite, our proprietary digital programmatic advertising platform, will continue to differentiate us in the marketplace. We are proud of our broadcast performance, but our overall financial results clearly demonstrate what I have been stating for quite some time: Townsquare has transitioned from being a traditional broadcaster to being a premier local media and digital marketing solutions company with fast growing, profitable digital products and solutions. We continue to be heavily focused on super-serving our local clients, local listeners and local communities while helping local businesses grow through our ‘Local First’ strategy, while simultaneously delivering results for our stakeholders. While the specific impact of the coronavirus pandemic to our business is unknown at this time, we know that there will be a negative impact. However, we are confident and optimistic about the long-term customer demand for our multi-platform products and marketing solutions. Our primary concern is for the safety and well-being of our employees, their families, our partners and our local communities across the country, and my thoughts and prayers go out to all who have been affected around the world. We are constantly monitoring the evolving environment in each of our 67 local markets. As the preeminent local media company in each of our local markets, Townsquare has the additional responsibility, obligation and civic duty to lead from the front, continue to inform accurately and provide comfort. I could not be prouder of our Townsquare Team and how each day they are serving their listeners, their clients and their local communities during this important time. Our future remains bright and I am confident that together we will emerge from this challenge stronger than ever before.”
Beasley Issues Statement on Company Coronavirus Policy. On Friday (3/13), Beasley Media Group issued the following public statement about its policy for doing business during the coronavirus pandemic. Chief executive officer Caroline Beasley said, “After careful deliberation, we have taken precautionary measures that are currently being implemented across all of our markets. The challenges we face are extraordinary, but the moment is not unique. At our core, our company exists to serve our employees, advertisers and our communities and keep them safe and informed during times exactly like this. Broadcasters are at our best during uncertain times. We will continue to strive to be at our very best in the coming days, weeks and months.” Through March 31, the company is enacting the following: Over the next two weeks, most full-time employees will be asked to telework. While some full-time employees will be needed in the office, they will be expected to follow CDC guidelines (attached) in an effort to maintain a safe and clean work environment. In addition, the company has instituted a “no work-related travel” policy. To limit public traffic at the radio stations, the stations will not be allowing listeners to pick up contest prize awards. Market managers will have the discretion to make limited exception instances where prizes are time limited. Beasley Media Group will be cancelling and/or postponing events and appearances for the next two weeks to ensure not only the safety of its employees but the communities they serve. The company will continue to evaluate and update policies as circumstances dictate.
Adams Radio Implements Coronavirus Policy. Broadcaster Adams Radio Group is putting its coronavirus work plan into effect and is mandating that all personnel that can work from home do so starting immediately. Adams CEO Ron Stone says, “I want to thank my general managers, engineers and others within our company for being very proactive in guiding the planning for our company. Incredible talent always steps up when faced with a crisis and our management has done just that. We are committed to supporting our workforce family and their families as well as the communities we serve. The time for us to act is now. In taking these actions, our priorities are to ensure the well-being of our work family and clients and to continue delivering the messages of our clients to help minimize as much as possible the disruption of their businesses, and ours, by providing the communities we serve with up to date information on the virus. We have taken appropriate steps to provide our employees with the assets required to work from home without disruption to the excellent broadcast products we deliver to our listeners and communities. Sales, programming, administrators and engineers will all be following this guidance as implemented by local management. This policy is effective immediately and will continue until it is safe for our employees to return to normal activities. We have not received notice that anyone employed by Adams Radio has been in contact with the virus and we are doing our part to keep it that way.”
Skyview Networks Reports 95% Ad Retention Rate in Wake of Coronavirus Pandemic. In a public release issued on Friday (3/13) in the aftermath of the NBA, NHL, MLB and other sports leagues announcing they were postponing or cancelling their games and related activities because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Skyview Networks said it “continues to serve its many sports partners during the COVID-19 pandemic.” Skyview EVP and general manager Jeanne-Marie Condo says, “Skyview Networks has been able to retain 95% of its sports dollars. This has been a remarkable 24 hours, at a time of caution, advertisers one after the other stood strong either building new campaigns with Skyview or choosing to keep the revenue in place for when the leagues commence. It was a tribute to the power of on-air radio and how it delivers for advertisers.”
TALKERS News Notes. In San Diego, KOGO-AM afternoon drive personality Carl DeMaio is back on the air on the iHeartMedia news/talk outlet after losing in the Republican primary for California’s 50th Congressional District seat. DeMaio came up short in a three-way race that was won by Carl Issa, who will face Democrat Ammar Campa-Najjar for the seat vacated by Duncan Hunter, who resigned after being convicted of misusing campaign funds. DeMaio hosts “The DeMaio Report” along with co-host and political consultant Lou Penrose…..Cox Media Group agrees to set aside its contractual retransmission dispute with DISH Network in 10 markets in order to allow the local news, as well as network content from ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX that has been blacked out by DISH since mid-January to air so citizens can get news and information about the coronavirus. CMG’s Kim Guthrie says, “We are pleased to be able to restore these channels on DISH so that our viewers in these communities can be informed and able to make the right decisions for the safety of their families. We appreciate DISH’s cooperation in agreeing to suspend our dispute so that we can help our viewers navigate through this uncertain time.”…..The nationally syndicated “America’s First News with Matt Ray” is added to the program schedule at iHeartMedia’s news/talk KFXR, Dallas in morning drive…..According to surveys of local radio buyers by BIA Advisory Services, if local radio could offer an over-the-air, zoned advertising product like local TV stations can, 54.6% say they would be “very interested.” BIA and Advertiser Perceptions will present that data and more during a webinar being held on March 24 at 2:00 pm ET. It’s titled, “Main Street Versus Madison Avenue on Geotargeted Advertising and Local Radio” and will feature BIA’s Rick Ducey and Advertiser Perceptions’ Justin Fromm, who will highlight the Main Street and Madison Avenue research. They are joined by Kathy Doyle, EVP local investment from MAGNA Global and George Leon, chief strategy officer at Hawthorne Advertising, who will explain why they think zoned radio ads would be valuable to their clients. You can register here.
Former, Longtime TRN Exec Greg Doyle Dies. Family and friends are mourning the death of Greg Doyle, who died Sunday (3/15) after a long battle with liver disease. His wife of 39 years, Lynn Finley Doyle, posted news of his passing on social media. Doyle was a longtime executive with the Oregon-based radio syndicated firm Talk Radio Network.
Music Radio News and Career Moves. Baltimore radio personality Matt Davis joins Times-Shamrock’s classic rock WZBA “100.7 The Bay” as midday host. Davis previously served with Hearst’s crosstown rock WIYY-FM; WXRK, New York; and WYSP, Philadelphia. Station general manager Jefferson Ward says, “In a world of increasingly nationalized radio, being local matters more than ever. Matt has been a part of Baltimore radio for many years and is passionate about our town, music, and creating great content on all platforms. He is the perfect fit for our team.”…..As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, The Academy of Country Music has decided to postpone “The 55th Annual ACM Awards,” originally scheduled for April 5 at Las Vegas’ MGM Grand Arena. The show, set to air on CBS Television, is being rescheduled for September.
TALKERS | October 4, 2018
iHeartMedia Enters into $10 Million Ad Deal with High Times. Via the Form 1-U filing with the SEC by Hightimes Holdings Corp, we learn that iHeartMedia has entered into a deal with the marijuana-centric media firm to provide advertising – initially $5 million worth of ad inventory with the option for another $5 million – in exchange for an 8% convertible note due September 26, 2020. Hightimes Holdings plans to use the inventory to publicize – via radio, digital and outdoor – its pending maximum $50 million Regulation A+ initial public offering. The 1-U filing explains that “upon completion of the Hightimes Pubic Offering, provided that a minimum of $15,000,000 of gross proceeds are raised and Hightimes Class A voting common stock trades on an ‘Approved Securities Market’ (as defined in the convertible note), all iHeart Ad Inventory purchased and the entire outstanding amount of the BMH [Broader Media Holdings] Note shall automatically convert into shares of Hightimes Class A common stock at a conversion price equal to the volume weighted average closing prices, as traded on such Approved Securities Market for the 10 trading days immediately following completion of the Hightimes Public Offering.”
FOX Sports Radio Adds New Talent to Weekend Programming. The new fall weekend lineup for FOX Sports Radio is announced by Premiere Networks. Focusing on college and NFL football, the network adds five-year NFL veteran Bucky Brooks, who teams up with FSR personality Mark Willard to host Saturdays from 4:00 pm to 8:00 pm ET, and sports radio and TV pro Kelvin Washington partners with FSR’s Steve Hartman on Saturdays from 1:00 pm to 4:00 pm ET. Washington will also join FSR weekend host and 13-year NFL veteran Ephraim Salaam on Sundays to host “Red Zone Radio” from 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm ET. Premiere Networks VP of sports programming Scott Shapiro states, “Coupled with the recent additions of RJ Bell, Chris Broussard, and Rob Parker to our weekday lineup, FOX Sports Radio has the best array of talent to provide thoughtful insight and entertaining commentary for all sports fans both on weekdays and weekends. When sports news breaks or action on the field develops, we are live 24/7 to provide instantaneous reaction with perspective and opinions from the best minds in the game.”
Kicking off the Upfront Season. Executives and talent representing Skyview Networks, CBS Audio and ABC Radio were present on Tuesday night at The Onyx Room in New York kicking off the upfront season at an event positioned as “Experience Beyond,” drawing the largest spenders in network radio. The event focused on new integrations and experiential opportunities for 2019 across Skyview Networks’ sales portfolio. The night was capped with an exclusive, live acoustic performance from country music star, Cassadee Pope. Pictured above (from l-r) are: Steve Jones, vice president/GM ABC Radio; David Muir, anchor, “World News Tonight”; Sara Haines, co-host, “GMA Day”; Dr. Jennifer Ashton, ABC News chief health and medical correspondent; Brad Mielke, host of ABC’s “Start Here” podcast; and Aaron Katersky, ABC News correspondent.
Michael Harrison Guests on Journalist Joe Strupp’s New Podcast Series. Noted journalist Joe Strupp, whose long list of credits includes serving as senior editor/investigative reporter for Media Matters for America and senior editor for Editor & Publisher has launched a new media-focused podcast series titled “Joe’s Media Corner” (that features extensive interviews with leading figures in the news and communications industries). TALKERS publisher Michael Harrison is his guest on episode 3. In this deep-dive interview, Harrison talks extensively about the challenges facing spoken-word radio in the 21st century, the role of news/talk within the talk radio spectrum, why conservative programming has worked more successfully than progressive on commercial news/talk radio, and how the radio industry has arrived in its present financial predicament. He also shares a historical overview about his role as a pioneer in FM progressive rock radio and the rise of album oriented rock (AOR) radio which later evolved into present-day classic rock radio. Don’t miss this fascinating, unvarnished conversation. To listen to this podcast in its entirety, please click here.
Bruce Law Named VP/GM for Cumulus Media’s Grand Rapids Cluster. Michigan native Bruce Law returns home to join Cumulus Media as vice president and general manager of the company’s Grand Rapids stations, including news/talk WJRW and sports talk WBBL-FM. Law previously served as president of Saga Communications’ Asheville, North Carolina cluster. Cumulus Media EVP of operations Bob Walker states, “We are thrilled to welcome Bruce back home to Grand Rapids. His passion for these brands and for Western Michigan is obvious and we are glad to have him on the team.”
TALKERS News Notes. As part of a new deal with the NHL’s New Jersey Devils and New York Islanders, Entercom announces that all regular-season and postseason games for both teams will stream live from Radio.com, the exclusive digital home for all Entercom content. The broadcasts will be available free via Radio.com’s app and website as well as the NHL, New Jersey Devils and New York Islanders mobile apps and website. In addition, WFAN, New York will promote all live, digital streams and air select head-to-head matchups between the two teams. Entercom SVP Jeff Sottolano says, “We’re excited to expand our partnership with the New Jersey Devils and add the New York Islanders. As the fastest growing digital audio app in the United States and unrivaled leader in local sports coverage, Radio.com aims to become a daily habit for the millions of users we reach each month, including tri-state hockey fans.”…..iHeartMedia-owned Total Traffic and Weather Network inks a deal to provide public radio news/talk WBEZ, Chicago with real-time traffic data and services, including TrafficNet, a 24-7 dashboard covering live breaking traffic information…..For its 21st consecutive season, ESPN Radio is broadcasting every game of the MLB Postseason. A rotating team of Marc Kestecher, Kevin Winter, John Brickley, and Jim Basquil will host 30-minute pre-game shows during the Division Series and a one-hour show during the Championship Series and World Series broadcasts.
Michael Harrison Podcast Poses Provocative Question: Does the Human Brain Act as a Kind of Radio/Television Antenna? Silicon Valley high-tech industry financial expert Mark Gober is this week’s guest on the award-winning PodcastOne series “The Michael Harrison Interview.” Gober is the author of a provocative new book titled “An End to Upside Down Thinking: Dispelling the Myth That the Brain Produces Consciousness, and the Implications for Everyday Life” (Waterside Press, 2018). In it, he presents the latest scientific research and evidence suggesting that, contrary to popular belief and mainstream science dogma, human consciousness doesn’t originate in the brain but, rather, in a higher universal dimension – perhaps even beyond time and space as we perceive them. The implications of such a possibility are profound. Harrison states, “I’ve always been fascinated by the obvious connections between human biology and our technological extensions of it. In other words, our inventions are enhanced mechanical versions of what nature has already provided us. Is it not possible that just as the content of radio and TV programs does not originate in the physical appliances that pluck it out of the air for us, our consciousness – thoughts, words and creativity – comes from some other invisible source outside the brain? Maybe the brain is a biological radio antenna processing signals from elsewhere? Mark Gober’s book tackles this issue in a direct, credible and understandable way. He’s a great guest!” To listen to the podcast in its entirety, please click here or click on the player box marked “The Michael Harrison Interview” located in the right-hand column on every page of Talkers.com.
Kavanaugh Investigation, NYTimes‘ Trump Wealth Story, U.S.-China Tensions, Trump-Russia Investigation, Midterm Elections, South Carolina Cop Attack, NFL Action, and MLB Playoffs Among Top News/Talk Stories Yesterday (10/3). The accusations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and the FBI’s investigation into Christine Blasey Ford’s claim; the New York Times story alleging Donald Trump’s family engaged in tax schemes to achieve its wealth; U.S.-China tensions over tariffs and China’s military programs in the South China Sea; the investigation into possible connections between Trump campaign operatives and Russian agents; November’s midterm elections and speculation about which party will have control of congress; the deadly attack on police attempting to execute a search warrant in South Carolina; NFL action; and the Major League Baseball playoffs were some of the most-talked-about stories on news/talk radio yesterday, according to ongoing research from TALKERS magazine.
Music Radio News and Career Moves. Classic hits it is for Entercom’s former hot AC WIAD, Washington “94.7 Fresh FM.” The new format and brand – “94.7 The Drive” – launched yesterday afternoon with the station promising “expertly curated classic hits, including rock, pop, and R&B hits from the 1980s, as well as mass appeal titles from the 1970s and 1990s.” Entercom Washington SVP and market manager Phil Zachary says, “Washington D.C. is the only major market without a classic hits radio station. With Entercom’s track record in the format from New York to L.A., we have the wherewithal to capitalize on this unique opportunity. It’s no stretch to launch with a high level of confidence when Pat Paxton, Jim Ryan, and Jeff Sottolano are part of the brain trust.” The station launched with limited commercial inventory and will announce programming updates in the coming months…..On-air pro Amy Reed is appointed morning drive co-host at Entercom’s country WPAW, Greensboro alongside Dale O’Brian on the “Wake Up with the Wolf” program. She had most recently been with Alpha Media’s CHR WARQ, Columbia, South Carolina as midday host and assistant program director…..Kelly Ford, co-host of the nationally syndicated “Ty, Kelly and Chuck” morning drive program is serving as host committee chair of the Play Like a Girl Honors Gala. The black-tie event will benefit the national non-profit organization, Play Like a Girl, and is being held on Monday, November 26 at the Marriott Hotel in Franklin, Tennessee. Ford joins fellow host committee chair (and WKRN-TV, Nashville chief meteorologist) Danielle Breezy, and honorary chair, Trisha Yearwood for the gala evening that will celebrate the achievements of leading women and men in sports and the girls they inspire. The Play Like a Girl Honors Gala will raise funds for programs that inspire leadership through sport and build confidence in girls on and off the field.
September 2018 PPM Data – Part Three. September 2018 ratings information has been released for Portland, Charlotte, San Antonio, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Cincinnati, Orlando, Cleveland, Kansas City, and Columbus. Nielsen Audio’s September 2018 survey period covered August 16 – September 12. See all the 6+ numbers from subscribing stations here. Meanwhile, managing editor Mike Kinosian (Kinosian@Talkers.com) provides his “Takeaways” from these 12 PPM markets below.
TWELVE TAKEAWAYS
Spoken Word Formats – With a May – September topline of 5.3 – 4.9 – 5.0 – 5.3 – 5.2 (6+), Alpha Media news/talk KXL “101 FM News – Stay Connected” carries on in fifth -place for the fourth straight month. KXL was up six-tenths in April and then off a combined one-half share in May and June. When “101 FM News – Stay Connected” faltered by four-tenths in March, it ended three consecutive increases that produced a cumulative +1.7. By way of comparison, the January through September trending for iHeartMedia’s KEX “News Radio 1190 – Depend on Us” is 1.7 – 1.7 – 1.8 – 1.6 – 1.6 – 1.7 – 1.6 – 2.0 – 1.9 (#18 – #20, 6+), with August’s 2.0 marking the first time it reached the two-share level (6+) in nearly two years (2.1, November 2015). An April improvement of two-tenths interrupted three straight up or flat trends that netted six-tenths (1.2 – 1.7 – 1.7 – 1.8, 6+). Returning two-tenths of August’s +.3 (1.0 – .8, 6+), Alpha Media news/talk KUFO falls from #24 to #26. “Freedom 970” posted a 1.0 (6+) four times in a row before dropping three-tenths to .7 (6+) in July. After six straight down or flat moves that resulted in a -1.0 (2.4 – 2.0 – 2.0 – 2.0 – 1.5 – 1.5 – 1.4, 6+), Entercom’s KFXX “1080 The Fan” regains 90% of that loss with a collective +.9 in August and September (1.4 – 1.7 – 2.3, #20 to #18, 6+). Flat at #22, Alpha Media-owned KXTG “The Game” erases August’s -.2 with September’s +.3 (1.2 – 1.5, 6+), while iHeartMedia’s KPOJ “Sports Radio 620” recovers from August’s loss of seven-tenths with a +.1 (1.1 – .4 – .5, #29 to #28, 6+). Despite adding one-tenth (8.1 – 8.2, 6+), Oregon Public Broadcasting news/talk KOPB shifts from first – where it has been each month this calendar year – to second. KOPB was +1.1 (January); -1.1 (February); +1.0 (March); -1.0 (April); and -.5 (May).
Portland Music Formats – Succeeding KOPB at #1 (see above) is iHeartMedia adult contemporary KKCW “K-103,” which advances from the runner-up slot. In addition to logging its best 6+-stat (8.8) since “Holiday” 2017’s 16.9, “K-103” is an overall +1.6 in three upticks in a row (7.2 – 7.7 -7.9 – 8.8, 6+). KKCW was #1 in December 2017 (13.0, 6+); “Holiday” 2017 (16.9, 6+); and tied for first (with KOPB) in April 2018 (8.5, 6+). By tacking on one-half share to August’s +.9 (4.4 – 5.3 – 5.8, 6+), Alpha Media triple A KINK “101.9 Uniquely Portland” progresses from fifth to fourth. Prior to August, KINK last reached the five-share level (6+) in February (5.0). In a somewhat similar boat is Salem Media Group contemporary Christian KFIS “104.1 The Fish,” which jumps by one-half share in September after posting a +.8 in August (1.7 – 2.5 – 3.0, #17 to #16, 6+). Entering the August sweep, “The Fish” had been down in each of the previous four sweeps for a cumulative -.8 (2.5 – 2.1 – 2.0 – 1.8 – 1.7, 6+). Following four straight up or flat trends that netted a +1.6 (4.0 – 4.0 – 4.6 – 5.4 – 5.6, 6+), Entercom-owned KGON “92.3 Portland’s Classic Rock” is a collective -.8 in August and September (5.6 – 5.4 – 4.8, 6+), slipping from fourth to sixth. July’s 5.6 is the highest 6+-showing for KGON since June 2017 (5.6, as well). Off by one-half share each are KGON’s adult hits cluster-mate KYCH “97.1 Charlie – We Play Everything,” which falls out of the top ten (#10 to #11); iHeartMedia-owned KXJM “Jam’n 107.5 Portland’s #1 For Hip-Hop” (3.3, #12 to #13); and Alpha Media’s KUPL “98.7 The Bull – #1 for New Country” (#16 to #17). “Charlie” is -1.0 in three straight down or flat trends (4.6 – 4.6 – 4.1 – 3.6, 6+) and is below a four-share for the first time since April 2016’s 3.9. “Jam’n” had been a collective +.4 in four straight up or flat moves (3.4 – 3.4 – 3.6 – 3.6 – 3.8, 6+), while “The Bull” is -1.6 in three straight sweeps without an increase (4.0 – 4.0 – 3.9 – 2.9 – 2.4, 6+). Even though iHeartMedia-owned CHR KKRZ is without a gain for the fourth sweep in a row for a combined loss of nine-tenths (4.0 – 3.6 – 3.4 – 3.3 – 3.1 – 3.1, 6+), “Z-100 Portland’s #1 Hit Music Station” climbs from #15 to #14.
Spoken-Word Formats – Backsliding from #14 to #15, Entercom news/talk WBT has a May – September (6+) topline of 2.6 – 2.8 – 2.7 – 2.9 – 2.9. When WBT gained two -tenths in June, it halted three straight losses that accounted for a -1.7 (4.3 – 3.6 – 3.4 – 2.6, 6+). Immediately prior to that particular streak, WBT was a collective +1.2 in three increases in succession (3.1 – 3.2 – 4.0 – 4.3, 6+). Following four straight down or flat sweeps that led to a -1.1 (1.7 – 1.7 – 1.1 – .7 – .6, 6+), co-owned sports talk WFNZ “The Fan – Charlotte’s Sports Leader” improves by a collective one-half share in August and September (.6 – 1.0 – 1.1, 6+) and is unchanged at #19. “The Fan” bounced back from February’s -.7 with a one-half share gain in March. A combined -1.4 in three downward moves in succession (4.1 – 3.7 – 3.0 – 2.7, 6+), University Radio Foundation news/talk WFAE drifts from #13 to #17. Up one-half share in June, “Charlotte’s NPR News Source” had a consistent January – May topline trending of 3.6 – 3.5 – 3.3 – 3.5 – 3.6 (6+). Having tripled its 6+-share as a result of three gains in a row (.2 – .4 – .5 – .6, 6+), South Carolina Educational Television Commission news/talk WNSC is off one-tenth to .5 (6+) but remains at #20.
Charlotte Music Formats – Continuing a down/up pattern that began in March and includes September’s +.8 (3.9 – 3.4 – 3.6 – 3.1 – 3.2 – 2.7 – 3.5, 6+), iHeartMedia CHR WHQC “Channel 96.1” (#15 to #12) is a combined -.4 in that stretch. Steady at #5, adult hits sibling WLKO “102.9 The Lake – Charlotte’s We Play Anything Station” is up or flat for the fifth straight month for an overall +1.4 (4.1 – 4.3 – 4.7 – 5.2 – 5.5 – 5.5, 6+). By posting a gain of six-tenths to 1.7 (flat at #18, 6+), Davidson College-owned WDAV “Classical Public Radio” erases the six-tenths it lost in three straight sweeps without an increase (1.7 – 1.3 – 1.1 – 1.1, 6+). Advancing by six-tenths as well is iHeartMedia’s WKKT “96.9 The Kat – Charlotte’s #1 for New Country,” which is an overall +.8 in three straight up or flat moves (6.0 – 6.2 – 6.2 – 6.8, 6+) and continues in third-place. Before gaining two-tenths in July, “The Kat” was a combined -1.0 in May and June (7.0 – 6.4 – 6.0, 6+). Format rival – Beasley Media Group’s WSOC – is not only up or flat for the fourth time in a row for an overall +1.5 (6.2 – 6.9 – 6.9 – 7.5 – 7.7, 6+) – “103.7 Country’s Hottest Hits” advances from second to first. Prior to August, the last time WSOC reached the seven-share level (6+) was in “Holiday” 2016 (7.0). Changing places with WSOC is its urban AC sibling WBAV “V-101.9,” which is -1.0 in August and September (7.9 – 7.6 – 6.9, first to second, 6+). WBAV stayed at #1 in back-to-back ratings periods, a highly-unusual occurrence in Charlotte. Prior to the August 2018 sweep, no station in this North Carolina metro had repeated at #1 since September 2017/October/November when iHeartMedia classic rocker WRFX “The Fox” accomplished the feat. It has been a revolving door for the market’s top spot which has been held by (in chronological order) iHeartMedia adult hits WLKO (December 2017); Beasley Media Group adult contemporary WKQC (“Holiday” 2017); iHeartMedia country WKKT (January 2018); Beasley Media Group urban AC WBAV (February); WRFX (March); WKKT (April); WBAV (May); WSOC (June); WBAV (July and August); and WSOC (September). “V-101.9” was +1.4 in May; eroded by -1.2 in June; and erased that -1.2 in its entirety in July with a +1.2. After notching five positive spikes in succession for an overall gain of nine-tenths (4.0 – 4.1 – 4.2 – 4.3 – 4.5 – 4.9, 6+), Beasley Media Group urban contemporary WPEG slips by one-tenth in September to 4.8 (6+). “Power 98” remains at #8 for the fourth straight month; August 2018’s 4.9 is its best 6+-showing since 5.9 in August 2017.
Spoken-Word Formats – An uptick of one-tenth (3.8 – 3.9, 6+) is enough to propel iHeartMedia news/talk WOAI News Radio 1200 – San Antonio’s News, Traffic, & Weather” from #11 into the top ten (#9). July’s 3.5 was its lowest 6+-stat since “Holiday” 2017’s 2.8. Repeating at #22, Alpha Media news/talk KTSA “Stay Connected” returns the three-tenths it gained in August (1.4 – 1.7 – 1.4, 6+). KTSA was a collective -.5 in June and July (1.9 – 1.8 – 1.4, 6+), after not having a loss for five reports in a row for a collective +.6 (1.3 – 1.6 – 1.7 – 1.8 – 1.8 – 1.9, 6+). Unchanged from August in 6+ AQH share (.7), iHeartMedia sports talk KTKR moves from #30 to #27. This time last month, “Ticket 760 – San Antonio’s Sports Station” wiped away its combined -.3 from three straight one-tenth decreases (.7 – .6 – .5 – .4, 6+) with a +.3. Texas Public Radio news/talk KSTX duplicates August’s +.4 (2.6 – 3.0 – 3.4, 6+), climbing from #14 to #12. A July loss of seven-tenths suspended three up or flat moves that led to a +.5 (2.8 – 2.9 – 3.3 – 3.3, 6+). With a +1.0 to 4.7 in “Holiday” 2017, KSTX crossed the four-share level (6+) for the first time in its PPM-history.
San Antonio Music Formats – Not only is Cox Media Group classic hits-oldies KONO-FM the market leader for the ninth successive sweep, “101.1 San Antonio’s Greatest Hits” is +2.2 in four straight increases (6.6 – 7.0 – 7.7 – 7.8 – 8.8, 6+) and reaches the eight-share threshold (8.8) for the first time since November 2016’s 8.2. Its +.4 in June stalled three consecutive downward moves for an overall -.7 (7.3 – 7.2 – 6.9 – 6.6, 6+). Country-formatted stations continue to hold down the #2 and #3 slots, however, iHeartMedia’s KAJA “KJ-97 San Antonio’s #1 Country Station” (5.6 – 6.1, +.5, third to second, 6+) overtakes Cox Media Group-owned KCYY “Y-100 San Antonio’s New Country Leader” (6.8 – 6.0, -.8, second to third, 6+). The +2.7 that “KJ-97” racked up in January and February (4.1 – 5.2 – 6.8, 6+) was cut virtually in half in March and April with a collective -1.3; “KJ-97” answered with a +.6 in May. September’s -.8 by “Y-100” suspends three straight gains that netted +1.5 (5.3 – 5.7 – 5.9 – 6.8, 6+). In August, it reached the six-share level (6.8) for the first time since October 2017’s 6.0. Off one-tenth in May, KCYY curtailed four straight up or flat trends that accounted for a +1.3 (4.1 – 4.7 – 4.7 – 5.1 – 5.4, 6+). These two country adversaries were locked together in the runner-up slot in June. Three straight decreases by KROM accounted for a -1.7 (6.1 – 5.5 – 4.7 – 4.4, 6+), but the Univision Radio regional Mexican outlet answers with a +.6 to 5.0 (seventh to fourth, 6+). “Que Buena 92.9” was a combined +.5 in April and May. Improving by six-tenths as well is Cox Media Group’s KISS “Rocks San Antonio,” which is an overall +.9 in three consecutive up or flat moves (3.6 – 3.6 – 3.9 – 4.5, tenth to seventh, 6+). Bouncing back from August’s -.6 with a September increase of one-half share (4.3 – 4.8, 6+), classic rock cluster-mate KTKX advances from eighth to sixth. Entering the August sweep, “106.7 The Eagle” gained nine-tenths in four straight up or flat trends (4.0 – 4.0 – 4.3 – 4.5 – 4.9, 6+). Gaining one-half share as well are Alpha Media regional Mexican KSAH “Norteno 104.1,” up a collective six-tenths in four straight sweeps without a loss (2.9 – 3.0 – 3.0 – 3.0 – 3.5, #14 to #11, 6+) and Univision Radio’s KXTN “107.5 Tejano & Proud” (2.7 – 3.2, #17 to #15, 6+). On the heels of August’s +.5, which ended three straight decreases that produced a loss of seven-tenths (4.7 – 4.4 – 4.2 – 4.0, 6+), Univision Radio rhythmic CHR KBBT surrenders more than twice that increase with a -1.1 to 3.4 (6+); “98.5 The Beat” plummets from #5 to #12. The wild ride continues for Cox Media Group hot AC KSMG, which was -.9 in three straight March through June downtrends (5.1 – 4.9 – 4.3 – 4.2, 6+); +.7 in July; -.9 in August; and now -.7 in September (4.0 – 3.3, 6+). “Magic 105.3 Today’s Best Music,” fades from #9 to #14 with its lowest 6+-share (3.3) in nearly three years (3.1, November 2015). Following four straight gains that accounted for a +1.8 (3.2 – 3.3 – 4.1 – 4.2 – 5.0, 6+), iHeartMedia CHR KXXM is an overall -2.1 in five April through September decreases (5.0 – 4.9 – 4.4 – 3.7 – 3.3 – 2.9, 6+); “96.1 Now – San Antonio’s #1 Hit Music Station” falls from #13 to #16. Meanwhile, Alpha Media’s similarly-formatted KTFM “Energy 94.1,” which was +.7 via three straight increases (2.1 – 2.4 – 2.5 – 2.8, 6+), falters by one-half share to 2.3 (#16 to #19, 6+).
Spoken-Word Formats – Flat at #10, Entercom news/talk KDKA-AM “News Radio 1020” is off four-tenths in three straight down of flat sweeps (4.4 – 4.2 – 4.0 – 4.0, 6+). A gain of two-tenths in June halted four sweeps in a row without an increase that produced a -1.1 (5.3 – 5.3 – 4.6 – 4.5 – 4.2, 6+). Co-owned sports talk KDKA-FM “93.7 The Fan” was a combined +1.3 in “Holiday” 2017 and January 2018; -.9 in February; +2.0 in April (5.8 – 7.8, 6+); -2.0 in three straight May – June – July declines (7.8 – 7.4 – 6.5 – 5.8, 6+); +1.4 in August (5.8 – 7.2, 6+); and now -1.1 in September (7.2 – 6.1, fourth to fifth, 6+). April’s 7.8 is the strongest 6+-showing for the Pittsburgh Pirates flagship since October 2015 when it scored a 10.1. A model of consistency – iHeartMedia sports talk WBGG “970 AM – ESPN Pittsburgh” (.1 – .2, +.1, flat at #18, 6+) has logged either a .1 (6+) or a .2 (6+) in each of the last 17 ratings periods. Adding six-tenths to August’s +.4 (2.0 – 2.4 – 3.0, 6+), Essential Public Media news/talk WESA carries on at #13 with its best 6+-showing (3.0) since October 2017’s 3.2. Before faltering by one-half share in April, “90.5 Pittsburgh’s NPR Station” was an overall +.8 as a result of three consecutive up or flat moves (2.1 – 2.7 – 2.9 – 2.9, 6+).
Pittsburgh Music Formats – A collective -1.7 in three negative moves in a row (7.3 – 6.9 – 6.3 – 5.6, 6+), iHeartMedia CHR WKST “96.1 Kiss FM Pittsburgh’s #1 Hit Music Station” dials up a +1.1 to 6.7 (fifth to fourth, 6+). Prior to August, the last time “Kiss” fell below a six-share (6+) was nearly five years ago (5.6, October 2013). Co-owned classic hits-oldies WWSW “94.5 – 3WS” (9.3 – 10.2, +.9, 6+) is #1 for the 19th consecutive ratings period and in double-digits (6+) for the fifth time this calendar year. WWSW was a combined +.9 in March and April (10.3 – 11.1 – 11.2, 6+), but forfeited -1.3 in May. In the runner-up slot for the ninth successive sweep, co-owned rocker WDVE erases nearly half of August’s -.8 with a September gain of three-tenths (8.5 – 7.7 – 8.0, 6+). WDVE was +1.6 (October 2017); -1.0 (November); -.8 (“Holiday 2017”); +.8 (January 2018); -.9 (February); -.5 in March; and -.8 in August. Debuting in August with a .4 (6+), Entercom’s urban contemporary WBZZ-HD3 adds six-tenths to 1.0 (6+) and remains at #17. After recording six straight up or flat trends since February for a collective +1.9 (2.3 – 2.4 – 2.7 – 2.7 – 3.2 – 3.7 – 4.2, 6+), iHeartMedia-owned WPGB surrenders seven-tenths (3.5, 6+) and exits the top ten (#9 to #11). With a 4.2 in August, “Big 104.7 – Pittsburgh’s #1 For New Country” reached the four-share threshold (6+) for the first time since February 2017’s 4.0. A one-half share loss to 3.4 (6+) by Steel City Media hot AC WLTJ suspends three consecutive improvements for a collective +1.1 (2.8 – 3.2 – 3.7 – 3.9, 6+), but “Q-92.9” continues at #12. After having their March 2018 – June 2018 information displayed, five stations are unlisted for the third straight month: classic hits-oldies WKPL and WPKL; and country-formatted WLYI, WOGG, and WOGI.
Spoken-Word Formats – Once again finishing in third-place, KFBK “Sacramento’s News, Weather, and Traffic Station” is down or flat for the eighth straight report for an overall -3.0 (8.6 – 8.1 – 8.1 – 7.8 – 6.7 – 6.3 – 6.0 – 6.0 – 5.6, 6+). The iHeartMedia-owned news/talk station was third in December 2017; second in “Holiday” 2017; first in January 2018; second in February; first in March (tied with KSEG); second in April, May, June, and July; and third in August and September. Meanwhile, the February – September topline trending for co-owned KSTE (moving from a three-way tie at #13 to #14) is: 2.5 – 2.4 – 2.5 – 2.5 – 2.4 – 2.4 – 2.3 – 2.6 (6+). In January, “Talk 650” notched a 2.7, its highest 6+-share since June 2017’s 2.8. Entercom’s KHTK “Sports 1140” is up one-tenth (1.1 – 1.2, #22 to #21, 6+). It is tied with co-owned KIFM-AM “ESPN Radio 1320,” which had lost 50% of its 6+-share (-.8) in three straight decreases (1.6 – 1.4 – 1.1 – .8, 6+), but adds four-tenths in September to 1.2 (#25 to #21, 6+). Capital Public Radio news/talk KXJZ tacks on two-tenths to August’s +.6 (4.5 – 5.1 – 5.3, 6+) and carries on in fourth-place. KXJZ was up a collective seven-tenths in May and June (4.3 – 4.7 – 5.0, 6+). After three straight up or flat trends that produced a net gain of four-tenths (.3 – .6 – .7 – .7, 6+), Northern California Public Broadcasting’s KQEI drops one-tenth to .5 (#27, 6+).
Sacramento Music Formats – Bragging rights for largest (6+) August 2018 – September 2018 increase by any station in the 12 PPM-markets noted here go to Entercom’s KRXQ “98 Rock” (3.9 – 5.2, +1.3, ninth to fifth, 6+). The last time “98 Rock” hit the five-share threshold (6+) was in December 2016 (5.1). Not only is co-owned KSEG #1 for the eighth successive sweep, “96.9 The Eagle – Sacramento’s Classic Rock” adds six-tenths to August’s +.1 (9.0 – 9.1 – 9.7, +.1, 6+). “The Eagle” was +1.0 in May; +.9 in June to 9.9, its strongest 6+-showing since July 2016’s 10.3; -.9 in July; and now +.6 in September. This marks the eleventh straight monthly report that Entravision Communications rhythmic CHR KHHM “Hot 103.5” (+.5, #16 to #13) is within 2.2 – 2.9 range: 2.9 – 2.6 – 2.5 – 2.7 – 2.5 – 2.6 – 2.4 – 2.3 – 2.5 – 2.2 – 2.7 (6+). Educational Media Foundation contemporary Christian KLVB “Positive & Encouraging K-Love” falters by one-half share (2.0 – 1.5, #18 to #19, 6+). In terms of 6+ AQH share, there is very little movement in the market’s country contest: Entravision Communications-owned KNTY “101.9 The Wolf” improves by one-tenth to 2.2 (#17 to #16, 6+), while Entercom’s KNCI “New Country 105.1” (4.4 – 4.2, sixth to eighth, 6+) and iHeartMedia’s KBEB “92.5 The Bull – #1 for New Country” (2.3 – 2.1, #13 to #17) are each down by two-tenths. “The Wolf” was off one-half share in April; lost one-tenth in May; regained one-tenth in June; was down four-tenths in July; and was flat in August. This time last month, “New Country” forfeited seven-tenths of July’s +.8. KNCI had been within 4.1 – 4.4 range (6+) between January and June (4.2 – 4.2 – 4.4 – 4.2 – 4.1 – 4.3, 6+); July’s 5.1 is its highest 6+-share since August 2017 (5.4). An August -1.1 by “The Bull” erased July’s +1.0. Immediately prior to being off four-tenths in May, “The Bull” was up or flat the previous four reports for an overall gain of seven-tenths (1.8 – 1.8 – 2.1 – 2.1 – 2.5, 6+).
Spoken-Word Formats – Even though Bonneville’s KSL drops two-tenths (5.0 – 4.8, 6+), “News Radio 102.7 FM & 1160 AM” advances from seventh to sixth. By picking up four-tenths in August, KSL pulled the plug on three consecutive declines that accounted for a -3.5 (8.1 – 5.2 – 4.9 – 4.6, 6+). Immediately prior to the May sweep, KSL, which was #1 in April, was +3.0 as a result of four consecutive increases (5.1 – 6.4 – 6.7 – 6.9 – 8.1, 6+). Following a May-August (bookend) topline of 4.1 – 4.0 – 4.0 – 4.1 (6+), iHeartMedia’s KNRS “Talk Radio 105.9 – Listen And You’ll Know” is off two-tenths to 3.9 (ninth to tenth, 6+). A +.3 in May ended three successive down or flat moves that accounted for a loss of two-tenths (4.0 – 3.9 – 3.9 – 3.8, 6+). Broadway Media-owned KALL recaptures half of August’s -.2 with a +.1 to 1.8 (#22 to #21, 6+). In advance of the August sweep, “ESPN 700 – Utah’s #1 Sports Talk” was an overall +.5 via four consecutive positive or flat moves (1.4 – 1.5 – 1.5 – 1.9 – 1.9, 6+). After four successive sweeps without a decrease that netted seven-tenths (2.8 – 2.9 – 3.1 – 3.5 – 3.5, 6+), University of Utah news/talk KUER falters by one-half share to 3.0 (#11 to #14, 6+). It previously was an overall -1.3 from three straight down or flat ratings periods (4.1 – 3.0 – 2.9 – 2.8, 6+). Brigham Young University news/talk KUMT debuts with a .9 (#26, 6+).
Salt Lake City Music Formats – Simultaneous with independent KSOP-FM “Z-104 Utah’s #1 Country” busting out a +1.1 (3.5 – 4.6, #11 to #8, 6+), Cumulus Media’s similarly-formatted KUBL “K-Bull 93 FM” freefalls by -1.5 (5.7 – 4.2, third to ninth, 6+). A combined -1.2 in June and July (4.6 – 3.9 – 3.4, 6+), “Z-104” added one-tenth in August. Meanwhile, when “The Bull” dropped two-tenths in August, it snapped a string of three straight improvements for a +1.1 (4.8 – 5.0 – 5.2 – 5.9, 6+). More than erasing August’s -.6 with a September gain of nine-tenths (2.7 – 3.6, 6+), Cumulus Media adult contemporary KBEE “B-98.7 Today’s Hits & Yesterday’s Favorites” jumps from #15 to #11. “B-98.7” gained six-tenths between April and July (2.7 – 3.3 – 3.3 – 3.3, 6+). Carrying on at #13, CHR cluster-mate KENZ “Power 94.9 Utah’s New Hit Music” posts its fifth consecutive increase for a +1.1 (2.4 – 2.5 – 2.8 – 2.9 – 3.3 – 3.4 – 3.5, 6+). Up eight-tenths (3.9 – 4.7, 6+), iHeartMedia-owned hot AC KJMY progresses from tenth to seventh. A one-tenth decline in August by “MY-99.5” ended at three a consecutive string of increases that netted a +1.1 (2.9 – 3.0 – 3.2 – 4.0, 6+). A collective +.9 in three straight sweeps without a loss (4.8 – 5.2 – 5.2 – 5.7, 6+) Capital Broadcasting’s similarly-programmed KBZN “Now 97.9 Today’s Best Music” leaps from sixth to fourth. After sharing the #1 slot in August, iHeartMedia’s KODJ regains the three-tenths it squandered in August (6.7, 6+) as “94.1 Salt Lake’s Greatest Hits” takes sole possession of first place. It was #1 this past June and July, as well. Moreover, September’s +.3 brings to a close three straight decreases that accounted for a loss of one-half share (6.9 – 6.8 – 6.7 – 6.4, 6+). Prior to June’s -.1, KODJ nearly doubled (+3.4) its 6+ AQH share through five successive up or flat trends (3.5 – 5.3 – 5.3 – 5.4 – 5.8 – 6.9, 6+). May marked the first time KODJ reached the six-share level (6+) since its 6.6 in June 2016. The station with which it shared August’s penthouse – Bonneville adult contemporary KSFI – loses two-tenths (6.4 – 6.2, 6+) and takes over at #2. “FM 100.3 – Better Music, Better Work Day” gained one-half share in August. Immediately prior to August, KSFI was -2.3 in four successive down or flat trends (8.2 – 7.3 – 7.3 – 6.3 – 5.9, 6+) with August’s 5.9 its lowest 6+-showing since May 2016’s 5.7. Up nine-tenths in March – only to lose nine-tenths in April – “FM 100.3” was on top for six straight ratings periods (November 2017 through March 2018). After trending 4.4 – 4.2 – 4.4 (6+), Broadway Media’s KXRK “X-96 – Utah’s Original Alternative” stumbles by eight-tenths to 3.6 (6+) and exits the top ten (#8 to #11). By faltering six-tenths to 2.1 (6+), rhythmic CHR sibling KUUU “U-92” (#15 to #19) has its consecutive string of increases that produced a +.7 end at four (2.0 – 2.2 – 2.3 – 2.4 – 2.7, 6+).
Spoken-Word Formats – Returning half of August’s +.2 (1.9 – 1.8, -.1, 6+), Entercom’s KXNT remains at #20. Before August’s increase, “News Talk Radio 840” had been down or flat the previous three ratings periods for a net loss of four-tenths (2.1 – 2.0 – 1.7 – 1.7, 6+). The March – September topline for Beasley Media Group news/talk KDWN “AM 720 Where Las Vegas Comes to Talk” (#23 to #24 ) is .9 – .9 – 1.1 – 1.0 – 1.1 – 1.1 – 1.0 (6+). A one-half share decrease in March concluded five straight positive or flat trends (.7 – .7 – .7 – .7 – 1.3 – 1.4, 6+) that doubled KDWN’s 6+-share. A combined -.3 in June and July (.8 – .6 – .5, 6+), Lotus Communications sports talk KWWN “ESPN Radio 1100” is now +.4 in August and September (.5 – .6 – .9, #27 to #25, 6+). Nevada Public Radio’s KNPR is an overall +.9 through four consecutive improvements (2.0 – 2.4 – 2.6 – 2.8 – 2.9, #15 to #13, 6+) and has its best 6+-showing since March (2.9, as well). A cumulative -.9 in April and May (2.9 – 2.6 – 2.0, 6+) directly followed three consecutive improvements that accounted for a +1.0 (1.9 – 2.5 – 2.6 – 2.9, 6+).
Las Vegas Music Formats – It’s another game of music chairs atop the leaderboard between Beasley Media Group classic hits-oldies KKLZ “96.3 – 70s, 80s and More” (7.5 – 6.9, -.6, first to second, 6+) and iHeartMedia adult contemporary KSNE “Sunny 106.5 Better Music for a Better Workday” (6.3 – 7.5, +1.2, second to first, 6+). Whereas KKLZ gained eight-tenths in August, “Sunny” spiraled by -1.3. The end result was KKLZ succeeding KSNE at #1. It is a familiar pattern between these two properties as “Sunny” was off six-tenths in April and replaced by KKLZ at #1. In May, “Sunny” succeeded KKLZ at #1. The two swapped places at the top in March as well. Back in December, KKLZ was ousted from the penthouse by “Sunny” after five straight months there. August marked the ninth time between July 2017 and August 2018 that KKLZ has been #1: July 2017 through November 2017, January 2018, February 2018, April 2018, and August 2018. KKLZ, which was up nine-tenths in July, has its best 6+-performance (7.5) since January’s 7.6. “Sunny” had been on top in May, June, and July, with July’s 7.6 its highest 6+-share since “Holiday” 2017’s 12.5. Unchanged at #4, Beasley Media Group urban-rhythmic oldies KOAS “Old School 105.7” is a cumulative +1.7 in five consecutive upticks (4.1 – 4.3 – 4.7 – 4.9 – 5.1 – 5.8, 6+). Adding one-half share to August’s +.2 (4.1 – 4.3 – 4.8, 6+), iHeartMedia-owned KWNR “95.5 The Bull – Las Vegas’ New Country Leader” advances from eighth to sixth. Within 2.2 – 2.9 range (6+) in each of the last six survey periods (2.9 – 2.3 – 2.2 – 2.4 – 2.3 – 2.6, 6+), Lotus Communications’ KOMP “92.3 The Rock Station” erodes by nine-tenths to 1.7 (6+) and departs the top twenty (#16 to #22). Forfeiting one-half share each are iHeartMedia adult hits KYMT “93.1 The Mountain” (3.2 – 2.7, #12 to #14, 6+) and Entercom alternative KXTE “X-107.5” (3.0 – 2.5, #13 to #16, 6+).
Spoken-Word Formats – An overall +2.8 in three straight positive spikes (7.7 – 9.1 – 10.4 – 10.5, 6+), iHeartMedia news/talk WLW has that bounty slivered exactly in half (9.1, -1.4, 6+). Nonetheless, the Cincinnati Reds flagship is #1 for the fourth month in a row although it shares the honor with Cumulus Media classic hits-oldies WGRR (see below). August 2018’s 10.5 is WLW’s highest 6+-share in more than two years (10.8, June 2016). “The Big One” was a combined +2.0 in January and February; -1.0 in March; +1.6 in April; -1.2 in May; and now -1.4 in September. Off four-tenths to 3.7 (6+), co-owned WKRC “55 KRC The Talk Station in Cincinnati” slips from eighth to tenth. It was a collective +1.3 in July and August (2.8 – 3.6 – 4.1, 6+), with July’s increase stopping four straight monthly reports without an increase for a collective -1.0 (3.8 – 3.7 – 3.3 – 3.0 – 2.8, 6+). Sports talk sibling WCKY “Cincinnati’s ESPN 1530” is flat at .9 (6+), but climbs from #20 to #19. Cincinnati Public Radio news/talk WVXU is unchanged from August in both 6+ AQH share (3.5, its best 6+-stat since February’s 3.6) and 6+ market rank (#12).
Cincinnati Music Formats – A gain of eight-tenths (to 4.8, ninth to seventh, 6+) by iHeartMedia’s WEBN “Cincinnati’s Rock Station” all but eliminates its -.9 in four straight down or flat trends (4.9 – 4.4 – 4.2 – 4.2 – 4.0, 6+). Adding six-tenths to August’s one-half share increase (4.1 – 4.6 – 5.2, 6+), Hubbard rhythmic hot AC WREW “Mix 94.9” inches up from seventh to sixth. Stuck on 4.9 (6+) in May and June, “Mix” was off eight-tenths in July, with 4.1 its lowest 6+-share since “Holiday” 2017’s 3.7. Over and above continuing a down/up pattern that surfaced in May (9.6 – 8.2 – 8.7 – 8.6 – 9.1, 6+), Cumulus Media classic hits-oldies WGRR “103.5 Cincinnati’s Greatest Hits” proceeds from the runner-up slot to a first-place tie with iHeartMedia news/talk WLW. After posting a one-half share gain in August to 1.3, its best 6+-stat since February’s 1.5, Cincinnati Public Radio’s classical-formatted WGUC surrenders six-tenths to .7 (6+) and leaves the top twenty (#18 to #22). Between March and July, “90.9 Music For Your Heart, Mind, & Spirit” registered a .8 (6+) four times (.8 – .8 – .8 – .9 – .8, 6+). Having trended 7.9 – 8.1 – 7.9 (June-July-August, 6+), Hubbard hot AC WKRQ “Q-102 Cincinnati’s Hit Music” slumps by one-half share in September to 7.4 (third to fourth, 6+). Off eight-tenths in four straight sweeps without an increase (5.6 – 5.2 – 4.8 – 4.8 – 4.8, 6+), Cumulus Media’s WOFX “92.5 The Fox – Cincinnati’s Classic Rock” shifts from sixth to seventh, while iHeartMedia CHR WKFS “Kiss 107.1 Cincinnati’s #1 Hit Music Station” is -1.0 in five straight down or flat sweeps (4.9 – 4.2 – 4.2 – 3.9 – 3.9 – 3.9, tenth to ninth, 6+).
Spoken-Word Formats – Off one-tenth (4.7 – 4.6, 6+), iHeartMedia news/talk WTKS “Real Radio 104.1 – We Say What We Want” slips from ninth to tenth. Its +1.0 in August suspended three straight decreases that resulted in a -1.8 (5.5 – 5.3 – 4.0 – 3.7, 6+). July’s 3.7 is the lowest 6+-showing for “Real Radio” since “Holiday” 2017’s 2.2. Steady at #11, Cox Media Group news/talk WDBO-FM “News 96.5” is +.8 in three consecutive increases (3.3 – 3.7 – 3.8 – 4.1, 6+). Before gaining four-tenths in July, WDBO-FM was -1.4 in five straight down or flat trends (4.7 – 4.7 – 4.6 – 3.9 – 3.9 – 3.3, 6+). As the result of three successive sweeps without a loss, iHeartMedia news/talk WFLF is a collective +.6 (1.5 – 1.5 – 1.9 – 2.1, #16 to #15, 6+). Unhanged at #18, co-owned sports talk WYGM “FM 96.9 The Game – Orlando’s Sports Leader” is likewise a collective +.6 via seven successive up or flat trends (.7 – .9 – .9 – 1.0 – 1.0 – 1.0 – 1.0 – 1.3, 6+). It is two-tenths ahead of Cox Media Group sports talk WDBO-AM “ESPN 580 Orlando” (.7 – 1.1, #22 to #20, 6+). Owing to September’s +.5 (to 4.0, steady at #12, 6+), Community Communications’ news/talk WMFE “90.7 Public Radio for Central Florida” halts a down/up pattern that began in February: 3.7 – 2.9 – 3.5 – 3.3 – 3.8 – 3.4 – 3.5.
Orlando Music Formats – Substituting August’s -.5 with September’s +.7 (4.3 – 5.0, 6+), Cox Media Group rhythmic CHR WPYO “Power 95.3” jumps from tenth to eighth with its strongest 6+-stat (5.0) in more than two years (5.3, August 2016). Prior to August, “Power” was a collective +1.2 in four successive sweeps without a loss (3.6 – 3.6 – 4.1 – 4.3 – 4.8, 6+). As a result of four straight negative moves (6.3 – 6.1 – 6.0 – 5.7 – 5.2, 6+), Entercom hot AC WOMX was an overall -1.1, but “Mix 105.1” picks up one-tenth to 5.3 (6+) and climbs from eighth to seventh. An increase of one-half share to 7.7 (steady at #2, 6+) by iHeartMedia-owned CHR WXXL “XL-106.7 Orlando’s #1 Hit Music Station” applies the brakes to three downward moves in a row that accounted for a collective -1.7 (8.9 – 8.4 – 7.8 – 7.2, 6+). Between February and May, WXXL was up an overall six-tenths via three increases of two tenths each (8.3 – 8.5 – 8.7 – 8.9, 6+). While co-owned Spanish tropical WRUM is #1 for the ninth month in a row, “Rumba 100” is an overall -3.4 in August and September (11.6 – 10.1 – 8.2, 6+), with September’s -1.9 the largest (6+) August 2018 – September 2018 erosion by any station in the 12 PPM-markets noted here. Prior to the May sweep, WRUM was +1.8 in four upticks in succession (8.9 – 9.3 – 9.5 – 9.9 – 10.7, 6+). April 2017’s 12.8 is the best-ever 6+-share in the station’s PPM-history. An overall +2.1 in six straight up or flat trends (4.0 – 4.2 – 4.5 – 5.1 – 5.6 – 5.6 – 6.1, 6+), Cox Media Group country WWKA “K-92.3” surrenders roughly half that increase (5.0, -1.1, sixth to eighth, 6+).
