Interview with Dr. Todd Gitlin

Gitlin, Todd ; McKiernan, Stephen

1997-07-23

In copyright

2018-03-29

McKiernan Interviews

75:34

McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Todd Gitlin
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 23 July 1997
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)

SM (00:00:00):
Put it right here.

TG (00:00:03):
Put it where?

SM (00:00:03):
Oh. Well, first questions I want to ask is, in recent years there has been a lot of written materials and actually a lot of journalists and even some politicians who claim that a lot of the reasons why we have problems in America today is because of the boomer generation. Replacing direct blame on that group of 60 to 70 million, whatever the count is, for all the bills of society. They are doing it in general terms. And when I say this, of course, we are talking about the breakdown of the American family, the increase of the drug culture, the lack of respect for authority, the divisiveness in American society, and maybe in some respects, even though the lack of civility we have toward each other because of those times. Could you respond to that thought, that kind of mentality that is out there today?

TG (00:00:54):
Well, first of all, I think it is not a rigorous claim. It is hard to know what it would mean to blame a cultural development of great complexity upon a generation of six- if it is a generation of 60 to 70 million people. And you are talking about upwards of a quarter of the American population. So if you are saying that one quarter of the American population is responsible for an abortion and culture, I am not sure what you are saying, generations do not act in lockstep. I think what is meant is that there is a particular segment of this so-called generation, and I say so-called because I should clarify why I am skeptical about the term. The baby boom is classified technically as consisting of everyone born between 1946 to 1964. Does it make sense to call this body a generation? These are people who the oldest of whom are 18 years older than the youngest of them. In what sense is somebody born in 1946, a member of the same generation as somebody born the year of the free speech murder. Born after the Kennedy assassination. So I think there is a lot of sloppy thinking here. What is meant is the charge that there is some critical mass of people who were the counter cultural or some combination of political activists and hippies or quasi hippies and that they are the ones who undermined authority. Now I think there is some truth to that. It certainly was the intention of these cultural movers and shakers to be the instruments of unsettlement in the culture to undermine authority. Sometimes in a targeted way and sometimes in a rather indiscriminate way. But to say that they are actors without influences is to say something absurd. They would then be the only actors in history not to have influences. So if one asks why there was a thrust to dismantle or well, to challenge or at the farther realms to undermine authority, you would have to ask why was authority vulnerable? This has to be part of the answer. And part of the answer to that question is because there were grave and blaring social problems which were experienced as social problems by large numbers of people, not simply by the activist here, but by people with grievances. And the authority to a considerable degree discredited itself. That is to say it made claims, which it could not live up to. In itself incapable of ruling legitimate. The Vietnam War is a very important part of the story of the undermining of this culture. The emergence of commercial popular culture and youth culture is another important part of the story. The emergence of the drug culture is another important part of the story. The implosion of the (19)50s family is an important part of the story. I mean, this is a very complicated story. As soon as I have complicated it, then automatically I think I have discredited any single factor charge. And so I need to do.

SM (00:04:52):
Let me check my [inaudible].

TG (00:04:52):
Okay.

SM (00:05:00):
In 1997 and as we get into 1998, if you were to just... Again, it is hard to define the 60 million, but if you were to say what define the boomer generation in 1997 terms and the overall impact that this generation has had on America as they approach 50. Because obviously when Bill Clinton became president of all the media was talking about he was leading the boomers because he was born in 1946. So just as of this juncture, as boomers are heading into this age of 50, what has been the overall impact so far on America with this group?

TG (00:05:40):
Bill Clinton is a baby boomer and so is Newt Gingrich. Trent Lott is a little bit older, but Dick Armey I suppose is a baby boomer too. What is the aggregate impact of these people? Obviously, it cuts across political lines. You could say there is a certain recklessness in this generation. Again, well, I still do not want to call it a generation, but by generation here, if we mean those born between 1946 to 1964, there is a certain recklessness, there is a certain unruliness, there is a certain arrogance, a certain belief that there is a destiny compounded by normal American self-grand and a destiny to remake the world, start the world war, and so on. But obviously the ways in which the members of this generation played out were very different, I mean Bill Clinton's form of arrogance is quite different in its imports, certainly as political import than Gingrich is. So I suppose overriding this political differences, there is a certain libertarianism that is the hallmark of people of this vintage often cutting across, let us say, lines of economic preferences and so on. A certain assumption that individuals make their own destinies and that they grow, they should not be current. Nobody should tell them how fast to drive and nobody should tell them what to smoke. You could argue there is also certain puritanism that goes with them. But once we are off into these questions of this magnitude, I find it impossible to say anything terribly meaningful about the politics or the cultural impact on this generation or except on to say individuals.

SM (00:07:49):
I am looking at, you teach college students today.

TG (00:07:52):
I actually teach mostly graduate students here, but...

SM (00:07:53):
I am going to see your graduate students returning students have been out in the world a while.

TG (00:08:00):
A lot of them. I do not know, probably 60, 50.

SM (00:08:03):
Well, just your thoughts on today's young people, and again, even this generation Xers, there are lot of Muslim hate that term.

TG (00:08:09):
I do not blame them. Probably, as much as I hate boomers.

SM (00:08:13):
Right. But looking at the boomers and the children of boomers, what influence have boomers had on their children in terms of the values that they held? And again, you cannot define the whole generation, but the values they held at that time. Because at that time you saw many young people active the civil rights movement, certainly against the war in Vietnam, the new movements, the came as a result of learning from the civil rights movement with the women's movement, the gay lesbian movement, the Native American movement and the environmental movement. They all kind of came around that period. There was this idealism, this passion. And I would love to have your perceptions on whether the boomers have been able to transfer these feelings to their children and whether they have been able to carry these passions on into their adult or themselves.

TG (00:09:04):
Well, to some degree, I think on questions of personal liberty, the carryover is substantial. It is not absolute, it is substantial. That is the more or less libertarian parents have raised a more or less libertarian generation. A skeptical generation of parents has raised or is raising a skeptical generation of kids. A disabused of authority, parent generation was raising an equivalently disabused of authority generation. I think the parental generation was hostile to racism and so are the children in general compared to earlier generations of anti [inaudible]. So in all those ways, I would say, and also let us say the degree of tolerance there is of gay and lesbians and people with different trait and so on. I think at least in the middle classes, there is a considerable area. On the other hand, it is part of the human condition. I think that the young go into rebellion, and I would not want to generalize it, the ways in which that happens. Sometimes it happens by becoming more conservative. Sometimes it happens by becoming more adventurous and reckless. I think that the impact here have less to do or many of the impact have less to do with the impact, with the influence of the parental generation. Remember the influence of a reality of a life world, which is different. In particular, assumptions about the economic future. The shift is from a society that assumes that there is going to be fat on the land to live off and a generation that to some degree is more edgy and anxious and assumes that the world is any less more attractive. I would add, by the way, you asked about the environmental issues. I think there has been some influence by the generation. Although there are too, it is hard to separate out the influence of the parental generation and the influence of media and the general culture. So I would be interrupted to think that you could...

SM (00:11:40):
If you were to describe the qualities you most admire and the qualities you least admire in the boomer generation, what would they be?

TG (00:11:48):
Well, again, I do not think I can answer that question unless you tell me what you mean by the boomer generation.

SM (00:11:55):
Well, I would say probably I would break it down to those individuals that were young in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, not so much the later boomers, because I see it even in higher education today. The people I work with that the younger boomers say those from (19)56 to (19)64 born in that period have no concept at all about what it was like then because they were too young.

TG (00:12:16):
Sure.

SM (00:12:17):
So I am basically referring to the people that were young through the mid-(19)60s, say through the mid-(19)70s.

TG (00:12:22):
And you are talking about the... I am sorry, go ahead.

SM (00:12:25):
So what do you think are the positive or the negative qualities of that aspect?

TG (00:12:30):
Are you referring to their qualities at the time or their qualities today?

SM (00:12:34):
Oh, just as you reflect on that era over time. The qualities, you can either say the qualities you had most admired then living through it or qualities that you reflected upon today and people that...

TG (00:12:48):
But you are talking about the qualities that they-

SM (00:12:49):
Yes.

TG (00:12:50):
...embodied at the time.

SM (00:12:51):
Yes, at the time and whether the things that you felt were positive and some of the things you thought were negative.

TG (00:12:58):
Well, their rebelliousness against stupid authority and destructive and violent war making power was very fine. Much of it was driven by selfishness and much of it was not. Obviously, I admire the courageous and self-abnegating more than the self-interested. But I think it made a lasting contribution to American history. I admire, if that is the right word, doing this to take risks personally. Now to admire that is also to be willing to be critical of some of the consequences. Some of the risks were stupid and dangerous, especially the ones having to do with drugs. But I admire the riskiness and admire it, especially when I look at the subsequent young people who it seems too much more resigned to the world as it is. I also admire something else in, again, many of the people in this group. I admire something that here that by no means was generally shared. I admire the conviction that it should be done well, things should be done. And that meant well ethically. It also meant well technically, the spirit of commitment to doing work that one control, to doing work that was pioneering, original. All those things are admirable and some of those carry over into pursuits that are very different from what was it in play in the late (19)60s and carries over into running fancy restaurants with food, and get capitalism, if you will.

SM (00:15:23):
Looking at the two basic...

TG (00:15:25):
But in general, I think I admire people. I think in this culture it is very hard to care about doing good things and I admire people. Hold on a second, Steve. I [inaudible] missing. [inaudible].

SM (00:15:44):
When you look at the two main issues of that era, which was the civil rights movement and certainly the war against Vietnam and the protest movement, I should say. I would like your opinion on how important you feel the young people were in ending that war and with particular emphasis again on that era, the late (19)60s, early (19)70s, what was happening on college campuses at the time, so-called 15 percent who were involved in some sort of activism. How important were they in ending the war? And the second part of the question is, how important were boomers in the Civil Rights Movement knowing that Freedom Summer was in 1964 and a lot of the civil rights war was in the (19)50s and the (19)60s and it would be about 18 years old if you were going down the Freedom Summer in the South because... So just your general thoughts on the impact that college students had on any of the war and how then if you could just how important the boomers were in the Civil Rights Movement.

TG (00:16:46):
The campus rebellion convinced the political leadership in the Democratic Party and political leadership to whom the Democrats were beholden that they should end the war because the war was tearing the country apart. And once Nixon was in power, the fact that the anti-war opposition was so demonstrative, convinced Nixon to Vietnamized the war that is to get American troops out. And eventually, I think and crucially place limits on the military expeditions, the military tactics that the US was willing to resort to in Vietnam, is what we mean by ending the war. I think if you performed the [inaudible] experiment and ask what would have happened if there had been no anti-war movement, if baby boomers had not enlisted any, it is hard for me to make a case that the war would have been shorter or less bloody. So I do not find that case persuasive. As for the civil rights movement, you are quite right. I mean the people made the civil rights movement happen. Were older than baby boomers, so case is closed. I mean some of them were foot soldiers in Mississippi in (19)64, and so they were not by themselves decisively.

SM (00:18:17):
You think they have carried on?

TG (00:18:19):
Again, I caution you against a hard and fast distinction between people on the basis of who might have been born in 1945 and who might have been born in 1946.

SM (00:18:35):
That is come up too, because many of the people I have interviewed are 55 and 54 and they quote, "Do not fall into the category of the boomer generation."

TG (00:18:43):
Well, the leaders...

SM (00:18:44):
They were on the front lines. They were like the... I remember Harry Edwards when he wrote that book, Black Students. He wrote down the definition of radicals, revolutionaries and activists and omics activists. I do not know if you remember the book. And basically a lot of the older students involved in the movement were the graduate students or at that time, or would be 55 years old now.