Spoken-Word Formats – This is the fourth successive sweep without an increase for iHeartMedia news/talk WTAM “1100 Cleveland’s News Radio” (6.6 – 6.5 – 6.4 – 6.0 – 6.0, seventh to eighth, 6+), which is -.6 in that stretch. A loss of one-tenth in June interrupted three consecutive increases that netted +1.3 (5.3 – 5.5 – 6.3 – 6.6, 6+); May’s 6.6 is the best 6+-stat for the Cleveland Indians flagship since October 2017’s 8.3. Not only is Entercom’s WKRK +1.3 in three upticks in a row (3.4 – 3.5 – 3.8 – 4.7, 6+), “Sports Radio 92.3 The Fan” cracks the top ten (#12 to #9). Cleveland’s “Fan” was a combined -1.8 in three straight (March through June) setbacks (5.2 – 4.4 – 4.2 – 3.4, 6+). A gain of one-half share (2.7 – 3.2, steady at #13, 6+) takes Ideastream-owned news/talk outlet WCPN to its best 6+-showing (3.2) since February’s 3.6. WCPN was a combined -2.5 in February and March (5.3 – 3.6 – 2.8, 6+).
Cleveland Music Formats – In addition to notching four straight improvements for an overall +1.5 (7.8 – 8.4 – 8.5 – 8.7 – 9.3, 6+), iHeartMedia classic hits-oldies WMJI “Cleveland’s Greatest Hits” is #1 for the fourth consecutive sweep. Ten recent WMJI fluctuations include: +.8 (November); -.9 (December); +2.5 (Holiday” 2017); -1.9 (January); +1.9 (February); -2.0 (March); +1.0 (April); -1.5 (May); +.6 (June); and +.6 (September). When “Cleveland’s Greatest Hits” reached double-digits (6+) in “Holiday” 2017, it was the first time WMJI accomplished that feat since September 2016 (10.8). Having lost roughly 40% of its 6+ AQH share (-4.1) in five straight down or flat trends since March (10.1 – 9.6 – 8.1 – 6.8 – 6.8 – 6.0, 6+), Radio One urban AC WZAK notches a +.5 to 6.5 (seventh to fifth, 6+). With a +.9, WZAK reached the top spot in December, but fell to third in “Holiday” 2017. Down two-tenths to 6.6 (yet progressing from fifth to fourth, 6+), urban contemporary cluster-mate WENZ “Z-107.9” concludes four straight improvements that netted +1.9 (4.9 – 5.6 – 6.0 – 6.1 – 6.8, 6+). Relinquishing more than half of the +2.4 generated via four successive upticks (6.0 – 7.1 – 8.0 – 8.2 – 8.4, 6+), Entercom-owned WNCX “98.5 Cleveland’s Classic Rock” (6.9, -1.5, 6+) slips from second to third. August’s 8.4 is its finest 6+-performance since June 2017 (8.4, as well). A collective +1.7 in July and August (6.4 – 7.4 – 8.1, 6+), iHeartMedia’s WGAR “99.5 – Cleveland’s #1 for New Country” surrenders nine-tenths to 7.2 (6+), yet actually advances from third to second. Three straight negative January through April moves resulting in a -1.0 (7.2 – 6.8 – 6.3 – 6.2, 6+) were largely halted by a +.8 in May; WGAR was -.6 in June.
Spoken-Word Formats – Up seven-tenths in August to curtail five straight February through July decreases that accounted for a -1.7 (5.6 – 5.4 – 5.3 – 4.8 – 4.1 – 3.9, 6+), Entercom news/talk KMBZ-FM “98.1 News-Traffic-Weather” drops two-tenths in September to 4.4 (eighth to ninth, 6+). Forfeiting two-tenths as well is co-owned KMBZ-AM “Talk 980” (2.4 – 2.2, flat at #19, 6+). “Talk 980” was locked on 2.2 (6+) in April and May before slipping one-tenth in June. Down or flat for the third sweep in a row for a loss of two-tenths (.7 – .6 – .6 – .5, 6+), Cumulus Media’s KCMO-AM “Talk Radio 710 AM” remains at #23. Entercom’s KCSP “610 Sports Radio,” which was up three-tenths in July and August (2.9 – 3.0 – 3.2, 6+), is off one-tenth to 3.1 (#12 to #15, 6+). The Kansas City Royals flagship more than doubled its 6+-share with a combined +1.9 in April and May (1.8 – 3.1 3.7, 6+). Three-tenths behind KCSP is Union Broadcasting’s WHB “Sports Radio 810,” which is a collective +.8 in four straight increases (2.0 – 2.1 – 2.4 – 2.6 – 2.8, #18 to #16, 6+). WHB was -.9 in February; +.9 in March; and an overall -2.0 in April and May (4.0 – 2.9 – 2.0, 6+). Locked on 3.0 (6+) in July and August, University of Missouri news/talk KCUR gains three-tenths to 3.3 (#14 to #12, 6+). Prior to May, KCUR was up nine-tenths as a result of six straight November 2017 through April 2018 up or flat trends (1.9 – 2.2 – 2.4 – 2.7 – 2.7 – 2.7 – 2.8, 6+).
Kansas City Music Formats – Not only is Cumulus Media’s KCFX #1 for the fourth month in a row, “101 The Fox – Kansas City’s Classic Rock Station” is a cumulative +1.8 in four straight sweeps without a loss (7.0 – 7.2 – 7.2 – 7.8 – 8.8, 6+). Moreover, this (8.8) is the strongest 6+-performance for KCFX since 9.1 in “Holiday” 2017. Prior to June, “The Fox” – last held the #1 position in February. It was -1.6 through three February through May decreases in succession (8.6 – 8.0 – 7.6 – 7.0, 6+). Tacking on eight-tenths to August’s +1.0 (5.5 – 6.5 – 7.3, 6+), Entercom-owned KQRC repeats in the runner-up slot. In six consecutive Holiday 2017 – June 2018 monthlies without a loss, “98.9 The Rock” was a combined +1.7 (4.5 – 4.5 – 5.0 – 5.6 – 5.8 – 5.8 – 6.2, 6+) and then dropped seven-tenths in July. In addition to entering the top ten (#11 to #7) with a gain of six-tenths (4.0 – 4.6, 6+), Steel City Media adult contemporary KCKC “KC-102.1 Today’s Best Variety” has its highest 6+-stat (4.6) since 4.7 in March. At the same time that KCKC sibling KBEQ “Q-104 New Hit Country” gains six-tenths to 5.6 (sixth to fifth, 6+), co-owned KFKF “Country 94.1” regresses by nine-tenths (6.2 – 5.3, fourth to sixth, 6+). “Q-104” was off a combined nine-tenths in July and August (5.9 – 5.8 – 5.0, 6+). It was up or flat in seven straight December 2017 through June 2018 sweeps for an overall +2.0 (3.9 – 3.9 – 4.4 – 4.4 – 4.8 – 5.5 – 5.8 – 5.9, 6+). Meanwhile, “Country 94.1” improved by six-tenths in July (5.9 – 6.5, 6+). When KFKF posted a one-half share increase in May, it erased the -.5 it recorded through three decreases in a row (6.0 – 5.9 – 5.6 – 5.5, 6+). The market’s other country FM – Entercom’s WDAF “106.5 The Wolf” – is down or flat for the fifth time in a row for a net loss of six-tenths (4.9 – 4.8 – 4.6 – 4.6 – 4.6 – 4.3, 6+), dipping from eighth to tenth. Flat at #3, Cumulus Media classic hits-oldies KCMO-FM “94.9 Kansas City’s Greatest Hits” is a combined -1.8 in six successive March through September declines (8.1 – 7.7 – 7.2 – 7.1 – 6.8 – 6.4 – 6.3, 6+). “Kansas City’s Greatest Hits” was #1 in March, April, and May.
Spoken-Word Formats – The extremely steady March – September topline of iHeartMedia news/talk WTVN is 5.4 – 5.6 – 5.4 – 5.3 – 5.6 – 5.4 – 5.5 (unchanged at #6, 6+). Earlier this year though, “News Radio 610” was +1.5 in January; -1.0 in February; and -.7 in March. A collective +.6 in August and September (.5 – .9 – 1.1, 6+), iHeartMedia sports talk WXZX “105.7 The Zone” progresses from #15 to #14. Following four down or flat sweeps in succession for a -.2 (.9 – .9 – .8 – .8 – .7, 6+), “The Zone” was +.3 in April and May, but dropped a collective one-half share in June and July for a 50% reduction of its 6+-share (1.0 – .9 – .5, 6+). Ohio State University news/talk WOSU is without a loss for the third month in a row for a net gain of seven-tenths (3.9 – 3.9 – 4.5 – 4.6, flat at #7, 6+). September’s 4.6 is its strongest 6+-stat since 4.7 in August 2017.
Columbus Music Formats – Anchored in the runner-up slot for the ninth time in succession, iHeartMedia mainstream CHR WNCI “97.9 Columbus’ Hit Music Station” – which was +1.3 in June and -1.8 in July and August (10.7 – 10.0 – 8.9, 6+) – gains one-half share to 9.4 (6+). WNCI lost seven-tenths in July, curtailing three successive up or flat March through June monthlies that yielded a +1.7 (9.0 – 9.4 – 9.4 – 10.7, 6+). June’s 10.7 is the strongest 6+-stat for WNCI since October 2017 (10.7, as well). Well ahead of WNCI is co-owned WCOL (15.0, -.1, 6+), which is #1 for the ninth consecutive sweep. When “92.3 Columbus’ #1 For New Country” eroded by -1.2 in August, it concluded five consecutive increases for an overall +4.0 (12.3 – 13.4 – 14.4 – 14.5 – 15.7 – 16.3, 6+). WCOL has been in double-digits (6+) each sweep since June 2017. Among the major fluctuations for “92.3 Columbus’ #1 For New Country” this calendar year are +3.1 (January); -1.7 (February); +1.1 (March); +1.0 (April); +1.2 (June); +.6 (July); and 1.2 (August). Regressing by six-tenths each are One Connection Media Group contemporary Christian WCVO “104.9 The River” (4.1 – 3.5, steady at #8, 6+) and Saga Communications hot AC WVMX “Mix 107.9” (3.3 – 2.7, ninth to tenth, 6+). Following four consecutive improvements that netted a +1.6 (5.1 – 5.6 – 5.7 – 5.9 – 6.7, 6+), iHeartMedia adult hits WODC “93.3 The Bus – We Play Anything” falters by three-tenths to 6.4 (third to fourth, 6+); 6.7 in August is its highest 6+-share since 8.1 in “Holiday” 2017.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1636
|
__label__wiki
| 0.778847
| 0.778847
|
U.N. passes sweeping international arms regulation viewed by some as Second Amendment override
by Ras Radio on April 2, 2013 at 12:12 pm
Posted In: The First 52
By David Sherfinski
The United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday signed off on a sweeping, first-of-its-kind treaty to regulate the international arms trade, brushing aside worries from U.S. gun rights advocates that the pact could lead to a national firearms registry and disrupt the American gun market.
The long-debated U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) requires countries to regulate and control the export of weaponry such as battle tanks, combat vehicles and aircraft and attack helicopters, as well as parts and ammunition for such weapons. It also provides that signatories will not violate arms embargoes, international treaties regarding illicit trafficking, or sell weaponry to a countries for genocide, crimes against humanity or other war crimes.
SEE RELATED: New Connecticut gun law to ban another 100 weapons
With the Obama administration supporting the final treaty draft, the General Assembly vote was 154 to 3, with 23 abstentions.
American gun rights activists, though, insist the treaty is riddled with loopholes and is unworkable in part because it includes “small arms and light weapons” in its list of weaponry subject to international regulations. They do not trust U.N. assertions that the pact is meant to regulate only cross-border trade and would have no impact on domestic U.S. laws and markets.
Critics of the treaty were heartened by the U.S. Senate’s resistance to ratifying the document, assuming President Obama sent it to the chamber for ratification. In its budget debate late last month, the Senate approved a nonbinding amendment opposing the treaty offered by Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican, with eight Democrats joining all 45 Republicans backing the amendment.
** FILE ** U.N. forces patrol a street in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, … more >
“The Senate has already gone on record in stating that an Arms Trade Treaty has no hope, especially if it does not specifically protect the individual right to bear arms and American sovereignty,” Sen. Thad Cochran, a Mississippi Republican who backed Mr. Inhofe’s motion, said in a statement. “It would be pointless for the president to sign such a treaty and expect the Senate to go along. We won’t ratify it.”
Despite the Senate vote, numerous groups have pressured President Obama to support the treaty, and Amnesty International hailed Tuesday’s vote.
“The voices of reason triumphed over skeptics, treaty opponents and dealers in death to establish a revolutionary treaty that constitutes a major step toward keeping assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons out of the hands of despots and warlords who use them to kill and maim civilians, recruit child soldiers and commit other serious abuses,” said Frank Jannuzi, deputy executive director of Amnesty International USA.
SPECIAL COVERAGE: Second Amendment and Gun Control
The American Bar Association also released a white paper arguing that the treaty would not affect Second Amendment rights.
General Assembly President Vuk Jeremic said Tuesday that the lack of a regulatory framework on the import and transfer of conventional arms “has made a daunting contribution to ongoing conflict, regional instabilities, displacement of peoples, terrorism and transnational organized crime.”
“Whatever the outcome of today’s meeting, for a treaty to be effective, we will need to keep working together to fulfill its goals,” he said.
Under the treaty, countries must also consider whether weapons would be used to violate international humanitarian or human rights laws, facilitate acts of terrorism or organized crime.
Proponents had hoped that the treaty could be ratified by acclamation at a final negotiating conference last week, but Syria, Iran and North Korea objected.
The final vote Tuesday was 154 countries in favor, three against, and 23 abstaining.
Some abstaining countries, like India and Egypt, felt the treaty did not go far enough on its language regarding terrorism and human rights.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/2/un-passes-international-arms-regulation-treaty/#ixzz2PKKe7OLI
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1640
|
__label__cc
| 0.607341
| 0.392659
|
Jun. 01,2016 10:37
Home > Editorial > Hybrid war against Turkey, who is fighting and why
Hybrid war against Turkey, who is fighting and why
For some time now the world's major superpowers, as well as regional powers, trying to take their place under the sun, began to actively resort to the tactics of "hybrid war".
It is worth noting that in general, "hybrid warfare" is not something new for the modern world. However, as technology advances, the possibility of conducting such wars is increasing as well. A hybrid war has several fronts, which include informational, diplomatic, economic, cyber front and direct military actions. However, military operations are often conducted not directly by the armies of warring parties, but by proxy groups, often mercenaries. Often, parts of the regular army, Special Forces of reconnaissance from one or both sides are involved. An illustrative example is Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. All the elements of a modern hybrid war can be traced in this conflict, there are other similar examples, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and so on. There is an element of a hybrid war in all of these hot spots as well.
I want to emphasize that hybrid warfare does not necessarily imply maintenance of active hostilities; the parties may be limited to terrorist attacks and guerrilla and semi-guerrilla operations in the territory of each other.
Active hybrid warfare with variable intensity is conducted against Turkey since the 1980s. This war continues to this day, but the motives for the war run deep into history. Hatred and envy of certain circles in Europe against Turks originates already since 1453, after the capture of Constantinople (although Christian Crusaders captured and plundered Constantinople long before Mehmed II). With the growth of the territory and power of the Ottoman Empire, hatred and fear of European ruling circles against the Turks only increased. For centuries, the ruling houses of Europe woven conspiracies and formed alliances against the Ottoman Empire. Finally, the entry of the Ottoman Empire in World War I on the side of Germany gave a chance to the historical enemies of the Ottomans, Britain, France and Russia, to finally put an end to the six centuries-old Empire. This process was even formalized in the form of a secret Sykes - Picot agreement, and later, with significant amendments, in the form of the Treaty of Sevres. But history decided otherwise, already buried and divided country has risen from the ashes and ruined the plans of Britain and France. Thus the Turks contributed to the continuation of a hybrid war against their own country.
During the Cold War, Turkey has become a battleground for the western and communist intelligence services. This battle also assumed creation of reliable domestic supports. After Turkey became a member of NATO, the confrontation with the Soviet Union has risen to a new level. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union mainly focused on the creation of radical leftist groups in Turkey. In the 1980s, the Soviet Union began to use Kurdish (PKK) and Armenian (ASALA) terrorists against Turkey. It is worth mentioning that NATO allies of Turkey did not wait around either. Despite the fact that the Ottoman Empire no longer existed, and Turkey became a member of NATO, along with Greece and France. French and Greek intelligence services actively cooperated with the Armenian terrorists, thereby using them against Turkey. This shows that the historical priorities of these countries have not changed.
Hybrid war against Turkey continued also after the end of the Cold War. Even so significant changes have occurred in the ranks of the opponents. For example, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, its legal successor Russia has been out of the game for a while, but its place was taken by countries such as Germany, Syria, and partly by Iran. After the Armenian terrorists, being too much into extermination of each other, finally left the scene, all the attention was focused on the PKK. Russia resumed active contacts and support for the PKK in the late '90s, in the mid-90s PKK interested Germany. Berlin consistently established contacts with the PKK. Thanks to contacts originated in the mid-90s between Berlin and the PKK, one of the most effective networks of the PKK operates in Germany, which is involved in finance collection and transferring, political planning, as well as informational and ideological confrontation. According to a report referred to the Minister of Internal Affairs of Germany in January 2015, during his visit to Turkey, 13 thousand PKK members live and conduct activities on the territory of Germany. Some experts have difficulties interpreting Germany's interest in the Kurdish issue. Perhaps Germany is trying to find a foothold in the rapidly changing Middle East. But if you look at the Middle East, the majority of these countries have long decided on foreign policy guidelines. Germany is too late. Realizing this fact, Berlin apparently decided to seek support and allies not among the countries, but among individual organizations and ethnic groups in the Middle East (I do not exclude that the decision was made on the assumption of an early collapse of one or more states where Kurds live, such as Syria and Iraq). It is noteworthy that Germany acts on several fronts in the Kurdish issue. With established relations (and therefor, the share of influence) with the PKK, Berlin also ignores the "Iraqi Kurdistan", which is a de facto independent state and not subordinate to Baghdad. Germany, trying to strengthen its presence and influence in the region, opened a consulate in Erbil. In addition, Berlin provided military assistance to armed Peshmerga troops, allegedly to fight the jihadists. Although, logically the assistance should have been provided to the legitimate Iraqi government, not the rebels, who advocate the division of the country and, almost as well as the ISIS, arrange ethnic cleansing in the territories under their control. It is noteworthy that some of those weapons got into the black market, and I do not rule out that another part is at the disposal of the PKK.
The flow of refugees from the Middle East to the European countries, in particular Germany, forces the German authorities to go on dialogue with the President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Democratic, economically developed and tolerant Germany, with a population of over 80 million people, accepted about 500 thousand Syrian refugees, and it has already created a serious political crisis in Germany. While the "intolerant" and "undemocratic" by German standards, Turkey, with much weaker economy, and almost the same number of population, took about 3 million Syrian refugees during the years of conflict. The EU, led by Merkel, puts pressure on Ankara in an attempt to resolve the issue of refugees by means of Turkey. Various tricks are being used to convince Ankara, from the promises of abolishing visas for Turkish citizens, to offers of financial support and intensification of negotiations on Turkey's membership in the EU. Of course, along with that, Berlin also uses elements of a hybrid war, which are expressed in provoking hysteria directed against the President of Turkey, as well as dirty speculations in the Bundestag, on the topic of the 1915 events in the Ottoman Empire. With which, by the way, Germany has a deep connection.
Not only countries take part in a hybrid war against Turkey, it is possible to note a number of organizations and biased political and public figures. In particular, it is about the Armenian and Greek lobbies. Of course the Armenian lobby stands out more in this matter. It should be stressed that the Armenian lobby has used almost all the ways to put pressure on Turkey, and to harm this country. They include terror, murder, blackmail, informational countering and attempts to falsify history. It is noteworthy that within the framework of Armenian lobby’s war against Turkey, Western scholars, who do not share the Armenian point of view, also became the target of Armenian terrorists. Since the independence of Armenia, this country has also joined a hybrid war against Turkey. But, due to the catastrophic economic situation, Armenia's contribution to this war is very limited. However, this limitation is offset by extreme aggression. The objective of the Armenian lobby and the Armenian state is to achieve recognition of the events of 1915 by Turkey as "genocide", compensation and territorial concessions from Turkey in favor of Armenia. Many might wonder, for what does Armenia, with its decreasing population, need more territory? For some, this question sounds rhetorical. In fact, the Armenian leaders are well aware that no one is going to concede them anything. It is not the result that matters, they need the process itself. The representatives of the Armenian lobby are often used by Russia and a number of European countries against Turkey, for their own geopolitical purposes.
Finally, on Russian involvement in the hybrid war against Turkey. I strongly disagree with those who argue that Russia and Turkey had good relations before Turkey brought down the Russian Su-24 that violated its boundaries. Yes, the countries had some partner relations, but it is not friendship. Russia and Turkey cannot be friends by default, because Russia positions itself as one of the world's superpowers, and Turkey - as a regional power. Russian and Turkish interests overlap historically and contradict each other in a variety of areas, from the Balkans to the Caucasus and Central Asia. The occupation of Crimea by Russia, under the pretext of "restoring historical justice" and "the protection of Russians", created tension in the relations between Russia and Turkey. Because, if we proceed from the "historical truth" and "historical affiliation", the peninsula belonged to the Ottoman Empire much longer than to Russia and the population of the peninsula is related to the population of Turkey, not Russia. Russian population, which was supposedly “saved” by the Kremlin, mostly was resettled here after World War II, and that was preceded by the ethnic cleansing against the Tatars. Accordingly, they are not the original inhabitants of the peninsula, of what the Turkish political elite is well aware. The beginning of Russian military operations in Syria, which Ankara considers as a part of its sphere of interests (Syria was part of the Ottoman Empire for more than Russian Empire and the Soviet Union existed put together), completely ruined the Russian-Turkish relations. One spark was enough for this powder keg to explode. This spark was the destruction of the Russian Su-24 by the Turkish Air Force. Immediately after the incident, without being able to respond symmetrically, the Russian leadership began to promote anti-Turkish hysteria with a racist tinge. The clumsy and primitive Russian state propaganda began to denigrate “Turkey, an accomplice of terrorists". The Russian side has accused the Turkish authorities of complicity with terrorism (support of ISIS and involvement in the oil trade with ISIS). Provided "evidence" was quickly exposed due to its coarse and worthless forgery and, after a while, the names of Russians actually involved in oil trade with ISIS have also come up. The Russian side generally failed to convince the international community, excluding the number of marginal, of the Turkish leadership’s involvement in oil trade with ISIS, or its support to the terrorists from ISIS. A few months after the incident with the Russian aircraft, when it became clear that no one believes in the Russian version of the destruction of an aircraft, and that attempts to convict Turkey of having links with the ISIS have failed, , the Kurdish terrorist organization "Kurdistan Freedom Falcons ", dormant for several years, suddenly woke up . I do not think it's just a coincidence. Eagerness of the Russian media to cover terrorist attacks in Turkey is also remarkable (I think there is no need to remind, who controls major Russian media outlets). In general, unlike, for example, Germany, France and the Armenian lobby, Russia, being in a state of deep systemic crisis, total corruption and incompetence, can only rely on brute force, or different kinds of proxy forces. For example, it can rely on the marginalized Kurdish terrorist groups. I want to emphasize that these marginalized groups cannot fundamentally affect the long-term prospects, the development of Turkey and the increase of its strength, developing into a regional influence.
Summarizing all the above, I can say that individually the countries or organization, waging the hybrid war against Turkey, are unable to turn the tide in their favor. The contradictions and unresolved problems between Turkey’s opponents do not allow them to come together and act in concert. As Turkey will increase its military and economic power, it is possible to predict the inclusion of Iran, Great Britain, Israel and the United States in a certain degree into the hybrid war against Turkey. The primary objective of the Turkish authorities is building up its own and allied capacity and infrastructure to confront the hybrid wars, as well as measures on fragmentation of the real and potential enemies.
Ali Hajizade, political scientist, head of the project "The Great Middle East"
Keywords : teror hybrid war turkey
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1648
|
__label__wiki
| 0.889352
| 0.889352
|
The 17-year-old entrepreneur who ditched university to make lip balm
November 27, 2018 Unikorn Staff 0
Original story by The Telegraph UK.
Last month, Rose Dyson watched as her school friends packed their bags and left Barnsley, South Yorkshire, for the country’s top universities, including Oxford, Cambridge and Durham.
At one point, having secured straight A star and A grades at her GCSEs, it looked like Rose would follow suit. But in August, the 17-year-old achieved two C grades and a D in her A levels.
She wasn’t disappointed, though: earlier in the week, she had been recognised by Transferwise as one of their ’20 under 20′ – Britain’s 20 most promising young entrepreneurs – and awarded a top prize of £10,000 to invest in her business.
“It’s not like I’ve been lazy and spent every day watching Netflix,” says Rose. “I was trying to do two things at once, which was really difficult.”
On top of full time studies, Rose has been running ethical beauty product business Pura Cosmetics, which she founded when she was 15. The idea came from local enterprise competition, ‘I Know I Can’ Big Challenge, in which school-age children were given £25 and told to design and create a product, then see if they could sell it.
“Cosmetics are so extortionate on the high street and with £10 pocket money per week I just couldn’t afford any full-stop, let alone the ethical products I wanted to buy,” Rose explains. “I wanted to make a vegan product that girls and boys like myself could afford.”
Rose decided to start with a lip balm. She rang local wholesale companies that sell cosmetics ingredients and asked what she would need. From there, she created a recipe that she still brews from the kitchen of her mum’s home.
Selling her initial batch of lip balms at her old primary school’s Christmas fair, Rose earned around £40. “That was my first profit,” she says. “I thought I was rich.”
Since then, Rose has developed a range of 12 lip balms and 10 lip scrubs, which cost up to £4.50 each, a 500 per cent mark up. The products are in high demand, but Pura Cosmetics is currently limited to selling 6,000 per month, the number Rose is physically able to produce. She hopes to increase her output to 15,000, the amount needed for big retailers, using the Transferwise investment – and her new-found free time.
“With Christmas coming, this is going to be our busiest period,” she says. “It’s winter so everyone has dry lips and the sales will be huge for us.”
When Rose told her parents she wanted to continue with the business rather than go to university, her dad was skeptical. “Because I’ve always been quite academic, he thought it was a little project at first that wouldn’t go that far,” she says. “He hoped I would go to university and become a doctor or dentist. But I said, ‘Watch me, I’ll prove you wrong’.”
Being an only child has helped. From a young age, Rose’s parents were eager for her to try everything: she did classes in flute, piano and dance, as well as going to swimming and football clubs. As the business gradually took over her spare time, lifts to the leisure centre became lifts to the local market and time listening to her practise an instrument became time helping to make lip balms.
“Dad takes me to the markets and Mum helps me label,” she says. “They’ve been able to give me a lot of attention and support while they’ve been working full time as well.”
While Rose’s friends study at university, she will be at home working full time alongside her mum, who has taken a 15-month sabbatical from the bank where she works to help out.
“I made the decision that I wanted to do this full time pretty early on, so it made sense to focus on the business rather then A-levels,” she says. “Kids often think university is the way to go as it gives you a degree. But there are other ways to achieve success.”
Rose’s age has, at times, posed a problem and she’s found it “hard to be taken seriously at 15.” There was the time at a local market when a female customer said to her, “You can’t possibly be a real entrepreneur, you’re too young”. The words cemented themselves in her memory and made her more determined.
There was also the time when a stockist replied to her request to work together, “You’re only 16, there’s no way your quality would be high enough to fit in my shop”. Rose sent the shop a batch of her products and, soon enough, the stockist apologised and was selling them on the front counter.
On more than one occasion, people at networking events have mistaken her for being someone’s daughter. And when she tried to open a bank account after the business started to earn money, she was told she was too young. But one of the biggest blows came when Rose was 17 and she was scouted for the 2017 series of Dragon’s Den, only to be told she was too young.
“That can be hard,” she says. “But about 95 per cent of the time it’s absolutely great and people love my passion, my drive and the products. It’s definitely easier now I’m 18 and a young adult.”
Being young has one major benefit: as a digital native, Rose has found it easy to promote her products on social media and sell them online.
With £10,000 investment, Rose plans to up her production to cater for larger retailers CREDIT:GUZELIAN
“From the start, I never thought, ‘I can’t possibly run my own company’ or ‘there’ll be obstacles because I’m female’,” says Rose. “We’ve got people like Karren Brady [vice chairman of West Ham FC and Apprentice star], Jacqueline Gold [chief executive of Gold Group] and Deborah Meadan [Dragon’s Den investor] who are amazing role models.”
In her class of entrepreneurs, Rose is supported by other young women, such as sisters Annie and Kate Madden, who run race horse supplement company Fenugreek and count five royal families among their customers. “It’s crazy how successful they’ve been,” says Rose. “They’ve met Harry and Meghan!”
Being a girl might actually have helped Rose strive at a young age. In the school competition, the boys she was competing against who wanted to create a solar-powered phone “couldn’t be bothered so they just sacked it in”. Research from the Entrepreneurs Network last year found that although men are 86 per cent more likely to receive venture capital funding, 36 per cent of male-run companies fold, compared with 23 per cent of those run by women.
When she celebrated her 18th birthday earlier this summer, Rose’s friends gave her the highest accolade. In her card, they asked her to let them know “when we can buy a share” and “when you’ve brought a private jet so we can come for a ride”. One step at a time, of course – for now, she has her hands full with the pre-Christmas rush.
Previous Post:A 21st Century Global Movement Witness
Next Post:Meet the Social Enterprises Recognized as “UN Goalkeepers”
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1649
|
__label__cc
| 0.674261
| 0.325739
|
Flores All Destinations
Things to do in Guatemala
Things to do in Petén
Things to do in Flores
Lake Peten Itza (Lago Petén Itzá)
Flores Tours
All Flores Tours
Seibal (Ceibal)
Yaxhá
Uaxactún
Ixpanpajul Natural Park (Parque Natural Ixpanpajul)
Maya Biosphere Reserve (Reserva de la Biosfera Maya)
Petén Forest
How to Spend 3 Days in Flores
Maya Ruins Tours from Flores
The Cayes
Lake Peten Itza (Lago Petén Itzá) Tours
Guatemala’s second largest lake, Lake Petén Itzá (Lago Petén Itzá), a sparkling expanse at the heart of the hot, humid Petén Basin, was one of the earliest cradles of Mesoamerican civilization. The lush rainforests at its fringe are home to at least 27 archaeological sites, in addition to Flores, capital of Petén Department. Once known as Nojpetén (City Island) by the Itza Mayans, Flores was also their regional capital, and was the last Mayan city to fall to the Spanish, in 1697.
You’re probably staying on the island, a great base for enjoying the lake. Head to the north shore for a walk on the malecón, or jump in for a swim with the locals. The west side boasts lakefront restaurants and bars where you can watch the sunset. Hire a cayuco (small, motorized boats) to other attractions overlooking the water, including ruins, Petencito Zoo, Cerro Cahuí Nature Reserve, “El Museo,” a small archaeological museum, and other towns along the lakeshore.
While the vast majority of visitors to Lake Petén Itza stay in Flores, with its wide range of hotels, restaurants, and tour operators, there are other options. The small towns of El Remate, San José, and San Miguel all have basic lodging, more authentic ambiance, and access to their own small ruins, hiking trails, caves, Spanish schools, and other diversions.
Note that inexpensive public boats that once plied the lake have been gradually phased out as roads and bus service improve. Instead, operators offer group boat tours, or you can hire a pricey private cayuco. Budget travelers may want to stick to chicken buses from the Santa Elena market to destinations around the lake.
Address: Lago Peten Itza, Peten, Guatemala
0 Tours and Activities to Experience Lake Peten Itza (Lago Petén Itzá)
More Tours in Flores
Things to do near Flores
Things to do in San Ignacio
Things to do in Placencia
Things to do in Hopkins
Things to do in Belize City
Things to do in Ambergris Caye
Things to do in San Pedro Sula
Things to do in Guatemala City
Things to do in Panajachel
Things to do in Antigua
Things to do in San Pedro La Laguna
Things to do in Quetzaltenango
Things to do in Roatan
Things to do in The Cayes
Things to do in Central Highlands
Recommended for Flores
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1650
|
__label__wiki
| 0.915816
| 0.915816
|
Jack Grealish Speaks Out Following Heartbreaking Play-Off Final Defeat to Fulham at Wembley
Jack Grealish has spoken out after Aston Villa‘s 1-0 defeat to Fulham in the Championship play-off final on Saturday.
Tom Cairney’s strike was the difference between the two sides as the Whites guaranteed their passage back to the top flight of English football at the expense of Villa.
Grealish once again proved why he’s one of the best young talents in England with his dazzling runs, one of which almost resulted in a world-class goal but Marcus Bettinelli kept him at bay.
After the game, Grealish spoke out on Twitter stating:
“Devastated as much as you guys are. We live and we learn.”
Clive Mason/GettyImages
A major talking point in the hotly contested game was when Ryan Fredericks appeared to have stamped on the Villa midfielder which left fans and Steve Bruce incensed.
Grealish took to Instagram where he put the following:
The 22-year-old has been heavily linked with a move away from Villa Park with numerous Premier League clubs said to be interested in the youngster.
However, Villa manager Steve Bruce has urged Grealish to stay stating via Express and Star : “Of course there’s going to be speculation over Jack.
“Me personally, I would like him to stay. I think another year with us would do him the world of good.
“That’s my personal view. He’s been playing regular football week in, week out, we’ll see what happens.”
Bruce also spoke about the stamp on Grealish, revealing: “The boy for me should have had a red card very early. That was right in front of the fourth official and the referee.
“For me, he stamps on him. Nobody wants to see spectacles ruined but you need big decisions like that.”
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1651
|
__label__cc
| 0.614078
| 0.385922
|
Return to pre-deal oil output levels possible, says Russia’s Novak
MOSCOW (Reuters) – A return to the oil production levels that were in place prior to the 2016 deal to cut output is one of the options for easing curbs, Russia’s energy minister said.
Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak attends a session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), Russia May 25, 2018. REUTERS/Sergei Karpukhin
Sources said this week that Saudi Arabia and Russia were discussing raising OPEC and non-OPEC oil production to ease 17 months of strict supply curbs amid concerns that a price rally has gone too far.
“We have agreed that within a month we will additionally study this issue … I can say that one of the options which could be considered is attaining the levels which were in place at the time of the signing of the agreement,” RIA news agency on Saturday quoted the minister, Alexander Novak, as saying.
OPEC and non-OPEC ministers meet in Vienna on June 22-23, and a final decision will be taken there.
The existing deal came into force on January 1, 2017, and envisaged that global oil producers would cut their combined output by 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) to cut bloated stockpiles and prop up oil prices.
An industry source told Reuters that one of the options under discussion was to cap oil production in Russia at the level of October 2016, the baseline level for the current agreement. In October 2016, Russia’s oil output reached a 30-year high of 11.247 million bpd.
Russia had pledged to cut oil production by 300,000 bpd to 10.947 mln. But in March and in April this year it failed to fully comply with the deal, pumping at the pace of 10.97 million bpd, a 11-month high.
OPEC’s semi-annual meeting in Vienna on June 22 will be followed by a meeting with non-OPEC producers including Russia the following day.
Oil prices have risen to $80 per barrel, the levels unseen since late 2014. Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that the price of $60 “suits Russia”.
Novak was also quoted as saying on Saturday he expected Iran to reduce its output by no more than 10 percent as a result of the move by the United States to withdraw from a nuclear deal and reinstate sanctions against Tehran.
“I think the output reduction will not be as significant as many expect. Some 10 percent is probably the maximum level,” he said when asked if he agreed with an estimate that the sanctions could remove as much as 800,000 barrels a day from the market.
Novak also estimated that the “geopolitical risk” premium to the oil price was around $5-$7 per barrel.
Reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin, Oksana Kobzeva and Maria Kiselyova; Editing by Richard Balmforth and Helen Popper
Posted in News, Reuters
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1652
|
__label__cc
| 0.674839
| 0.325161
|
Kurt Mattes
Director of Accessibility, VFO
Kurt Mattes is the Director of Accessibility at VFO™, the world’s leading assistive technology (AT) provider for the visually impaired. He strongly advocates for inclusive workplaces in this role, working to expand the company’s technology products and services to address the needs of all people.
Previously, Kurt worked on JP Morgan Chase’s (JPM) accessibility team, developing solutions that increased ATM access for people with vision and mobility disabilities. Also at JPM, Kurt established an accessibility IT team, assisted with crafting a company-wide accessibility policy, became a board member of the international accessibility employee networking group, and provided expert technical guidance to the firm-wide American Disabilities Act (ADA) Controls program.
He’s assisted numerous organizations, such as State Farm, Ally® Bank, Toys”R”Us®, and government agencies, to create accessible and inclusive applications, to develop accessibility programs, and to incorporate accessibility into their culture.
Kurt has been a member of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Working Group, as well as the Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Task Force.
All sessions by Kurt Mattes
The Importance of Accessibility in the Workplace
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1653
|
__label__wiki
| 0.865152
| 0.865152
|
Free State High School mourns loss of science teacher
Dec 15, 2014 - 7:13pm
Elliot Hughes
Brad Simon. Photo courtesy of the Lawrence school district.
The Free State High School and Lawrence school district communities are mourning the loss of physics and chemistry teacher Brad Simon.
In an email to FSHS parents Sunday, principal Ed West said Simon died Saturday evening, likely due to “heart problems.” He was 53.
Simon is survived by his wife, Lisa, and one son, Aaron, according to his bio page on the FSHS website.
Simon was in his third year of teaching at Free State, where he taught advanced placement physics and general chemistry. He was also involved with the school’s chess and robotics clubs.
Lorna Larson, a transition facilitator at FSHS, said Simon was able to coach the chess club to become a contender despite not being an especially skilled player himself.
“Brad had a lot of patience and understood how to teach kids, including students with special needs,” Larson said.
Simon previously taught at Holton High School, Ottawa Middle School, Kansas University, Highland Community College and Baker University, according to the FSHS website.
Many students expressed their condolences over Twitter, either by writing tweets in tribute or favoriting those posted by others. Several posts noted Simon’s sense of humor.
Services for Simon will be at 1 p.m. Friday at Warren-McElwain Mortuary, 120 W. 13th St.
Jordan Rose, who teaches advanced placement chemistry at FSHS, said she would never forget Simon’s willingness to help others.
“Whether it was a lesson that went completely wrong or something else that frustrated me, Brad was one of the first people to stop by my classroom and check in to see if I was okay and to let me know that he believed in me,” she said.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1656
|
__label__wiki
| 0.656778
| 0.656778
|
Home Partners Team
Featured Creator Interview: Hydraulic Press Channel
Sep 5, 2019 · 10 min read
Have you ever watched a YouTube video of a bowling ball or a diamond getting crushed under a hydraulic press? If yes, it’s very likely it was made by Finnish entrepreneur couple Lauri and Anni Vuohensilta, the creators of the Hydraulic Press Channel and founders of the HPC Entertainment Company. Anni and Lauri live a seemingly ordinary life in the countryside outside of Tampere, but they are in fact, super popular YouTube celebrities. They are most known for their hydraulic press videos, but also make other crazy science experiment videos like combining red hot steel with dry ice or mixing smoke grenades with soap water on their other YouTube channel Beyond the Press. Today we get to hear a bit more about what happens behind the scenes of their channels.
Explosive start
In 2015 Lauri was watching a lot of YouTube and saw a carsandwater video called “red hot nickel ball”. At the time he was working at his family’s workshop and thought that he could easily make the same type of videos. He told the idea to Anni, who also got excited.
“We were thinking about all the machines we had at the workshop and came to the conclusion that the press is the easiest – you can put anything in there and just pull the switch and something always happens. We checked immediately and saw that there’s nothing like that on YouTube,” Lauri says.
Anni tells that the couple often has plans and projects together, and the YouTube channel was just one among others: “We often get excited about things and if we get excited about something, we start doing it full on. And then we make great big plans but most of them never come true, at least before they didn’t.”
In the first five months the videos got very little views. Anni and Lauri didn’t promote their channel anywhere, they didn’t even tell their friends they were making videos. Then all of a sudden, one of their videos about folding an A4 paper seven times, went viral on Reddit. “In the first week it got 2 million views. At that point we thought ‘we have to start making more of these’. During a couple of days when we realized that every video we post gets millions of views, we felt like we had to keep making videos. Of course we couldn’t know how long the popularity would last, but we felt like we had to keep making videos,” Lauri says.
Eventually the couple decided to leave their day jobs – Lauri at his family’s workshop and Anni at IKEA – to become full-time YouTubers. Now, their YouTube channel has over 2 million subscribers. The White House even sent them a TV box to crush during the Obama administration, in an attempt to campaign against the cable company monopoly. Anni and Lauri attribute their channel’s popularity to a combination of different things.
“With this topic it’s very easy to come up with interesting click-baity titles for the videos: what happens if you do this or that – and as videos, they’re entertaining. Our personality and style also go well with them. It’s easy to click and easy to get into that YouTube loop of watching more and more. They also fit really well on the platform,” says Lauri.
“It’s a mix of different things, things just click and it’s a good concept,” Anni adds.
Driving a car with saw blades on a frozen lake, crushing real diamonds with the hydraulic press… how does the couple come up with all the crazy ideas for their videos?
“We get a lot of suggestions from our viewers, and those are like challenges to us. If we make some stupid thing it’s kind of like “yeah, but can you make this even stupider?” Quite a big part of the ideas I just come up with. Let’s say, we think about a topic, like ice on a lake, and then we think about all the tools and machines we could use for the video. We also watch quite a lot of other channels. We might see some video like cutting styrox with a pressure washer– and if we think it’s a fun idea, we get a pressure washer the size of a truck and cut half a meter thick ice with it,” Lauri says.
Viewers not only suggest ideas for videos, but they also send stuff for Anni and Lauri to crush. The weirdest item anyone has ever wanted them to crush is a tooth. Anni told them not to send it, so their wish didn’t come true.
“I was like, I don’t want to crush anyone’s tooth!,” she laughs.
Anni points out that the Finnish countryside gives the perfect surroundings for making these types of videos:
“We have really good resources: we have the workshop here and in the countryside you can do pretty much anything. In the United States people make these kinds of videos in their backyards - here we have a lot more space.”
The couple has also learned how to collaborate with companies to make better videos.
“We’re pretty good at selling stuff. If we need something really expensive for the videos, we can often make deals and get them. I also helps that we’re in Finland, it’s a bit easier here compared to other European countries and the United States. Especially in the United States it’s harder to get big companies to lend expensive machines for these kind of things. In Finland it’s more relaxed and companies want to do all kinds of fun things,” Lauri says.
Speaking of fun, what is the most fun thing about making the videos?
“I think it’s the most rewarding when you come up with a great idea and then you go and execute it. Like yesterday we made a video where we tested how much pressure hardened glass beads can take. We started making the video and it turned out the beads were super hard, a lot harder than we expected. So then we felt really good: we have an interesting title and an even more interesting result, and people are really going to like this. So those kinds of videos are maybe the most fun,” says Lauri.
Working with heavy machinery and explosives can be dangerous, but Anni and Lauri are well prepared for all the risks.
“We always think all the big and dangerous stuff through really well in advance and make sure everything is done in a safe way,” Anni says. “Actually, the biggest risks lie in doing more ordinary stuff, in things that we do repeatedly every day – like using the press. If you have a little careless error with that, like tripping on an electric cord or if you’re too close to the press and something flies in your eye or something, that can be dangerous. But of course we always have the safety glasses on, so that helps a lot.”
Lauri tells the couple hasn’t had any dangerous situations so far:
“We don’t really have any dangerous situations, we’re pretty careful with these things. Like if you do something risky once, you’ll probably survive it – but if you do it three times every week, at some point you’re going to get hurt. So you have to make sure to do everything really safely.”
And what if safety – or money – wasn’t a concern, what would be a dream thing to crush?
“Lauri has his chemical element dreams,” Anni laughs.
“Well, people always say that if you crush two big plutonium balls you would get a nuclear explosion,“ adds Lauri.
Views on the industry
Anni and Lauri have had their YouTube channel since 2015 and in that time, they have seen some changes in the industry.
“In the beginning there was a period of half a year, or 3 months, when this was a trending topic, so at the time it was really easy to get views for practically anything in this space. But then on the other hand, there was more competition also, so you had more stress about executing the best ideas before anyone else. These days almost nobody else is doing this, so you can just make one hydraulic press video per week without having to worry about somebody making a similar video first.” Lauri says.
Anni points out that over the years YouTube has tightened their monetization rules.
“YouTube rewards longer videos, which affects it, too. If we have an ad in the middle of the video, it can’t be a 3 minute video with a one minute ad. So we need to make longer videos. Before we would make three 3-minute videos per week, but now we make one 10-minute video which has the same amount of content. So you have to pile up more content into one video,” Lauri adds.
All in all, the couple has found their passion on YouTube and wouldn’t change their work for anything.
“Most of the time this work doesn’t feel like work, it’s so much fun. We just had a new employee start on Monday, and at the end of the week I asked him how he was feeling about the job. He said that it was a better week than the 1995 hockey championship week, when Finland won gold. So he was really excited,” Anni laughs.
Sometimes work not feeling like work might cause some challenges though, she points out:
“At the same time this is like a hobby, and then sometimes I’m reading YouTube comments at 10pm on a Sunday night and wondering if I’m working or if this is free time.”
Anni and Lauri have uploaded over 240 videos on the Hydraulic Press Channel so far, some of which have become their personal favorites. Lauri is excited about the hardened glass drop video they’re currently working on.
“We could only break the small glass bead, which is about the size of the tip of my finger – and that took 30 tonnes! We have another one, bigger than the size of a golf ball, that we’re planning to press it this Sunday. I know that the hardened glass drop videos always get lots of views, people like them, and nobody would ever think that you couldn’t break it, so I can’t wait to publish that one. It’s a bit of technical topic, so I doubt it will get like 20 million views, but I think it’s going to be a really good video and I was so surprised myself, so I think others will be surprised too.”
Anni remembers one video from the channel’s early days. In the video, they pressed a dictionary.
“It wasn’t the best quality video or the biggest explosion, but at that time we were still learning so we had these self-built covers for the press and we had cameras all over the place. When the dictionary exploded, the covers flew off and knocked our cameras down. Inside the press I had my cell phone shooting a slow-motion video, which turned out to be the only one we could use. In the finished video we had a text in the beginning: “our main camera didn’t survive this explosion, this is shot with just a phone”. That itself is a promise of an adventure, and then there’s massive chaos when the book explodes. It was the first time we blew up a book. What made it more funny was that at the time, my Finnish accent was super strong, and in the beginning of the video I say that I’m going to blow up this English-Finnish dictionary, because I don’t need it anymore. It’s such a funny and surprising video,” Lauri says.
Last but not least, who should we interview next?
Without any hesitation, Lauri has a YouTube channel in mind:
“Isaac Arthur is amazing, they make great tech and space related videos. I don’t understand how they are able to make a 30-40 minute, really well produced video every week.”
HomePartnersTeam
FAQNewsPress
Instagram YouTube Twitter Email
iOS Android Web
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceContent GuidelinesBrand Guidelines
Made with ♥ in Finland
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1659
|
__label__cc
| 0.749031
| 0.250969
|
Prashanti Vodanovich
Based in Australia with over 20 years of experience in the wellness and luxury spa/hotel industry as a therapist as well as in a management capacity. Prashanti holds a Diploma of Clinical Aromatherapy & the Aromatic Medicine Skillset, an Australian Government approved qualification with over 1200hrs of recognised study. She has also travelled to Provence to Complete 3 levels of the Advanced Clinical Aromatherapy Program with Essential Oil Resource Consultants lead by Rhiannon Lewis.
Prashanti’s vast therapeutic training has made her a highly regarded formulator & consultant. As the founder of Cura Co.Lab she formulates and manufactures a range of signature operational products for a number of Luxury Spa’s in Australia and has a passion for promoting and educating her clients on the safe & sustainable use of aromatic plants and essential oils in the industry. She also advises to large hotel groups on the use & selection of Eco-Conscious products. As a formulator Prashanti is fastidious in researching, sourcing and creating ethical products. Prashanti is currently studying a Globally recognised Diploma of Cosmetic Chemistry & Personal Care Science fuelled by her desire to create eco conscious, effective products that work with and for nature.
Lidiane G. Franco Pelli
Lidiane G. Franco Pelli has a degree in Forestry Engineering in Jan / 2005 from the Federal University of Viçosa (UFV), where she worked as volunteer with medicinal plants in a NGO, which helped her to solidify a childhood passion, linked to a familiar custom of using medicines remedies. She conducted a research with a symbiotic association between microorganisms (mycorrhiza and rhizobacteria) in a native plant (Anadenanthera peregrina) at the Laboratory of Mycorrhizal Associations / BIOAGRO / UFV. This brought an understanding of how associations between micro and macroorganisms are the basis for the survival of all ecosystems in our Planet.
After graduating, she worked with the recovery of degraded areas, maintenance and preservation of the Permanent Preservation Areas (PPA) and Legal Reserve. She elaborated and executed environmental education programs, which put her in close contact with the local population. She learnt about their customs and ways of life.
She prepared and executed a biodiversity conservation plan, coordinated a team to survey and monitor biodiversity data, including endemic plants (Serpentine plants) in Barro Alto and Niquelândia, Goiás, Brazil. She was responsible for reporting GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) indicators related to the Biodiversity of the company she worked for.
She became a mother in 2009, when she decided to dedicate herself to motherhood and return to studying old passions: medicinal plants, a passion since a very young age. In 2015, she got in touch with aromatherapy and in 2018 she started studying with Carla Véscovi, who always transmitted the importance conscious use of essential oils. Since then, Lidiane has been studying this very beautiful and loving area. She is also a yoga teacher for children and yoga nidra teacher as well, always looking for body care and healing linked to the care and healing of our Planet. The preservation and proper management of resources, promotes the balance between our life and the life of our Planet, therefore we are completely interconnected.
The combination of two passions: Conservation of Biodiversity with Aromatherapy is something wonderful, a dream coming true!
Para a Biografia de Lidiane em Português, por favor clique aqui.
Marika Fleri
Marika Fleri has been practicing aromatherapy for the past 20 years in Malta focusing mainly on education, promoting safe use of oils through various media including TV, newspapers, magazines, workshops and social media. She has been working in oncology and palliative care for the past five years. Marika is the Coordinator of The National Cancer Platform which brings together all Maltese non-government organizations working in the field of cancer and she mans a ‘one-stop shop’ concept office at Malta’s oncology hospital.
She is also the clinical aromatherapist in residence at the hospital working with other health care professionals to offer an integrative and holistic approach to treatment.
Marika is a VTCT Tutor, Assessor and Internal Quality Assurer. She runs AromaHub Malta together with Lorraine Spiteri.
She is the founder of The Azure Butterfly Project, a group of professional complementary therapists who are voluntarily offering their services where it is most needed and where otherwise it would be very difficult for people to have access to therapists.
Jonathan Benavides
While working with autism at the University Psychiatric Hospital in Leiden in the Netherlands in 1988, Jonathan started to develop multisensorial interventions in order to break the armour and get into the patient’s world. Since then he has always been interested in research the integration of different disciplines. In 2002, he got first in touch with aromatherapy when working with sensorial therapies for autistic children in the Netherlands and began studying advanced clinical aromatherapy in the UK.
Since then he has continued to extend his knowledge. Jonathan has been working within the palliative home care system in The Netherlands since 2009, incorporating his skills for providing comfort to the seriously ill and dying. Over the years he has developed, used, trained and lectured in diverse therapeutic interventions (conventional and non-conventional) such as
“Into the tunnel” for autistic children (1987)
“Bio-gymnastics, integrating the emotions in your body (1989)
“Ahava, the Reiki of Love”, a new Reiki approach (2001)
“Anointing, a spiritual seance”, an energetic chakra harmonisation (2008)
“Into the Light”, psychological approach for the sick and dying (2011)
“Integrative Reiki, Reiki Usui together with essential oils, electromagnetic frequencies and roses energy” (2013)
“Reinforcing your T-cells”, a holistic immunological approach” (2015)
“Let be free again”, a trauma release aromatic approach (2017)
“Train to the Light” aroma and sound for HEARTS (UK) (2018)
“Remembering and Honouring you”, aroma and texture for HEARTS (UK) (2018)
“Adjusting, a multisensory self-compassionate approach for cancer related distress” (2019)
“De-Compressing, for stress relief, resilience and to treat anxiety, fear and solitude” (2020)
For some years now, Jonathan conduct forest bathing workshops wherein he takes people to the forest to experience not only the trees themselves but in conjunction with the essential oils the same tree species produces. In this way he has taught many people to appreciate the trees as beings and in this way, he has help people to become more conscious of the fragility of nature and our responsibility within.
Besides working in the Netherlands, Jonathan also works regularly at the IKYA Klinikken in Oslo (Norway) and in Casa do Ser in Lisbon (Portugal).
He has participated in several seminars, conferences and congresses in aromatherapy, complementary therapies, psychology and music therapy.
Jonathan is working also at the moment on a book about spiritual aromatherapy for palliative care, dying and beyond.