TG (00:19:03):
Sure. Yeah. But again, the category baby boomer comes along at a certain point in order to try to comprehend what was happening in terms that were not really political. And it is in that sense, itself an interested term. It is not a neutral term. It is a way of saying what we have here is a problem with a bunch of kids rather than what we have here is a certain stagnation and deficiency and often criminality in a political system.

SM (00:19:39):
And you were...

TG (00:19:39):
I am saying, I think, that what was in play were political controversies. The actions of generations. Generations were not the actors of the situations.

SM (00:19:55):
Individuals. In the groups.

TG (00:19:56):
Well, in groups, groupings, movements.

SM (00:20:01):
Let us put a time were back here and put back in time. You were obviously very involved with SDS and so forth and you were involved with many groups. You were against the war in Vietnam and you were obviously the epitome of the term activist from that era. I have asked this to everyone and you might want to go along the same lines of previous questions, but many people that I was around, I was allowed too on a college campuses, so I was assuming thing and firm and they want to [inaudible]. So I got around a lot of activist students too. We got about a lot of issues. We had a lot of things. But there was a feeling that we were the most unique generation in American history because of the times and you had made a reference of an adjective to describe the boomers or the group that was involved arrogantly. Is that a sign of arrogance by... Even you, you were involved that we were the most unique generation in American history.

TG (00:21:00):
I did not say that.

SM (00:21:00):
You did not say it, but some people felt that because of the times, because of the issues. Some people may even say in throughout history, nothing ever... There were so many issues that came together all at once.

TG (00:21:12):
Jean-Paul Sartre wrote in the introduction to a book by a school classmate of his, he wrote, "We thought the world was new because we were new in the world." He was writing about the group of French elite students who were born around 1905. He was describing during their 20s. Feeling that the world is new and that you are experiencing it is unprecedented, is not a new feeling. What was new in the (19)60s was that so many people felt that the world was an unprecedented world and so many of them had access to mass media, which were receptive to that message. And there you go to the rather arrogant claim that the novelty of this moment is unprecedented. I mean, yes, it was a terrible to stare at the war in Vietnam. It was terrible to stare at World War II. It was terrible to stare at story at the World War I. It was terrible to live through the Civil War. History is a nightmare. So I do not take claims like this very seriously, but it certainly is. It is factually true that many of the so-called boomers thought that the way in which their situation was essentially was new. Whether is that accurate? I do not know how to say. I mean it seems to be an unanswerable question.

SM (00:23:01):
This goes right into the next theory because we talk about maybe an attitude of uniqueness, but again, this quote, "We are going to be positive change agents for the world." It is an opposite.

TG (00:23:12):
Sounds rather arrogant.

SM (00:23:13):
Well, but during the Vietnam War protest, the immorality of the war, Dr. King been making that tremendous speech linking civil rights in the war in Vietnam. Seeing the morality not only at home, but in Southeast Asia. There was a sense of, I do not even know if we want to get in morality here, that many that were involved were morally right.

TG (00:23:35):
True.

SM (00:23:36):
And whether that feeling that we were positive change agents, that by we, meaning those that were involved in the movement and positive change agents for the betterment of society. And that is true that the war ended.

TG (00:23:52):
Do I think what is true?

SM (00:23:54):
That the individuals involved were positive change agents for society.

TG (00:23:57):
Absolutely.

SM (00:24:00):
Those positive change agents was you think many of those people have carried on? The war ended, so that is open. But the idealism getting involved, caring about others, do you think that has continued within this group as they have gone into their age?

TG (00:24:18):
As people age, they become more conservative. They have more to conserve. This generation, again, for all of its claims of novelty is no different from any other. It had other things to do. It had successes to make. It had property to acquire. It had families to raise. It had an America to live in. I do not believe that people will, a historical period into being, everything was in place for these movers to move and shake the world. In the (19)60s, they were great popular upheavals to be lived in and furthered and the period since, for a variety of reasons. The period since mid-(19)70s has been very, very different character, has been in many ways a rebellion against the rebellion. It has been a counter rebellion, which also follows from the tremendous magnitude and scope of the convulsions of the (19)60s. It was going to be a counter reaction, do not simply tell society to change and expect that it is going to cave in and say, "Okay, your kids are right." So when the convulsion came back, in the faces of the baby boomer, change agents. Many were cowed, many were chasing, many became more conservative. But all the evidence from sociological studies says that those who were politically active in the movements of late (19)60s and contacted 10, 20 years later were more likely to be politically active on the left than those of their peers who had not been politically active before. They made less money. They were more likely to be involved in so-called helping professions. But they are not 18 anymore.

SM (00:26:32):
The David Horowitz is not the world of rarity.

TG (00:26:35):
Well, David Horowitz was not a leader of the new left. David Horowitz is considerably older.

SM (00:26:40):
I want to get into the aspect of healing, getting back to the tremendous divisions of that era. Certainly the Vietnam War, civil rights, and of course the issue of rioting in the streets. We all know anybody who knows history of that 1968 Democratic convention.

TG (00:27:00):
Hold on a second. Hold on a second.

SM (00:27:01):
Yes. Okay. This gets into the question of healing. I made a reference to it earlier in reference to Senator Muskie, meaning we had. Do you feel that, again, I know you have a hard time with the term boomer representing the 60 some million or...

TG (00:27:20):
I have a very hard time with it.

SM (00:27:22):
But do you feel that the boomers who were acting, are having a hard time with healing from that era? Because, let me explain. The divisions were so intense and you know this. The divisions were so deep and today many people still do not forgive those who were on the other side. The Democratic Party actually is still they say, you are still having problems from that era, and the divisions within the party, within that era?

TG (00:27:48):
Sure. It is partly correct.

SM (00:27:51):
But do you feel that the boomer generation themselves are still having problems with healing from the divisions of that time as they have gotten older? That is those who were for and against the war, the veteran as opposed to the protest.

TG (00:28:03):
You mean healing internally or healing in their relation with each other?

SM (00:28:10):
Both.

TG (00:28:12):
Well, I think to feel abandoned by your country is a grievous feeling. Many people who were against the war and many people who were for the war came out feeling abandoned by their country. In a sense, both have a case to make. Both were abandoned in a variety of ways, and both had expectations which were not lived up to. So both feelings are understandable. Between each other, I do not take it to be given that people in a big and complex society should love each other. There was a huge political conflict. It is not a generational conflict. It is a political conflict. Societies that have been through bitter political conflicts do not easily heal. Those who were most committed on different political sides do not easily reconcile. Nor is it self-evident to me that they should.

SM (00:29:26):
I want to really get that...

TG (00:29:27):
But you see, there are many things that divide those who were devoted supporters of the war, and those who were devoted opponents of the war. There were many things divide. There were [inaudible] divisions here. The difference is getting wise. And so these differences also should not be collapsed simply into differences with respect to the experience of the war. But certainly it is the case. I mean, certainly the great division in American society was between those who had to fight in the war and those who did not. Now that was not of the making of baby boomers. That was making of the policy makers who decided who would be drafted and who should be sheltered for the draft. Those were largely class division. And that was a matter of political policy that was not undertaken by the boomers. The boomers did not make policy about who was drafted. Those policies were made by government agencies, by the selective service system, and ultimately by the political authorities who did not want to have middle class kids sent to war. So we had a highly selective draft. We had essentially a work class war. And of course, there was bitterness between those who went and those who did not. But what my point is, and it is not... There was also much bitterness between those who went and supported the war and those who went and hated the war. This is all very complicated. But my point is that it is not that the boomers created that division. That division was structured as a result of policy.

SM (00:30:58):
Do you think again, there should be efforts made to bring the opposing sides together, try to understand the intensity of the divisions, not only to heal more beyond the Vietnam memorial wall, which is supposed to heal the nation, transcribes books to heal the nation, which was geared toward the healing Vietnam veterans and their [inaudible].

TG (00:31:20):
I will check. Make sure this [inaudible]. Should efforts be made to bring people together?

SM (00:31:26):
Yeah. Should efforts be made to bring posing sides together even today, to try to get a better understanding of the division so that there can be lessons of learning for future generations. That in times of difficulty, which may come forth, that there some specific lessons that can be taught and that healing should be one of them. Because I get back to that statement that Senator Muskie made, which was a surprise to our students and to me when I asked that question, because I thought he was going to go right back to (19)68, the divisions in America. That healing, that generations oftentimes become bitter and they carry that bitterness to their grave and that bitterness is transferred to their children who then carry it on for generations. And then may be one of the unique things that could have come up of the divisions of the (19)60s and its early (19)70s amongst the boomers is that, they make greater efforts to heal within the ranks. Not only between those who were for of those who were against the war, the tremendous divisions within the cities. I know the riots were happening. There is a lot involved here, but efforts be made to try to understand the passion of the times more. That efforts should be made to bring some together, knowing that we cannot heal 60 million people. But...

TG (00:32:51):
I think that conversation among people would disagree it is always... Do I think that no one should not have an illusions here? I think that the people who were on these supposed sides then largely do understand why they had the views they did. What they need is something much more elusive than understanding. And I do not know what it is. I do not know what it is. It alludes me too. God knows you have had plenty of conversations in America about the Vietnam War and what the complete [inaudible]. And I do not think there is a ritual solution. I think we keep looking for ritual solution to what was a deep political conflict. I do not think the wall does it. I do not think movies do it. I do not think boomers do it. I do not think anything in particular does it. I think it is okay for society to live with the differences. I do not know how. I mean individuals find their own way to avoid tangled landscape. But I do not know about collective solutions. I do not hear it. I just do not know.

SM (00:34:13):
[inaudible], of the old term [inaudible].

TG (00:34:16):
I mean, I think the wall. I mean, just speaking personally, I think the wall is wonderful. It is very beautiful and very moving and very stirring and it does not feel me in this lightest, nor does it affect my views. Well, I value it greatly as a monument, but I do not. So as the work that is claimed for it. You think the nation... I am sure that the nation should be [inaudible]. A terrible war was done. Terrible crimes were done. Would it mean for me to change my view about the nature of these crimes? I do not know. They do not change my view. I do not have any regrets about that. And so there are consequences in history. People try to do difficult things and it is going to hurt. Why should we expect it is going to make us feel good. We live in a feel good culture. Why should we feel good about that history? I do not think history should make us feel good. I think history is shame. For me, not my project. I mean, I want to be a fully living human being, but I do not... I think life breaks everybody in some way or other. Anyway, who is right? [inaudible] strong and broken places, but the ways in which people are broken and then the ways in which they need to heal ourselves immensely the areas. I do not know how to think about doing it in one false move.

SM (00:35:57):
Sure. This site is working properly here. Could you, in your own words, define the generation gap that took place at that time between the boomers and the World War II generation? There has been books written about it, but from your own perspective, what did the generation gap mean to you? And then secondly, what does a generation gap mean today between the boomers and their kids?

TG (00:36:22):
Even in the (19)60s, I did not find the term generation gap very useful. I did not feel that I was involved in a generation gap. I thought I was involved in a political conflict. I mean, I also had differences with my parents, but those were also political differences. There is a lot of research by the way that goes to show that a great number of the activists of the left who did not especially experience a generation gap with their parents, they experienced a political conflict with the leaders of the country. Dick Flacks and many other researchers have discovered that the values of the student activists were not in general, not in general at least that where this was studied awfully different than the values of their parents. They came from relatively democratic families. That is the center of political families in general, where this was studied. So I never thought much of a concept and I still do not. I do not think it was a generation gap. It was a political country.

SM (00:37:36):
How about today between youngers?

TG (00:37:41):
You mean teenagers?

SM (00:37:41):
Yeah, teenagers and...