Marju Kivi
My name is Marju Kivi and I am specially honoured to become an Airmid Ambassador for Portugal!
I was born in Estonia and have lived in Portugal for 20 years. Together with Marco, in our family are three lovely children, teenagers by now. A watermill from 19th century appeared to us suddenly where is now installed Naturalness Essential Oil Distillery.
So ten years ago we moved from Lisbon area to a village called Louriçal do Campo. Situated in the heart of Portugal, aside of Gardunha mountain and Ocreza river. After we had moved, there was still no certain idea of how we may manage to put bread on the table… On one hot summer morning, Marco and I had gone for a mountain bike ride. There was this steep uphill and we had to walk, off from the bikes. In the air was this sweet, woody aroma. It was intense and invited us to discover: “come to me and dicover who I am!” At the time I did not understand this message this way, but still we are so attached to this plant and willing to work with her. So from that moment on the hills, we became essential oil distillers. The plant is Cistus ladanifer, Rock Rose in common language. There are now eight years of relationship with Cistus plant including all the challenges she may lay on us.
Because Portuguese flora is rich in aromatic and medicinal plants and the climate allows the development of volatile compounds, there are several wild grown plants we work with besides Cistus ladanifer.
Over eight years of activity as essential oil distillers, each year is different. Who works with Nature, knows that you may add two plus two but the outcome may not be four. This happens so for climate conditions and human action.
As an Airmid Ambassador for Portugal, I am honoured to learn with Airmid Institute. Why should I do so? Well, actually Marco used to be a lawyer and I studied to be a cycling coach but around us exists this knowlegde within Nature. Great functionality, mechanisms of survivance and so much beauty! Still, for humanity, there is long way to discover more truth about plants! As essential oil distillers, we are servants of Mother Nature´s knowledge. To be able to deliver a plant extract inside a bottle is an honour for us. Our question to the consumer is: “do you know, how many kilograms of plants are needed to produce a quantity of essential oil inside this bottle?” and “how come this product has this amazing action on one´s health?” or “who planted all wild grown plants?”.
Happy to be on board with Airmid Institute and to protect natural source of aromatic and medicinal plants in Portugal! Are you with us?
Rosie Walker-Chen
Originally from the U.K., Rosie has lived in Taiwan for the past 18 years and is extremely happy to call Taiwan her home. She has been involved in education for over twenty years. From an early age Rosie has had a deep love of plants and nature. Culminating in becoming an Aromatherapist and a member of the IFPA. Rosie would like to use her experience in educating and helping people to become aware of the plight aromatic plants face due to the increased popularity of phytomedicine.
Dr Jacqui Stringer
PhD, RGN, MIFPA
Jacqui is Clinical & Research Lead for the Complementary Health & Wellbeing services at The Christie NHS Trust; an acute cancer hospital in Manchester, UK, where she has been working clinically with essential oils since 1997. Her clinical focus is the management of patients with complex physiological and / or psychological needs, at all stages of their treatment. The role includes maintaining a clinical case load where essential oil preparations are used in conjunction with standard licensed medications to facilitate maximum healing / symptom support. In addition to her clinical duties, Jacqui leads on the department’s research programme as a central part of her role. Fundamental to her leadership is addressing the issue of sustainability when choosing essential oils, for use in both the clinical and research setting. Crucially, we look to use oils grown in a sustainable way, preferably using approaches, which are integral to and beneficial for a country’s innate ecology.
Would you like to be a Airmid Ambassador?
To apply to become an Airmid Ambassador, please email us at info@airmidinstitute.org. Those wishing to join us are asked to complete an application form and to meet for an interview. Click here for more information on the program.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1667
|
__label__wiki
| 0.931366
| 0.931366
|
Long, George Merrick (1874–1930)
by Ruth Teale
This article was published in Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 10, (MUP), 1986
George Merrick Long (1874-1930), Anglican bishop and educationist, was born on 5 November 1874 at Carisbrook, Victoria, youngest son of English parents William Long, grocer, and his wife Eliza, née Merrick. On leaving Maryborough Grammar School he entered the local branch of the City of Melbourne Bank. He was encouraged to matriculate by his vicar, Canon Charles Harris, who also instructed him in public speaking and persuaded Archbishop Goe to offer him the Rupertswood theological studentship at Trinity College, University of Melbourne (B.A., 1899; M.A., 1901). In 1897, after gaining first-class honours in inductive logic and mental philosophy, he was awarded a Hastie exhibition and the Trinity College Dialectic Society's medal for oratory. Long was made deacon on 28 May 1899 and priested on 10 June 1900. From 1899 he had charge of the district of Foster in Gippsland where the church and rectory had recently been destroyed by a bushfire. At Maryborough on 4 July 1900 he married Felecie Alexandra, daughter of Alfred Joyce.
Long returned to Melbourne as senior curate to Archdeacon Hindley at Holy Trinity Church, Kew. Here he suggested the foundation of a boys' school despite opposition from the council of Melbourne Church of England Grammar School; after twelve months as a preparatory school, Trinity Grammar School accepted boys of all ages and Long became headmaster in 1904. He adopted a modern curriculum and exercised that 'mysterious gift of personality which excites the personal devotion and enthusiasm of the boys. He had dignity without stiffness, and a very approachable friendliness of manner without familiarity'. An outstanding headmaster, he declined the wardenship of St John's Theological College, St Kilda, offers of important parishes and nomination for the headmastership of Geelong Church of England Grammar School. He served on several diocesan committees and in 1910 was made a canon of St Paul's Cathedral. When in May 1911 Long was elected to the see of Bathurst, New South Wales, he became one of the few Australian-born bishops. Consecrated on 30 November 1911 in St Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney, he immediately began revising antiquated diocesan finances and ordinances and was awarded a Lambeth D.D. in 1912.
In November 1917 Long enlisted in the Australian Imperial Force as a chaplain and honorary captain. He embarked for London in January and early in April went to the Australian Reinforcement Camp in France, where his abilities were recognized by Major General Sir Brudenell White. Transferred to Australian Corps Headquarters, he was promoted on 1 June honorary lieutenant-colonel and appointed director of education with the task of organizing professional, technical and general training (particularly in agriculture).
Returning to London in September Long and his small staff by Herculean efforts set up the administrative machinery. He secured the co-operation of British (and European) universities, professional, technical, commercial and industrial institutions and many other groups and individuals, such as the British Wool Buyers' Federation, a perfume manufacturer in France and Albert Mansbridge, founder of the Workers' Educational Association. Teaching within the divisions was hampered by lack of books and paper and the movement of the men, but after the Armistice 'non-military employment' was found for many. Some 12,880 soldiers and nurses completed courses of training or work-experience and many thousands more participated. In March Long's health broke under the strain. He was promoted brigadier general on 1 January 1919, awarded an honorary LL.D. by the universities of Cambridge (1918) and Manchester (1919) and appointed C.B.E. in 1919.
In July Long returned to his diocese, where he began to expand educational opportunities. He resuscitated All Saints' College, Bathurst, on a new site; in 1925 he opened Marsden School for Girls at Kelso; he encouraged the founding in large country towns of hostels for boys and girls from bush homes attending public high schools; he supported the re-establishment of St John's Theological College at Morpeth; and he promoted the training scheme of the Brotherhood of the Good Shepherd, Dubbo, which assisted men without means to enter the priesthood. In 1920 he began the rebuilding of his crumbling cathedral to a towering design by Louis Williams; the sanctuary, choir and warriors' chapel were consecrated in November 1927. In 1920 he had become foundation president of the national council of the Church of England Men's Society and, a Freemason, was grand chaplain of United Grand Lodge in 1923-26. With the help of (Sir) John Peden, he drafted and cogently advocated a constitution for the Church of England in Australia independent of the Church in Britain; his draft, by 1928 ratified by every diocese except Sydney, became the basis of all subsequent versions. He favoured conservative revision of the Book of Common Prayer and deplored the 'paralysis of fear' besetting both those who wanted it retained and those who deemed Australian churchmen 'intellectually incompetent' in liturgical studies. A democrat and nationalist, he advocated the White Australia policy on grounds of racial purity and industrial harmony, and as politically expedient for a 'high-spirited people' in an 'active and mobile young democracy'.
In December 1927 Long was elected bishop of Newcastle and enthroned on 1 May 1928. He had a sensitive knowledge of economic and industrial issues and was popular with the mining unions on the Newcastle coalfields. He had retained his connexion with the Australian Military Forces and in 1929 was appointed chaplain-general. In March 1930 he sailed for England to attend the Lambeth Conference in London, but suffered a cerebral haemorrhage after its opening session and died on 9 July in St Thomas's Hospital. His requiem was celebrated by Archbishop Cosmo Lang before 300 bishops, and his ashes were brought back to New South Wales and placed in All Saints Cathedral, Bathurst. He was survived by his wife, three sons and three daughters; his eldest son Gavin Merrick (1901-1968) became official historian of World War II.
Tall and dignified, with smooth dark hair and regular features, Long was a fine athlete, cricketer and tennis player when young. Although he was a High Churchman, but not an Anglo-Catholic, his charm and administrative gifts were recognized by all Anglicans. To Charles Bean he was 'one of the great Australians of his generation', whose outstanding work may well have been his contribution to the 'turning of the A.I.F.'s effort from destruction to construction'. St Christopher's chapel in Christ Church Cathedral, Newcastle, is his memorial, and a window of its Tyrrell chapel contains his portrait.
Australian Church Congress, Official Report (Melb, 1925)
W. H. Johnson, The Right Reverend George Merrick Long (Morpeth, NSW, 1930)
C. E. W. Bean, The A.I.F. in France, 1918 (Syd, 1937)
Melbourne University Magazine, July 1920
Sydney Diocesan Magazine, 1 Aug 1930
'Obituary', Times (London), 10 July 1930, p 16
Church Times (London), 11 July 1930
Australian Church Review, 17, 31 July 1930
Church Standard, 18 July 1930.
Long, George Merrick
Ruth Teale, 'Long, George Merrick (1874–1930)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/long-george-merrick-610/text12505, published first in hardcopy 1986, accessed online 16 January 2021.
This article was first published in hardcopy in Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 10, (MUP), 1986
View the front pages for Volume 10
Carisbrook, Victoria, Australia
London, Middlesex, England
Religious Influence
Anglican bishop
Anglican minister
army chaplain
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1669
|
__label__wiki
| 0.852354
| 0.852354
|
https://apnews.com/article/41ca6bb537134b8581243b650e2be480
Justices seem ready to OK asking citizenship on census
By MARK SHERMANApril 23, 2019 GMT
Immigration activists rally outside the Supreme Court as the justices hear arguments over the Trump administration's plan to ask about citizenship on the 2020 census, in Washington, Tuesday, April 23, 2019. Critics say the citizenship question on the census will inhibit responses from immigrant-heavy communities that are worried the information will be used to target them for possible deportation. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Despite evidence that millions of Hispanics and immigrants could go uncounted, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority seemed ready Tuesday to uphold the Trump administration’s plan to inquire about U.S. citizenship on the 2020 census in a case that could affect American elections for the next decade.
There appeared to be a clear divide between the court’s liberal and conservative justices in arguments in a case that could affect how many seats states have in the House of Representatives and their share of federal dollars over the next 10 years. States with a large number of immigrants tend to vote Democratic.
Three lower courts have so far blocked the plan to ask every U.S. resident about citizenship in the census, finding that the question would discourage many immigrants from being counted . Two of the three judges also ruled that asking if people are citizens would violate the provision of the Constitution that calls for a count of the population, regardless of citizenship status, every 10 years. The last time the question was included on the census form sent to every American household was 1950.
Three conservative justices, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, had expressed skepticism about the challenge to the question in earlier stages of the case, but Chief Justice John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh had been silent, possibly suggesting a willingness to disrupt the administration’s plan.
However, over 80 minutes in a packed courtroom, neither Roberts nor Kavanaugh appeared to share the concern of the lower court judges who ruled against the administration.
Kavanaugh, the court’s newest member and an appointee of President Donald Trump, suggested Congress could change the law if it so concerned that the accuracy of the once-a-decade population count will suffer. “Why doesn’t Congress prohibit the asking of the citizenship question?” Kavanaugh asked near the end of the morning session.
Kavanaugh and the other conservatives were mostly silent when Solicitor General Noel Francisco, the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer, defended Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’ decision to add the citizenship question. Ross has said the Justice Department wanted the citizenship data, the detailed information it would produce on where eligible voters live, to improve enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.
Lower courts found that Ross’ explanation was a pretext for adding the question, noting that he had consulted early in his tenure with Stephen Bannon, Trump’s former top political adviser and immigration hardliner Kris Kobach, the former Kansas secretary of state.
The liberal justices peppered Francisco with questions about the administration plan, but they would lack the votes to stop it without support from at least one conservative justice.
“This is a solution in search of a problem,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court’s lone Hispanic member, said of Ross’ decision.
Justice Elena Kagan chimed in that “you can’t read this record without sensing that this need was a contrived one.”
Roberts appeared to have a different view of the information the citizenship question would produce.
“You think it wouldn’t help voting rights enforcement?” Roberts asked New York Solicitor General Barbara Underwood, who was representing states and cities that sued over Ross’ decision.
Underwood and American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Dale Ho said the evidence showed the data would be less accurate. Including a citizenship question would “harm the secretary’s stated purpose of Voting Rights Act enforcement,” Ho said.
Census Bureau experts have concluded that the census would produce a more accurate picture of the U.S. population without a citizenship question because people might be reluctant to say if they or others in their households are not citizens. Federal law requires people to complete the census accurately and fully.
The Supreme Court is hearing the case on a tight timeframe, even though no federal appeals court has yet to weigh in. A decision is expected by late June, in time to print census forms for the April 2020 population count.
The administration argues that the commerce secretary has wide discretion in designing the census questionnaire and that courts should not be second-guessing his action. States, cities and rights groups that sued over the issue don’t even have the right to go into federal court, the administration says. It also says the citizenship question is plainly constitutional because it has been asked on many past censuses and continues to be used on smaller, annual population surveys.
Gorsuch, also a Trump appointee, also noted that many other countries include citizenship questions on their censuses.
Douglas Letter, a lawyer representing the House of Representatives, said the census is critically important to the House, which apportions its seats among the states based on the results. “Anything that undermines the accuracy of the actual enumeration is immediately a problem,” Letter said, quoting from the provision of the Constitution that mandates a decennial census.
Letter also thanked the court on behalf of Speaker Nancy Pelosi for allowing the House to participate in the arguments.
“Tell her she’s welcome,” Roberts replied.
Associated Press writers Jessica Gresko and Darlene Superville contributed to this report.
Follow Mark Sherman on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/shermancourt
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1674
|
__label__wiki
| 0.613969
| 0.613969
|
ZUL-QARNAIN
We have seen in the previous section that the story of the iron gate of Gog and Magog belongs to the realm of fairy tales or the category of "Gone with the Wind" as shown in the "Romance of Alexander." We now turn to investigate more of the Qur'anic claims about Zul-Qarnain.
The Qur'an speaks about Zul-Qarnain as a historical figure. Who could this man be?
Yusuf Ali identifies Zul-Qarnain as Alexander the Great when he states:
"Personally, I have not the least doubt that Zul-Qarnain is meant to be Alexander the Great, the historic Alexander, and not the legendary Alexander..."[1]
Razi explores three possibilities as to who is Zul-Qarnain. In spite of some difficulties he prefers to identify Zul-Qarnain as Alexander the Great.[2]
We agree with Yusuf Ali's statement, but here again the Qur'anic claims about Alexander the Great do not fit the historical facts.
ALEXANDER WAS NOT EVEN A BELIEVER
The language of the Qur'an about Zul-Qarnain or Alexander the Great leaves us with the impression that Alexander the Great was a true believer. He talks like a believer and behaves like a believer. He even talks as if he was a prophet.
He said: "This is a mercy from my Lord: But when the promise of my Lord comes to pass, He will make it into dust. And the promise of my Lord is true. (Q. 18:98, Yusuf Ali's translation)
From the above we understand that Zul-Qarnain or Alexander the Great received a promise from God concerning this barrier that he personally built. This promise was not given hundreds of years before the building of the barrier. This promise was a personal message to Alexander the Great there and then.
Furthermore we are told in Q. 18:86 that God spoke to him directly. Razi observed that "God spoke to Zul-Qarnain without intermediary, and that proves that he was a prophet".[3]
Until when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water. Near it he found a People. We said: "O Zul-Qarnain! (Thou hast authority,) either to punish them or to treat hem with kindness." (Q. 18:86)
But was Alexander the Great a prophet, or even a believer?
Alexander the Great, contrary to the impression given by the Qur'an, was an infidel par excellence.
"At Memphis Alexander sacrificed to Apis (one of the Egyptian idols) and was crowned with the traditional double crown of the Pharaohs; the native priests were placated and their religion encouraged."[4] "Alexander consulted the god (Ammon) on the success of his expedition."[5] And "On the Hyphasis Alexander erected 12 alters to the 12 Olympian gods."[6]
In Egypt he was received as the son of Ammon[6] (one of the Egyptian gods). This god is represented by a ram, with two prominent horns of course, and hence Alexander's name in the Qur'an Zul-Qarnain meaning the two horned one.
Furthermore, "He seems to have become convinced of the reality of his own divinity and to have required its acceptance by others ... The cities perforce complied, but often ironically: the Spartan decree read, 'Since Alexander wishes to be a god, let him be a god."[8]
Alexander was far from being even a believer.
Where did the Qur'an then get the idea that Alexander the great was a prophet? It came from the legend concerning Alexander.
The Jews made Alexander a believer and favoured by God so much that "God parted the waters of the Pamphylian sea so that Alexander's troops might pass in pursuit of the Persians."[9]
Like wise the Christians made him a saint. Here is a sample of Alexander's prayer:
And king Alexander bowed himself and did reverence, saying, "O God, Lord of kings and judges, thou who settest up kings and destroyest their power, I know in my mind that thou hast exalted me above all kings, and thou hast made me horns upon my head, wherewith I might thrust down the kingdoms of the world; give me power from thy holy heavens ... I will magnify thy name, O Lord, forever ... and I will write the name of God in the charter of my kingdom, that there may be for Thee a memorial always. And if the Messiah, who is the Son of God, comes in my days, I and my troops will worship Him..."[10]
According to the Qur'an and the legends Alexander was a believer, but not according to history.
DID ALEXANDER GO WEST?
The Qur'an claims that Alexander travelled west.
They will question thee concerning Dhool Karnain. Say: 'I will recite to you a mention of him.' We established him in the land, and We gave him a way to everything and he followed a way until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and he found nearby a people." (Q. 18:83-86, Arberry)
However, Alexander never went west as the Qur'an claims. He travelled east and south (to Ammon and Memphis in Egypt).
HOW FAR DID ALEXANDER GO EASTWARD?
The Qur'an claims that Alexander travelled to the far east.
Then he followed a way until, when he reached the rising of the sun, he found it rising upon a people for whom We had not appointed any veil to shade them from it. (Q. 18:89-90, Arberry)
Ibn Kathir understood from the Qur'anic passages that Zul-Qarnain travelled the whole length and breadth of the earth. And Razi said that "he reached the closest place to the rising of the sun". But how far east did Alexander the Great travel?
When reaching "the Hyphasis [west of India] his (Alexander's) army mutinied, refusing to go further in the tropical rain; they were weary in body and spirit, and Coenus, one of Alexander's four chief marshals, acted as their spokesman. On finding the army adamant, Alexander agreed to turn back."[11]
Contrary to the claims of the Qur'an Alexander the Great was not a believer he did not travel west and he did not go to the far east.
Even though the classical Muslim scholars are very unanimous on the identity of Zul-Qarnain, after looking at the above presented historical problems, it is no surprise that some contemporary Muslims deny that Zul-Qarnain is Alexander the Great.
They say the Qur'an does not mention Alexander the Great in sura 18, but it mentions Zul-Qarnain.
Is there evidence that the person mentioned as Zul-Qarnain is Alexander the Great?
In the Qur'an 18:83 we read: "They will ask thee of Zul-Qarnain. Say: I shall recite unto you a rememberance of him."
Who did ask Mohammad a question about Zul-Qarnain? Ibn Kathir informs us that the unbelievers of Mecca sent to the People of the Book asking them what questions they could pose to Mohammad in order that they might test him. The people of the book said: Ask him about Zul-Qarnain, some youth whom he did not know what they did, and the Spirit.[12]
What was the form of the question suggested by the People of the Book and posed to Muhammad by the Meccan unbelievers?
If they had come to Mohammad, asked him about Alexander the son of Phillip, and he replied by mentioning Zul-Qarnain, then we have no argument with our Muslim friends. According to this form of the question Zul-Qarnain is Alexander the Great.
The other alternative is that the Meccans asked Mohammad about someone called Zul-Qarnain. And in reply he recited, "They will ask thee of Zul-Qarnain ..." It is the People of the Book then who were the source of the question about Zul-Qarnain and Mohammad responded with information about the SAME person. So the name Zul-Qarnain was mentioned by the People of the Book before Mohammed provided the answer that mentioned Zul-Qarnain.
The question then becomes: What did the People of the Book mean when they told the Meccan unbelievers what to ask Mohammad, not what did the Qur'an mean when it mentioned Zul-Qarnain.
Someone was known to the People of the Book as Zul-Qarnain before the Qur'an made a mention of him. And Mohammad in his reply to the question was talking about the same person. Who was that person? The answer is not from speculating what the Qur'an might have meant by Zul-Qarnain, but what did the People of the Book mean by Zul-Qarnain. For the title Zul-Qarnain came from the lips of the People of the Book before it came from the lips of Mohammad. In other words, the meaning of the title Zul-Qarnain is not to be found in the Qur'an but in the sources that were available to the People of the Book who were the contemporaries of Mohammad. The documented historical evidence tells us that the title Zul-Qarnain was exclusively the legendary title for Alexander the Great.
In "The Christian Legend Concerning Alexander", we find that Alexander said in one of his prayers, "O God ... Thou hast made me horns upon my heads".[13] And the translator adds in a footnote that in the Ethiopic version of this legend "Alexander is always referred to as 'the two horned'"[14] It was from this Ethiopic version or a similar one that the People of the Book knew the title Zul-Qarnain. THE PEOPLE OF THE BOOK DID NOT INVENT THE TITLE ZUL-QARNAIN.
The title "the two horned" i.e. Zul-Qarnain was a legendary title first. It was passed to the People of the Book from the legends second. It was put into a question to Mohammad third. And it was mentioned in Mohammad's answer fourth. What the Qur'an meant by Zul-Qarnain, is what the People of the Book meant by Zul-Qarnain when posing their question.
Please remember that the People of the Book used that title first in the question they gave the Meccans to test Mohammad. That proves that this title is pre-Quranic. And the only source for the title "Zul-Qarnain" is found in the legends about Alexander the Great. It is true that others were described as animals with two horns, but not a human with two horns and then only in a vision as symbol of their power, not as reality and history as in the case of Alexander the Great. No one else in history was called Zul-Qarnain except Alexander the Great. Not only was the name Zul-Qarnain only applied to Alexander the Great but the description of the Qur'an fits the legends about him too, as we shall see later.
1. The Holy Qur'an, Translation and Commentary by Yusuf Ali, Appendix 7, page 763 (1983)
2. Razi, at-Tafsir al-Kabir, commenting on Q. 18:83-98.
3. Razi, at-Tafsir al-Kabir, commenting on Q. 18:86.
4. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Alexander III, 1971.
9. The Medieval Alexander, George Cart, Cambridge at the university press, 1956, p.126.
10. "A Christian Legend Concerning Alexander", in The History of Alexander the Great Being the Syriac Version of the Pseudo-Callisthenes. Translated by E.A. W. Budge, 1889, p.146.
11. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Alexander III, 1971.
12. Ibn Kathir commenting on Q. 18:83.
Books and articles by P. Newton
Answering Islam Home Page
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1680
|
__label__wiki
| 0.695645
| 0.695645
|
James Duane: The Irish American Who Rebuilt New York
March 30, 2020 By Mike McCormack
During the American Revolution, New York was totally destroyed and was rebuilt by the son of an immigrant from Co. Galway, Ireland. He was the first post-colonial person to wear the title ‘Mayor of New York’ and his name was James Duane. He was born in New York, then called the Province of New York, to Irish immigrant parents on February 6, 1733; a time when the Central Park was considered ‘upstate’ and a wilderness. He grew up with an interest in finance, real estate and the law and was called to the Bar in 1754. He earned a reputation for being a bit of a maverick, taking … [Read more...] about James Duane: The Irish American Who Rebuilt New York
Patrick Sarsfield Gilmore, America’s First Superstar
A TV documentary on the St. Louis World Fair mentions how John Philip Sousa and his band dominated the entertainment, which included a young John McCormack singing at the Irish Pavilion. It brought to mind a forgotten era when American superstars were not individuals with a current hit record, but band leaders – people with the ability to not only play, but compose, arrange, and lead a musical organization. And, in the beginning, America’s first superstars were the leaders of America’s first bands – her marching Brass Bands and though Sousa was certainly one of them, he was not the … [Read more...] about Patrick Sarsfield Gilmore, America’s First Superstar
Archbishop “Dagger John” Hughes
John Joseph Hughes was born on 24 June 1797 in Annaloghan, Co. Tyrone, to a poor farmer. As a Catholic in English-ruled Ireland, he couldn’t even receive a Catholic education. When John was 15, his younger sister, Mary, died and British law barred a Catholic priest from presiding at her burial; the best he could do was to scoop up a handful of dirt, bless it, and hand it to John to sprinkle on her grave. Hughes never forgot that and dreamed of ‘a country in which no stigma of inferiority would be impressed on my brow, simply because I professed one creed or another.’ Fleeing poverty and … [Read more...] about Archbishop “Dagger John” Hughes
Irish American Heritage Month: Patrick Gallagher, USMC
March 23, 2020 By Neil Cosgrove
Patrick Gallagher was born in Derrintogher, County Mayo, Ireland, on February 2, 1944. At the age of eighteen, like so many you Irish men and women before him, Patrick immigrated to the United States and the promise of a new life filled with opportunity. He quickly started on the immigrant dream: studying law while working in real estate, even getting involved in local politics as a campaign worker for Senator Robert Kennedy. In 1966, Patrick was drafted for service in Viet Nam. Despite pleas from a heartsick sister living in the states to avoid the horrors of war by merely returning to … [Read more...] about Irish American Heritage Month: Patrick Gallagher, USMC
The Irish Ferries That Turned The Tide At Trenton
A number of Irishmen were key to Washington’s success in crossing the Delaware River to take Trenton. Among them were two immigrants: Paddy Colvin and Sam McConkey, who ran two river ferries. In 1885, Rev A. Lambing wrote: when reading one of the Trenton papers, I saw the simple statement that the American forces under General Washington crossed the Delaware at Patrick Colvin's ferry into Pennsylvania. Struck by his name, which at once denoted his nationality, I resolved to know more about him. He did, and he found that Patrick Colvin of Co. Cavan, Ireland bought a ferry and land … [Read more...] about The Irish Ferries That Turned The Tide At Trenton
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1681
|
__label__cc
| 0.720599
| 0.279401
|
Apac in the World
Apac District :: Home of the Langi :: Northern Uganda :: Africa
Re-vamping Apac in the World
July 15, 2011 by Line E. Gissel
After many months of hibernation, this blog is now ready to face the world again. If you live in Apac and you like writing, and would like to reflect publicly about all things Apac, Langi or Ugandan, why not become a writer for the blog???
Just write an email to apac.blog@gmail.com, and we will fashion you with a username so you can become a contributor to the blog.
With many good wishes,
Posted in People, Uganda | Leave a Comment »
On local power politics: messy, shady and more or less unchecked
May 22, 2009 by Line E. Gissel
Back stabbing. Character assassinations. Plots to undermine fellow elected politicians or fellow civil servants. And, crucially, thinking 20 steps ahead. These are the ingredients of Apac Politics. This district in Uganda, where 0.2 per cent of the households have access to electricity and 0.1 per cent of the adult population holds a diploma or a degree, provides ample study for a contemporary Macchiavelli, while Kasparov could learn a thing or two from those at the epicentre of the eternal conflicts.
The district council is comprised of councillors from (the governing) NRM party and, overwhelmingly, (the opposition party) UPC. (Some say this explains the total lack of interest in the district by the central government.) The executive committee is headed by District Chairman, Hon. Nicholas Opio Bunga, a retired teacher. He selected his fellow resident of Inomo sub-division as his Vice-Chairman. His council includes two councillors who have stood out in the past year: Apac’s very own ‘Jack the Zipper’, Hon. Malakwang, who attacked two women with a scissor for wearing trousers (see previous blog posts), and the councillor for Ibuje, who smashed the glass front of the district notice board because his private construction firm failed to secure a public contract. Neither culprit was disciplined by the Hon. Chairman, ‘father of the district’. These are the least of the council’s antics.
A month ago, staff at Apac Hospital went on strike. Peaceful collective action in Uganda is rarer than Hummers on the streets of Kampala, so eyebrows were raised. Doctors, nurses and assistants protested the ‘disappearance’ of their 30 per cent salary top-up, paid by the WHO, and designed to combat the rampant desertion of essential health workers from northern Uganda. According to the council executive, the money had appeared on an account, but nobody had ‘remembered’ what the money was for, and so had been ‘disappeared’. (The district receives 27 billion shillings annually from the central government, and so should be used to keeping track of bank statements…). It is widely believed – and not disproved – that the money was ‘eaten’, ‘privatised’. Neither the Chief Finance Officer, nor the Secretary for Finance or the Chairman offered to explain the matter. Nobody offered to pay back. In the end, the top-ups were partly paid.
Who checks the checkers? The powers and excesses of the district civil service are, in theory, checked by the council. But what happens when councillors have an interest in not checking key civil servants? The answer, according to the democracy school, is for the population to register their dismay through the ballot or by revoking the powers of their representatives. Both are provided for in the Ugandan constitution. But before the population can act, they need to know about the abuses of power. In this sense, knowledge is power. The police and the inspectorate of government can of course investigate on the basis of suspicion, but rarely do; the radio can broadcast any events and discoveries, but is owned by a sub-county politician; and the civil society can demand for accountability. All these actors are either under-capacitated or compromised, and often both.
The Chief Finance Officer answers to the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), the head of the district civil service. But in a coincidence of perfect timing, Apac has been without a CAO for the past months. The Deputy CAO – upon the refusal by the CAO of another district (Kotido district) to accept his transfer to Apac! – was appointed as Acting CAO by the Ministry of Local Government. But the executive committee of the council wrote to the Ministry to oppose this appointment and the Ministry has hesitated to identify the head of the civil service, the implementing arm of the local government.
In Uganda, every district has a Resident District Commissioner, whose responsibility is to monitor the implementation of central and local government services. In Apac, the RDC had to step in to sort out the hospital crisis. As he reports directly to the President of the country, and in the absence of an angry electorate, he was one of the only people with sufficient powers to put pressure on the council and the civil service to find the missing resources so the hospital could call off the strike.
In this patriarchal and old-fashioned society, the scapegoat of the hospital strike has been a young doctor, one of only two doctors (the hospital is nominated to have seven). Since the collective action took place, he has been at the receiving end of intimidation and character assassination. Perhaps the voters will register their disappointment with the district leaders. Until then, old men in positions of power and authority have a great time doing entirely as they please.
Posted in Conflict, Politics | Tagged corruption, local politics, the democracy school | 3 Comments »
…And word has it that George Bush is also around…
March 3, 2009 by Line E. Gissel
Apparently – and this is difficult to understand – the warlord Joseph Kony, leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army, the rebel movement which is killing thousands of civillians in the DR Congo and South Sudan and have turned his war against President Museveni into a regional conflict, has a son… called George Bush! Perhaps Kony named his offspring in honour of a fellow strongman whose name he heard all the time on his satellite radio in Garamba Forest. Or, he felt inspired by the fact that his rebel army was listed on the list of terrorist movements globally, which George W. Bush initiated. Or, he shares the Acholi love for grand history-making names, as described below. Or? You tell me.
Posted in Conflict, People | Tagged Globalisation, LRA | Leave a Comment »
Meet Livingstone, Chairman Mao, Mus(s)olini and Ronald Reagan
February 23, 2009 by Line E. Gissel
Ugandans have an affinity for grand names, whether of the famous or the infamous kind. High-profile members of the public are Livingstone Okello Okello, a Member of Parliament (Chua County/Kitgum District), Chairman Mao, the chairperson of Gulu District, Ethan Musolini, a motivational speaker and CEO of Success Africa, and Ronald Reagan Ukumo, also Member of Parliament (Aswa County/Gulu District). Imagine that Mao has a meeting with Reagan and Livingstone in Parliament, it must happen quite often as they are all three Acholi political leaders, Mao at the district level and Reagan and Livingstone at the national levels. Or that Musolini gives business tips to Mao…!
We are sure to see a lot of Barack and Michelle coming up soon. The other day I met a man, who had just become a father for the first time. His daughter was to be Sasha, after Obama’s second-born.
Other things are already named Obama. Across the country there are numerous Obama Supermarkets and Obama Hotels. And Apac has its own Obama Mudslide on the daily Apac-Kampala bus:
The new mudslide on the Felista bus that ferries people between Apac and Kampala
Posted in People, Politics, Uganda | Tagged Globalisation | 3 Comments »
20 days of ‘Lightening Thunder’ against the LRA and over 400 civilians killed in retaliation: What will 2009 bring?
January 5, 2009 by Line E. Gissel
The Juba Peace Talks look unmistakenly failed. The past 20 days the government has renewed its military offensive against the Lord’s Resistance Army, together – it claims – with the Congolese and South Sudanese military. According to the government, the attacks were aimed at forcing Kony back to the negotiating table, after having failed to sign the peace agreement five times. Well, Operation Lightening Thunder did not compel Kony back to the Peace Talks; I am not sure anyone believed they ever would.
The UPDF, the national army, have hit various LRA camps in the heavily forested Garamba National Park in north eastern DR Congo, but somehow Joseph Kony and his fellow insurgents seem to leave these camps in good time. Rather than divine intervention, it is, of course, likely that the LRA is assisted by a source of insider information about any forthcoming attacks. The UPDF says today that they have killed 13 insurgents in total. The media has not been allowed access to the sites, so there has been no independent verification of events.
Independently verified has, however, been LRA’s retaliatory attacks on civilians. Which is probably the most worrying aspect of the renewed war between the Government of Uganda and the Lord’s Resistance Army. The latter has attacked a number of villages in South Sudan, DR Congo and in the area bordering the Central African Republic; last week 45 people were massacred in a church 10 kms from the town of Doruma in DRC.
It is difficult to get a clear overview of the figures involved. Aid agencies estimate that over 400 civilians have been killed, Caritas quotes a figure of 486. The tabloid paper The Red Pepper reported that 65,000 people have been internally displaced since the attacks began almost three weeks ago.
On Friday morning they attacked trucks in Tori and Yei, South Sudan; and Friday night they were back in the forest, attacking the chief station of the Garamba park rangers. The Red Pepper claimed to know that they were heading south towards Uganda.
People in Apac remember the fact that the LRA, after the government’s Operation Iron Fist against its bases in Sudan in 2002, re-invaded parts of Northern Uganda and came as far south as Lira, Apac and Soroti! Their reach of these districts signalled their strength: Lira, Apac and Soroti are hundreds of kilometres from the Sudanese border; the most southers of these three districts, Apac is situated almost in the middle of Uganda!
If they could do that in 2002, the question remains, will they be able to again? Access to information – independently verified – seems as important as ever: In this region, where governments certainly appear to be unable to protect their own citizens, information is the most important means of protection.
The fact that part of the LRA consists of abductees makes the issue exceedingly complex. Over the past two decades, the Ugandan and South Sudanese governments failed to protect their villages and to prevent the abduction of children and young people; now these same governments want to kill the LRA insurgents, including the victims-turned-soldiers whose abduction they failed to prevent in the first place. But if they do not attack – and eradicate – the LRA, the government claims, there never will be peace in Northern Uganda.
Right now, people who happen to live at the intersection of the Central African Republic, South Sudan and north eastern DR Congo seem to be most at risk. It is a tragedy that these are three failed states. Although the prolonged existence of the LRA has always has regional aspects – funded by Sudan to destabilise Uganda – it now has become a regional destabilising force as it finds its victims at the margins of three – or four?- basket cases of African Governance.
Only the gods will know what 2009 has in store for this region…
Posted in Conflict, Politics, Uganda | Tagged access to information, LRA | 1 Comment »
Uganda on Obama: Through the lens of ethnicity and post-colonial political trauma, Obama’s ascent to power signals a Luo revival to be celebrated or feared…
November 11, 2008 by Line E. Gissel
In Apac and with few exceptions, male surnames begin with O and those of females begin with A. The names are Luo. The word, Lwo, has entered the vocabulary of many non-Africans in 2008. The year began with ‘ethnic riots’ between the Luo and the Kikuyu of Kenya, and ended with a certain Barack Obama, partly of Lwo lineage, winning the US elections.
In the immigrant country of the USA, it is virtually impossible to judging a person based on her surname. Is a Rice white or black, poor or rich? But in Uganda, the ethnic make-up of somebody is instantly determined on the basis of his surname: Anyone with an O-name is from a northern tribe, those with K-names are likely to be Baganda, and those with M, N, T-names are probably from western Uganda. The political history of colonial and post-colonial Uganda has contributed to the charged nature of surnames beginning with O, Luo names.
The British recruited Luos and other northern tribes into the army, and favoured the southern tribes with the education system and the civil service. The country’s first president (1966-70), Milton Obote, was a Langi from Apac, whose politics alienated many non-Luo people, particularly the Baganda. When Idi Amin took control of the state (1971-79), he eliminated many Luos in the army, to prevent a come-back for Obote. Obote did come back (1980-85), but was toppled by Tito Okello, who lost (or ceded, depending on your persuasion) power to Yoweri Museveni who remains president to this day. His rule has been challenged twice in insurgencies by Luo militants, led by Alice ‘Lakwena’ Auma and Joseph Kony. The willingness of Luos of different tribes to mobilise behind Obote, Okello, Auma and Kony has given rise to the perception that these tribes are inherently militaristic, easy to mobilise, fearless, strong and – dangerous…
The New Vision newspaper reported today that Ugandan MPs had celebrated the election of Obama: “Conspicuously, names of most MPs in attendance, started with the letter O. From opposition leader Ogenga Latigo, [to] Odonga Otto, Okupa Alijah, Otafiire Kahinda, they were all there. Others adopted the letter O, to suit the occasion. Deputy speaker Rebecca Kadaga became ‘O’daga, Igeme Nabeeta became ‘O’beta.”
It appears that there is such thing as the ‘Lwo factor’ in Ugandan politics; and in the political sphere, perceptions matter. Here in Apac, many feel that the national army could have eliminated the Lords’ Resistance Army if it had wanted to; and furthermore that it served the government to keep the Luo in check by its ‘own’ insurgency. (The counter-claim is that the LRA received financial support from Luo abroad.) Exiled Lwo Olara Otunno claimed in 2006 that the IDP camps in northern Uganda were so badly protected and serviced, that they aimed to eliminate the 1.5 million camp dwellers. President Museveni was among the first three heads of state to congratulate Mwai Kibaki upon winning the (disputed) Kenyan elections, defeating the Lwo opponent, Raila Odinga. And when the media earlier this year focused on the regional distribution of high-level state jobs, it emerged that ‘northerners’ occupy seven per cent of positions of power in the state despite constituting 19 per cent of the population of Uganda.
This narrative of deliberate marginalisation or silent persecution is alive today, in the north. Such feelings are often felt most strongly, and articulated most frequently, by those in the diaspora. Yesterday, a letter from Canada to the editor of New Vision, thus argued that “Over the years if you were of Luo background in Uganda and Kenya you were likely to face this silent hatred, cynicism and even ridicule because of your Luoness. After the overthrow of Obote I, some people had to change their Luo names to make them look non-Luo. For example from Okobel the name was changed to Kobel to remove the ‘O’ to protect such a person from easy identification… In East Africa, the election of Barack Obama brings home a revolution to not only all citizens, but particularly to those who are Luo who had felt despised for no apparent reason, except that they are Luo. Barack Obama’s election should be significant and therapeutic to all, especially the Luo in Uganda and Kenya who had been suffering from the trauma of being invisible and isolated.”
Obama’s ascendancy brings hope, to some, of a Luo revival. While the election of Obama was made possible by a sense of nationhood in the US, in East Africa the event is interpreted through the lens of ethnic or tribal differences.
Posted in Globalisation, People, Politics, Uganda | Tagged Globalisation, Luo | Leave a Comment »
On ‘fake accountability’
October 17, 2008 by Line E. Gissel
You would think that the phrase ‘fake accountability’ was an oxymoron: how can something provide accountability and then fake it at the same time? Well, it is very well-known concept here in Apac. In fact, I was yesterday asked to contribute to it! Fake accountability is when accountability is doctored, made up. It is mainy ‘paper accountability’ – receipts, attendance lists, quotations – that are falsely made up; ‘physical accountability’ is more difficult to doctor as it concerns real things on the ground: whether the contract is performed, whether the purchased item physically exists, whether something is available?
Yesterday I attended a dialogue meeting organised by an NGO. It was a fruitful exchange of ideas (and blame) between CSOs and Lower Local Government officials, both elected and appointed, with the aim of ensuring that Apac district will perform well in the up-coming Local Government Assessment. Every year, Apac fails the assessment, and thereby loses 20 per cent funding from the Ministry of Local Government. Which means 20 per cent less spending on public services. The underlying reason for this constant struggle to pass the assessment’s minimum criteria is the nature of governance in Apac.
Following the end of the Cold War, and particularly the way in which it ended, the donor community and Western governments thought it wise to democratise Africa from below: the invested heavily in a civil society, which was supposed to keep the state in check. As the civil society thereby stands conceptually opposite the state, it is often supposed to be substantially opposite too – but, it is not… Often, the civil society mirrors the public sector, perhaps because the underlying reasons for public conduct are societal.
Yesterday, as I signed the attendance list for the dialogue meeting – a list that would constitute part of the evidence that the event actually took place – I was handed another attendance list. That of another meeting, which never had and never would take place. But for which money was already spent. The list would be presented to the donors as proof of expenditure on transport refunds, lunch and sitting allowances for the participants. Four people had already signed the document, with or without noticing the discrepancy in meeting titles.
The list was never circulated further, and the first sheet was thrown away. Wisely or unwisely. You see, the organiser of the fictitious event is a relatively powerful person in Apac. Paradoxically, the meeting was themed good governance in the civil society sector.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged corruption, workshops | Leave a Comment »
The million-dollar question is whether ownership of a development process can be transferred
October 1, 2008 by Line E. Gissel
The no. 1 ingredient that almost all donor-recipient relationships contain is the need for the recipient to feel a sense of ownership. Ownership of the project or programme. Of the development process or initiative. Of a change process which has only become possible because of a factor from without: the idea, the rationale, the money, the equipment.
The million-dollar question is: it is possible? It is possible to define the (often narrow) parameters of funding, select the recipients, fund the programme – and at the same time transfer ownership of the objectives, activities and entire process to the recipients?
Ownership means that the (local) recipients own the project and determine a range of factors, from recruitment of project employees to budget allocations. It assumes that you take better care of things you own, that you become more dedicated because you own it.
But the donor often needs to satisfy her own donors, whether governments, larger organisations or the general public in the West, and therefore does not feel that she can let everything be determined by the (new) owners. Because, what if the recipients take decisions with which the donor disagrees? Should the latter step in and ‘remind’ the recipients of the ‘right’ path, the objectives of the partnership, or should she stick it out, risking that the project takes on unforeseen or undesirable dimensions, becomes subject to non-liberal local dynamics, or is used for private rather than public gains? If the answer lies somewhere in between these two options, the question remains whether a path between donor control and local ownership exists at all. And, if so, which amount of donor control would disable the sense of ownership?
The jury is still out, I’m afraid.
Today is International Day of Democracy.
September 15, 2008 by Line E. Gissel
This morning, the radio read a statement which highlighted Democracy Day, a recent addition to the long list of international days. In 2007 the UN Generally Assembly apparently adopted the day, defining democracy as a
“universal value based on the freely-expressed will of people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems, and their full participation in all aspects of life.”
The statement was translated into Lwo by the newsreaders, who were apparently struggling with the vernacular terms for some of these words. The influx of new concepts from without seem to have taken place too quickly for leb Lango (the tongue of the Lango) to adopt. So the news piece was about elections, a small part of the wider notion of democracy, rather than about an opening up of the political space and the participation of citizens in local decision-making. These things happen. The word for Treasurer in Lango, for instance, translates into ‘keeper of the money’… a rather misleading term, particularly when one considers the fact that there is so much corruption here.
Across the globe, meanwhile, American keepers of the money either filed for bankruptcy or flagged their warning signs. But the global village was not so global as for this news to travel all the way to Apac where life went on as usual, and people called the radio with comments and lamentation. It shall be interesting to see if the shocks of a global financial crisis are felt here in this seemingly isolated part of the world.
Posted in People | Leave a Comment »
To workshop or not to workshop: the political economy of the civil society sector
August 3, 2008 by Line E. Gissel
Is it because Uganda has been a donor darling since the early 1990s? Or because the civil society is marked by poverty of ideas? Or perhaps because everybody wants development and nobody wants change (see previous post).
Whatever the reason, the civil society sector in Uganda can be summarised by one word: workshopping. Or ‘workshop hopping’. Civil society activists hop from workshop to workshop, at their regional capitals or, mostly, in Kampala:
To be consulted on a particular issue, such as the new NGO Amendment Bill or the indictment of the LRA leadership by the International Criminal Court. To be sensitised on a value that is deemed important, such as rights-based approaches to development or gender equality. To discuss issues that confront their own sector, such as NGO accountability. To have their capacity built in, say, decentralisation policies or stakeholder analysis methodologies. To be briefed about a new funding opportunity such as an EU development programme. To engage with the local or central government in ‘dialogue meetings’.
This culture of workshopping has generated three challenges:
The need to translate workshop knowledge and ideas into real work, at desks and in fields across the country.
The need to follow up the resolutions and ways forward generated at the workshops; to see how far things go once the participants leave the hotels, conference centres and community halls.
The need to de-monetarise knowledge and skills. At the moment, workshop participants get, expect and rely on transport refunds, per diems, out-of-pocket facilitation, allowances for accommodation and dinner… you name it.
The other day, a Head of Department at the Apac District administration lamented that his department cannot get community members to attend his meetings, sensitisations and workshops because he does not have a budget for the various forms of ‘facilitation’ which they expect. Farmers leave the meeting on, say, new farming technologies or value addition once they hear that there will be ‘no facilitation’ such as a transport refund or an allowance. It is a real problem.
During most workshops, the first session will concern ‘Expectations and Fears’. It is common to hear participants list ‘transport refund’ as an expectation and ‘not enough facilitation’ as a fear, after which the workshop organisers will have to explain which levels of ‘facilitation’ their budget allows.
One day, I gave a lift to Kampala to four workshop participants. We reached the conference centre earlier than planned; the invitation had just told up-country participants to register in the evening, so as to be ready for the morning session on the following day. They complained that the workshop organisers probably only had booked dinner for them, and not lunch. That now they would have to meet the cost of the lunch themselves. Perhaps they forgot that if they had been in Apac, they would have had to buy lunch for themselves; or that my lift had saved them the transport cost, since they would get a transport refund at the end of the workshop.
Their thinking, it seems, indicate that in Uganda there exist a culture of workshopping, a particular set of seemingly self-evident practices and interpretations of life and the world. It is so central to the whole NGO set-up of this Equatorial country, that this blog will explore its many aspects over the coming months.
Posted in People | 1 Comment »
The Public in Apac…
"[F]or while the public realm may be great, it cannot be charming precisely because it is unable to harbor the irrelevant." - Hannah Arendt
Vegetables Currently at Apac Market
Cabbages, green leaves, green peppers, red onions, tomatoes. That's it.
Categories Select Category Africa (2) Conflict (4) Economics (5) Environment (5) Globalisation (2) Malaria (4) People (15) Politics (8) Uganda (8) Uncategorized (4)
iHaveNoTribe.com - I Am Kenyan
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1682
|
__label__wiki
| 0.638854
| 0.638854
|
Week 15 Knapp Smash Mouth Football Women in Sports Discussion Question | All Paper
+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
Week 15 Knapp Smash Mouth Football Women in Sports Discussion Question
by | May 12, 2020 | writing | 0 comments
Read Lecture: “Knapp Smash Mouth Football ‘ (attached below) Complete the discussion board question and reply back to one post. (attached below)
week_15_thursday_post.docx
journal_of_sport_and_social_issues_2012_knapp_smashmouthfootball.pdf
women_in_contact_sports.ppt
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Read Lecture: “Knapp Smash Mouth Football ‘ (attached below)
Complete the discussion board question and reply back to one post. (attached below)
Many contact sports, such as tackle football in the United States, are seen as some of
the last bastions of masculinity. These sports are often used to reproduce and venerate
hegemonic masculinity thus women have often been excluded from these sports. Yet,
as you learned in this week’s lecture and readings, girls and women do participate in
these sports and some do so at very high levels. What are some reasons that people
have used to keep girls/women out of sports like football? What draws some
girls/women to sports like football? What are some of the ideological barriers they face?
There are now a number of women coaching in the NFL (these women are former
athletes in women’s professional football leagues), what impact could this have on our
understanding of sport and gender in our society?
reply back to the following post:
Andre Avellaneda
Football is a very popular sport in the United States, typically played by men who tackle
and chase each other around a field in order to score points. Football being a very
rough, physical, and taxing sport on the body results in the belief that only men can play
football because they are better suited to handle this type of activity. This goes back to
the mindset that women are not capable to do more than whats expected of them
(cooking, cleaning, taking care of children). This type of discrimination actually inspires
and motivates women to prove men wrong and play football as well as other
controversial sports! Unfortunately, this does not go without criticism form the outside
world, these athletes may be told many disparaging words for playing a sport that is of a
“manly” nature. However, I believe we can learn from these women who are breaking
down the walls of gender discrimination and help educate the masses about gender
equality, especially in sports.
Journal of Sport
& Social Issues
http://jss.sagepub.com/
Smash Mouth Football: Identity Development and Maintenance on a
Women’s Tackle Football Team
Bobbi A. Knapp
Journal of Sport and Social Issues published online 26 December 2012
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://jss.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/12/21/0193723512468759
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Northeastern University’s Center for the Study of Sport in Society
Additional services and information for Journal of Sport & Social Issues can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://jss.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://jss.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
>> OnlineFirst Version of Record – Dec 26, 2012
Downloaded from jss.sagepub.com at SOUTHERN IL UNIV CARBONDALE on March 15, 2013
59Journal of Sport and Social IssuesKnapp
JSSXXX10.1177/01937235124687
Smash Mouth Football:
Identity Development and
Maintenance on a Women’s
Tackle Football Team
Journal of Sport and Social Issues
XX(X) 1–24
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
http://jss.sagepub.com
Bobbi A. Knapp, PhD1
Opportunities for women to participate on professional women’s football teams
have expanded over the past decade. Still the experiences of these players have
largely gone unnoticed by the general public in the United States and underanalyzed
by scholars. Using a feminist interactionist framework, this research examines how
women on a successful Midwestern football team developed and maintained their
identities as football players. The major themes that emerged from participant
observations and semistructured interviews include play the right way, recognize
uniqueness, and demand respect.
women’s football, identity development, gender, contact sports, coach–player relationship
There is little question that football holds a dominant place in American culture (Messner, 2002; Nelson, 1994; Oriard, 2001). Some scholars have suggested that football’s
rise in popularity is linked to fears of the increased feminization of American society
(Messner, 2002; Nelson, 1994). Indeed, lessons learned on the field are believed to
prepare players “for life within the ‘sex-gender system’” (Sabo & Panepinto, 1990,
p. 115). The assumption here, of course, is that the players are males. Yet, girls and
women have taken up the sport in numbers not seen before, and some suggest that their
Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Carbondale, IL, USA
Corresponding Author:
Bobbi A. Knapp, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Kinesiology, Southern Illinois University
Carbondale, 1075 S. Normal Avenue, Davies Hall Room 107, Mail Code 4310, Carbondale, IL 62901, USA
Email: bknapp@siu.edu
Journal of Sport and Social Issues XX(X)
involvement in sports that were once reserved for men provides us with an opportunity
to see gender roles as constructed (Nelson, 1994; Theberge, 1997).
As the history of women’s football is unearthed, information regarding women
playing on football teams in the early part of the twentieth century has been uncovered. Though originally limited, opportunities for girls and women to participate in the
game have expanded throughout the ensuing decades. There are girls such as Holley
Mangold who played on the offensive line for Alter High School outside of Dayton,
Ohio, who received interest from several smaller universities and, more recently,
Monique Howard who played right tackle for Detroit Pershing High School (Hannah,
2007; McCabe, 2011). Furthermore, Hnida (2006) played at the college level for
Colorado and New Mexico. Currently the two most prominent women’s professional
leagues, Women’s Football Alliance (WFA) and the Independent Women’s Football
League (IWFL), are home to 92 teams giving thousands of women the opportunity to
play tackle football.
Although more females are playing football, the sport remains a male preserve in
numbers, structure, and values. According to the National Federation of State High
School Association (2011), boys made up 99.87% of high school football participants
(1,108,441). The number of girls who played was 1,395 (0.12%; National Federation
of State High School Association, 2011). Furthermore, players such as Hnida remain
an exception at the collegiate level and no woman has suited up for a National Football
League (NFL) team, which remains the standard of football in the United States. Even
the organizational structure of the women’s professional leagues includes a majority
representation of males especially as coaches. As Coakley (2007) noted, structural
power is often integrated with ideological power thus it is likely that the current structure of women’s professional football would influence the characteristics and beliefs
that are valued in the sport. This article examined women’s experiences on one successful Midwest team. The research question this study sought to answer was: How
did the women formulate and maintain their identities as football players on a successful Midwestern women’s football team? Of central importance to this question were
the roles team membership and the head coach had in determining the boundaries for
the normative role of football player to be enacted.
Although there has been an increase in the opportunities for women to play football, little research is available about these players’ experiences on these teams. The
intent of the study was to examine the experience of a women’s professional football
team from a feminist interactionist perspective. I sat out to explore how the players on
the Thunder (the name of the team and all players are pseudonyms) formulated and
maintained their football identities on this team given their lack of previous experiences with organized football. This interpretive approach allowed me to focus on the
ways in which the women created meanings and identities out of their interactions
with each other, the coaching staff, and the larger society while the feminist framework encouraged a focus on power in the gender relations within and outside of football. The feminist framework was of particular significance given the key leadership
roles held by males. As football opportunities continue to grow for females in the
United States, this study provides an opportunity to better understand the ways
players’ identities are being constructed and maintained within a successful team
Identities: Construction and Confirmation
Research that develops out of an interpretive framework seeks to understand “the
meanings and realities of individuals within social settings” (Silk, Andrews, &
Mason, 2005, p. 7). Generally, such research examines the overlapping issues of
socialization and subcultures (Donnelly, 2002). In such, the socialization process is
seen as a key aspect of identity formation (Donnelly & Young, 1988). From this perspective, it is believed that people create meaning through social interaction (Beal,
2002). Thus, one’s understanding of one’s identities are constantly being constructed,
confirmed, and negotiated through our interactions with others and the world around us.
The symbolic interactionist approach places the focus on the formation and maintenance of identity through social interaction. Through the examination of everyday
interactions, an interpretive sociology attempts to understand individuals’ actions in
relation to societal norms of conduct (Mead, 1934). This suggests that people’s actions
are influenced by societal and subcultural expectations (Pike, 2005). As Birrell and
Donnelly (2004) noted, “Goffman characterizes interactions as theatrical performance
in which generally known “scripts” for action are enacted by participants who take
turns in their roles as actors and audiences” (p. 51). Donnelly and Young’s (1988)
research examined how people entering climbing and rugby subcultures enacted subculturally appropriate roles for designated audiences. The “neophyte” performed their
identities to both audiences of the larger society and of the subculture in which they
are attempting to become members. Donnelly and Young (1988) found that once “neophytes” became members of the subculture, they “ceased to consider outsiders as a
valued audience” (p. 224). Thus, as one becomes socialized into the subculture more
value is placed on the acceptance from others within the subculture.
Goffman’s work provides several sensitizing concepts to better understand the act
of socialization (Beal, 2002; Donnelly & Young, 1988). Goffman defined a team as a
group of individuals who assist in staging a routine. Goffman’s concept of team was
especially relevant to this study, as team membership had a profound influence on how
individual players came to identify as football players. In addition, each team has a
director or a person who is “given the right to direct and control the progress of the
dramatic action” (Goffman, 1959, p. 97). On sport teams, the director is most often
the coach, as was the case in this study. Sabo and Panepinto (1990) suggested that the
“coach–player relationship is the epicenter of football ritual” (p. 116). Throughout
their work examining football as ritual, Sabo and Panepinto (1990) noted the various
ways in which coaches get their players to conform. Some of the methods introduced
by Sabo and Panepinto (1990) that were examined in this study include the “manipulation of in-group/out-group tensions to insure conformity” (p. 119), “promises of grandeur” (p. 119), and ridicule (p. 119). Donnelly and Young (1988) referred to the final
stage of identity formation as acceptance/ostracism. This stage involves the “confirmation of the identity by established members of the subculture” (Donnelly & Young,
1988, p. 226).
In addition to the concepts of teams and directors, Goffman also noted that teams
often adopt a “party line” that represents the team. Through the research with this
team, it became apparent that the team’s “party line” was smash mouth football. The
directors and party lines help team members know what is expected of them in their
role as football players on this team. In Encounters, Goffman (1961) noted that a “role
consists of the activity the incumbent would engage in were he [sic] to act solely in
terms of the normative demands upon someone in his [sic] position” (p. 85). In this
case, to maintain “face” team members have to enact the proper role of a football
player. When players deviate from these expectations, they are seen as being “out of
face” (Goffman, 1963, p. 8) and often receive some sort of corrective action from the
director or other team members.
Team membership can have a profound impact on the development and maintenance of an athletic identity. In her research on women’s ice hockey, Theberge (1995)
noted that “one of the most significant features of sport participation involves the
experience of team membership” (p. 389). Theberge went on to examine the role of
team identity, and the contribution of the coach’s influence, on the athletes’ development as a team and as individual hockey players. She also noted that this shared player
identity helped to unify these women who were from diverse backgrounds. This was
also found in Jackson, Keiper, Brown, Brown, and Manuel’s (2002) research on firstyear Black and White intercollegiate athletes in which they determined that “White
and African American athletes’ sense of racial identity may be minimized or overshadowed by their athletic identity” (p. 159). These authors go on to state that coaches
will often downplay any intergroup differences in order to provide a united front for
the purpose of winning contests. This is further supported in Murrell and Gaertner’s
(1992) research on the benefits of a common group identity, which found that a strong
team identity may be an important component of team success. All of which is relevant to this study as it will be shown that to form, and even more so to maintain, one’s
identity as a football player on the Thunder team was to accept and to reproduce the
characteristics of the larger team identity that itself was mostly influenced by the head
coach. In addition, any race, ethnic, or class differences the players may have had were
downplayed for the overall success of this team. Furthermore, due to the high level of
success this team experienced, it is safe to say that all players who made the team
(passing both the physical tryout and the coaches’ interview) and stayed with the team
experienced extreme normative pressure for their individual football identities to take
on the same characteristics of the larger team identity.
In their 2005 study, Jones, Glintmeyer, and McKenzie used an interpretive biography method to explore the role of coach–athlete relationship in the development of
disordered eating in a former elite female swimmer. The study examined the sometimes problematic and oftentimes underanalyzed role of coach’s discourse in the
development of athlete identity. They note the “culture of conformity” that often exists
in such relationships in that the coach takes on the role of the “knowledge giver and
athletes as receivers who need that knowledge to better their performance” (Jones
et al., 2005, p. 378). They found that the coach’s discourse about losing weight to
become a better swimmer combined with other factors, such as societal expectations
of the slender female body, pushed the female athlete to develop disordered eating that
continued after her competitive days were finished. Their examination of the impact
of the coach on one athlete’s actions is of particular interest to this study as it was
found that the coach of the women’s football team took on a key director position,
influencing the way in which the women came to identify themselves as football
players.
In one of the few studies to examine women’s involvement in football, Migliaccio
and Berg (2007) explored the benefits and constraints women experienced in participation on two teams in Northern California. The benefit that stood out the most to the
women was the development of teamwork and a family-like environment that they
experienced. Additional benefits included meeting a diverse group of women and the
opportunity to experience the physicality of football, while the constraints examined
included injuries, demands on time, finances, and relationships, and the perceptions
held by the general public. Although the research provides an insightful exploration of
women’s experiences in football, the role of the coach(es) in influencing these experiences went unexamined.
In Knapp’s (2011) article on becoming a football player on a Midwest women’s
tackle football team, the influential role of the coach was first acknowledged. Knapp
(2011) explored the factors that influenced women’s decision to play football and how
they began to develop their identities as football players. This study examined the
initial stages of women’s involvement in football and found that women often got
involved in the game because they love football, want to be a part of history, and/or
because of the physical nature of the game, while their development of their football
identities was dependent on their abilities and personal characteristics, significant others and the influence of veteran players. It was within this final theme, influence of
veteran players, that the coach’s role in socializing players into football was most
noticeable as it was noted the coach often used veteran players as role models of
proper behavior for new players to follow. Through the inclusion of coach and player
narratives, one can see how influential the coach was in this initial developmental
stage in which the women became football players. This current study attempts to
build on this research by exploring the next phase of identity development on a women’s tackle football team and in doing so reinforces and expands on the influence of
the head coach in not only the development but also the maintenance of a football
identity. Indeed, the coach played a central role in the normative pressure athletes
experienced to conform their personal football identities to the characteristics of the
larger team identity, as formulated by the coaching staff.
Due to the nature of the research question—How did the women formulate and maintain their identities as football players on a successful Midwestern women’s football
team?—a feminist interactionist framework was used in collecting and analyzing the
data. An interactionist framework is concerned with the meanings and identities
people create through interactions (Blumer, 1969). Goffman’s concept of the team, as
a group of individuals who assist in staging a routine, was useful in providing a deeper
understanding of the meanings and identities that developed out of the Thunder players’ interactions. At the core of these interactions, and the team, was the head coach
who acted as the director (Goffman, 1959). Based upon his past experiences as a
player for a Big Ten football powerhouse and as a coa …
Purchase answer to see full
We offer the best custom paper writing services. We have done this question before, we can also do it for you.
Click on the “Place Your Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.
Policy Scenario #3 – Immigration and Social Justice
International Relation Progress Assignment
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1685
|
__label__wiki
| 0.550673
| 0.550673
|
Essays Database Essays Harriet Tubman Essay
Harriet Tubman Essay
Harriet Tubman Essay was an escaped slave. She helped so many of her black people that
she became known as "Moses of Her People." During the civil war she
served the union army as a nurse, spy, cook, and scout. She was also conductor
on the Underground Railroad. She was a very heroic woman.
Harriet Tubman was
born on plantation near Bucktown about 1820. She was one of eleven children of a
slave couple. At seven years old she was hired out to do housework and care for
white children on nearby farms. Later she became a field hand. When she was a
teenager she was struck on the head. As a result of the blow, she fell asleep a
few times a day for the rest of her life.
We will write a custom essay on Harriet Tubman specifically for you
Hard work toughened her, and before
she was 19 she was as strong as the men she worked with were. In Philadelphia,
Pa, and later in Cape May, NJ, Harriet Tubman worked as a maid in hotels and
clubs. By December 1850 she had saved up enough money to make the first of her
nineteen daring journeys back into the south. She went back the lead other
slaves out of bondage. In 1851 she returned for her husband to find that he had
remarried.
Harriet Tubman: Comptons Encyclopedia (http://comptonsv3.
web.aol.com) (2000)
Harriet Tubman: Hutchinson Encyclopedia (http://ukab.web.aol.com) (2000) Harriet
Tubman: Encarta Online Concise (http://www.
encarta.msn.com) (2000)
English Essays .
Harriet Tubman Essay 220 Words | 1 Pages
Harriet Tubman Essay Harriet Tubman was an escaped slave. She helped so many of her black people that she became known as Moses of Her People. During the civil war she served the union army as a nurse, spy, cook, and scout. She was also conductor on the Underground Railroad. She was a very heroic woman. Harriet Tubman was born on plantation near Bucktown about 1820. She was one of eleven children of a slave couple. At seven years old she was hired out to do housework and care for white children on nearby farms. Later she became a field...
Harriet Tubman Essay Harriet Tubman was born 1821 in Dorchester county. She was one of eleven children, and her parents were slaves. At the age of seven she was hired to do housework and to take care of white children on nearby farms. In 1944 she married John Tubman, a free black. In 1949 she escaped to the north to freedom by following the north star. Before the outbreak of the American civil war in 1861 she made 19 journeys back to lead other slaves and her parents to freedom along the clandestine route known as the Underground Railroad to...
Many slaves tried to escape from the South to the freedom that awaited them in the North. One woman who made it to the North, however, repeatedly risked her precious freedom and returned to the South to smuggle out hundreds of slaves. To rid themselves of this thorn in their sides, the slave owners offered a huge reward--forty thousand dollars for her capture! But they never captured HARRIET TUBMAN Essay. Harriet Tubman was born into slavery on a Maryland plantation in the eighteen twenties. Hired out as a nursemaid at the age of seven, she was beaten every time the...
Harriet Tubman Essay Essay written by Shawnda Fletcher Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. During the war she was as a scout, spy, and nurse for the United States Army. After that she kept working for rights for blacks and women. Harriet Tubman was originally named Araminta Ross. She was one of 11 children born to Harriet Greene and Benjamin Ross on a plantation in Dorchester County, Maryland. She later took her mother's first...
Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. During the war she was as a scout, spy, and nurse for the United States Army. After that she kept working for rights for blacks and women. Harriet Tubman Essay was originally named Araminta Ross. She was one of 11 children born to Harriet Greene and Benjamin Ross on a plantation in Dorchester County, Maryland. She later took her mother's first name. Harriet was working at the age...
Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped from slavery and then guided runaway slaves to freedom in the North for more than a decade before the American Civil War. During the war she served as a scout, spy, and nurse for the United States Army. In later years she continued to work for the rights of blacks and women. Harriet Tubman Essay, a great African American woman, escaped from slavery, started the Underground Railroad and worked for the rights of blacks and women. Harriet Tubman, originally named Araminta Ross, as one of 11 children bon to slaves Harriet...
harriet tubman Essay: Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Category: History Paper Title: harriet tubman Text: written by Shawnda Fletcher Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. During the war she was as a scout, spy, and nurse for the United States Army. After that she kept working...
: Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * Copyright DueNow.com Inc. * Category: History Paper Title: harriet tubman Essay Text: written by Shawnda Fletcher Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. During the war she was as a scout, spy, and nurse for the United States Army. After...
written by Shawnda Fletcher Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. During the war she was as a scout, spy, and nurse for the United States Army. After that she kept working for rights for blacks and women. harriet tubman Essay was originally named Araminta Ross. She was one of 11 children born to Harriet Greene and Benjamin Ross on a plantation in Dorchester County, Maryland. She later took her mother's first name. Harriet was...
Category: History Paper Title: Harriet tubman Essay Text: written by Shawnda Fletcher Harriet Ross Tubman was an African American who escaped slavery and then showed runaway slaves the way to freedom in the North for longer than a decade before the American Civil War. During the war she was as a scout, spy, and nurse for the United States Army. After that she kept working for rights for blacks and women. Harriet Tubman was originally named Araminta Ross. She was one of 11 children born to Harriet Greene and Benjamin Ross on a plantation in Dorchester County, Maryland. She later...
Topic: Harriet Tubman Essay
Harriet Tubman Essay was an escaped slave. She helped so many of her black people that she became known as "Moses of Her People." During the civil war she served the union army as a nurse, spy, cook, and scout. She was also conductor on the Underground Railroad. She was a very heroic woman. Harriet Tubman was born on plantation near Bucktown about 1820. She was one of eleven children of a slave couple. At seven years old she was hired out to do housework and care for
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1686
|
__label__wiki
| 0.636004
| 0.636004
|
Results of the «Golden Hephaestus-2017»
On May 25th, Astana hosted a solemn award ceremony to honor the winners of the “Golden Hephaestus” National Industry Competition.
The Golden Hephaestus National Industry Competition is an annual contest to recognize the professionals, companies and projects of the sector as well as outstanding tutors and journalists. This year, the celebration in the honor of miners and metal workers was held in a truly royal manner – in the Saltanat Sarayi Reception Hall. The ceremony was led by Syrym Kashkabayev and Olga Spirina, while the Astana String Quartet furnished the musical illustration of the gathering.
The ceremony started with the felicitations to the heroes of the day: in this year Kazzink LLP commemorates its 20th anniversary, and Kazakhstan Electrolysis Plant (KEP), which is a part of the Eurasian Resources Group (ERG), celebrates the 10th jubilee along with the becoming one of the top ten aluminum global giants.
Traditionally, the winners receive awards from the senior officials of the sector ministries and CEOs of the key industry players to bring into focus the importance of the awards and showcase the scale of the recognition. People of labor constitute the golden assets of the country, the principal wealth of the Republic. This year ceremony was attended by Alik Aidarbayev, the First Vice-Minister for Investments and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Zhenis Kassymbek, the Minister for Investments and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Saginov Zamir Sadykovich, the Executive Secretary of the Ministry for Investments and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Kaztayev Aldiyar Aslanovich, the Chairman of the Board of ERG, Eldar Mamedov, the Chairman of the Board of KAZ Minerals Management LLP, and Nikolai Radostovets, the Executive Director of the Republican Association of Mining and Metallurgical Enterprises as they complimented the nominees.
The secret balloting, which, as is customary, was accomplished shortly before the ceremony, literally two hours before the beginning, was keeping all 190 nominees of this year competition on their toes! This was the record number of the participants over the eight years of the history of the competition!
The first prize in the “Geologist of the Year” nomination went to the field-worker “by birth” – Zharmukhambetov Mazhit Nurbayevich, the Director in Subsoil Use of the Technical Directorate of Eurasian Resources Group. Mazhit Nurbayevich was conferred with the “Enbek Danky” of the Third Category, “The Excellent Worker of the Subsoil Use Exploration”, and “The Honorary Prospector of the Subsoil of Kazakhstan” badges of achievements.
The judges of the competition awarded the “Miner of the Year” prize to Solovjev Sergei Nikolayevich, the lead mining engineer of the technical and investment planning division of Vostoktsvetmet LLP. Sergei Nikolayevich has over 45 years of the working experience in the industry, always being on the frontline – it was him who initiated the change of the opening scheme of the bottom levels of the Annenskaya Mine resulting in the economic benefits of more than 10 million dollars, and it was also him who developed a number of patents for the re-mining of the Zhezkazgan field and stripping of the Anisimov Kluch deposit.
Karynbayev Tlek Oralbekovich, the operator of the mixing and charge preparation equipment of the titanium ingots and alloys workshop of Ust-Kamenogorsk Titanium and Magnesium Plant JSC, became the “Metallurgist of the Year”. Tlek Oralbekovich was awarded with the “Enbek Danky” of the Third Category and the “Fifty Years of UK TMP JSC” Anniversary Medal.
The “Project of the Year” is a very special nomination. It recognizes activities of those mining and metallurgical enterprises that have successfully implemented industrial projects aiming to enhance economic growth and social development as well as expansion of the production areas. This year, it is the project of KAZ minerals Aktogay LLP, dedicated to the development of the Aktogay deposit and construction of Aktogay Mining and Refining Plant, which has been considered the best in this category. The development of this deposit has been included into the State Program of the Industrial and Innovative Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan, being one of the two largest strategic projects of KAZ Minerals Group.
The “Innovation Leader” title went to INTERRIN Scientific-Production Enterprise, while Kazzinc LLP has been predictably selected as the Kazakhstan Contents Leader. For 2016, the percentage of the GWS purchased from the domestic commodity producers for the subsoil use activities in respect of the annual procurement program has arrived at the level of 67.88 %!
The Golden Hephaestus Competition provides strong support to the talented young people and reputable and committed tutors – on top of the honor and recognition from the industry peers, these nominations have also money prizes.
The title of the “Academic Tutor” went to Krupnik Leonid Andreyevich, Doctor of Engineering of the Kazakh National Research Technical University after K.I. Satpayev. In 2016, five large projects were implemented under the academic advising of Leonid Andreyevich, with the impressive outcome of three doctors in engineering, eight candidates of technical sciences, two Ph.Ds in Engineering and eight holders of the Master’s degree!
The winner in the “Thesis of the Year” category is Mashkenova Aizhan Yerlanovna from the Karaganda State Technical University.
ERG, the Title Partner of the Golden Hephaestus Prize, has a tradition to select a winner in its own nomination. Following the judgment of the experts of the Company, the “Best Solution in Energy Preservation” prize has been given to the Transnational Company “Kazchrome” with its project on the qualitative standardization of the energy carrier consumption.
Fifty six journalists were battling for the prize in the “Best Journalist Material on the Mining and Metallurgical Complex in the Mass-Media and Internet Resources”. This year, the choice of the judges belongs to Gusev Oleg Ivanovich, the correspondent of Atameken Business Channel, with his series of materials about the challenges of the iron-and-steel industry of Kazakhstan.
The TV-show “Bolgert. Industries – Industrialization of the Republic of Kazakhstan 2016: Outcomes and Prospects” was recognized as the best TV-material (presenter – Evgeniy Bolgert, producer – Mirana Nusupbekova, Atameken Business Channel).
The winner of the “Best Journalist Material on the Man of Labor in the Mining” was the article of Burjanov Vladimir Alexandrovich, named “Uncle Sasha on the horizon: minus 160 in regard to the level of the Baltic Sea”, published in Express K, a social-political national newspaper.
A very touching moment of the Golden Hephaestus Ceremony was the honoring of Albert Pavlovich Rau. In his speech, Zhenis Kassymbek emphasized that “this man was literally standing at the very dawn of the present day MMC. He put his own heart and soul to help Kazakhstan in becoming the country known for its achievements in this sector, and we do feel proud for where we are now. Over many years, he provided an immense support to AMM Congress which has become such a significant event much due to his efforts!”
Created on 06 June 2018 .
Last updated on 09 April 2019 .
Get E-invitation Apply to Participate
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1689
|
__label__wiki
| 0.975041
| 0.975041
|
General of the Army George Catlett Marshall
George C. Marshall was born in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, on 31 December 1880. He graduated from the Virginia Military Institute in 1901; the next year, he married Elizabeth Carter Cole.
Marshall was commissioned a second lieutenant in 1902 and served with the 30th Infantry in the Philippines for the next two years. In 1907, he was promoted to first lieutenant and graduated from the Infantry and Cavalry School. He was a student, and then taught at, the Staff College from 1908 to 1910.
From 1913 to 1916, Marshall was assigned to the 4th Infantry at Forts Logan H. Roots and Crocket; he then served a tour with the 13th Infantry in the Philippines. In 1917, he was promoted to captain, and then to temporary major. In 1918, he was promoted to temporary lieutenant colonel and temporary colonel.
During the First World War, he served with the American Expeditionary Forces in France as an operations officer of the 1st Division and the First Army. Later he was assigned as the chief of staff of the VIII Corps. Marshall participated in the Cantigny, Aisne-Marne, St. Mihiel, and Meuse-Argonne operations. He also served as an aide to General John J. Pershing after the war.
In 1920, Marshall was made a permanent major; in 1923, he became a permanent lieutenant colonel. From 1924 to 1927, he led the 15th Infantry in China, and then was an instructor at the Army War College. He then served as assistant commandant of the Infantry School until 1932. In 1930, he married Katherine Boyce Tupper Brown. Promoted to full colonel in 1933, Marshall commanded the 8th Infantry until being reassigned as the senior instructor of the Illinois National Guard from 1933 to 1936. In 1936, Marshall was made a brigadier general and led the 5th Infantry Brigade. In 1938, he became the head of the War Plans Division, General Staff.
From 1938 to 1939, Marshall was the deputy chief of staff of the Army. In 1939, he became the acting Chief of Staff. In September, 1939, Marshall was promoted to major general, and full general. He served as the Army Chief of Staff from 1 September 1939 to 18 November 1945. As Chief of Staff, he centralized the professional leadership of the Army in the Chief of Staff’s office, urged pre-war mobilization, coordinated wartime industrial conversion, streamlined administration, oversaw grand strategy once the U.S. entered the Second World War and was the principal American architect of Allied victory. In 1944, he was made a temporary General of the Army, a rank made permanent in 1946.
After the war, Marshall served as President Harry S Truman’s personal representative to China, until 1947. He retired from active service and became the Secretary of State until 1949. In 1948, at the commencement speech at Harvard, he urged a program of European economic recovery, which became known as the Marshall Plan. In 1949, Marshall was recalled to the active list and was the president of the American Red Cross from 1949 to 1950. Marshall then served as the Secretary of Defense until 1951. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1953 for the Marshall Plan. Marshall headed the American Battle Monuments Commission from 1949 to 1959. He died in Washington, D.C., on 16 October 1959.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1694
|
__label__wiki
| 0.613266
| 0.613266
|
A: 3 Waihirere Lane, Tauranga New Zealand
P: +64 7393 5827
E: info@sumer.co.nz
W: sumer.co.nz
Auckland Art Fair 2021 galleries announced
New Zealand’s premier art fair announces participating galleries for its 2021 edition.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Installation-view-of-Neon-Parc-stand-featuring-art-by-Dale-Frank-at-Auckland-Art-Fair-2018-image-courtesy-Matt-Hunt-copy.jpg 1000 1021 Rosy Leake /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg Rosy Leake2021-01-13 10:20:272021-01-14 13:49:48Auckland Art Fair 2021 galleries announced
Zina Swanson: Any Plant Thought of Too Much Will Not Thrive
Sumer presents work by Zina Swanson.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Sumer-Zina-1.jpg 800 800 MaddyMatheson /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg MaddyMatheson2020-11-19 00:00:002020-11-17 11:22:23Zina Swanson: Any Plant Thought of Too Much Will Not Thrive
Group Exhibition: Bower
Sumer presents a group exhibition.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Sumer-1.jpg 1614 1614 MaddyMatheson /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg MaddyMatheson2020-11-19 00:00:002020-11-17 09:09:09Group Exhibition: Bower
Ella Sutherland: FOLDS
Sumer presents work by Ella Sutherland.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2T3C1312-1.jpeg 800 800 MaddyMatheson /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg MaddyMatheson2020-10-17 00:00:002020-10-20 16:43:55Ella Sutherland: FOLDS
Areez Katki: On Chroma
Sumer presents work by Areez Katki.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Areez-Katki-1.jpg 800 800 MaddyMatheson /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg MaddyMatheson2020-10-17 00:00:002020-10-20 16:15:05Areez Katki: On Chroma
Andrew Hazewinkel: Rushing Air, Flooding Light
Sumer Contemporary Art presents a new exhibition of work by Andrew Hazewinkel.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/11-Andrew-Hazewinkel-Rushing-Air-Flooding-Light-copy-1.jpg 2048 1463 YasminePaulaMasi /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg YasminePaulaMasi2020-09-16 00:00:002020-09-25 11:41:56Andrew Hazewinkel: Rushing Air, Flooding Light
Auckland Art Fair postponed
Auckland Art Fair announces postponement amidst coronavirus fears.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/DSF8551_cropped-1-1.jpg 1200 1200 Rosy Leake /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg Rosy Leake2020-03-17 15:44:512020-03-17 15:44:51Auckland Art Fair postponed
And the Auckland Art Fair galleries are…
Auckland Art Fair announces 2020 participating galleries + a special ticket offer.
https://artcollector.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/DSF8551_cropped-copy.jpg 1200 1206 Rosy Leake /wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art-Collector-Magazine-Online.jpg Rosy Leake2020-02-13 15:34:342020-02-18 12:33:52And the Auckland Art Fair galleries are…
FOLLOW THIS GALLERY
Laree Payne Gallery Walker Street Gallery and Arts Centre
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1695
|
__label__wiki
| 0.569197
| 0.569197
|
GVAFoundation.org
Revision as of 18:17, 24 April 2012 by Thebruce (Talk | contribs)
1 The site
1.2 Director's letter
1.3 Contacts
[edit] The site
Gotham Victims Advocate Foundation helps victims of crimes within Gotham City.
Who speaks for the victims?
In every trial there's someone to speak for the accused. It is the law that if an accused person cannot afford a lawyer, then one will be provided for them, free of charge. That's as it should be.
But if you are robbed, and can't make your rent...
Who speaks for you?
If you've been mugged and beaten, and can't afford prescription antibiotics, who speaks for you?
We'll help you find an array of services and cut through the red tape. Contact us.
[edit] Security
Get a Home Security Evaluation
Several companies will come to your house and do a security evaluation for free. These companies are in the security business. They will want to sell you an alarm system, but even if you can't afford an alarm system, they will be able to give you simple, useful advice on keeping your home or apartment safe. We've had good reports on Acme Security Systems, but there are many others.
[edit] Director's letter
What does it say about this city that a masked vigilante has become a hero? It says that things are out of balance. It's a sign of a breakdown in the social contract. It's a warning that society - our society - is in dire condition.
I believe in laws, in a system of justice. I believe that it is better to have a system with police and judges, a system that is open to public scrutiny. Batman operates outside of the law. But our system is broken, and it's broken for the people who need its protection the most.
Recently, Harvey Dent of the District Attorney's office has stood out with his crusade against the rampant corruption within the police department. While I applaud his efforts, I remain skeptical. Throughout my years working in this office, the District Attorney's office and its various associates have failed to effectively aid and protect the victims of crime, specifically those from the lower economic class. More than often, criminals in this city receive deals that decrease the punishment they should receive for their misdeeds while the victims are left forever sifting through the wreckage.
Obviously, it is impossible for a city and its leaders to erase the misfortune imprinted into a victim's mind. But it is possible to help them through the ordeal, to minimize their agony, and to curb their fear. This is ideal justice- true justice.
In a perfect world, the people who need hope would get it from the systems society establishes to protect them and serve them. From the courts. From the police. Maybe the day will come when that is where Gotham turns again. But for now, I am grateful for anyone whose actions speak for the people who need it most.
Dana Worthington, founder of GVAF.
[edit] Contacts
GVAF email inquiries@gvafoundation.org
GVAF phone 1866 237 6314
Emailing inquiries@gvafoundation.org replies with this message:
From inquiries@gvafoundation.org Subject: RE: PTSD Help From: inquiries@gvafoundation.org
We have received your email and we hope to send you a more personal response as soon as possible. GVAF is a volunteer organization and the consequences of the Fear Toxin attack in The Narrows have led to an overwhelming number of requests for assistance. We are attempting to respond as quickly as possible.
Gotham City Services has set up special programs for assistance with housing or for assistance with symptoms associated with the Fear Toxin attack.
Again, our apologies for our inability to respond at this time.
Calling 1-866-237-6314 gives this message, which ends with a beep:
Thank you for calling the Gotham Victims Advocate Foundation. If you are calling about the free psychological screening for PTSD for people living in the Narrows, we currently have a waiting list for that service. We are working with the city to expand the program. If you are having symptoms of exposure to the Fear toxin, such as hallucinations, depression and especially thoughts of harming yourself or others, please hang up and get medical help immediately. If you would like to talk to someone about our services, please leave a message. Response times are unfortunately rather long these days, as we are a volunteer organization, and we will do our best to address your concerns.
[edit] November 30, 2007
The mention of Acmesecuritysystems.com is deleted and this is added instead:
Protecting Victims
The Law requires that victims of crime be protected, but we've had five people call us in the last four weeks complaining that they have been approached by predatory security firms and lenders who clearly knew that their homes had been vandalized during the Fear Toxin riots in The Narrows. One of our clients contracted with the security system that approached her, which promised to provide her with 24 hour security for $12.99, and to install the system for free. It was the classic bait and switch. We reviewed the contract and found that after three months at the monthly security rate would go to more than fifty percent higher than the average security system charges in the city, and that added to that monthly charge would be a $15.99 a month fee to cover the installation costs of her system. The contract is for three years and there is no release clause.
It's apparent that these companies are getting the victim's information. One of our volunteers pretended to interview for a job with one of these companies. She reported that there were Gotham Police documents on the desk of the man who interviewed her. When she asked if the company was working with the police, the man interviewing her winked and said no, but that the Gotham Police's secure internal documents server was an open book. He said the GPD's document security was a joke.
GVAF has scheduled an appointment with Police Commissioner Loeb to discuss the issue of identity security for victims. We have also filed a lawsuit for the GVAF client with the security company.
This led participants to look up the site Gothampolice.com/secureinternaldocuments.
[edit] March 5, 2008
GVAFoundation.org President Dana Worthington announces her candidacy for Gotham District Attorney on the site:
I am announcing my candidacy for District Attorney of Gotham City.
If I don’t, who will represent you, the people of Gotham?
I have always believed that someone must hold government accountable. I have always believed that it was important that someone outside of government is there to demand good governance.
Government is failing the people of Gotham City.
In the months since the Narrows attacks, this city has shown itself unwilling or unable to solve the problems of corruption and poverty that are threatening each and every one of us. I can no longer stand on the outside. It is time to change this city from within. I am asking your support.
[edit] July 10, 2008
After the countdown ended on Whysoserious.com/Overture, GVAFoundation.org was "Jokerized," along with nearly every other website in the game.
(GVAFoundation.org) -- direct link
Retrieved from "https://batman.wikibruce.com/GVAFoundation.org"
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1697
|
__label__cc
| 0.617431
| 0.382569
|
« Oksana Grigorieva
Anna Stryukova Zavorotnyuk – beautiful blonde »
Marina Orlova, Sexiest philologist
Marina Orlova – beautiful teacher
Marina Orlova was born in 1980 in Arzamas (Nizhny Novgorod). Now she lives in California, USA.
She is a Russian philologist, etymologist, and author who has become an Internet celebrity, hosting one of the most popular channels on YouTube, HotForWords, and a corresponding website. Also she hosts a bi-weekly radio show on Maxim Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio. Called the “Sexiest philologist in the world” by New Yorker Magazine, Marina was voted the World’s #1 Sexiest Geek by Wired.com.
The girl’s a regular on Fox Network’s O’Reilly Factor Show and was voted the 5th hottest woman on the net by G4 TV. By the way, she’s been recommended by the New York Times Magazine. In addition, she was mentioned in Cosmopolitan as one of the top 3 channels on YouTube. And she was a part of the Best On-line Campaign of 2009. As well, Marina just completed her book, published by HarperCollins, entitled Hot for Words.
Besides, she stars in a killer iPhone game called Attack of the Bikini Zombie Babes from Outer Space!
@HotForWords is a bad philologist who can make you hot for more than just her tweet.
Her tag-line state is “Intelligence is Sexy.”
The theme of the Orlova’s website and YouTube videos is tracing the origins of English words. Some of her entries focus on everyday words such as irony and OK, while others address lengthy and rarely used tongue-twisters such as floccinaucinihilipilification and antidisestablishmentarianism. Some entries also address idioms, including “let the cat out of the bag”, “dressed to the nines”, and “three sheets to the wind”, or new words like the verb “to Google”.
Cute Orlova initially aspired to become a model. She went to two photo shoots, but did not succeed – she was too short to be a model (1.65 m).
Amazing girl says that her work takes up all of her time, and that she sometimes sits at the computer 12 to 14 hours at a time and has little time left for socializing. To tell the truth, she is currently single.
Her Book
Orlova, Marina (2009, 3 years ago). Hot for Words: Answers to All Your Burning Questions About Words and Their Meanings. New York: HarperCollins.
Her official site: http://hotforwords.com/
Hot For Words by Marina Orlova
Original teacher Marina Orlova
Do you want her to teach you?
Astonishing Marina Orlova
Bright Marina Orlova
Fantastic Marina
Blind Prince Vasily
Sergei Mikhalkov – great writer
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1701
|
__label__cc
| 0.593097
| 0.406903
|
beyond escapism
fantasy, science fiction, feminism
← Book review: Gibbon’s Decline and Fall by Sheri S. Tepper
Book review: The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula LeGuin →
Book review: Everwinter by Elizabeth Baxter
Posted on June 25, 2014 by zhenya
Everwinter begins with the story of an ending. The king of Variss has journeyed up the slopes of a haunted mountain to release the ancient powers that dwell there – powers his ancestors had been charged with keeping safely locked away. He sets them loose, against the advice of pretty much everyone, and unsurprisingly, it is a bad idea. His act takes an army of men to their deaths, causes an avalanche that buries all of Variss and plunges the land of Thanderley into an ice age.
Everwinter is the first book in Elizabeth Baxter’s The Wrath of the Northmen trilogy. Set three years after destruction of Variss, the book does little more than provide a lead-up to the inevitable quest to discover what caused the disaster. The writing, for the most part, is fairly standard epic fantasy fare, with its talk of ancient magic, old gods and their human offspring – but with science added in.
What made me want to write about it, though, was a post by Tansy Rayner Roberts about the use of the concept of historical authenticity to justify sexism in fantasy writing. In “Historically Authentic Sexism in Fantasy. Let’s Unpack That”, Roberts questions the practice of treating history as a uniform repository of truth from which fantasy writers can reliably extract a ‘realistic’ picture of men and women’s lives in historical societies. All too often, this picture is one that prioritises the exploits of men while marginalising women – all because this would, supposedly, be truer to mainstream narratives about the past, or generally about societies that are less technologically developed than our own.
Roberts questions this practice (which I prefer to call lazy world building) by putting the focus on the fact that those narratives are history. If (heterosexual, white, usually wealthy) men tend to be the active subjects of those narratives, that speaks more about the privilege that continues to be afforded to their voices than it does about their relative importance in the actual subject matter of history (and fantasy).
Most epic fantasy writers draw, to varying degrees, upon motifs from real-world histories and cultures to build up the settings of their novels, and Everwinter is no exception.The book is set in the city-states of Ral Tora and Chellin – two very different societies that epitomise (not always subtly) the tensions between science and religion, reason and magic, that lie at the heart of the story. From the beginning, however, Baxter makes it clear that men and women have an equal stake in the resolution of these tensions. While incorporating many motifs from what might have been ancient Roman and other societies, she never lapses into an exclusive focus on the heroics of male fighters and schemers, plus their lusty female love interests, just because this would be more consistent with what “history” tells us about men and women’s social roles.
The more I saw of Chellin and Ral Tora, the more it became obvious that Baxter was taking great pains to avoid replicating ‘sexism as a default’ even when, let’s face it, she could have easily got away with it. Any reader of epic fantasy might be disappointed, but surely not surprised, to open yet another book set in a strongly patriarchal society, where only a few exceptional women manage to distinguish themselves from their passive, vain and man-obsessed peers – by developing magical powers or running away on quests that are, as much as anything else, quests against a life confined to domesticity, marriage and children. These exceptional women do not care about their looks, and talk with disdain about dresses, romance and other supposed trappings of femininity. Almost always, though, they also happen to be naturally beautiful. And it never takes them very long to find true love.
Everwinter is different. In Chellin and Ral Tora, the participation of women in public life is a matter of course – and so is their presence in all lines of work, whether it involves fighting, politics, worship or scholarship. In Chellin, men and women both serve as members of the Senate. Astrid, the Regal of Chellin, and Ravessa, its High Priestess, are serious, ambitious women who worked their way up from the bottom of the social ladder. Their capacity to deal with the demands of leadership are never put in question because of their gender (or, I couldn’t help noticing, because of High Priestess Ravessa’s pregnancy). Women join armies and elite combat units; Commander Alara, a woman, is the leader of Ral Tora’s City Watch. Women work as engineers, scholars and healers; some of them have children, but at no point are their careers treated like something unnatural because of that.
The female characters we see the most of are Astrid and also Falen (an engineer and, as we later learn, the exiled daughter of the king of Variss). These women are very much defined by what they do. They grapple with tactical and logistical problems, pursue their own agendas and are generally portrayed as active subjects of their own lives. They are not perfect, but their mistakes have nothing to do with their relationships with men: Astrid is driven by her desire to be a good ruler and save her people from the Everwinter (rather than by her lingering feelings for High Priest Tamardi), and Falen is too concerned first about her work and then about her homeland to spend much time mulling over the faintly signposted attraction between her and Bram Thornley (an apprentice engineer and one of the book’s unlikely heroes).
This is not to say that Everwinter offers us a radical vision of equality, because it doesn’t. Baxter does not exactly turn the patriarchy on its head, or do away with gender roles altogether. The city of Ral Tora is, after all, ruled entirely by men: no woman can ever hope to rise through the ranks, as Astrid did in Chellin, and join the Council of the City Fathers. And the high level of equality that women appear to have in the world of work (or at least in the Engineering Guild) does not extend to their social behaviour. Baxter makes Bram Thornley seem more human by emphasising traits that are not exactly typical of a born fantasy hero; we see him drinking with his fellow apprentices, often to excess, and nursing hangovers during morning shifts. With only one exception, however, young women are absent from the taverns of Ral Tora – except when they wait at tables, or come to nag their drunken brothers into returning home for dinner. And Thanderley’s version of equality has another obvious missing piece: though the women in Everwinter fill many traditionally male-dominated roles, there are no men who do the opposite. Caring jobs in Chellin and Ral Tora appear to be filled entirely by women (although perhaps we will see this lingering gender divide subverted in one of the later books).
For all these criticisms, I found Everwinter to be a refreshing read. The fact that it does not, in the end, overturn the gendered division of labour altogether is perhaps only to be expected. It is a fantasy book set in a world that incorporates many traditional features of an epic fantasy adventure, and as such, it is never going to be free of the hierarchies that gave shape to them. Yet Baxter tries harder than many other writers in her genre to incorporate these features without also picking up entrenched stereotypes and patriarchal ideas about what women can be and do. The resulting world may not be entirely new, but it is a more imaginative one because of it.
This entry was posted in Book Review, Elizabeth Baxter, Fantasy and tagged Elizabeth Baxter, epic fantasy, fantasy, world building. Bookmark the permalink.
A short story review: ‘When it Changed’ by Joanna Russ
Book review: The Other Wind by Ursula Le Guin
Always already perfect: beauty and female characters in fantasy books
Book review: The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula LeGuin
Beyond ranting quietly to myself in my own head Book Review Elizabeth Baxter Fantasy J. V. Jones Joanna Russ Lois McMaster Bujold Margaret Atwood Science Fiction Sheri S. Tepper Short Story Review Ursula LeGuin
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1702
|
__label__cc
| 0.555935
| 0.444065
|
R.N. Seeks Fast Track Master’s To Meet Demands Of Changing Field
Filed Under:Baltimore, Career, Careers, Education, Employment, job, Jobs, Let's Get To Work, Mercy Medical Center, R.N., Susan Brown, Theresa Bailey
(credit: Thinkstock)
As far back as 2008, the Institute of Medicine, along with a major public health nonprofit, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, recognized that nursing, as a profession, would need to evolve as the our society changed and as healthcare became more about chronic illnesses than acute care. It was clear that nurses needed more education to meet these needs. Theresa A. Bailey, R.N. is an in-patient oncology nurse at Mercy Medical Center in Baltimore, and she also provides services at Good Shepherd, a treatment center for adolescents with severe emotional and behavioral issues.
(Photo Courtesy of Theresa A. Bailey, R.N.)
Bailey received her associate’s degree in nursing from Community College of Baltimore County/Catonsville, and she is currently pursuing a master’s degree in the bachelor’s to master’s fast track program through Walden University.
What inspired you to enter nursing?
“As with many people who enter nursing, it is because of the desire to care for others. Many of us have had family members cared for by a great nurse leaving an impression upon us, which influences us later. For me, it was the nurses during the illnesses of both of my parents in the late 1980’s. I actually started the nursing program many years ago but had to withdraw. Then, in 2007, I was encouraged and supported to explore nursing again.”
How does your educational background relate to your current roles?
“Nursing education combines lecture and textbook instruction, then demonstration and laboratory study leading up to clinical practicums at on-site facilities. This education prepared me to become an R.N. on a medical and surgical inpatient oncology unit at a local hospital. I also work at a residential treatment center for adolescents, which is quite different from the hospital, but my education allows me to practice there effectively as well.”
How has your education helped to further your career and contributed to your success?
“The diversity within my education has also allowed me to fill in and care for patients in other hospital units with many other diagnoses, which broadens my experience.”
What is some advice you can offer others looking to go into nursing?
“Do what you love. Ask to shadow at a local hospital. This enables you to get a brief snapshot of what it is like to be a nurse on a daily basis and not just what is portrayed on television. Nursing school is unlike any other programs. While most tests have one correct answer and three wrong answers, in nursing school, there are four correct answers and you have to discern the most correct and the safest response. Gather support from family and friends.”
Susan Brown originally spent many years in banking/finance before confronting her addictions. She has now been in recovery for 20 years.
Primary interests include metaphysics and energy healing in which she has several certifications. She has written for Examiner.com since 2009 and also writes for Om Times. Sue lives in Baltimore.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1704
|
__label__wiki
| 0.910083
| 0.910083
|
David Wills
David Wills is one of the founding members of Negativland. He was a cable repairman when he joined the group with a then-teenage Mark Hosler and Richard Lyons, until he retired in the '90s. David is also known as "The Weatherman." Due to his being a recluse, it has been difficult for fans of Negativland and even the band themselves to contact him and in the past, he has shown up at Negativland concerts or Negativlandland on a TV screen. Starting in June 2008 The Weatherman has been posting audio, video, pictures and more from his enormous archives on his section (Dumb) of the Negativland website.
Within days after the release of Negativland's clever parody of U2 and Casey Kasem, recording industry giant Island Records descended upon the band with a battery of lawyers intent on erasing the piece from the history of rock music. Craig Baldwin follows this and other intellectual property...
Within days after the release of Negativland's clever parody of U2 and Casey Kasem, recording industry...
Source: David Wills on Freebase, licensed under CC-BY
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1708
|
__label__cc
| 0.68418
| 0.31582
|
Marriage?
By Donna Steigleder / September 7, 2014 September 7, 2014
When Lynn and I were dating, I knew that his father had only lived to be in his forties and that he died from complications of MS. Having a medical background, I had a vague, general knowledge of the condition but primarily just enough knowledge to know that it affected mobility and the eyes and I had had a few employees make accommodate
• An adaptation or adjustment especially of a bodily part (as an organ)
• Adjustment to new circumstances;
• Adaptation; something fulfilling a need
requests related to memory. I knew that genetics was a factor, but not an absolute, in determining if he would also suffer from MS. I also knew that while Lynn had his vises, he was good about what he ate and he exercised regularly; so, in my opinion, he was more likely to have complications from his smoking than he was from having MS. I seriously considered all these factors and went into my marriage with full knowledge of what I might encounter. I actually was very reluctant to get remarried, not due to the MS, but due to the fact that marriage was so difficult and even if you tried your best, you can’t control the other party. When I finally decided to marry Lynn, I went into marriage with a full commitment to staying married for sickness or health, richer or poorer, etc. I had survived one divorce and didn’t want to go through another. In other words, my fear was not of the MS but of the relationship difficulties itself.
And, I was right to be concerned. Those first few years were VERY difficult trying to blend two families; taking two very independent and totally different personalities and trying to learn how to compromise and adapt. We struggled. We had counseling. We became distant and we sought and found ways to become closer. We had to work at it; it did not come naturally to either of us. We were both very afraid of being hurt again and therefore, afraid of totally giving ourselves to the marriage. After all, we both knew how it felt to have loved and lost; but throughout it all, whether or not he might have MS was never a factor.
Then, one day I found him comparing how fast he could wiggle his fingers on one hand as compared to the other. I could see the difference. He had seen a physical therapist about occasionally having “drop foot” after exercising. He had complained of numbness and some weakness in his left leg which was attributed to sciatica. I asked him during those occurrences if he had mentioned his familyThe basic unit in society traditionally consisted of two parents and their children but the family has now been expanded to include any of various social units differing from but regarded as equivalent to the traditional family. More history of MS and he said that wasn’t what it was and his doctor had his family history. I knew then; however, that he had MS. My daughter, who was in nursing school at the time, and I talked about the fact that we both believed he had MS. Even his son, suspected it but Lynn was in denial. I finally got so frustrated that I confronted him about my concerns and demanded that I be allowed to go with him to his next appointment because he would never give me a straight answer about what was discussed.
As it turned out his next appointment was with a cardiologist (he also has mitral valve prolapse). The doctor asked him how he was doing; then, he asked me. I told him Lynn’s heart was fine but something was wrong with his nervous system. Lynn shot me a look of daggers but the cardiologist promptly set us up with a neurosurgeon because at the time, I thought it was possible it could be a disc issue (since he said MS had been ruled out by his doctor already). The rest is history. Blood work was done; as was a MRI and a lumbar puncture, and as we were driving home from an anniversary visit to the beach, he got the call that said it was MS.
I already knew in my heart what the diagnosis would be and I think Lynn knew but didn’t want toknow. However, actually hearing it still kicked us in the gut. I have to be honest that fear of what was ahead did cross my mind. Lynn and I were distant emotionally at that time because he would not share his thoughts or his life with me. He kept me at a distance. I think he was afraid I would leave if he got MS. His parents had divorced while his father had MS and though I don’t think the divorce was due to MS, it probably played a part in it. However, for us, it had the opposite effect.
I became Lynn’s advocate. I shielded him from too much information (at his request; he still wanted to deny as much as possible); I did all the communication with the doctors and healthcareefforts made to maintain or restore physical, mental, or emotional well-being especially by trained and licensed professionals More facilities. He finally recognized that he needed me and he let me in and though that process we are closer now than if he had not had MS. If he had not been diagnosed with MS, who knows if our marriage would have survived? I like to think it would have because we are both Christians who are totally committed to staying together but I’ve learned you can never say never…about anything.
continue reading at: http://multiplesclerosis.net/blog/marriage/
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1714
|
__label__wiki
| 0.863769
| 0.863769
|
Look For Chris Rock in the East Village Tonight
May 1, 2014 By Daniel Maurer
Local fixture Michael Che has a part in the film. (Photo: Mindy Tucker)
Chris Rock’s new film is shooting in the East Village tonight.
According to signs posted around the neighborhood, the “untitled Chris Rock movie,” produced by Scott Rudin and written and directed by Rock, is about “one-time stand-up Andre Allen, who has abandoned comedy — and the funny movies that make him famous — for more serious fare. But over the course of one day in New York, everything he thought he knew about his life gets overturned.”
The film’s working title was Finally Famous, per Vulture, and also features “J.B. Smoove as his security guard, Sherri Shepherd as his high school ex-girlfriend, and Rosario Dawson as a New York journalist tasked with profiling Rock’s character, who, as the photos from set reveal, has a full-on undercut — classic New York journalist.” Other reports say comics Doug Stanhope and our own Michael Che — who just got tapped as The Daily Show‘s new correspondent — also have roles.
According to notices, additional photography for the movie, which started filming last summer, will begin at 10 p.m. tonight and will take over parking on Second Avenue between East 10th and 11th Streets, as well as East 10th and East 11th Streets between First and Second Avenues.
Tags: Arts + Culture, chris rock, film, Michael Che
« Josh Stewart Got A Lot of Static About the Premiere of His Latest Skate Film » East Villagers Will Have to Wait For OddFellows Ice Cream, But Have a Look
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1715
|
__label__wiki
| 0.879745
| 0.879745
|
Why Men Love Fast Cars
Struggling Ferrari miles off the F1 pace at Spa with no quick fix in sight
Hamilton takes pole for Belgian Grand Prix while Ferrari misery continues
Scoop Out
September 7, 2020 September 7, 2020 brighton-apartmentscom
Carrying an emotional burden only spurred Lewis Hamilton on to greater heights in taking pole for the Belgian Grand Prix. He dedicated his own riveting performance at Spa-Francorchamps to the memory of Chadwick Boseman, who died on Friday. Hamilton said the news had left him almost broken but felt the actor had been such an inspiration to young black people he desperately wanted to deliver in his honour.
While Hamilton dominated in Spa, at the other end of the grid Ferrari flailed and foundered in the forests of the Ardennes. Charles Leclerc and Sebastian Vettel failed to make it into the top 10 shootout and finished in 13th and 14th respectively.
For Hamilton, only afterwards did he reveal how the news of the death of Boseman, who played Black Panther in four Marvel films, had weighed heavily on him. Having been a strident voice in F1’s anti-racism campaign and a supporter of the Black Lives Matter movement, Hamilton took the death of an inspirational black figure, whom he had met in New York, personally.
“This was an important pole, I woke up today to the saddest news of Chadwick passing away,” he said. “It’s been such a heavy year for us all and that news broke me, so it wasn’t easy to get back focused. Our superhero died last night, that was weighing heavy on me today. I was so driven to deliver a good performance so I could dedicate it to Chad.”
The world champion felt Boseman had played a vital role in promoting the diversity which Hamilton has also championed. “I am a huge Marvel fan and knowing how Hollywood has been, to see the first black superhero come out, everyone was just so proud,” he said. “This under-representation is such a common thing, to see someone like him make it to be such a powerful figure in the Avengers world was incredible and inspiring. I can imagine young black kids looking up and seeing that it as possible to be a superhero, so his legacy will always live on.”
At the sharp end Hamilton betrayed no sign of the sadness he was feeling. He looked nailed on for the top spot from the moment he took to the track. His first hot run in Q3 saw him confident enough to lead the field out, unconcerned by trying to find a slipstream.
Exploiting every inch of the track and the clear pace advantage he was enjoying, a blistering lap ensued with a time of 1min 41.451sec. It was over half a second clear of his Mercedes teammate Valtteri Bottas. Leading the way again on his second run, the British driver found even more. He went two-tenths quicker in 1.41.252 and Bottas remained second, a full half a second adrift, an age for a driver in identical machinery. The Red Bull of Max Verstappen was in third.
For Ferrari, what was expected to be a trying weekend deteriorated into only narrowly avoiding humiliation. Their car has been down on power all season since the FIA issued a clarification on the engine regulations to the team, in a controversial private settlement. They knew it would cost them at the power-dependent Spa but no one anticipated a descent almost to the back of the grid. The car also has aero problems, creating too much drag, and in Belgium they struggled to switch on the tyres because they were experimenting with a low‑downforce setup to combat the speed deficit. It left them with a lack of grip, compounding their woes.
Last year they were dominant at Spa. They led every session before the race with a one-two and Leclerc took pole with a seven-tenths advantage. He went on to win untroubled from the front. This time they went backwards through practice, 14th and 15th and 15th and 17th on Friday, before the ignominy of the final session on Saturday morning when Leclerc was 17th and Vettel last in 20th.
In qualifying they were close to being beaten by the Ferrari-engined Haas and Alfa Romeo cars, not to mention the rest of the midfield. A yellow flag late in Q1 that slowed some final hot laps may have spared them going out in the first session. With the car designs frozen for cost-saving purposes in 2021, a long and painful season and a half stretches ahead of the Scuderia.
Leclerc swore over his radio and added: “There is not much more I can do,” after his final lap. “It’s very difficult to find an explanation,” he added. “It’s a big step back compared to the others so we need to try and find the main issue, try and address it.
Vettel also acknowledged the plight in which Ferrari have found themselves. “It is the true picture of what the car can do around here. We tried everything,” he said. “Obviously we’re not where we want to be, but that’s not the first race and the first qualifying where that has been the case.”