TG (00:37:43):
Teenagers are always at odds with their parents. The question is not whether they are at odds. The question is what social and cultural forms do they find and wish to express that? And those will always be different. My mother felt estranged from her parents in certain ways, but growing up during the depression, the circumstances were not conducive to, it was in a full-blown, acted out rebellion of this sort that we are. But it was not that there was no generational tension. It was enormous generational tension. I do believe it is in the human condition that there be such tensions and that young people need to set out to differentiate themselves in some way, which is a painful fixing process that hurts everybody, but is also necessary.

SM (00:38:42):
You teach a lot of college kids today and do you see activism happening that much amongst today's young people?

TG (00:38:55):
Not very much.

SM (00:38:56):
And I want to different age activism, because we all know chronical higher education stayed over and over again every year with [inaudible] studies that over 85 percent of law entering freshman in their high school years were involved in volunteer activity and continue to do so when they get into college. But I remember reading that volunteerism is often symbolic of a conservative era rather than a liberal era. That you have to define the difference between volunteerism on the one hand and true activism on the other, which means caring about the political process, voting and actually even being desirous of some juncture of getting into a position of common responsibility as a politician to serve others. And there is no issue in politics. [inaudible].

TG (00:39:39):
It is a very different style of activity. I mean, I am not dismissive of it. I share this assessment that service is the, I have called it the silent movement of this generation again. And often enough it is in a certain sense conservative, not something expressive of a conservative era, but it is self-conservative because it aims to act in the name of conserving values. It aims to act in the name of values that are already in place. It aims to do something constructive. It wants to lay hands on and see a difference. It wants to tutor, it wants to take care of the battered women. It wants to take care of homeless people. It wants to reach out and touch someone. It wants to do good in a concrete palpable way. And that is very different from the activist style. There is not very much of the (19)60s activism. But which is not to say that there is no... Well, I do not know. I take it back. What is the state of the moral climate? What is the moral temperature of young people today? It is very hard to read. It seems significantly distracted and private, anxious, diffuse. It is very hard to find any pattern in it. It is a left wing, it is a right wing. It is identities. Certainly there is no thrust that I can make out. There is no pattern that I can make out. There is not certainly any organized movement. There is a great deal of fragmentation. Even among those who would describe themselves as activists, tremendous fragmentation.

SM (00:41:38):
Have there been any studies about, you mentioned, I do not get the gentleman's name, but that the sons and daughters of activists are activists. Any studies showing the percentage of those that were truly involved in those movements to pass this on to their kids? Or have they shared? This is another question. Have they really shared what they went through with their kids? Or do they feel that I am not going to burden them with what I went through with a young person because they have their own problems today?

TG (00:42:13):
I do not know of any studies. I am sure there are some. My impression is that most of them, certainly the ones I know have tried to convey to their kids what their (19)60s experience was. But also my impression that significant number of the kids could care less or feel burdened by it or sick and tired of hearing that of Gloria's old days, which understand saddled by memories which are not theirs. In some way imprisoned by their parents harking back to something that sounds so fabulous that they missed. Not a thrill for you. But I do not know of any studies that try to look at this system. I do not know.

SM (00:43:10):
I hate to use this term again because the quality that I mentioned that would be the most unique generation American history, but we were going into your own personal life. Do you feel that you personally, beyond your years as an activist now into the adulthood and middle age that you have made a contribution to society? Going back to that terminology that many people, that era felt that we are going to be change agents for the betterment of society. So the proof is in the pudding and the proof is in your life.

TG (00:43:44):
Yeah, I think I have made a contribution.

SM (00:43:44):
I guess, I say in what ways?

TG (00:43:47):
Well, I made the... You know I was a foot soldier in the Civil Rights Movement. But I think that was a great crusade that made small contributions towards the entire world movement. I think that was an absolutely necessary [inaudible] with largely healthy consequences. As we left [inaudible] intellectual, I tried to clarify what was happening as best I understood it. Try to make my understanding available to others. That is the intellectual project to try to certifying what is others to feel little more courage and less bewildered and more knowledgeable. I have done what I could in those directions. I think I have done it all brilliantly, no. I think I have done it perfectly, no.

SM (00:44:54):
When the best history books are written, and they will always say that history books, the best ones are 50 years after an event. Some of the best World War II books now are coming out now. Stephen Ambrose 1940 or early [inaudible]. When the best books are written in maybe even 25 years from now about this period, the (19)60s and a year ago is excellent. So I am not be degrading your book. I am just using what historians often says 50 years later, what are they going to say about movers? What will be the judgment?

TG (00:45:29):
Again, about 60 million people. I hope they are not making any judgment of 60 million people. But what could that possibly be? That is more than an entire population of Italy or France. What can you say about 60 million people?

SM (00:45:46):
But even judging even an era of that young generation, the (19)60s. That is booming on the late (19)60s and early (19)70s. What do you think they will be saying about that of the (19)50s?

TG (00:45:57):
The activists.

SM (00:45:57):
The activists.

TG (00:45:57):
Left activist activists.

SM (00:45:57):
Yes. The left activists.

TG (00:46:02):
Very different from the boomers. I mean that is a different, already you are down from 60 million people to maybe a few hundred thousand. We are talking about 1 percent of the generation. It is different. I think they will say what I have said. I do not think their judgment will be different. I think they will say that this generation had a big challenge. Did a lot of smart and important things. Made a lot of stupid decisions as well. You know they did. They do great things and they do awful things. And sometimes they do not know at the time which is which, and I think they will see as a generation with great successes and great failures.

SM (00:46:43):
If there is one...

TG (00:46:46):
I cannot imagine that they would say anything different. I mean, it would be goofy to do one to say part of that and not say the rest of it. That would be travesty.

SM (00:46:57):
If there is one event that stands out above all others in your life, the one event that changed your life more than any other, what is that event?

TG (00:47:15):
Probably the Cuban Missile Crisis. If I had to choose one event.