Daniel Ricciardo was in fourth for Renault with Red Bull’s Alexander Albon in fifth. Esteban Ocon was sixth for Renault, with Racing Point’s Sergio Pérez and Lance Stroll in eighth and ninth. Carlos Sainz was seventh for McLaren with his teammate Lando Norris in 10th. Daniil Kvyat and Pierre Gasly were 11th and 12th for AlphaTauri and the Williams of George Russell was in 15th.
Kimi Räikkönen and Antonio Giovinazzi were in 16th and 18th for Alfa Romeo. Romain Grosjean and Kevin Magnussen were in 17th and 20th for Haas with the Williams of Nicholas Latifi in 19th.
Written by brighton-apartmentscom
Previous Previous post: Lewis Hamilton closes on Schumacher’s record after winning Belgian Grand Prix
Next Next post: Struggling Ferrari miles off the F1 pace at Spa with no quick fix in sight
Lewis Hamilton closes on Schumacher’s record after winning Belgian Grand Prix
Lewis Hamilton bemoans the fact Mercedes are in a one-horse race
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1719
|
__label__cc
| 0.557225
| 0.442775
|
Salinas Resident Sentenced To Prison For Identity Theft and Preparing False Tax Returns
CreativeCommons Taxes
On Tuesday, September 5, 2017, a Salinas, California resident was sentenced to 54 months in prison for aggravated identity theft, filing false tax returns, and making false statements. 41-year-old Elizabeth Calderon pleaded guilty to the charges on September 12, 2016. The sentence was handed down by the Honorable Beth Labson Freeman.
According to court filings, Calderon assisted in the preparation and filing of more than 4,000 federal income taxes from 2010 to 2013. Many of the returns were materially false because, because they contained improperly reported credit, expenses and deductions. Some also had false filing statuses or contained some combination of the aforementioned attributes. Simultaneously, Calderon hide the profits she earned assisting in the filing of the tax returns.
Calderon omitted hundreds of thousands of dollars from her own tax returns and purchased a home in the name of a “straw” buyer. Calderon also admitted to preparing and filing fraudulent tax returns using stolen identities. In total, her conduct led to the government losing more than $1,000,000.
Calderon was indicted by a federal grand jury on October 1, 2015. In addition to serving 54 months in prison, Calderon has also been ordered to pay $1,036,547 in restitution. She will also be required to forfeit $167,381 and serve three years of supervised release. Calderon has been ordered to refrain from preparing or filing tax returns for anyone else during her supervised release period. She will begin serving her sentence on October 25, 2017.
Tags: californiaelizabeth calderonsalinastaxes
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1720
|
__label__wiki
| 0.750431
| 0.750431
|
Could coffee be the alternative fuel of the future?
By David Biello on December 10, 2008
Researchers from the University of Nevada, Reno, have discovered that coffee can be turned into an alternative fuel other than caffeine: biodiesel. And you can have your coffee and drink it too. No need to use the fresh stuff, old grounds are more than up to the task, according to material scientist Mano Misra and his colleagues.
Even after being subjected to the rigors of brewing, roughly 15 percent of the weight of dried coffee grounds is oil, which, much like palm and soybean oil, can be converted into biodiesel. The coffee has the added benefit of not being a food source, like palm oil and soybeans.
Nevertheless, more than 16 billion pounds of coffee are produced globally every year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Misra estimates that the grounds from that haul could be used to make as much as 340 million gallons of biodiesel. For their part, the researchers turned grounds donated by Starbucks into biodiesel that had the added advantage of smelling like a fresh cup o' Joe.
The researchers note that coffee's high proportion of antioxidants, such as chlorogenic acid, acts as a natural preservative for the resulting biodiesel, preventing it from going bad like other forms of biofuel and even petroleum diesel can. The researchers hope to set up a pilot plant to convert grounds into biodiesel next year and estimate that, for its part, Starbucks in the U.S. alone could turn a profit of $8 million a year from the process, assuming that both the biodiesel and leftovers of the process can be sold.
To chill this simmering cup a bit: the U.S. Department of Energy says that the U.S alone burns 40 billion gallons of diesel a year, meaning that converting all the grounds in the world wouldn't even contribute 1 percent of U.S. diesel consumption. Still, it's an idea that could perk you up.
Credit: ©iStockphoto.com/James McQuillan
Diabetes Rx ups bone fracture risk
By Coco Ballantyne on December 10, 2008
No nukes: World leaders call for end to all nuclear weapons
By Jordan Lite on December 10, 2008
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1723
|
__label__wiki
| 0.583234
| 0.583234
|
The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
The New Testament, in an Improved Version: Upon the Basis of Archbishop ... - Страница 164
1809 - 612 страници
Пълен достъп - Информация за книгата
History and Doctrine of the Millennium: A Discourse Delivered in the ...
Henry Dana Ward - 1850 - 74 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three : the father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law."* " Strive to enter in at the strait gate ; for many, I say unto you, shall seek to enter in, and shall...
The Life of the Rev. John Emory, D. D.: One of the Bishops of the Methodist ...
Robert Emory - 1841 - 380 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law." But shall these dissensions be charged to the account of Christianity, all gentle and long-suffering...
Expository lectures on select portions of the Acts of the Apostles, Том 1
John Jones - 1841
...there shall be five in one house divided ; three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...the daughter, and the daughter against the mother." ' But how then (may it be asked) can Christianity be justly represented as a religion of peace ? How...
American Views of Christ's Second Advent
Henry Jones - 1842 - 220 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three: the father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law."* " Strive to enter in at the strait gate; for many, I say unto you, shall seek to enter in, and shall...
Gospel of the Four: A Unique Conflation of the Four Gospels Into a Single ...
Peter B. Jones - 2002 - 558 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law." Luke continues, indicating in w. 54-59 through...
Ограничен достъп - Информация за книгата
The Laws of Life
James Shane - 2002 - 708 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The Father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Lu. 12:51...
The Lord's Life on Earth
Servant Of the Lord - 2003 - 192 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law, and the daughter-inlaw against the mother-in-law. And he said also to the people,...
Actual Proof of My Existence Signed: God of the Bible
Don Christie - 2003 - 248 страници
...above the Planck length, a (35 | 53) mirror or reflection of the Father. Luke 12:53 "The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law," Revelation...
The Historical Jesus, Том 4
Craig A. Evans - 2004 - 419 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...and the daughter-inlaw against her mother-in-law. (xii. 49-53) Matthew gives the same passage in a rather more condensed form: Think not that I am come...
Terror and Suicide Attacks: An Islamic Perspective
Ergün Çapan - 2004 - 155 страници
...there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the...and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. (Luke 12:51-53) According to the Bible, acts of violence and catastrophes will befall toward the end...
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1724
|
__label__wiki
| 0.709456
| 0.709456
|
Government in Business: Hearings Before the United States House Committee on ...
(공)저: United States. Congress. House. Committee on Government Operations
If local government in the United States is weakened, just so is the structure of our Government weakened. If local government totters, then failure of our traditions and heritage of local government, and individual initiative will fall by the wayside and be replaced by a centralized government–bureaucratically all powerful.
We regard a cessation of Federal acquisition of valuable industrial and commercial properties with their consequent removal from local tax rolls, as essential. We think these bills are a step in that direction.
I shall be happy to try to answer any questions the members of the committee may have.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any questions, Mr. Osmers?
Mr. OSMERS. No; I haven't any.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dawson.
Mr. Dawson. The Government went into the business of buying large tracts, building large buildings and equipping them with machines calculated to furnish the Army with necessary war materials that they had to have. Private industry was not in position to meet the challenge of war. That was the responsibility of the Government.
What would you have substituted for the steps taken by the Government in World War I and prior to World War II in order to meet the threat that the Nation was facing then, which challenged its existence?
Mr. HAMILTON. I am making no criticism, Congressman Dawson, of past history. I am merely making a plea for correction of existing difficulty in the future.
I do not criticize the Federal Government's acquisition policies regarding war production potential during the war. However, I can give you cited examples where such production facilities, which were built by the RFC, paid taxes. They were transferred as surplus as a result of the war's ending; later transferred to private enterprise, which turns out civilian goods as well as military goods, and makes a profit on those because that particular plant is in a tax-free status.
Mr. HILLELSON. Congressman Dawson, could I ask a question, or would you yield?
Mr. Dawson of Illinois. Yes.
Mr. HILLELSON. That relates to 5605, doesn't it, Mr. Hamilton?
Mr. HAMILTON. That is correct.
Legislation has come from this committee to correct that particular situation, and we very much commend the committee and Congressman Hillelson as a freshman Congressman for getting the bill through the Congress. We are very hopeful it will pass the Senate as well, since it has passed the House.
Mr. OSMERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to point out while it is true the Government did build under such circum.stances as that during the war it has, in some instances, become a continuing policy and it is a trend that must be stopped.
I would say this: Had it not been for the magnificent private enterprise and free labor system we have in this country we would never have been as successful in the production of war material as we were.
I think it is a good ststement, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. CONDON. Mr. Hamilton, would you be critical of a situation that occurs in my town of Richmond, where the Maritime Commission owns Richmond yard 3?
Now, they are leasing that out to private enterprise to run various types of businesses there, but only certain private enterprise is interested because they have a 24-hour recapture clause, because they want to keep that yard available in the event of another emergency, where we have to start building ships rapidly.
Now, don't you feel that is a type of Government activity that certainly is justified by the international scene as we see it today?
Mr. HAMILTON. Oh, yes. If you were asking if I should be critical of the 24-hour recapture clause, I certainly would not be. I don't think the American Municipal Association is in favor of the Government doing anything to endanger its national security.
Mr. CONDON. There you have an example of private enterprise in a free from ad valorem taxation because the Maritime Commission and the Government feels it is necessary to keep that yard in the event of a future grave emergency. I don't feel you can get away from that situation as long as it is necessary to keep that yard.
Mr. HAMILTON. I am not critical of that type of a situation, sir. I think that there is a distinction between that particular type of situation in Richmond and the type of situation covered by Mr. Hillelson's bill, principally about which I have been speaking this morning.
Mr. Condon. Now, one or two other questions: In the light of Mr. Osmers' bill, is there any reason why the Department of Defense, itself, cannot, because they are the biggest holder of these properties and the biggest doer of these activities, make the changes without creating this additional board and taking the authority away from Defense and putting it over in the Secretary of Commerce?
Mr. HAMILTON. No, sir; there is none, and if you will read my statement you will notice that we state here we are in favor of the principles embodied in the bill. We are not commenting on the specific sections of the bill.
Answering your question more directly, the Defense Department can correct this situation; but I have been present in many meetings where they have been so requested and to date I regret to say the Defense Department is not disposed to do so.
Mr. CONDON. Here is an illustration that is of concern to me: For example, let's take submarines. Submarines are made by the Electric Boat Co., a private-enterprise group. They are also made at the Portsmouth Navy Yard and the Mare Island Navy Yard. Now, the Department of Defense and the Navy Department feel, for reasons of national security, they want to have both prepared, the navy yards, to make these submarines, and also to keep the Electric Boat Co. going. That is their decision as of now. I am just wondering about
the wisdom of taking that decision-making power away from the Department of Navy and the Department of Defense, and putting it over, in effect, in the Secretary of Commerce.
Mr. OSMERS. Mr. Chairman, I am not trying to answer the question of the witness, but I have listened very carefully to what Mr. Condon has said, and I don't think that is particularly within the scope of these hearings, or within the scope of the bills that have been presented and that are under discussion, and that we can very well get into what should be the national-defense policy of the United States with respect to some of these things.
Certainly, take, for example, the manufacture of an atomic submarine: That is not a competitive activity with private enterprise in this country and, therefore, I don't think
Mr. CONDON. It is in a sense, Mr. Osmers, because-
Mr. OSMERS. What private company is making atomic submarines?
Mr. CONDON. I understand the Electric Boat Co. is geared to do it.
Mr. OSMERS. No; they are doing it for the Government.
Mr. CONDON. That is private enterprise. The Electric Boat Co. is private enterprise.
Mr. Osmers. That is probably because the Government can't do it itself; but the important thing is that is not a case that would come within any of these bills, whether they pass or not. That is a matter that comes within the national-defense policy of the United States, and that isn't a competitive business type activity.
If you go back to the thing Lincoln said--and I wouldn't attempt to quote it exactly—if you stay within the sphere of Government doing those things the people cannot do for themselves-obviously no one would build an atomic submarine because no one would have use for it except the Government.
Mr. CONDON. I think the Navy yard in building private ships is competing with shipbuilding yards. So, if you carry that argument to the extreme, the Navy yard should go out of business.
Mr. OSMERS. To some extent you are correct; that is correct.
Mr. HAMILTON. If I may answer the question directed to me by Congressman Condon, I think a distinction must be made in any consideration of this problem, a distinction between those activities of the Government which have a historical basis and those activities of the Government which have been carried on for many, many years as compared with the tremendous growth in new Government activities, which actually, to a large extent, have followed World War II rather than growing up during it and preceding it, and I certainly don't think, as an individual now, not speaking for the American Municipal Association or the city of Boston, you can close up or should close up the Boston Navy Yard completely.
Mr. McCORMACK. I hope not.
Mr. HAMILTON. I think that distinction must be made between those historical government functions and this steady growth of new governmental functions.
The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Thank you for coming in.
Mr. HAMILTON. Thank you, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Arthur Smith, Jr., District of Columbia Trucking Association. If you will, identify yourself and then proceed in your own way.
STATEMENT OF ARTHUR CLARENDON SMITH, JR., SECOND VICE
PRESIDENT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TRUCKING ASSOCIACIATION
Mr. Smith. My name is Arthur Clarendon Smith, Jr., representing the District of Columbia Trucking Association, of which I am second vice-president. We represent over 200 firms locally who operate over 7,000 vehicles in this area.
Specifically, our complaint today comes from the movers division of this association in which we have 30 moving companies as members of the District of Columbia Trucking Association.
I am personally employed by Smith's Transfer & Storage Co. as vice president and general manager.
Our two complaints are with the Government competition we find from the General Services Administration, Moving Section, and the crating operation at the Cameron, Va., Quartermaster Depot in Alexandria, Va.
Let's take the first problem concerning General Services Administration and their Moving Section of that organization.
The CHAIRMAN. May I interrupt you just a moment?
Mr. Osmers, I wonder if you would take over because the Bender subcommittee has a meeting at 11:30.
If you will continue these hearings-
Mr, OSMERS. All right, sir.
Proceed.
Mr. Smith. First, let me explain their function as I understand it. The Moving Section of General Services Administration is charged with the function of moving all Government offices in this area. believe this could be done by the local moving companies in this city at a savings of public funds if let out on a competitive-bid basis.
Mr. BROWNSON. You wouldn't confine your observations to this city?
Mr. SMITH. No.
Mr. BROWNSON. You would let anybody have the opportunity to bid?
Mr. Smith. That is right.
Our reason for believing this is our observation of some of these moving operations where manpower is not used as economically as it would be by a private concern. Unfortunately, we have not been able to prove this to General Services Administration, and we have no way to compare their cost and ours. In fact, it is very difficult for us to find any facts from this organization as their figures are not open to public scrutiny from our investigation, and they are very difficult to find. We have found that they pay over a million dollars a year in wages alone and they employ approximately an average of 400 laborers. We know they are adequately supplied with vehicles of their own and they do hire some outside trucks from private contractors to supplement their fleet when very busy.
From the above figures, we then estimate that General Services Administration does well over $2 million worth of office moving in this area for which only few taxes are paid to the local or Federal Government where they hire a few trucks.
We know in our own moving business and from figures received from the survey of the National Furniture Warehousemen's Association that the main cost of local or intracity moving is 40 or 50 percent of the dollar cost the local mover receives and pays out in labor on local moving jobs. We can substantiate this with our own operation figures and the figures the National Furniture Warehousemen's Association has gathered from the whole moving industry.
Several years ago, during the latter part of the Jesse Larson administration of General Services Administration, we had a conference with his office regarding this problem and requested their cooperation
and open bids for this work. We received little, if any, cooperation as they definitely were not interested in our proposition because no bids were asked for until this year.
The first of this year, in February and March, there seems to have been a change in that feeling; yet, after competitive bidding in three particular instances, the low bidders were refused as being too high and the GSA was given this work.
I am referring to the invitation to bid No. 11BJ54-63 issued by the Veterans' Administration Supply Maintenance Division and bid No. 64 of that same office. I also am referring to the bid made for the Civil Service move on March 12, 1954, to move the Civil Service office from the Old Pension Building
The successful bidders on these jobs were, respectively, the Jacobs Transfer Co. on bid No. 63 at $5,100, the Colonial Storage Co. on bid No. 64 at $4,160, and the Kane Transfer Co. at $19,785 for this last Civil Service move.
All of these bids were rendered in good faith but were not accepted as we were told the General Services Administration Moving Section was sure it could handle these office moves at a lower cost.
There were approximately six companies biddding on each of these invitations, and until this day we have had no accounting as to how successful or unsuccessful the General Services Administration was in completing this work at a lower cost.
There was one instance in one of these bids where the bidders were told that all file cabinets moved must be held in an upright position; yet, it was noticed that the General Services Administration did not follow their own instructions but moved these file cases in the most expeditious manner by turning them over on four-wheel dollies. It impressed us as being ironical that we sould be required to bid on one particular way of moving and then the General Services Administration was allowed to move these file cabinets in the usual manner which would naturally make our cost higher than usual for this large volume of filing cabinets.
The General Services Administration is well equipped with vehicles. From the count in the annual motor vehicles report of December 1953, they have a total of 232 trucks in this area from a 1-ton rating and above. Perhaps all of these are not used in moving; yet, this is the second largest fleet in this area, which is exceeded only by the Post Office Department, which has 380 trucks.
A recent step forward in our opinion which General Services Administration has made is that they have recently let a contract with a private firm, the Jacobs Transfer Co., to do their hauling for their new Franconia warehouse.
Mr. OSMERS (presiding). Where is that located?
Mr. Smith. That is the new warehouse out on Shirley Highway, right off Shirley Highway, a very large installation.
The first contract let was for a 3-month test period. The second contract, now running, is for 1 year's duration, which that firm was successful in securing as low bidder after lowering their first bid 344 cents per hundred pounds on the original trial run contract.
After this year's contract was let, the General Services Administration Public Relations Office let out a press release stating the fact that this new contract would save the taxpayers nearly $60,000 a year
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1725
|
__label__wiki
| 0.595329
| 0.595329
|
OUR STORY BEGINS IN 2014
OUR VISION FOR THE WORLD
A WORLD WHERE…
AT OUR FOUNDATION…
Burn Bright is a social enterprise, not-for-profit organisation, that was established in 2014.
At Burn Bright we encourage, challenge and develop students through tailored experiential leadership, wellbeing programs and national camps. We are student leadership and wellbeing specialists who work with students from Year 5 to Year 12 in a collaborative, fun and inclusive team culture. This brings about positive behavioural change, a shift in mindset and personal wellbeing, allowing students to make informed choices and decisions.
We have a team based in Sydney and Melbourne who travel to all parts of Australia to work with young people and partner with schools on a daily basis.
The acquired leadership behaviours, wellbeing habits and character traits help build meaningful, healthy and positive long-lasting skills and friendships that will continue beyond the school years.
In short, Burn Bright provides the fuel and the spark that ignites the potential within every student, leading to enhanced self-efficacy and a heightened sense of personal wellbeing.
The scope for growth of our work is limitless and we want to invite you to be a part of our journey.
Australian Charities and Not For Profits Commission
Burn Bright is a Not For Profit organisation, officially registered as a Public Company Limited by Guarantee. Burn Bright is registered with the Australian Charities and Not For Profits Commission (ACNC). On the ACNC’s website you can find out the legal information about Burn Bright. Burn Bright does not have Deductible Gift Receipt (DGR) status.
Visit The ACNC
MENTAL HEALTH, MENTAL ILLNESS, WELLBEING AND FLOURISHING
We help young people to look after their mental health and wellbeing in a proactive and preventative way. We do this through using a range of positive evidence-based strategies that help young people to take charge of their lives.
Burn Bright’s vision is for all young people across the world to be flourishing. We do this through using a range of positive evidence-based strategies that help young people to take charge of their lives and to help equip them with the experiences and tools so that they can flourish. Burn Bright believes that being mentally well is an absence of mental illness (for Burn Bright this is a focus on anxiety and depression) state of successful performance of mental function, resulting in productive activities, fulfilling relationships with people and the ability to adapt to social change and to cope with adversity.
Refers collectively to all diagnosable mental disorders involving – at Burn Bright this means for anxiety and depression.
Significant changes in thinking, emotion and behaviour
Distress and/or problems functioning in social, work or family activities.
Preventing mental illness aims to:
“reduce the incidence, prevalence, recurrence of mental disorders, the time spent with symptoms, or the risk condition for a mental illness, preventing or delaying recurrences and also decreasing the impact of illness in the affected person, their families and the society” (Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994).
A state in which an individual is able to realise his or her own abilities, handle day-to-day events and obstacles, function effectively among his or her peers, and engage in health-promoting behaviour (World Health Organization). The purpose of mental health promotion is to prevent and reduce the rates of mental illness, namely anxiety and depression.
The concept of psychological wellbeing refers to optimal psychological functioning and life experience. Burn Bright’s ‘wellbeing’ programs don’t refer to a general sense of wellbeing but a specific definition of psychological and eudaimonic wellbeing. Eudaimonic wellbeing explains that wellbeing is just more than being subjectively happy, eudaimonia is about the actualisation of human potential and true nature (Deci & Ryan, 2001). Eudaimonia occurs when people’s life activities are most congruent with deeply held values and are holistically or fully engaged. Under such circumstances people would feel intensely alive and authentic, existing as who they really are (Deci & Ryan, 2001).
Burn Bright uses the word ‘flourishing’ to describe individuals who are free from mental illness (anxiety and depression) and exhibit high levels of emotional and psychological wellbeing and high levels of positive functioning (i.e., psychological and social wellbeing).
Burn Bright uses the word ‘flourishing’ as a psychologically validated word for moving young people towards the flourishing end and away from the mental disorder end (depression and anxiety). Ultimately it is Burn Bright’s goal to have less young people suffering from anxiety and depression and more young people ’flourishing’.
THE BURN BRIGHT TEAM VALUES
THE SYDNEY OFFICE
THE MELBOURNE OFFICE
THE NEW ZEALAND OFFICE
BURN BRIGHT WORKS ACROSS AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND
WE IMPACT YOUNG PEOPLE THROUGH…
Student Leadership Programs
We empower young people through leadership strategies, to enable peer to peer support for others and promote strategies for mental health prevention within their schools and communities.
Our leadership programs educate students through the lens of servant leadership and that to lead others purposefully, they must first learn to lead themselves. Students leave our leadership programs understanding what it takes to become a servant leader, how to use their influence well and importantly, how to incorporate proven leadership qualities into their own daily lives.
Burn Bright’s ‘wellbeing’ programs don’t refer to a general sense of wellbeing but a specific definition of psychological and eudaimonic wellbeing. Our wellbeing programs are specifically designed to enable young people to build a solid foundation of character and values to ignite their lives with the possibility of the future. These programs are a dynamic and engaging way to learn about oneself and the people around them. The acquired leadership behaviours, wellbeing habits and character traits help build meaningful, healthy and positive long-lasting skills and friendships that will continue beyond the school years.
National Camps
Burn Bright delivers camps across Australia. Burn Bright’s prestigious National Leadership Camp is hosted every year in the July school holidays in Sydney. National Leadership Camp brings together 120 high school students from year 10 to 12 over 4 days to explore who they are as leaders and to develop and grow their capacity to serve others and their local communities in a fun and engaging way. Burn Bright also hosts the Perth College Leadership Camp for year 11 and 12 girls in Western Australia during the January school holidays.
WE LOVE OUR MUSIC
Our Burn Bright Leaders
Burn Bright Leaders lead by example. They have demonstrated the capacity, skill-sets and personal attributes to inspire their students to embrace the notion and actions required to become leaders themselves.
All Burn Bright programs have a minimum of two leaders irrespective of the size of the group, allowing them cater to the personalities and learning styles of all students. Every Burn Bright Leader is a strong communicator. When they talk to students our Leaders use real stories and life experiences that build credibility, rapport and a sense of a shared understanding.
SAY HELLO TO OUR TEAM
Andy Skidmore CEO
Andy is a life long social entrepreneur and is passionate about equipping young people to grow as leaders by taking a wellbeing approach and fostering positive and meaningful relationships.
When he was 21 he founded the Not For Profit organisation Burn Bright, a social enterprise with the mission of growing the next generation of young Australians through student leadership, wellbeing programs and national camps. Over the past 5 years Burn Bright has worked with over 50,000, 12-17 year olds, from all corners of Australia through school based programs and hosting the Australian National Leadership Camp.
Burn Bright are student leadership and wellbeing specialists who work with students in a collaborative, fun and inclusive team culture. This brings about positive behavioural change, a shift in mindset and personal wellbeing, allowing students to make informed choices and decisions. Burn Bright’s programs are focused on demonstrating how students can turn theory into action by practicing and road testing skills learnt before applying them in their own lives. Burn Bright has a team of 10 staff and over 100 volunteers. Burn Bright’s programs are based on embedding and living out the concepts of positive psychology and are informed by the science of wellbeing.
In 2018 Burn Bright was named Australia’s Most Innovative Charity by Westpac and UNSW, due to their company culture and their social enterprise business structure. Burn Bright has also won awards for their outstanding use of data and have been recognised by Anthill as one of 100 ‘Cool Australian Companies’ in 2018. Andy is regarded as one of Australia’s leading social entrepreneurs and innovative thinkers to solve some of Australia’s most complex social issues.
Andy graduated from Macquarie University with a Bachelor of Arts – Media. He has studied Social Entrepreneurship at Stanford University in the USA and is currently studying his Masters in Coaching Psychology at Sydney University.
Layton Fraser COO
Layton Fraser is the Chief Operating Officer and program facilitator at Burn Bright Australia.
With a Kiwi accent, it’s easy to miss that he was actually born in South Africa before his parents made the move to New Zealand. Having a strong background in the sporting industry and sports coaching, Layton approaches facilitation from a unique perspective and vantage point.
Upon leaving school Layton studied a sports degree and had the opportunity of working for New Zealand Cricket and the BLACKCAPS for over 6 years, with the 2015 Cricket World Cup being a highlight. Working alongside a professional sporting team provided not only many incredible opportunities, but also gave an insight to how athletes handle and use their inherited influence.
Throughout his younger years, Layton also developed a keen interest in leadership and the opportunities that came with it. This started with Layton being one of the founding members of the Hauraki District Youth Council and flowed on to him attending many leadership forums and events around the globe in his post high school years.
Through attending, facilitating and keynote speaking at these leadership events Layton, started flirting with the idea of how these higher-level concepts and conversations can be transferred and be taught in an engaging and transformative way to school students.
Whilst no longer working with the BLACKCAPS, Layton has not completely stepped out of the professional sporting landscape and for the 2018/19 season is involved with Sydney Thunder BBL & WBBL franchises.
Michaela Young SCHOOLS AND PARTNERSHIPS LEAD
Michaela is a lover of people and all things that allow individuals to live full and well lives.
Michaela grew up in Sydney and completed her high schooling and university there, too. In 2014 Michaela completed a Bachelor of Events and Leisure Management at UTS. Whilst studying she worked for the YMCA for 3 years in Before and After School Care. Soon after graduating, Michaela serendipitously learnt of Burn Bright through a friend, emailed Andy, volunteered for a few weeks, and then joined the team soon after.
After almost 4 wonderful years with Burn Bright, Michaela embarked on a belated ‘gap year’ that led her to teach English overseas in Thailand. Not wanting to leave Burn Bright for too long, she returned to Australia in September of 2019 with the hope of joining the Burn Bright team for round two. 2020 saw Michaela in a new role as Camps, Programs and Community Manager.
Michaela is her best self when investing in the people and communities around her, both in her personal and professional life. Life’s’ golden moments for Michaela include anything to do with connecting with others, adventure, good food and taking in a pretty view.
Harry Steer IT, Systems and Digital Content Lead
Harry first encountered Burn Bright as a delegate at the 2016 National Leadership Camp where his passion for leadership and service was sparked. After returning to National Leadership Camp for a second year as an agent and third year as a mentor, he joined the team as a Casual Facilitator in 2018.
During his time at Burn Bright, Harry has developed a real passion for helping others to unlock their strength and be the best they can be. He hopes to further his passion by influencing change in young people around Australia and watching them undertake their own leadership journey.
Through his journey at Burn Bright, Harry started hopping behind the camera and keyboard, developing skills in photography, videography, web design and system automation. Continuing to develop and grow on these skills, he now serves as the lead for our IT systems and works alongside the team to create content across our social media channels and online courses.
When Harry isn’t working with Burn Bright, you can find him trying out different cafes around Sydney, writing in his notebook, skateboarding or playing basketball.
Peter Strempel Office Support
Peter was born in Perth and moved to Sydney in his early 20’s to continue work as a youth worker and surfboard maker. This was followed by 30 years working in IT as a computer programmer.
Following retirement in 2016 he searched for an organisation that was aligned with his values of servant leadership and service, especially in the youth space.
This search led to Burn Bright where he is now volunteering one day a week and mentoring at the National Leadership Camp.
Peter has been married to Denise for 38 years and they both feel part of the Burn Bright team.
When not at Burn Bright you may find Peter running along Manly beach, riding his mountain bike or indulging his passion for photography.
Sarah Ashton Programs Lead
Sarah was born and raised in a small country town in Northern NSW. She moved to Sydney Independently at the age of 16 to pursue her studies for year 11 and 12, and talents as a dancer at Newtown High School of the Performing Arts. After graduating Sarah struggled with Anxiety and Depression and was referred to KYDS, an organisation that provides easy access to mental health and well-being support to young people within the community. Because of the help Sarah received at KYDS she gained the confidence to pursue a 6 month Bollywood contract in India.
Upon returning to Australia Sarah studied a Bachelor of Media and Communications at Macquarie University and then went on to pursue her passion for the Film and TV industry at the International Screen Academy. Along with her studies Sarah was appointed the role of Youth Ambassador for KYDS where she used her own experiences to benefit others, encouraging other young people to seek help, reduce stigma amongst the broader community, as well as raise awareness and funds for the organisation.
Her work with KYDS led her to Burn Bright and cemented her passion for positively influencing the youth of today.
In Sarah’s down time she has a love for rock climbing, karaoke and chasing adventures with her wonderful fiancé and step daughter.
Sarah Dunn Program Facilitator
Sarah was born and raised in a small farming community in North Queensland prior to her move to Sydney in 2019. Sarah has always had a passion for supporting community projects and thriving for positive and rewarding relationships with others. This has lead to her participation and involvement in school councils, local community groups and many fundraising events throughout her life. She is keen to continue this passion and inspire positivity in students with Burn Bright.
Sarah developed an interest for performing from a young age and has recently graduated with a Bachelor of Theatre (Specialisation Musical Theatre) in 2019 from Central Queensland University. She hopes to go on and complete her Masters sometime in the near future.
Outside of work, Sarah enjoys singing, playing tennis, going bowling with her friends and visiting the beach
Melanie Brading Program Facilitator
Melanie recently graduated from Macquarie University with a Bachelor of Social Science majoring in Social Justice and a Graduate Certificate in Teaching English as a Second Language.
She believes leadership and a strong understanding of self and others is the key to positive change, and is passionate about serving others, mentoring, and striving for excellence.
She has been inspired by international leaders and attending leadership events such as the Global Young Diplomats Forum.
She leads several volunteer teams and is a local youth leader.
In her spare time, Melanie loves reading every thing she can get her hands on, cooking and writing.
Belle Powell Program Facilitator
Belle believes in the power of people, kindness and authenticity.
Belle was born in London to American and Australian parents. Her cross cultural upbringing saw her spend her formative years in England, the USA and finally Australia where she has been settled for the last 5 years.
Belle’s story with Burn Bright begins in 2016 when she attended NLC as a student. Her enriching experience saw her return the following year as an Agent to continue to soak up the vision and impact of Burn Bright. Belle joined the team in 2020 as a Casual Facilitator with the goal of investing in and unlocking leadership in young people across Australia and New Zealand.
Belle is to begin study next year at the University of Sydney majoring in Politics and International Relations. Her passion for social justice saw her elected to the YMCA Youth Parliament as Minister for Women’s Affairs and Penrith Youth Advisory council.
In her spare time, you’ll find Belle at a yoga class, listening to a podcast, chatting to a loved one or going for a bush walk.
Blair Vincent Chairperson
Blair grew up in Sydney, playing Rugby Union from an early age. This passion has continued to this day, and has translated to a fierce competitive streak. Spending some time working alongside CEO Andy Skidmore, I learned firsthand the value of strong working relationships. The highlight was a roadtrip to Finley then on to Canberra, 6 hours whizzing by in the blink of an eye.
More recently Blair has been working at Macquarie Bank, learning along the way the many challenges of leadership and managing people. Blair is married to Hannah, a deeply compassionate yet quick-witted social worker.
On weekends you’ll find me either playing sport, watching sport or catching up with mates.
Cath Healy Non-Executive Director
Cath believes investing in the mental health and wellbeing of young people is investing in our future. She’s a passionate supporter of Burn Bright and the positive impact that their programs and camps have on the young people in Australia and New Zealand.
Cath has a double degree in Social Work and Arts majoring in Psychology & Sociology and a Graduate Diploma Mental Health Science majoring in Children & Adolescents. She has extensive experience working with children, young people, their families and schools as a Wellbeing Practitioner in NSW and as a Student Support Services Officer in VIC.
Cath lives in Rural NSW with her husband and two sons and works in Private Practice, providing online and face-to-face therapeutic counselling.
Ammy Lewis Non-Executive Director
Ammy is impassioned by two things: leadership and the law – and she considers her positions on the Burn Bright Board and as a solicitor to be a perfect marriage of the two.
Ammy holds a Bachelor of Laws / Bachelor of International Studies and has worked for the Vice President of the Fair Work Commission and as a solicitor in the world’s largest specialist employment law practice.
Ammy attended her first National Leadership Camp in 2009 and has made it her mission to change the lives of young people ever since.
Ammy believes in the power of education and is a champion for mental health awareness in the law and breaking the cycle of disadvantage.
Matt Schultz Non-Executive Director
Matt’s passion and focus is young people and leadership and you can see this reflected in his achievements
and the communities he has been willing to serve throughout his life. Matt graduated from the University of
Newcastle in 2006 with a Bachelor of Arts in History and Japanese. After his graduation Matt begun working
for the Not-For-Profit mentoring organisation ‘Rush’. As mentor coordinator Matt was able to impact the
lives of countless young people throughout the Newcastle and Hunter regions.
In 2011, Matt graduated with his Masters of Teaching and for the last 4 and a half years he has been teaching
history at a high school in Newcastle. Matt has also volunteered as a mentor at National Leadership Camp and at the
Canberra based National Student Leadership Forum. One thing you may not know about Matt is that he can
recite the alphabet backwards in 7 languages. Feel free to ask Matt to show you this skill if you ever see him around!
Edward Swayne Non-Executive Director
Ed is the numbers man on the Burn Bright Board!
Throughout his career, he’s worked with top-tier investment banks. Ed has significant experience with capital raising projects and has worked across major Merger and Acquisition deals.
He studied a Bachelor of Commerce and Economics at Macquarie University majoring in Actuarial Studies & Finance.
He’s the proud Dad of Ethan & Anna and is a stock market guru.
Andrew Lawrence Non-Executive Director
Andrew brings broad business experience to the Burn Bright Board!
Through a 30 year career he has driven growth and profitability at Visy Industries, Dairy Farmers, Mars, Colgate and Nestle after commencing as a Graduate Trainee at Unilever. He holds a BE and BSc from Sydney Uni and a MComm from UNSW. He has led or been on leadership teams and boards in his key roles for over 20 years and brings a wealth of experience to the BB team.
Beyond this business career he had been a life mentor to many over the past 10 years and has a passion for young people to be transformed into the leaders of the future in whatever they do. He built a number of high performing teams through his business career and loves seeing people reach their full potential and making a mark on this planet. In recent years he has completed coaching certifications and a range of other courses in the personal transformation space and is also a Personal Trainer with Vision PT and trains a number of professional clients most mornings.
He is married to the beautiful Jess and has 3 early 20’s children who are awesome and are exploring their passions in this world with amazing success. They have taught Andrew plenty over the years and they share awesome relationships these days despite having to take a tough road at times to get to here. He grew up in Adelaide then Sydney from the age of 13 and has lived in Melbourne and Albury but now resides back in Sydney.
The Burn Bright Blog
September 5, 2019 Burn Bright named as most innovative charity second year in a row – NFP Innovation Index
Burn Bright named as Australia’s most innovative charity second year in a row – NFP Innovation Index 5 Sept 2019 – Sydney -Burn Bright has just been announced for the second year in a [...]
September 12, 2018 Innovation Awards: Burn Bright leads the charity sector through innovative approach
12 Sept 2018 – Sydney -Burn Bright has just been announced by the 2018 GiveEasy Innovation Index as the Number One Not-For-Profit Innovator in Australia as a result of their influential [...]
September 10, 2018 How Human-Centered Innovation is an Organisational Game Changer
By their very nature, charities exist to enhance social wellbeing. It stands to reason that if the people who are part of those charities, the ones who are committed to service, are in fact [...]
WE COULDN’T DO THIS WITHOUT OUR ALL STARS
Organisations We Partner With
National Leadership Camp Supporters
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1730
|
__label__wiki
| 0.589455
| 0.589455
|
Connecticut Health Investigative Team (https://c-hit.org/tag/grissell-gonzalez/)
Grissell Gonzalez
By Sujata Srinivasan | June 9, 2020
Tameeka Coleman and six of her children lived on the streets before moving into a shelter in Fairfield. “We were together, so it was bearable,” said Coleman, 38. The hardest part was when her children cried for their home. “They wanted to know how we had lost our apartment,” said Coleman, who was evicted after she couldn’t pay the rent. Living conditions play a key role in children’s well-being.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1733
|
__label__wiki
| 0.931143
| 0.931143
|
WWE: Wrestlers Who Could Have Carried WrestleMania
Leave it to the WWE to move from one legendary tradition at WrestleMania and create something totally new to help create new hype and drama.
If it is true that Triple H and The Rock could be headed to a WrestleMania 31 showdown, then let me be the first to say Hallelujah. This is a former feud that could have some legs and could sell many tickets at the new Levi’s Stadium. It’s only fitting to bring The Rock to the millions (and millions) of fans in the WWE on the company’s grandest stage.
As a fan of professional wrestling and someone who loves WrestleMania, here are a few wrestlers who I would have loved to see headline the event, and could have carried it on their backs in grand fashion.
BARRY WINDHAM
The son of wrestler Blackjack Mulligan. He is best known for his appearances with the National Wrestling Alliance (NWA) and World Championship Wrestling (WCW).
In NWA/WCW, he was a one-time NWA World Heavyweight Champion, a one-time United States Heavyweight Champion, a one-time Television Champion, a one-time Western States Heritage Champion, a four-time NWA (Mid Atlantic)/WCW World Tag Team Champion and a one-time NWA United States Tag Team Champion with Ron Garvin.
In the WWF, he was a two-time World Tag Team Champion with his brother-in-law, Mike Rotunda. On March 31, 2012, Windham was inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame as a member of the Four Horsemen.
CURT HENNIG
Hennig is recognized by WWE as a one-time world champion, having held the AWA World Heavyweight Championship for 373 days (the seventh-longest reign in history). He won three additional world championships: the WWC Universal Heavyweight Championship once, and the I-Generation World Heavyweight Championship twice. A two-time WWF Intercontinental Champion, Hennig has been named by WWE as one of the greatest Intercontinental Champions of all time, and was the longest-reigning champion of the 1990s.
Hennig returned to the WWF for a brief period in 2002, being one of the last three men remaining at the Royal Rumble. He later challenged for the NWA World Heavyweight Championship in TNA, prior to his death on February 10, 2003.
KERRY VON ERICH
The Modern Day Warrior and the Texas Tornado. He was part of the Von Erich family of professional wrestlers. He is best known for his time with his father’s promotion World Class Championship Wrestling (WCCW), where he spent eleven years of his career, and his time in World Wrestling Federation (WWF).
Adkisson held forty championships in various promotions during his career. Among other accolades, he was a five-time world champion: a four-time WCWA World Heavyweight Champion and one-time NWA World Heavyweight Champion, and a one-time WWF Intercontinental Champion.
TERRY FUNK
Funk has appeared in the NWA, AWA, WWF/E, WCW, ECW, ROH, and TNA.
In major promotions, Funk is a three-time World Champion, having held the NWA World Heavyweight Championship once and ECW World Heavyweight Championship twice.
He is the only man to have been inducted into the WWE, WCW, Professional Wrestling, NWA, Hardcore, Wrestling Observer, and St. Louis Wrestling Halls of Fame.
Funk is often noted for the longevity of his career, which has included multiple “retirement” matches.
In the 1970s and 1980s, he and his brother Dory Funk were two of the best mat wrestler to ever appear in a ring.
RON SMMMONS
In WCW, Simmons was a one-time WCW World Heavyweight Champion; as the first African American to win the title, he is recognized by WWE as the first black world heavyweight champion in professional wrestling history. He was also a one-time WCW World Tag Team Champion with Butch Reed and a one-time WCW United States Tag Team Champion with Big Josh.
In the WWF, Simmons was a three-time WWF Tag Team Champion with Bradshaw as one half of the Acolytes Protection Agency. As the leader of stable The Nation of Domination, he also competed for the company’s singles championships on pay-per-view, headlining the 1997 King of the Ring event against The Undertaker for the WWF Championship. Simmons was inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame Class of 2012.
He is a current trainer currently working for WWE. He makes occasional on-air appearances on other WWE television and pay-per-views and works as a backstage booker and producer in WWE’s NXT Wrestling developmental territory. Billed as “the son of a plumber”, Rhodes’ character was that of the American working man, particularly in promo videos such as his famous ‘Hard Times’.
Rhodes is a three-time NWA World Heavyweight Champion, and during his time in Jim Crockett Promotions (the forerunner of WCW), he was a former United States Champion, and multi-time Television, World Tag Team, and Six-Man Tag Team Champion. He has also won many regional championships during his wrestling career.
He is one of six men inducted into each of the WWE, WCW, Professional Wrestling, and Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame.
OWEN HART
Among his many accolades, Hart was a one-time world champion, having held the USWA Unified World Heavyweight Championship during the USWA’s partnership with the WWF, a two-time WWF Intercontinental Champion, a one-time IWGP Junior Heavyweight Champion, a one-time WWF European Champion, and a four-time WWF World Tag Team Champion.
He was also the winner of the 1994 WWF King of the Ring. A staple of the WWF’s In Your House pay-per-view series from 1995–1998, Hart wrestled more matches at those events than any other performer with 22, including three headlining slots. He also main-evented SummerSlam 1994 in a steel cage match against older brother Bret Hart for the WWF Championship, which remains one of only five WWF matches in history awarded a full five stars in the Wrestling Observer Newsletter.
The Randy Savage Story DVD
Randy Macho Man Savage Collector’s Edition Box Set
[amazon_link id=”B00JHH1YAW” target=”_blank” container=”” container_class=”” ]WWE The Paul Heyman Story[/amazon_link]
Related Items:wrestlemania
Top 10 Shawn Michaels WWE WrestleMania Matches
WrestleMania 1: Awkward Promos and Bad Perms
WWE WrestleMania – Opening the Mania Part 1
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1736
|
__label__wiki
| 0.578109
| 0.578109
|
BJORK v. MASON
Court of Appeal, First District, Division 2, California.
Brian BJORK, a Minor, etc., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. David M. MASON, Defendant and Respondent.
No. A084831.
Monte L. Hansen, Mark T. Clausen, Hansen & Jones, Santa Rosa, Attorneys for Appellant. Terence S. Cox, Karen M. Houston, Cox, Wootton, Griffin & Hansen LLP, San Francisco, Attorneys for Respondent.
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an appeal by a boy who was injured when a tow rope attached to an inner tube in which he and another boy were riding, and which was being pulled by a boat owned and driven by respondent, broke and snapped back, hitting him in the eye. The trial court held that the case was covered by the primary assumption of risk doctrine articulated in Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696 (Knight ) and, on that basis, granted respondent summary judgment. We reverse.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On July 17, 1997, appellant, then age 15, along with four other boys, ages 11 to 15, went to Lake Berryessa, Napa County, where they spent the day in various water sports, mainly involving water skiing and inner tubing behind a boat owned and driven by the second cousin of three of the boys, respondent Mason. Mason, a self-employed adult, lives in Novato, Marin County, as did the five boys he took with him to the lake that day.
At the time, Mason owned a 19-foot, 1981 Ski Centurion boat powered by a 275 horsepower motor which he often used for water skiing on, e.g., Lake Berryessa, Lake Shasta and the Sacramento River Delta. In his deposition, he testified that he had at least 25 years of experience in recreational boating, including pulling water skiers and people riding in inner tubes.
On the day in question, Mason was not being paid for any of his time or effort. Indeed, as noted, three of the five boys he took with him on the day in question were his second cousins. The group spent the morning and the early portion of the afternoon with Mason (and him only) driving his boat and the boys taking turns both water skiing and being pulled in the inner tube (tubing). Each type of activity consumed about 50% of the time, Mason testified. In connection with the tubing part of the day's activities, Mason's only instructions to the five boys were: “Wear a life vest and try to stay on.”
The inner tube apparatus Mason used for that part of the day's recreation was owned by him and brought by him to the lake. It consisted of a combined inflated rubber tube and attached rope. Mason had no idea how or when he acquired this unit; he testified that it “just showed up amongst my ski equipment.” He did not know if he had owned it for more than five or ten years, stating “I just don't know when it showed up.” However, he had not used the device previously in 1997. He did not recall if he had used it at all the previous year, but noted that he “used it very seldom.” In the off-season, he stored the unit, enclosed in a special container, in his father's attic. On the day in question, he inspected the tube and rope; both appeared to be “in safe condition.”
Some of the tubing in the morning involved two boys in or on the tube, with Mason's boat pulling it and them. Appellant had been one of two boys on it during one such prior occasion. Sometime early in the afternoon the group resumed tubing and appellant and one of the other boys, Robert Stafford, got on the tube together. Their combined weight was estimated at about 260 pounds, or the equivalent of one large man; Mason thought this was a safe weight. With Mason driving, the boat proceeded through a “No Wake” zone marked by buoys; in this zone, the boat's speed was legally limited to five miles per hour so as to avoid creating a wake. However, near the end of the zone, Mason twice briefly accelerated the speed of the boat two or three miles per hour above that level so as to increase the movement of the tube and, thus, the enjoyment of its passengers. At the second of these accelerations, the tow rope broke; the broken end flew backwards and struck appellant in the eye, injuring him.
Mason testified that he had experienced or seen broken tow ropes many times in his extensive experience with water skiing and tubing. However, he had never previously had anyone hurt while tubing, and had seen only one injury involving water skiing.
Two expert witnesses retained by appellant opined that (1) the tow rope which broke was “very old” (perhaps 10 years old) and frayed, (2) a tow rope should be replaced whenever it appears frayed and damaged and, in any event, at least every two years, and (3) it is important to use a tow rope that is appropriate for the weight being towed.
Appellant, via his guardian ad litem father, filed a complaint stating a single cause of action for negligence in Marin County Superior Court on October 2, 1997. Respondent filed a general denial, specifically pleading assumption of risk. After discovery, including the depositions of both parties, respondent moved for summary judgment. After further briefing and oral argument, the motion was granted on July 22, 1998, and judgment for the respondent entered on September 21, 1998. This timely appeal followed.
III. DISCUSSION
A. Standard of Review
A motion for summary judgment “shall be granted [by the trial court] if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (c).) However, summary judgment shall not be granted by the court based on inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence, if contradicted by other inferences or evidence, which raise a triable issue as to any material fact. (Ibid.) To obtain summary judgment, a defendant must show either that one of the required elements of the plaintiff's case cannot be established or that “there is a complete defense to that cause of action.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (o)(2).) If the defendant meets this burden, the burden then shifts to the plaintiff to “set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists,” in order to rebut the defendant's showing. (Ibid.)
Appellant challenges the trial court's grant of summary judgment, contending that a triable issue of fact exists as to whether the doctrine of assumption of risk applies. Since determining whether the primary assumption of risk doctrine applies resolves the question of whether a duty of care exists, it is “a legal question ․ to be decided by the court․” (Knight, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 313, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696.) We therefore review the trial court's grant of summary judgment de novo “to determine whether the defendant has conclusively negated a necessary element of the plaintiff's case or demonstrated that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of trial.” (Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center (1993) 6 Cal.4th 666, 673-674, 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 137, 863 P.2d 207.)
B. Primary Assumption of Risk
The trial court found that the primary assumption of risk doctrine obtained here and barred recovery by appellant. Appellant asserts that this ruling was erroneous because, he asserts (1) there was and is a triable issue of fact as to whether respondent increased the risks inherent in tubing by his action in twice accelerating the boat a few miles per hour over the posted speed limit before he had completely exited the restricted speed zone, and (2) the breaking of a tow rope is not an inherent risk of water skiing or tubing.
Respondent supports the trial court's ruling, contending that the parties to this litigation were coparticipants in a sporting activity of the sort that implicates the primary assumption of risk doctrine and that his own behavior did not rise to the level required to exempt him from the protection afforded a sport coparticipant by that doctrine.
To sort out all this, we must start with our Supreme Court's 1992 decision in Knight. There, a plurality of the court ruled that a participant in a touch football game involving both men and women was barred by the doctrine of primary assumption of risk from recovering from injuries she suffered therein. Labeling her a “coparticipant” in the particular sport involved, the court held: “[W]e conclude that a participant in an active sport breaches a legal duty of care to other participants-i.e., engages in conduct that properly may subject him or her to financial liability-only if the participant intentionally injures another player or engages in conduct that is so reckless as to be totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport.” (Knight, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 320, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696.)
Simultaneously with the filing of Knight, the court decided Ford v. Gouin (1992) 3 Cal.4th 339, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 834 P.2d 724 (Ford ). This case is even more instructive in the present circumstances, as it involved not touch football players but two men involved in waterskiing, the plaintiff being the skier and the defendant the driver of the boat. The former was skiing both barefoot and backwards in a channel of the Sacramento River Delta, and was severely injured when his head hit a tree limb. He sued the defendant, claiming his injuries resulted from the defendant's steering the boat too close to the wooded shoreline. Before the Supreme Court, he contended that any assumption of risk doctrine “should not apply in the context of a ‘cooperative’ sport such as waterskiing.” (Id. at p. 345, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 834 P.2d 724.) The court disagreed: “Although most of the prior authorities cited in Knight did involve sports that are played by competing teams, the rationale of those decisions is, in our view, equally applicable to an active sport such as waterskiing even when it is engaged in on a noncompetitive basis. [¶] As noted in Knight, the decisions that have recognized the existence of only a limited duty of care in a sports situation generally have reasoned that vigorous participation in the sport likely would be chilled, and, as a result, the nature of the sport likely would be altered, in the event legal liability were to be imposed on a sports participant for ordinary careless conduct. [Citation.] This reasoning applies to waterskiing. Even when a water-skier is not involved in a ‘competitive’ event, the skier has undertaken vigorous, athletic activity, and the ski boat driver operates the boat in a manner that is consistent with, and enhances, the excitement and challenge of the active conduct of the sport. Imposition of legal liability on a ski boat driver for ordinary negligence in making too sharp a turn, for example, or in pulling the skier too rapidly or too slowly, likely would have the same kind of undesirable chilling effect on the driver's conduct that the courts in other cases feared would inhibit ordinary conduct in various sports. As a result, holding ski boat drivers liable for their ordinary negligence might well have a generally deleterious effect on the nature of the sport of waterskiing as a whole. Additionally, imposing such liability might well deter friends from voluntarily assisting one another in such potentially risky sports. Accordingly, the general rule limiting the duty of care of a coparticipant in active sports to the avoidance of intentional and reckless misconduct, applies to participants engaged in noncompetitive but active sports activity, such as a ski boat driver towing a water-skier. Under the principles set forth in Knight, summary judgment in favor of defendant was properly entered.” (Ford, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 345, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 834 P.2d 724.)
Focusing even more specifically on the sporting activity involved here is the very recent decision of a panel of Division Five of the Second District, Record v. Reason (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 472, 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 547 (Record ). There, four adults, including the plaintiff and defendant, went waterskiing and tubing on Castaic Lake in southern California. The plaintiff was injured when he fell from the tube during what he claimed was an abrupt and fast turn executed by the defendant, the owner of the tube and the driver and part owner of the boat. The court held, with one dissent,1 that the trial court was correct in granting summary judgment to the defendant on the basis of the primary assumption of risk doctrine.
The Record court had relatively little difficulty concluding, largely on the basis of the holding in Ford, supra, that tubing was a type of sporting activity covered by the doctrine. It noted: “Compiling all of the distinguishing factors, it appears that an activity falls within the meaning of ‘sport’ if the activity is done for enjoyment or thrill, requires physical exertion as well as elements of skill, and involves a challenge containing a potential risk of injury. From the evidence presented, tubing meets these criteria. Egstrom, in his declaration, described the equipment used, the force and speed experienced by the rider even when the boat is going at recommended speeds, the skill needed by the boat operator, and how the rider's position affected his ability to stay on. In his deposition, appellant described the enjoyment a rider receives from tubing as ranging from, the ‘simple pleasure’ of being casually towed behind the boat to the ‘thrill’ of the boat turning rapidly to get the inner tuber to go much quicker. Inner tubing thus appears to be a variation of water-skiing designed to accommodate those eager to experience the force of whipping around the wakes but lacking the ability to water-ski. Combating centrifugal force with a white knuckled grip on the tube handles entails at least as much physical exertion as sport fishing. Skill in developing a steadfast grip and feel for the tube as it travels is required, and an experienced tube rider will obviously have a greater ability to stay on the tube than a beginner. For these reasons, we hold that tubing is a sporting activity subject to primary assumption of risk.” (Record, supra, 73 Cal.App.4th at p. 482, 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 547.)
We agree with this analysis and adopt it here.
Another issue dealt with in Record was whether a driver of the boat is a coparticipant in the sport of tubing. Unlike appellant here,2 the defendant-boat driver in Record contended he was not. The court observed: “[A]ppellant contends that the control the boat driver has over the tube rider's speed and direction removes tubing from primary assumption of risk because the boat driver is not a coparticipant with the tube rider but controls the tube rider's activity. He likens the relationship to that of instructor and pupil. [Citations.] [¶] Appellant's attempt to analogize respondent to an instructor or supervisor lacks merit. Appellant was not under the tutelage of the respondent, and respondent had no position of authority over him. They were friends who chose to take a trip together to a lake to engage in a mutually enjoyable sport. ‘Under the reasoning of Knight, participants are ․ those actively engaged in the game or other activity.’ [Citation.] In Ford v. Gouin, supra, 3 Cal.4th at page 345, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 834 P.2d 724, the court held that the boat driver was a coparticipant in the sport of waterskiing. A boat driver is equally as integral to tubing as to waterskiing. [Citation.] We see no reason to question respondent's status as a coparticipant.” (Record, supra, 73 Cal.App.4th at pp. 485-486, 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 547.)
Based both on this precedent and respondent's concession, we conclude that respondent occupied coparticipant status with appellant.3
Such being the case, one of the bases urged by appellant for reversal may be disposed of rather easily. It is that, by twice accelerating his boat a few miles per hour above the posted limit so as to “[have] fun with the kids,” respondent improperly increased the risks inherent in the sport of tubing and is thus ineligible to rely on the primary assumption of risk defense. We have no difficulty in rejecting this contention. If the primary assumption of risk doctrine has any substance at all, it cannot preclude the sort of minimal transgression appellant complains of regarding the two minor and brief accelerations of the boat. Indeed, almost exactly this point was dealt with in Record: whether the speed and turn angle utilized by that defendant at the time that plaintiff was thrown by the tube raised a triable issue of fact as to whether those actions “increased the risks inherent in the sport.” (Record, supra, 73 Cal.App.4th at p. 484, 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 547.) Again relying on the very similar fact situation of Ford, the court held they did not: “Even assuming, as we must for summary judgment review purposes, that the boat was traveling five to ten miles per hour over the recommended speed limit for towing adults in the tube and that respondent made a sharp, three-quarter turn, respondent's activity was merely negligent, ‘an “inherent risk” of [the] sport,’ barring recovery for the appellant. (Knight [ ], supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 316 [11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696].) Holding a boat driver to a duty to ensure the tube rider does not fall off the tube would inevitably chill the driver's willingness to provide the exciting ride which appears to be necessary to tubing and narrow the spectrum of excitement, changing the fundamental nature of the sport. Appellant did not meet his burden of showing that the alleged conduct was outside the boundaries of the sport.” (Record, supra, 73 Cal.App.4th at p. 485, 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 547; see also Ford, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 345, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 834 P.2d 724.)
We agree and hold that, for the same reason, the alleged minor “accelerations” by respondent while exiting the “no wake” zone cannot form a basis for liability to appellant under the primary assumption of risk doctrine.
But respondent was something more than a coparticipant for purposes of this case: he was also the supplier of all of the equipment used on the day in question, and a failure of one piece of that equipment caused the injury at issue. As noted earlier, appellant's second contention is that a broken tow rope is not an inherent risk of the sport of tubing, relying on the declarations of the two experts noted above. We will now address that issue.
Respondent answers this second contention by (1) citing his uncontradicted testimony that he had seen many broken tow ropes in both waterskiing and tubing and (2) arguing that the test of liability pertinent to coparticipants is whether the defendant's conduct was intentional or reckless. Unfortunately, both parties are able to cite language in Knight to support their respective positions regarding the pertinent test of liability.
At one point in Knight, the Court generally described the responsibility of persons involved in sports and sporting facilities as being “not to increase the risks to a participant over and above those inherent in the sport.” (Knight, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 316, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696.) Inherent risks are assumed by a participant, the court went on; risks over and above those are not necessarily assumed. Appellant quotes these passages from Knight and then asserts that a broken towrope (like the faulty ski resort towrope noted in the same passage of Knight ) is not an inherent risk of the sport of tubing.
Respondent responds by quoting language a few pages later in Knight where the court dealt directly with the test applicable to coparticipants. In those passages, the court held that a participant may be liable to a coparticipant for injuries the latter suffers if, but only if, “the participant intentionally injures another player or engages in conduct that is so reckless as to be totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport.” (Knight, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 320, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696; see also id. at pp. 318-319, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696.)
We concede that the two tests thus articulated a few pages apart in Knight are a bit confusing.4 But we believe that the correct test is the second one, i.e., that set forth in the portion of the opinion dealing specifically with the liability of coparticipants in sports. As applied here, that test means that respondent can only be liable to appellant for injuries caused the latter by any intentional or reckless actions undertaken in his or her capacity as a coparticipant. We stress this latter point because we believe that, as and when a person supplies equipment to be used in a sport, even if he or she thereafter becomes a coparticipant in the sport, the act of supplying the equipment is something separate and distinct from participation in the sport and the tests for liability are accordingly different.
First of all, every one of the assumption of risk cases that has even come close to discussing equipment failures has made clear that these are covered by general negligence rules and not by the primary assumption of risk doctrine. In Knight itself, as already noted, the court explicitly distinguished between the case of a ski resort not smoothing out moguls on a ski run and letting its towropes deteriorate. (Knight, supra, 3 Cal.4th at pp. 315-316, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696.) And in several of the coach/instructor cases (although a fortiori not involving coparticipants), the courts have stressed the duty of the defendant “not to supply faulty equipment.” (Wattenbarger v. Cincinnati Reds, Inc., supra, 28 Cal.App.4th at p. 755, 33 Cal.Rptr.2d 732; cf. also Galardi, supra, 16 Cal.App.4th at pp. 822-824, 20 Cal.Rptr.2d 270 [horse jumping instructor raising the levels of the hurdle too high]; Tan, supra, 13 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1534-1536, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 89 [stable allowing plaintiff student to ride a horse which was “off” in its behavior].)
And even where coparticipants are involved, one recent case has effectively held that the failure of a defendant to have and utilize the correct equipment (a retention strap on his snowboard) was critical. It meant, the court said, that the “doctrine of primary assumption of the risk is not an absolute bar to recovery ․, because the lack of a retention strap could be found by a jury to have increased the risk of harm to plaintiff beyond what was inherent in the sport of skiing.” (Campbell, supra, 75 Cal.App.4th at p. 830, 89 Cal.Rptr.2d 519.) 5
Although no assumption of risk case of which we are aware has specifically so held, we think this reluctance to treat injuries caused by equipment failures similarly to injuries caused purely by coparticipant action is both correct and supported by general tort law. We note in particular the language of Restatement Second of Torts section 405: “One who directly ․ gives or lends a chattel for another to use, knowing or having reason to know that it is or is likely to be dangerous for the use for which it is given or lent, is subject to the same liability as a supplier of the chattel.” (See also, to the same general effect, Rest.2d Torts, § 388.) Citing section 388, Witkin states that the Restatement Second of Torts “recognizes a general liability on the part of anyone supplying chattels, whether as seller, lessor, bailor, repairer, donor or lender․ ” He goes on to note that California follows this rule. (6 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (9th ed. 1988) Torts, § 949; see also id. at § 958.)
This principle has been recognized in assumption of risk cases. Thus, in Ferrari v. Grand Canyon Dories, supra, a case involving a passenger on a river rafting trip who was injured when she fell against a metal frame on the raft, the court stated: “Defendants' obligation not to increase the risks inherent in the activity included a duty to provide safe equipment for the trip, such as a safe and sound craft.” (32 Cal.App.4th at p. 255, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 65.) As suggested by section 405 of the Restatement Second of Torts, this rule applies whether the equipment is provided commercially or otherwise.6 Thus, the Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that a defendant who allowed his neighbor to use the defendant's defectively assembled sawhorse as the two were erecting a brick wall to enclose the defendant's carport could be liable for injuries sustained by the neighbor when the sawhorse collapsed. (Ellis v. Caristi (Ariz.App.1977) 117 Ariz. 279, 572 P.2d 107, 108). “The fact that the bailment is gratuitous does not change the rule,” said the court, citing Restatement Second of Torts section 405. (Id. at p. 108.)
This rule makes sense especially if one considers other possible scenarios. Thus, suppose that, on the day in question, not the tow rope but a blade of the boat propeller broke off and injured appellant and, further, that expert testimony was adduced that proper maintenance would have prevented the break. Should respondent's conceded coparticipant status mandate summary judgment for him? Next, suppose that, instead of accepting the generosity of respondent on the day in question, appellant's parents had taken him to the same lake and purchased water skiing and tubing recreation for him from a commercial operator, and that one of the operator's tow ropes broke resulting in the same injuries. Should the rule be that the commercial operator might be liable but a gratuitous supplier of the same equipment (e.g., respondent) not? Finally, suppose A wants to go mountain climbing and obtains a climbing rope from an experienced climber, B. Should B's possible exposure to liability for injuries sustained from a break in the rope depend on whether B (1) accompanies A on the climb or (2) receives compensation from A for the use of the rope? Under the rule articulated in sections 388 and 405 of the Restatement Second of Torts, we think the answer to all of these hypotheticals is “no” and, more importantly, that in all instances that is the correct outcome.
In this connection, we should stress that what is before us is not the issue of final imposition of liability on the defendant, but only the issue of whether summary judgment should have been granted in his favor on this record. That record, as noted, contains not one but two declarations by experts opining, among other things, that the tow rope in question was both “very old” and frayed and that, in general, such ropes need to be replaced at least every two years.7 Respondent himself testified he could not recall how or when his inner tube apparatus turned up among his boating and water sports equipment, and could not answer as to whether the device was more than five, or even ten, years old. Such testimony creates, in our view, a triable issue of fact as to whether, qua supplier of the equipment as distinguished from qua coparticipant in the sport of tubing, respondent owed appellant a duty of care to supply nondefective equipment.
IV. DISPOSITION
1. This issue which provoked the dissent was whether there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff's pre-ride request to the defendant to “go slow and take it easy” because of a pre-existing back injury could form the basis for an “explicit understanding” to vary the norms of the sport such that would vitiate application of the primary assumption of risk doctrine. (Record, supra, 73 Cal.App.4th at pp. 482-484 and 487-491, 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 547.) Nothing similar to that issue is implicated here.
2. Respondent's counsel impliedly conceded that his client was a coparticipant in his opening brief, and confirmed that concession in oral argument.
3. This conclusion is not, however, as clear here as it was in Record. Here, 5 young boys, all ages 11-15, were waterskiing and tubing under the guidance of one adult, respondent. The latter was the exclusive driver of the boat, which he owned. He was, in a very real sense, in control of all the water sports activities the group engaged in that day. And being in control of others has often been seen to be inconsistent with coparticipant status. The most obvious cases are those involving coaches, instructors or commercial operators on the one hand and students, trainees or customers on the other. The whole assumption of risk doctrine is applied quite differently in such circumstances. (See, e.g., Tan v. Goddard (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1528, 1534-1536, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 89 (Tan ); Galardi v. Seahorse Riding Club (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 817, 822-824, 20 Cal.Rptr.2d 270 (Galardi ); Ferrari v. Grand Canyon Dories (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 248, 254-255, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 65; Allan v. Snow Summit, Inc. (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 1358, 1368-1372, 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 813.) One of the principal reasons for the different rule in such cases is that, in them, the coach, instructor, ski resort or the like is perceived as the “party who controls the activity.” (Bushnell v. Japanese-American Religious & Cultural Center (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 525, 533, 50 Cal.Rptr.2d 671; see also Allan v. Snow Summit, Inc., supra, 51 Cal.App.4th at p. 1370, 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 813 and Wattenbarger v. Cincinnati Reds, Inc. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 746, 754-755, 33 Cal.Rptr.2d 732.)But it does not follow that when there is substantial control of a sporting event by one party, that party is necessarily ineligible for coparticipant status under the primary assumption of risk doctrine. Thus, although here there is no question that respondent was in control of the day's water activities, it is also clear that, as one who has “had boats all my life” and “take[s] children skiing a lot,” respondent found pleasure and enjoyment and in operating his boat on the sort of occasion in question. Thus, even absent his concession, we would conclude that respondent was a coparticipant for purposes of the analysis mandated by Knight.
4. They may well have confused some of our sister courts. For example, in a single paragraph in Allan v. Snow Summit, Inc., supra, 51 Cal.App.4th at p. 1368, 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 813, the court quotes both iterations of the test articulated in Knight. And in the very recent case of Campbell v. Derylo (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 823, 89 Cal.Rptr.2d 519 (Campbell ), a panel of the Third District utilized the “increase the risks over those inherent in the sport” test to reject the defense of primary assumption of risk in a case involving a defendant snowboarder who failed to use a retention strap with his snowboard, resulting in the device speeding down the hill by itself, striking the sitting minor plaintiff. The court conceded that the two were coparticipants (id. at p. 827, fn. 1, 89 Cal.Rptr.2d 519), but did not thereafter consider whether the defendant's conduct fell within the “intentional or reckless” category.
5. But, as noted in the previous footnote, query whether increasing “the risk of harm ․ beyond what [is] inherent in the sport” (Campbell, supra, 75 Cal.App.4th at p. 830, 89 Cal.Rptr.2d 519) is the correct test given a coparticipant relationship.
6. At oral argument, respondent's counsel suggested that this rule obtains only when the equipment was supplied commercially, citing Harrold v. Rolling J Ranch (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 578, 585, 23 Cal.Rptr.2d 671. We disagree; that case neither articulates nor implies any such limitation.Respondent also relies on a “broken fishing line” case, Mosca v. Lichtenwalter (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 551, 68 Cal.Rptr.2d 58, in which the court held that the primary assumption of risk doctrine permitted summary judgment against a plaintiff fisherman who was hit in the eye with a lead sinker attached to a line which had been stuck in a kelp bed, but which flew back when, allegedly, unsafely jerked by the defendant, another fisherman on the same boat. But in that case there was no allegation, or even a basis for an allegation, of a defective fishing line. As every fisherman (or ex-fisherman) can attest, fishing lines are supposed to break under the proper circumstances.
7. Contrast a commercial sporting enterprise case, Ferrari v. Grand Canyon Dories, supra, 32 Cal.App.4th at pages 256-257, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 65, where the court relied on uncontradicted expert testimony that the equipment involved (a river raft with an exposed metal frame) was state of the art to sustain a summary judgment based on primary assumption of risk.
HAERLE, Acting P.J.
LAMBDEN, J., and RUVOLO, J., concur.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1740
|
__label__wiki
| 0.811076
| 0.811076
|
The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jimmie Lawrence TRAYLOR, Defendant and Appellant.
Cr. 19115.
Decided: February 04, 1972
Robert D. Bash, Los Angeles, for defendant and appellant. Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., Robert F. Katz, Deputy Atty. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.
Defendant was charged by information with a violation of section 11500.5 of the Health and Safety Code, possession of heroin for sale, and he entered a plea of not guilty. Two prior felonies were alleged and denied by defendant. Trial by jury was waived.
Defendant was found guilty of possession of heroin (Health & Saf. Code s 11500), as a lessor and necessarily included offense to the crime charged. Defendant's motions for a new trial and for probation were denied, and he was sentenced to state prison, with a request for diagnostic information and recommendation under section 1168 of the Penal Code. Defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction.
Los Angeles police officers testified as to the circumstances of defendant's arrest. They were on routine patrol when a double parked two-door Cadillac drew their attention. As they drove up behind it, the officers activated the red light on their vehicle and the Cadillac pulled ahead and to the curb. The Cadillac had four people in it, two in front, two in back. The officers then saw defendant emerge from the right side of the car, and the driver from the left. Both began running down the street. They were apprehended by one of the officers.
The other officer found two men in the rear seat of the Cadillac, and, with the aid of a flashlight, a tied red balloon with some contents on the floor in front of the right front seat. A further search turned up a green envelope containing fourteen balloons from under the right front seat. All the balloons found contained heroin.
Defendant and Donald Harrison (hereinafter referred to as ‘the driver’) were placed in the police car, evidently under arrest. One of the officers recalled a conversation with defendant which concerned a ‘bogus' twenty dollar bill that had been found on his person, and in which defendant said that the car parked in front of the Cadillac was his car.
A small red mark was observed on defendant's inner arm, and his pupils were contracted when he was examined later that evening. One of the officers had seen the mark at the scene of the arrest.
Defendant contended at trial that he had never been a passenger in the Cadillac and did not know the driver. He testified that he was preparing to cross the street at the corner ahead of where the Cadillac was parked, when he saw an officer pursuing the driver along the sidewalk to a point near where he was standing. Both defendant and the driver were taken to where the cars were parked, and after it was determined that defendant was an ex-convict and had a counterfeit twenty dollar bill in his wallet, he was handcuffed and placed in the police car. Only then was the Cadillac searched and the heroin discovered.
Charges against the driver were dismissed after the preliminary hearing.
Defendant attempted at his trial to prove his version of the facts by calling the driver to the stand. Defendant asked the witness eight questions, all of which he refused to answer on grounds that the answers might tend to incriminate him (U.S. Const., Amend. V), unless he were granted immunity from prosecution.1 He acted on the advice of counsel.
The trial court refused to order the witness to answer the questions, ruling that he had properly invoked his privilege not to answer, in that the answers might tend to incriminate him. Defendant's attorney then took the stand and testified, subject to a motion to strike if the testimony turned out to be inadmissible, to the substance of a conversation he had had with the driver before the noon recess that day.2
Defendant argued that this testimony was admissible, though hearsay, as a declaration of the driver against his penal interest. (Evid.Code s 1230.) The trial court ruled that there was nothing in the statements attributed to the driver which ‘would subject him to the risk of criminal liability,’ and granted the People's motion to strike the entire testimony.
Defendant on appeal renews his contention at trial that the trial court's findings are inconsistent. He argued that if the answers to the questions put to the driver on the witness stand would tend to incriminate him, the same information testified to by another must be against the driver's penal interest. Conversely, if the statements testified to by defendant's attorney are not against the driver's penal interest, the answers to the questions put to the driver on the stand would not tend to incriminate him, and he should have been ordered to answer. In effect, defendant asks this court to hold that a successful assertion of the privilege against self-incrimination with respect to a line of inquiry, automatically makes the assertees extrajudicial declarations on the subject admissible under section 1230 of the Evidence Code.
The first question before us is obviously whether the court erred in its determination that the driver properly invoked the protection of the privilege against self-incrimination. The proper judicial focus in such an investigation is upon the questions asked. The court need not determine what defendant's answers would be, nor that the answers would in fact tend to incriminate the witness. If the witness were required to prove the hazard, he would be compelled to surrender the very protection the constitutional privilege is designed to guarantee. ‘(T)he privilege forbids compelled disclosures which could serve as a ‘link in a chain’ of evidence tending to establish guilt of a criminal offense; in ruling upon a claim of privilege, the trial court must find that it clearly appears from a consideration of all the circumstances in the case that an answer to the challenged question cannot possibly have a tendency to incriminate the witness. (Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486—488, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 L.Ed.2d 1118 (1123—1125); Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 479, 486—488, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 .l.Ed. 653, 661—662; Zonver v. Superior Court, 270 Cal.App.2d 613, 620, 76 Cal.Rptr. 10; Cohen v. Superior Court, 173 Cal.App.2d 61, 68—70, 343 P.2d 286; Evid.Code, s 404.)' (Prudhomme v. Superior Court, 2 Cal.3d 320, 326, 85 Cal.Rptr. 129, 132, 466 P.2d 673, 677.)
When the surrounding circumstances are considered, all doubts as to the propriety of the court's ruling are removed.3 For example, even testimony that merely placed the witness at the scene could provide a ‘link in a chain’ of evidence which could end in proof of the driver's possession of the heroin. Thus the trial court's refusal to instruct the driver to answer the questions put to him by defendant's attorney was not error.
The fact that it is within the judicial imagination that the answers to the questions asked of the driver could incriminate him does not, however, mean that the witness' extrajudicial statements as to the same subject matter necessarily fall within the penal interest exception to the hearsay rule as found in section 1230 of the Evidence Code. Defendant's only argument at trial that the driver's extrajudicial statements were against his own penal interest, was that apparently the trial judge felt that the statements were incriminating to the driver, or he would have ordered the driver to answer the questions put to him on the stand. The argument is not well taken.
The trial court ruled that there was nothing in the driver's extrajudicial statement which would subject him to criminal liability. The test here is not whether the statement could provide a link in a chain of evidence leading to the declarant's criminal liability, but whether the statement satisfies the reason why declarations against interest are admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule. According to Wigmore ‘(t)he basis of the Exception is the principle of experience that a statement asserting a fact distinctly against one's interest is unlikely to be deliberately false or heedlessly incorrect, and is thus sufficiently sanctioned, though oath and cross-examination are wanting.’ (5 Wigmore, Evidence (3d ed. 1940) s 1457, pp. 262—263.)
It is hard to see how, under all the circumstances, the driver should have realized that the statement he made to defendant's counsel was ‘distinctly’ against his own penal interest. While an attorney, well versed in the law concerning the possible inferences of constructive possession which arise when narcotics are found in an automobile, might appreciate that an individual defendant is in a better position to disavow any connection with the narcotics, the more people are found to be in the car, this is too subtle a point to be appreciated by the average layman. Essentially all that the declaration did was to substitute George Browning for defendant as the front seat passenger. To be sure, it covered affirmatively certain matters concerning which the declarant had claimed the privilege against self-incrimination. However, the fact that, on the advice of counsel, he had stood on his constitutional rights as a witness in no way proves that he appreciated that, when he admitted such matters as being on the scene in the statement to defendant's attorney, he might lighten the People's burden in any renewed criminal prosecution against himself.
Defendant's next assignment of error concerns the refusal of the trial court to grant immunity from prosecution to the driver under section 1324 of the Penal Code. Defendant claims that the statute allows the prosecution to secure immunity for its witnesses, but gives no correlative right to a defendant, and thus denied him equal protection of the laws. (U.S.Const., Amend. XIV.) Upon defendant's motion that the driver be granted immunity, the court inquired whether the prosecution joined in the request. The prosecution did not join, whereupon the trial judge indicated that the only applicable statute, section 1324, contains no provision for a grant of immunity on a defense motion in the absence of a request by the district attorney.
The court was faced with a similar issue in People v. Williams, 11 Cal.App.3d 1156, 90 Cal.Rptr. 409. There it held that defendant's constitutional rights were not violated by the trial court's failure to apply section 1324. We reach the same conclusion here. (See also People v. Hernandez, 19 Cal.App.3d 411, 418, 96 Cal.Rptr. 854; In re Marshall K., 14 Cal.App.3d 94, 99—100, 92 Cal.Rptr. 39.)
The thrust of defendant's argument seems to be that the equal protection clause requires that all the rights available to the prosecution must be afforded defendants. To whatever extent this theory has application in criminal procedure, it has no application here. The decision as to who shall be granted immunity is ultimately a legislative function. (See 8 Wigmore, Evidence, s 2281, pp. 490—508, (McNaughton rev. 1961); 13 A.L.R.2d 1439; 21 Am.Jur.2d 219—220, Criminal Law, s 150; 98 C.J.S. Witnesses s 439, pp. 259—263; People v. Groves, 63 Cal.App. 709, 714, 219 P. 1033 (dictum).) Necessarily prosecuting attorney's must exercise considerable discretion in this area, subject to the guidelines established by the Legislature. (42 Am.Jur. 245, Pros. Attys., s 14; 16 Cal.Jur.2d Rev. 363, District and Pros. Attys. s 8.) The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not require that the power to trigger the effect of a law such as section 1324 of the Penal Code which the Legislature has vested in the district attorney must also be exercisable by a defendant. Clearly a legislature can react differently to the probable motives of a prosecutor who requests immunity, and those of a defendant in a criminal case.
Defendant next contends that, during his trial, his right to freedom from unreasonable search was violated, and that the testimony based on the search was inadmissible. During the People's rebuttal a police officer qualified as an expert on narcotics use was permitted, over defendant's objections, to examine defendant for evidence of such use. He testified after the examination that it was his opinion that defendant was then under the influence of narcotics, that there were no physical indications of injections of narcotics as old as the date of defendant's arrest, but that the quantity of fresh marks indicated that defendant was a heavy user of narcotics.
At trial, defendant's counsel was unable to offer any authority for his contention that the examination, conducted during a recess in a room apart from the courtroom, was improper, and we have found none. The examination was limited by the trial court to defendant's head, arms, hands, and legs, and evidently lasted about ten or fifteen minutes. Defendant's counsel was allowed to be present at the examination.
The examination of defendant was certainly less of an intrusion into his privacy than that which would have been sanctioned at the time of his arrest. (Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 86 S.Ct. 1826, 16 L.Ed.2d 908.) The examining officer merely counted and characterized marks on defendant's arms and hands, looked in his eyes, and noted certain outward physical characteristics, such as perspiration. This involved little more than had occurred the day before, when defendant during cross-examination had been requested by the prosecuting attorney to exhibit his bare arm to the court. Defendant complied without objection. One of the arresting officers was at that time also allowed to examine defendant's arm. The only significant differences between the examination complained of and that of the day before was the amount of time expended and the expertise of the person making the examination.
Defendant's contention that the testimony as to the findings made during the examination was not properly admissible in any event, is similarly without foundation. The theory under which the testimony was first offered and admitted was as impeachment of defendant's assertion that he had never used narcotics and that marks observed on his arms during his testimony were an ‘old tattoo.’ Since this question is collateral to the issue of defendant's guilt of the crime charged, we do not doubt that it could properly have been excluded by the trial court as improper impeachment. The court, however, ruled otherwise, and was within its discretion in doing so. (People v. Eisenberg, 266 Cal.App.2d 606, 615, 72 Cal.Rptr. 390; Evid. Code ss 351, 352. See Law Revision Commission Comment to Evid. Code s 780.)
During further argument on the admissibility of the officer's testimony, the People expressed a desire to have the testimony admitted for all purposes. Further testimony was then elicited from the officer, consisting of the officer's opinion that defendant was a user of narcotics at the time of his arrest. With the addition of this opinion the entire testimony became directly relevant to the culpability of defendant as to one element of the crime charged. ‘An essential element of the crime of possession of narcotics is knowledge of the narcotic character of the article possessed (People v. Winston (1956), 46 Cal.2d 151, 161, 293 P.2d 40) and evidence of prior use of narcotics and presence of needle marks is admissible for such purpose. (People v. Casas (1946), 77 Cal.App.2d 255, 257, 175 P.2d 19.)’ (People v. Hancock, 156 Cal.App.2d 305, 312, 319 P.2d 731, 736; People v. Mora, 232 Cal.App.2d 400, 405, 42 Cal.Rptr. 725; People v. Murray, 198 Cal.App.2d 805, 810, 18 Cal.Rptr. 280; People v. Young, 197 Cal.App.2d 129, 131—132, 17 Cal.Rptr. 283).
This brings us to defendant's contention that the evidence was insufficient to show that he had dominion and control of the heroin and that he had knowledge of its narcotic character. Defendant offers People v. Hancock, Supra, 156 Cal.App.2d 305, 319 P.2d 731, and People v. Foster, 115 Cal.App.2d 866, 253 P.2d 50, for the proposition that mere presence, even of an addict, at the scene of discovery of narcotics is not sufficient to support a conviction for possession. In the case at hand, however, the evidence presented by the People indicates circumstances other than ‘mere presence.’ The testimony of the arresting officers concerning defendant's flight from the seat in front of and under which the heroin was found is evidence of defendant's guilt, tending to show both dominion and control and knowledge. In addition, the evidence that defendant was a narcotics user at the time of his arrest certainly indicates knowledge of the character of the substance. The fact that the People's evidence was not uncontradicted is, of course, irrelevant, for it was apparently believed. If the circumstances reasonably justify the trial court's findings, reversal is not warranted merely because the circumstances might also be reasonably reconciled with a contrary finding. (People v. Redmond, 71 Cal.2d 745, 755, 79 Cal.Rptr. 529, 457 P.2d 321; People v. Williams, 5 Cal.3d 211, 214, 95 Cal.Rptr. 530, 485 P.2d 1146.)
The trial court ruled that a violation of section 11556 of the Health and Safety Code (knowing presence in a place where narcotics are being unlawfully used) is not an offense necessarily included in a charge under section 11500 of the same code. Defendant does not assign this as error, but he argues that the trial court should have amended the complaint, on its own motion, to charge a violation of section 11556.
This argument is apparently based on a distinction drawn by this court in People v. Wilson, 271 Cal.App.2d 60, 76 Cal.Rptr. 195. There we distinguished a number of cases which had upheld treatment of section 11556 as an offense necessarily included within a charge of possession, noting that those cases were upheld on the theory that the proceedings were actually ‘informal amendments' of the information. That opinion goes on to hold, however, that this theory has no applicability where the lesser charge is not itself supported by the evidence. (People v. Wilson, Supra, 271 Cal.App.2d 60, 62—63, 76 Cal.Rptr. 195; see People v. Hensel, 233 Cal.App.2d 834, 43 Cal.Rptr. 865.)
Here the trial court ruled at the time of defendant's motion for a new trial that there was not sufficient evidence of recent use to support a finding on the lesser charge. In any event the trial court was satisfied of defendant's guilt of simple possession of heroin as a lesser and necessarily included offense to the crime charged. Furthermore, defendant's motion was not for an amendment to the complaint to show a separate offense, but for a finding that section 11556 is a necessarily included offense. The court correctly ruled that it was not.
Defendant's last point, as presented, has no merit. He claims that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to order a diagnostic study under section 1203.03 of the Penal Code. It seems obvious that if there was such an abuse, it was probably rectified by the court's request for a diagnostic study and recommendation pursuant to section 1168 of the Penal Code. (Holder v. Superior Court, 1 Cal.3d 779, 782, fn. 3, 83 Cal.Rptr. 353, 463 P.2d 705.)
The Attorney General's brief recognizes that the real issue is not the trial court's failure to commit defendant under section 1203.03, but the expressed reason for that refusal: because of a prior conviction involving the use of a deadly weapon, defendant was ineligible for probation unless, according to the terms of the sixth unnumbered paragraph of section 1203 of the Penal Code, the court found his case to be ‘unusual’ and the district attorney concurred in the grant of probation. The deputy district attorney advised the court that he had been instructed ‘to suggest that the only appropriate punishment, as hard a decision as that is, in Mr. Traylor's case be a sentence on the state level,’ and that his office would not consent to probation, even if a referral under section 1203.03 would result in a favorable recommendation. The court then stated that under the circumstances such a referral was useless.4
These proceedings all took place several months before the Supreme Court's decision in People v. Tenorio, 3 Cal.3d 89, 89 Cal.Rptr. 249, 473 P.2d 993 which, quite recently, in People v. Clay, 18 Cal.App.3d 964, 96 Cal.Rptr. 213, was interpreted as nullifying the necessity of the district attorney's concurrence in ‘unusual’ cases. Since the Tenorio rule is fully retroactive (In re Cortez, 6 Cal.3d 78, 82—83, 98 Cal.Rptr. 307, 490 P.2d 819), it obviously applies on a direct appeal.5
The judgment is reversed as to the sentence, and the case is remanded to the Superior Court of Los Angeles County for that court to exercise its independent judicial discretion as to defendant's eligibility for probation.
1. The eight questions which the driver refused to answer were:1. ‘(W)as (defendant) in your car on the day and time in question?’2. ‘Did Officer Peters discover the contraband that's been marked People's 1—A and 1—B before you were handcuffed and placed in the police unit, if you know?’3. ‘What was the total number of people in your vehicle, including yourself, when the police car pulled in behind you?’4. ‘(W)ere you present in court and did you hear Officer Peters testify that he observed you exit the vehicle and run towards the corner?’5. ‘Where was the defendant when you first observed him that evening?’6. ‘Did you see the defendant exit from his vehicle in front of yours that evening, after the officers pulled in behind?’7. ‘Do you know the whereabout of George Deway Browning?’8. ‘Do you know the address or whereabouts of Richard Fuller, Jr.?’
2. ‘. . . And he informed me that a George Browning was the passenger in the front seat of the Cadillac that he was the driver of.‘And that after the car was stopped, the right door was opened and Browning got in the rear seat by the time Officer Peters approached the vehicle, and that he first observed the defendant exiting from the 1955 white sedan that was parked in front of him.‘And that that was the first time that he had seen the defendant.‘He further told me that Officer Peters could not have observed what was going on in the front seat when he was in a position at the rear of the Cadillac, because the man that was in the rear seat, a Mr. Fuller, weighed over 300 pounds and was an extremely large man.‘He also told me that Officer Peters did not search the Cadillac for contraband until after he had found a bogus $20 bill on the defendant, and placed him under arrest and handcuffed him and put him in the police unit, along with Mr. Harrison.‘It was at that time that the Cadillac was searched and the contraband that has been marked People's 1—A and 1—B had been discovered. . . .’
3. There is perhaps some doubt as to the possibility of incrimination in the answer to the question ‘were you present in court and did you hear Officer Peters testify that he observed you exit the vehicle and run towards the corner?’ Obviously, whether or not he heard Officer Peters so testify is immaterial as to the truth of the officer's testimony. The question, however, was wholly foundational, and an answer to it could not have aided defendant's efforts to secure from the witness' testimony as to the events surrounding the arrest.
4. The record does not indicate why the court nevertheless requested a diagnostic study and recommendation pursuant to section 1168 of the Penal Code. We do not know whether the request was ever honored.
5. As noted above, the Attorney General, on this appeal, correctly analyzed the nature of defendant's real complaint. In a brief filed some months before the decision in People v. Clay, 18 Cal.App.3d 964, 98 Cal.Rptr. 213, he argues most persuasively that the Tenorio principle does not apply to the sixth unnumbered paragraph of section 1203.03. We feel, however, bound to follow the Clay holding.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1741
|
__label__wiki
| 0.526768
| 0.526768
|
STOCKTON v. RATTNER
Richard M. STOCKTON, Plaintiff, Cross-Defendant, and Appellant, v. Jack P. RATTNER et al., Defendants and Respondents.
DEBTOR REORGANIZERS, INC., a California corporation, Cross-Complainant and Respondent, v. Richard M. STOCKTON and Phyllis I. Stockton, Cross-Defendants and Appellants.
Goldberg & Franklin, Encino, for appellants. Gendel, Raskoff, Shapiro & Quittner, Richard S. Berger, Bernard P. Simons, Los Angeles, for respondents.
Plaintiff appeals from an order authorizing the sale of a residence at Avalon, Catalina Island, and ordering the proceeds of the sale to be impounded, pending final determination of the action in which the order was sought and obtained.
In 1964 plaintiff made an assignment for the benefit of the creditors of certain corporations. One of the properties assigned was the Avalon residence involved in this appeal. The contract of assignment provided that the residence was not to be sold by the assignee, without plaintiff's consent, ‘until and unless all of the other assets which have been transferred and conveyed pursuant to this agreement shall first have been sold and disposed of and there shall still remain monies due and payable under the terms of this agreement.’ In February, 1967, plaintiff filed the action in the course of which the order appealed from was made. Essentially plaintiff claims that the assignee has not complied wih certain provisions of the assignment, has failed to render proper accountings and, in particular, has failed to pursue certain accounts receivable. Various kinds of relief, including rescission, are prayed for. Significantly the third amended complaint, on which the action will apparently go to trial, nowhere alleges that had the assets assigned been properly managed and had plaintiff been credited with all that was due him, the corporations' debts would have been satisfied. Defendant and respondent, Debtor Reorganizers, Inc., as nominee of the original assignee, Jack Rattner, filed a cross-complaint claiming that plaintiff had failed to transfer all of the assets that he was bound to transfer under the 1964 agreement and had interfered in other ways with the performance of the covenants contained in the assignment for the benefit of the corporations' creditors. An additional cause of action for declaratory relief also sets forth, with respect to the Avalon property, that a dispute has arisen between the parties as to whether or not cross-complainant was entitled to sell it to satisfy the claims of the creditors.
The cross-complaint was filed on September 20, 1967. On August 7, 1969, defendant and cross-complainant assignee noticed a motion for an order authorizing the sale of the Avalon property. That motion was denied without prejudice on September 29, 1969. On August 17, 1970, the motion was renewed. The moving papers, if believed, show without question that under the terms of the 1964 agreement the sale was authorized because the other assets assigned, all of which had been liquidated, were quite insufficient to satisfy the debts of the corporations.1 Several offers for the Avalon property had been received, but plaintiff had not consented to a sale. The property was deteriorating and falling into disrepair. It was also the victim of vandalism. Its value was decreasing.
We are informed that the reason why the assignee sought the order authorizing the sale was that, without the order, no policy of title insurance could be obtained.
The opposing papers refer to the opposition filed against the 1969 motion for authority to sell, but that opposition is not included in the record. We gather that plaintiff opposed the motion primarily on two grounds, one legal, the other factual: legally plaintiff seems to claim that as long as any asset assigned under the 1964 agreement remains undisposed of, the Avalon residence cannot be sold even if there is no chance that a disposition of that asset can satisfy the creditors; factually he appears to dispute the assignee's contention that all assets have been disposed of.
The motion for authority to sell was granted by an order filed October 13, 1970.
The first question raised by respondent concerns the appealability of the order authorizing the sale. Concededly it is not made expressly appealable by any of the subsections of section 904.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Rather, plaintiff argues that if the authority granted by the order is exercised he will be permanently deprived of a residence and that under familiar equitable principles the fact that the cash proceeds of the residence are to be impounded, cannot make up for the loss of a ‘unique’ piece of real property.
In Degnan v. Morrow, 2 Cal.App.3d 358, 364—365, 82 Cal.Rptr. 557, 559—560, the law is summarized as follows:
‘It is settled law that a party may appeal from part of a severable judgment. (3 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (1954) p. 2186.) Accordingly, no violence would be done to our appellate practice by allowing such a partial appeal here. And despite the ‘one final judgment rule,’ it is established that an interlocutory judgment, not expressly made appealable by statute, is nevertheless appealable to the extent that it requires as a collateral matter, the immediate payment of money, or the performance forthwith of an act (Greene v. Superior Court, 55 Cal.2d 403, 405, 10 Cal.Rptr. 817, 359 P.2d 249; Sjoberg v. Hastorf, 33 Cal.2d 116, 119, 199 P.2d 668; Draus v. Alfred M. Lewis, Inc., 261 Cal.App.2d 485, 489, 68 Cal.Rptr. 154); Or has the effect of a final determination of property rights (Southern Pac. Co. v. Oppenheimer, 54 Cal.2d 784, 786, 8 Cal.Rptr. 657, 356 P.2d 441; Carradine v. Carradine, 75 Cal.App.2d 775, 778, 171 P.2d 911; California etc. Ass'n. v. Superior Court, 8 Cal.App. 711, 713, 97 P. 769). When such an appeal is taken the litigation of the main issues continues to a final judgment. (Draus v. Alfred M. Lewis, Inc., Supra, at p. 489, 68 Cal.Rptr. 154; Woodman v. Ackerman, 249 Cal.App.2d 644, 649—650, 57 Cal.Rptr. 687.)' (Emphasis added.)
It can, of course, make no difference that the ruling complained of is denominated an order, rather than a judgment. If it has the effect of a final determination of property rights, it is appealable.
The case most in point and the one which persuades us that we may properly decide this appeal on the merits is California etc. Assn. v. Superior Court, 8 Cal.App. 711, 97 P. 769. In that case the defendant sought a writ of prohibition to restrain a receiver from selling certain personal property. The appellate court recognized that, in the exercise of his duties, the receiver might have to sell such property ‘as where charges and expenses of care would absorb the property, or where it was likely to become valueless by reason of its perishable nature, or other attendant circumstances which might require the same. . . .’ (California etc. Assn. v. Superior Court, Supra, 8 Cal.App. at p. 713, 97 P. at p. 770.) It then proceeded to deny the writ, but not for the reason that the particular sale involved was authorized under the principles recognized in the decision. Rather, the writ was denied because the order authorizing the sale was ‘so far independent of suit itself as to make (it) substantially a final decree for the purpose of an appeal’ and, hence, appealable.
Since the decision rested entirely on the availability of an appeal, the statement that the order authorizing the sale was appealable cannot possibly be considered dictum.
None of the respondent—assignee's cases cited to support the proposition that the order appealed from is not appealable persuade us that we should not follow the rule of California etc. Assn. v. Superior Court, Supra.
In Henry Cowell Lime & Cement Co. v. Figel, 27 Cal.App. 11, 148 P. 796, a sheriff held certain personal property under attachment. A motion by the plaintiff to have the property sold was denied and the plaintiff appealed. It was held that the order was not appealable. This in no way militates against California etc. Assn. v. Superior Court, Supra, for the denial—as distinguished from a grant—of the motion to have the property sold, in no way affected anybody's property rights.
In Melick v. Superior Court, 93 Cal.App. 189, 269 P. 746, certain property of the petitioner was seized under a writ of attachment. The petitioner was never served with summons. The plaintiff in the action then noticed a motion for the immediate sale of the property. It was served only on petitioner's co-defendant. A writ of prohibition was granted. One of the arguments of the real party in interest had been that prohibition was not a proper remedy because petitioner could ‘have relief by means of the writ of review; the order made by respondent court not being appealable.’ For this proposition the real party in interest cited the Henry Cowell case just discussed. The court assumed the correctness of the proposition that the order was not appealable and then held that under the facts of the particular case the availability of writ of review did not bar prohibition.
The Melick case is at most a dictum that appeal was not an available remedy. Certainly Henry Cowell does not support it. The contrary holding in California etc. Assn. v. Superior Court, Supra, appears not to have been brought to the attention of the court. We must, therefore, follow the earlier case.
We turn to the merits. We feel that the order made must be reversed, not because the assignee's showing did not justify him in selling the property under the terms of the 1964 assignment, but because we do not conceive it to be the proper function of the superior court to give its blessing to the sale the propriety of which depended entirely on the resolution of the issues framed by the pleadings in an action which had not yet been tried. The assignee was not in the position of a sheriff who seeks a court order to sell property under section 548 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or of a receiver who seeks a similar order under section 568.5 of the same code. It had a contract, executed in 1964, authorizing it to sell the property, that stood in its name, under certain conditions. If plaintiff had never brought the action in the framework of which the order appealed from was made, the assignee never would have been in a position to seek a judicial imprimatur of a proposed sale, unless he himself started some proceeding, such as an action for declaratory relief. In any such action, however, no judgment declaring the right to sell could be rendered on affidavits.2 Indeed the assignee does not claim that the order appealed from has the same effect as would a final judgment validating the sale. It appears to be willing to take the risk that if and when all the issues in the underlying litigation are resolved, it may somehow be held legally responsible for a sale ultimately shown to be unauthorized by the 1964 agreement. This, however, merely points up the inappropriateness of the superior court's acting in the matter at all. What it boils down to is simply that the order appealed from made the assignee's title more marketable, by enabling it to obtain a policy of title insurance.
Nothing in this opinion is to be construed as a holding that a sale of the property, without judicial sanction, is not authorized by the 1964 agreement; nor are we deciding to what extent, if any, the deteriorating condition of the property by legal implication modifies the express rights and duties of the parties as outlined in that agreement. We point out that the assignee is not restrained by any preliminary injunction and that unless a court, after a trial, holds otherwise, the agreement is fully in effect. Finally, nothing herein is intended to exonerate plaintiff if by his activities in the premises he has violated any express or implied covenant of the 1964 assignment. We merely hold that it was not the business of the superior court to authorize the sale of property, not In custodia legis, where the sole purpose of the authorization was to make the title of one of the litigants more marketable.
The order of October 13, 1970, authorizing the sale of the real property referred to therein is reversed.
1. The liquidation deficit was shown to be in excess of $566,000.
2. Unless, of course, the facts are so one-sided that a motion for summary judgment is in order. Perhaps this is the remedy which the assignee should have sought.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1742
|
__label__wiki
| 0.70877
| 0.70877
|
Granted Clemency, Former Crossroads Student Committed to Serving His Community
by Aaron Mueller | Dec 21, 2016 | Stories, testimonies, testimonies2
Tairone was raised by his grandparents to go to church every Sunday. But the other six days of the week, his religion was running the streets.
And while his grandparents taught him Scripture, his uncles taught him the ins and outs of the drug game.
It didn’t take long for Tairone to choose what religion he would follow. What started as selling weed in junior high snowballed into a career of selling crack cocaine as a young man. Before long, Tairone became the go-to drug dealer in his community.
“With that lifestyle, I lied, cheated, gambled and had many women. This became a way of life that drove my ego,” Tairone said.
Everything came to a screaming halt when Tairone was arrested in a police sting operation.
Handcuffs, cop car, jumpsuit, jail cell. Just like that, Tairone’s fast life of hustling, clubbing and running the streets was over.
November 18, 1998—it’s a date Tairone will never forget. It was the day he says he heard God’s voice more clearly than ever. He was lying on his bed in his cell. His mind was racing, thinking about the family and friends he had let down and the promises he had broken. Rehashing all his past sins, Tairone tried to come to terms with the inevitable—a long prison sentence. Was life even worth living?
In the midst of the chaos in his mind, Tairone heard a still, small voice: “Tairone, I am a jealous God.”
“I knew it was God,” Tairone said. “I knew I had to stop playing games and I surrendered my life to Him.”
After being sentenced to life in prison, Tairone surrounded himself with Christians who kept him encouraged. A friend introduced him to Crossroads Prison Ministries (then known as Crossroad Bible Institute).
“I fell in love with the lessons and instructors,” Tairone said. “I thank God for their patience, love, encouragement and instruction.”
Equipped with God’s Word, Tairone began sharing the Gospel with others in his facility. He saw men’s lives radically changed when they met Jesus. One man, who was a member of the Mexican Mafia, left behind his gang after Tairone led him to the Lord.
“God was changing people’s lives,” Tairone said. “I didn’t like prison. But I learned that we may not want to be in a particular place, but God always has a purpose and plan for us, no matter where we are.”
Tairone also was made a mentor in the suicide watch program in his prison, where he continued to share God’s love and truth to those who were hurting.
This whole time, Tairone trusted the Lord that he would one day be set free from prison. Despite being handed two life sentences, Tairone said he trusted that God would deliver him.
In 2016, his prayers were answered when he was granted clemency by President Barack Obama. Out of the thousands of petitions, Tairone was one of sixty-one prisoners to receive clemency.
Today, four months since he was released from prison, Tairone’s voice is still filled with awe and wonder when he talks about his newfound freedom.
“Being able to look at God’s creation—the trees, the flowers, the sounds of cars, to see people. It’s just really amazing,” Tairone said, attempting to come up with words to describe the joy in his heart.
Tairone is not taking his second chance lightly. He has found a good job and strong home church. He has a passion for reaching the youth of his community with the message of the Gospel.
Now he leads his church’s van ministry, driving throughout the city picking up teenagers to take to church on Sunday mornings. He shares his life story and the truths that he learned from his Crossroads Bible studies.
“Crossroads opened my eyes up so much. It’s such a blessing to know God is real and to be able to trust him in every area,” Tairone said. “I want to share this with everyone.”
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1753
|
__label__cc
| 0.609481
| 0.390519
|
Research Article: PG545 treatment reduces RRV-induced elevations of AST, ALT with secondary lymphoid organ alterations in C57BL/6 mice
Date Published: June 6, 2019
Author(s): Aroon Supramaniam, Helle Bielefeldt-Ohmann, Penny A. Rudd, Julie Webster, Vito Ferro, Lara J. Herrero, Partha Mukhopadhyay.
Recently the anti-viral effects of prophylactic treatment with the low-molecular-weight heparan sulfate mimetic PG545 in Ross River virus (RRV) infected mice were reported. We further investigated the related, transient pathophysiology of PG545 drug treatment in RRV-infected and mock-infected PG545-treated mice. PG545 treatment resulted in mild lethargy and piloerection, on days after the drug administration. Mice were treated with two or three doses of PG545 within a ten-day period and were subsequently culled at peak disease or at disease resolution. The treatment responses of the spleen and liver were assessed through histology, flow cytometry, gene arrays and serum biochemistry. Microscopy showed an expanded red pulp in the spleen following either two or three treatments with PG545. The red pulp expansion was further demonstrated by the proliferation of megakaryocytes and erythrocyte precursors within the spleen. In addition, flow cytometry and gene array analyses revealed a reduction of lymphocytes within the spleens of PG545-treated mice. Previously unreported, RRV-induced elevations of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine transaminase (ALT) enzymes and creatinine were also noted in the RRV-infected mice. However, PG545 only reduced AST and ALT levels but not the creatinine levels in infected mice during treatment. Mice treated with three doses of PG545 also showed hepatosplenomegaly and anaemia, which were reversed upon discontinuation of the treatment. In summary, this study demonstrates that dose and frequency related haemopoietic pathophysiology such as hepatosplenomegaly and anaemia, occurred in C57BL/6 mice treated with PG545. However, this effect was reversible once drug administration is terminated.
Australia is home to more than 70 arthropod-borne viruses that are mostly enzootic. However, a few exceptions, such as the Ross River virus (RRV) and Barmah Forest virus (BFV), can also infect humans and cause diseases [1]. Increased precipitation often leads to dramatic events such as extreme rainfall and non-tidal flooding [2]. These weather events in turn, enhance vector breeding and can exacerbate viral transmission to animal and human hosts, causing frequent, sporadic disease outbreaks [2]. RRV is an arthritogenic alphavirus in the Togaviridae family. It is transmitted either by the Aedes or Culex species of mosquitoes and causes notifiable diseases in Australia [3]. Infected individuals may be mildly febrile and experience debilitating peripheral polyarthralgia and myalgia. The musculoskeletal pain experienced can be either acute, or progress to chronic or recurrent pain, leading to significant morbidity [3]. In 2015, the largest epidemic in Australia reported a spike of 9,544 cases compared to the conventional annual incidence of around 5,000 cases [4, 5]. Then, in 2017, another 6,925 cases were reported [6]. Furthermore, the 2017 outbreak, also reported significant incidences of RRV disease (RRVD) in temperate regions such as Melbourne compared to the previous non-incidence in these cooler climate [7].
In the current study, we explored the consequences of prolonged treatment of PG545 in RRV-infected mice alongside, the recently published standard PG545 treatment for RRVD in mice. This was done, to determine if an increase in the treatment frequency could impact the duration and further reduce the acute clinical disease observed in the RRV-infected mice. Additionally, the occurrence of compound-induced lymphoid organ changes, if any, were also critically evaluated, to determine compound efficacy and tolerability. During this study, it was first noted that, the PG545 treatment to both mock- and RRV-infected mice groups caused a reduction in weight gain across the treated groups. Other comparable murine studies of PG545 administration have also reported weight losses in treated animals [30].
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1756
|
__label__wiki
| 0.746669
| 0.746669
|
Episode 61: What The Hell Is Wrong With MSNBC, Part II — A Rebuttal
Citations Needed | January 9, 2019 | Transcript
Jan 9, 2019·41 min read
Nima: Happy New Year, everyone! We are back. Hope everyone had a wonderful holiday — maybe even a relaxing one. Thank you all for joining us now in 2019. For those of you who may be new to Citations Needed in this new year, you can follow the show on Twitter @CitationsPod, Facebook Citations Needed and you can support the show through Patreon.com/CitationsNeededPodcast with Nima Shirazi and Adam Johnson.
Adam: This episode’s going to be a little bit different than usual, but we’re excited about it. We had an inquiry from a journalist and former host of MSNBC’s The Cycle from 2012 to 2015, Touré, who now himself has a podcast. He reached out to us as a big fan of the show, “but I thought your episode on MSNBC had problems.” Obviously he worked at MSNBC, so that didn’t necessarily surprise us, but we were curious to talk about that because we like to think that we respond to criticism and he suggested coming on the show to talk about it.
Nima: Yeah. Indeed.
Adam: So this episode is going to be part two of our unexpected two-part series.
Adam: Maybe it’ll be three, maybe it’ll degenerate into a 17-part series —
Nima: It’ll just keep going, that’s right.
Adam: Where we want to talk to someone who is, who is going to be defending MSNBC from our criticisms and we’re going to kind of really get into the weeds about that. And I’m excited to do that.
Nima: Yes. So, Touré is going to join us today. He was super gracious about coming on. We are happy to have him and we will basically leave this episode as our conversation.
Adam: Uh, two quick production notes. When we recorded this interview, I had a severe case of bronchitis. I’m now not sick, so if I sound like I’m dying [during the interview], that’s why. But I want you to know that the show must go on. And I, I, that’s the podcaster life. It’s the life I chose. It’s a hard life.
Nima: It chose you.
Adam: It’s true. Salesmen aren’t, aren’t made, they’re born. That’s the same thing with podcasters. Second thing is if you haven’t listened to the first one, we sort of recommend you do, it’ll help clarify what he’s responding to, what we’re responding to —
Nima: That’s right.
Adam: So if you have time, it’s Episode 34: What the Hell’s Wrong with MSNBC?, definitely one of our more controversial ones. So go back, listen to that and then listen to this conversation, which is sort of an attempt to expand upon a lot of those, those criticisms and those ideas and try to get another voice from the inside who is somewhat adversarial to us.
Nima: So stay tuned and enjoy this extended conversation with Touré.
Nima: We are joined today by writer, journalist, cultural critic, TV host, podcaster Touré, who got in touch with us because he really wanted to talk to us about one of our episodes, namely the What the Hell is Wrong with MSNBC?
Touré: (Laughing.)
Touré (credit: toure.com)
Nima: We are thrilled, thrilled to have Touré on Citations Needed today to chat. Touré, thank you so much for joining us.