SM (00:47:21):
In what way did that have an effect on your life?

TG (00:47:24):
It convinced me that the respectable Emilio [inaudible], which I had worked in for years was... Its immediate effect was to discourage me from political activity altogether for one. But within a few months I had become president of SDS. I had [inaudible] and radical.

SM (00:48:01):
I am going to list some names of this period, names that are well-known. Just a few comments on each of them. What do you think? Just your thoughts on them. I have done this with every person and the gamut runs every different direction in terms of how they respond to these people. And these are the household names of the late (19)60s and the early (19)70s. Jane Fonda?

TG (00:48:26):
She was an actress who got in over her hat.

SM (00:48:34):
Did you place her? I met her in Tom Hayden at Kent State at the fourth reunion of Kent State [inaudible] before, at the room one and two. How would you rate her? I do not know how Vietnam better feel about it. But how would you rate her? Would you rate her really as a sincere activist? I know about you and about Tom Hayden and I know about Rennie Davis and I know the sincerity there. But was she a sincere activist? Was she really sincere?

TG (00:49:06):
I never met her then. I met her later. I cannot presume to judge her since I do not know her.

SM (00:49:14):
Tom Hayden.

TG (00:49:18):
Well, I knew Tom Hayden starting in 1960. It is hard to summarize. I wrote a great deal of Hayden in my book. Very gifted, charismatic person and strong. Late in the (19)60s, foolish and manipulative [inaudible]. But after that, deeply dedicated and effective. The figure through the early (19)70s when many people who have been involved in the anti-war movement has retired.

SM (00:50:12):
It is just a complicated figure. He has written a book on the environment recently. And then he just bought a book the other day that he edited essays on hunger in Ireland. He realized he was Irish. He was talking about his Irish background [inaudible].

TG (00:50:26):
Middle name is Emmet, named after David Grish.

SM (00:50:33):
Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin.

TG (00:50:35):
Well, I have also written a great deal about them. Abbie was also very gifted wild figure. Often creative, wholly unaccountable to others. Reckless. And after many relatively solid years, I think starting in 1967, she is quite brilliantly at times and creatively control and at the same time a brilliant cultural entrepreneur. Jerry Rubin far less talented. Far more manipulative and less sincere, self-promoted, less original.

SM (00:51:43):
About Black Power leaders of that era. The Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, Eldridge Cleaver, the Black Power figures.

TG (00:51:52):
Well, those are not Black Power figures. Those are Black Panthers. There is the difference.

SM (00:51:56):
But Stokely Carmichael.

TG (00:51:59):
Stokely Carmichael.

SM (00:52:00):
Right.

TG (00:52:00):
Okay, so let us take him one at a time. Stokely Carmichael, a very talented and charismatic figure. [inaudible], power turn I think in the end was a serious mistake. As he became progressively more incendiary, became progressively more destructive. Newton, obviously very talented and deeply pathological poet crag. A crag boss in the making. Deeply dipping and delicate, unbalanced man. Bobby Seale. I do not know who he was when he started. He got in over his head. He had very strong authoritarian tendencies. Similar, which I saw in person. What damage he did is hard for me to say. I do not think he was a figure the way he really wants. He is of lesser historical significant. Cleaver. Very smart, very tricky. There was some talent who was promoted far above his... And you remember, let us not forget a long-time rapist.

SM (00:53:45):
We talk politicians at this time. Lyndon Johnson.

TG (00:53:50):
Brilliant politician who could have been one of the great presidents and [inaudible] away on Vietnam. The most tragic president of the 20th century.

SM (00:54:07):
Kennedy.

TG (00:54:10):
Rustling. A moral, not deeply tested. He died at 46. A brief conference. Oh, it is a very limited. Aggressively deceitful politician with some very shrewd political instance, which enabled him to become president and obviously, was once turned against his own self-interest were also his downfall or felt much for him.

SM (00:55:07):
Gerald Ford.

TG (00:55:11):
As a political figure in the late (19)60s or as a president?

SM (00:55:14):
As a president.

TG (00:55:15):
As a president, best unelected president we ever have.

SM (00:55:25):
How about Robert Kennedy?

TG (00:55:27):
Another great tragedy. Started as a passionate McCarthy, right? And a very bold prosecutor. A man of tremendous force and calculating, capable of learning. Comes in late in (19)68, but then had enormous potential. And how old was he when he died? Could have been 42. Could have been one of the greats. Could have been one of the great presidents.

SM (00:56:11):
George McGovern.

TG (00:56:13):
I am very fond of George McGovern. I think the world as in... He was a moral man. Comes out of the best of American Protestant reform. He was an honorable man who made obviously some real miscalculations. But I have never doubted his moral clarity and his decency.

SM (00:56:40):
Eugene McCarthy.

TG (00:56:47):
Worst possible leader for a respectable political insurgency. He did one great thing, which was to declare for the presidency. And then he abandoned his campaign and his people throwing the towel. Failed to make deals with Humphrey, which could have prevented the election of Richard Nixon. A terrible political leader, a narcissistic, and work with a political leader.

SM (00:57:26):
What about Hubert Humphrey himself?

TG (00:57:30):
A great moment. Civil rights movement was great. He was a very good exponent of nuclear disarmament in the early (19)60s. And then his weakness of character bring him into a marionette Johnson. And he did not come on. He did not. He declare independence soon enough to say it to the Democratic Party. So he has had great opportunity.

SM (00:58:01):
George Wallace.

TG (00:58:04):
I just saw it. Four little girls last night. The Spike Lee movie about the girls in Birmingham. It is a wonderful film. I was reminded watching George Wallace, that is how horrible he was. Worst of American racism. Simple Man of several things.

SM (00:58:35):
Have other people. Timothy Leary.

TG (00:58:41):
I remember self-promoting reckless, irresponsible, non-artist.

SM (00:58:49):
The Berrigan brothers.