Touré: Yeah, thanks for having me. I’ve been listening to the show for a few weeks and it’s really extraordinary. You guys are really smart and you’ve opened my eyes several times. I mean, every episode I’m like, ‘Oh my God. Hypocrisy bias. Yes!’ ‘Oh my God. Jake Tapper. Yes!’ ‘Oh my God.’ I mean like you guys are just really sharp and really smart and criticizing the left from the left is really powerful and I think what you’re doing is really valuable and I wanted to have the conversation with you because I thought perhaps the conversation about MSNBC was not necessarily exactly as strong as it could have been.
Adam: Alright, well, that’s all the time we have. Thanks for coming on. Really appreciate it.
Touré: (Laughs.)
Nima: (Laughing.) Yeah. Well, anyway. Uh, so that was great. That was Touré, everyone.
Adam: So just to lay the table here, if you had issues with the MSNBC episode, which we had some interesting feedback on, that and obviously we had our MSNBC informant whose name we shall not reveal. And you had some issues with that. I’m curious as a fan of the show, what would you say were your sort of primary issues with that episode? What did you feel like we were maybe unfair about?
Touré: Well, let me, so my basic case, and I can answer many questions about MSNBC, I mean, you know, your discussion dismissed the notion that this is a business and MSNBC does not air things that people don’t want to see, right? We’re in the business of getting people to watch the shows and if you don’t take seriously the responsibility and the imperative to get people to watch, then we’re not having a real conversation. Right? It’s not public broadcasting, right? We’re trying to get ratings everyday at four o’clock the ratings come out and everybody’s pouring over them. Right? We want to have good ratings. Now, typically MSNBC is third, right, behind Fox and CNN, so it puts a lot of pressure on all of us to try to do better. And one thing that was left out of the discussion is the importance of CNN to MSNBC. Everybody at MSNBC as well as CNN and Fox sitting in their offices watching a four-box, right? A television that’s showing four screens, CNN, MSNBC, Fox and either CNBC or HLN depending on who you are. So one core difference between CNN and MSNBC is that CNN has always, and I used to work there as well, CNN has always had a sort guiding force from above and especially now in the era of Jeff Zucker. He is really guiding what the entire programming does. So you get a sense of it’s a singular sort of 24 hours, right? MSNBC is much more siloed. There are folks above, but it’s really each executive producer and host who are really able to decide what they want to cover, but what that does is it puts a lot of pressure on each executive producer especially. It’s easier to replace an executive producer than a host. Right? And so if your show doesn’t do well, then you are on the chopping block, right? To lose your executive producer-ship and further down the road your hosting job. Now if you mirror CNN and your cut on the story that they’re on, it’s not your fault, the audience just didn’t want to watch that, but if you zig when CNN and/or Fox zags and you cover something different and you don’t do well, then you made a mistake. So it puts a lot of pressure and incentivizes at least paying great attention to what CNN is doing.
Jake Tapper of CNN, Tucker Carlson of Fox News, and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC (credit: variety.com)
Adam: Right.
Touré: So when you, when you understand it like that, like ‘I need to keep my job, I love this place, I love this job, I want to keep it.’ It’s much more difficult to try to do. And you know, one of the things you talked about, why aren’t you more progressive? Why aren’t you covering climate change? Why aren’t you covering Yemen? Why aren’t you covering more union stuff? Especially with climate change the audience tunes out. Chris Hayes did a week at least of climate change. We had him on The Cycle, we had a bunch of climate change segments, the audience disappears and that incentive, I mean we’re not giving the audience things they don’t want to see. If we see the audience is not paying attention when we put on that we can’t cover it.
MSNBC segments on Stormy Daniels vs. segments on US war in Yemen 7/3/17–7/3/18 (credit: fair.org)
Adam: Right. So this was something that our mystery guest brought up and it’s something we try to address in the show a lot, which is this idea of editorial decisions are not ideological or have their own biases, they are simply a matter of ratings. And I want to address this point to the best I can, and we touched on it in the episode on MSNBC, but maybe we didn’t touch on it nearly enough. This line of argument, the sort of, ‘it’s just about ratings and clicks,’ strikes me as the end of media criticism. That we all, we should all just pack it up and go home, right? Because we’ve, we’ve offset any moral responsibility to this nebulous libertarian free market that’s made the decision for us. And this strikes me as a little pat. Um, I don’t doubt that ratings are a huge factor and this is what I told our guest on that episode. They obviously are, but to me saying cable news is about ratings is like saying building a ship is about sailing. Yes, but where are you sailing and why? The ratings are a necessary axiom of all media that’s not public, although that has ratings considerations too. But, you know, Fox News is a huge ratings cash cow, but obviously Fox News has an ideology. They have an ideology both in spite of and because of that need for ratings. So it strikes me as like, while that’s true and I think it’s important that we recognize that and I thought we did a good job talking about that with our guest, but maybe we should’ve done a better job, it seems like a bit of a get out of jail free card. Um, and one thing I’ll note, and I agree, climate change can be a total snooze fest. I don’t disagree with that, but things like, let’s say take war crimes for example. So I wrote an article in FAIR in July of 2018, noting how MSNBC had not covered Yemen in a year. Now the obvious response is, ‘Oh, Yemen’s boring. It’s far away. Nobody cares.’ But in that time they had over a dozen stories about Russian war crimes in Syria, so evidently some people care about war crimes somewhere. They just happen to incidentally care about war crimes done by enemy states rather than the US. So I think the ratings argument is true as far as it goes, but I don’t think it really covers the whole base. What do you, what do you say to that?
Touré: Not really entirely sure how to answer that. I mean the Yemen piece in particular I think falls into a generalized Africa bias, which I imagine you guys will probably get around to doing a show on. Generally, you know, whatever happens in Africa, most Americans don’t care, right? And they just assume Africa is just war-torn, wild, it’s not unusual that they’re all killing each other.
Nima: Yeah. I mean, while Yemen isn’t in Africa, it is very close geographically, it’s less than 20 miles away across the Bab-el-Mandeb strait where the US has an airbase and where they refuel Saudi planes from and many of the civilian deaths resulting from the US and gulf monarchy air strikes have been part of the Afro-Yemeni community.
Touré: Right, but if somebody throws a lit match in Paris, you know it’s team coverage, right? That ‘oh my God!’
Adam: Yeah.
Touré: I mean every single thing. I can’t say every single thing we did was for ratings, but it’s not a get out of jail free card, but we have to work with the audience. If the audience is not interested-
Adam: No, totally.
Touré: Then we have to work with the audience. If we’re not serving them, then they will leave. And every media business does this. Radio, Netflix. I mean like everybody has to serve the audience. I wonder if some of the complaint is off because you’re saying why isn’t MSNBC more progressive and they could be and they try to be, but really I think MSNBC is more Democratic than progressive and obviously there’s a large overlap.
Adam: Oh yeah, no, that, that was, I think that was something we argued that like the, the show for better, for worse, it’s very partisan, but less so than Fox.
Touré: But less so in nature, but they care about things that the Democratic Party would care about and where progressive and Democrats part ways.
Adam: And why does the Democratic Party care about certain things? Right.
Touré: They would choose the Democratic path rather and covering the horse race and covering the things that Democratic Party cares about rather than things that progressives, Amy Goodman stuff, progressive stuff that a Democrats may not want.
Adam: Sure. Yeah. No, I think that’s totally fair.
Nima: Yeah, and I would also note that I think when it comes to these massive media corporations, there is a decision to be made and sometimes it’s made for producers and for hosts, but also there’s this idea of leading, you know, you can lead on a narrative, you can lead on a story, you can lead on an issue and maybe you can’t go, like, full progressive because, right, you’re corporate-owned and you need the audience. Like, I feel like we all understand that environment that these big companies are operating under, but at the same time, if, let’s say Chris Hayes or Rachel Maddow, who have an hour every single night in prime time and they’re unable per what they say themselves to talk about certain issues, they’re unable, there are people have more power in media than these people. And they have to then create their own podcasts to talk about issues that they feel like they’re not able to talk about on television every single night. And it’s not that I think we’re expecting MSNBC or any part of the NBCUniversal family, to actually be left or to even be progressive or to even be, you know, all that liberal. But like it’s the idea of crying out that they are so hamstrung that it’s not really up to them, it’s just like, we’re just giving the viewers what they want and they don’t want to hear anything that is unpalatable to them. And it’s like, well then obviously nothing is ever going to change. And why don’t, why doesn’t MSNBC just like do a better job at being Fox and then they’ll get more ratings? It’s like it just winds up being problematic when that winds up being the excuse.
Touré: I mean, I don’t think it’s an excuse. It is a business. We’re here to try to make money and we are, I say “we” and I probably shouldn’t, but I mean I still feel part of the family and I still appear on MSNBC a lot and I know and love a lot of those folks even though I’m not officially there anymore, but I mean it becomes almost immature to suggest we should talk about it apart from it being a business. I remember when I was first trying to get a show and I had ideas for programs and Dylan Ratigan, who’s show was on the most was like, unless you’re saying here’s the advertisers that I can pull with this concept or with this show or who will, who will follow me, then you’re just saying, ‘Daddy, can I drive your car?’ That’s an immature gesture. And there’s an experimentation process obviously. Right? You know, they put things on and they see how it does. And so it’s not purely like, everything is not known. Right? Like how is the Russia scandal going to play? Oh, they like that. Keep talking about that. How is the Ukraine situation going to play? They didn’t like that, so don’t talk about that. But it’s not like they will be often like, ‘well, let’s talk about it less.’ There is definitely a strong desire and imperative to feel like we have covered a broad variety of news. On The Cycle we would do a domestic, national, like super political DC story and then the B block would quite often be foreign policy, quite often in Africa or the Middle East or in Eastern Europe, you know, and then by the fourth block then we were into, you know, we could do cultural stories because we were not in a national emergency. Now we’re in a national emergency. So the whole thing is like, ‘Trump is completely screwing up the country.’
Touré: I mean I feel a little like out of breath saying like, you know, if you’re not talking about how we can continue to get audience than it’s not a mature conversation, you know, it’s not an excuse. It’s a business. You don’t see businesses sell, I mean businesses have lost leaders, but that’s a strategy, right? You don’t see businesses stocking products that people don’t want.
Adam: But, but, but you have to appreciate that there’s sort of two extremes, right? There’s the other extreme which is that if it’s just about ratings, you know-
Touré: Well, no, it’s just just about ratings. So they do have deals.
Adam: It’s not just about ratings —
Touré: And they will talk about climate change even though the audience with leave-
Adam: Right. So there’s some percentage, like there’s some, there’s some like, I dunno, let’s say it’s 70 percent ratings, 30 percent, you know, it’s like what we said in film school, some for the meal, some for the real. Right?
Touré: Okay.
Adam: So, some sort of to pay the bills and some things that you care about.
Adam: Um, and I guess it’s the something that we care about is the percentage that we’re trying to interrogate here with an understanding that yes, it’s a business. I think Nima and I would both acknowledge that, but it’s, it’s kinda like when you critique Democratic politicians, they always say, ‘oh, well we have to make this compromise to win.’ And I think in certain cases that may be true, but it’s not, you can’t, it’s not enough, right? You can’t always say that because then there’s no such thing as criticism. Um, so the question is, where do you, how do you distinguish between, you know, someone within MSNBC or a similar corporate media as sort of trying to change, move the needle versus outside people like us who try to say, okay, well here’s some, what we try to do at least, to say ‘here’s some sober analysis as to what objectively is important versus what’s covered.’ Um, and I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that a lot of it is about sort of what’s important in the Democratic Party. And I think that maybe that may be one of the problems, right? Because, you know, Yemen, for example, was Obama’s war. Obama started the war, Trump put it on steroids, but he started it. And so it became, and it was supported by most Democrats at the time. Um, and so it became not sexy in a partisan context and maybe that’s an institutional problem at a place like MSNBC where they’re taking cues from a wing of a party. Specifically that is, that is aligned with military and corporate interest. I mean MSNBC hires how many ex-spooks and how many ex-generals? I mean the, there begins to be a bit of a, of a filtering bias there that I think is important to talk about.
Touré: Mhmm. I mean, yes. And then also of course as I alluded to before, we’re watching CNN and what are they doing and you know, we don’t want to stray too far away from what they’re doing and quite often I’d be like, why are we doing the same thing as them? Like we should be counter-programming them. Uh, and this argument was generally rejected for various reasons. I think I sort of outlined some of why that would be.
Adam: Why do you think that is? I’m curious.
Touré: Well, as I said before you, you-
Adam: Because I, I think that’s interesting.
Touré: You’re at risk of losing your job, right? I mean, you-
Adam: But like why do you think that they were, they were very concerned about seeing what CNN were doing? Were they sort of seen as like the center of gravity of news?
Touré: Um, yeah, more or less. I mean like they are doing better than us in the ratings, right? It’s not some abstract reason why they have that position. They’re doing better than us.
Adam: Oh, okay.
Touré: And if we and we can predict, we’re probably going to lose to CNN most of the time. If you lose to them doing the same story or a similar story, then it’s the audiences fault, you know, if you lose them doing a different story than you made a mistake in what you chose to do. I mean, one of the things we talked about a lot was the ratings for a given show are based on three things, the news flow of the entire day, what the show before you does and then what subjects you choose to pick. But two of those things you have no control over. Right? I mean like, you know, when Michael Cohen gets sentenced, I’m watching MSNBC and CNN all day long. On a quieter day, I’m watching more SportsCenter. Right? Um, so, and that has Katy Tur, Chuck Todd whatever, they have no impact —
(via MSNBC)
Nima: They, but they do have an impact on what guests they bring on. I mean, who’s getting booked, obviously that has to do with who’s available and who the bookers are and how much time they have and who can show up or at least call in, but I mean I don’t think the audience sitting at home is like desperate to hear Barry McCaffrey’s opinion in the abstract. It’s only because he’s on MSNBC all the time that, you know, ‘oh, well that’s a serious voice,’ you know, that comes out of all this military career and now he’s seen as an expert and like you can kind of extrapolate that to all kinds of guests across all of the networks, but those are concerted decisions that don’t necessarily follow the news cycle. It’s like that’s who you’re deciding to put on as your expert. Not even as the anchor who is extensively supposed to just be objective, but when your talking heads don’t even have any sort of scope it’s like you’re just determining your own Overton Window on TV and assuming that that’s what the audience wants and that’s why you’re doing it. It just winds up being like this weird feedback loop because you’re not offering anything different. How do you know if the audience is gonna react differently or not?
Touré: I agree that on all the networks, definitely on CNN, MSNBC, there is a pro-war military bias. They wouldn’t ever have somebody on with McCaffrey or Colonel Jack or whatever and say, ‘I don’t think we should be going to war at all.’ Like that would never happen. And that’s a problem across cable news. It’s a problem across news in general and I completely agree with you there.
Nima: Yes.
Touré: Um, I mean, I think that there’s definitely an effort at MSNBC to get the smartest guests that you can get and people who are knowledgeable about given subjects. I mean, I appreciate immensely that MSNBC generally it will be a group of progressives talking about something as opposed to CNN, which always wants a bar room brawl and they always want some sort of left/right conversation, you know, Marc Lamont Hill argues against police brutality and then there’s a cop, who is like, ‘well, sometimes you got to kill these black people.’ Like what? Like, what are you talking about? And that is, I’m consistently drawn into, ‘Ooh, let me see what this fight is. ‘And then after four minutes I’m like, that’s four minutes, I’ll never get back and on MSNBC there would be a more interesting —
Nima: Right. And why were there twelve squares on my screen all yelling at each other?
Touré: Right. And then MSNBC, there will be more often a building of ideas of ‘yes, I agree with you and, and this and that.’ And so we are building toward something that is an idea that’s interesting and I can more often watch and feel sort of intellectually nourished, watching a good conversation on there. I mean, I think there’s an effort to be as smart as you can with the guests, with the subjects. Um, it’s a tricky thing because there’s a tremendous amount of speed that this whole thing, I mean they call it ‘feeding the beast’ and I mean they have to produce, I don’t even know, I mean it’s over, It’s easily over 100 guests a day, right? I mean from Morning Joe to what is it, The 11th Hour? Right? I mean, it’s, I don’t know-
Nima: Yeah, with Brian Williams because that guy can’t possibly get fired for any reason.
Touré: No comment. Every show has at least six segments and every segment has generally two to three guests. Right? So what is that? 18 times? What? 7:00 am to 11:00 pm —
Nima: Yeah, it’s like 16 hours of programming.
Touré: I mean, you know, if they know that you are a good talker and you’re going to be interesting and we can in a millisecond tell the, ‘oh, why should I be listening to you?’ ‘You worked at Goldman Sachs for 10 years and we’re going to talk about the stock market.’ Great. I, I understand why you’re here. I love the Democratic Strategists which convene, I don’t even know what that means.
Adam: Oh yeah. It probably also means Goldman Sachs.
Touré: Anybody can be a Democratic Strategist to come on and talk about, but I mean like we want to communicate quickly to the viewer why they should listen to this person. Uh, and you know, what, why they’re there. And if we know, hey, you know, this person is a good, I mean The Cycle did a really good job, I think, of trying to find new people who were, because every show wants to put on guests who you haven’t seen before, but you can’t, but the risk is you put on a guest who is a dud, you know, they just don’t, not that they don’t know what they’re talking about, they’re just not interesting to listen to. And then it’s a failed segment.
Adam: Right. It seems like there’s a lot of, I want to be able, I want to delineate here between what we view as being institutional problems with corporate media, specifically corporate cable media and that which is unique to MSNBC. And I think a lot of the stuff you’re talking about is institutional, for better or for worse. And it’s not a particular moral failing on the people at MSNBC. And I think that’s probably true. I think the, where the rubber hits the road and why we focused on them specifically is that they present themselves as being left or progressive as a marketing thing. So you sort of get was good will to win people over who are concerned with issues that we sort of generally associate with the left and so the extent to which, you know, it’s useful to criticize them, I think without being gratuitous or, or being disproportionate or disingenuous, I think is useful. Right? This whole point of media criticism is to keep people honest and you can see why it’s a little grading in the last three to six months. You know, Chris Hayes for example, has been harping on Twitter and every now and then on his show about the sort of devastation of Yemen and that’s really great. Uh, but you know, from August of 2016 to August of 2018, he didn’t mention it once on his show and he does this whole Serpico routine, right? Where he’s changing it from the inside and it gets a little bit obnoxious because if you feel like you’re being constrained or you can’t say some things or there’s something you can’t talk about then like we should talk about that on an institutional level about why that is. Because that’s a problem.
Touré: There’s certainly nobody from on high saying you cannot discuss X.
Adam: Well, I don’t think that’s how that works. I wasn’t suggesting that is how that works. And I think we’ve made it pretty clear in the episode that’s not how it works.
Touré: I am quite certain that if we’re talking about 2014, 2015, there would be more discussion of Yemen, but the national emergency that is Trump sort of crowds out that discussion. I mean, like we never, we never ever did six segments on Obama. Never. I mean like, there just wouldn’t be enough.
Adam: That seems somewhat belied by the fact though, that there were so many segments on war crimes in Syria. I mean, I guess you could make an argument that the reason why they focused on war crimes in Syria was because it made Russia look bad and that tied into Trump, but —
Touré: No, it wouldn’t, it wouldn’t be, it wouldn’t be that. It would be more like we, we as a nation are used to hearing about strife in the Middle East. This is a continuing narrative. Um, so it makes sense. It’s not, I wouldn’t go so far as it makes Russia look bad and thus makes Trump, like that’s a longer leap. Like I don’t think people are —
Adam: Well, I mean I do think there’s definitely like a sort of general, I mean, you, you would agree that institutionally, not just on MSNBC but across American media that war crimes committed by America’s enemies are highlighted more than those committed by the United States. Right? You’d say —
Touré: Absolutely. Absolutely. Absolutely.
Adam: Okay. That’s what I would chalk it up to.
Touré: The notion that America has done wrong, uh, the American military has been sent to do something wrong. You can’t say that. I mean just generally, and nobody’s telling you can’t say that, but you kind of know, like that would be a major thing to say. That would be really, I mean like, you know, just, but I mean that, and you guys touched on that in one of your episodes, just like there’s no, it’s difficult as Americans to separate our respect for the troops themselves in our discussion of, you know, military as doing something that is immoral or inappropriate or unethical or just wrong, right? Like there’s no, you know, I mean similar like Marc Lamont Hill is going through this now, right? There’s, you cannot, you cannot be pro-Palestine without it being anti-Semitic. And how can we not criticize a government like the government of Israel without being anti-Semitic? I mean like these are not making any comment about Jewish people or the right of Israel to exist. You’re making a comment about the, the Israeli government and that should be able to be decoupled from anti-Semitism. But in America it’s not. I mean I remember that at one point we were talking about one of the Israel/Palestine conflicts because they flared up a couple of times really badly while we were doing The Cycle and I felt compelled to point out something that would really be more pro-Palestinian people, like just ‘be careful.’ Like not that somebody from on high is going to be upset, but the audience will be offended.
Nima: Of course, of course. But that’s like the bullying that keeps narratives perpetuated. Right? I mean, I, I totally agree. I mean, we see that all the time. We comment on that a lot. I think no one would, would dispute that. I just think that when we’ve been talking about what the viewership wants, what the corporate sponsors want, how are you going to get backing for this? How are you going to stay on the air? And I think something really interesting has happened recently, which actually speaks to coverage or lack of coverage of Yemen and it’s for years there was nothing and then once there started being a little more pushback, like I think Chris Hayes’ show actually really broke through based on a lot of, uh, I think listener and viewer pushback and stuff that he was seeing on social media. He started covering it more. Chris Murphy started coming on more and we see now literally the day that we are recording this segment right now, the Senate voted to end military aid to Saudi Arabia over Yemen.
Adam: Yeah. It’s important to note. And like this is also largely because MBS fell out of favor with the ruling class consensus therefore it —
Nima: Right, Khashoggi has a lot to do with that.
Adam: Yeah, exactly. Because he was, he was a member of the club. Um, but I, you know, in the lead up to the last vote in March MSNBC didn’t cover it once. Um, and I wrote about it for FAIR because I was like, this is the moment, this is the moment we could have ended it. We could’ve, we could’ve ended this nine months ago and there was no institutional support from any Democratic Party media whatsoever.
Touré: Yeah, yeah. I mean Trump is crowding out that sort of stuff. They would have covered that in 2014 and 2015, but it’s just, it just becomes so crowded with Trump. I think one thing-
Adam: Yeeaaah, but they didn’t cover it when Obama was in office, they didn’t cover it in 2016 either. They covered it once in all of 2016 so that, that doesn’t seem true.
Touré: No but I mean I’m talking about 2014, 2015 when things are quieter. Once you have a horse race going on, everyone goes nuts over that.
Adam: Sure. Okay.
Touré: I mean, one of the things that I personally and I said this on the air and it didn’t really, we got, we got dumped so I didn’t really get to live this out, but I sort of made a pledge to the audience, I’m not going to do theater criticism. I’m not going to do it. I mean, I remember after the first Obama debate with Mitt Romney, right? Remember when Mitt Romney was all caffeinated and Obama was very cool and Mitt Romney lied repeatedly and talked in a fantasy about things that could not be accomplished. And Obama was very calm and said reality based things. And I was the only one in the room when we recapped it as a group who was like, yes, of course Obama won and everybody else said no, of course Romney won. And I’m like, you guys are doing theater criticism. And you know, it was, it was tricky in those days, partly because, you know, if you’re black and you’re supportive of Obama, then you are dismissed as, you’re just, you’re just on the team because you’re both black and like —
Nima: Right. In the tank already. Sure.
Touré on the MSNBC show he co-hosted from 2012–2015, The Cycle. (credit: MSNBC)
Touré: And I remember running into somebody who’s prominent at Fox, a black guy, and he was like, ‘yeah, of course Obama won, but we can’t say that because they won’t listen us because we’re black,’ and like, you know, so you kinda got caught up with that sort of stuff sometimes. But you know, I mean once you get, once you get into a horse race, you know, with 17 Republican candidates, you know, but sometimes, you know, I find a lot of the mistakes that happen sometimes will happen via a lack of thought rather than a, you know, it would be great if there would be a little more media criticism, self media criticism within these institutions. Right? Quite often there’s not. One day, I tell this story a lot when I do colleges and stuff, one day in our first year, I believe, I was given like a little 50 word reader. We were doing like news blips, right? Like, you know, and that’s definitely where we’d be like, ‘fighting continues in Yemen,’ you know, blah blah blah. And it said, I think 20 people were shot in Chicago over the weekend. It was July. No context on shootings go up in the summer. No context on Chicago is not top 20 in terms of homicides per capita, no context on Chicago versus itself because criminologists wants you to compare cities to themselves. There’s too many variables when you compare one city’s homicide and gun statistics to another. Um, so I, so I’m just handed this reader that’s like 20 people shot in Chicago over the weekend. Next! And I’m like, wait a minute, I mean that was a big issue for me. Like “Chicago” is a right-wing meme, you guys are going to do an episode on Chicago —
Adam: Oh, “Chicago”’s a huge dog whistle.
Touré: Eh, you know, and this goes back to the eighties when they started talking about “Chicago, Chicago”, which is a way of demonizing black people and fighting against gun laws and all those sorts of things. And I said, and I knew Chicago is actually an extraordinary success story in the last 20 years. They have cut their, their gun homicide rate in half. Right? That’s extraordinary. And I said, ‘I want to add a line to the end that says, “and yet Chicago continues to be on pace for its lowest gun death rate in 20 years.”’ And they said, ‘okay,’ and then I’m like, ‘ah, this levels the story rather than doing that Chicago wink, wink, you guys know what that means thing.’ We were in a different thing. We were in Baltimore after that uprising, after the Freddie Gray situation and we were looking for folks to interview and this woman who was clearly, to me, nodding out, heroined out, just sort of came up and just threw her arm over my shoulder and was like, oh, you’re cute. And my producer said, “Great, let’s interview her.” And I looked at her in horror, but now it’s, it would be too rude to both of these people for me to say ‘I’m not doing this.’ But I asked her one question and then I wrapped it up and, and I told her, I told my producer, ‘you can’t tell that this person was high?’ Like I’m, I don’t want this, I don’t want to have man on the street and we picked one person who’s actually high at the moment. Like, the streets are filled with people who are not, it’s 11:00. There’s, everybody here is not and we pick the one. And the producers were like, ‘I didn’t notice.’ The producer was not accustomed to seeing people nodding. So that producer did not recognize, ‘oh, that person is clearly on drugs at this second,’ right? So, and you know, if I was not there and forcefully saying ‘burn that tape because I know if you send it back to New York, they’re going to, somehow that’s going to air,’ then it would have, you know, if it wasn’t for and not that I’m so great, but I was just sort of paying attention to like, I care about how these people are portrayed and there’s tons of people who are in, you know, not ridiculous who we could choose. But you know, both of these moments are mistakes of, of, uh, under thought rather than overt —
Nima: Yeah, just kind of convenience, right? Of, there’s so much to produce, there’s so much to get up all the time that that’s why you’re like, ‘I guess we’ll have Josh Barro on again!’ But there’s a —
Touré: Wait a minute, wait a minute, hold on, hold on. That was a terrible example.
Nima: Go on.
Touré: Josh Barro is brilliant. He is brilliant. And he is, he is —
Nima: (Laughing.) He’s on every show.
Touré: He’s brilliant. And he is, he is —
Adam: Let’s not, let’s not, let’s not get out of hand here.
Touré: No, no, no, no, no. I worked with Steve Kornacki. Josh Barro is brilliant. There is no, there is no millimeter lost between those two in terms of, he is brilliant. And he is objective in terms of he’s not biased left or right. I am. I am on the team. I had been a Democrat my entire life.
Adam: Come on. But that’s not really true. Josh Barro has certain ideological blinders. I mean he, he’s obviously very capitalist, he has a very hardened ideology for what he views as being kind of center, center-right politics. I mean he’s biased like anyone else. I mean everyone’s biased, right?
Touré: I mean, I, I mean sure. I mean, I mean at the rate of everyone’s biased then where are we? I’m saying we did a show where —
Adam: I mean, the question is are his politics good?
Touré: Well we did. I mean, when you talk about capitalism, absolutely nobody in the entire equation is saying, what about communism? What about socialism? That actually, there is a good argument to be made for that, even though it failed in Russia. Like, nobody’s, nope, that person will be laughed out of the room, but I mean, like, I mean —
Adam: I mean, doesn’t that sort of prove our entire thesis?
Touré: The show that we did, we were very clearly two-to-two and a half Lefties and two Righties, or at least it was supposed to be the one Righty, sort of, and-
Ari Melber, Abbby Huntsman, Krystal Ball and Touré (credit: msnbc.com)
Nima: Just as a refresher, who was on The Cycle?
Touré: Well, there were six of us over time. It started with me and Krystal Ball and uh, Steve Kornacki and S.E. Cupp and then overtime it became, Krystal remained throughout the whole run, but Steve left to do his own show and was replaced by Ari Melber and S.E. left and was replaced by Abby Huntsman. Um, so that was our group.
Adam: Now, a lot of what you say tracks with what our guest said, um, uh, which is —
Touré: Well, he never mentioned CNN. And you cannot discuss MSNBC without talking about CNN because we are completely and not that they’re not reacting to us, but they are definitely listening to CNN and paying close attention to what they’re doing.
Adam: Right. Um, so there has been times where MSNBC has had higher ratings than CNN, is that correct? Or is that never been the case?
Touré: I mean as it like for like, there’ll be —
Adam: Because I know, I know, I thought that in recent years they kind of caught up to them because of a lot of the anti-Trump stuff has been good for ratings and obviously people are tuned into Maddow.
Touré: I mean, I’m no longer privy to the ratings on a day to day basis. I mean I could go on TV by Numbers and sort of figure it out, but I mean, you know, sometimes we would beat CNN, but usually not. But I mean, you know, maybe a quarter? I mean the first year we beat them a bunch of times, but you know, generally they’re, they have an institutional advantage in terms of their history, in terms of, you know, they’re in all the airports. They’re the wallpaper of America and they’re seen as non problematic. I mean, when I’m out in the world, right, people can just throw on CNN and it’s like comfortable, like putting out like cheese, like nobody dislikes cheese, like nobody’s saying, you know, but if know you put out wine and some people are like, well ‘I don’t drink wine.’ ‘I like beer’ or ‘I’m an alcoholic’ like ‘I don’t want to see it’ or ‘I don’t drink because I’m an athlete’ or whatever. So MSNBC is more challenging to certain people and you know, it’s hard to compete when you’re in all the airports all over the world.
Nima: Maybe just to, just to close on so one of the things you’ve mentioned to us earlier is you did happen to find our episode on Jake Tapper compelling. How do you feel like that is different? Certain critiques we were making of him and that idea, that standard, that, that model of newsperson and how do you think that that differs? Like why was that compelling? And then the MSNBC critique not so much?
Touré: Well, you know, honestly I want to avoid that question because I, I mean I, I’m not friends with Jake but I know Jake and I don’t want to be talking about specific individuals who I know.
Nima: Sure.
Touré: Um, because I think that would, you know, that would come across strange. I mean just, just something that just occurred to me —
Nima: Take…Japper.
Touré: (Chuckles.) Something that just occurred to me to go back to a point you were making before, when I was doing music criticism at Rolling Stone, I would never talk about, ‘well they gotta have a pop filler song for radio because they got to try to sell platinum.’ Like I don’t think about that. I’d be like this pop radio song is, is bullshit and it goes against, you know, what we really want for this genre. We want serious lyrics and hip hop or serious guitar playing in rock and roll and none of like we don’t want the pop song with Demi Lovato. Like what did, I would totally do that. And, and somebody inside the label would be like, ‘dude, we’re trying to sell records here.’ So I mean like you as the critic are doing what you should be doing. MSNBC could be better and I’m trying to explain from inside like, well, but if you don’t, if you don’t include the economic, I mean I remember early on right around when Michael Jackson died, I was really ascendant at the network and I remember hearing about a meeting where somebody said like triumphantly, like a high up meeting where somebody said like ‘we’re not covering Michael Jackson.’ And they were very proud of themselves and you know, because there was like, that’s like, you know, we’re looking down on Michael that’s like —
Adam: And that person was gone two days later.
Touré: That, that was an entertainment story and then somebody higher up was like, ‘what are you talking about? You should not be proud of yourself that you’re not covering the story that the audience is clamoring for.’ Like what are you talking about? So I mean like those business economic concerns are very important. A lot of people, Chris Hayes, definitely, you know, others definitely, you know, we tried to do it on The Cycle, will try to break out of that. Will try different things. Lots of shows will try different things. Let’s see if they’ll watch a segment on this or that and you know, maybe it works. Maybe it doesn’t. And you have to deal with that. But you know, life is trickier in the Trump era because just the amount of time you have is just squashed. We would not be able to do The Cycle as we did it in the Trump era, you know, I mean they used to do segments on books. They used to have segments on the Oscars. They used to have fun and in the F block and the, and the E block like no more, like you have to cover Trump for 60 minutes. And quite often I could see it in their eyes, they have ripped up, they wrote a schedule at 9:00 or 10:00 am or they wrote a rundown, that’s what they call it, a rundown, at 9:00 and 10:00 am. And at 2:00 pm they had to rip it up because like Trump.
Nima: Oh right, because comes out and makes like fart noises with his hands in the Rose Garden and now that has to be the fucking A and B blocs.
Touré: Yes. Or somebody else flipped or —
Adam: But I guess here’s my question and then I’ll, and then we’ll leave it here, which is that if I was to bring on Sean Hannity and he said the exact same thing about why Fox News does what they do, that people want to see it, that Republicans want to see it, that, you know, stories about the knockout game or whatever sort of fatuous or racist programming. Like doesn’t this sort of rejoinder-?
Touré: It’s an interesting comparison. Fox News should never be in the same sentence as MSNBC unless you’re saying, well, you know, the LA Lakers and the —
Adam: Hold on, hold on, hold on. I’m simply saying the same logic applies. I’m not comparing them. I’m not saying that the same. I’m saying, well, what’s to stop them from using the exact same, the exact same, uh, I don’t want to say excuse but-
Touré: Surely they would, but you, I sense that you know, that it’s sort of a bad faith comparison because they are performing in bad faith, right? And the, and I use the verb performing —
Adam: Well, but I’m, but I’m saying is that we acknowledge that there is —
Touré: There is an attempt at MSNBC, a sincere attempt, to say what is the important news that the people need to know and how can we cover that objectively? And quite often as, this is not a specific criticism of MSNBC but of journalists in general who are on the left, who would, most of us that veer toward quote unquote “objectivity,” which as you guys have talked about on this show leads us leaning rightward when we should just, you know, it took us forever to start saying Trump was a liar. You know, I mean, people in news are not clear enough that the Republican Party has gone completely off the deep end ideologically, rhetorically the way they perform. The Democratic Party is not doing that. Right? You know, when people say both sides, I pull my hair out and —
Adam: I want to be really clear here. I want to be clear. I’m not at all saying they’re the same, nor am I saying they’re even comparable. I’m saying that we acknowledge that there is an ideological component to Fox and to some extent even CNN when it comes to their pro-military centrism. I’m confused why MSNBC would be different with an understanding that a large majority of MSNBC’s ideology is not bad, that it’s actually good or neutral, that things like, you know, opposing racism or opposing Trump, these are good things, right? I’m not saying the ideology is per se bad, but I’m saying we acknowledge there is ideological content for other corporate media, but somehow MSNBC is just driven by the sort of libertarian ratings regime from which they can’t escape regardless of the best intentions.
Touré: I mean, if it was, if it was just purely ratings than we could, we could do what Fox does, right? There is a sincere attempt by each show to say what is the important news that the people need to know about and how can we, how can we present that in a compelling way? Right? Fox is doing something entirely differently and they may justify it on, we want ratings and we’re getting ratings, but they are producing quite often, bizarrely racist programming. I mean their entire, their entire prime time lineup is consistently racist, consistently presenting a worldview that is fantasy, that has nothing to do with reality. They are the globetrotters, they are not playing by-
Nima: Well, because they’re operating on the, on the level of world-building and to have no counter to that and MSNBC almost sets itself up as counter to that and I think part of our frustration with that is that there’s no attempt, at least on MSNBC’s side, to do world-building of their own look. We’re not expecting them to become like super socialist, super like, that’s not the issue. It’s not like we’re shocked that the Backstreet Boys doesn’t sound like fucking Tom Waits. Like we’re not shocked at that. It’s the fact that there seems to be no attempt to drive a culture even to the moderate liberal left that MSNBC sometimes does. It, it, it just seems to be, you know, as you keep saying like, ‘Oh, well see what CNN’s doing and then we’ll kind of do that.’
Touré: Well, no, that’s not, that is not what I said and that is, that is, that is not what I said at all. We’re paying attention to CNN, but we’re not just mapping CNN, but that goes back to something that you guys did talk about accurately in your MSNBC episode in terms of the history of the place. Is Fox began as an ideological gesture to capture a certain audience. MSNBC did not begin that way. MSNBC the first many, many years was a colorful CNN and then the success of Keith Olbermann led to a Rachel and Lawrence and this explosion of progressives. So they sort of found their voice years into their life and was like, ‘Oh, people are going to watch that. So give them more. Give them more anti-Bush, give them more anti-Bush.’ Um, so it emerged because the audience was wanting it, not because there’s some Ailes or Zucker type figure sitting in the corner going, ‘Okay, now we’re going to do this. Now we’re going to do this. Now we’re going to do this.’ So you can’t have world building without some of that. Nobody, there’s no central figure telling all the shows, this is the perspective we’re taking. Um, which is similar to the Democratic Party versus the Republican Party, I mean quite often on Twitter and I watch TV and I’m like, all the Republicans are saying the same thing. I mean like the moment that Trump, the moment that the story changed and they were all like, it’s just an FEC violation. And they kept saying over and over and they will, they have this message discipline that Democrats don’t, we don’t behave like that. That just never happens. And that is reflected in MSNBC that there’s not a cohesive message, but that’s not the way the Democratic Party operates at all. Right? That’s not the way Democratic people operate at all. I mean, there is a hierarchical nature to the thought that quite often exists in conservative structures. Um, I’ll just not even just in Fox outside of Fox. So being it sort of maps onto the way that these, these ideological groups tend to function in American society. You’re right, there are certain, there’s clearly certain things that are beyond the pale in terms of critique of military.
Adam: Yeah. I think, I think the analogy we used with our guest was that it’s not, it’s not as if someone comes from on high and says, ‘don’t do this,’ but you’re like a rat in a cage and you touch a certain wall and you get electrocuted and you learn quickly what not to talk about.
Touré: Um, I’ve been. Wow. Wow. Wow. I did not. I never felt like a rat in a cage. I felt tremendous freedom and I felt-
Adam: Sorry, a rat in a maze was the term we used. But yes.
Touré: Well I didn’t feel like that. I felt tremendous responsibility, right? To get the story right, to inform the audience properly, to make sure that they understood what’s really going on. Um, that was my way. Now obviously you guys as super lefty critics are right to point out like, ‘well, you’re not doing this and this and this,’ and they’re not. Would you really think that you would consistently cover something that the audience is saying, we’re not interested in that?
Adam: I would say that there are ways of making things like war crimes interesting as proven by the fact that they’ve covered them in the past, but we’re going to give you the last word before you go. I do want to know if you want to talk about your podcast and where people can check that out?
Touré: Yeah, absolutely. Thank you so much. I mean, I’m doing, it’s called Touré Show and you can catch it, you know, anywhere that you find podcasts are streamed and you know, I do hour long one on ones with successful, interesting, fascinating people. Most of the time it’s black people. I mean, I’m really trying to center blackness in this show. So occasionally we’ll have on white people, but if they’re talking about black people, right? So we’ve had two people who worked closely with Prince talking about him. We had the filmmakers who did a film about Sandra Bland talking about her and her case. We have actors, writers, you know, athletes, musicians. We’re going to have Malcolm Gladwell and Sonia Sanchez and Rosie Perez and Lil Yachty on in January. You know. Um, so I mean it’s just a broad array of people and you know, I’m trying to get at what made you successful and what can the audience take from your journey that might make them successful? We talk to people a lot about like their self-talk, you know, we had Tiffany Haddish on and she talked about, she gets up in the morning and she looks at herself in the mirror, like dead in her eyes and she’s like, you know, ‘you’re doing a good job’ and ‘you’re good enough’ and ‘you’re strong enough’ and ‘you can make it.’ And those sorts of messages really power her throughout the day. And I just want to talk to people about like, what are you doing right and communicate to the audience some things that they can possibly take on for themselves.
Nima: Fantastic. Well, Touré thank you so much for joining us. Writer, journalist, critic, TV and podcast host. Everyone should check out Touré Show and uh, thank you so much for coming on to Citations Needed and talking to us about the work that you do and the work that we try to do.
Touré: Thank you.
Nima: So that was great. That was our Citations Needed rebuttal episode, the Citations Rejoinder.
Adam: It’s not easy to sort of come on and have to be the, you know, the heel.
Nima: So we appreciate that and I appreciate Adam, your wrestling reference there. So thank you for that. It’s a good way to start 2019.
Adam: It’s your fault. I didn’t actually know what a heel was until I started doing this show with you. I still hate wrestling.
Nima: (Laughs.) I’m going to change that in 2019.
Adam: My least edgy take, pretty, pretty banal take. But I’m happy with that. I think, incidentally, Touré reaching out to us, we had for a long time wanted to do a kind of, it’s all about the clicks, it’s all about the ratings episode because I get that we get this a lot in media criticism and I think we did a good job sort of addressing that or what the kind of limits of that are and whether or not people think we did is I guess up to them
Nima: They could let us know and then they’ll insist on coming on the show.
Adam: Well it’s the sort of perennial media criticism question. Right? Which is our editorial choices, products of some free market or the editorial choices informed by maybe more sinister factors or more sort of, uh, you know, and I think that it’s, um, I think it’s always interesting to debate that. I don’t want to editorialize too much because I really want people to form their own opinions based on our back and forth. Obviously we have home court advantage. We’re cheating here, but I, I think, uh, I think it’s a fascinating topic and anyone who has any thoughts on that by all means, you know, tweet at us and stuff we’re always curious to hear what you guys think.
Nima: So yet again, thank you Touré for coming on. Thank you all of our listeners for listening to this episode, for joining us now in this new year. You can follow the show on Twitter @CitationsPod, Facebook Citations Needed. Certainly we encourage you and thank you so much if you do, to become a supporter of our show, we are completely listener funded. There are no ads, there are no billionaire backers and we’d like to keep it that way. So please do help us out if you can, and if you are interested in that, you can do so through Patreon.com/CitationsNeededPodcast with Nima Shirazi and Adam Johnson and an extra special shout out goes to our Critic-level supporters through Patreon. Thank you again for tuning in everyone. I am Nima Shirazi.
Adam: I’m Adam Johnson and I guess we kind of have to upload to Spotify now don’t we?
Nima: Yeah, that’s a good point. (Laughs.) Citations Needed is produced by Florence Barrau-Adams. Our production consultant is Josh Kross. Associate producer is Sophia Steinert-Evoy. Our production assistant is Trendel Lightburn. Transcriptions are by Morgan McAslan. The music is by Grandaddy. Thank you everyone for joining us. Happy New Year again. We’ll catch you next time.
This episode of Citations Needed was released on Wednesday, January 9, 2019.
Transcription by Morgan McAslan. Post by Sophia Steinert-Evoy.
Artists Are the Architects of Activism We Need
Jesse Firempong in Asparagus Magazine
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1759
|
__label__wiki
| 0.616505
| 0.616505
|
Snap. Flash. Smile.
Another amazingly adventurous avenue…
By Cassandra Chin Article
Permanent site sought for Grand Forks and District Fall Fair
The Grand Forks and District Fall Fair Society is seeking a permanent home for the fair.
Les Braden, president of the Grand Forks and District Fall Fair Society, proposed three options recently to Grand Forks city council.
The first is to purchase a portion of the Sugimoto property, which is currently potato farmland located northerly to the city by North Fork/Franklin Road; the second is dedicating a portion of a parcel of land (Parcel Z) south of 68th Avenue, including rezoning if required; and the third option is dedicating approximately 3.5 acres west of Dick Bartlett Park and east of the Silver Kettle Village. Braden hopes this will be done by 2013.
Braden reminded city councilors at a recent council meeting of a promise made in June 1999 that then city council had designated the property at the west end of the city (Parcel Z Plan 28940) for the fall fair and other stakeholders.
However, the promise was reversed several months later by the incoming city council.
“Council tried to say they aren’t responsible because it was a different council that said it, but morally they have an obligation to the people of Grand Forks to supply us with a decent sized chunk of land,” Braden told the Grand Forks Gazette.
Mayor Brian Taylor, who was also the president of the fall fair society for three years, shares Braden’s frustrations with the lack of permanent space.
“The problem is, from the city’s side, we’re looking for an appropriate property that would give the versatility that would allow this to be more than a one time a year site,” he told The Gazette. “It has to be a site that will accommodate other groups and organizations that could utilize the space, such as the 4-H groups or agricultural organizations.”
During the meeting, Coun. Michael Wirischagin noted that he supported the idea of finding a permanent home for the fall fair.
“From my point of view, I don’t see Parcel Z as a bad fit,” he said, adding he would like to see a business plan from the society before he could agree or make a motion. Wirischagin also questioned what would go onto the property, how much they would want, and the time frame. This included what the society would require from the city.
Councillors Cher Wyers, Patrick O’Doherty, Bob Kendel, Neil Krog and Gary Smith would also like to see a business plan.
Braden noted that although the councilors would like to see a business plan, it is difficult to create one when the society does not know what chunk of land they would be given.
“We know what size we want, about 20 acres (eight hectares) – having talked with a couple of other B.C. fairs,” he explained. “They told us don’t go for anything less because you’re going to need it in the future. If you’re trying to expand and put in permanent (buildings) you need a piece of land big enough to do so.”
With additions including parking facilities and permanent buildings, Braden noted that the Grand Forks and District Fall Fair Society is eyeing two places: Parcel Z or a part of Sugimoto’s land, which is still within the city limits and close to water and sewer pipes.
“I do know there are grants available but in order to get a grant, you have to have a piece of land,” he said. “We want to be able to access grants that are available to assist in the construction of buildings to house events, the construction of which could be done to incorporate the future development of a community centre.”
The idea of a community centre has been a big question for many organizations in Grand Forks that are looking for a larger facility to hold events.
In Braden’s presentation, it was noted that a community centre would also benefit the city as an event location that can be used by community groups and organizations.
Ultimately, Braden pointed out there should be a public discussion with city council and residents on whether or not there should be a permanent space.
“If people feel that we don’t deserve it and nothing will become of anything, then let us know,” he concluded. “On the same token, if everybody is in favour of it, we’ll keep working as we had the last couple of years in getting a permanent site.”
– With files from Karl Yu
Tagged fall fair, grand forks, grand forks gazette
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1761
|
__label__cc
| 0.650852
| 0.349148
|
The Distributional Impact of Taxes and Transfers: Evidence from Eight Low & Middle Income Countries
Book Launch, Presentation Nora Lustig
The World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA
The event will launch a new book—The Distributional Impact of Taxes and Transfers: Evidence from Eight Developing Countries—that provides an assessment of the effects of taxation and public expenditures on the income of different households, individuals, and socioeconomic groups as well as the distribution of income across the entire population and their impact on poverty and inequality.
The event will begin with a short introduction by the co-authors—Gabriela Inchauste, a lead economist in the Poverty and Equity Global Practice of the World Bank Group and Nora Lustig, Director of Commitment to Equity (CEQi), Tulane University. The event will also include a panel of experts that will discuss the longer-term impacts of the work, including the initial reception of the work, the extent to which there was a country dialogue and whether that led to policy changes in the longer run. The panel will also look at some more recent case studies where the analysis has helped to shape the policy dialogue.
Publication Page
World Bank Video: How Tax and Spending Policies Can Reduce Poverty and Inequality
Blog Post: World Bank – Let’s Talk Development: “How do taxes and transfers impact poverty and inequality in developing countries?”
Ministerio de Hacienda, Paraguay CEQ Handbook 2020 Workshop: Methodological Advances in Fiscal Incidence Analysis Commitment to Equity Institute (CEQ)
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1763
|
__label__wiki
| 0.986714
| 0.986714
|
Thomas says high court needs geographic diversity
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas says the nation's highest court would benefit from more geographic diversity among its justices and should hold some sessions outside of Washington, D....
LINCOLN, Neb. – U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas says the nation's highest court would benefit from more geographic diversity among its justices and should hold some sessions outside of Washington, D.C.
Thomas' comments came in a speech to University of Nebraska-Lincoln law students Thursday and were reported by the Lincoln Journal Star (http://bit.ly/pGwsqS). Thomas, a Georgia native who has worked in Washington, D.C., for some time, said the court would benefit from a more balanced geographical mix that "reflects the fact this is a big country, not just the Northeast."
"There's nobody from the Heartland," said Thomas, who visits Nebraska periodically because his wife's family is from the state.
Six of the nine justices have strong ties to Boston, New York and central New Jersey. Chief Justice John Roberts is a Midwesterner raised in Indiana, but he went to college and law school at Harvard and has spent his entire professional life in Washington. Four justices were born or raised in New York City — Brooklyn-born Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Antonin Scalia, raised in Queens; Bronx native Sonia Sotomayor; and Elena Kagan, who is from Manhattan.
Thomas also told the Nebraska law students that it would be a good idea for the justices to occasionally hold sessions outside of Washington.
"I think it would serve us all to move around the country," Thomas said.
A University of Southern California law professor, Lee Epstein, has begun to look at whether there's any correlation between geography and voting patterns in Supreme Court cases. Her research is at a preliminary stage.
University of Notre Dame Law School professor Richard Garnett told The Associated Press he's not bothered by the lack of geographic diversity on the Supreme Court because he thinks the justices' skills are more important than their roots.
"We are well-served if the justices of the Supreme Court are well-trained, able, thoughtful lawyers," said Garnett, who believes the current panel fits that.
Thomas spent roughly 90 minutes answering student questions during his visit. He told the group that the court is being asked to play too big of a role in the nation's governance. Currently, he said too many of the difficult decisions are being left to the courts to decide.
"The really hard calls ought to be made by citizens and their political leaders," Thomas said.
Thomas was appointed to the court by Republican President George H.W. Bush, and he took his seat in 1991.
Information from: Lincoln Journal Star, http://www.journalstar.com
HSBC halts US foreclosures over paperwork errors
Car Flies About 60 Feet Into Upper Floor of a Building in California
US foreign aid faces cuts as China's reach grows
Houston Day Care Center Fire Kills 3, Injures 4
2 Arrested After 6-Hour Standoff on Milwaukee Interstate
Police: 5 killed in shootings in Yuma, Ariz.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1766
|
__label__cc
| 0.661771
| 0.338229
|
Martin Sensmeier
Film Review: The Magnificent Seven
Antoine Fuqua revives the classic Western with style and a keen eye for action.
by Blake Goble
Justice has a number in The Magnificent Seven trailer — watch
Antoine Fuqua’s remake of the Western classic stars Denzel Washington, Chris Pratt, Ethan Hawke, and many more.
on April 20, 2016, 9:58am
Denzel Washington, Chris Pratt saddle up in first images from Antoine Fuqua’s The Magnificent Seven
Remake of the classic western also stars Ethan Hawke, Vincent D’Onofrio, Byung-hun Lee, and more.
on April 19, 2016, 6:42pm
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1767
|
__label__wiki
| 0.777573
| 0.777573
|
Prior Investments
Larry McVicker
Gary Riley
Steve Schwarz
Charles Sweet
Paul Smucker Wagstaff
In the News Archives
Published Article Archives
Cyprium Investment Partners Invests in Network Hardware Resale LLC
June 28, 2012 | Announcements
Cleveland, OH – June 28, 2011 – Cyprium Investment Partners LLC (“Cyprium”), a private equity firm focused primarily on non-control investments, announced today that it has completed a subordinated debt and equity investment in Network Hardware Resale LLC (“NHR”). The infusion will enable NHR, the leading provider of pre-owned and new networking solutions, to refinance existing indebtedness while providing capital to further fuel efforts relating to the next phase of the company’s expansion.
Headquartered in Santa Barbara, Calif., NHR is the world’s foremost independent supplier of used, pre-owned and new IT networking equipment, from leading networking vendors including Cisco, Foundry and Juniper. In addition, NHR offers its global customer base a compelling array of services and backs all its products with a standard, one-year replacement warranty.
“The Cyprium team really understood our vision and embraced our goals for the next phase of NHR’s expansion worldwide,” said Mike Sheldon, president and CEO of NHR. “The additional capital investment will support our continuing efforts to reinforce our global presence with top-quality products, state-of-the-art facilities and industry-leading services that best meet our customers’ network and budget requirements.”
Last month NHR announced major service enhancements to its NetSure family of comprehensive, fully managed network service and support programs, providing a one-stop resource for network monitoring, technical support and unprecedented assurance for multi-manufacturer network environments. The company also is tripling its inventory capacity and doubling the size of its corporate headquarters as a part of a move to new office and warehouse facilities. NHR also is increasing the capacity of its Amsterdam facility by nearly 50 percent to accommodate ever-increasing global customer demands.
“NHR presents a compelling investment opportunity for Cyprium,” said John Sinnenberg, Chairman of the firm. “Cyprium’s professionals have a long history of partnering with high-quality private companies, and we are excited to support a market leader like NHR.”
About Network Hardware Resale
Network Hardware Resale (NHR) is a leading provider of networking solutions that specialize in reducing IT costs. Based in Santa Barbara, Calif., the company is an independent reseller of pre-owned Cisco, Foundry and Juniper networking equipment as well as an authorized reseller of resilient, scalable equipment from Force10 Networks. NHR also offers cost-effective network management, asset management, alternative maintenance and technical support services. Founded in 1986, NHR provides global sales and technical support from its Santa Barbara, Dallas metro, New York City metro, Amsterdam, London and Singapore locations. Organizations worldwide purchase quality networking equipment from NHR, including Global 1000 companies, small and mid-sized enterprises, government entities, educational institutions, healthcare organizations and telecommunications service providers.
About Cyprium Partners
Cyprium Partners (Cyprium) is a private equity firm focused primarily on non-control (minority ownership) investments. Cyprium typically utilizes a combination of subordinated debt, preferred stock and/or common stock to enable family owned businesses, entrepreneurs and management teams to achieve their financial and/or strategic objectives. Cyprium will also selectively invest in control (majority ownership) positions. With offices in Cleveland and New York, the firm invests $10 million to $40 million per transaction in privately-held companies based in the U.S. and Canada that have $8 million or more of EBITDA. The company is currently investing out of its third fund, which has $500 million of committed capital from investors including pension funds, insurance companies, fund-of-funds, family offices and entrepreneurs who the firm has backed in previous investments. Learn more about Cyprium Partners at www.cyprium.com.
Karen Heise
©2021 Cyprium Investment Partners LLC. All Rights Reserved.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1769
|
__label__cc
| 0.517538
| 0.482462
|
Home » Players » Imran Khan
Sana Mir reveals the name of her favourite cricketers
Posted On / October 26, 2018 / by CricketTimes.com Staff
Pakistan women’s cricketer Sana Mir has recently become the first woman player from her country to become the top-ranked bowler in the ICC rankings.
She appeared in a popular talk show ‘Voice of Cricket’ last month where the host Zainab Abbas asked her about various cricketing aspects. During the show, Sana was also asked about her favourite cricketer and she was quick to answer as MS Dhoni and Imran Khan who have been the stalwarts for their respective nations.
Hailed as one of the most successful captains in world cricket, MS Dhoni has all three ICC trophies to his name. He came to the limelight after leading underdogs India to a spectacular Twenty20 World Cup title in 2007. Four years later, his iconic six over mid-wicket at the Wankhede stadium brought the ODI World Cup back to India after 28 years.
“MS Dhoni and Imran Khan are my favourite cricketers. Dhoni is an inspiration to me and you can say he is my favourite captains among all as well,” Sana Mir said.
Here’s the video of her interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTHuKV8O8kI
TAGS: Imran Khan, India, MS Dhoni, Pakistan, Sana Mir
CATEGORY: Featured, Imran Khan, India, MS Dhoni, News, Pakistan, Players, Sana Mir, Teams
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1772
|
__label__wiki
| 0.977291
| 0.977291
|
Once he retires, NFL quarterback to coach at Catholic high school
In Catholic News Service, Church in the US
Rob Herbst
NFL quarterback Philip Rivers is introduced May 8, 2020, as the head football coach in-waiting at St. Michael Catholic High School in Fairhope, Ala. He signed a one-year contract with the Indianapolis Colts during the offseason and will take over the St. Michael football program after he retires. (Credit: Rob Herbst/The Catholic Week via CNS.)
Philip Rivers said he fulfilled one childhood dream by playing quarterback in the NFL. He'll soon fulfill another by coaching high school football.
FAIRHOPE, Alabama — Philip Rivers said he fulfilled one childhood dream by playing quarterback in the NFL. He’ll soon fulfill another by coaching high school football.
The 38-year-old Rivers was named head coach-in-waiting at St. Michael Catholic High School in Fairhope. He’ll follow in the footsteps of his father, Steve, a longtime high school football coach who’s in the Alabama High School Sports Hall of Fame.
Rivers’ coaching career won’t begin immediately. He’s set to begin his 17th season in the NFL after signing a one-year, $25 million deal with the Indianapolis Colts in the offseason. Paul Knapstein, athletic director at St. Michael, will serve as interim coach for at least the 2020 season. Rivers will take over once he retires from the NFL, which could be after a couple more seasons.
“It’s a special day for me and my family. I will probably get a little emotional,” said Rivers. “I (had) two childhood dreams. One was playing in the NFL. I still love that. The other was to be a high school football coach as my dad was.
“Wow, how blessed am I to be able to live both of those out?”
Rivers was the No. 4 overall pick in the 2004 NFL draft. He reached eight Pro Bowls during his 16 seasons with the San Diego and Los Angeles Chargers, and his 59,271 passing yards rank sixth on the league’s all-time list.
He and his wife, Tiffany, are the parents of nine children. Faustin Weber, the principal at St. Michael, said Rivers’ upbringing, as the son of a longtime high school coach, as well as his Catholic faith are important attributes in the school’s eventual head coach.
“He and Tiffany are devout Catholics,” Weber said. “I believe he’s going to be a tremendous influence on the lives of our young men here and their faith life. He brings an infectious optimism and enthusiasm to whatever he does and I think he’s going to really advance our culture here and be a tremendous influence for good.
“Our mission is to build scholars, leaders and disciples of Jesus Christ and I really believe he’s going to help us advance our mission,” he said.
Rivers played high school football at Athens High School in northern Alabama, but the connection to the Gulf Coast of Alabama came a few years ago when Rivers’ family developed a relationship with a family in the area.
Rivers then conducted football camps at St. Michael each of the past two summers.
“It seemed like the perfect fit,” Rivers said. “As the days went by, we felt more and more like God had a hand in this and kind of laid it in our lap from the standpoint of location, a school with the same vision and a young football program. As time went, it made sense. It was the right fit.”
St. Michael opened in the fall 2016 and its football program will enter its third varsity football season this fall. The program has won three games the past two seasons.
“Our program will be faith, family and football,” Rivers said. “It will be built on faith, and family will be very important, and we’ll work like crazy at the football part.”
Herbst is editor of The Catholic Week, newspaper of the Archdiocese of Mobile.
Longtime Notre Dame football coach Lou Holtz to get Medal of Freedom
Ex-Notre Dame coach Lou Holtz to receive Presidential Medal of Freedom
Catholic school principal fired for reporting abuse
faith and sports
Church in the US
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1774
|
__label__wiki
| 0.789356
| 0.789356
|
Inside BritBox’s Decision To Add Piers Morgan’s ‘Good Morning Britain’ To Their “Now” Line Up
By Meghan O'Keefe Twitter @megsokay Aug 14, 2018 at 10:00am
Photo: Getty Images ; Illustration: Dillen Phelps
Michael Apted's '7 Up' Series Got All The Attention In The Wake Of His Death, But His Feature Work Is Worthy Of Reconsideration
Stream It Or Skip It: 'Traces' On BritBox, Where A Woman Returns To Her Scottish Hometown To Find Who Killed Her Mother
Don't Feel Ashamed of Your Streaming History When You Look Back on 2020
Matthew McConaughey Rants About "Illiberals," Cancel Culture, and Free Speech on 'Good Morning Britain'
In just a little over a year, BritBox has made some pretty bold moves. The fledgling streaming service, owned in collaboration by BBC and ITV, has launched its first original show, offered a live-stream of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s big royal wedding, and announced further plans to boost its “Now” line-up of up-to-date popular British programming. During the streaming service’s presentation at Summer 2018 TCA, they also announced that they would be adding two ITV morning news shows, Good Morning Britain, featuring the controversial Piers Morgan and co-host Susanna Reid, and This Morning to their “Now” menu.
Decider caught up with BritBox President Soumya Sriraman after the presentation to chat about all things BritBox. We asked Sriraman about the strategy behind picking up Piers Morgan’s morning show, how their new panel show channel is doing for them, and how big of a deal the Royal Wedding was for them.
DECIDER: You announced a lot during the panel today. I wanted to ask about the ITV livestreams, just in terms of the morning shows. What was the catalyst for that and why did you go with the ITV programming?
SRIRAMAN: This is something that we have been looking at for a while. Our promise has always been to take you closer back to the UK, and we’ve always struggled that we weren’t able to bring you real news because there is clearance issues. News is only cleared for fair use in certain territories and many clips and things are just not covered. So along the way I’d been speaking to the multiple producers of the shows in the UK, and the last time I was in London I found myself watching Piers. Usually when I’m there in London, I’m watching the BBC morning show. And I found myself tuning back in [to Good Morning Britain], and back in, and back in. I’d go out, but he’s addictive.
Then I had a completely different meeting with ITV a couple days after. And actually we were going to order This Morning. This Morning is much more in the vein of what I thought the show should be, and I said to them in the meeting, “I know we are talking about This Morning, but why can’t I do Good Morning Britain?” Because it is very difficult, with all of these other strings attached. And I said, “Could you guys please look at it and find out if it’s doable? Because I am really interested in looking at it.” And that’s how it came about.
Here’s a question I have for you in terms of how you’re developing BritBox’s line-up. Have you discovered any weird loopholes people didn’t know about in terms of clearance, or have you been able to push for new regulations?
Inside BritBox’s Big Gambit: Crowning ‘The Bletchley Circle: San Francisco’ As Its First Original
A behind-the-scenes look at how The Bletchley Circle crossed the pond...
by Meghan O'Keefe (@megsokay)
Every single day I feel like I learned something new about clearance. I’m like, “No one told me about this,” and “What do you mean the equity group has to weigh in?” I’m sitting in these meetings saying, “Okay, what does that mean? Does it mean I have to write a bigger check?” It’s kind of weird to say that, but this was an important part of what we wanted to do. Because we always said this is not going to be easy, but everyone has to commit to it.
Every single day I think the process gets a little bit easier, mostly because the producers back in the UK go, “Oh, I don’t mind finding a creative way to try and solve these problems” I think the fact that we have launched, the fact that we are semi-successful, I think makes it all possible for our parents, for the producers, the broadcasters, all to feel like they are part of a journey with us.
You mentioned today that the royal wedding live-stream was your most successful event so far. By what measure?
Oh gosh, 5x! 5x more people! We literally sat there, and it was petrifying. I was here in LA for another set of meetings. The New York team had been awake since midnight the previous night because they were setting up Harry’s Bar because we had a live-stream back to the UK, so ITV was going to stream the fans in the U.S. watching the royal wedding. So we had to set up for that. We had to get the tech team in London lined up, because we had a BBC “whatever” that was going to the BT tower, and was going to pull from something else, and it was hairy. It was super hairy. And then the thing that scared me the most was that when it suddenly started the streams increased, the number of people. We had never seen this many people on the service, is it going to crash? So all of those things…but it all worked out.
You have been adding more quiz shows to your line-up, so how do you go about deciding what’s going to be the comedy and the quiz slate? Is it just whatever you can get? Is there a specific kind of show you’re looking for?
We always thought there was three distinct groups of people that are going to like Britbox. There’s Anglophiles, everyone who knows about it from Masterpiece Theatre and then thinks, “I need to find more like it”. Then there’s expats who probably have a VPN of some sort to watch programing over here, and this is an easy solution for that kind of thing. And then we always thought there was a third group that we thought were “think-y” TV watchers that care for things like panel shows, quiz shows, really off-the-cuff comedy, which doesn’t necessarily appeal to the first group, for sure. It probably appeals to the second group, but the second group is probably there for a completely different reason: more the soaps.
We tried panel shows and thought, “Oh, this is interesting. It is working, but not as well.” Technically, it was working more than we had heard it was working in other places. QI really launched it last year. It was working well, but not huge. By the way, panel shows are very hard to clear, and it’s something, again, I’ve been dealing with it for a while. Finally, the Mock The Week guy said to me, “I’ll find a way to clear it”. Have I Got News For You is the one I wanted, still un-clearable. So we’ve been working through it, so sometimes I have to go, “How big is the check?”
But we were able to get Mock The Week to do it, and I went to the Would I Lie To You? guy and said, “Come on, you guys keep saying it’s un-clearable. Figure it out.” And we packaged it together as a panel channel and suddenly that whole thing has just gone to the top. Now I know that that audience, which is more male-skewing, exists. I would say [the quiz shows and comedy are] male-skewing and the mystery stuff is more female-skewing.
soumya sriraman
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1776
|
__label__wiki
| 0.971429
| 0.971429
|
July Music Appreciation Night Playlist
This month, our theme was ‘Cover Bands’. Our full playlist is now available… Happy Listening!
This month’s featured system included:
Speakers – Wilson Audio Alexx Speakers
Phono Pre-Amp – D’Agostino Phono Pre-Amp
Amplifiers – D’Agostino ST400 mono amps
Digital Playback – dCS Vivaldi system CD/SACD player
Turntable – Clear Audio Master Innovation turntable w/ Goldfinger Cartridge
Cables – Transparent Opus Cables
Equipment Rack –HRS MXR rack with isolation shelves and couplers
Offa Rex (Silver Platters new music feature) — “The Queen of Hearts” from the CD “The Queen of Hearts”
Chris Robinson Brotherhood (Silver Platters new music feature, playing at the SoDo store 8.1.17) — “Behold the Seer” from the CD “Barefoot In The Head”
Marcus Miller (coming to Jazz Alley next month) — “Girls and Boys” from the CD “Silver Rain”
Tom Petty, Jeff Lynne Winwood, Dhani Harrison, & Prince — “While My Guitar Gently Weeps” from the LP “Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Live — Vol. 1”
Eva Cassidy — “People Get Ready” from the LP set “Nightbird”
Peter Malick Group — “This Heart Of Mine” from the CD “New York City”
Rod Stewart — “I Know (I’m Losing You)” from the Mobile Fidelity LP “Every Picture Tells A Story”
Bob Curnow — “(It’s Just) Talk” from the CD “L.A. Big Band * the music of Pat Metheny & Lyle Mays”
Pentatonix — “Imagine” from the CD “PTX Vol. IV Classics”
The Beatles — “Twist and Shout” from the remastered CD “Please Please Me”
Grant Green — “I Want To Hold Your Hand” from the CD “I Want To Hold Your Hand”
Emmylou Harris — “Goodbye” from the LP “Wrecking Ball Deluxe Edition”
Steve Earle — “Time Has Come Today” from the CD “Sidetracks”
Tedeschi Trucks Band — “Everybody’s Talkin'” from the CD “Everybody’s Talkin'”
Wes Montgomery — “‘Round Midnight” from the Analogue Productions LP “The Wes Montgomery Trio”
Issac Hays — “Walk On By” from the CD “Hot Buttered Soul”
The Nice — “America” from the LP “Autumn ’67 — Spring ’68”
Willie Nelson — “Graceland” from the CD “Across the Borderline”
A Perfect Circle — “When The Levee Breaks” from the CD/DVD set “Live 2010 2011”
Leslie Odom Jr. — “Autumn Leaves” from the CD “Tony Bennett Celebrates 90”
Eric Johnson — “Little Wing” from the CD “Mariani Anthology Ant 4.11”
Sting — “The Wind Cries Mary” from the Classic Records LP “Power Of Soul”
Michael Manring — “Spirits In The Material World” from the CD “Drastic Measures”
Yuri Honing — “Walking On The Moon” from the CD “Star Tracks”
John Cale — “Pablo Picasso” from the LP “Guts”
Rush — “Crossroads” from the LP “Feedback”
Krokus — “Stayed Awake All Night” from the CD “Stayed Awake All Night/The Best of Krokus”
Stanton Moore — “Here Comes The Girls” from the CD “With You In Mind”
Brownout — “Hand Of Doom” from the LP “Presents Brown Sabbath”
Jimi Hendrix — “Born Under A Bad Sign” from the Classic Records LP “Blues”
Stevie Ray Vaughan — “Little Wing” from the Analogue Productions LP “The Sky Is Crying”
Type O Negative — “Santana Medley” from the CD/DVD “Sympathy For The Devil”
Santana — “Saja/Right On” from the CD “Milagro”
Eric Clapton — “Goodnight Irene” from the CD “Old Sock”
Eric Clapton — “After Midnight” from the Mobile Fidelity LP “Eric Clapton”
Power Station — “Bang A Gong” from the LP “Power Station”
Cheap Trick — “Ain’t That A Shame” from the CD “The Greatest Hits”
Stevie Ray Vaughan — “Little Wing/Third Stone From The Sun” from the Classic Records LP “Power Of Soul”
Miles Davis — “Human Nature” from the CD “You’re Under Arrest”
Creedence Clearwater Revival — “I Put A Spell On You” from the Analogue Productions SACD “Creedence Clearwater Revival”
Yo-Yo Ma, Chris Thile, Edgar Meyer — Bach’s “Trio Sonata No. 6 in G Major, 1st mvmt” from the CD “Bach Trios”
Cedric Tiberghien — Bartok’s “Sonata For Two Pianos And Percussion, 1st mvmt” from the CD “Bela Bartok”
Tomita — Stravinsky’s “Firebird Suite: Finale” from the LP “Voyage Through His Greatest Hits, Vol. 2”
Jacqui Naylor — “Miss You” from the CD “Shelter”
Jacky Terrasson — “Come Together” from the CD “Take This”
Leslie West — “Give Me One Reason” from the CD “Soundcheck”
Van Halen — “Intruder/ (Oh) Pretty Woman” from the remastered LP “Diver Down”
Chaka Khan & Kenny Olsen — “Little Wing” from the Classic Records LP “Power Of Soul”
Meet The Chronosonic XVX
Clearaudio Turntables: High-Quality Music
Phantom Reactor: A Small, But Mighty Speaker
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1777
|
__label__wiki
| 0.57894
| 0.57894
|
Understanding galaxy e...
Understanding galaxy evolution
The Evolution of Galaxies :
Studying how galaxies evolve takes more than just observing them and noting their properties. A notable part of an astronomer's job is about constructing physical models that explain the observed behavior. Read here how PhD Mikkel Stockmann contributed to increasing our knowledge about galaxy evolution.
The giant elliptical galaxy ESO 325-G004. Like most other elliptical galaxies, ESO 325-G004 has virtually ceased forming new stars, so that only the old, orange/reddish stars are left, giving the elliptical galaxies their characteristic color (Credit: NASA, ESA, and The Hubble Heritage Team).
The Cosmic Dawn Center is devoted to studying the formation and evolution of galaxies, in particular the most massive, elliptical galaxies. Such a study involves investigating the relations, if any, between their various physical properties — for instance their size, stellar populations, amount of dust, rotation, morphology, and what not.
It turns out that, in the present-day Universe, there is a tight relation between three such properties, namely the galaxies' size, mass, and brightness. In other words, if you measure two, you almost get the third for free.
This relation is known as "the Fundamental Plane" of elliptical galaxies. Plane, because when these properties are plotted in a 3D coordinate system, they fall in a rather flat, 2D region. Don't worry if this sounds confusing; we'll get back to it further down where we'll visualize the Plane.
Relating these three properties requires us to define them properly:
Galaxy size
Galaxies are a mix of stars, gas, and dust, as well as the invisible dark matter. As you travel from the center and out, the density of these components decrease, but you will never get to a point where they reach zero.
How, then, do you define the size of a galaxy?
There is no "correct" way to specify its size, and different definitions are used, depending on what you use it for. One way could be to define its radius as the region within which a certain fraction (say, 99%) of its mass is located. But observationally, this is not easily determined — we don't weigh galaxies, we observe their light.
Hence, another definition is typically used, namely the radius of the region within which half of its light is emitted. As long as we use the same definition, we can compare galaxies to each other.
Galaxy brightness and mass
To be able to compare the size of galaxies, often the so called "half light radi us" is used; the radius within which half of the galaxy's light is emitted.
Galaxies are bright because they're full of stars (although the stars are sometimes outshone by other luminous stuff such as quasars). If truth be told, the Fundamental Plane relates the galaxies' size with 1) the galaxies' surface brightness — that is, the brightness per area — and 2) the velocity of the stars moving around inside them. But since area depends on size, and since the stellar velocities depend on the galaxies' mass (stars move faster in massive galaxies), we can use some clever algebra to express the Fundamental Plane in terms of size, brightness, and mass. These quantities are a tad easier to grasp.
Whereas size and brightness are measured relatively effortlessly, however, the mass is less easily determined. Especially because the largest part of a galaxy's matter is dark matter. But even though it cannot be seen, it affects the velocity of the stars.
The Fundamental Plane of elliptical galaxies
What is the origin of the Fundamental Plane? Was it always like this? If not, when did galaxies evolve to establish the relation? And how does the relation change with time? These are questions that puzzle astronomers.
During his PhD studies at DAWN, Mikkel Stockman investigated the Fundamental Plane, particularly its evolution, pushing observations back to unprecedented early times. The fact that the three properties are not randomly distributed over all possible values, but fall in a narrow Plane, means that they are connected. This is perhaps not surprising in itself, but when this Plane apparently exists not only today, but also in the past, things get interesting:
"If such a Plane exists, it tells us that these galaxies evolve in a similar fashion", says Mikkel Stockmann. "And the earlier epochs we see this Plane, the earlier this type of galaxies must have formed".
As we look deeper into the Universe, we also look farther back in time, since the light from distant galaxies takes time to reach us. In his latest paper, Mikkel Stockmann and his collaborators — a team of international astronomers — compared the physical properties of elliptical galaxies in the present-day Universe (that is, "local" galaxies) to the properties of galaxies many billions of lightyears away, seen more than 10 billion years in the past, closer to their date of birth.
Evolution timeline of massive, elliptical galaxies. In the research described in this article, we will take a closer look at the last three steps (Credit: NASA, ESA, Sune Toft, & Ann Feild)
He then presents a physical model that explains how the size, mass, and brightness of elliptical galaxies evolve from 10 billion years ago to today — that is, how the Fundamental Plane evolves.
The model is based on our current understanding of the build-up of galaxies, the evolution of stellar populations, the mixture of dark matter with "ordinary" matter, and other well-founded physics.
"Passive" and "active" evolution
Mikkel Stockmann argues in his paper how galaxies evolve simultaneously through different mechanisms:
The first mechanism may be called passive evolution, as it occurs via "internal" processes. For reason that are a full-blown study in itself, elliptical galaxies cease to form new stars at an early age. This is in contrast to the more active spiral galaxies — such as our own Milky Way — that keep forming stars. As time goes, more and more stars die out, meaning that the galaxy's brightness decreases.
At the same time galaxies grow, both through a smooth accretion of new gas and dark matter from the intergalactic space, as well as through devouring smaller galaxies. This mechanism actively changes the structure of the galaxy, increasing both its mass and its radius. Clearly, adding more stars to the galaxy also increases its brightness, but mass increases faster, so the mass-to-light ratio increases.
In principle, this bombardment of smaller galaxies might be thought to increase the larger galaxies' stellar velocities as well, and this was in fact also thought previously. But in an earlier paper, Mikkel Stockmann showed that this is in fact not the case.
Visualizing the Fundamental Plane
Visualizing the Fundamental Plane can be a bit tricky, because it consists of three variables (size, mass, and brightness), and so forms a 3D "space". Sometimes we therefore consider only two variables at a time. Another rather enlightning way is to consider a "mixture" of two of the variables and compare this to the third variable.
An example of this would be to compare the mass-to-light ratio — that is, a galaxy's mass divided by its brightness — to its size. This is shown in the figure below.
2D version of the 3D Fundamental Plane.
A lot is going on in this figure, so let's take a closer look:
The orange ellipses represent galaxies. The farther they are to the right, the larger they are, according to the observations. Being higher up can mean they the are either more massive, or that they are fainter. Or both.
The galaxies fall in two groups — the ones in the bottom are observed properties of the distant galaxies, seen 10 billions years ago, while the upper group represent local galaxies, seen roughly like they are today.
In both cases, the galaxies are seen to fall in a rather narrow range — this is in fact the Fundamental Plane "seen from the side", so to speak (if this makes little sense, try viewing the 3D version below).
Din internetbrowser understøtter ikke iframes. Det betyder, at videoen Fundamental plane ikke kan afspilles.
The Big Question now is, how did the galaxies go from populating a region in the bottom left of this diagram, to the top right. And Mikkel Stockmann offers an explanation.
The two mechanisms discussed above are depicted, respectively, as a red arrow (the passive evolution decreasing the brightness and hence pushing the galaxies up), and a blue arrow (the structural change increasing the mass and size and hence pushing the galaxies both up and right).
"If we aim to understand how and when these galaxies were born — which is something that the Fundamental Plane helps us with — we can figure out which type of galaxies we must study in order to find the progenitors of the ones that will later become the most massive galaxies in the Universe", Mikkel Stockmann says. "We can study how they formed, and thereby better understand galaxy evolution".
These mechanisms can explain most of the evolution over the last 10 billion years. Most, but not entirely. When doing the actual math, Mikkel Stockmann calculated that, seemingly, we still "need" the galaxies to move a little farther up in the diagram. That is, the galaxies observed in the present-day Universe are either a little fainter, or a little more massive, than Mikkel Stockmann's model suggests.
Enter dark matter…
As time goes, galaxies tend to "condense". That is, its matter tends to become more concentrated in the central parts. Dark matter adds to the total mass, but it doesn't emit light, and it doesn't collide with neither itself, nor with the normal matter.
Because normal, gaseous matter can collide, it is easier to condense and settle into the central parts of the galaxy than it is for the dark matter. Hence the normal matter dominates the total mass in the center, whereas the farther you travel from the center, the more the dark matter dominates.
This in turn means that, as the radius inside which we measure the light increases, we enter regions of more mass, but not more light. In other words, the ratio between the two increases. This is enough to push the Fundamental Plane up where it should be, according to the observations. This mechanism is depicted by the black arrow in the diagram.
With this model, it seems that we are getting closer to understanding how the elliptical galaxies evolve.
The paper describing these new findings (and other) has been accepted for publication in the Astrophysical Journal, and can be read here: arxiv.org/abs/2012.05935.
Galaxies in the Very Early Universe were Surprisingly Mature
Astronomical discovery: How novae light up the sky
The Solar System follows the Galactic standard – but it is a Rare Breed
Peter Laursen, Science disseminator
E-mail: pela@nbi.ku.dk
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1779
|
__label__wiki
| 0.789799
| 0.789799
|
The Relative Impact of Risk and Protective Factors on the Psychological Functioning of Sexual and Gender Minority Youth
Ilayna Krysten MehrtensFollow
Research has consistently indicated that sexual and gender minority (SGM) youth are at increased risk of psychological and emotional concerns relative to their cisgender heterosexual (cis-heterosexual) peers. A large body of research has sought to identify the risk factors that may contribute to this disparity; however, fewer studies have investigated the factors that may promote resiliency, thereby reducing risk. Subsequently, very little is known about the relative influence of risk and protective factors among SGM youth. Additionally, significant methodological concerns have been identified, which may affect the interpretability, generalizability, and clinical applicability of existing research. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the relative influence of risk and protective factors that have been identified in previous literature, while taking into consideration several methodological shortcomings identified in existing literature. Participants included 158 sexual and gender minority (SGM) adolescents. Results implied increased risk of depression and anxiety among gender minority youth relative to sexual minority youth. Results also supported a direct effect of gender identity on psychological functioning; however, no direct effects were observed for sexual orientation. For risk factors, only identity-specific risk factors (i.e., orientation-based victimization) were found to mediate the relationship between gender identity and psychological functioning. For protective factors, no significant moderators emerged. However, positive, promising effects for self-esteem, school connectedness, and social support were observed. Clinical implications and future directions are discussed and include assessing identity-specific risk, tailoring services to support promotive factors such as self-esteem, and increasing attention to protective factors in the research literature. Relevant terminology as outlined by the American Psychological Association is presented in Appendix A (APA 2015a; 2015b).
Mehrtens, Ilayna Krysten, "The Relative Impact of Risk and Protective Factors on the Psychological Functioning of Sexual and Gender Minority Youth" (2020). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 5324.
Kelley, Mary Lou
Available for download on Wednesday, June 28, 2023
Child Psychology Commons, Clinical Psychology Commons
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1781
|
__label__cc
| 0.663677
| 0.336323
|
Rev. James F. Harris, 90, Jasper
Reverend James F. Harris, age 90, of Jasper, Indiana, passed away at 9:52 a.m., Monday, December 21, 2020, at his home.
James was born October 13, 1930, in Athens, Texas, to Frank and Anna (Schumacher) Harris. In addition to his parents, James was preceded in death by his first wife of 52 years, Evelyn (Reed) Harris; two sons, James F. Harris, Jr. and Kim H. Harris; and one step-daughter, Rachelle Petrey.
Survivors include his wife of 14 years, Amelia Harris of Jasper; his children, Brenda (Harold) Suddarth of Greenfield, Indiana, Debra (George) Eubanks of Louisville, Kentucky, Sheila (Kevin) Haycox of Huntingburg, Indiana, Ron (Cindy) Harris of Huntingburg, Indiana, Rita Clagg of Terre Haute, Indiana, Lisa (Rick) Miller of Avon, Indiana, Donna (Gerald) Peeples of Philpot, Kentucky, Tim (Sara) Harris of Jasper, Indiana; one brother, Bob (Barbara) Harris of Evansville, Indiana; one sister, Virginia Pate of Lindale, Texas; two step-children, Donna Reeves of Shelbyville, Kentucky and Rick (Connie) Reeves of Sellersburg, Indiana; 27 grandchildren, 4 step-grandchildren, 31 great-grandchildren, 4 step-great-grandchildren, 1 great-great-grandchild and 2 step-great-great-grandchildren.
Married at 19, James headed to Baylor University for 2 years and then onto Carson-Newman College in Tennessee. After graduation James and Evelyn returned to Evansville and pastored at Community Baptist. That summer they had their fifth child. In July of 1958, James was asked to go to Jasper, Indiana, to further the Southern Baptist work there at what became First Baptist Church of Jasper. While in Jasper, they were blessed with five more children. From there, he pastored at several surrounding community churches including Gentryville Baptist Mission, Immanuel Baptist in Petersburg, English Baptist Church in English and First Baptist Church of Huntingburg. James was a bi-vocational pastor for 19 plus years before retiring from Jasper Rubber Company as V.P. of Scheduling. In 1978, James became a full time pastor at Sugar Creek Baptist Church in New Palestine, Indiana. From there, James pastored South Side Baptist Church in South Bend, Friendship Baptist Church in Crawfordsville and First Baptist Church in Kentland, Indiana. Returning to Dubois County, James and Evelyn continued their ministry at Heritage Hills Baptist Church in Santa Claus. After losing his wife of 52 years, James became an Associate Pastor at First Baptist Church in Jasper. It was there he met and married his wife, Amelia, of 14 years. Together they ministered at Shoals Baptist Church until his health required he stop preaching at the age of 85. He also served the Indiana Baptist Convention as Interim Director of Missions, was a member of the Historical Committee, as well as other positions. Known for his sense of humor, his kindness and generosity, James insisted that a great attitude was a choice. He was always grateful and pleasant to those who crossed his path. His family was a very important part of his life and he always lit up when children were around.
Funeral services for Reverend James F. Harris will be private with burial taking place in Fairmount Cemetery. Nass & Son Funeral Home has been entrusted with handling the arrangements. Memorial contributions may be made in memory of: Mr. & Mrs. James Harris Charitable Endowment, Baptist Foundation of Indiana, 3021 East 71st Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46220, or Kindred Hospice. Condolences may be shared online at: www.nassandson.com.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1789
|
__label__cc
| 0.680028
| 0.319972
|
Tel: 02921 320 150 | E-Mail: info@duddenlaw.co.uk
Landlord and Tenant Act 1954
As a business, it is good practice to have a solid understanding and implementation of employment law in the UK. Employment laws are designed to provide a level of regulation between a business and its employees. Failure to adhere to the various regulations could result in serious consequences, so it is important to understand and receive advice wherever necessary.
What is employment law?
The laws are designed to specifically lay out exactly how staff and employers should behave while at work. The area of employment law is complex and there are several pieces of legislation, which detail the sheer amount of existing employment laws. The vast amount of laws that exist are designed to protect workers’ rights, while also providing a level of protection to employers.
All employers have the right to be protected from dismissal via laws relating to unfair dismissal, constructive dismissal, wrongful dismissal. Within an unfair dismissal, an employer must demonstrate that the dismissal is fair and provide adequate reasons for the dismissal.
A constructive dismissal applies when a worker resigns from a position when they feel they cannot continue in the role due to discriminatory treatment, which breaks the rules set out within The Equality Act 2010.
A wrongful dismissal occurs when an employee is dismissed without being offered the required notice period. Failure to follow the laws set out in the Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures could result in the case being taken to an employment tribunal.
It is important that your business maintains an awareness of these laws to ensure a safe and functional working environment. Our team are available to offer professional guidance and advice, to assist with every aspect of employment law issues. To find out more, please contact us today.
A contract of employment is an agreement between an employee and an employer, which details the services expected in return for payment. The law states that all employees must be provided with at least certain basic information, within two months of starting work. It is important to provide a clear employment contract, as this can form the basis of evidence in an Employment Tribunal Hearing.
Part-time workers and fixed-term contracts
If an employee works part-time hours, they are protected by the Part-Time Workers Regulations, which state that these workers should not be treated less favourably than full-time workers. This also applies to those working via a fixed-term contract, which are often used to provide cover for other permanent workers or for short-term projects.
Salary, wages and bonuses
The term ‘wages’ is legally defined as payment for employment and includes commission, holiday pay, bonuses, fees and any additional non-contractual payments. By law, all workers over the age of 16 must be paid the national minimum wage (NMW). The rate rises depending on age and there are different rates which apply to those working under an apprenticeship.
The Working Time Regulations
The Working Time Regulations will apply to the majority of workers and are designed to limit the hours which employees can work, while also laying out the regulations for holiday pay. To summarise, workers should not work more than an average of 48 hours a week without prior written agreement. In addition, workers should have 5.6 weeks of paid holiday per year and at least one full day away from the workplace each week. In terms of breaks, workers should have a 20-minute rest break where the days are longer than six hours.
How Can We Support You?
Get in touch with us or arrange an appointment in person.
Dudden Law is the trading name of Dudden Law Solicitors Limited who are authorised & regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (662668)
Dudden Law Solicitors Limited is registered in England and Wales (Reg. No. 12045601). A list of the directors can be seen here.
Company registration no. : 12045601
VAT registration no. : 358 4494 53
Dudden Law – Cardiff Solictors, situated in Roath Chambers, have a proven track record of providing a quality service with client care at its core. We are able to assist clients throughout South Wales and the UK. We are proud of our reputation in providing direct solicitor contact, effective advice and assistance whenever it is required while maintaining the interests of the client’s at all times.
Roath Chambers
80 Albany Road
Cardiff.
CF24 3RS.
info@duddenlaw.co.uk
Mon – Fri – 9.00 -17.00 (Online Only)
Saturday – 9.00 – 13:00
Sunday & Bank Holidays – Closed
Copyright 2020 Dudden Law - All Rights Reserved
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1790
|
__label__cc
| 0.576372
| 0.423628
|
What Do Special Educators Need to Succeed?
June 19, 2017 | By Elizabeth Bettini and Kristin Murphy
A shortage of special education teachers is threatening the ability of schools in many states to provide high-quality education to students with disabilities. On a national level, 49 states identified a shortage of special education and related service personnel during the 2013-14 school year.
In Arizona, for instance, where districts reported a 29 percent increase from 2013 to 2014 in the number of positions that remained vacant, special education was one of the areas with the highest vacancy rates.
Special educators serve students with significant learning and behavioral needs. To effectively serve their students, they must have sophisticated knowledge and skills about content, pedagogy and students’ learning. Special educators who are fully qualified in special education through a teacher preparation program provide more effective instruction, resulting in stronger achievement among their students.
When no qualified special educator can be found, open positions may be filled by substitute teachers who are not qualified to teach at all, by prospective teachers who have not yet completed their teacher preparation or by teachers who are licensed in other areas, but have no specialized preparation for special education.
Dr. Loretta Mason-Williams from Binghamton University (SUNY) analyzed a nationally representative survey of teachers; 16 percent of special educators were not certified in special education. This rate was higher in high-poverty schools, which have greater difficulty attracting and retaining all kinds of teachers.
In this context, special education teacher attrition is a major problem – for when a qualified special educator leaves, schools struggle to find a skilled replacement.
So the question is, why do special educators leave their schools?
Here’s Why We Left
In the mid-2000s, we began our careers in education as emergency certified teachers – that is, we were hired to teach students with disabilities through “provisional licensure programs” (such as this one) that allowed prospective teachers to be considered highly qualified without full preparation or licensure.
We both served as special education teachers for students in middle and high school settings in high-poverty, urban communities – Elizabeth in Tucson, Arizona, and Kristin in New York City.
We served students who qualified for special education because of emotional disabilities. Most of our students had been identified with mental illnesses, such as bipolar disorder and anxiety disorders. Many had histories of trauma and abuse.
Our students relied on us to teach them grade-level standards in all areas. They also relied on us to teach the foundational skills they had missed, such as phonics and math facts. In addition, they relied on us to help them develop the social and behavioral skills necessary to live healthy lives and build positive relationships.
In other words, in our first year as uncertified teachers, we were responsible for the totality of our students’ learning experiences during the school day, for everything they needed to know to be successful in school and beyond.
We struggled to meet these responsibilities with sparse resources – we had few books and curricula, limited mentorship and minimal professional development opportunities. We were planning and delivering instruction in all content areas completely on our own, despite the fact that we had never been trained to do so. We knew our students needed far more than we were capable of providing.
We both improved our skills over time, yet within five years, we both left our schools. We were committed to our students, but we left because we knew that no matter how hard we worked, no matter how much we grew as educators, we couldn’t provide high-quality instruction in all content areas – the kind of instruction our students deserved – without better support.
Our failure to adequately meet our students’ needs was not our failure alone – it was the failure of an educational system that systematically places unqualified teachers in classes serving students with the most significant needs. And then it fails to support them.
As academics, we now study the systems that lead to difficulty recruiting and retaining effective special educators, including how schools can support them, so they can better serve students.
And Here are Stories of Teachers
In our research, we find that our own experiences are not unique.
In one study, we interviewed eight special educators in classes for students with significant emotional disabilities. Like us, they felt deeply committed to providing high-quality instruction and being a constant source of safety for students with serious social-emotional needs.
They also spoke about the challenges of planning high-quality lessons in all content areas for students in multiple grade levels while meeting students’ social-emotional needs and fulfilling all of their other responsibilities as teachers, such as bus duty, lunch duty, administrative paperwork and so on.
These challenges left them feeling as though they were failing their students.
Take Diedre (name changed), an elementary school special educator. She was responsible for teaching all content areas to students in kindergarten through fifth grade. Diedre had no scheduled planning time, limited curricular resources (e.g., math and reading curriculum) and no lunch break away from her students.
Whereas the general education teachers in her school coplanned instruction for all students within a single grade level, Diedre was planning, completely on her own, for students in every single grade level. She didn’t have colleagues with whom she could share resources and ideas, or go to for help when a student struggled with a standard.
Further, she had extensive extra responsibilities – she planned professional development for all of the teaching assistants in her school, supervised afterschool activities and did bus duty, among other things.
In her interview with us, she shared,
[As a consequence], I end up feeling like I’m never really doing my job, and I’m always letting the kids down.
Exhausting Workloads
Other studies confirm that Diedre’s experience is not unique.
For instance, when Dr. Susan Albrecht and her colleagues from Ball State University surveyed 776 special educators who teach students with emotional and behavioral disabilities, they found that more than half felt they had inadequate time to fulfill their responsibilities.
Similarly, Dr. Bonnie Billingsley from Virginia Tech and her colleagues found in their analysis of a survey of new special educators, more than 75 percent reported that routine duties (such as paperwork, supervising students in nonacademic activities, etc.) interfered with their teaching.
In a recent (not yet published) study, we worked with Dr. Nathan Jones from Boston University and Drs. Mary Brownell and Maureen Conroy from the University of Florida to analyze data from a survey Dr. Peter Youngs from the University of Virginia conducted with 245 special and general educators who were in their first three years teaching in urban districts in Michigan and Indiana.
Unsurprisingly, teachers who felt more overwhelmed were more likely to be emotionally exhausted, and more likely to plan to leave. And, new special educators were significantly more likely to report feeling overwhelmed than new general educators.
Working Conditions Matter
A growing body of research indicates that, when teachers work in more supportive conditions, their students show better academic achievement gains.
For instance, when Dr. Susan Moore Johnson and her colleagues at Harvard University analyzed data on all schools in Massachusetts, they found that schools in which teachers rated their administrative support and their school culture more highly had stronger student achievement gains in reading and math. This was so even when controlling for school demographic characteristics, such as the proportion of students living in poverty.
Subsequent analyses with large data sets have obtained similar results, showing that teachers are more effective in schools in which they have supportive administrators and collaborative relationships with skilled colleagues.
Teachers whose schools had more collaborative cultures become more effective more rapidly than teachers whose schools were less collaborative.
Studies have shown that special education teachers are also more likely to want to continue teaching when they work in a culture of collective responsibility for all students, when they can trust their colleagues and have opportunities to collaborate with them.
In our study of new special educators in Michigan and Indiana, we found that special educators felt less overwhelmed when their schools had cultures of collective responsibility for students with disabilities, and when they interacted with their colleagues around instruction more frequently.
Teachers Need Support
Special educators often choose to teach because of their commitment to serving students with more significant needs.
And, as we know through our research and experience, they often leave, not because of their students, but because of the unsupportive conditions in which they are expected to serve those students.
Retaining special educators in their schools over the course of their careers is essential for ensuring that students with disabilities are served by qualified and skilled special educators.
For that to happen, our educational system must fulfill its commitments to them – by providing them with adequate time to do their jobs, administrative and collegial support for learning to teach, high-quality professional development opportunities and the material resources necessary to teach.
Research Map Special Education Practices
Elizabeth Bettini is an Assistant Professor of Special Education at Boston University.
Kristin Murphy is an Assistant Professor of Special Education at the University of Massachusetts Boston.
Research-backed Success with Social-Emotional Learning
By Dr. Melissa Moore
At These Colleges, Students Begin Serious Research Their First Year
By Nancy Stamp
The Gift of Teacher Time
By Jill Anderson
Helping Parents Decipher Education Jargon and Get to What Matters
By Carly Chillmon
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1793
|
__label__cc
| 0.70393
| 0.29607
|
Music | I’m Stone In Love With You By The Stylistics | Philadelphia Soul (1972)
By Edge of Humanity Magazine, October 3, 2018
This song was selected from the
Hermit Poet’s Music Collection
To listen on YouTube CLICK HERE
I’m Stone in Love With You
Worldwide, Timeless & Diverse
See our Complete Music Selection HERE
Tagged: I'm Stone In Love With You, I'm Stone In Love With You The Stylistics, Philadelphia soul, Philadelphia sound, Philly soul, Soul Music, The Stylistics, TSOP
DXCVIII
Music | Have You Seen Her By The Chi-Lites (1971)
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1796
|
__label__cc
| 0.711852
| 0.288148
|
Economy » News » Pork: EU pork exports on record sales
Pork EU pork exports on record sales
Photo: imago images / McPHOTO
EU countries exported more than half of their pigmeat to China.
pork Export EU China
fleischwirtschaft.com — BELGIUM, Brussels. According to the EU Commission, export revenues reached €4.84 bn., which was €1.26 bn. or 35.0% more than in the period from January to April 2019, almost half of which came from customers in China, who paid a total of €2.37 bn. for cuts, sausages or offal delivered, two and a half times as much as in the same period last year.
The increase in exports in terms of value was much more pronounced than in terms of volume due to higher selling prices compared to 2019. Pork exports from the 27 member states increased by 147,200 t or 8.2% to 1.94 mill. t carcass weight (cw).
As in previous months, this growth was solely due to China's extensive demand. 1.07 mill. t of pork were delivered to the People's Republic, an increase of 466,540 t or 77.6% compared to the first third of 2019. China's export share thus continued to climb, most recently reaching 54.9%. By contrast, the EU sold less pork to all other destinations. Exports to the new third country Great Britain fell by almost 30% to 249,090 t, and a total of 14.5% less goods were shipped to Japan with 135,800 t. The situation was hardly any better for Australia, South Korea, the USA or the Philippines, where export volumes were between 31.6% and 58.6% below the previous year's level.
Among the EU countries, Spain is increasingly becoming the top export country. Compared to the first four months of 2019, the Iberians were able to increase their pork deliveries to third countries by 34.2% to 511,930 t, which is above average. In comparison, the growth in German exporters was rather modest at 7.3% to 427,300 t. Although they were able to achieve a strong increase of 27.3% to 238,240 t in the frozen pork category, sales of bacon and by-products declined at the same time. The number three EU exporter, Denmark, increased its pork sales to third countries by 16.3% to 331,370 t. In contrast, deliveries from France to the world market fell by 6.7% to 98,470 t, and in the case of Poland by as much as 30.9% to 96,240 t.
Source: fleischwirtschaft.de; AgE
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1799
|
__label__wiki
| 0.959212
| 0.959212
|
Homechevron_rightWorldchevron_rightHamas open to any...
date_range 14 Feb 2016 10:40 AM GMT
Hamas open to any initiative to open Rafah crossing
Gaza: The Islamic movement is open to any initiative that ends the suffering of the Palestinian people due to keeping the Rafah border crossing between the Gaza Strip and Egypt closed, a senior Hamas official said on Saturday.
Ismail Haneya, Hamas deputy chief, said his movement was ready to cooperate with any party that presents any initiative to keep the key crossing permanently open, Xinhua reported.
Haneya welcomed Egypt's decision to temporarily open the terminal for two days as of Saturday.
"Egypt's historic, Arab and Islamic role cannot be abandoned, and the Palestinian cause is one of the major concerns of Egypt," he said.
Internal division between Haneya's movement and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Party that started in 2007, was the major reason for keeping the crossing closed, mainly differences on who rules the crossing.
Egyptian officials had repeatedly said the country would not keep the crossing open from its side for the Palestinians, while the Palestinians are divided, and it would only open it permanently when the internal Palestinian division ends.
Haneya called on Egypt to extend the opening of the crossing for more than two days to let a bigger number of Palestinians to travel, mainly patients and students.
According to the Hamas-run Ministry of Interior, there are 25,000 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip who are in an urgent need of travelling through the sole and main gate for the Palestinians to travel abroad.
Last week, delegations of the two rival groups; Fatah and Hamas held a two-day round of talks in Qatar to implement former reconciliation deals and understandings reached between them in the last four years.
The two groups agreed on the principle of implementing their agreements, but said both will get back to their political leaderships to agree on the mechanism of implementing their reconciliation agreements.
Egypt competes with Qatar on sponsoring the issue of Palestinian reconciliation and sponsors the internal Palestinian dialogue since it started in 2007.
Earlier in the day, Egypt temporarily opened the Rafah border crossing for two days after it remained closed for 70 days, officials said.
The last time Egypt reopened the terminal was on on December 3 last year for two days.
In a statement, the Hamas-ruled Borders and Crossings Corporation said Egypt reopened the crossing from its side and the first bus of passengers had already crossed.
It added that the crossing will be working on Saturday and Sunday for Palestinians who want to travel in both directions, adding that priority was for humanitarian cases, students and those who hold dual citizenships.
Hundreds of Palestinians gathered on Saturday morning at the Palestinian side waiting for busses to move them into Egypt.
The corporation said the Rafah terminal was opened for only 21 days in 2015, adding the year was the worst ever for operating the crossing, the only gate for around two million Palestinians in Gaza to the world.
Since 2007, Hamas movement has been ruling the Gaza Strip, including Rafah crossing after it violently seized control of the enclave following weeks of internal fighting with security forces of President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Party.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1800
|
__label__wiki
| 0.976318
| 0.976318
|
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightAfter Wagah blast,...
After Wagah blast, Taliban group vows ‘revenge’ against PM Modi
Peshawar, Pakistan: A new Pakistani Taliban group behind this week's devastating suicide bombing on the Wagah border has said the attack was as much aimed at India as Pakistan, suggesting that Indian targets might be next, a Reuters report said on Wednesday.
At least 57 Pakistanis were killed during the flag-lowering ceremony on Sunday when a bomber tried to get as close as possible to the border in a possible attempt to cause casualties on the Indian side as well.
The report quotes Ehsanullah Ehsan, a prominent militant and spokesperson for the group, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan Jamaat Ahrar (TTP-JA), who said that he had warned Prime Minister Narendra Modi that attacks in India were in the pipeline.
"I have already conveyed it to Modi ... that if our suicide bombers can carry out attacks on this side of the border, they can easily do it on other side of the border in India," he told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location.
"I told him that his hands are red with the blood of Kashmiri mujahideen (fighters) and innocent people of Gujarat for which he would have to pay the price."
He earlier tweeted in English: "You (Modi) are the killer of hundreds of Muslims. We wl (will) take the revenge of innocent people of Kashmir and Gugrat" (sic). An Indian intelligence official said the account appeared genuine.
Ehsan said however that the Sunday attack was specifically aimed at the Pakistani military.
"We have proudly stated that our target was the Pakistani security forces and their installations in which we succeeded," Ehsan told Reuters.
The central Pakistani Taliban group, known as the TTP, has effectively disintegrated this year and split into a range of smaller groups such as TTP-JA who appear to be exploiting their ties to al Qaeda to broaden their mission beyond Pakistan.
Ehsan said that unlike the TTP's narrow focus on war in the tribal areas on the Afghan border, his outfit sought to attack countries around the region. "The TTP focuses on Pakistan only, while we have a global agenda of jihad and therefore we have people from all over the world including the Arab and Western world for this mission."
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1801
|
__label__wiki
| 0.584245
| 0.584245
|
> Recommendations> Hallyu
Autumn Musing
Published Date : Aug. 28, 2018 / Edited Date : Jul. 29, 2020
Four views of Seoul
during the season of contemplation.
1. Olympic Park
It has already been 30 years since the creation of Olympic Park. In 1986 and 1988, major events like the Asian Games and the Olympics took place, giving rise to the lush, green park we know and love today. Walking through the park, pedestrians are greeted with many different types of scenery. In the 1,400,000㎡ plot of land, no two place look the same, making it much enjoyable for visitors to leisurely walk and look around the park. With Mongchontoseong Fortress as its center, there are 5 walking trails placed around the park. Following the old Baekje relics, the trails feel secluded and cut off from the world. Spanning a distance of 2.3 km, the walking trails of Olympic Park offer up some wonderful scenery. For example, the famous “Lone Tree", a very popular photo spot, can be found nearby. When the houses near Mongchontoseong Fortress were demolished for the park, that tree was the only one of its kind to survive. The singular tree in the middle of a vast field creates an undeniably picturesque landscape.
424 Olympic-ro, Songpa-gu, Seoul
http://www.olympicpark.co.kr/jsp/english/index.jsp
2. Gyeongui Line Forest Park
The railways, once ways for merchants to commute and transport their wares, have changed so much over the years. Covered in greenery, it had been completely transformed into a forest trail. The railway from Yongsan Station to Gajwa Station covers a total distance of 6.3km. Starting with the Daeheung-dong section of the railway back in 2012, the Forest Park was finally completed and open to the public starting May 2016. Out of all the sections, the Yeonnam-dong section went through the most dramatic transformation. Alluding to New York’s Central Park, the new green space was nicknamed “Yeon-tral Park” and steadily grew into being a very popular spot. These days, people can be commonly seen having picnics on the grass or reading books on the benches in the park. In front of Exit 6 of Hongik Univ. Station, there’s a Gyeongui Line Book Street. There, booths operated by various publishers sell books and various book events take place along its cultural spaces. It’s the perfect place to feed the literary soul. In fact, there are many things that will thrill visitors willing to explore the different sections of Gyeongui Line Forest Park as the areas around the railway is constantly being developed and expanded.
Area around Yeonnam-dong, Mapo-gu, Seoul
parks.seoul.go.kr/ (Korean)
3. Hanyangdoseong (Seoul City Wall) and Naksan Park
Built along the ridges of Mt. Naksan, Mt. Namsan, and Mt. Inwangsan, the fortress wall became the borders of the capital city of Hanyang during the Joseon dynasty. Within those walls, the streams and lush forests gave rise to a village which grew into a city. Although much of Hayang’s former appearance has been lost during its transformation to Seoul, the historical walls continue to stand strong as a border around the city. Within the wall that spans a distance of 18.6km, there’s a small portion of the wall in Naksan spanning 2.1km from Hyehwamun Gate to Heunginjimun Gate. Famous for looking like the back of a camel, Naksan is the smallest and easiest mountain to hike out of the four main mountains surrounding Seoul. The Naksan Park that passes through the wall is a great place to rest and the city view beyond the walls are breathtaking to see. As the sunset colors the autumn skies and slowly darkens into night, the street lights turn on, lending visitors a tranquil atmosphere in which to view the city’s night scene.
41 Naksan-gil, Jongno-gu, Seoul
http://seoulcitywall.seoul.go.kr/front/eng/index.do
4. Deoksugung Stonewall Walkway and Jungmyeongjeon Hall
Connecting Daehanmun Gate to Jeong-dong, Deoksugung Stonewall Walkway – the inspiration behind many songs and poems – is Seoul’s most famous and beloved walking trail. As the weather gets cooler, the Stonewall Walkway obtains a serene and tranquil atmosphere. This year, it’s doubly so as the length of the wall has been extended. On August 2017, a portion of the wall blocked off by the British embassy was finally opened to the public after 58 years. 100m of the wall from the back gates of the British embassy to the staff dormitory has been realigned and extended to reach Deoksugung Palace and is expected to be open to the public around October 2018. Although it’s part of the same Stonewall Walkway, it’s a little different from the path from Daehanmun Gate to Jeong-dong. The new part of the wall is a bit lower and continues to clash a little with the red brick walls of the British embassy. Let yourself ruminate over the history of Seoul as you walk along the same path that King Gojong and King Sunjong walked for their ritual ceremonies. Visitors can learn more about the Korean empire through the exhibition that opened in Jungmyeongjeon Hall last year.
41-11 Jeongdong-gil, Jung-gu, Seoul
Tuesday – Saturday 9:30 – 17:30, Closed Monday
http://www.deoksugung.go.kr:8081/
#Gyeongui Line Forest Park #Naksan Park #Deoksugung Stonewall Walkway #Autumn Musing #Jungmyeongjeon Hall #Hanyangdoseong #Seoul City Wall #Olympic Park
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0003.json.gz/line1802
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.