TG (00:58:52):
I have respect for them. Holy serious, old, talented. Dan, there I knew. Very talented poet. They were good spirits.

SM (00:59:07):
Martin Luther King Jr. Make sure I get this there.

TG (00:59:31):
He is one of the great men. Great figure who Patty Riff might have done as well one of those.

SM (00:59:31):
Malcolm X.

TG (00:59:31):
Good to know about Malcolm X. I do not join in the worships that is so common today. I think he is a legend man, a self-created man. [inaudible] fast when he was killed. Rather primitive, I mean beliefs. I mean, let us recall that to be a black Muslim minister, meant to believe that the white race had been converted by a scientist Yakub [inaudible] world. But he did have the strength to recognize that when he brings that he had been committed to a fundamental racist view of the world. When he made a position for powerful position strip himself of the protections and comforts of that view, a set of wrong views, long views and oh wait, he was killed for it. I think most of his great, most of his great potential will not be known. We do not know who he would have been.

SM (01:00:43):
Dr. Benjamin Scott.

TG (01:00:54):
I think he was brave. I think he was a principal person who was moral and came to the board when was needed at some risk to his [inaudible].

SM (01:01:09):
Pretty close to being down here. A little bit more on this side. A little bit more on this tape. Muhammad Ali.

TG (01:01:18):
I respect his political principles. I heard he was an immature, great boxer who became a...

SM (01:01:34):
Who others? Ralph Nader.

TG (01:01:41):
Pretty impressive, very American style crusader. The individual and of course had a huge impact, had a great ability to attack. Very skilled and devoted author. Many who went on to do... In later years, he has been like so many people coming out of (19)60s lost in the co-campaign. He ran-

SM (01:02:09):
With the Green Party, I believe.

TG (01:02:12):
Well, but he did not run. I mean, it was all right to take a Green nomination and run and raise issues that the Republicans and Democrats were having. He keep that apology, but he did not really run. He ran half-baked campaign. He should have raised money. If you are going to do that, you raise money, you go out and talk to the maximum number of people. You do not run a stealth again. That is childhood. That is the McCarthy sin.

SM (01:02:33):
Spiro Agnew.

TG (01:03:03):
Mediocre politician. This corrupt character with his politics is bad, man.

SM (01:03:04):
About Barry Goldwater.

TG (01:03:12):
Interesting figure. I take it a man of principle. Its rights. He [inaudible] as well in history. Partly because he has had the scope and the depth of character to be willing to change his mind on certain matters. Partly because he is willing, because he does not seem to be a party man. He seems to be willing to speak his mind. He is the heroic figure of the Republican Party. He made it possible for them to produce Ronald Reagan. There is no Ronald Reagan without Barry Goldwater. So in that sense, I think, I mean you are of the wrong direction, but certainly a very important figure.

SM (01:03:52):
Senator Fulbright, your thoughts on him?

TG (01:03:55):
I respected Fulbright. I am anxious for my case on the war. But he was the earliest among the late comers on race, he was witness alleged good for a southern white democratic politician. [inaudible] of substance.

SM (01:04:20):
Senator Muskie.

TG (01:04:23):
I do not think much of that Muskie one way or the other. [inaudible] Fulbright, he was quiet New England politician. I do not think he is a major figure in that history.

SM (01:04:37):
For the women of that period, the Women's Movement. Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug, the Shirley Chisholm, the woman that read the forefront of the Women's Movement.

TG (01:04:45):
I love the...

SM (01:04:45):
The great Gloria Stein, you mean. Betty Friedan.

TG (01:04:49):
The greatest of them is none of those. It is Betty Friedan. Betty Friedan is one who deserves credit. She was a very smart woman, wrote a very fine book, created a movement. There is very few individuals who are properly credited with kick-starting the movie. She has had largely thoughts for herself and been willing to make enemies, which is important in politics. Featured figures in the second half 20th century. Gloria Steinem, I never thought much about. I considered her actually interesting. I cannot really speak to her influence. I mean, I know she had some. It is hard for me to... I see her as a light person. Bella Abzug. She comes into her own in the (19)70s. I do not see her as belonging. I think she is... What happened, same thing for Shirley Chisholm. Less reports, but neither of them I think are formative. The way that Betty Friedan.

SM (01:06:07):
How about this thing? We have Robert McNamara.

TG (01:06:17):
Well, certainly during his time in office, the most destructive people I have heard in history. Since then, the man who [inaudible] chance to redeem himself. The book raises as at least as many questions as it answers. But I honor him for making effort.

SM (01:06:42):
Henry Kissinger.

TG (01:06:44):
War criminal. Maligned, I should say. Maligned force.

SM (01:06:51):
I want your commentary here because when you look at the two, when you compare Kissinger and McNamara? There seems to be even among Vietnam veterans, a tremendous hatred for McNamara obviously. And even the book in retrospect was even in upset most of the veterans.

TG (01:07:08):
I wrote a very critical piece on it. I mean, I am not a fan of the book, but do not get me wrong.

SM (01:07:14):
It does not seem to be the dislike or Kissinger as much as there is for McNamara. And in realizing that at the end of 1969-

TG (01:07:21):
There is a lot or someone who do not know.

SM (01:07:21):
...28,000 Americans still died under the President Nixon.

TG (01:07:27):
Right. And plenty more Vietnamese on it.

SM (01:07:29):
Right.

TG (01:07:29):
They do not know. They do not know. Henry Kissinger is a much smoother player with a much more ingratiating to the press. A much worse figure in my life.

SM (01:07:42):
How about President Eisenhower?

TG (01:07:45):
Well, with respect to what?

SM (01:07:47):
Just these are names that are in boomers’ lives as a president, as a figure.

TG (01:07:54):
Oh, at the time he seemed, what if this may strike you a strange word, silly. The President, in retrospect as a figure, as a Cold War figure, not bad. Just in general, he was not so easily intimidated. And as Kennedy intimidated into reckless conduct. But a very limited man, very limited.

SM (01:08:35):
Music of the era. When you look at the music of the late (19)60s, early (19)70s, you personally, who were your favorite artists?

TG (01:08:44):
Starring when?

SM (01:08:45):
Actually, we are talking about the late (19)60s through the early (19)70s.

TG (01:08:49):
Well, when you say late (19)60s. When do you want me to start?

SM (01:08:54):
Probably around the time the Beatles came over in (19)64. Okay. That year. How music changed from (19)64 on. Because prior to that it was certainly a lot different. Rock and roll was already here. But certainly the Beatles changed things. And the folk singers. And how important, not only your thoughts on the music of the year, how important it was to the young people and especially with the messages that it portrayed and your personal favorites and why.

TG (01:09:18):
Okay. My personal favorites. Dylan, Joan Baez, Judy Collins, Leonard Cohen, Otis Redding. [inaudible] to who. Would be therein. That would be about. That is my list. That is my brother, too.

SM (01:09:37):
In the movement? What part did they play on in the movement? How-

TG (01:09:44):
In the political movement?

SM (01:09:45):
Yeah. How important was for that movement?

TG (01:09:48):
The only ones who were important in the political movement are Dylan and Joan Baez.

SM (01:09:53):
Any people in the movement can of just listen to the words they were capturing the time.

TG (01:09:57):
Just listen to the words now.

SM (01:09:58):
No. I met them on the music, but the music and the words. But...

TG (01:10:01):
Oh, yeah.

SM (01:10:02):
They kind of have sense of excitement and they had some passion. Phil Ochs was on that category too, was not he?

TG (01:10:09):
Yes, sir.

SM (01:10:10):
But was a figure. Yeah. Couple more names and we will be done. Woodward and Bernstein. Thoughts on that?

TG (01:10:26):
Reporters. Credit for what they did. They did real reporting and they were bold and they were right. So very important.

SM (01:10:34):
Richard Daley.

TG (01:10:37):
Nice. For the...

SM (01:10:37):
For mayors. What is very important?

TG (01:10:42):
Daley was rhetoric. Very, very limited man. Boss.

SM (01:10:57):
Okay, so then Daniel Ellsberg.

TG (01:11:03):
Ellsberg was an authentic hero. Okay. After many substitutes he did a very bold thing. And what he did had an impact. Personally courageous. Ellsberg year is a much more [inaudible] than...

SM (01:11:25):
Gandhi.

TG (01:11:25):
The first whistleblower.

SM (01:11:33):
I mean, first. I mean there were others in the past, but in other words, that is the first one I remember.

TG (01:11:35):
[inaudible]

SM (01:11:44):
He kind of, I asked right, was in the next [inaudible]. About the people around Richard Dixon is John Mitchell, Ehrlichman, Haldeman in that group.

TG (01:11:49):
Thugs.

SM (01:11:52):
Vietnam veterans yesterday told them Gestapo.

TG (01:11:53):
Well, I think that is silly. They are not Nazis. But these are very small people.

SM (01:12:08):
Again, the reason why I bring these names up, these are names that came of prominence during the... Actually the ones in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, the names stand. And the last one I have is Sam Ervin. The old gentleman there who ran the...

TG (01:12:22):
Sam Ervin represents the best of American Constitutionalism. [inaudible] way.

SM (01:12:27):
Are there any figures that have not been mentioned that you think should be mentioned when you can look at, I want to say I got the people that stand out of that era. Is there one that is missing that I have not... I know for example, I could have said all the big four of the Civil Rights Movement. Roy Wilkins and Whitney Young and James Farmer. I could have included that, but I am trying to...

TG (01:12:48):
I think very well of them. I especially I think well of Farmer. I think Farmer is a great man. Who has fully understood. Farmer's instincts were brilliant and he has a long history that most people are aware of [inaudible] on or something. I understand he is quite ill and in bad shaped. I know there was a bit of some hope to get him a congressional medal of honor, but has not happened.

SM (01:13:20):
On several years back that picked him up at the Wilmington train station. He was blind.

TG (01:13:25):
Yeah.

SM (01:13:26):
But he was okay every other way. The mental capabilities were strong. And we put him up with the holiday in and gave a great speech. Tremendous. He had not lost any... The vigor that was in his voice. The strength was still there. The passion.

TG (01:13:40):
I am glad to hear it. He was a great speaker. I can hear him speech.

SM (01:13:44):
We have that on tape, too. And I will never forget this, Doctor... When I took him to train station, I asked him as, "Are there any words of advice that you could give me in terms of my everyday work here in relationship with the university?" And I bring in speakers and all he... Because I had spent a day with him and I expected him to give me a long... Well, this is what you should do and that should do because we are killing time waiting for the train. And he said some two words, "Carry on." And as a result of that, in all my letters, and I will probably send it to you too, the grand of my letters, I always say carry on. Because I really admire what people do and how they live their lives. And those are the greatest two words that anybody can feel in that is to carry on, especially when working for others and caring for others. So it is one of those anecdotes, it is one of my metaphors, it is part of my metaphor. I am basically done. Are there any thoughts that you would to conclude here, that you would like to say regarding that group of young people in that era, in American history? That even though to us, it does not seems like only yesterday, but here it is, 1997 and to young people, it is like a century era. Any other final thoughts?

TG (01:15:09):
Well you are asking the guy written, depending on how you want to calculate it, three books about the (19)60s. Do I have any more to say? Lots of articles. Give a lot of talks. No. I do not know any more else.

SM (01:15:27):
I want to thank you for taking time out of your schedule. Really appreciate it.

TG (01:15:29):
[inaudible]

SM (01:15:29):
Do you mind if I take some pictures?

(End of Interview)

1997-07-23

Stephen McKiernan

Todd Gitlin

75:34

English

Binghamton University Libraries

audio/mp4

Sound

Audio

Sociologists; Authors, American--20th century; College teachers; Columbia University; Gitlin, Todd--Interviews

Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly.