25
10
1775
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/ac183043a0a70487c674787765aa9449.jpg
652b25f161722e269d870e640a6484af
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/9f6fb06c0c1f42e05dd4c4b54fcb4abe.mp3
b81d237ba176d76e899de5186968a79b
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
1997-07-25
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Steve Gunderson, 1951-
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Steve Gunderson is the former President and CEO of the Council on Foundations as well as the former Republican congressman from Wisconsin. Gunderson is currently President and CEO of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities. After graduating from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Gunderson went on to train at the Brown School of Broadcasting in Minneapolis."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":4487,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,5099745],"5":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"10":2,"11":4,"15":"Arial"}">Steve Gunderson is the former President and CEO of the Council on Foundations as well as the former Republican congressman from Wisconsin. Gunderson is currently President and CEO of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities. After graduating from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Gunderson went on to train at the Brown School of Broadcasting in Minneapolis.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
MicroCassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; Newt Gingrich; Generations; Activism; Civility; Young generation; Individuality; Robert Kennedy's funeral; Bob Dylan."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Baby boom generation; Newt Gingrich; Generations; Activism; Civility; Young generation; Individuality; Robert Kennedy's funeral; Bob Dylan.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
35:58
Subject LCSH
Legislators—United States; Council on Foundations; Gunderson, Steve, 1951--Interviews
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Steve Gunderson
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: Benjamin Mehdi So
Date of interview: 25 July 1997
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
00:02
SM: First question I want to ask you is a lot of the criticisms today, for example, I have heard Newt Gingrich oftentimes say it I have heard George will say it in some of his commentaries, and I have even read about it in some of the historical books that I read, that if we look at today's problems in America, there is sometimes there is a generalization that a lot of the problems go back to the boomer generation, the breakup of the American family, the increase in drugs in America, the lack of respect for authority, even sometimes the-the lack of civility between people will be placed back on the boomer generation by Boomer generation. I mean, those born between (19)46 and (19)64. What are your thoughts on that kind of thinking? That places the blame on our problems today to a generation?
00:50
SG: I think it is partially true. I think there are dynamics that were resolved with the baby boomers coming of age, that have profound long term generational effects, certainly, the lack of trust in institutions, the polarization of American politics, the willingness to question and take on authority and traditions, all of those important dynamics from the New Age and development years of the baby boomers. That, however, does not answer the more significant questions about the ability of American or international institutions to cope with a dramatically changing nature.
01:43
SM: This is where [audio cuts] [inaudible] reached her in many ways and personally reach. It's a follow up question to that. If you look at the year 1997. And as we're heading into the year 1998, if you could look at, again, this generation, which is just reaching 50, we hear the news a lot about Bill Clinton being you know, more than 46 being kind of the lead of the boomer generation. But what would you say are the accomplishments of the boomer generation thus far? If you were to look at this generation, knowing that they are just reaching the age of 50?
02:21
SG: I think there are some dramatic accomplishments. I think telecommunications and scientific breakthroughs during this generation’s history are more significant than any other generation in history of the world. You just look, you know at 100 different examples of that area. Second, I think here at home, this generation has had two profound effects. They have created an environmental sensitivity that did not exist before. And I think they have clearly created a fiscal sensitivity in terms of the federal government's ability to match income and revenues without [inaudible] allocations.
03:15
SM: The top of that question, if you were to list some of the adjectives, some of the qualities that you think are the positive qualities of boomers, and then list three or four, their negative qualities, and trying to evaluate them, based on your lifetime, when you were young, maybe as you changed over the years, and how you feel now, but looking at the qualities that they may have compared to say, the World War II generation and even today's younger generation,
03:43
SG: Ambitious, motivated, driven goal setting which more so than the generation before us and the generation after us. At the creative side, we also made the regeneration, which is more selfish, which is more consumption oriented or sensitive to appreciation of the arts and culture, community. Throughout the liberal arts generation were educated to be.
04:22
SM: How about the area of passion? One of the things it is like, you know, when you look at the boomer generations made up 65-70 million, I am sure the final the exact number, but they will say that 15 percent were really involved in some sort of activism, could have been conservative activism could be liberal, but basically 15 percent. I interviewed Todd Gitlin in New York two days ago, and he said, let us break it down to 1 percent activism because really only 200,000 of the true activists at that time, leading protests against the war, ending the battle, the civil rights and so forth. Your thoughts on that kind of?
04:58
SG: Oh, I think we were much more activist generations at the expense of our personal families and human community lives. You can look at the percent that was involved in the war, but they taught the other elements of our society. You see activism today in many different areas, you see it in the religious and social right, you see it the women's movement, you see it in the gay and lesbian movement, you see it in the black history and culture movement. Almost all of this is driven by baby boomers who are affected and taught what activism meant, as they grew up. Even if they were not active in their active classroom when I was done an act of history in Vietnam. There is no I would not say I have not been an activist. Right.
05:43
SM: Right. And you would not ever have tried to find so closely that activism is like the liberal left.
05:49
SG: No. I think-
05:50
SM: -That sometimes that is what they portray activism is left of center, as opposed to right of center. Knowing your history, a lot of people involved in the Goldwater movement, were-
06:00
SG: More activism on the right today than on the left.
06:05
SM: How do you feel about people who try to place labels on activism and activism, again, which was supposed to be a quality of the boomer generation, and whether they carried it on as they have gotten older, is a negative quality. I say this because this past week, I interviewed Ron Castile, former DEA of Philadelphia, who was a diehard conservative, and now he is a judge. And he says, do not ever put up the term activism on me even though when he was a college student, he was active on some issues. And also, as he has gotten older, he was responsible for putting the Vietnam Memorial together in Philadelphia, you know, he did something but he that label, that term is seems to have a negative connotation, some people.
06:45
SG: Well, in terms of histories, and the truth is he is an activist, the truth is the [inaudible] even Christian coalition are activists. The truth is that there are many different activists and social and political right.
07:04
SM: I go many directions here in all interviews, I have about 40 Questions from then I have about 100 of them, really. And one of them is that I deal with students’ day in and day out, and you met many. And when you visit our campus, it is interesting that when they look at people from our generation, no matter who they are, what they represent, they will tend to place them into two categories. And there does not seem to be anything in between. Number one is I wish I had lived when you live, there were so many issues. I mean, life seemed exciting. They were tough things and the war in Vietnam and civil rights. And then many of the movements came about the gay and lesbian movement, the women's movement, the Native American movement, the environmental movement, I wish I could have lived then when all these things are happening. And then the other attitude is I am sick of hearing it. I am sick of hearing about the nostalgia all up all the boomers are you live as in the past, you remember the memories of this, this movement and that movement? And the- you know, we have our own problems today, we have our own issues. And so, the issues then are no longer applicable. What are your thoughts on that, and how we can best reach today's young people when they have those kinds of, those kinds of attitudes?
08:10
SG: To restore that one generation and the next role as part of it is parent child. Part of it is there is a basic historical and cultural transition that occurs from one generation to the next. And some of that is simply irreconcilable. So, I am not sure that we can reach him there to question in the mode in which we can reach in his own civility, if we can find ways to be more civil in our discourse and in our activism. And I think that is what really turns off the young people is not a passion to identify and solve problems, but it is the lack of civility that which our generation addresses those issues.
08:54
SM: Would you talk a little bit more about the civility and whether boomers who it's like, there seemed to be at that time and in your face, attitude, you're never going to satisfy the demands that many of the activists had, and whether that's been able to be transferred as people have gotten older. Some people will say they even see it in the halls of Congress of which-
9:14
SG: Oh, sure.
9:15
SM: -You were there and-and people just cannot be civil. And it goes back to those times is like pointing fingers and arguing and not listening. And you are the reason why we have all the problems in the world. As you know that kind of-
09:27
SG: The problem for my generation is that passion was identified as confrontation in reverse. There was no such thing as a moderate opponent to the Vietnam War. Alteration became the regiment of passivity rather than a compliment of style. And so, as a result of that we have learned and carried with us unfortunately, with the way we display our passion on any issue today is to be loud, confrontational and too often rude.
10:08
SM: How is that affecting today's young people, I do not want -
10:11
SG: It is a turn off. It is a great American turnoff, because they increasingly look at both the style and the issues by which we take passion to that degree endeavor I can identify, it is why they turn off the government. It's why they turn on to volunteerism during your generation did not want to debate issues.
10:41
SM: This leads into another area and that is at 50, which is the oldest the front of the door movement, realizing these potential negative qualities that you have raised about the boomers. can things be turned around in terms of can boomers ever change who they are, as they get older, in order for us to be life is supposed to be constantly changing? We teach students day in and day out that you are constantly evolving and developing.
11:06
SG: Oh, yeah.
11:07
SM: So, it can, for example, what happened in congress this past week with someone who Gingrich's closest people kind of stabbing him in the back it was, was amazing scenario.
11:16
SG: But-but the truth is that that is a classic example of where people are motivated simply by politics, rather than by policy. And but he goes in by passion, you are going to have those kinds of dynamics. It is also why the general public, not just the generation expert, the general public, totally tunes out to what is going on Capitol Hill. They were not only increasingly irrelevant, as government's percent of participation in society decreases, but also, when they see the styles of people though they do not want to be relevant to the water we associate with that. But on the other hand, I think we correct this issue because any generation as it ages mellows out, and also, they just historic that the generation often returns to its roots. And as a result of that, I think you will see the baby boomers, find a new interest in community, and neighborhoods. And, frankly, volunteering the day-to-day problems of their fellow man.
12:28
SM: Activism back in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, was basically define defined into two major categories. Of course, it was the Civil Rights Movement, and it was the war against Vietnam. And of course, then a lot of the other movements evolved from the Civil Rights Movement, the movements that we talked about earlier. Today, there is a lot of different kinds of activism. There's activism on the internet, there is, there is all kinds of different things and that, but it's not geared toward one major happening like the war. Could you comment on two things? Number one, how important were the college students in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, in terms of ending the war in Vietnam? This seems to be a controversy with the people I have interviewed that some say they had no influence at all, others say they had a lot of influences. How important were the students on college campus in the war, and how-
13:22
SG: They were very important because they not only affected change themselves, they affected a nation's perception. The reason that others weighed in against the world was because their consciousness had been raised by college kids.
13:36
SM: That was the point blank asked you, what is the number one reason why the war ended? In Vietnam? What would that one reason be?
13:46
SG: American exhaustion, fighting at home, we were tired of fighting over there. We were tired of being in a war that was recently difficult to determine who was right who was wrong and was winning was losing. And we in essence, decided just plain to come home.
14:04
SM: Looking at the Civil Rights Movement, how important were the boomers in that movement, knowing that in the summer of (19)64, which is really Freedom Summer when the oldest Boomer would have been 18 years old in the summer of (19)64. And a lot of great civil rights efforts has been the late (19)50s through that time period of (19)64. How important were the young people of that era in terms of assisting carrying on the message of the Civil Rights Movement?
14:36
SG: I think in many ways they were the people's army rallying to their leaders call whether it be Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, whoever it was we were in many ways the troops, but you were certainly not the leaders.
14:57
SM: As you have gotten older and you know, the war ended, and certainly the-the draft was no longer a problem. So many people thought that, well, since that ended, there is really no more cause anymore. And that was what it was all about. But when you when you look at people of your age group now who are close to 50 have been carried on the idealism of that time have, they carried on in their lives now some people have, but your thoughts on that.
15:25
SG: We are a much more driven and materialistic generation; we are an idealistic generation. That has probably been a great transition for the ideals of our young adulthood. To the deals of our business, and professional experiences.
15:47
SM: That caught me the other end. [chuckles] To me, money is real secondary. I thought, when I was young, and the people I was around, we were going to go into the service professions and serve others. Money was secondary, any, any the friends that are going to go to law school, and they were going to go right back to the university, some went on to be very successful corporate lawyers, but so you do not think the majority of the people really carried that the money was secondary as-
16:13
SG: Well. I mean, I think you have seen that in the increasing apathy of the American people. You have elections for less than a half vote, and you look at who those people are. People that are not voting are the young and baby boomer generations.
16:31
SM: Even statistics are astonishing about how many of the college aged students voted, I just cannot believe we have almost begged students to vote, or we have a voter registration drive, we get about three or 400 registered, but it is not easy. What is in it for me, you know, that kind of an attitude. That is another thing, that quality, that an activist is never supposed to say what is in it for me, an activist is supposed to say I want to serve others, or something for the betterment of society. And you think that most of the mountain a great majority of boomers have taken that quality of what is in it for me mentality, which is the total alien nature of what an activist truly is?
17:10
SG: Well, I think we are a selfish generation, motivated by money and our own economic standing. But I will also say that we have also witnessed the selfishness of our parents’ generation, its- their demands on the government. And so, while we are selfish, we are not selfishly demanding of government to take care of us, we are rather preoccupied on a personal basis to deal with our own economics.
17:42
SM: Did you change your thoughts on this generation over the years, say, when you were in college, and then 10 years out of college 15, 20. Now or 25, or whatever, have you been pretty consistent in your attitudes toward your generation? Or was there a point in your life you saw an awakening and your point of view just totally changed?
18:07
SG: I am using doubt in my opinion of our generation has changed, that we use as a classic example. Through this line by Robert Kennedy used in graduation speeches in colleges and high schools across the country at that time, which was some people see things as they are and ask why I dream things that never were and ask why not? You have not heard that use the last 20 years. You have not heard it used because there are no dreams anymore. People, there are no ideals anymore. People have been much more consumed by their own personal day to day than the greater good. That was driven by Kennedy statements. I mean, I remember as a college student the day Kennedy, the day Kennedy, Robert Kennedy's funeral, going home from college, and listening to that funeral all the way home in the radio. It was not just me it was everybody in the car. I got the record of Robert Kennedy's funeral. There is no way my generation would listen to or buy a record of a US senator’s funeral today.
19:25
SM: You are right.
19:28
SG: Dramatic change.
19:30
SM: In your- Why-why did this happen?
19:38
SG: Um, I think it is a combination. On the one hand, it is a growing disaffection with government and the government's ability to make change. I think second it is a simple reality that most as they moved into adulthood, and family life, became the responsible providers of the family as opposed to the social activists that they have been in their youth. So, I think it is a combination too. Third, I am going to go so far as to say, it is also a lack in the last 20 years of inspirational leaders.
20:17
SM: There is a real good point because I even hear that among African American students in terms of trying to who are the leaders within the African American community. And of course, Jesse Jackson is the one name that always comes forward. But he is older, he is like 55 years old, so-so they see him a sense and another-another going back a rappers with Chuck D people that are on the radio and they were really Sister Souljah people like that is what they are identifying to. They are not leaders, their personalities in the media or in the music world, or something like that. I find that amazing that boomers are inspired by the Bob Dylan's of the world, and you know, the music of the year. But like you say, you also admire the political leaders, you do not see a whole lot of that. Very good observation. Wha- one term that is often used when I was young, and I do not know if you heard it around your peers, but that we are the most unique generation in American history that we are going to be the change agents for the betterment of society. And we thought that when we go into a rally, or we are in an auditorium listening to a speaker of that period on a college campus, and whether that attitude was an arrogance on the part of the young at that time thinking that it was going to carry on, that seems to be a term that I heard all the time, I want to know if you heard that when you were young-
21:34
SG: Sure.
21:35
SM: -That we are unique, and that no other generation before us, and certainly none that will follow will ever be like us. And this goes beyond just the numbers game, which is-
21:43
SG: Well, I think I think certainly, we all grew up believing we were different than anyone before us. I do not know that we would go so far as to see what would include generations after us.
21:55
SM: Another quality of youth then more than anything that you need that [inaudible].
22:01
SG: Well, yeah, because part of what we were doing is we were we were rejecting the status quo of American society. And we knew that we were going to be dramatically changing the status quo. But we were not so naive as to suggest that would not also be done by future generations against us.
22:22
SM: Just a straight point question. We are the biggest generation ever. There may never be another one that vigorousness again, believe I wrote an article last week, so we had 76 million I never knew we had that many in the boomer generation. But what is the most significant? Again, it might be a repetition of an earlier question but what made the generation different beyond their size?
22:50
SG: Their view of the world, their view of the United States, first generation that did not want America to be the superpower.
23:02
SM: Melodramatic flaws here. [chuckles] Good observation.
23:11
SG: Just so you know. I am happy to call you next week and finish. I am real sensitive to time here. I have promised somebody at University of Alabama we would be back to them by 230. And I can miss that for a little bit.
23:26
SM: Are you okay through 2:30?
23:28
SG: No, I have got a draft a letter to get to them. That is what I my concern is, can we go 15 minutes, to 2:20. Cut it off.
23:34
SM: And yet, you want me to come back? Like-
23:38
SG: She thought this was going to be half an hour so.
23:42
SM: Oh, she did.
23:43
SG: Yeah.
23:43
SM: Oh. 1 to 2:30. That was a little late too.
23:46
SG: Hour and a half today. I mean, I am happy to call you, if that works. To save you a trip or if you're back in town. I am happy to fish it up. My problem is [audio cuts]
23:55
SM: Okay, right. I do want to take a picture.
23:59
SG: I apologize for that. But this is unpredicted.
24:03
SM: Do you feel the boomer generation is having problems with healing and I raised this because of the fact that the Vietnam memorial was built with the hope that it would heal the generation, it would heal the nation, it would heal the veterans? Where do you feel we stand right now in the area of healing in this nation and knowing that the divisions in that era were so, so wide? Because people were for and against the war, people got involved with Civil Rights Movements. They thought civil disobedience was a precursor to riots, just your thought about the healing processes in America since that time.
24:39
SG: I do not know that Americans know the importance or value of healing anymore. I do not think it is a goal. I do not think reconciliation is a goal. I do not think mutual respect is a goal. I think all of this is a result of the increasing polarization of a nation of society in the increasing cynicism about our institutions, and the combination of the two, produce an attitude which says everybody else claims to be the victim. So, I must be the victim too. You know we’re each a different victim. You're that academic victim, you are that wasp, male, Father, victim of middle America, I am that gay victim, patties that woman's victim, somebody's the black victim, everybody's a victim.
25:38
SM: How would you define the generation gap from that era between the boomer generation of their parents and today's boomers and their children, you are to define the two generation gaps.
25:51
SG: I think our generation better understand the role and temporary importance of generation gaps. And so, I do not think the gap is as great between us and the next generation as it was between our parents’ generation and us, because for parents’ generation had a much more difficult time understanding the dramatically different visions. Because we had a generation gap with our parents that were better at minimizing the generation gap between us in the next generation.
26:31
SM: What will be the lasting legacy of the boomer generation when the best history books are written and say 50 years from now, your thoughts on what they will be saying, many of us will be long gone. How do you think historians will look at this period? And by this period, I mean, when we were young, the (19)60s early (19)70s impact on America. And as they some of the things you referred to earlier, the qualities they took over.
26:55
SG: It is the generation that broke down all the barriers in the world, and broke down the political boundaries, and said that, frankly, they do not matter. We broke down cultural boundaries, we broke down the communications boundaries. In many ways, we break it down into the language, and the economic boundaries, certainly through trade. This generation more than any other generation has made the world a smaller place and increasingly interdependent.
27:25
SM: When I took students to meet Senator Muskie before he died by two years before he died. And we put a question about the impact of 1968 on America. And the divisions were many of the boomers had an equality at least, which is still a lack of respect for authority even as they have gone into adulthood, people like that, who they report to, and so forth. It was getting into the issue of healing again, and he basically said that we have not healed since the Civil War. And he talked about two different Americans before and after the Civil War. The question I am getting at is this. Do you feel this generation boomers because of the divisions of those times have a real serious healing comparable to the Civil War where there were such divisions in America and they went to their grave of bitterness toward the other side? You think this is an issue with many boomers that there is this feeling within their suffering, something missing because they never forgave a lot of Vietnam veterans maybe never forgave the protestors. Protestors feel guilty that they did not serve, but there is-
28:23
SG: No one can minimize the impact of Vietnam on our generation or society. I would not attempt to do that. I do, however, think that there is a big difference. And I would disagree with Senator Muskie.
28:39
SM: Keeping time to-
28:42
SG: I appreciate it. I think that to be honest, technology did not allow the kind of national consciousness that occurred in this country until before World War II. Before that people really did not care what happened day to day in the world or even in Washington, because then find out about it for days to come. They were much more consumed by their own community. And we are the first generation that the majority of kids growing up will not be employed in their home community. When I talked to young people now, I said, the majority of your class probably will not be employed in the US. I mean, there is a dramatic change of that local consciousness there. So, I would disagree a little bit with Senator Muskies’ basis.
29:31
SM: Three important quality and that is the issue of trust in America. I want to know if you feel one of the qualities of the boomer generation that they will be carried to their graves is the quality or lack of trust. They have in their leaders and refer to it earlier, kind of created a consensus cynicism as America. And just your overall thoughts on the cynical leadership that has happened throughout the lives of boomers. And will they be able to overcome that as well?
30:01
SG: No. Because the only way they could overcome that is if Social Security and Medicare would be without any challenges in their retirement years so that they would be able to live totally economic security and comfort. And they are not going to be able to do that. Also, what you are going to have is you are going to have an increasing two class society, not only among the young and the working, but also among the elderly. You are going to have those elderly who had the ability to either put things away or have great inherent inheritances, and you are going to have the majority who did not, and they are going to be bitter, they're going to say life was unfair to me. Now, my retirement is unfair to me as well.
30:43
SM: In the area of empowerment, which we always try to deal with young people, the sense that your voice counts that when you are working with college students, we need to hear your voice, that empowerment is something we try to develop in people so that as they go online, they are heard their voice counts. Your thoughts on the concept that many boomers felt of sense of empowerment, when they, you know, gets the major issues of the day, the war, civil rights and the movements we talked about. Whether they carry that sense of empowerment into their lives. And whether you feel today's young people have a sense of empowerment, that they are really being listened [audio cuts]. model that we try to work with college students about is developing self-esteem that in [inaudible] trying to work on that. So, your, just your thoughts on that concept of empowerment that so many of the boomers had, and where that may have gone.
31:42
SG: I do not think in the area of high technology and individualism, that you can create group empowerment. And certainly, you cannot create the feeling of generational power. Very difficult for a person growing up with a personal computer, somehow understand how they and everybody else their age are going to make a cumulative difference.
32:04
SM: Does that apply to boomers themselves as they hit 50? Certainly, you as a congressperson felt empowered.
32:11
SG: I think, I think we as a generation, were empowered by our impact on Vietnam. We were empowered by our ability to impact the environmental policies in this country. We were powered by our numbers. So, there were there were signs that gave us reason to be empowered. I do not know if those signs continue, however, as we become almost disseminated into increasingly polarized society. I do not think the- a bond which unites us today is not the bond of our generation.
32:55
SM: When you look back at your life? What was the first one experience, one happening that had the greatest impact on your life? What was that one happening?
33:06
SG: [inaudible] the two. I would have to say, John Kennedy's assassination as a teenager, when they close the school down, and everyone was glued to the TV for four days, or we had a National Day of Mourning as a big impact on a young person. The second was landing on the moon. Vividly, we landed on the moon, watch that on TV. And that was the victory of science and high technology, which-which told our generation that we were a part of something far different than the nation in the world's history.
33:52
SM: What did those two experiences, how do they affect you as you moved on until right now, when you when you saw that assassination of John Kennedy, what did that do to you? And then as you grew up, I am going to do something to make the world better, what-what was the date, did those two experiences really-
34:12
SG: Well, they are, they are, significant for very different reasons. Kennedy's assassination in the events which follow led to a distrust or lack of reliance on the government to my generation. It- everybody produces Vietnam as the beginning of the cynicism. I think they minimize the impact of Kennedy's assassination, the underlying foundation for that cynicism and government. On the other hand, the landing on the moon talks all about technology. And it is, it is so dramatically different from this small town I visited or visited I grew up in, where people did not leave their counties say nothing of leaving their globes. Where you communicated through the operator at the local telephone station not through technology thousands, hundreds of thousands of miles away. I mean, like, what a disconnect. And then we sat and watched TV, which took us from that generation of a past where we were sitting in our living rooms with our parents, to the generation of the future we saw it on television that day. That was the bridge between here and here.
35:44
SM: I got many more questions. I think-think we will cut off here and what I will do is, I will either come back to Washington because I am making three or four more trips down here this summer or call you on the phone at times convenient because the rest of the [audio cuts].
(End of Interview)
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Description
1 Microcassette
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Steve Gunderson
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Gunderson, Steve, 1951- ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Legislators—United States; Council on Foundations; Gunderson, Steve, 1951--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Steve Gunderson is the former President and CEO of the Council on Foundations as well as the former Republican congressman from Wisconsin. Gunderson is currently President and CEO of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities. After graduating from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Gunderson went on to train at the Brown School of Broadcasting in Minneapolis.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1997-07-25
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.58
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
35:58
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b9b33a4437579d44ddd3de902a02c143.jpg
9651133f94c1340296e38cb6c0b206e6
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/33413b0059b7833680088a92d291c9c9.mp3
16e02ac00b43aba5889a021d17925db5
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
2010-03-15
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Alice Kessler-Harris
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Alice Kessler-Harris is Professor Emerita of American History at Columbia University. She is also Professor Emerita in the Institute for Research on Women and Gender. Dr. Kessler-Harris specializes in the history of American labor and the comparative and interdisciplinary exploration of women and gender."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13057,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Alice Kessler-Harris is Professor Emerita of American History at Columbia University. She is also Professor Emerita in the Institute for Research on Women and Gender. Dr. Kessler-Harris specializes in the history of American labor and the comparative and interdisciplinary exploration of women and gender.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
1 Microcassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
89:14
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"ewish immigrants; Jewish labor movement; Women's equality; Sexism; feminism; Working women; G.I. Bill; Post-war period; Anti-Equal Rights Amendment; Women's Studies; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam Memorial."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Jewish immigrants; Jewish labor movement; Women's equality; Sexism; feminism; Working women; G.I. Bill; Post-war period; Anti-Equal Rights Amendment; Women's Studies; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam Memorial.</span>
Subject LCSH
College teachers; Columbia University; Kessler-Harris, Alice--Interviews
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Rights Statement
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.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Alice Kessler-Harris
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: Kiernan Sullivan
Date of interview: 15 March 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM: 00:00
Testing one two [fumbling with mic] and again, you will see, uh, anything. I am going to ask you though about your early years.
AH: 00:09
Okay. [laughs]
SM: 00:09
Um, could you tell me a little bit about your upbringing? Um, uh-uh- where you were born, and, uh, maybe some professors and teachers that really inspired you. And how did you develop an interest in women's issues, and especially women in labor?
AH: 00:34
Okay, those are a lot of questions, all in one. Um, I was born in England, um, in 1941, uh, of, uh, refugee parents who had, uh, just a year before, um, managed to make it out of Hungary and Czechoslovakia and, uh, to England. Uh, I grew up in Wales, in Cardiff, uh, and, uh, lived there until I was 14, when we started the immigration process to the US. Uh, so all of my early memories are, um, British, Welsh. Uh, I, uh, when we came to the States, uh, I spent two years at, uh, Trenton Central High School.
SM: 01:30
Mhm.
AH: 01:34
Uh, a typical immigration story. My father had a sister in Trenton. My mother was gone already. She died when I was a kid, and, uh, um, so Trenton was where we came and went to school. There was in Trenton, a o-or at Trenton High School, a, um, just a wonderful vice principal, uh, whose name was Sarah Christie, who took me and my brothers, actually two brothers, one older and one younger, on board, and in my case, um, selected the college that she thought would be good for me, and, um, took my father and me down there because I was still fairly young, and he was not comfortable letting his daughter go away-
SM: 02:29
It was Goucher, right?
AH: 02:30
-to school - right. So she actually drove us down to Goucher, made an appointment with the principal, oh sorry, with the dean of admissions for me and with the Dean of Students for my father. And, um, I ended up getting a scholarship there, and spent four very happy years at Goucher. And there I encountered another really super terrific woman whose name was Rhoda Dorsey, um, who was then a young assistant professor at Goucher, and who then went on to, um, become first dean and then president of the, uh, the college. She is still around, and I still see her, and I am very fond of her, but it was she who, um, probably more than anything else, um, uh, influenced, um, my decision to become a historian, and particularly an American historian, given the fact that that was a new arena for me, uh, and it was she actually who, in, in the end, after many steps in between, uh, suggested Rutgers to me as a place to go to school. And, um, a-and that is why I ended up going to Rutgers and ultimately getting my degree there.
SM: 04:04
How did you pick? Uh, why did you care? Was there some experiences you had in college that, uh, turned you toward women's issues?
AH: 04:14
No, I cannot say that I was particularly turned towards women's issues until the late 1960s, until the women's movement began. And, um, before that, I had been turned much more towards immigrant and labor issues, and I think that makes you know absolute sense in terms of my own immigrant background. So you know, I was an immigrant and I wanted to be an American [laughing], that was the sort of bottom line, and the best way to do that was to study American history, and particularly to study immigrant American history. So that is what I did. And even more specifically, I did a visitation on Jews in New York in the 1890s so I was particularly interested in Jewish immigrants. And to do that dissertation, I learned Yiddish because that was my family was Hungarian and German speaking, but not Yiddish speaking. So I learned Yiddish to recoup that piece of a past that I shared, and, um, the rest is history, I suppose. The Women's History piece came out of, uh, the women's movement is the honest answer, and, um, it came out of the fact that I finished the dissertation in 1968 I was already married and had a four-year-old child. I have a daughter who was born in 1964 at that point, and, uh, I had t-to get the degree done, as you can imagine. I had sort of buried myself in books and had not been particularly politically active, y-you know, a-a lot of sort of, um, you know, marches and demonstrations, but no leadership of any one kind in any of those things. And then I lifted my head up, as it were, after I finished the dissertation, and I noticed that there was a woman's movement all around me just beginning, but New York was the, uh, you might say, the epicenter of that.
SM: 06:31
That is right.
AH: 06:33
So I got my first job in September of 1968 started working at Hofstra, where I taught for about 20 years and, uh, joined a consciousness raising group. The same year, uh, met other women who were active in the women's movement, and began to get involved. And it was only after that that I noticed that this dissertation I had written, which was about, you know, the Jewish labor movement in New York in the 1890s had no women in it. You know, that I had systematically just discarded all the women because I was studying the labor movement. And the labor movement was, in those days-
SM: 07:19
Male dominated.
AH: 07:20
-male dominated. So it was at that point that I started to, um, to work on women. I mean, I, I-I went back to some of the Yiddish materials and so on, to recoup some of the women I had overlooked. And so the first things I ever published were, uh, pieces on women in the labor movement. And...um-
SM: 07:48
Do you think, um, we are in the 1960s now, late (19)60s, that the women's movement really came about because of the sexism that took place within all the other movements? Uh, we know that in the civil rights movement, sexism was dominant. Uh, uh, when you leave, when you look at the anti-war movement, it was very dominant. And, um, in talking to some other people, even in the American Indian, American Indian movement, it was dominant. And even to- in the gay lesbian movement, it was very dominant. Um, do you think the women's movement would have happened if the-if they had been treated equal in these movements from the get go? Or, uh, because a lot of people believe it was an offshoot, even though we know civil rights was a, um, role model for the movement. But just your thoughts on the sexism that took place within just about all the other movements.
AH: 08:41
I think that that is, um, certainly a chunk of the explanation for the women's movement, but I do not think it is, by any means, the entire explanation.
SM: 08:51
Mhm. [mumbling]
AH: 08:50
So, uh, you know, I-I would say that, uh, you know, and Sarah Evans first proposed this in personal politics, and I think she is completely right that the sexism within the, um, uh, civil rights movement, the anti-war movement and so on, was an issue, and alerted a lot of women to the, especially a lot of young women, a lot of college aged women, uh, to the fact that here they were fighting for equality for other people, and they themselves were being treated, not only unequally, but unfairly. So, I-I think that that is the case, but I think that after all, limited numbers of women were involved in those movements, and that there is another source of female discontent, if you like, or of the women's movement that should not be overlooked, and that comes out of the- and it is really a long history of, uh, discrimination in the workplace and of the stifling of opportunities for women in those places. So, by the early 1960s it was quite clear that women were going to be earning a living. Large numbers of women were going to be earning a living. And after 1963 after Betty Friedan, uh, the old argument that women were working for pin money, or that they did not really want to be in the labor force and so on, um, I-I think had very little purchase after that point, so that I have called it sometimes incremental changes so women enter the workforce. Uh, they enter the workforce to earn income for their family for the most part, and then they discover that their opportunities as workers are limited. Uh, they their wages are limited. Their wages are unequal, uh, their promotional possibilities are limited. Uh, their capacity to enter certain fields are not only limited, but sometimes denied altogether, and that those things by the mid and late (19)60s are creating - you might call them the fuel for the fire. You know so then perfectly ordinary women who had never marched, you know, had never gone south to, you know, join the civil rights movement. Uh, you know, the mothers of children are, uh, discovering that they are being treated unfairly. And I think that form of sexism, you know, the sort of cultural sexism of who was expected to work and who was expected to, uh, take care of the household just hit home, uh, in about the same period. Now there is a kind of synergy between them that I would certainly agree to. But I do think that there is a strand there that is if you dig deeply, you can find it in the (19)30s. You can find it in the women who were active in the labor movement and would not call themselves feminists. You can find it in the early 1960s in the President's Commission on the Status of Women, where the question of work and family is a major question, you know, unresolved in that, uh, commission, and which spawns, you know, a state commission in every state in the Union, which state commissions are ultimately responsible for creating the National Organization for Women. So, you see, there is another thread there that I think people have perhaps not paid sufficient attention to, and which parallels, um, you know, and energizes, perhaps the younger women, or that the younger women certainly align with.
SM: 08:51
T-the, uh, 1950s to me, women, even though they may have been mothers at home raising children, they were still the teachers because, uh, just about my entire school, I did not see a male teacher in my entire school. It was all female in elementary school, obviously nursing professionals and certainly secretarial because my mom was a secretary. Uh, he raised the kids and then went back to work.
AH: 08:50
Right.
SM: 08:51
So-so [clearing throat] what we saw were people that were in some very responsible positions. Um, what was it about the, the middle-class women of that period in the (19)50s, where they realized, once their kids got a little bit older, that they wanted to go back to work to help raise because, um, my niece is going through this right now? Is it - with a, with a baby - but, uh, she has to do both things to survive, uh, to pay the mortgage. And was this the precursor of the two-income family? Uh, and once the two-income family was present -
AH: 09:36
It was not the precursor; it was the two-income family. The two-income family begins, if you look at the data, it begins in the post war period. So-so again, I have written about this, but-
SM: 14:18
Mhm.
AH: 14:20
-if you look at the trend line, you see that women are entering the workforce at a fairly steady clip and the number but they are mostly single women into the 1930s the Depression period, women continue to enter the [car horn] workforce, and their proportion remains steady. It does not decline, even though there is discrimination against married women. The 1940s women enter at a huge rate, as you know-
SM: 14:58
Right.
AH: 14:58
-because of the war. And then they were pushed out after the war. But immediately after they have pushed out, if you follow that first trend line, it continues to go up. So if you see, the, the war as a blip, you can see the trend line just increasing slowly but steadily, until by 1952 1953 there are almost as many. The proportion of women in the workforce is almost as many as there were during the war. And the proportion of married women and married women with children is now beginning to increase dramatically. So then you have to say, Well, why do women go back to work in the (19)50s? Some people go back to work because they had a great time during the war. You know-
SM: 15:46
Mhm.
AH: 15:46
-they learned that they could be economically independent, and that work was very satisfying. So that is some of it. Uh, some of it is that, uh-uh, they, uh, like their husbands, who sometimes benefit from the GI Bill, uh, begin to go to college and to get an education, and then to want to use that education. And that is the group that moves into the teaching and the nursing this, what we sometimes call the semi professions, uh, social work and-and so on and-and it is the, uh, the desire to use the education that they have that pushes them into the workforce. And then there is a whole other group that, um, moves into the workforce because standards of living are changing in the post war period and the male income is simply insufficient to support, a, a middle-class standard of living for most working-class families, but two working class wage earners can live reasonably well. So, the idea that, uh, y-you know, the male does not have to support a family that the woman can go to work to pay college tuition, to provide ballet classes for the kids to, you know, get that second car, or to buy the new refrigerator, or the leather town house. You know, all those things which, you know, the consumer things which are, uh, and which become necessities in that period. That is, you know, houses do not exist anymore without electricity or with outdoor toilets, or, you know, those are and to maintain or sustain that kind of standard of living requires an extra income. Sometimes it requires half an income, and women become two thirds of the people who work part time, for example, or women leave the labor force while their children are small and then go back into the labor force. But whatever it is, however families work it out, people begin slowly the idea begins to break down that men alone support there, and-
SM: 18:08
It is interesting, I interviewed Phyllis Schlafly about a month ago, and, uh, she has typified the woman, a woman of the (19)50s, because she would not do anything unless she asked her husband.
AH: 18:20
Yes.
SM: 18:21
And, uh, sh- he wanted, um, she wanted to run for the Senate or Congress or whatever, and she asked her husband, her husband said no.
AH: 18:30
Right.
SM: 18:30
So she did not run.
AH: 18:31
Right.
SM: 18:32
So, and she said she, um, she was interesting, because she said, I- she was against the women's movement, obviously, and she was one of the leaders of the anti-ERA effort. Uh, but she also believes that the troublemakers of the (19)60s are now running today's universities, and she p-pointed that out [inaudible] making comments about women's studies and everything.
AH: 18:55
Well, I-
SM: 18:55
Yeah.
AH: 18:56
I am one of those people.
SM: 18:58
[Laughing]
AH: 18:58
So, I proudly declare myself to be a troublemaker-
SM: 19:00
Right.
AH: 19:00
-of the (19)60s-
SM: 19:02
Right.
AH: 19:02
-in that sense-
SM: 19:04
Mhm.
AH: 19:04
-because, uh, I mean, y-you know that that she chose to ask her husband, that her husband said no, and that she responded-
SM: 19:15
[inaudible] sometimes, Yeah, we are doing fine.
AH: 19:18
There was a there was a class issue there. A- that Phyllis Schlafly was of a class status and already involved with a husband who could, in fact, support her and the family, makes her not unique by any means, but relatively speaking, unusual. There were millions of women who, um, they did not even think about running for the Senate, but they did think about becoming school aides, or getting secretarial jobs, or using whatever education they-they had because they needed to. Did they ask their husbands for permission? Probably, but would a husband have said no if he understood that this money could bankroll a kid's education, that you could then send your kid to the State University, because, you know, you would have enough money in the bank to do that, or you could, you know, get that second car for the family, or take vacations every year. So there-there was a class issue that I think people like Phyllis Schlafly often do not, uh, understand. But-but there is another issue too, which is, um, the 1950s 1960s are CUSP years. They are years of transition and transformation. So, uh, you know, it is absolutely the case that many women, particularly many white, middle-class women, benefited from the single income male house holder. You know, they could, as a famous historian named Ivy Pinchbeck once said, uh, they could manage not to have two jobs. So if you consider housework and child rearing one job and going out to work a second job, which most people do, it was a, you know, a great joy and liberation to many women not to have two jobs that is, to be able to stay home with their children, to be able to, you know, make the choice of child rearing, uh, rather than, uh, you know, going out to work and rushing home and you know, so on and, and that is the other piece of this that happens in the (19)50s. So, there is, on the one hand, the pull of income, o-of the need for income, and th-then there on is, on the other hand, an ideology which still says women belong at home, femininity serving the male obedience and so on, are good values. Now I am a great example of that. I grew up in a generation where I firmly believed I would not go to work. I was going to go to college. In fact, I married a medical student in my third year of college, I was set to go. I never intended to spend my life earning a living, and it never occurred to me that that would be but then, uh, you know, I started grad school. Why did I start graduate school? Well, my husband was in medical school. He just finished medical school. He was fairly young. Uh, what was I going to do for a few years? I was going to teach. We were moving from Baltimore to New York. I knew that you could only get a job as a real teacher, not a probationary teacher, if you had a master's degree. So, my initial thought was, all right, I would go get a master's degree, and I would go to graduate school to do that, and then I teach a few years. I get to graduate school. I love graduate school. I do well in graduate school, I think it is, you know, it is just the place I want to be with the conversations I want to have. Now, by now, it is 1962 1963 you know, the word is in the air. You know, there is a civil rights movement. I belong to bits of it. There is an anti-war movement beginning. I am present at that moment at Rutgers where Eugene Genovese bangs the table and says, I do not fear a Viet Cong victory. Indeed, I would welcome one.
SM: 23:44
Were you in the room when that happened?
AH: 23:45
I was in the room when that happened. So, so you see, I am not a leader of any kind, but I am influenced by all these ideas that are in the air. And then I get pregnant, and I have a baby, I am not sure if the order of this is right, but it all happens around the same time. And once I have a baby, the husband says, “Hey, what is going on around here? Why are you continuing to work? What is- but I am committed by now, so I use my fellowship money. I get deprived of a fellowship because I have a baby, I begin to feel that sense of, you know, it is not the same for me as a, as a woman. And then suddenly, in 1968 I finish my degree, I get a job because there are jobs available then, and I discover that I can construct a life, that I am not dependent, that I want this job, I want to work. And at that point, the marriage freys, it is not his fault, it is my fault, because I am the one who changed. His expectations of a wife and a family were absolutely legitimate given the period-
SM: 24:57
Yeah, the time, yeah, the times.
AH: 25:04
-that we grew up in. But I am, you know, there is all this stuff going on around me. I am the one who changes. So, when Phyllis Schlafly says, um, you know, my husband told me not to do it, so I did not, you know, that is great, right? My husband told me not to do it too, but I did, right? And there are as many, there are as many people like me out there as there are like Phyllis, Schlafly, maybe more. And if you want to call us troublemakers, because-
SM: 25:41
Well she used that term.
AH: 25:42
-Right. No, no, I am not-
SM: 25:43
Yeah-yeah. Yeah.
AH: 25:43
I am not blaming you at all-
SM: 25:44
Right, right.
AH: 25:45
-for this. All I am saying is, is I see how she could use that term, because she is really talking about a generation of people just like me who, uh, who do not want to follow the traditional patterns and the traditional lines.
SM: 26:06
See, that is, that is, you know, you are, you are a mover. I-uh-It is not, it is not really a year. It is an attitude. It is really about an attitude. Because, um, if you talk to a, a study of the Free Speech movement with Mario Savio, the very same thing there. Um, it wa- i-it is about the world of ideas. It was the concept of the world of ideas that was important in the free speech movement. And you are talking about 1962-63 that exactly was when Feminine Mystique was written, yeah, and it came out. And, um, I would have to check this thing to make sure this is doing fine. Um, and I noticed, um, in, in an interview that they had with Betty Friedan, before she passed away, talking about The Feminine Mystique, she said it was, um, about- it was all about equality. It was about equality. And then, uh, the person that followed up said, what about the, the radical women of the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, the ones that burned their bras or would not shave their legs, or, um, you know, those kinds of individuals. And she said, you know, they were radicals. That is not what I was into. That is not what I was into. She was kind of, kind of negative toward that kind of stuff.
AH: 27:19
But she is not telling the truth about herself, of course.
SM: 27:22
Yeah.
AH: 27:23
I mean, if you if you read, um, Daniel Horowitz's biography of Betty Friedan, you discover that, uh, you know, she comes out of the left, she comes out of the labor movement. She herself was a radical for a long time in her life that, while she was writing this book-
SM: 27:43
Right.
AH: 27:43
-you know, from a, you know, a sort of middling perspective that really is not where she is coming from. And indeed, I think, uh, only a Betty Friedan that is somebody who came out of the left and the labor movement, those are the women, after all, who are also, at this point, creating groups like women strike for peace, you know, and the ban the bomb movement and so on, you know. And they, you know, many of them have a, you know, what you would call a radical background. So, I mean the, the thing, the thing is that what we understand as radical may not have really been so radical at all. I mean, I do not think I was so unusual in that period. Uh, a-and I certainly, you know, if you think about organizations like now, or the Women's Equity Action League and how quickly they took off. You have to believe that there are millions of women who are somehow dissatisfied. You know, they may not be dissatisfied in the way Betty Friedan describes, but they are dissatisfied with that traditional you know, I-I am just an appendage of my husband, um, and I can be happy if he makes a good living being an appendage. Um-
SM: 29:07
Betty Friedan says, but part of the result of the women's movement, as I help conceptualize it, is to give it a vision and lead it is an end to such a no-win either-or choice. Women today have choices, and demand choices, choices to have kids or not, and the reproductive technology there too. And it is a fact that most women continue to choose to have children. They, they know it as a choice now, but they do not choose to have too many, and they do not choose it as either-or career or children. That is something that Betty Friedan says [inaudible].
AH: 29:44
Yeah, this says there is something true about that, but there is also something sort of oversimplified about that. I do not know when she actually said that, but if you look at the data now, lots of women are choosing not to get married. Lots of women are choosing to have children even though they have no partner. Lots of people are choosing to have same sex partners and to have children with those same sex partners. So, her sort of the underlying assumption there that marriage between a man and a woman is the basis for the choice to have a child is no longer valid. It is for professional women, for teenage black women, it is not legitimate to have a child. But for professional, 30-year-olds who do not have a husband, it is, you know, the numbers of those women who decide to get pregnant or to adopt children is Legion. I have not counted them, but-
SM: 29:45
I know that David Kaiser, who, t-the historian that wrote 68, um, he knows you. I think he knows you.
AH: 30:47
Yes.
SM: 30:53
He knew about you, and when I interviewed him, he said, do not bring up Betty Friedan to me. She is homophobic and, uh, she is not, er, uh, one of the leaders of really, uh, she, and, uh, Gloria Steinem is another story. Yes, she is fantastic. And so is Bella but Betty Friedan is homophobic, so in the gay community, I guess there is some sensitivity toward her. But, um, Phyllis Schlafly, um, trying to think something else that she said, uh, um, oh my goodness, um, it will come back to me. She said a lot of things [chuckling] that you might well know. Um, what do you mean when you say the gendering of society? Because, uh, you, uh, that is I have read some of the things on the web. And, uh, what does that mean to you?
AH: 31:36
I do not know that I ever said the gendering of society. I think I might have said the gendering of the labor force, and I think I have said a shift in the gendered, what I call the gendered imagination. But if I were going to talk about that whole concept of gendering, I would say the following: that we, um, and here I speak as a historian or a social scientist, I guess, uh, that we have often explained, uh, uh, transformation and change in society in terms of class and in terms of race differences. That is, you know, people say, um, uh, the, uh, you know, the industrialization altered people's expectations of work and of their place in society, and that changes how people think about democracy and politics and so on. And we have not often thought of gender as a sort of motivational force. And one of the things I think that we have learned over the last generation, and I think it has really taken 20 or 30 years to learn it, is that gender and gendered tensions might be as important as any other kind of tensions, not more important, but as important. So, you know, you could say, uh, the effort of men and women to, you know, sort of create different kinds of relationships within families, you know, the most intimate level, to create satisfying lives for both of them, then produces a whole bunch of other issues and demands. You know, it produces, well, the demand not only for, uh, equal work for men and women and equal pay for men and women, but also the demand for, um, a more egalitarian view of what work should be and how it should be structured. Uh, it produces a different sense of children and who's responsible for them. It produces a different, uh, perspective on social policy. You know, there is nobody left to take care of the aging parents anymore. We need social security and pensions, not just to be supplements, but to take care of them. It produces a different perspective on the role of the public school system in education. So we note now in New York City that virtually every public school at the elementary level has an afternoon school program which is free and available, and that is a response to shifts in the family. So what I am saying is that the, the gendered tension, uh, produces all kinds of other, uh, incremental kinds of changes that are not easy to deal with. You know, they are, they are very difficult, and sometimes they have backlash effects. And i-if you want me to keep talking, I can say, for example, the thing that comes very painfully to mind is the welfare reform issue. So it used to be that assumptions about women's gender roles meant that poor women who needed support would be supported to stay home with their small children so that they could take care of them and the children would not suffer. Now we have a gendering, a different kind of gendered balance in this society, in which we no longer assume that women with children will stay home. We assume that women with chil- with children will be out to work. And so instead of paying for women to stay home. We pay them to go out to work, but we have not figured out what to do with the children yet. In other words, you know, we have not provided appropriate day care. We have not provided it in appropriate places. We have not given these, you know, women reasonable transportation. We have not figured out what to do when the kids are sick. You know, we...do you see what I mean? So now that requires a whole another set of questions. They have not yet been resolved.
SM: 36:14
You see another just came out. My niece told me this, and it was on CNS, uh, CN-NBC, or whatever is that breastfeeding a child in the first six to eight months, they go to work after the you know, they got to go. There is no privacy.
AH: 36:28
Right.
SM: 36:29
And so that is a big issue. Now, I believe in Obama's, uh, Bill w-was it was not for six months or trying to build something, so they have to build a room for a private area. It was just something there was they were not sensitive at all-
AH: 36:39
Yes.
SM: 36:40
-to women's, uh-
AH: 36:40
Yes.
SM: 36:41
-needs.
AH: 36:42
Look 50 years ago when I got my first job. So 1961 to 62 I taught for a single year in a Baltimore High School, and I had to sign a contract that said, and that is exactly 50 years ago, right? I had to sign a contract that said that if I got pregnant, I would tell them and I would resign within four months of the beginning of the pregnancy. That was normal. I did not blink twice at signing that contract. It was perfectly normal. So nobody had to think about privacy or extra rooms, or it was assumed that it was not that everybody did resign when they had babies, but the expectation was that you would do so. So, you know, it is a half a century later, and look at the consequences of that. You know, whether it is about breastfeeding, or whether it is about on-site daycare, or whether it is about Chinese menu benefit options and employers finding that it is too expensive to provide healthcare anymore, and now maybe we can have national healthcare. In other words, nothing is isolated in a cocoon, and when you start shifting these what look like very intimate gender relationships, you produce huge consequences for the society as a whole.
SM: 38:11
I-I just thought what Phyllis, uh, said, she said, in, uh, she said that one half of all babies born last year were born out of wedlock. That is what she, uh, she had the st-statistic, was a year ago, so, and she was I-I again, I am not sure, we talked about a lot of different things, what she was referencing into, but she put that in as a-a statement that, uh, unwed mothers, and I-
AH: 38:33
I-I would like to check out that statistic, and I would, I would bet you dollars to donuts that included in that number, if the number is correct, and I think it is probably exaggerated, but if the number is incorrect, it probably counts as unwed women and men who live together as partners and men and men and women and women who live together. In other words, if out of wedlock means out of traditional marriage, having a marriage ceremony done, that might be correct, but if, but that, of course, that does not mean anything, because the children who are born under many of those circumstances have two parents, you know.
SM: 39:15
One, one of the first questions I have asked everyone, uh, on the general questions, not specific ones, is that, um, in 1994 when Newt Gingrich came into power, he made some pretty strong statements against the, um, (19)60s and the (19)70s [mumbling]. He has, he has quoted, he talks about it all the time, in certain ways. He is a boomer himself, but, uh, and then, uh, notice, Mike Huckabee recently has said some things on his TV show about the (19)60s generation. He likes to throw these one liners out there and for church will in his writings over the years, always likes to throw a little jab here, jab there. Um, someone told me, uh, in, in response to his chapters, anybody ever really told you or told you that he worked for Jesse Helms, and that is how he got his start? I said, no, I did not know that well, I do not think he likes the world to know it either, so [laughing] s-so lo-, there is a lot of stuff out there, but basically, what I am saying is that it is, it is a general perception on those that do not like, the, the Liberals from that era, whether they be in the anti-war movement, civil rights, uh, women's movement, uh, the gay and lesbian, uh, the environmental movement, the Native American Chicano, um, is that they are just, um, the breakdown of our society really started then the lot of the issues of the divorce, the divorce rate, the lack of responsibility, lack of respect for authority, the, the beginning of the isms. Um, of course, the welfare state will always be thrown out there. That was an LBJ thing. Um, so I do not know, how do you respond to that? Because, uh, it is, it is, it is really, it is becoming very strong now. It is stronger than I have ever seen it the backlash against that era. I preface this by saying that Barney Frank, I mean, I think I am going to have to turn this, uh, no, I am still good. Barney Frank wrote a very good book in the (19)90s called Speaking Frankly, and he is Mr. Democratic and, uh, but he said that we have to as a party, the Democratic Party, we have to say goodbye to the anti-war people and those-those (19)60s people and the-the people that were around McGovern, because if we were going to survive as a party, people are not going to join us. They are going to think of the radi- radical aspects. Uh, and that is always stuck in my mind, and this is a politician saying it. And, uh, so Mike, the basic question is this, when you see blanket statements made, stating that that period, and we all know what they are talking about, the (19)60s and early (19)70s, um, that all our-uh, just about all our problems started, then, um, how do you respond to that?
AH: 42:00
How I respond to that is by saying, some people would call that the breakdown of society, and other people like me would call it the transformation of society, uh, the transformation of society to a more democratic uh, um, uh, ground. In other words, I, I you can look at what happened in the (19)60s from various perspectives. From one perspective, you can see it as an enormous challenge to a variety of traditional value systems. Among them, the, uh, racial segregation, um, gender inequality, um, [car horns] or patriarchy, uh, if you want to put it that way, uh, you know elitist, uh, government, you know, uh, decision making made by political people and so on. So what the 1960s did, from that perspective, is to say, no, we were, uh, we have now moved far enough so that we want to transform the society on more democratic and egalitarian grounds. Uh, now you could say that that is a breakdown in the sense that our forefathers never envisioned such democracy. They did not envision racial equality, they did not envision gender equality, and so look at the terrible things you have done to our society. And that is one way of looking at it. [car horns] But another way of looking at it is to say, you know, this democratic experiment that this country is involved in is an evolving experiment. And the (19)60s and early part of the (19)70s, you know, there was a decade in there when we really tried to push the boundaries a little further. Uh, we got a good way doing that. We did not get as far as some people wanted us to, and we left some problems hanging. But by Jove, you know, we, we created a far greater access for African Americans, for people of color.
SM: 44:33
[mumbling] I know it is at the end. [recording pauses]
AH: 44:40
Okay, so, no, just the point is that we, we created, uh, access. We the- you know, the New Left view of democratic participation. [recording pauses]
SM: 45:04
[inaudible]
AH: 45:04
So, I was going to say the-the new left's, um, uh notion of, um, participatory democracy was in some ways, completely nuts. You know, it is, um, you know, in this in the sense that, uh, it is stymied activity. You know, we all spend hours day and night talking about things. But on the other hand, it also fostered the town hall meetings that you now see, where presidential candidates and so on actually think that upon occasion, they can actually go talk to ordinary people, and that ordinary people have things to say so. So that is what I think about that argument. I think that when, uh, Newt Gingrich should know better, because he was trained as a historian.
SM: 45:58
Yes.
AH: 45:59
You know, change does not come without, um, uh, pain, and, and people will disagree with it, and will, uh, you know, sort of pull in the other direction and try to pull us back in the other direction. But I do not believe that, uh, we-we can or that people will tolerate being moved back, uh, you know, to the sort of pre democratic or and we are certainly not as democratic as we could be, or as egalitarian as we could be, even now,
SM: 46:40
I know that, um, his commentary the other day against, uh, President Obama was pretty strong. [mumbling] He is the farthest left president we have ever had. And what is interesting also that President Obama tries to distance himself from the (19)60s, I think, because of the Bill Ayers and the all the other stuff. But also, um, his critics oftentimes say he is the epitome of the (19)60s. He is the reincarnation of the (19)60s. So here we have a man who wants to distance himself from that period, and yet we have his critics saying that he is the, uh, epitome and the, uh, role model of that period. He is-
AH: 47:21
But he has got critics on both sides. Right?
SM: 47:23
Yeah.
AH: 47:24
On the one hand, they say he is the epitome of the (19)60s and he is too far left, and he is a socialist and so on. On the other hand, people like me are saying, wait a minute, he is not far left enough. You know, what has he done? He has not stopped the war in Afghanistan. You know, he has settled for a health care bill, which is half of what we would like to have gotten. In other words, he is getting criticized from the left as well as from the right. And if you read magazines like the nation, what you get are articles saying, you know, hold off. Do not be too disappointed. He is doing as much as he can, you know, even though he is not doing, you know, enough so, so maybe he is doing something right, because [laughing] he is going right down the middle.
SM: 48:12
You have taught s-since the middle (19)60s, I guess, on college campuses. So you saw the, uh, the boomers when they were coming. Uh, they are 64 so they, they were in the (19)60s and (19)70s, and then you had the Generation X ers that came in the, uh, (19)80s and, uh, (19)90s, and now you got the millennials. Uh, Generation Y is right around the corner. See, everybody has got these terms for them. But, uh, one of the things that people have written is that the gener- that the boomer generation, were the best educated kids that they had, the best teachers, they had the best school system. They were seen to be more knowledgeable about issues, uh, not only that, often, not all of them active on the, um, uh, issues, but as a teacher, as a professor, as someone, you had good students in all your classes and every year. But did you see, c-can you perceive that that period students may have been more inquisitive, more questioning? Even you as a teacher, uh, how they seem to they seem to have been different and I have had other professors who have told me this.
AH: 49:17
I, uh, I think the answer that question is yes, but I think you have to remember that I was closer to their age than I am now, and students are always much more willing to engage and to push a professor who is young and, you know, seen as, uh, responsive, rather than somebody who's been around for, you know, 40 years and-
SM: 49:20
Right.
AH: 49:21
It is like their grandparents so, but that said, uh, I think it is probably true that the kids of the, of the, uh, late (19)60s, I started teaching in (19)68 and those first four or five years were of course, the heart of the anti-war movement. And so, uh, you know, the kids were active. They were engaged in the learning process. Uh, they, uh, you know, if they disagreed with the book, the challenge was not to get them to not disagree. We wanted them to disagree, but the challenge was to, uh, help them to defend their disagreement, to, um, you know, to articulate and to think about, you know, what the roots and the sources were of it. And so I think that that is true. Nowadays, students tend to be somewhat more passive, although I have to say that in my Women's Studies classes and my women's history classes, Phyllis Schlafly notwithstanding, um, those students tend to be, uh, much more challenging, uh, much less willing to accept authority, uh, you know. So they will repeatedly distinguish themselves, you know, from the second wave, you know, they will identify me almost immediately as a feminist and as a second wave feminist, and identify themselves as, uh, the third, or even now the fourth, fourth wave. And that is very rewarding. That is there. It generates very useful conversations about the differences, which, of course, reveals something to them-
SM: 51:48
Mhm.
AH: 51:48
-about, you know, what the past was like and what the present is like. Uh, those kinds of, uh, that kind of pushing, that kind of challenging I do not find in my other classes, but I would suspect that others might you know, others of a younger generation, others of different political persuasion might.
SM: 52:15
In your opinion, um, when did the (19)60s begin? When did it end, and what was there a watershed moment, um, watershed happening? So, it is a three-part question. Uh, [mumbling].
AH: 52:31
Well, it began and ended - is it all right?
SM: 52:35
Yep
AH: 52:35
It began and ended at different points for different people. Um, So I do not think there is one answer to that question. For me, I would say, uh, it probably began in 1964 and it probably ended, well, it did not end, uh, because I remained involved actively in the women's movement. For me, perhaps it still continues, but, uh, the at least that piece of it, the women's movement, piece of it still continues. It is still an ongoing struggle. It is changed and transformed, but, uh, I-I would say it began in 1964 for me, because that is when I became active in the civil rights movement, and that is when the civil rights movement became a kind of living part of my life, although even in college, I had become aware of it, though not particularly active in it, um, I would say, um, that the (19)60s ends, uh, in some sort of grassroots way. Um, by the early part of the (19)70s, (19)73 the withdrawal from Vietnam, you might say was, the is a good day to end it. Now, what succeeds that, of course, is just a ton of legislation and policy changes around the issues I care about, including affirmative action, uh, for blacks and whites and for women and so on.
SM: 54:20
Yeah, I have, I have a question here. Uh, I have a question here because during the period when boomers were growing up and young, um, we had the Brown versus Board of Education. And then we had the Civil Rights Act. We had the Voting Rights Act (19)64 and (19)65, um, so, and then, of course, Roe v Wade, which was a major, major happening. We actually have we had programs on that before I left school, about the threat that it may try to be changed back. Um, that is why the Stevens Point there, right? [chuckling] That is really big. Um, but getting back to the question, when you are talking about women. And of course, I am talking about the boomers, which are now. The oldest ones are 63 and the youngest ones are 46, um, what laws are the most important that you feel for all women? Uh, in and-and when I break it down here, it is hard to not only in terms of equality, but where, uh, discrimination was present, and where it has been improved, uh where, uh, uh, the whole business of the labor force, uh, equal pay for equal work, uh, the whole issue, I noticed there is so much here, so you cannot talk about all of it. But what would be the key points, the legal issues that you feel have really changed how we look at women today?
AH: 55:48
For women?
SM: 55:48
Yes.
AH: 55:49
Um, I-I would say, uh, e-equal pay. Equal pay is not as important as, um, occupational segregation. Uh, it symbolically is important, but, uh, the bunches of studies now that have demonstrated that pay actually that that equal pay legislation is ineffective unless occupational segregation is simultaneously, uh, eliminated and the shifts in occupational segregation have been, uh, not insignificant, especially at the professional and financial levels, but not very, um, uh, I would say, marginal at the level of the trades and the, um, under crafts, uh, which isn't to say that they have not been there. So, the numbers of carpenters, of female carpenters, have doubled from two to 4 percent, you know, like that. But still the notion that, um, occupational segregation is, um, an invalid, inappropriate, um, uh, you know, claim, which was the claim that, um, both men and women agreed to for years that is gone, and it is gone not through a single law, but through a series of successive changes, starting with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and, uh, with Title Seven of that act, and, uh, through the actions of the EEOC, uh, continuing through the, uh, Labor Department, new labor department regulations and so on. So I would say that is one big change. The second one has to do with reproductive rights, although I agree with you that that is now threatened. Well, I guess we will see how effective it will be, and where I think, uh, the beginning of the challenge to that, I would probably date to Griswold. So that is 1967 that is the Connecticut decision, which makes that illegal for states to limit the distribution of birth control only to married women. You know, women are entitled to birth control whether or not they are married. Uh, and that continues, of course, then through the abortion, uh, protests and demonstrations, and then Roe v Wade, but in there you have to sort of put things the cultural things like Title Nine, you know, women should be able to participate in sports. Um, I do not know quite where that belongs, but I think that was a big one. Uh, and in the reproductive rights thing, there are a whole series of things that sort of tentacles that that leads to including, um, the, uh, court decision on GE which, um, uh, said it was really okay for insurers not to insure pregnancy and childbirth. And then the 1979 government, um, uh, legislation which says nope, and people who provide health insurance for their workers have to include, if you provide any health insurance, then pregnancy has to be so the so-called Pregnancy Disability Act. So, so that whole sequence of things you know, who controls reproduction, who is responsible? How people deal with it, the Hyde Amendment. You know that there are a whole series of we could separate them out, if you like, but if you wanted to summarize it, I would say, uh, the thing that was important in this period was the recognition that, uh, reproductive issues were not were neither wholly private, that is that they were not within the control and purview of women and their husbands, and at the same time they-they were not wholly public either. You know that we, and I think that is what the big debate is about now, but I do not think it takes place just on the yes abortion, no abortion. I think it takes place on all these other fronts too.
SM: 1:00:57
Do you, do you feel that when women have to leave work, they get six weeks no pay. Is what happens, is-
AH: 1:01:05
12 weeks
SM: 1:01:06
I-is it 12?
AH: 1:01:06
[inaudible] family medical leave-
SM: 1:01:09
My, uh, my niece just, uh, says, in New York State, she could only get, um, a month and a half, six weeks
AH: 1:01:17
Family medical leave act. It is a federal act, says 12 weeks. It does not cover some people. Maybe she is in a non-covered job.
SM: 1:01:25
They do not get paid either.
AH: 1:01:26
But there is no pay-
SM: 1:01:27
Yeah.
AH: 1:01:27
-for it.
SM: 1:01:27
Is that right?
AH: 1:01:29
That is right, although many employers now provide, Columbia being one of them, now provide maternity leaves, which they did not. But the difference is, you know, there is a maternity leave and there is a parental leave, so that 12 weeks unpaid anybody can take the maternity leave. Or the, you know, the pregnancy leave is available, often out of sick pay, often for women, at the cost of giving out, you know, a vacation or something else. Not good. Not good. Much better in Europe.
SM: 1:02:05
One of the questions I have been asking everyone centers on a question that we, um, asked Senator Evan Muskie (?) when we took a group of students to Washington in the mid (19)90s, before he passed away, he was not well. He had been in the hospital. And this was organized through, uh, arrangements with Senator Gaylord Nelson, who I got to know quite well, senator from Wisconsin. And the question that the students came up with, because they did not grow up in the (19)60s, and, and they had watched the film of 1968 and they saw the students and the police could club each other. They knew that the Kennedy and King had been killed, and, uh, that Johnson had resigned, and Tet and all the other things. So they knew all this. The question they asked is, do you feel that the boomer generation, the generation of 74 million, will go to its grave like the Civil War generation, not truly healing from the really strong divisions that tore the nation apart in that time? They want to know, number one, from Senator muskie, were we close to, uh, breaking apart as a nation because of the burnings in the cities and all the things that are happening, i.e. close to a second civil war? A-and secondly, uh, with all the divisions between black and white, male and female, gay and straight, uh, those who supported the troops, those who did not for the war, against the war and all these divisions, um, you know, the question was, are they going to go to their grave, like many in the Civil War did, uh, that had all these reunions, but they still never truly healed from the Civil War. What are your thoughts?
AH: 1:03:48
I think the only people who go to their graves thinking that are people who do not know any history, because it does not take much history to recognize that every decade or so, every generation, uh, certainly has seen equally powerful divisions which have threatened to tear the nation apart, and which, as you know, in the case of the Civil War, sometimes did tear the nation apart. But you know, divisions, not only over the Civil War, but divisions over reconstruction, uh-
SM: 1:04:24
Make sure, we are doing okay. Yep! Okay.
AH: 1:04:27
Uh, divisions over reconstruction. Divisions over free silver tore the nation apart. Divisions over, um, uh, you know, World War One and whether we should go to war divisions over the New Deal and the Social Security Act of I mean, you could go on and on. And you know, the 1930s certainly saw its, uh, you know, its marches and people in the street and demonstrations and-and attacks. And you know, people thought the political consequences of that would never end, and not only did they end, but they are now some of the most popular programs that we have. So, I do not know how you-you know the divisions over the Vietnam War, to say nothing of the other divisions were powerful and deep. And, you know, we got beaten up by cops on horses. We did not understand why they were wielding clubs at us or-or, you know, pushing us around at the Pentagon, or arresting we, you know, we thought we were doing the right democratic thing. And 20 years later, do we even remember that? No, those are the stories that we tell our children. They are not, you know, sources of division. I do not know, huge divisions over the civil rights marches and-and would anybody say those tore, you know, Brown v Board of Education, Yeah, they tore the nation apart. But the rifts aren't permanent. I think that what we see now is a, um, is a very articulate, uh, right wing made more articulate by the kind of media and sources that are available to them. So when 200 Tea Party people meet in Boston, 200 is almost nothing, but when every television channel and Fox News Features them so that every household gets a sense that people are uncomfortable. They seem more powerful than in fact they are so no, I would say, um, if you know any history, you know that divisions are, are not unhealthy. I, I wish, I wish there were less racial division. I wish I were not seeing these attacks on Obama. You know, as a socialist, is that a euphemism for the N word? Is that a- you know, you, you really that that scares me a little bit. I wish we had a Supreme Court that, you know, would you know restrain the use of weapons or the handling of weapons. I think you know these recent decisions about, um, allowing weapons on the public streets of big cities without, you know, monitoring or checking or I think those are absurd.
SM: 1:07:54
Do not know why that is doing it. Here we go. All right, uh, I want to mention that, um, Senator Muskie, when he responded he did not even mention 68 he said he did not even talk about it, um, because they thought he was there at the convention. He would, that is what they were asking. He said, um, I just saw the Ken Burns series in the Civil War, and we lost 430,000 men in that war and the South almost lost their entire generation. So, um, he said, we have not healed since the Civil War. And then he explained why when I am talking about it, uh, and he said, all you need to do is go to get his emergency (?). When you drive on one side, uh, the south just leaves flags. In the north, you do not, you do not see anything. [recording pauses]
AH: 1:08:40
Do you have another tape?
SM: 1:08:41
Yeah, I do have another tape. I do not know why it is stopping. There you go. Um, anyways, uh, one, one of the other things of during that particular period, um, in the (19)60s- [recording pauses]. Alright. When you think of the (19)60s and the (19)70s, um, three slogans come to mind w-when I think of period different types of people. Number one was the slogan that Malcolm X gave, which is by any means necessary, symbolic of a more radical, violent group. The second one was Bobby Kennedy speech when they are words, when he said, um, some men, some men, sees things as they are, and ask, why? I see things that never were and asked, why not? And that was a Henry David Thoreau quote, but it was more symbolic of the activist mentality, uh, wanting to, uh, do positive things, things for justice and equality, you name it. And then third one was more kind of a hippie mentality, which was, uh, from a peer Max poster, uh, you do your thing. I will do mine. If by chance, we should get together, it will be beautiful. Which was kind of a hippie mentality. Um, and I thought that kind of civilized the, um, boomers when they were young, the (19)60s, the (19)70s, uh, maybe some of the ideas they carried on even into the (19)80s. Are there any slogans or quotes that you feel are important? The only other one that came out from us other people was we shall overcome, which was the Civil Rights-
AH: 1:10:13
I like that.
SM: 1:10:14
-and the John Kennedy quote, wh-um, uh, ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country. Do you have some quotes that you feel, uh, really are symbolic of the period?
AH: 1:10:31
The woman's, uh, movement. Uh, the woman's movement line was the personal is political, and that was one that was very influential for me. Um, I have to say that, uh, you do your thing, I will do my thing. Uh, that was the Cultural Revolution. You left thing. And maybe that is what distinguishes me from really, the boomer generation. I could not bear that slogan [laughing]. I could not stand it, and I thought, you know, it is an anti-political slogan. It is, uh, you know, let us just drift apart. Leave me alone and I will, you know, so, so no, that that was not what I thought the (19)60s was about. I thought the (19)60s was about, um, uh, uh, a fairer and I like the word fair better than I like the word, uh, equal, but, but I would say a fairer and more equal society, creating one for everybody. So. And I think to do that, we needed, we need the Robert Kennedy slogan. You know, I think that that is the most.
SM: 1:11:46
Uh, I-I have a whole mess of questions here. We are going to cut some of these because we only have 10 more minutes here. Um, uh, all right, uh, w-what were some of the books? Now, we have talked about the feminine mystique. And certainly there were other writers that were important, Betty Friedan and, um, I know Susan Brown Miller has written some major books, uh-
AH: 1:12:09
The people we read before we read Susan Brown Miller and Kate Millett and so on.
SM: 1:12:14
Right.
AH: 1:12:15
We read, um, uh, Herbert Marcuse, Norman O. Brown [Norman Oliver Brown], uh, you know, they were the precursors of this so Marcuse, uh, eros and civilizations. Freud's civilization, and its discontents. Uh, Norman O. Brown, life against death. Those were the books that we, uh-uh Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities. So, before we were reading the women's books, we were reading in the late (19)60s, these books, and those were the books I was sometimes teaching. You know, of-of the women's books, uh Shulamith Firestone's [Shulamith Bath Shmuel Ben Ari Feuerstein], uh, Dialectic of Sex [The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution] , uh, was important. Uh, Juliet Mitchell, the Long Revolution or no, I think the book was called Woman's Estate, uh, and then the popular books were Kate Millett, um, Germaine Greer, uh, Betty Friedan was old hat by the late (19)60s. I mean, for people like me, it is probably not for younger people. And then fiction, Marilyn French's the Women's Room. Um, Kathy Davidson, I have forgotten the name of that book, something divisions, sexual divisions or something. Um, Alix Kates Shulman, uh Memoirs of an Ex-Prom Queen. Uh, there was a lot of that, a lot of fiction going on. And then the, uh, black fiction, the African American women's fiction, beginning to emerge in the mid, uh, (19)70s. So, Toni Cade Bambara, um, uh, Toni Morrison, of course, [SM coughing]. Um, Alice Walker, not till later. But that is what we were.
SM: 1:14:23
Was Carol Oaks, one of those? Uh-
AH: 1:14:25
No.
SM: 1:14:25
No?
AH: 1:14:26
Uh, I mean, she was there but she was not from-
SM: 1:14:30
[Interrupting and overlapping speech] Simone de Beauvoir-
AH: 1:14:32
Simone de Beauvoir was enormously influential. Yes, yes, yeah. We read her early on, in fact, now when I teach that period, I start with Simone de Beauvoir.
SM: 1:14:45
In terms of magazines, we all think of Ms., but were there other magazines that were influential? Uh-
AH: 1:14:50
There were.
SM: 1:14:52
-either underground papers or-
AH: 1:14:55
Yeah, there were several of the underground papers. There was a paper called New Directions for Women, which was, which lasted about 15 years, and which was, um, you know, widely read. There was, um, uh, uh, underground paper called red rag. There was another one. There were several underground papers. I cannot remember the names of them all, but, oh, you know, we would get them all and devour them. Is, is, I think there were no, uh, the thing about Ms. was that it was a mass circulation magazine, and that is what made it different. The others had smaller circulations within the feminist, you know, intellectual, but Ms., really, you know, sort of extended beyond that, and that is what made it so important.
SM: 1:15:54
I would like, uh, these are some female um, uh, leaders that have been come to the forefront in the last 30 some years. Um, if you just give your thoughts, just quick thoughts, it does not have to be anything in depth. Some are popular, and some are maybe not so popular.
AH: 1:16:12
This is a trap, [laughing]
SM: 1:16:13
It is not a trap.
AH: 1:16:14
This is a Rorschach.
SM: 1:16:15
Uh-
AH: 1:16:15
[Laughing]
SM: 1:16:17
Lynn Cheney.
AH: 1:16:17
Yuck.
SM: 1:16:17
[chuckling] Okay. Is that - you do not have to go any further. Do you want to say anything more?
AH: 1:16:25
Yeah. I mean, I-I think, um, a very conservative woman, uh, somewhat hypocritical, uh, in my judgment, as a as a, um, uh, the chair of the NEH, which was when she first really came to my attention. Uh, she was enormously destructive, uh, both because she, uh, supported and, well, I would say it this way, she limited NEH support to projects which she found politically acceptable and correct, and that seemed to me to be a violation of the NEHS mission she excluded from panels people of varieties of political and social backgrounds and opinions. Uh, so, uh, right.
SM: 1:17:22
Eleanor Roosevelt,
AH: 1:17:24
Eleanor Roosevelt, one can only have admiration for. I mean, even though you could make positive and negative judgments about her, but she, she was, um, a far sighted and, uh, often a very courageous leader of women, uh, who was limited by her own, you know, politics and class and so on, but, uh, she was a great lady.
SM: 1:17:58
Uh, two, uh, do two at a time here, uh, Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice, because they were the most well-known. Seemed to be.
AH: 1:18:07
Well, Condoleezza Rice neither had much to say or do about women's issues, so I cannot really speak to that. I, uh, did not much like her as a secretary of state because she was too war like and, um, uh, too closely tied to Bush administration policies which she supported. And I dislike, uh, Hillary Clinton. Uh, I find, you know, I have a lot of admiration for Hillary Clinton, though I do not always agree with what she says and does, particularly, did not agree with her stance on the welfare issue or its renewal, but on the other hand, she was very smart, she was thoughtful, she was responsive. Uh, she you know when as senator, she took reasonable positions on many issues. So if I had to choose between them, I, you can tell which one I choose.
SM: 1:19:10
Gloria Steinem and Bella Abzug.
AH: 1:19:13
Uh, birds of a different feather, although, uh, very closely tied, Bella Abzug comes out of her radical background, and though she was an impossible person by all accounts, she was a ,uh, political force, and one has to both respect and admire that force. Uh, I wish she was still alive. I would love to hear her voice out there. Uh, Gloria Steinem has been a different kind of leader of women, um, very active on the range of you know, of women's issues per se, uh, Bella was more interested in broader issues. As well as women's issues, issues of human rights, issues of, uh, well, all the issues that came before the Senate, issues of corporate-
SM: 1:20:07
[inaudible] Yep.
AH: 1:20:12
But, um, whereas Gloria Steinem has a sort of narrower mandate, uh, h-her greatest contributions, it seems to me, uh, were both in the founding of Ms., but then also in the um, uh, the effort to create a kind of inclusionary woman's movement, as opposed to one that was divided so...
SM: 1:20:40
Um, Lindy Boggs-
AH: 1:20:43
Yeah.
SM: 1:20:43
-and Angela Davis [both laughing] Lindy-
AH: 1:20:49
I am going to leave Lindy Boggs out, partly because I do not know enough about her to make quick judgments. About Angela Davis, uh, you know, what is there to say? You know, for her moment in time, uh, you know, she was, uh, uh, just an enormous inspiration to large numbers of young people. You know, black, beautiful, a woman, uh, concerned with feminist issues, a pioneer in trying to sort of, um, think about the relationship between race and gender in a constructive way, rather than in a divisive way. Uh, you know, uh...I do not know about the last 20 years. I mean, uh, you know, she seems to me now to have been sort of repeating what she said earlier, so, but that first decade or so, uh, in the (19)70s, early part of the (19)80s, um, she was terrific.
SM: 1:22:13
Shirley Chisholm and Phyllis Schlafly.
AH: 1:22:15
[laughing] There are two more birds of a very different feather. For, um, Shirley Chisholm, I have only, uh, admiration, um, you know, in all the ways that she broke new ground and did it, uh, um, not in A Bella absent way, not by, you know, pushing forcefully, but by gently opening doors, which opened partly because she was so, you know, she was insistent and yet not strident. I guess is the- I suppose some people would disagree with that, but I think that at the moment that she chose to run for president, for example, and to make a statement. Those were very brave things for a woman to do, and for a black woman to, you know, to take on, to step out, um, know that that is that took some courage. About Phyllis Schlafly, what can I say? I-I disagree with practically every word she has written. I do not know what she is like as a human being. Uh, people seem to like and respect her. Uh, I think, um, uh, she is rooted in an ideology that, um, uh, does not seem to me to be, uh, to work anymore. Uh, she adopts, uh, hypocritical positions with relationship to how she herself lives, you know, she is, she is, uh, you know, argues for particular kinds of lifestyles for women, and then lives a whole another lifestyle herself. Um, I just, I mean, I know she has been an important force and has persuaded a lot of people to move in her direction. But, but I cannot, um-
SM: 1:24:23
At the CPAK conference boy, she is popular.
AH: 1:24:26
Yeah-yeah.
SM: 1:24:26
We are coming up - because she is historic.
AH: 1:24:28
So is Sarah Palin. So ask me about Sarah-
SM: 1:24:31
Yeah, exactly. Sarah, Sarah is on, Sarah is-
AH: 1:24:32
She is on your next-
SM: 1:24:34
Actually, I had a co - uh, Sarah Palin and Bernadine Dorn, because, uh, you have got, uh-
AH: 1:24:39
Why would you pair them together? Bernie-
SM: 1:24:41
Well I got [mumbling] Sarah just happened to be on top of each other.
AH: 1:24:45
Oh okay. Um, one at a time [laugh]
SM: 1:24:49
Yeah.
AH: 1:24:51
Bernadine Dorn, uh, um, you know, she was one of our heroines of the 1970s
SM: 1:24:49
[muffled]
AH: 1:24:59
Oh I was going to say she was one of our heroines of the 1970s even though, uh, the, you know, the radicalism turned some people off, and uh, you know, the, the sense that she would resort to violence and so on, though both Ed Ayers and Bernadine have since said that they, they never, um, targeted people that they-they targeted buildings or, um, institutions, but not people, and that the damage that was done, and there was damage done was often inadvertent, but still, she was, uh, Bernadine. Bernadine Dorn had a kind of presence among people, a lot of them, like me, who never could have imagined ourselves, um, y-you know, actually committing a violent act, but who were angry enough that we, you know, might have wanted to or wished to. So, um, uh, About Sarah Palin, what can I say? She seems to me to be a sort of inversion of feminism, uh, a kind of person who, uh, would only have been, could only have been possible in the light of a feminist movement, and yet, who undermines everything that feminism has ever stood for. So, so I am, uh, you know? I mean, I-I am only not angry about it, because I do not think, at least, I hope it is that the campaign is not going to go anywhere, but in the sense that, um, you know, her, uh, capacity to be elected governor, her capacity to do that with, uh, several children, her, uh, uh, capacity to have a baby and go right back on the campaign trail and so on. All those freedoms were, uh, freedoms which were, um, produced by an active women's movement. But that active women's movement had a sense of solidarity with other women as women, uh, had a sense of, um, uh, commitment to children, not the, you know, the dragging around of a, of a baby just to demonstrate that she, you know, was big enough to handle this child who had been, you know, born damaged. Uh, of that I, I mean, I think contempt isn't too strong a word. I-I, um, I find it really troubling that, uh, women can, you know, sort of place her in the category of a feminist camp when-
SM: 1:28:16
There is another female Twitter. Now, I forget her name. She was a congresswoman.
AH: 1:28:19
Yes, from Michigan, Michelle Bachman.
AH: 1:28:20
Yeah.
SM: 1:28:20
Two peas in a pod.
AH: 1:28:27
Yes, and she is another one like that, who you could not imagine getting where they were. And yet, once there, they want to deny other women whatever you know whether it is their reproductive you know they have made their own reproductive choices. Let other women make their- they have made their own marital choices, their own lifestyle choices.
SM: 1:28:54
The, the only other names I had here, and we are I had mentioned is Susan Brown Miller, Kate Miller, Charmaine, Erin Helen. Helen Gurley Brown. I, I am actually, uh meeting two weeks the person [mumbling]
AH: 1:29:06
She was my student.
SM: 1:29:07
Oh she was?
AH: 1:29:08
Jennifer Scanlon, yeah.
AH: 1:29:09
Yeah.
SM: 1:29:09
Yeah.
(End of Interview)
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Dr. Alice Kessler Harris
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kessler-Harris, Alice ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
College teachers; Columbia University; Kessler-Harris, Alice--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Alice Kessler-Harris is Professor Emerita of American History at Columbia University. She is also Professor Emerita in the Institute for Research on Women and Gender. Dr. Kessler-Harris specializes in the history of American labor and the comparative and interdisciplinary exploration of women and gender.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2010-03-15
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.59
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
89:14
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/d2d7823ba9d3ed3db4397280e2554f0e.jpg
08d0d31cd4d72469b526394c7dac6b83
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/a68293686f8f3ea57e9b335a388a5504.mp3
27d4227795dc73d91550704205c2ec15
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
2009-07-28
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Steven F. Hayward
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Steve Hayward is an author, political commentator, and policy scholar. He currently serves as a Fellow at Ashland University's Ashbrook Center where he directs a program in political economy. Hayward earned a Bachelor's degree in Business and Administrative Studies from Lewis and Clark College. He also earned a Master's degree in Government and a Ph.D. in American Studies from Claremont Graduate School."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13057,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Steve Hayward is an author, political commentator, and policy scholar. He currently serves as a Fellow at Ashland University's Ashbrook Center where he directs a program in political economy. Hayward earned a Bachelor's degree in Business and Administrative Studies from Lewis and Clark College. He also earned a Master's degree in Government and a Ph.D. in American Studies from Claremont Graduate School.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
1 Microcassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Woodstock; Baby boom generation; Counterculture; Self-assertion; Abortion; John F. Kennedy; Nineteen sixties; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam veterans; NAACP; Feminism; Family Ties (TV Show); Civil War generation."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Woodstock; Baby boom generation; Counterculture; Self-assertion; Abortion; John F. Kennedy; Nineteen sixties; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam veterans; NAACP; Feminism; Family Ties (TV Show); Civil War generation.</span>
Subject LCSH
Authors; Journalists; Hayward, Steven F.--Interviews
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
64:55
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Rights Statement
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.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Steven Hayward
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 28 July 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:06):
Today's interview will be with Steven Hayward of the American Enterprise Institute, which is a conservative institution in Washington, DC. This is July 28th, 2009. And this interview is part of my oral history project on the boomer generation. Looking at the (19)60s, the (19)70s, the (19)80s, some of the characteristics of the boomers and certainly, excuse me, issues related to boomer lives and the events that shaped their lives. This is... All right, the first question I would like to ask, when you think of the (19)60s and the (19)70s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind?
SH (00:00:50):
It is just like word association, feel like a war shark test, hippies, rock music, Vietnam War protests. Gosh, I do not know. I struggle a bit. I write about these things. It takes me a long time to come up with my generalization, so it is hard on the spur the moment. But yeah. Well, I mean, I guess a lot of ferment and turmoil and uncertainty and changing rules of the game. And gosh, you could go on forever about all this. Maybe some of your follow-up questions will tease out more.
SM (00:01:23):
Is there one specific event in your life or in your mind that shaped you when you were young?
SH (00:01:30):
No, not really. I mean, I was fascinated by a lot of things. The space program, of course, that was one of the things that went right in the (19)60s was getting to the moon when everything else seemed to be going wrong. I was born in 1958, so by 1970, I am only 11 years old, so I am not quite... I mean, I was aware of what was going on around me. Looking back, I think the whole Woodstock thing was kind of an interesting moment. Because as I write in my book, the media and all the deep thinkers, and of course the people on the new left and the so-called youth or countercultural movement thought of that as the beginning of a new civilization. I mean, you had Time Magazine and the New York Times both talking about how Woodstock youth really were different, and that there really was something new to the counterculture. And in fact, what was it, four or five months later, you had the attempt to do a follow-up on the West Coast at Altamont, which ended up as a disaster. And that was kind of the end of the whole thing. The whole end... all the attempts trying to do Woodstock reunions have really worked. So Woodstock was kind of a one-off, and were it not for the neighbors and people in the surrounding area... I mean, back up a step, the Woodstock was supposed to be 50,000 deep or something, it ended up being 500,000 or something like that. And so they did not have toilets, they did not have food, they did not have water. And if not for the neighbors in those surrounding towns, you could have had a real catastrophe there. So that was always... I guess I am rambling a bit here, but what comes to sight out of Woodstock and a lot of other parts of those years was the pretentiousness of the baby boomers and the so-called counterculture or youth movement, that they really did represent some new phase of human nature, when in fact there really is no escaping some of the basic facts of human nature.
SM (00:03:22):
Following up to that question, what do you think, if you were to look at the boomer generation again, that is defined by the scholars as those born between (19)46 and (19)64 that fall within that generation, what do you think are the strongest characteristics of that group and the weakest characteristics of that generation?
SH (00:03:43):
Oh, let us see. Oh, boy. Yeah, that is another hard question to generalize about. I mean... Yeah, gosh, I do not have a good answer for that question. I mean, I sort of repair to some of my general... I mean, I think the scholars and intellectuals of that period share the same defects with the broader generation, which is a lot of self-indulgence. A lot of self-assertion. I think there is the idea that is quite typical of baby boomers is I mean, a popular form of it is we can have it all, right? But then the sort of more serious intellectual version is that through triumph of the will ideas, I mean, it is very nichey. I think it is people thinking that the only real obstacles to changing the world are failures of our willpower. And so there is a disregard of what conservatives would recognize as some of the lessons and requirements of tradition and authority. And, Tom, you know, those are some general traits, I think you see, I am trying to think of some good examples, but hard-pressed off the top of my head, but they will probably come to me later anyway.
SM (00:04:59):
Do you think that the term activism, because it was a highly activist period, not only in terms of the anti-war movement and the civil rights and the women's movement and the environmental, gay, lesbian, Chicano, Native American, all these movements came about at that time. Do you look at that as a positive quality in America?
SH (00:05:19):
Well, no. And it can be qualified this way, you had the activism for activism's sake. You had the notion that commitment was the way you exhibited your moral purity or moral seriousness. I mean, if you go back a century, let us take the abolitionists, who crusading to abolish slavery, or the early women's movement of people who wanted votes for women and suffragette movement. I mean, they were activists too, but their activism was subordinate to a concrete moral purpose that you could argue about. Whereas I think what you tended to see coming out of the (19)60s and (19)70s was activism for activism's sake. Activism became its own moral category. And you say... In other words, people would say, "I am an activist," and by the way, what you were activist about just flowed from one thing to another because Martin Luther King was a civil rights activist, but the civil rights took the priority over activism, right, whereas I think later in the (19)60s and the (19)70s, as I say, activism became its own moral category, and commitment became the most important moral tribute or moral... what do I say, a moral attribute, but in fact that it represents a certain value-free abstraction from more hard headed thinking about what the moral purpose is behind it. I mean, let us look at, for example, one of the great cultural divides would be abortion. Both pro-choice and pro-life people think of themselves as activists, but obviously on a very different side of a moral divide. But the media tends to treat them equally as well. They are all activists. And so that is why I think the term activism has acquired its own status, separate and apart from thinking about what it is you are activist about.
SM (00:07:05):
Good point. One of the things we would see on television, say in the (19)90s, we would see when Newt Gingrich came to power in (19)94, really, the Republican leadership and the conservative leadership, you would see George Will make comments about it. You would see Newt Gingrich and other people say that... They would really criticize that whole era, that boomer generation because of the breakdown of values, the breakdown of American society, the drug culture, the divorce rate, no respect for authority. Do you think they were blowing a lot of wind there, or do you think there was some truth into what they were saying?
SH (00:07:47):
Well, no, I think there is a lot of truth to it. Here is the... Couple of problems need to be sorted out about this whole phenomenon we are talking about. We tend to think of the (19)60s as when... essentially as America's cultural revolution, like you said, with cultural revolution in China or something. And that is narrowly speaking true. But I think that something that I did not think of, I first heard James Q. Wilson suggest this idea, that in fact, the seeds of what we now criticize of the (19)60s and the (19)70s were present way back in the (19)20s and (19)30s, especially the (19)20s. I mean, you saw in modern philosophy of existentialism, of modernism in the arts, the modernist poetry of certain aspects of T. S. Eliot or Ezra Pound, people like that, bohemian culture, some of it linked of course to radical politics, modernist literature, all the rest. The beginnings of the sexual revolution and so forth, were all very much present back in the 1920s. And what Wilson points out, and a few others, and I think Francis Fukuyama has also talked about a bit of this, is you then had the Depression and World War II in short order when you could not afford to indulge in these kind of escapes from restraint or traditional restraints or traditional morality. I mean, both the Depression and the war, which of course were global phenomenon. In other words, call the halt to the progress of the diffusion of the ideas of modernity. And then, you know, you had the 1950s, you have us and the rest of the world getting back to order. But then with the baby boom and the prosperity that comes in the post-war years, you have a return to realizing the consequences of modernist spot in the 1960s. So in other words, the 1960s are partly the culmination of a long-term philosophical change in social and philosophical thought that really could arguably go back 200 years to the enlightenment when we start explicitly throwing over authority and tradition. And you also have a demographic problem. I think it was Pat Moynihan who said the principal job of civilization is to get young people from 16 to 24. We had a lot of them there in the (19)60s and (19)70s when the kids were surging into colleges and so forth. And Moynihan's argument was you were always going to have some trouble in the (19)60s of some kind just on demographic grounds alone. Too many young kids just surging through our educational system and into the workforce and all the rest of that. You overlay all that with, as I say, the long term social currents going back a century or so along with the particular events, especially the Vietnam War in this country, civil rights and unrest in the streets. And you have quite a phenomenon. One of the curiosities of the (19)60s is that what we think of as the student movement was not just an American phenomenon. Remember, I mean, you know, you had student unrest at universities in Europe and even in Asia and even in a couple of universities behind the Iron Curtain, you had had some student riots and whatnot suggesting that there was something beyond just the war and just the domestic scene in America that was going on in the 1960s.
SM (00:11:00):
Beautiful thoughts there. What is the one event in your eyes that changed the generation forever? What do you think, if you were to ask a room full of, say, a... If you were speaking at West Chester University and a bunch of boomers, particularly those boomers that were in the first 10 years of that age group, what would you think would be the number one event to shape their lives?
SH (00:11:25):
Well, I think it would... takes a little explanation. Probably the assassination of John F. Kennedy, although it did not happen immediately. I think the most interesting work on this subject lately is Jim Pearson's book... What is the title of it? I forget the exact title. It is Camelot and the Unmaking of Modern Liberalism or something like that. James Pearson. It is worth looking up.
SM (00:11:49):
I will get it.
SH (00:11:50):
Yeah. And he makes a very interesting argument in there. Remember that before Kennedy's assassination, the big concern of the establishment liberals was... Well, the radical right, the conspiracy theorists of the John Birch Society and the McCarthyites, and people like that. And liberals were all for rationality and progress and incremental reform. And of course, in the immediate hours after Kennedy's killing, and then later it became through legend as well, it had to have been some kind of right wing plot. Well, it turns out it was Oswald who was a dedicated communist. And what Pearson points out is that Kennedy was a victim of the Cold War. This was a leftist who was out to kill Kennedy because Kennedy was against Castro and so forth. And what happened is in the years since then is the left essentially lost its mind over this. Now it is the left that is in conspiracy theory. Had to be the CIA and the mob involved in killing Kennedy. It could not have been Oswald. 9/11 was an inside job. We hear all these crazy things that have continued to this day. And suddenly it has the left that is interested in conspiracy theories and has gotten somewhat irrational. And it is really kind of amazing that within three or four years after Kennedy's killing, all his leftist ideas had caught on college campuses and had overwhelmed liberals. Portland and Johnson, I think he was kind of a fuddy-duddy to the youngsters searching through the universities of six... Of course, Kennedy had been kind of a hip, stylish young guy. So anyway, I think that was sort of the watershed event in the (19)60s that... and we will never know how it would have gone if Kennedy had lived, but I think it might have gone by differently. We will never know. I mean, Johnson thought after he won the election Ford-Goldwater, he still thought his problems were going to come from the right and from populous conservatism and from the John Birch Society type. And one of the things that, for Johnson and other liberals like him, mainstream liberals, is they were completely disoriented when their "most ferocious" problems came from their left. And they never did understand that and get over it. And I think that is how we get disrupted liberalism, at least in the (19)90s. I think in a lot of ways Clinton kind of righted the ship for liberals. We will see if Obama figures this out.
SM (00:14:13):
Kind of a follow-up, that term watershed, what do you think was the water... What was the watershed moment that began the (19)60s? Because a lot of the books that have-
SH (00:14:23):
Kennedy's assassination.
SM (00:14:24):
Oh, okay.
SH (00:14:25):
Yeah. I mean, until Kennedy was killed, you are still kind of... In my book, I described that year (19)64, right around then, as the tail end of the tailfin era, I call it. And that is because, I mean, Kennedy wanted to, as he created a slogan, was, "Let us get the country moving again." But it really was a continuation of a lot of Eisenhower policies. The economy was growing okay, but not... It was roaring after the middle of the years of the (19)60s. So I think that is the event that really snapped the country out of its sort of post-war stability that you had under Eisenhower and Truman.
SM (00:15:02):
One of the other criticisms of the boomer generation is that this was a generation of 70 million or 75 million and oh, really, only 15 percent were involved in activism of any kind during this timeframe. So it was really a small number. So thus their impact was not as great as people might think. People look at that sometimes as well, that is another attack on that generation and those that were involved.
SH (00:15:30):
Well, I have a couple of thoughts on that. I mean, the number may even be smaller. I mean, in some surveys thought that the number of people involved in campus activism was 5 percent or less. However, it is 5 percent of a large number. You point out if you are talking about 70 million people, you are talking about a couple million at least. And of course, the other thing is that even if it is a tiny minority, that is irrelevant in this sense. I mean, the history of politics is small, concentrated, determined groups that determine political outcomes. I mean, that is the Bolsheviks and the Soviet Union, right? It is the Nazis in Germany in the (19)30s. It is the Federalists in the United States in 1787 saying, "We need to get a new constitution because the Articles of Confederation are not working." So, the history of politics and social change is small determined groups that become the use of shade the tail that wags the dog, and they sort of drag along the rest of the generation with them. And even though you may have only two to 5 percent or even 10 percent, if you want to of people involved in activist activities or sympathizing with the ideas of the new left in the student movement, you probably have at least an equal or double that number who sympathize with it or who find themselves influenced by it, because that is the sort of social dynamic of modern mass movement. So I think that although it is an important point to keep in mind that you did not have a lot of people burning their draft cards and marching in the street, it had a strong magnetic effect on the rest of the generation, I think.
SM (00:16:56):
My next question is actually a two-part question. How important were the college students of that era? And we are talking late (19)60s, and oftentimes when we talk about the (19)60s, we are talking about college students up to about 1973, because it is hard... The (19)70s is often thought about after, sometimes even after the helicopters took off from Vietnam in (19)75. So it is hard to separate those first three to four years in the (19)70s. How important were college students in ending the Vietnam War, number one? And number two, how important was this generation with respect to having a very important influence on the civil rights movement, the women's movement, and all the other movements?
SH (00:17:38):
Yeah. Got to take those in several different parts. I think it is overstated or exaggerated that the anti-war movement actually stopped the war. That that is been their big claim ever since then, "And gee, we stopped the war." In fact, as Todd Gitlin among others recognized, although the war was unpopular, the anti-war movement was even more unpopular with American people. Americans are funny that way. I mean, majority of Americans, they are capable of having conflicting ideas in their heads at the same time. We call that cognitive dissonance. So while the war was increasingly unpopular in the later (19)60s and especially into the (19)70s, a lot of people also do not like anti-war protestors. Whoop, hello? Hello?
SM (00:18:23):
I am here.
SH (00:18:24):
Hm. Uh-oh. Somebody-
SM (00:18:29):
That is me. I am okay. That is not my phone. We are okay.
SH (00:18:34):
Oh, okay. I am not sure what happened there. I have another extension here someone may be using. Anyway...
SM (00:18:37):
Okay.
SH (00:18:39):
Where was I in all that? Oh, the war story is a complicated one. I mean, I argue that the war was lost very early on, as early as 1964 when the Johnson administration decided they were not going to fight it like a real war, but fight it like an exercise in game theory. Once you committed that as your basic strategy, you were not going to win that war in any sense. And then the American people, you continued to support the war majority according to polls as late as mid-1968. And it was after Ted that they started losing heart for it. But yeah, it was... Hold on a second. Oh, mom, who did that? Huh? Nothing. Never mind. I got someone... Anyway.
SM (00:19:26):
Okay. It is okay.
SH (00:19:29):
So where was I? Yeah, I mean, yeah, that is a complicated story. I mean, Nixon, I think knew the war was lost, but wanted to get us out in some reasonable fashion, and that is why it took another few years. But the student movement... By the way, the anti-war movement really loses steam starting about 1971, I think, when draft is abolished, right?
SM (00:19:48):
Right.
SH (00:19:48):
That took a lot of the steam out of the anti-war movement.
SM (00:19:51):
And one of the other points is that the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, if it was not for that particular group, the other groups were waning at that time.
SH (00:19:59):
Yeah, I think that is right. And one of the other things you noticed is when Nixon decided in 1972 to escalate bombing and whatnot in the spring, and then again at Christmas, the public opinion poll showed pretty strong public support for him. So at that point, we were already getting out our ground troops.
SM (00:20:17):
Right.
SH (00:20:18):
But the other question, civil rights, look, the civil rights movement, which mostly means the NAACP and people like Kang and Bill Randolph and all the others who have been toiling at that for decades, deserve the credit for making civil rights happen. An awful lot of... For the rest of the new left and the student activists and the baby boomers came to that quite late. And they showed up for the victory parade, you might say, right? Everyone is proud of marching in the South in (19)63 or (19)64, but at that point, the movement had been toiling for decades to get to that point. So that is always been a little bit of opportunism. If I were a Black civil rights leader from that era, I would have had mixed feelings about all of that. Nice to have the help, but where were you when we needed you in 1948 is what I would have been wanting to ask. And similar, the other thing, the environmental movement... The environmental movement spout itself after the civil rights movement. So the Environmental Defense Fund was sort of thought... was founded to be something like the Civil Rights Litigation Organization. But in fact, a lot of those organizations were not even founded until after the initial Clean Air Act was adopted. And quite the opposite of the civil rights, many whose organizations are now a century old.
SM (00:21:33):
You are right. When you talk about the women's and the gay and lesbian movement, I think even they will say in the beginning, they look to the civil rights movement as their...
SH (00:21:40):
As their model.
SM (00:21:40):
As their model.
SH (00:21:43):
What makes both those movements possible is prosperity. I mean, feminism does not work if you do not have prosperity. I can be flip about it a little bit, but not entirely and say, what makes the feminist movement possible is dishwashers and washing machines. Now, you can... the labor saving devices mean... and also expand educational opportunity. But all that is based on prosperity and technological improvements. So now, the ancient distinctions between male and female labor are eroded, and now women can join the workforce in any capacity at all in large numbers, which is what they did. And I always think there has been, and this is not an original thought, I always think there has been quite a distinction between what you might say, equity feminists, there would be no ordinary educated women who would like to be lawyers or doctors or managers or whatever. And then your ideological feminists who are all about gender differences and all that sort of nonsense that you get in higher education and gender studies and whatnot. That is a really tiny minority, I think. Most real women, I think, do not care anything about any of that stuff.
SM (00:22:47):
How important do you feel the boomer generation who are now in their early six... or in their sixties basically, and in aging, and many of them probably thought when they were young, they never would age.
SH (00:23:00):
Right.
SM (00:23:01):
Some still have their youthful ideas, but I am not sure really how many. What kind of an influence have they had on their children and their children's children because now they are becoming grandparents, and the millennial generation is now the largest generation in American history. There are more millennials than there were boomers, but generation X was basically their kids. And the generation Xers were the born from (19)65 to about 1980. And so what kind of influence have these boomers had, not only... I am not only talking about white boomers, African American boomers, Asian American boomers, even gay and lesbian boomers who have their own issues. What kind of an influence have they had on their kids and their kids' kids with respect to activism and having an influence in their lives in that direction?
SH (00:23:59):
Well, yeah, that is hard to say because I mean, it is hard to generalize about too much, but there is a couple of straws in the wind. I mean, the old joke is that a... One old joke is that a neo conservative is a liberal with a teenage daughter. I mean, one comparison I made in actually my next book that is coming out in a little while is the great politically charged TV show in the early (19)70s was All in the Family, right?
SM (00:24:28):
Yes.
SH (00:24:28):
Archie was the bigot and the son, Mike, Meathead, was supposed to be the enlightened liberal, right, and they were always fighting about stuff. 10 years later, the politically charged sitcom was Family Ties, right?
SM (00:24:43):
Mm-hmm.
SH (00:24:43):
And there what you had was boomer parents who had been hippies in the (19)60s who do not understand their conservative son, Alex, right?
SM (00:24:50):
Yes. Michael Fox.
SH (00:24:52):
His hero was William F. Buckley and Milton Friedman on the show. It was the exact opposite of All in the Family, just in 10 years. I mean, that really to my mind, is a difference between the Reagan years, in cultural terms, a difference between the Reagan years and the Nixon years, or the late (19)60s, early (19)70s. And I thought that was a real cultural marker of things. You know, you see other things, I mean, what I picked up from students today and people in their twenties, teenagers, is they think all this talk about the (19)60s that you folks and parents and grandparents talk about, a lot of them think it is a little puffed up and pretentious, and they have a, "What was that all about?" kind of attitude, and you guys were kind of silly. And the long hair, and God knows the bell bottom jeans and disco, the (19)70s, they look at with complete horror. So maybe that is just the wheel turning that happens in cultural terms. But you do not see, I mean, remember that in the (19)60s you had one of the big totems was the generation gap, the younger generation versus the older generation. And the younger generation... Or the older generation could understand the younger generation. I do not see that as around as much today. You do not see that represented. There has always been parents against kids a little bit, but I do not see it. It was not been blown up into what you might call a metaphysical dimension as it was in (19)60s and early (19)70s. The generation gap, you often see that in capital letters. It was a real social phenomenon. Well, I think that is gone. So to that extent, I think it is the baby boomer parents and grandparents today are maybe a little older and wiser, and their kids are not as, for whatever reasons, do not seem to be as easily swept up into some of these pretentious enthusiasms for the moral superiority of their new generation.
SM (00:26:43):
Right. I think I know your answer to this, but when I was... I am a boomer, and when I was in college, I was around friends who thought we were all the most unique generation in American history, and mainly because there was a feeling that we were going to cure everything. We are going to bring peace to the world, we are going to end racial injustice. Everything is going to be good, almost like a utopia. Your comment on that, just the feelings that be... a feeling of being the most unique generation in American history when they are young, I still think many boomers still feel that as they are old, in their old days.
SH (00:27:27):
Yeah, that is right. They probably still have that attitude somewhere consciously or subconsciously or from some level. I mean, one of the problems with the (19)60s is that the so-called establishment, the parents of the boomers went out of their way to affirm all that nonsense. In my book, my Age of Reagan book, I quote Time magazine saying... Time Magazine, remember, I think it was 1967, named the under 25 generation as Man of the Year.
SM (00:27:55):
Yeah, I have the magazine.
SH (00:27:55):
Yeah, that is the point, they called it Man of the Year, right?
SM (00:27:55):
Yeah.
SH (00:27:56):
Some of the prose in that article, if you got it is really astoundingly idiotic. This is just a new generation, but a new kind of generation, and I am paraphrasing here, but it said they really are better than their parents. They are going to really bring new hope. So if you are a kid and the establishment is telling you this, then what are you going to think? Of course you are going to run away with these intentions. I mean, that was not the only one. You had the Cox commission, Archibald Cox commission appointed by I think Johnson or somebody after Columbia University was sacked. Now, that was essentially a bunch of hooligans who trashed one of our leading universities, and the Cox commission went on about the wonderful idealism of this generation and how terrific they were. And it was just an unbelievable failure of moral... sort of moral accountability on the part of the older generation who should have... That I do not think you would see today. I do not see people today pumping up a younger generation and saying, "Oh, yeah, you are better than we are," in part because of the residue, as you say, of baby boomers who still think deep down inside, they probably are a little better than the World War II generation. And in part because I just think we are not going to run that movie over again.
SM (00:29:08):
I want to read something to you. This has a little bit to do with the meeting we had with Senator Muskie before he passed away when I was working at the university, and I took students down to Washington for our Leadership on the Rope programs. He was kind of... had just gotten out of the hospital, was not feeling well, but I am going to read this question first. Do you feel boomers are still having problems with healing from the divisions that tore the nation apart in their youth, the division between Black and white, divisions between those who support authority and those who criticize it, division between those who supported the troops and those who did not? What role has the wall played in healing divisions? Or was it primarily a healing for veterans? Do you feel that the boomer generation will go to its grave, like the Civil War generation, not truly healing? Am I wrong in thinking this or has 35 to 40 years made the statement, time heals all wounds a truth? And I want to follow it up with... We met with Senator Muskie and I asked that very question to him with 14 students in the room, and I think he was not expecting the question and he did not answer for a minute, and he almost had tears in his eyes. And then he said, "I just got out of the hospital and I had a chance in the hospital to watch the Ken Burns movies about the Civil War." And he said, "My only comment to you is that we had not healed since the Civil War." And then he went on talking about the generation that we lost due to all the men who died and making the comparisons of the populations. And I will tell you, the students, you could hear a pin drop in the room for the next 10 minutes. It was just an unbelievable experience. It was such an experience that one of my students went on to higher ed and got his PhD and that was the moment that he knew he had to go on. But your thoughts on that whole business about healing within the... Do you think there is an issue here on healing?
SH (00:31:07):
Well, yeah, I mean, I tend not to that language of healing and reconciliation and closure and all the rest of that. That is very much therapeutic baby bloomer language that we would not... Our grandparents from the World War II era, parents and grandparents, they would have never used... They would never have had midlife crises, first of all. Right? And they would not have used that therapeutic language about closure and all the rest of that. However, I do think that what is underneath all that though is, the way I sometimes put it, others have too. There is kind of a Hatfield versus McCoys intramural feud among baby boomers. I think on political terms, that is how you can explain Bill and Hillary versus Newt in the (19)90s. I mean, remember Newt calling the Clintons countercultural McGoverniks, which got everybody else that. And there was a business, by the way, last year in the presidential race, and something that, again, Sullivan and others pointed out, is that part of the genius of Obama was saying, "I am not part of all that." Hang on. It is a complicated story. But I mean, part of his genius, I think, was saying, "We ought to give a gift beyond this baby boomer feud that we have been carrying on since the (19)60s." He does not quite mean it because he is very much a product of the (19)60s and (19)70s leftism. But still, I think he had an insight there that yeah, this has now become a long running feud. The Civil War comparison I think is a pretty good one. If this is not geographical, it is ideological and cultural. And yeah, I think probably we will go to our grave with some of all that. I think they are going to have some of the young Americans for freedom fight some old SPSers in their nineties in their nursing homes, yelling at each other about the tent offensive or something. I think it will go on till the very end.
SM (00:32:51):
I know when I interviewed the late Gaylord Nelson, who I thought was a great statesman, I do not know if you ever had a chance to meet him.
SH (00:32:57):
Yeah. Never met him, but you certainly know his work.
SM (00:32:59):
Oh, my gosh. And he passed away and I went to... because he had helped us with some of our speakers and meeting people, and he came to our campus twice. He was kind of the real deal. And he always... When I asked him that question, he said, "People do not walk around Washington, DC with that they have healed on their sleeves." But he made one important point that I think was the most important memory of that meeting, he said, "But forever, it has left its impact on the body politic."
SH (00:33:29):
Yeah, that is right. Yeah. And I think it is interesting to say about Muskie. I mean, Muskie was one of those postwar liberals who I think was completely disoriented and surprised by what happened. And I mean, partly was Lyndon Johnson we know was upset about the riot. He did not understand why Blacks were rioting in Detroit and Newark and places like that after he put it all he can do for them. And I think that the new left, remember the new left was very radical, and their enemies were liberal. I think it was... I forget if it was Tom Hayden or Peter Collier, or which one of them said that our first object was to murder liberalism in its official robes. And so if you are going to establish a liberal like Muskie, you cannot understand... This is completely incomprehensible to you. And I think that explains why he hesitated in answering the question, because I think he still does not understand to this day or cannot accept it or finds it bizarre and hard to come to grips with. And I think he and people like Moynihan and others perceive how damaging this was to establishment liberalism. And it really was 20 years or more getting over it, and to some extent may still not have gotten over it. Clinton, I think, represented a walk back from the brink. I mean, Clinton signing on welfare reform, talking stuff on crime, and in other ways represented that we are no longer going to give in to the radical left and the new left on these subjects, even if he had some sympathies with it himself. But now under Obama, you have got a lot of those folks somewhat older and wiser and a little more shrewd who still believe some of that stuff, I think. As you saw this whole Gates affair the last... has been a real revealing moment, I think, for Obama and people on the left. But nonetheless, I think that is being blindsided by something that nobody could have foreseen as what so upset people like Muskie and probably Nelson too.
SM (00:35:29):
And of course, we had a chance to even have our students meet Senator Fulbright.
SH (00:35:32):
Oh, yes.
SM (00:35:33):
And he probably would fall into that same category there.
SH (00:35:38):
Yeah.
SM (00:35:38):
Overall, now that you mentioned that you were 11 when these things happened, so you are in the younger group of the boomers, but over the years, have you changed your feelings toward boomers? Obviously, you have degrees, you have done a lot of thinking and writing about it as you have gotten older. But have you been consistent in your thinking, or have you been really evolving and changing?
SH (00:36:04):
I think I have probably been pretty consistent in my thinking. Yeah. No, It would take a while for me to sort out my thoughts on all that.
SM (00:36:14):
Yeah. What do you think might be the lasting legacy will be of the boomer generation in... Of course, when I talk boomers now, I am really not only talking about the (19)60s, I am talking about the (19)50s when they were young and raised in that post-war era where hopefully a lot of parents were there. I reflect on it on the (19)50s and on. When I think of the (19)50s, I think of Dwight Eisenhower. I think of security, even though we had the McCarthy hearings and the threats of Russia, seemed to be a much more stable time. I remember that personally. And then all of a sudden, as I got to be a teenager, things, so many things changed. So really, when you are talking boomers, you are talking about the (19)50s, the (19)60s, and the (19)70s, and of course when Ronald Reagan came in and Assay Bay. So you are talking about a lot of things here.
SH (00:37:07):
Yeah. Yeah. I think what explains the (19)50s is, well, a lot of things. But you come out of World War II with a couple things. One is that the whole world's exhausted and broken, destroyed except for the United States, really. And so all that rebuilding time, I think, we have a whole generation of people coming back from national service, and they are very service and dutifully oriented people, and they start having kids like crazy. And I think I recur to the answer I gave a little earlier. I think it takes a while for the rise of prosperity and for some of the social ideas I was talking about that were fermenting back in the early part of the 20th century to exhibit themselves. It is hard to trace out causation on this because there is so many things that overlap. But yeah, I mean, that is why were the (19)50s so sort of placid and quiet. Well, I think the other thing about the (19)50s is, and other people have made this point, is that you had, in the (19)50s, you had the... and coming out of World War II, you had the triumph of bigness. I mean, in the (19)50s you used to talk about three things: big government, big business, and big labor, and big projects. We built the interstate highway system and out here in California, we built the water projects and the modern university system and lots of three ways. We built the suburbs all over the country. And that was regarded as a great success. That is back in the days when people would tell pollsters that by large margins, 60, 70 percent said they trusted the federal government to do the right thing almost all the time. Today that number's under 20 percent almost all the time. So the collapse of confidence in big institutions, like especially big government, but also big labor and big business. So it is a sort of simpler framework for the world then. And most people looked up from their morning newspapers and what they saw the government was a record of success. You had won a big war. You have built a big highway system, you have built middle class prosperity and new communities all across the country, and things went pretty well. It is not still (19)60s when things start going wrong with riots in the streets and the war that cannot be won and all the rest of that. But people start changing their minds about all this.
SM (00:39:18):
How important... Could you comment on the music of the year? Because when you think of the (19)60s, the music continues to be played on the radio. Every generation seems to love it. Most of the young people that I have been around, both generation Xers and millennials, they loved the music of the (19)60s, but it had seemed to have had a very important impact on that generation. When you look at the era when my parents grew up, the big bands were very important to them in the (19)40s and the (19)30s, late (19)30s into the (19)40s. Then you had the Sinatras, and of course Elvis came about in the 1950s and that whole period, rock and roll. But the (19)60s, could you just comment on how important you think when you defined the Boomers, how important music is?
SH (00:40:05):
Well, I mean, obviously, so (19)60s style music was the soundtrack to the student activism and whole youth movement. I mean, I am not a music critic, so I am not going to offer an opinion whether it is better or worse. But I do notice a couple things. One is that if you look at popular entertainment today, TV shows, especially in movies, you will find that for music background, they tend these days to use two periods, use music of the (19)60s and maybe in the (19)70s, and then rap, and rap-inspired styles today as you see in movies and TV shows. Whereas, in other words, the music of the (19)70s, disco especially, and a lot of the music of the (19)80s, has just disappeared. I mean, it is still a little bit of a round. And when Michael Jackson dies, people buy his records again and play them for a couple of days before putting them away again for good. But yeah, there is something, and I do not know if that is because it is connected with historical moments in some way or not, but yeah, I mean, that was the rock fest. Before the (19)60s, big musical events were just big musical events. But of course, bigger rock festivals of the (19)60s, and Woodstock being the best example I already mentioned, those became political events as well, in some sense, larger social events. And they are kind of still thought of that way a little bit today. I do not know if you had benefit concerts before the (19)60s, but nowadays, benefit concerts for political social causes are a big thing and pretty prominent. And all musicians think they have got to be part of doing something like that.
SM (00:41:41):
Right. Like Willie Nelson and Farm Aid, which began in, I think in (19)81. He was just on television last week talking about it. He thought it was a one-year happening, and it is every year since.
SH (00:41:52):
Right. But then you had... I remember one of the first ones was in the early (19)70s was the concert for Bangladesh, which I forget what that was, but that raise... in London or somewhere, that raised some millions of dollars for famine relief, I think was (19)70s. I forget when it was, sometime in the early (19)70s. But yeah, so yeah, music became politicized. That is the other thing is, music has always had some political content to it, but I think it... You know, you saw more of it starting in the (19)60s than you had before. You actually went out and tried to measure it.
SM (00:42:26):
If you were to list some of the bands or personalities music-wise, entertainment-wise who may have had a great influence on the boomers, who would they be?
SH (00:42:36):
Oh, I do not know. That would be a purely subjective response. I mean, you had the leading artists who broke the ground, the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, of course. And then certain individual performers like Jimi Hendrix, but then some of... and they were not especially political, I do not think, I mean they had their politics, but their songs with a couple of exceptions. I mean, one of the Beatles, most famous tracks is their right-wing song Tax Man, right?
SM (00:43:04):
Yeah.
SH (00:43:06):
They was shocked that having to pay 98 percent tax rates on the large amount of money they were starting to make. And so that was kind of an irony in their case. But then you would have Buffalo Springfield, Crosby, Stills & Nash, they were much more explicitly left wing, anti-war, so forth. And help, I mean-
SM (00:43:26):
Mr. Hayward, I want to change my tape here. Hold on one second.
SH (00:43:29):
Yeah.
SM (00:43:34):
Okay. I am back.
SH (00:43:39):
Yeah, I am not sure what else to add to all that. I mean, that is...
SM (00:43:41):
Certainly, we cannot forget the Motown sound because when we are talking about rock, Motown was big.
SH (00:43:46):
Right, right. And that was not especially politic. I mean, off the top of my head, that does not strike me as especially political. Popular with civil rights folks, but I do not think of any... Off the top of my head, I do not think of any particular Motown ballads that were highly politicized in their content. Unlike some of the rock bands who wrote explicitly anti-Vietnam War songs and so forth.
SM (00:44:07):
Were there any books, you are an intellect, and yeah, I have asked this to some people, and I am a book person. I read a lot of books, and I was reading back when I was in college, so I had deep feelings on books. But were there any books that you think college students or young people or the boomers were reading when they were young that influenced them?
SH (00:44:26):
Well, yeah, I mean this I would want to think about, but off the top of my head, I think of a Charles Reich, Greening of America, which is a pretty late book in the (19)60s or maybe early (19)70s. J. D. Salinger's, Catcher in the Rye was popular, I think, for its sensibility. And which swathly fits into the beats out of the (19)50s, with Jack Kerouac and all the rest of that. Herbert Marcuse was very popular. What was his book called, One-Dimensional Man or something, I want to say. I am not sure if that is the right one. And a lot of stuff is kind of impenetrable, but it was popular for especially superficial leftist intellectuals. I know I am missing a whole bunch of books [inaudible].
SM (00:45:11):
I know that Roszak's The Making of a Counter Culture was very big and-
SH (00:45:15):
Yeah, but I guess that was in the (19)60s, or was that a little later? I do not remember.
SM (00:45:18):
No, that was in the... I went to grad school and it was required reading. And then anything that Erickson wrote, the psychologist was-
SH (00:45:28):
Oh, yes. Right. Yeah.
SM (00:45:30):
He wrote a lot about the (19)60s and identity politics. It was so funny.
SH (00:45:33):
I have thought about the books of that era for quite a long time. So once upon a time I did, but I really sort of lost touch with that.
SM (00:45:41):
Right. I have a question here regarding kind of a follow-up to the healing issue, and that is the issue of trust. I start my question by stating that when I was in college in my 101 class in psychology, and I will never forget this professor talking to us, saying that it is very important to trust others. Because if you have an inability to trust, then you most likely will not be a success in life. Now, I was a college student first year, I did not really take that in, but I never forgot it. And then I saw what many boomers thought were lies that leaders did not... Nixon lying, President Johnson lying, Gulf of Tonkin, you studied... Even President Eisenhower lied with the U-2 incident. Now, recent John Kennedy lied about what was going on in Vietnam with saying goodbye to the Diem, the murder of Diem.
SH (00:46:40):
Right.
SM (00:46:40):
And then you have got so many others during that period when people were evolving, do you think that there is an issue... that boomers have an issue, have had an issue their whole lives with trusting others? They do not trust leaders, and in that era, they did not trust anybody in authority, whether it was a minister, a rabbi, a president of the university, a politician, anyone in a position of responsibility, I do not trust you.
SH (00:47:08):
Yeah, that is right. I know. I think that is a common theme is you just do not trust large institutions, public or private. And part of that has got its postulates. And again, some of the intellectual ideas of authenticity and individuality going back at least a century, you know, you want to trust yourself first before you trust somebody else. And partly it is the increasing complexity of the modern world. I mean, anyone who thinks about this seriously for more than five minutes understands that responsible governments and leaders have to conceal certain things and prevaricate about the truth. If you believe otherwise, you would say we would not have any spies at all if we would disband the CIA tomorrow, which no responsible person would ever do. And again, there is some cognitive dissonance in play. We are cynical and distrustful of institutions, and to a certain extent that is healthy, right? I mean, that is not too far from Thomas Jefferson's idea that the Tree of Liberty should be watered with the blood of pirates every 20 years or so, or should have periodic revolutions to renew things. And on the other hand, we always say, "We really want a leader we can believe in." This is part of the enthusiasm for Obama, change we can believe in. And we will always end up being disappointed. People like that. We were disappointed with Jimmy Carter, who told us he wanted to give us a government as good as the people, and then within a few years he was telling us the people were no good.
SM (00:48:32):
And even Ronald Reagan, who most people loved, but then Iran Contra toward the end, and then people started to question him.
SH (00:48:39):
Exactly. I mean, that was the worst part of the whole thing, was as somebody put it, it was as though you had learned that John Wayne had been selling rifles and whiskey to the Indians, and then that was a huge problem, yeah. And right. So no, I think there is something to all that, and we will probably never actually get that back. And that is a mixed bag. Yeah, I do not know what else to say about that.
SM (00:49:07):
Do you think that boomers have pressed this onto their kids and their grandkids, and is that healthy?
SH (00:49:14):
Well, it depends. I mean, a great book about this is now quite old, but I think is onto the origin of this was Robert Nisbet's Twilight of Authority.
SM (00:49:23):
I think I have that.
SH (00:49:23):
Back quite a long time, the erosion. So social reasons for the erosion of respect for authority in any forms, and it is not brand new, did not really start with the boomers, but accelerated around then for some of the reasons you mentioned, read the newspaper headline. If you trust the newspapers.
SM (00:49:37):
Right.
SH (00:49:41):
Walter Cronkite, the most trusted man in America, right? We do not even watch the network news anymore. I mean, if Walter Cronkite were still alive, we would not think of him that way anymore. It is impossible to recreate Walter Cronkite now, but that is just the way we have gone. And I do not think there is any changing that back.
SM (00:49:57):
If some people, even Johnson's, they talk about two things that caused President Johnson to resign. One of them was Cronkite making those comments on television, the second being that McCarthy had finished in second place up in New Hampshire.
SH (00:50:10):
Right, yeah. But then he was going to beat him in the Wisconsin primary the next week.
SM (00:50:14):
Right.
SH (00:50:15):
He knew he was going to lose.
SM (00:50:17):
Why do you think the Vietnam War ended?
SH (00:50:23):
Well, yeah, a complicated story. I mean, as I said a little earlier, I mean, that war was lost at the very beginning when it was decided to run it not as a traditional war, but as an exercise in game theory in one sentence, in this whole theory of graduated escalation with pen signals to the North Vietnamese. I mean, in other words, Johnson's people completely misjudged the character of the North Vietnamese in thinking they were rational actors who could be bargained with. In fact, they were revolutionaries who were determined to win and figured out early on that they could outlast us and were willing to do so. And the failure to recognize that fact meant the war was lost in the beginning, unless you were going to change your tactic. Well, it was too late after 60 days. That is when we made our final flint and said, "We are not going to effectively prosecute the war." But then at the other end of it, it finally ends... Well, it finally ends with North Vietnamese victory, right in 1975. But it ends for us when Nixon decides that he is going to escalate enough to make them conclude some kind of agreement to let us get out in one piece, which we more or less did. I mean, you put up the helicopters taking off in (19)75 was not exactly getting out in one piece, but it was... came pretty close.
SM (00:51:29):
Right. Let us see here. I am coming toward the part where we asked you some of the names for your mission response, but what does the wall mean to you in Washington? I lived in California too until 1983, and of course it opened (19)82. And the first thing I had to do when I came to Philadelphia is I had to take the train down to Washington to see the wall. Because it meant an awful lot to me and I have been at every Memorial Day in Veterans Day ceremony since 1994, and I am not a veteran, just because I feel I have to be there to pay my respects to those who serve. Your thoughts on the impact that this wall has had on America?
SH (00:52:12):
Well, I do not know. I think it was a bigger deal when it first opened up. I mean, in my next book on Reagan, as we were talking about, I have a couple paragraphs about how controversial the whole thing was when it was first announced and then opened up. And also people changing their mind. It is interesting. National Review Magazine initially criticized the design, and then when it opened up, they wrote an editorial saying, Tensiter saying, "Well, we were wrong. This is actually pretty good." So, I do not know, people bring their own aesthetic, philosophical judgements to that kind of memorial. I once reflected that, and actually, I think I tried to do the math once, but if you... In Europe, for example, did the memorial in that style to the dead of World War I, it would stretch down the entire length of the Mall, right? Because the numbers are so much larger. The idea of putting every single person's name on the wall is that is very modern American. It also reflects now our commitment to individuality. And there is certain things about that that are noble and laudable. I do not really have any strong feelings one way or another about those, the Vietnam War Memorial.
SM (00:53:20):
What does Kent State and Jackson State mean to you?
SH (00:53:24):
Oh, gosh. I do not have a strong response on that either. In both those cases I am now sort of vague on the facts about how much it was a provocation, how much was overreaction by the National Guard troops. You can always bring in the old themes of town and gown there. An awful lot of... I mean, this is certainly true of the police in Chicago in (19)68, but true National Guard troops, as long as there are working class people who resented what they were perceived of as these privileged kids who are acting up. And it does not excuse what happened, but I think it sometimes gets forgotten that there really is... Those particular moments, you mentioned Kent State, are reflective of the cultural division amongst the baby boomers. And that is where I mentioned before that Hatfields versus McCoys. So that was one place where real shooting broke out, like the old Hatfield-McCoy feud.
SM (00:54:23):
Right. I am to the part now where I am going to ask just some... give some names of people of that era just for some brief comments, and then also terms of that era.
SH (00:54:35):
Yeah.
SM (00:54:36):
Watergate.
SH (00:54:38):
Oh, the great crown and catastrophe of the (19)60s, you might say, even though it was in the (19)70s, but it was had its origins in the (19)60s, of course.
SM (00:54:47):
Woodstock.
SH (00:54:49):
Yeah, I already said my part about that. It was sort of the cultural apogee of the youth movement.
SM (00:54:57):
1968.
SH (00:54:59):
Oh, yeah. The worst year for America since 1861.
SM (00:55:10):
The term counterculture.
SH (00:55:10):
Yeah, the pretentious name that the youth movement gave for itself.
SM (00:55:11):
Hippies.
SH (00:55:15):
People who did not bathe at all.
SM (00:55:17):
How about yippies?
SH (00:55:20):
Yeah. Well, that was the sort of formalized what? That actually was the acronym for Youth International Protest, was not it?
SM (00:55:24):
Youth International Party.
SH (00:55:26):
Yeah, Youth International Party. Yeah. Right. Jerry Rubin and those guys.
SM (00:55:29):
Yep. SDS.
SH (00:55:33):
Yeah. Students for Democratic Society. I mean, I do not really have a sort of summary one sentence about them. I mean, they were the organized radical force of it.
SM (00:55:43):
The weathermen.
SH (00:55:45):
Yeah, the violent streak of the whole... They were the mad bombers of the New West.
SM (00:55:52):
Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
SH (00:55:55):
Well, John Kerry comes to mind immediately. Yeah.
SM (00:55:59):
Boy, there are a lot of people that do not like him in this group. It is amazing.
SH (00:56:05):
When he was emerging as a candidate, what, four years ago, very early on, I thought, oh, this is all going to come back in a big way, and this election is going to end up being about Vietnam to some extent. And I am kicking myself for not having written an article about that, because what happened with swift boats and all the rest of that, I foresaw all that quite clearly. And yeah, that is another... That was really a classic example of something that Obama understood, is that one of the things that was wrong about the 2004 election is that we were fighting out our old divisions from the (19)60s, especially over the war, because Kerry was really a bad candidate for precisely that reason. But he had all that baggage.
SM (00:56:43):
The people that, not the Swiffo people, but there were other Vietnam veterans against the war that had problems with him. They did not dislike him because he is a Vietnam vet, but there were issues around that period that they liked his speech in front of Fulbright, that took a lot of courage and they praised that, but the fact that he was one of the few guys because he was wealthy that could fly to locations where everybody else had to hitchhike, take planes, ride in old cars, and he was flying in airplanes. That really upset a lot of the Vietnam vet. Young Americans for Freedom, which Lee Edwards has talked about a lot, but is a forgotten group when talking about the anti-war movement.
SH (00:57:26):
Yeah-yeah. Oh, was that your next question?
SM (00:57:30):
Yeah. Just your thoughts on the young Americans for Freedom, which was a conservative group.
SH (00:57:33):
Yeah. I mean, they have finally gotten some of their due. There have been a couple of liberal writers who have talked about how... This is ironic that at one point in the early (19)60s, it was generally thought across the spectrum that the youth movement was going to be a right-wing phenomenon, and Young Americans for Freedom starts before SDS, for example, and it turned out some pretty impressive rallies and turned out some impressive numbers of people who never got the media coverage for it.
SM (00:58:00):
Well, I think there needs to be a book written about it.
SH (00:58:02):
I think there was one by a guy named Andrews a few years ago, a short little book [inaudible] side of the (19)60s. It was mostly about... Yeah.
SM (00:58:09):
Yeah. I think there needs to be more information for scholars because-
SH (00:58:13):
Yeah, I do too. Yeah. That is right.
SM (00:58:14):
The enemy's list.
SH (00:58:17):
Oh, well, Nixon's paranoia again. But all politicians have their enemy's list, whether they write them down officially or not. That was a little bit exaggerated, I think.
SM (00:58:25):
Okay. Ted?
SH (00:58:25):
Yeah. A military victory for the US and a political defeat for the US.
SM (00:58:37):
Cambodian invasion.
SH (00:58:39):
Yeah. Another thing that was puffed out of all proportion. It turned out that key members of Congress had been informed about what was going on, and the Cambodian government knew what was going on, but it was supposedly "secret" for diplomatic and political reasons. You wanted to have certain amounts of public deniability for political reasons, and so that was one of those events that spun out of control.
SM (00:59:03):
Black power.
SH (00:59:05):
Yeah, the militant side of civil rights, which dismayed even Martin Luther King, of course.
SM (00:59:10):
The American Indian Movement.
SH (00:59:13):
A sideshow. Native Americans wanting to get in on all the fun.
SM (00:59:18):
Mm-hmm. Again, these are some names of personalities now. Andy Hoffman.
SH (00:59:24):
Oh, yeah. Sort of the clown prince of the new left.
SM (00:59:27):
Jerry Rubin.
SH (00:59:29):
Same thing. Yeah. He is even more the clown prince of the new left.
SM (00:59:32):
Timothy Leary.
SH (00:59:34):
The pharmacist of the new left.
SM (00:59:36):
Of course Richard Nixon.
SH (00:59:38):
Yeah. The perfect hate figure for liberals of all stripes.
SM (00:59:43):
Spiro Agnew.
SH (00:59:45):
Oh, yeah, I do not have a good quick one for him. Nixon's designated hitman, you might say.
SM (00:59:53):
Eugene McCarthy.
SH (00:59:57):
Interesting guy. One of the unappreciated geniuses of American politics, I think. And certainly this is more appreciated, one of the great wits of American politics.
SM (01:00:07):
Pretty well educated too.
SH (01:00:08):
Yeah.
SM (01:00:09):
And boy, was he a poet. A lot of people-
SH (01:00:11):
Exactly. Yeah.
SM (01:00:12):
He could have been a poet and never been in politics.
SH (01:00:14):
Right.
SM (01:00:15):
George McGovern.
SH (01:00:17):
Yeah. Sort of a tragic figure in a lot of ways. Yeah, I will leave it at that.
SM (01:00:23):
John Kennedy.
SH (01:00:24):
Well, as his reputation had it, but somewhat naive about the movement that he wrote to the nomination.
SM (01:00:32):
John Kennedy.
SH (01:00:34):
Yeah. Well, the boy prince of liberalism and we will never know how that might have turned out.
SM (01:00:39):
Bobby Kennedy.
SH (01:00:43):
The other boy prince of liberalism, about whom I think we have a quite inaccurate perception.
SM (01:00:50):
Sergeant Schreiber in the Peace Corps.
SH (01:00:53):
You do not have too much to say about that. He was this little decent guy, but that was not... a marquee job, but I think actually a fairly ordinary one.
SM (01:01:03):
Lyndon Johnson.
SH (01:01:05):
Yeah. The tragic figure of establishment liberalism.
SM (01:01:08):
Robert McNamara.
SH (01:01:11):
Oh, oh, God. The face of technocratic liberalism.
SM (01:01:17):
George Wallace.
SH (01:01:20):
Yeah. I do not... What do you say about him? Do not have much to say about him really.
SM (01:01:25):
Ronald Reagan.
SH (01:01:27):
Yeah. The other... Boy, what do you say about him? The fulfillment of the Goldwater Revolution in the Republican Party, I guess you would say.
SM (01:01:39):
Jimmy Carter.
SH (01:01:44):
Oh, I do not know. What do you say about him in one sentence? He campaigned on the slogan of Why Not the Best, and we are still asking that question about him.
SM (01:01:57):
Gerald Ford.
SH (01:01:59):
Oh, a very decent man who did well in a bad situation.
SM (01:02:02):
Daniel Ellsberg.
SH (01:02:05):
Oh, yeah. An opportunist little runt.
SM (01:02:10):
Dr. Benjamin Spock.
SH (01:02:13):
Oh, yeah. Another sort of shooting star, sort of overblown... of overblown reputation.
SM (01:02:19):
Norman Mailer.
SH (01:02:23):
Oh, I do not have anything to say about him really.
SM (01:02:23):
Okay. The Berrigan brothers, Daniel and Phillip.
SH (01:02:26):
Yeah. I do not really care about those guys either. I do not have anything to say about those guys.
SM (01:02:36):
All right. Let us see who we have here. Barry Goldwater.
SH (01:02:36):
Ah, yeah. The breakthrough figure for modern American conservatism.
SM (01:02:40):
About Huey Newton, Bobby Seal, Eldridge Cleaver, and Angela Davis, that group.
SH (01:02:45):
Yeah. That would be the same as the Black Power folks, the militant side of civil rights.
SM (01:02:50):
Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug, and Betty Friedan?
SH (01:02:55):
Yeah, they are the gender... They are the vanguard of gender feminism.
SM (01:03:01):
Mm-hmm. Okay. Let us see. Is there any question that I did not ask you that you thought I was going to ask you that you would like to comment on, on the boomers in the (19)60s?
SH (01:03:13):
No, not really. That covers quite a lot.
SM (01:03:17):
I think I am missing one thing here. I know I have asked most of... You have answered some very good... You have done some deep thinking on these, I can tell, on some of the questions. I want to fill you in also on what I am doing is I will be getting these transcribed, but I am going to send you... I did not realize this because this was my first book, and I actually did early retirement to do this book because I have been working on it since (19)96 when I first interviewed Eugene McCarthy. And then I had my parents were... I had a lot of issues, and I went back and forth. Now I am finishing it up. And so the first 30 people, I did not know about, you had to get a waiver signed by all the people. They all agreed to do it, but they did not... Nobody ever asked about a waiver, but I am sending now waivers to the individuals, and you sign it, send it back to me, and then when I get it transcribed and I send the transcript to you to give the final okay in editing. And that is what I am doing with everyone. The original 30 is kind of an issue because seven of them have died. So I do not know what is going to happen there.
SH (01:04:23):
I have no idea. You will have to talk to your publisher about that or something.
SM (01:04:26):
Yeah. But waivers are important, even though they agreed to do it.
SH (01:04:31):
Yeah.
SM (01:04:35):
You have any other thoughts you want to say on anything?
SH (01:04:37):
I do not think so. We covered a lot of the waterfront.
SM (01:04:39):
Yeah, what I usually do with each interview, I take pictures of people, and I have really good pictures of you when you were here, but you may have gotten a little older looking. I do not know.
SH (01:04:51):
Well, I am balder, I am pretty sure, and I am a lot thinner. I lost a bunch of weight here a couple years ago, so we will be around September if you are in through Washington, or October, if you are in through Washington.
SM (01:05:00):
Yeah, why do not I do this? Because I got great shots of you, but I would like to have a more current, so when you are back down there, I will come down and take some pictures because I am actually going to be interviewing Dr. Sally Satel.
SH (01:05:11):
Oh, right, sure.
SM (01:05:12):
I am going to interview her along with M. Stanton Evans next week. Next week. And then I am going out to Dr. Murray's home to interview him.
SH (01:05:22):
Oh, good. Yeah.
SM (01:05:23):
So I will be down... And I am actually interviewing Ron Robinson from the Young Americas Foundation sometime when he is not having that conference of the... that is coming up for him. And even Dr. Ornstein is interested in doing an interview as well, but he has got a lot of family issues in August.
SH (01:05:42):
That is right. Yeah.
SM (01:05:43):
So, well, Dr. Hayward, thank you very much.
SH (01:05:47):
Sure thing.
SM (01:05:49):
And I will be in touch with you. When will you be back in...
SH (01:05:52):
Early September.
SM (01:05:53):
Okay. I will send you... Do you want me to send the waiver at AEI or at your home in California?
SH (01:06:01):
Oh, how soon do you want it? Do you want it end of this month or...
SM (01:06:04):
Yeah, I am going to be mailing them all out in September.
SH (01:06:05):
Oh, send it to AEI then.
SM (01:06:07):
Okay. And then you just send it back to me, and then of course, then you will see the transcript when it is transcribed and you can edit it and whatever.
SH (01:06:13):
Right. Okay.
SM (01:06:15):
All right. You have a great day.
SH (01:06:16):
Yeah, you too. Bye-bye.
SM (01:06:16):
Thanks. Bye.
(End of Interview)
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Dr. Steven Hayward
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Hayward, Steven F. ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Authors; Journalists; Hayward, Steven F.--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Steve Hayward is an author, political commentator, and policy scholar. He currently serves as a Fellow at Ashland University's Ashbrook Center where he directs a program in political economy. Hayward earned a B.S. in Business and Administrative Studies from Lewis and Clark College and a Ph.D. in American Studies and M.A. in Government from Claremont Graduate School.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2009-07-28
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.60
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
66:22
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/2ed57e20ff708551da3157ae3a3e8921.jpg
ef749c7ec55504af22e07f4c688ffde3
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b4ee3217d63fe8521477f757e1bcfb6d.mp3
8566fafd4a41a7ef5dba9cff73855a38
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
2007-07-15/17
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Judith Campbell
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Judith Campbell is a sister of a Vietnam Veteran who died in the war. She is linked to the group of families of the Vietnam veterans whose names are inscribed on the wall. Campbell is an active participant in The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund (VVMF) ceremonies and programs, as well as a strong supporter of the Education Center at The Wall. Judy C. Campbell lives in Wilmington, Delaware, and works on behalf of Gold Star Families everywhere."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13311,"3":{"1":1},"4":[null,2,16777215],"5":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"6":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"7":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"8":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"9":0,"10":2,"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Judith Campbell is a sister of a Vietnam Veteran who died in the war. She is linked to the group of families of the Vietnam veterans whose names are inscribed on the wall. Campbell is an active participant in The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund (VVMF) ceremonies and programs, as well as a strong supporter of the Education Center at The Wall. Judy C. Campbell lives in Wilmington, Delaware, and works on behalf of Gold Star Families everywhere.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
2 Microcassettes
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"The Nineteen sixties; Nineteen seventies; Vietnam War; Flag etiquette; Post-traumatic stress disorder; Activism; Government trust; Robert Mcnamara; John F Kennedy; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">The Nineteen sixties; Nineteen seventies; Vietnam War; Flag etiquette; Post-traumatic stress disorder; Activism; Government trust; Robert McNamara; John F Kennedy; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. </span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
113:55
Subject LCSH
Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund; Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Veterans; Sisters; Campbell, Judith--Interviews
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Judy Campbell
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 7 July 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:09):
Okay, thank you very much for doing the interview. First question I would like to ask is, when you think of the (19)60s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind? When you think of the (19)60s and early (19)70s... And again, the (19)60s and early (19)70s, that period up to about 1973 is still considered part of the (19)60s, a lot of people in the history books consider that. But what comes to your mind when you think of that era?
JC (00:00:45):
Well, when I think of the (19)60s, I immediately think of Vietnam. It was a teenager during that time and the evening news was, "Vietnam-Vietnam-Vietnam-Vietnam." And friends, and loved ones, and family members went to Vietnam, so the first thing I think of is Vietnam when I think of the (19)60s. I know there has been a lot of emphasis on the Vietnam era, the Woodstock era, and the hippies and everything, but to me, I think that was really a small minority of people, it was just that they were in the press. I mean, there was a large majority of people who were not involved in that, but I think there was an unfair assessment that was the typical person growing up in the (19)60s, was a hippie that went to Woodstock, the love generation kind of thing.
SM (00:01:59):
Was there one experience for you that set up, the (19)60s began for me, your personal experience? And also, when did you know that period was over based on a personal experience in your life?
JC (00:02:18):
For me, the (19)60s began in (19)67. As I said earlier, I was just a teenager, I was a kid, I was wrapped up in my school life, my friends. But in (19)67 my brother left for Vietnam, and I remember vividly standing outside the circle of Washington National Airport now Raegan Airport. And it was beautiful January sunny day, we did not even have coats on it was so beautiful. And I took my brother to the airport, and we stood outside the circle, he had on his Green Beret uniform, and he would not let me go into the airport with him. He embraced me, patted me on my fanny, and told me three things which I will never forget. One was, "I am doing this to keep you free. Men with wives and babies should not have to go. My medic skills are needed." And then he turned and he went into the airport, and that was the last time I saw him tragically, 19 days later he was killed. Interestingly enough, my husband and I recently took a trip back to Washington and we went to go to that very spot, as my husband never knew my brother. However, over the years, Richard has often said to me he knows him through me, but based upon the timeframe of when my brother left, Richard said, "I probably checked him in." Because Richard was working at United Airlines at the ticket counter. So we went back to the airport, and it was really funny because the airport's totally different. And we went to the ticket counter, we were hesitating to go to the ticket counter to speak to these ticket agents at their line behind the counter. And we looked at one another and we said, "They are so young, they are not even going to know what we are talking about." Well, a police officer who was very young as well saw us, and came up to us, and evidently they must train the police officers who work at National Airport about the history of the airport, because we told him specifically the spot we were looking for and he directed us to it. And we told him a reason and everything, and he was very gracious. We went to the very spot, and we were able to stand in the spot where I last saw Keith, and wanted to walk through the door that he had walked through, which is now boarded up. The construction crew were working on the door, and they said, "Sorry lady, we just boarded this up. We cannot take the board down, but it is a good thing you came when you did because it is going to be concrete pretty soon, and you are not even going to see the board." So we were able to stand in the doorway per se, with a board behind us, at the exact space where my brother walked through. And the ticket counter is now a storage closet, and the gentleman allowed us a tour of the storage closet. So we went down memory lane, it was a nice venture. But to answer your question about... That was the biggest thing to me, because it was such a rude awakening to me to get out of my own little world, teenager, school, friends. I had a rude awakening to what life was really all about.
SM (00:05:42):
When did it end?
JC (00:05:49):
I do not think there is an ending, I think the boomers of the (19)60s' generation have a tremendous impact on the youth today. There seems to be a perception even in the workforce, that there is not always the respect there for the boomers, but there is a two-sided story there. You tend sometimes to have the younger generation think, my education, my knowledge, I may be your boss someday, which sometimes often is very much the case. Your boss is much younger than you are, and sometimes the age of your own children. And then boomers sometimes tend to have that attitude, "Hey, look, I have been here longer than you have. I have climbed the ropes." And there is a lot of truth to be said for both, but there needs to be a respect between the two. And I think with my generation, I really felt that there was more family time. I have a friend of mine who runs a daycare center, she was having the worst time getting the children to sit down for lunch, she could not figure out why she could not control these children to sit down for lunch. So she finally sent a survey home to the parents about, "What time do you have dinner? Where do you eat dinner?" And 99 percent of the responses came back, "Hey, I do not get home from work till 7, 7:30 at night, the kid is almost ready for bed." Bottom line was the children do not have that family time, that quality time, sitting down and eating meals together. Whereas I think there is a lot to be said for the generation where I grew up, it was very important, family time. I mean, my mother was a single parent with four children and worked three jobs, but there were certain routines in our family that she never allowed to not take place. i.e. Sunday night was always popcorn night, The Ed Sullivan Show, and curling up with mom, and time together. And I do not think there is enough of that anymore, I think the younger generation today raising their own children can really learn a lot from us. And our generation as well, we were children of parents from the depression, and our parents wanted to provide for us the things that they did not have. And we were financially, that timeframe in our country, economy wise, I think probably in one of the best shapes we were ever in. And I think the youth today need to understand that it is important for them not to live on credit, but to strive to work to own something, be it their own home, or car, or just to learn the value of money, and not this perception that things should just be handed to them. And I would even go a step further with that, with our freedoms. I think there is just a perception by so many people sadly, that we just assume we can get up in the morning, and go to work, and go to the gym, and go do our extracurricular activities, and not think about anything else. And I am reflecting on a conversation I had with a Gold Star Mother just earlier today, because she had written a letter to the editor, and I was calling her on a different matter. But recently she had a letter to the editor about we are having some warm weather here lately, in the (19)90s, which is a little unseasonably hot for us. And she was saying, "People are complaining about being in this hot weather." She said, "Think about our men and women overseas carrying all their gear and it is 130 degrees." I just think there is a lot... Now that we are in a war again, there is a lot that people do not appreciate and value. And one of the main things that I think they should really appreciate the value of is our freedom. They affectionately call me at work flag lady, because I keep them straight on the flag etiquette issues. And they affectionately call me that, but they also know why I am a flag lady, because it is not a piece of cloth.
SM (00:10:42):
A very good thought. So what are your thoughts on the boomer generation? And again, when we define the boomer generation, some people will say it's individuals that were born between 1943 and 1961, and then others will say it's those individuals born between (19)46 and (19)64, but basically in that basic timeframe. There has been a lot of criticism by critics like George Will, and Newt Gingrich, and others complaining that the boomer generation is really a lot of the ills of our current society today, we can blame right on that generation, their lifestyles, the way they lived, all the characteristics, their activism, and so forth. What are your thoughts on those individuals who criticize the boomer generation for creating the problems we have in our society, and what are the problems? Again, defining the issues on drugs in our society, the issue of broken families, divorce rates being higher than they have ever been, just the overall characteristics of some of the ills of our society today, and blaming it on the generation.
JC (00:12:11):
I actually think that that is a real misconception, because I think as I said earlier, the percentage of people who did the drugs, and the love movement, and the hippie movement, and all that, were a minority. And I think it is a very unfair assessment to say that the boomer generation was creative of all these negative things. I do not know if it was, because that generation, there was so much. If you look back at film clips from the (19)60s and (19)70s in the news, you will see so much about Woodstock, and the drugs, and the hippies. And I think even my own children probably thought I drove around in a VW bus with peace symbols on it, that was not true. I think it really... Maybe it is a media to blame, I do not know. But there was just too much emphasis put on that, and I really think it was maybe 5 percent of the people were in that category. Actually, I think it's unfair and unjust to say that, because the boomers I know turned out to be very productive citizens who have good jobs, work hard to provide for their families, and are successful contributing citizens. So, I just do not fall into that acceptance of that.
SM (00:13:44):
When you think of...
JC (00:13:44):
When you think of specific individuals, as you mentioned, I think that was a small percentage of people, I truly do. And I just think people tend to sometimes... You want to look at the glass half full or half empty, I am the type of individual that wants to look at it half full. And I think a lot of people then when they're looking at this, are looking at the negative and the half empty glass, and pulling into these individuals. I really do not think that they have the impact that people tend to say that they do.
SM (00:14:19):
It is interesting because this is 2007, and all you are hearing about in some of the higher education materials is the Summer of Love of 1967, which this is 40 years ago.
JC (00:14:30):
And you are still hearing that.
SM (00:14:31):
Yeah, you are still hearing it now, anybody who was in the Bay Area knows that was big. That was big, the Summer of Love, and the music and everything, so there is definitely an impact here. But how many people were actually part of the Summer of Love when you really think about it within the...
JC (00:14:59):
Geographically, you could not have even gotten all those people in Woodstock if you tried.
SM (00:15:01):
Right. Yeah, they were kind of happenings for the people that were there and all. But if you look at the boomer generation now, and again, when someone who might counter what you just said in terms of, "Well, the boomers were 70 million strong, and maybe 15 percent were involved in activism and involved in some of the activities, anti-war movement, civil rights, women's movement and so forth." And some of the interviews I have had come up with that 15 percent as well. But the 85 percent who were not involved were subconsciously affected by this. So, when you look at the bloomer generation as a generation, what are the positive qualities that you see in this generation, and what are some of the negative qualities that you have perceive?
JC (00:15:52):
Well, I would say some of the positive qualities were there was more family time, more openness and communication. And maybe that is why somebody can come back and say all this hippie stuff, whatever, but that was their way of expressing the openness and the feeling of freedom. There was more openness and honesty, and even if there was an era of disagreement, there was a respect with that disagreement, and an acceptance of difference of opinion and values. I would say the least admired, who were rebellious, and tended to lead the forefront for generations. I keep emphasizing that, I do not really think that there were that many of them, I just think there was more emphasis put on them. But I really think our generation had more values, and I think one of the downfalls for some of the values is when they took prayer out of school, I really believe that. I mean, heaven forbid if they ever say, "In God we trust, take that off of our money." I mean, what is next? I mean, when I said there was more openness, I mean, I have friends and still do who were of many different religious persuasions, and they are respecting of my own religion, I am respecting them theirs. But when I was in school, it was a common practice to open the day with prayer, Pledge of Allegiance. And I vividly remember Mrs. Brown, my sixth grade teacher, having the Bible on her desk. I mean, you would never see that today. I remember recently attending a luncheon and there was a veteran there, and we were commenting on the patriotism, " When did you learn how to fold a flag?" We were talking about that. And he said, "I never learned how to fold a flag until I was in the military." And my husband would always ask me, "Where did you learn to fold the flag?" And I said, "In school." In elementary school when we got to school, we stood around the flag pole, we raised the flag, and at the end of the school day we went outside and we sang the song, Day is Done, Gone the Sun, and we dropped the flag down and we folded it. I have been in different buildings, there was a gym that we used to belong to, and they raised the flag every morning. And the gentleman had not raised the flag, and I watched him go to get the flag, and it was in one of those postal plastic mail bins just thrown in there. It just got under my skin to think when they took the flag down at the end of the day, they just balled it up and threw it in there. And then one day I was on the exercise equipment at the gym, and I hopped off, I went running over to the guy at the counter, and he said, "What's wrong?" And I said, "My goodness. Find whoever's responsible for the flag and get it corrected immediately." They had it hanging upside down. And he said, "What does that mean?" And everybody saw all this commotion, and saw how upset I was, and they came running over, and I said, "The flag is upside down." "Well, what does that mean?" I am saying to myself, "You are a veteran." I mean, these are mature people who do not know common things like flag etiquette. I mean, if a flag is upside down it means you are in distress. I mean, that is a very serious situation, especially now we are in a war on terrorism.
SM (00:19:57):
During that timeframe, if you remember, some flag was burned at times.
JC (00:20:03):
Oh, my goodness, nothing gets under my skin more than that. And I think that, again, is something that we need to stress to the new generation. When you talk about the flag, and that that happened, that was despicable. When you talk about things in that area that would get under my skin, that would be that. I had friends after my brother was killed who would come into our home, and say months after he was dead, "I cannot come into your house, it is like a shrine." I said, "What do you mean it is like a shrine? We have not changed anything." His picture was on the mantle. I said, "Do you think we are going to take his picture off the mantle because he is dead?" There is an expression, and I am not going to quote it correctly, you may know what it is, it is something to the effect, "You are not dead until you are forgotten." To me, that is the worst thing that we can do, is to forget. So the current generation can learn from us, and could learn from the Vietnam era. And they are building the center down in Washington to help educate the youth of tomorrow, which is vital, and very important for the continuation of our history because we can learn. Yes, a lot of people get upset about the Vietnam War, it can be a very controversial war. I have several coats, and jackets, and things that have been presented to me over the years that I treasure, and some of them have patches on them. And one has a patch on it, "If we lost the war in Vietnam, we would be speaking Vietnamese." I have had friends say to me, "My gosh, why do you keep talking about your brother and everything. The war is over, it is dead. We have lost that war, blah-blah-blah-blah-blah." And I am like, "The worst thing you can ever say to me is that his life was a loss." I hear that and I cringe, almost as much as somebody burning the flag. I cannot go to the Vietnam Memorial wall and look at over 58,000 plus names and say, "That is a loss." It is not a waste, it is not a loss, those are men and women who sacrificed the ultimate, that war was not lost on the battlefield. I am not into politics, I do not care to be into politics, I am thankful that I have the freedom to vote for politicians, and I hopefully pray and trust that democracy will continue to lead us in the road to continue to have the freedoms to express. I will leave the politics up to the politicians, but I will defend and perpetuate the memory of my brother and his brothers as long as there is breath in me. And I think that it is our duty to do that for the citizens today.
SM (00:23:10):
I am in a hundred percent agreement with everything you are saying here, one thing that really upsets me in a similar vein is you cannot even talk about Vietnam today. I work on a university campus.
JC (00:23:23):
Now I agree with you, I think that bothers me a lot too.
SM (00:23:26):
And I work on a university campus, and I go down to the Vietnam Memorial, I put the pictures up in the glass case. I put it up only because it is an educational tool. Every time I go to the Vietnam Memorial on Memorial Day or Veterans Day, I put the pictures up two weeks later after they are developed. I put them in the glass case. I show the pictures, and it is as an education tool, I have been doing that for 15 years. And when we brought The Wall That Heals to our campus, and we had speakers back in 2000, 2001, I keep hearing amongst fellow boomers that this is a new generation, they had different issues. "Just remember, Steve, when you were young, were you talking about World War II?" It upsets me, because I think we have to really make sure that history is never forgotten. And what is interesting is, if students do not know it, then it is our responsibility to be educators too. We have to be educators here, we all have to be educators. And so, what you are talking about, about your brother, is your brother can never be forgotten, that he did give the ultimate price. Those 58,000 names... When I go down to Washington now, I always go to the Vietnam Memorial first, it is my generation, but I am also going to where my dad served in World War II, who did not live long enough to see that wall. So, I go there and I go to the Pacific War section, and I take my dad down, and I take my dad's picture, and he is with me. And I go over to the Pacific and my dad is there, and so it is about serving your country, it's about giving the ultimate. And that is why Vietnam vets, you always say welcome home to them. I do not care who they are, where they are, I welcome them home. Even though no one said it to them in 30 years, I am going to say it to them.
JC (00:25:46):
We were up in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania, and we were at a store, friend of ours has a store there. And this gentleman had come in the store, and he had on a Vietnam cap. And we were talking, and then we left about the same time, and I was parked on the side of the street, and he was walking across the street. And as he left to go across the street, I said, "Thank you for serving." He got to the island of the street, he turned around and he came back, and he got right in my face, and he said, "What did you say?" And I got a little skittish. I mean, here I am on the street alone in Upper Darby, with this man in my face. And I said, "Thank you for serving." And he said, "Nobody has ever said that to me." So, I echo your sentiments, that it is our responsibility to show the example that we are to thank our veterans of all wars, of Korea, of World War II, Granada. I mean, there are a number of conflicts that people have forgotten about, Beirut. There's all kinds of conflicts that people tend to forget about. When people talk about the Vietnam War, and a negative concept that they have of that timeframe of life. Forget it, get over it. I have something that I always give back to them, and I share this with Vietnam veterans. And there is one Vietnam veteran who is very dear to our... They are all dear to our hearts. But I remember being at a reunion in Rochester, Minnesota, and I remember vividly being in the Fellowship Room hospitality suite, and this veteran who resembles the country western singer... Oh, what is his name?
SM (00:27:43):
Current? Willie Nelson?
JC (00:27:46):
Willie Nelson. Actually, without having this man's permission to use his name, I will not use his name, but he knows who I am talking about. I call him Willie, because he is the spitting image of him, he could be his twin. We went in deep conversation, this group at our table, about PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder, which a number of youth today do not even know what that means. And I looked at him and I said to him, "Do you remember the best things that ever happened to you in your life? You have got your college degree, you got married, you have had your children, in whatever order." We all start laughing. I said, "Think about the most positive things that have ever happened to you in your life. Have you forgotten them? Of course not, so how in the world can anybody expect you to forget the most difficult, the most painful, the most challenging times that have happened to you in your life? You cannot forget it, it is what molds you, and shapes you, and makes you who you are. And for people to tell people, forget it, it's passed, it is just not possible, you cannot do that." I was talking to Gold Star Mother, [inaudible].
JC (00:29:02):
Yeah. I talked... Was talking to a Gold Star mother, several Gold Star mothers this morning. And one lost her son in Iraq in December of last year. And she told me she does not go out of the house. Now is not that awful? And we are going to work on that. We are going to change that. And these are the kind of things that the generation today. With this current war, you have some men that are being deployed five, six times. Who is cutting the grass? Who is fixing the broken garbage disposal? Who is helping with the leaky roof? We need to be banding together to help these families. And I think this is the thing that we can learn so much from the Vietnam Era, and the Vietnam veterans are doing that. They never want the veterans today to be treated in the manner in which they were. I think another area that is very sensitive but strongly needs to be addressed. Very strongly I believe. And this is our churches. Our very churches who profess love and forgiveness have slammed the door, many of them, on our veterans. I have spoken to a Vietnam veteran who... well, I did not personally speak to him, but I know someone that did. And I value this person's words, so I know it is true. This Vietnam veteran came back from Vietnam, bought a motorcycle in California, drove to Indiana to see his mother. It was Easter Sunday morning. Obviously he was very dirty and grubby. He had just driven across country. And the deacon stopped him as he is going into the church and said, "You cannot go in there looking like that." And he said, "You do not understand. I just came back from Vietnam. It's Easter Sunday. My mother's in there. She does not even know I am home." And the deacon said, "You do not understand. You cannot go in there looking like that." Well, I will give to this generation this. No, I do not agree in today's attire. If that would happen today. The way kids dress today.
SM (00:31:04):
I know it.
JC (00:31:04):
He would be welcome church I am part of. I wear blue jeans to church now. But there is... We have to have this ability to embrace one another and accept one another. And I think too back in the era when I grew up. There was a lot of unjust things done to African Americans. I never understood that and I still do not. Because when I grew up. I grew up in Arlington, Virginia. And I went to Washington Lee High School. To the same high school Sandra Bullock went to. The brother and sister. I cannot think of their names. Warren Beatty. Shirley McClain.
SM (00:31:53):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:31:56):
Of course I graduated much after their time. Much.
SM (00:31:59):
Yeah.
JC (00:31:59):
They graduated way before me. But anyway. I used to walk home from high school and there was a development near us called Halls Hill. Only African-Americans lived there. Only whites lived where we lived. But my girlfriend and I, Kathy Clark, we would walk home together. We would walk through my development first. I would go home and she would walk on her merry way. Kathy to me was not black, African American, whatever. Even today, if I get an application in a store or a survey or whatever. They will have the question on there. What your race is.
SM (00:32:41):
Yeah.
JC (00:32:45):
I always cross it out and I go, "Why does this matter?" And I will put, "There is one color and it is red. It is blood red." And that is the way I was raised. I have never understood this black and white issue because it is not the way I was raised. Now our daughter, when she was in college. Consequently, our children were not raised that way. She went to college in the south. She had a job off campus and she called me. Waitressing. And she called me. She said, "Oh mom, you would not believe this." She is 32 years old, so this is not that long ago. She said, "You would not believe it. We are having lunch break. And the blacks are sitting on one side of the room and the whites are on the other. So my friend who I really talk with them all the time is over with the blacks. So I walk over there to sit with them. And they say, 'You want to sit here?'" She said, "Well, why would not I want to sit here?" Now this is still going on today. This is despicable.
SM (00:33:53):
Yeah. This is a big issue. Again, in higher ed. Because of the fact that... If Dr. King were alive today. Always say if Dr. King were alive. But it was all about integration. And now we have the decision of self-segregation. And to me, it's shocking. And the Boomers who went through this era of the Civil Rights Movement and all the things that happened. And again, a lot of the young people of color and people who were not of color who did not experience this when they were young do not know what it was like. And I do not know what the parents have done to educate their kids. It gets into a question then. When you were young and a lot of people I was around felt that era, the (19)60s, early (19)70s, was a time when as a young people we could change the world.
JC (00:34:52):
Oh, yeah.
SM (00:34:54):
We were going to be the most. And there was this feeling. It's almost an arrogance. But at that time, it was just a feeling, I do not even know if we thought about arrogance. But a feeling that we are the most unique generation in American history. And we are going to end racism, we are going to end sexism, we are going to end... We are going to have peace in the world. We are going to do all things. Your thoughts on that kind of an attitude that was held by a lot of people in the Boomer generation. And just your thoughts on... Thank you. They were the unique generation. Looking at it from when you were young and looking at it today.
JC (00:35:33):
You know I agree. We were a unique generation. And I think it was the values and the principles that we were raised with, and we are willing to stand behind those values and principles.
SM (00:35:53):
What are the values? When you mention the values and the principles. What are the values and the principles again that you felt that...
JC (00:35:58):
Respect. There was no way I would go over to a friend's house and... Say the mother's name is Diane Smith. There would be no way I would say, "Hey, Diane. How are you today?" It would be, "Hi, Mrs. Smith. How are you today?" And we had chores we had to do. Again, as I told you my mother was a single parent with four kids. And we had a bulletin board going down the steps. And we each had our list of chores. And you better bet your sweet bippy those chores better be done, or you were not going to have any extracurricular activities. Be it to the football game or going out for hamburgers on Saturday. My mother always took me out for hamburgers and milkshake on Saturday. I do not recommend doing that today. You have got to spend in another way for that today. But they are... I think today's generation and the... I look at the youth in my office. I do not know when they have time to spend with their children. I am fortunate. I have a very brief commute to work. But some of these people have... Are on the road 45 minutes, hour, two hours a day just to get to work. How can you really have quality time with your children when you get home? I do not know how they do it. And then again, I think... I get back to the values of not living on credit. I look at some of these kids in my office today and hear where they live and go, "My goodness. How can you afford to live there? How can you afford those taxes?" And they keep wanting more and more and bigger and bigger. Some girl in my office working on... She and her husband are working on fixing up their house. And I said, "Oh, that is wonderful. You are doing all this work around the house." Oh, yeah. We are selling it. Buy bigger and bigger. They want bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger. And how are they paying for this? I think they can learn from... Our generation, as I said earlier, had the parents from The Depression. And there was almost an extreme there because they had nothing.
SM (00:38:06):
Right.
JC (00:38:15):
And then they want to provide for us and give us. They need to learn the values of saving a buck. Having respect for their elders. How many times I have been at work carrying a... They are not necessarily work, but some of. Because I do have a wonderful office. I do not want to give that perception. But I am sitting there loaded with grocery packages or whatever. And this 25-year-old to 30-year-old kid walks out the door and left the door kicking in the face while you are standing there struggling. And I am like... I come home and I... Next time I talk to my son, he is 34, I give him the big lecture. "Mother, what are you giving the big lecture for? I did not slam the door in your face." My point is you see a lady carrying groceries, you open the door for her. Now it is amazing to me that one time I said thank you to a gentleman for doing that. And he said to me. I could not believe it. It was at the post office. This was just a couple years ago. And he said to me, "Well, I hesitated doing that." And I said, "Well, why did you hesitate doing that?" And he said, "Because one time I did that and the woman [inaudible]." I got to pay this eventually. He just kept... And now they have the soda machines with the... We were out a couple weeks ago with our kids and we walked by a soda machine. And my son said, "Oh, you want to bottle of water?" I said, "Sure." I started to go in my purse to get out of dollar bill or whatever it was. He said, "Oh no, mom. I will get it." And he gets out a credit card. Flashes it in front of the screen and goes.
SM (00:39:53):
Yeah.
JC (00:39:53):
And I said, "I do not understand. Why did you do that? Why do not you use money?" He said, "Nobody carries money anymore."
SM (00:39:53):
Yeah.
JC (00:39:53):
And I said, "Well, does this mean then that you are managing money well? Because you can keep track of even every dollar you spend for every bottle of water or soda you buy?"
SM (00:39:53):
And what was his answer?
JC (00:39:53):
Yeah. He said, "I can." That is okay. He has got two kids.
SM (00:40:19):
Getting back to this. We talked about the percentage of people involved in activism. I want to ask you about your thoughts on activism as a whole. Activism is defined as... Who defines it? A history professor said this to me yesterday. He says, "Whose definition is this?" And I said, "Well, [inaudible] would say that activism is basically individuals who want to make a difference in this world." People who want to make a difference in the world is to me what the definition of activism is. But there seems to be a... In higher education today, a fear of activism. And looking at activism as a negative activism. Because they kept perceptions of what it was in the past. They think of the (19)60s. They think of disruption. They think of shutting things down. They think of nothing but negative. What is your thought on... When you think of the anti- war movement, how important were the young people of the Boomer generation in ending the war in Vietnam and basically their involvement? What are your thoughts on their involvement in the anti-war movement? Knowing that your brother served and died, yet there were young people that were out there protesting that war. The anti-war movement itself. Your thoughts on those individuals. I have had some conversations with people down at the wall. Some other mothers who have lost their...
JC (00:41:38):
I even watched recently more protests going on in our area. Off of two and two. And I... It is very emotional to me when I see people protesting war. And I just want to go up to them and really get involved. And I know that I should not act on emotion, so I do not do it. I tend to be a very emotional person anyway. I look at it as... Because of men like my brother. Because of men and women that are on that wall in Vietnam. The Vietnam Memorial Wall. And the men and women that died in Iraq. Because of what they did for our freedom and our democracy. It is all for them and afforded these people the right to protest. I do not agree with them. With the current war, nobody wants war. I do not know what the answer is with this war. I just heard today, 10 more Americans were killed. I find sometimes I cannot watch the news anymore. And I know that is narrow minded. Putting on blinders that way, going to that extreme. It is a reality that we are in. I read something one time, and... I read that the dreams we shared as a family, referring to when my brother was killed. The dreams we shared as a family were changed forever on that fateful day. But as the years progressed and grief lifted its ugly veil, I found continued healing. A belief that he is watching every step that I make and [inaudible]. It has not been easy along this journey, and oftentimes it's very painful. But just as my mother taught us, if you believe in something give it your all and always remember to do good for others. [inaudible]. But what really counts in man's heart is the ability to have freedom to express that heart. Your life, the life of my brother, [inaudible]. You will always be missed and we will never forget you. [inaudible]
SM (00:44:11):
Here we go. It is back. The batteries were getting low. I could tell.
JC (00:44:16):
Getting back to what I was saying. Their activism tends to have a negative connotation I think. When people think of activism, they think of... I think most people probably get a negative conception of what the word means. But I tend to agree with you. Activism is giving your all to something that you believe in. And I have an incredible tenacity about me to do that. If I believe in something, I do not care how bad somebody stomps on me or hurts me. And believe me, it has happened. If I still believe in something strongly, I will continue to pursue it with my all. That is the way I was raised. That is the way my brother was raised. That is why my brother did what he did. He heroically... He was an American hero. First of all, he had his honorable discharge. He had already seen combat duty during the Dominican Republic crisis. He served with the 82nd Airborne Division. 11th Special Forces. He had his honorable discharge. He had no reason to even go back into the military. But he too was raised with strong values and principles that one person can make a difference. They believe in something and they know it is right. Give it your all. And that is what he did. He reenlisted because he was a good medic. One of the best. And we have heard this over and over and over. They recently renamed the Fort Sam Houston Library in his memory. It is now the Keith A. Campbell Memorial Library. At the library dedication. After the dedication, we were all at dinner. Keith Sergeant from the 11th Special Forces shared a story about us that we had never heard. And that was when they were out on maneuvers. And Bob had walked into a tree branch. And if it had not been for Keith's medical treatment on site, Bob would have probably lost his eye. Now mind you, he was a teenager. I look at my own children and go, "Can my kids do that?" So, this kid was a phenomenal medic. He was not the kind of kid who liked going to school. Do not give him a clock and say, "What makes it... Do an essay on what makes it tick." He would be taking it apart and putting it back together to figure out what makes it tick. He was a real hands on person. And everything he learned, he learned the hard way and he did a dad gum good job. So, when he went off to Vietnam to save lives, he did do exactly that. And I feel very blessed that I have met two of the men that he died saving. How many people are that fortunate? To me those...
SM (00:47:17):
Those people. Did he save them in Vietnam?
JC (00:47:20):
Yes.
SM (00:47:20):
Wow.
JC (00:47:22):
Yes. One gentleman. Keith's body laid on him for five hours. There was a firefight. A very bad firefight that came up overnight. They were actually in the planning stages for Operation Junction City. And lo and behold, they had to put everything on a screeching halt for Operation Junction City because here comes Operation Big Springs. You will find very little on Operation Big Springs. Very little. Which is very interesting. But all of the medics were down with this one company. And Keith and his buddy Ken were with another company and heard it over the radio. Keith left the safety of his perimeter to go. And as he started to go, Ken pulled him down and said, "Do not go. Whoever goes is not going to come back." And Keith pushed him down and said, "I am going. You have a wife and a baby." Now remember what he told me before he left Vietnam? One of the things? Men with wives and babies should not have to go. Ken literally told me that Keith save his life by doing that. Keith crawled through a hail of grenades and bullets. Now mind you, this is just three days after getting the Bronze Star for another battle. He was not stopped in 19 days. I do not know when that kid slept. I look at the geographic location of these different battles he was in, because I have been really doing a lot of research since (19)99. I cannot believe the adrenaline that kid must have had or how he ever got done what he did. I just do not know. I have talked to veterans that would tell me... It is funny. I do not even know why I was thinking about that this morning because I guess I was talking. These conversations I had with all these Gold Star mothers that is reflected. Brought a lot of stuff back to me. But I was thinking this morning about how these men did not sleep when they were over there. And one told me. All the monsoons and the rain they had, but they had ponchos. But he never took his poncho out because it would rattle and make noise. Think about a man over there who probably was a snorer. He would probably be afraid to have fallen asleep.
SM (00:49:47):
Oh, yeah.
JC (00:49:47):
So these men were in jungle with you name what. And he was just nonstop. But anyway.
(00:49:56):
Keith picked up a rifle of another man that was killed along the way. Took that with him. Shot a sniper in the tree. I have the original article from The Evening.
SM (00:50:13):
Okay.
JC (00:50:14):
There used to be two newspapers in Washington DC. The Washington Post and the Evening Sun.
SM (00:50:18):
Star.
JC (00:50:19):
Star. My mother always... Despite the hardships of being a single parent with four kids, she managed to subscribe to both of the newspapers. Because she always told us, "There are always going to be many sides to a story. You need to read them all." And you would. You would see the same story on the news. And you would read The Post and you would read The Star and you could hear three different things of the same thing. But anyway, I have the original newspaper article that said there was a sniper killed in the tree. One Viet Cong killed. Da-da-da-da. And then I knew that was the Viet Cong that Keith had killed. I had mixed emotions about that too because did not that young man have a mother?
SM (00:50:59):
Right.
JC (00:51:00):
But anyway. Keith reached Eddie Taurus. Drug him to a nearby... Gave him enough medical aid to stop his bleeding and then drug him to a nearby tree where he literally... Because there were more snipers. The guys used to... Snipers used to tie themselves in the trees. He knew there was not enough coverage for the sniper in the tree. That up in the tree. In the tree where Keith had drug Eddie to for that tree to protect him. So Keith used his body for the other portion of Eddie to protect him. And in doing so, he got shot and he fell on Eddie. And it took them another five hours to pull the two of them out of there. Now I was blessed to meet Eddie back in (19)99. Flew out to California to meet him for the first time. Had a wonderful, warm... You can only imagine. Incredible meeting. But the whole weekend if he were facing me, he just clammed up. He could not look at me. He could not talk. And I did not get it. I could not understand it. It was the house. The owner of the home where we were staying who brought it to my attention. She said, "You do not get it. He sees your brother in your eyes."
SM (00:52:19):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:52:20):
So, I approached him and I said, "Eddie, we have come this far to find you after all these years. You do not even look at me." And he said, "Vicky's right, you do not get it. Your brother was on me for five hours. I see Campbell. I see you. I cannot look at you."
SM (00:52:38):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:52:42):
And even at the library dedication. As long as I was not looking at him. But I kind of got off the path a little bit, which I tend to do. But to answer your question about what I think about the people who protest and the activism and everything. I think the men and women who died have given them the freedoms to exercise their opinion. And though I may not always agree with them, we should have the opportunity to respectfully disagree. And I am thankful, very thankful, even though I disagree with some of them. Very thankful that they have that opportunity to have the freedom. There was an email exchange going around for a while. And I do not like all this tit for tat email stuff that people send you. And sometimes emails can... You can go to the office and you do emails all day long. I do not want to come home and do them at night. All this nonsensical stuff sometimes that comes around. Do not waste my time with it. If it is more than a paragraph, do not bother sending it to me. But anyway, I got this one email that was interesting to me about what's your favorite color? What is your greatest fear? What is this? And it was interesting to see family members and friends respond to some of these things. One of the questions on there. What is your greatest fear? It was very interesting to see what people said their greatest fear was. My greatest fear is to be sitting at a sidewalk cafe in America, having a cup of cappuccino, and having somebody drive by and throw a bomb. And that is something that has always been a fear of mine. See this is the difference. Even back in (19)67. Even though my mother. My mother was an extraordinary woman in the process of educating us. We understood even back then what communism meant. We understood that there were people on the other side of the world that did not have refrigerators. That if they wanted milk or eggs or perishable items, that they literally were standing in blocks long to get those things. And then they would have to consume them because they did not have a refrigerator to put it in. We knew that there were people who lived on the other side of the world that could not go into a church or a synagogue or whatever of their choice. We were raised with that. In other words, the values we were raised with were so strong. That our freedom and our democracy is such a gift. It was so instilled into us. That is why Keith did what he did. And that is why I continue to perpetuate his memory. Not only because he was an American hero, which he really was. A true hero. I did not even realize what a hero he was until (19)99. It is because I call it grief lifting its ugly veil. I related very much to this mother today who said she did not go out of the house. I went out of the house because I had to. And I was a sibling. I was not a mother. A Gold Star mother. I was merely a sibling. Then I talked to another mother this morning who told me her 42-year-old daughter will not talk about it. Her son that died. And I explained to her. I understand that. That is the way I was until (19)99. And I called it grief lifting its ugly veil. And I went through all my brother's memorabilia at that time. And then that is when I realized what he really had done. Oh my gosh, this man was a hero. And he would never want to tell you. He would be... He would be sitting here right now saying, "Judy, get off it." And the majority of the men that I know that went over there feel the same way. Point being, he did a job that they were sent to do and they did it with their all. And that is the same for the men and women today. And a lot of these kids today go to the workplace who... We had the draft back then. People are not understanding. These people that are over there today enlisted.
SM (00:57:21):
Right.
JC (00:57:22):
What a sacrifice. They know what they are getting into. Maybe some of the National Guard did not know they were going to have five or six tours.
SM (00:57:31):
What you are really talking about here is... Considering the next question I have is about healing. One of the things. One of the most... Two or three of the most important questions I have been asking every individual in this interview process. We know that the Vietnam Memorial when it was built in (19)82. We know the purpose. To heal a generation as Janice Brooks' book talks about. But we knew it was about a healing. The Vietnam vets. Healing their families. Paying tribute...
SM (00:58:03):
The Vietnam vets healing their families, paying tribute to those who served people who gave the ultimate price, remembrance. And healing... I am asking a two-part question. How much do you feel that wall has done to heal the Vietnam veterans and the Vietnam generation, which includes the 70 million boomers? It includes the individuals who did not serve. It includes those who were for and against the war. We all know about the unbelievable divisions that took place at that time, as some people have said, historians have said, we came very close to a second civil war in with all the things that were happening with the cities up in flames and dealing with issues here at home. And then the war itself had really divided families, generation gap. Just your thoughts on healing, because you are talking about dealing with your brothers, your loss of your brother. So just your thoughts on the whole healing process where-
JC (00:59:24):
The Vietnam veterans. The Vietnam Memorial Wall, you will have to forgive me for choking up, was the greatest gift that America gave the Vietnam veterans. The Vietnam veterans were treated in despicable manners. Spat on, had to change their uniform when they would come home. I know Vietnam veterans to this day that will not tell you they were a Vietnam veteran for fear of the way that they are going to be treated. That is just incomprehensible to me. Men who, good night, look what they ate, look what they slept. Look what they went through for 12, 13 months, whatever, had their buddies blown up right in front of them. Come home and get told horrible... I have not even had Gold Star mothers tell me that their son deserved to die because he was a baby killer. Now, first of all, were you there to see them kill a baby? I remember one veteran telling me, "I came home and I was on the elevator in the Pittsburgh airport and there was this little old lady who had an umbrella and she turned around and she started waving that umbrella at me. And it was one of those ones with a big point on the end of it and said, you baby killer, you a baby killer." And he said, "You know what, ma'am? I never killed a baby and I never hit an old lady. But if you do not get that umbrella out of my face and quit threatening me, I am going to do it." Where do people get off making these assumptions and treating people in such manners when they themselves were not even there? And this conception of all Vietnam veterans did drugs. They did not do drugs. I know Vietnam veterans today who are successful MDs, successful lawyers, professionals. Yes, it is like anything. You have some people who cannot pull themselves up from the bootstraps and move on with their lives for whatever reason, or try to milk the system and do not want to go to work every day. So, they try to get somebody to pay their way of the rest of their life. That is with anything. Look at car accidents. People do that with car accidents all the time, milk the system with that. But the majority of the Vietnam veterans I know are respected human beings who not only gave to our country then but are continuing to give back to our country today. And the Vietnam Memorial Wall is the only safe haven that they could have to go to where they were not judged, where they could pay their respects to those that they were with. And the thing that is the most painful I think for them though, I cannot walk in their shoes and say, what they feel. I can only imagine because I listen to a lot of them, talk about that survivor guilt. They go to the wall and they often think, look at the reflection and think, "Why is it not me on there? Why am I standing here and you're there?" And it was funny, I have always heard everybody talk about the wall with reflection, reflection, reflection. I am like, I do not get it. I do not see the wall in reflection when I go. And people look at me like, "Huh, how can you not see it?" It is because my go, Keith's name is way up there and I am looking up at a name so I am not looking straight ahead. So, I do not see a reflection. But then I have also heard the wall described as angels’ wings, which I think is beautiful. A beautiful description. So, I think the Vietnam Memorial Wall is the great, again, I reiterate that, the greatest gift our nation has ever given to not only our country for future generations, but specifically to the veterans themselves, were so mistreated. Now for healing for me personally, and again, it can only be spoken on a personal level because I do a lot of work with Gold Star Families because it is really where my heart is. Every time I hear of another family who has joined the Gold Star Family ranks, my heart shatters. It shatters because I know their lives have changed forever. I have been privy to the conversations from some Gold Star Families that I will not repeat the conversations, but I can say was certainty that people have no concept unless they are a Gold Star Family of how traumatic it is, and the worst thing we can do is forget. I remember a friend of mine years ago, her son was six years old and he died of Reye Syndrome, which is taking Aspirin and you have a fever and they do not do that anymore. And it was just up here around the corner at the card store. And I saw her in this card store. It was shortly after her son was killed.
SM (01:05:12):
Died.
JC (01:05:14):
Died, I am sorry. Died. And I [inaudible] my way in and out of the aisles to get my cards and get back out of there. And I come home. It's not a half hour later the phone rings. "Judy, it is Carol Lee. I know you saw me in the card store. Why did not you talk to me?" I said, "Carol Lee, I would tell you I did not know what to say to you." And she said, "You know what the worst thing you can do?" And it was a good thing she was a friend because only a friend can get away with this. She said, "The worst thing you can do is what you did. It is like Kevin never existed. Kevin was my only son. If you do not know what to say to me, simply say, I am praying for your broken heart, which I know you are, but do not act like I do not exist." So that is what I tell people. You see Gold Star Families because I think 90 percent of the time people do avoid people for the very reason that I did. You do not know what to say. You have mixed emotions because you think, "Oh, they are having a good day. If I say something, it is going to make them feel bad." But what people do not understand is we never forget anyway. So, if we are having a good day and you think you are going to bring us down by bringing it up, I got news for you. We will never forget. We were blessed to recently be at our daughter's for the birth of our first grandson. Even my husband does not know this. I am holding this beautiful baby to my breath and loving him and praying he may never see more. That he may grow up in a country of freedom and that he will someday learn through going through the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center the sacrifices made for him to have the life that he hopefully have. Okay? And then my next breath was, "Keith, why aren't you here to hold him? Why are not you here?" We never forget holidays and Christmas. There is always in our mind's eye, in our heart and at place at that table always. And there always will be. And this is for all of these families. And I would like to encourage people to realize that it's okay to say something because when I talk about this Gold Star Mother today, the only thing she says she does is she goes out in her garden and plays with her flowers and that is it. She does not go any... She send me the invitation again about the luncheon. I lost it. I do want to come. And then she said this to me, "I do not go anywhere by myself." And I said, "Well how is your husband with all of this?" "My husband does not talk about it." And see, this is why it shatters me when I hear about another Gold Star Family, because I know this. It divides families. They not only lose their loved one, but it shatters relationships in walls of the family unit itself. Because the biggest mistake we all make when we lose somebody we love, no matter what the circumstances is. I have done hospice work in the past and this is what I will tell the hospice people, the families. Grieve together. We do not do that. Grief has so many facets to it. You have guilt. You have, why me? Shock. You have all these different emotions with it and you stay so... I remember vividly when Keith died. I mean, so angry with my mother for years over it. I remember laying on the living room sofa, we used to have a picture over the fireplace. It was of a seascape and had a warm wood frame to it and a picture light on it. And that was like the nightlight because our house was the revolving door. Everybody came from campus and back then, you did not have to lock your doors. We never did lock our doors. It was always the revolving door. You never knew when Keith was coming home. You never knew when anybody was coming in the room. But after Keith died, I remember laying on the sofa screaming at the top of my lungs. Now it was a small house, much smaller than this. You cannot tell me my mother did not hear me screaming. Never came downstairs. No, we never grieved together. My sister never grieved together. My sister still has not gotten over it. I have not gotten it over yet. I remember Nancy Reagan recently saying on an interview about President Reagan's death, of course things must be getting better. And she looked right at the reporter and said, "Actually it gets worse." She is absolutely correct. The only thing time does is help with controlling your physical outside emotions. In other words, helping you to get a grip and not be a blubbering idiot in front of people. That is the only thing time does. Healing will never happen in the respect. Totally. Because a piece of you has been taken out and cut out. I had a double mastectomy almost 15 years ago. And I remember going to a counselor about it and before it happened, because that was part of the protocol I was in. I went through Hopkins and they're really top-notch. And that was part of the protocol, you had to do that. This breast cancer surveillance unit program. I went through and I went to the counselor and she said, "Well, I will be perfectly honest with you, I do not know..." Kudos to her because she was honest. She said, "I do not know what to tell you what you are going to expect." She said, "But I do know that from what you told me about your brother, you have experienced loss in your life. And so, I am here to tell you, you are probably going to experience the same thing as you did in the loss of your brother. Why me? Guilt, was it something I ate? Was it where I lived? Disbelief, shock. So that is what happens." And she was absolutely correct. You were telling me about a family member in your life having a health challenge and to a certain level, they too will experience in that way. It is a normal chain of events for all people. And like I said earlier, you do not forget the best things that have ever happened to you in your life. Do not anybody tell me to forget the worst because I cannot. But it is my obligation and responsibility to go about living my life in a positive way so it does not demean and bring other people down. I think if enough of us can do good things by educating, and this is my goal in life, educate every American that they know what a Gold Star is. A Blue Star, a Silver Star. They do not know. Even people in the military do not know.
SM (01:12:59):
See, when I met you in Washington, I mentioned to you and the person who was the national director of the Gold Star Mothers. Yeah. I think it would be fantastic to have a program at a university where Gold Star mothers came in and spoke.
JC (01:13:14):
Absolutely.
SM (01:13:14):
Because you never see that. And obviously we are in another war now, but the mothers who have lost... And there is also, I think it is Mrs. Zaalberg, you may have seen it on the national news. She lost her son in Iraq last year. She goes to the Arlington every day and sits in front of the stone in Section 60. Now she is the only one that does it. Everybody comes every day. And she was on the national news because here it is, the middle of the winter, it is almost like a blizzard out there. And she is sitting in front of... They let her in even in days when they are closed, because she has to be in with her son. That might be a good person to link up with. I forget what channel, I think it was Zaalberg. I have been to Section 60 twice, just there last week, I think her last name was Zaalberg. But obviously to be there every day, 365 days a year is unbelievable.
JC (01:14:15):
That is unbelievable.
SM (01:14:17):
And she is the only one. Everybody else comes there. But I went into the Section 60 there and I saw it is very sad.
JC (01:14:25):
Oh, gosh.
SM (01:14:26):
Again, the healing for you, the healing for the vets, but how about the nation? The nation was torn apart with the war and a lot of things.
JC (01:14:36):
Nobody wants to be torn.
SM (01:14:38):
Do you think we are still divided from that era? Do you think you still have the divisions from that era based on-
JC (01:14:44):
I do, but I do not think to the degree that we did then. If you look back then on the news reports and you would see all the protestors, you would see mobs and mobs and mobs of them. I just saw a news clip the other day after Lady Bird Johnson was killed with President Johnson standing in the White House. And you could hear in the background all the protestors and the things they were saying to you, "How does it feel to let another family lose a son?" You could hear that because that is how close the sidewalk. But you do not see that protesting on the news like you did back in the (19)60s. So, to answer your question, yes, but not to the same degree.
SM (01:15:34):
I have always had the thought that, and like your opinion on this too, that those individuals who were in the anti-war movement, who were, whether they be in college or not in college or whatever, that when they bring their kids now and their grandchildren to the wall... But all kids say, "Dad or mom, what did you do during that time?" And then of course the 85 percent who supposedly never was involved in the anti-war or any activism or served, that whole generation, you are-
JC (01:16:15):
I would like to know what they say to their kids as they come to the wall.
SM (01:16:19):
I think that if you have ever sat down in Janice [inaudible], I think this is a story that really has not been discussed.
JC (01:16:24):
I think you are right.
SM (01:16:26):
Because I think the wall is become... To me, it is such a symbol to everything. It is about healing.
JC (01:16:36):
It is.
SM (01:16:39):
And it is about caring for those who gave their lives. There's no room for politics here. It is a time to reflect. It is a time to think. And it is also a time to reevaluate what you did when you were young. And I think that wall does that to every boomer.
JC (01:17:04):
Yeah. That is-
SM (01:17:05):
No matter who they were or where they were at that time. And there is millions of stories, oral histories that need to be told on this.
JC (01:17:11):
I think you are right.
SM (01:17:12):
And hopefully I am going to be part of it because I got to devote the rest of my life to a lot of these things when I leave higher education. The wall, I go down there on my own a lot. I was just down there last week and I go to the wall and there's no ceremonies happening. I just sit there on the bench and reflect.
JC (01:17:28):
See, that is my dream to go in the middle of the night. I have this punch list of things I want to do before I die. One was go skydiving, I did do that. That was the best thing I ever did.
SM (01:17:41):
Wow.
JC (01:17:42):
That was awesome. One is to ride into Washington DC in the middle of the night on a Harley. And I do not even own a Harley, I did not even have a motorcycle license and go to the wall at night when nobody was around. Because when you go during the day, there is all these people there and you just do not feel like... I worry too much about what other people think. You see some kid who is like 12, 13 walking down towards you. You do not want to be standing there, blubbering idiot. And my husband will say, "Well, why do you care? If you want to blubber, blubber?" And sometimes you cannot control it. But I want to be there in the middle of the night. Just by myself.
SM (01:18:26):
I have been there around 12 midnight. But the one thing about they say about the area, it is not safe because there has been some murders at the Lincoln Memorial and that is why they actually closed off the back area there. Because two years ago there were two murders. As you look at Arlington, people had wandered around the back and then they were murdered there. So, I cannot believe... There should be a lot more security there. I think the security should be in that whole area should be increased so people cannot-
JC (01:19:02):
Oh, I remember when 9/11 happened. Of course, it's like President Kennedy's death. We all know where we were and what we were doing. But I remember when that one plane was not quite accounted for. I remember vividly walking into the lady's room, going into the stall and just praying with all my strengths. Dear God, do not let them destroy [inaudible]. I was so afraid of that.
SM (01:19:31):
One thing about the wall that I now know is that if anything ever did happen to the wall, they have backups for the wall. They are made already because those are not the originals. So, some of the originals, I think there is at least one or two of them taken out already. They wear out. That is why they do not allow people to walk on top anymore. Nothing will ever happen to that wall. Because they know in time that certain sections will have to be replaced. The names will all be on there, it will just be replaced. It is there forever.
JC (01:20:11):
Good.
SM (01:20:12):
Just like the World War II memorials. So, they are there forever. They have backup plans. And that is the first thing I ask because that is why they stopped the people walking because in the early years-
JC (01:20:21):
Personal etchings.
SM (01:20:23):
Yeah. Do you want to take a break here or I got a-
JC (01:20:29):
Oh no, I am fine. If you are fine.
SM (01:20:30):
I take a... Maybe, well-
JC (01:20:33):
Why do not you take a break? Because you are the one that is in there.
SM (01:20:35):
Oh, this has been fascinating because it allows you to be able to share your thoughts. And certainly, before I leave, I do not know if you have a picture of your brother, picture of you with your brother, because that is very important. And certainly, when I go down to the Vietnam memorial-
JC (01:20:52):
Yeah. He lives this with me.
SM (01:20:57):
I guess about the healing. This business about healing, just your thoughts, do you think that many members of the generation are having healing problems that were not veterans?
JC (01:21:10):
Yeah, and I think I am thinking about it more after what you just said. I bet there is a lot of guilt from some of those people that protested. I bet they never envisioned the Vietnam Memorial Wall being the most visited memorial in Washington DC. And I would be very interested in going back and talking to some of them myself to see how they are raising their kids. Oh, yeah. I think there's guilt with... We all have guilt for whatever reason.
SM (01:21:41):
I have always thought, and I have had this from some of the people, do you like them or not that when you think of the people who served, and when you think of the people who protested, who were sincere in their protests, and then you think of the 85 percent of the 70 million that did nothing. How are those 85 thinking? Because those people that protested the war may not change one bit. You do not treat a veteran poorly, but they will be very solid in their beliefs against the war. But the question I have is, I am a little child with a father or mother. Mom and dad. What did you do? Did you serve or did you protest?
JC (01:22:32):
I remember my mother worked at the Pentagon when Keith was killed. And she would periodically, not all the time, but sometimes on her way to work, stop at Keith's grave before coming to work. And she went to Keith's grave, now I remember I grew up in Arlington. So that whole section where Keith was buried was nothing but a grassy field when I was a kid. I watched them turn that grassy field into... When Keith was buried, those green berets were in mud up to their knees. Precision. Because it was not grassed over and they were all the temporary markers.
SM (01:23:13):
Right.
JC (01:23:14):
But my mother came to work and she saw this tarp laying over Keith's grave, and she thought, "Well, they are digging more graves and everything." She said, "Maybe one of the workers left this tarp." She walked over and she kind of pushed it and there was somebody in it under, it was a kid. He was sleeping.
SM (01:23:35):
Oh my gosh.
JC (01:23:36):
My mother said, "What are you doing?" And he said, "I am here as a war protestor and I needed a place to sleep." And she said, "Do you know where you're sleeping? You are in a national cemetery. You are on my son's body."
SM (01:23:52):
Oh my gosh, that is terrible.
JC (01:23:54):
Then he told my mother that he was given $25. He was up from New England someplace. He was paid $25 to get on a bus and come to Washington to protest. These kids were paid money to come into Washington.
SM (01:24:13):
They did not really care?
JC (01:24:14):
Did not even know what they were doing.
SM (01:24:16):
Unbelievable. Can I use your restroom?
JC (01:24:19):
Oh, absolutely.
SM (01:24:25):
Here we go. Next question is dealing with the generation gap. There was a tremendous generation gap for the boomers because there was a lot of parents were split from kids during that era. And there does not seem to be today... I work with college students though there seems to be a real closeness between parent and child today because there's so involved in their son or daughter's education. Could you comment your thoughts on the generation gap that happened in the (19)60s and (19)70s? Did you see it? Did you sense it? And you have already said that your family was pretty close in the values and maybe your family-
JC (01:25:17):
Well, my parents were divorced too, and so I did not know my dad, so in that sense. And I would say the majority of my friends, gosh, I think [inaudible] of my friend's parents, if I remember correctly, were married. Phil, my boyfriend, he was killed in Vietnam. His parents were divorced, but they were cordial to one another. His dad lived in Taiwan most of that time. His mother lived in Arlington. But I do not really see that.
SM (01:25:50):
Because the generation gap, there is a Life magazine cover, which showed a young boy. I have it in my office at work and the whole magazine is all about the generation gap.
JC (01:25:57):
Well, I have remember people talking about that. Yeah.
SM (01:26:04):
Do you sense that today's families are closer than maybe they were in the-
JC (01:26:15):
I think they are striving for that now. I think they got along the way to go. But I look at people that I know who have kids in college, and you're right. When they are in college, all the paperwork you got to fill out and all that. I do not know. I do not-
SM (01:26:38):
What do you think will be the, as time goes on, what will be the legacy of the boomer generation?
JC (01:26:48):
Everybody is going to think of Vietnam. I really do. Vietnam will be a big issue, but hopefully it will be a learning experience.
SM (01:27:02):
The issue of trust is something that.
SM (01:27:03):
The issue of trust is something that... I will use my myself as an example. When I think of, when growing up of... When I was very young, I had a minister. My grandfather was a minister, and we would go to church every Sunday as a little boy, and I looked up to my minister. I looked up to my teacher. I looked up to people in authority. I looked up to even President Eisenhower, even though I was a little boy, and John Kennedy. Heck, I met John Kennedy when I was a little boy at Hyde Park one Sunday. Something happened in that era of... With the Gulf of Tonkin, if you read about that, was that contrived, the body counts? Then we ended up in Watergate. Then you had presidents like Nixon with the Enemies List, and there is a lack of trust, and I think it affected a lot of people in the boomer generation. Could you comment on whether trust, how did that whole issue, how important trust is with you as a member of the boomer generation, and your peers, your thoughts on the whole issue of trust and trust in leaders?
JC (01:28:20):
I think trust is something that has to be earned, and I think people have lost a lot of trust along the way for some of the very issues that you have mentioned. I mean, you would think that your leader that you trusted to run the country or whatever would do it in an honorable way. I mean, you just look at Enron and all of that. I mean, you have major individuals who are overseeing corporations, who have stripped people of their future. Their retirement's gone, and I think people have lost a lot of trust in a lot of people, and I think trust is something that is really in a bad way right now.
SM (01:29:16):
Do you blame the boomer parents for maybe their kids not trusting, or do kids trust today? What effect does this lack of trust have on the kids?
JC (01:29:30):
I think the effect it has on people, people pretty much do their own thing anymore. They feel like that they do not... That is why I do not think they look up to leadership with respect anymore because they just feel like... Oh, I mean, I look at a recent incident that was in the news, when the iPhone came out here. Here, you have a mayor, who's mayor of a city that people are dying constantly on the streets, and he is sitting in a lawn chair behind an iPod. When you trust that that leader would be working to make sure people are... I mean, send an assistant to sit in the lawn chair. I think it's not only trust, it is just there is kind of that sense of accountability is gone, and respect, but no wonder. I mean, look at some of the things that you see.
SM (01:30:25):
As a young person, and when your brother passed away, did you put any blame on President Johnson and President Nixon, depending on the year?
JC (01:30:37):
Actually, maybe I was one of those rare birds from the (19)60s. I actually did not get into that accounting of blame. I really did not. I do not think any human being would have a pulse if they did not feel the pain and the loss for each and every casualty that comes across their desk. I look at President Johnson. I look at President Bush. I know we have a letter from President Johnson. Maybe it was just a form letter, who knows? I would have to go back and look at it again, but probably was. But I am sure when he had that stack of letters on his desk, and if President Bush still does that today, if that is still done, they still have to be thinking when they are stroking that pen, and it has to affect them in some way. It truly does. I never did blame Nixon and Johnson. I read books, and McNamara and all of them, and again, there were issues that happened that I am not pleased with, but I really... No, I do not. If it had not been Vietnam, it would have been perhaps another conflict. Nobody wants war, but it's inevitable. I went through a phase in my life where I was almost that generation of peace, peace, peace, but then I realized that that was an immaturity. It is naive to think we're never going to have war. I mean, just look how history repeats itself. Of course, I do not want war. Nobody does, but unfortunately it happens. The thing that scares me is the fact with the technology we have, the weapons get more powerful.
SM (01:32:50):
I have come to the section now where I am just going to read some names from that little section toward the end where you... Just quick responses, they do not have to be any in-depth, just your initial, quick response on your thoughts on these individuals.
JC (01:33:03):
There is one that I am already getting a little blood pressure up.
SM (01:33:06):
Okay-okay. Yeah, Tom Hayden.
JC (01:33:12):
No comment.
SM (01:33:14):
Jane Fonda.
JC (01:33:16):
I do have strong feelings about Jane Fonda, only in the regard that I have seen how Vietnam veterans have responded to her. I was not there. I did not see her palm pass what has been rumored that she passed. I have heard her say in recent years that she was a born-again Christian, but her definition of born-again Christian must be a little bit different than mine because I recently saw her on David Letterman, and that was not my depiction of what a born-again Christian is. I do truly feel if Jane Fonda really is sorry for the wounds that have been created between her and Vietnam veterans, if she truly is repenting of that, that she should spend some time going to different veterans' organizations and trying to have healing before any more veterans pass, and even before she passes because I think there is a strong bitterness there that it would be nice to see healed. I do not know if it will ever happen though.
SM (01:34:38):
Robert McNamara.
JC (01:34:45):
Had a lot of power.
SM (01:34:51):
Does it upset you that he knew in (19)67, as he states in his book, In Retrospect, that we should have left Vietnam, that it was a losing war, yet he did nothing to do it, and then he left. That is getting into politics again.
JC (01:35:11):
I know, but you know what? In the very end of things... You were talking earlier about somebody going to their grave not liking somebody. In the very end, all of these people who have an accountability, I believe that, [inaudible] threefold.
SM (01:35:29):
How about Lyndon Johnson? Again, just quick comments on him. Bobby Kennedy?
JC (01:35:43):
I thought he was very energetic and had potential there.
SM (01:35:49):
Eugene McCarthy.
JC (01:35:54):
Again, powerful.
SM (01:35:58):
How about John Kennedy?
JC (01:36:02):
I thought he was very powerful. When you hear about the Camelot era and all of that, I think a lot of that was just... There was a lot of grace during that era, a lot of grace and respect because I too remember growing up, and it is Mr. President, Mr. President. You hear the youth today talk about Bill, Billy Boy, and that what's-its-name guy in Texas, who cannot even speak a complete sentence. I mean, there is no respect. Even if you do not like the person, even if you do not like any of these names of these people that you are talking about, to me, there should be a respect for the office.
SM (01:36:51):
Is this working? Yes, it is. All right.
JC (01:36:55):
When you are naming all of these names and everything, as I said, and I am not sure if it was on the tape or not, I really think the offices are offices that need to be respected, and even if I do not agree with some of the things that they do, I still need to... As an American, I think it is my obligation. I need to respect the office, and if I have a negative feeling or negative comment about somebody, I am not doing the office any service by expressing that negative attitude. And I think it tends to tear down when we do that because, as I said earlier, I remember it was the president, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and now it is all these anecdotes, these flippant names about Billy and the Texan, and that is disrespectful, to me, and I do not want to be a part of that.
SM (01:38:02):
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
JC (01:38:05):
I think Dr. Martin Luther King really did bring to the forefront that there was a definite civil, I mean, a civil rights issue between Blacks and whites. I do believe strongly, though, also that sometimes it has taken to the extreme, and people take advantage of it. I think it is very, very wrong that people talk about people in a Black-white issue, anyway. I think people should be spoken of as an individual, period. Why does it matter if somebody is white or Black? If you are going to do that, we are going to have Black history month, why do not we have Caucasian history month? I mean, where do you draw the line?
SM (01:38:58):
How about Malcolm X?
JC (01:39:10):
There is a concern about, me with certain individuals, that their power to project negative thinking really does impact people. That is why it is that much more our responsibility and duty to project the positive.
SM (01:39:33):
Gets into the next group, which is the Black Power people like Huey Newton and Bobby Seale and Angela Davis.
JC (01:39:40):
And part of it... Yeah. You talk about some of those people, they get radical, and they get extreme, and there is this... To me, if anybody has to scream all the time to get a point across, there is something wrong with that. I just do not like it when there is all that screaming. Do not know how to word that.
SM (01:40:03):
Were you fearful of the Black Power movement, or did that affect you in any way?
JC (01:40:10):
Well, I remember a visit, being at National Airport. It was a wedding, and it was right in the heart of all the clashes that were going on. We were in Roslyn. First, we went to National Airport, and we were expecting people into the plane, and then I had a friend of mine put his briefcase down, and he told me, "Put that briefcase by you, and do not let it out of your sight for a moment." So, I actually straddled it between my legs because he was so adamant about, "Do not let go of this." It was heavy, so I did not want to hold it. Then when he came back and we went to Roslyn to drop the people off at the hotel, I said, "What was in that suitcase?" He said, "Guns." Of course, you could not do that today. We were right in the midst of all the shootings and everything that was going on when Martin Luther King was killed, and I remember all of that. I would just like to express to these people, where does all this hatred... I think sometimes people take... I started to tell you earlier that I think sometimes the Black-white issue is taken to the extreme. Like anything, people try to milk it, take advantage. I mean, where are all these white people who are never mentioned that never grew up with this Black-white issue? I mean, people make it sound like everybody made the Blacks sit on the back of the bus. Well, they only did back then. Well, we do not do it anymore. That was wrong, and so Martin Luther King made a difference there. He really did.
SM (01:41:50):
How about Dr. Benjamin Spock?
JC (01:41:53):
I laugh when I hear about Dr. Benjamin Spock because I think my kids were raised okay. He was raised on their book, but you do not hear about him anymore, do you? I did not get involved into his politics. I just only read about him with raising babies.
SM (01:42:07):
He died in (19)98. He died the same week my mom died, and I remember being with my mom and showing her a magazine where he had passed away. And it was interesting because the week my mom died, he died before my mom died, and Frank Sinatra died two or three days later, all in 1998. So, it is hard to believe it has been that long.
JC (01:42:32):
It sure is.
SM (01:42:34):
How about the Berrigan Brothers? Did you know anything about Daniel and Philip Berrigan?
JC (01:42:37):
No, I did not.
SM (01:42:38):
The Catholic priests who were... We have had them on our campus, and one just passed away. How about Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, the yippies?
JC (01:42:48):
Yeah, they were yippies, all right. Again, they probably got their little groupies together for all their bus trips and everything, but do you ever hear about them anymore? Here today, gone tomorrow.
SM (01:42:59):
Yeah, though they both passed away. Ironic that Jerry Rubin died illegally crossing the street.
JC (01:43:09):
Really?
SM (01:43:09):
Yeah. That was in Los Angeles. He had actually become very conservative and part of the establishment, so to speak. Yeah.
JC (01:43:15):
Well, I think a part of that, that whole thing was just a matter of maturity, this rebellious way. I mean, all kids go through that, even today.
SM (01:43:30):
Well, they were way out. I saw Jerry Rubin when I was in college, and he came to speak. The place was packed. He was a great speaker. Daniel-
JC (01:43:39):
Oh, that is scary.
SM (01:43:41):
Yeah. Obviously, great speakers can really inspire. How about Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon Papers?
JC (01:43:48):
Oh, yeah. Yeah.
SM (01:43:51):
Or Ralph Nader?
JC (01:43:54):
Well, Ralph Nader actually helped me unload a car, so I cannot say too many bad things about him.
SM (01:44:00):
Oh, he did?
JC (01:44:01):
We had a car that got off the assembly line without any inspection. It was an Omni, and I remember turning the corner, and in fact, my son was in an infant seat, and the car door flew open. And I remember driving the car when my father-in-law was here and thinking, "Oh, it just handles all the bumps so well," only to find out it did not have the right shocks and everything. And his office literally helped me unload that car without having to pay extra.
SM (01:44:32):
Excellent. Yeah, he wrote a book on that around the (19)70s. How about Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon?
JC (01:44:44):
Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon. Well, I see Richard like this. I remember my brother saying he wanted to be 21, so he could vote. So, when I think of Richard Nixon, I think of the fact that my brother never got to be old enough to vote.
SM (01:45:00):
Oh. Well, what year did your brother die?
JC (01:45:03):
(19)67.
SM (01:45:03):
Yeah, (19)68 was the first election that he could have. Yeah.
JC (01:45:14):
Damn that liar.
SM (01:45:16):
How about Muhammad Ali? Because he is very well known in terms of as an athlete, but he was against the war.
JC (01:45:23):
Yeah. Again, I am glad that he had the right to express his feelings, with democracy, about his feeling against the war. I am glad people afforded him that opportunity.
SM (01:45:37):
Yeah. Right here I am going... Spiro Agnew, I have to mention that name.
JC (01:45:40):
Oh, yeah. I remember Spiro Agnew.
SM (01:45:41):
Yeah. I do not know what you think about good old Spiro.
JC (01:45:43):
Spiro.
SM (01:45:49):
And the Watergate Committee, any thoughts on Watergate and that whole...
JC (01:45:55):
Again, it helped people to lose trust, which is a sad commentary.
SM (01:46:05):
Now, these are just some terms from the period, and just quick responses. Woodstock.
JC (01:46:13):
Hippies.
SM (01:46:13):
Communes.
JC (01:46:13):
Love.
SM (01:46:21):
Black Power.
JC (01:46:23):
Fist up in the air.
SM (01:46:26):
SDS.
JC (01:46:28):
Yes, was that a drug?
SM (01:46:29):
No, Students for a Democratic Society.
JC (01:46:33):
Oh-oh, yes. Yes-yes.
SM (01:46:35):
Started by Tom Hayden.
JC (01:46:37):
Oh, that is right. That is right. Brainwashed.
SM (01:46:42):
The Weathermen. They were the ones that blew up buildings and stuff.
JC (01:46:50):
Oh, that. Oh, yeah.
SM (01:46:52):
They were a take-off of the SDS group, and that is how it died. How about the word the counterculture? How about, let us see, Chicago 8?
JC (01:47:09):
Where is all this today? Hopefully, you do not hear about it.
SM (01:47:13):
Remember the Chicago 8 trial, the (19)68 convention? Kent State.
JC (01:47:18):
Yeah, yeah. I had a girlfriend whose sister was there, who knew that [inaudible] one.
SM (01:47:24):
Kent State and Jackson State. Any thoughts on Kent State?
JC (01:47:30):
I just remember my girlfriend's sister being there. It was not her.
SM (01:47:37):
How about the Beatles?
JC (01:47:39):
Never did like them.
SM (01:47:40):
Never did, huh? What about the music of the (19)60s, Jimi Hendricks, Janis Joplin?
JC (01:47:46):
I never liked-
SM (01:47:46):
Motown, the music.
JC (01:47:49):
I used to always play back my brother's favorites. I liked Buddy Holly and Ricky Nelson. I always thought the Beatles were too twangy, (singing). I truly never understood the big hype for the Beatles.
SM (01:48:07):
How about the Rolling Stones and all those groups?
JC (01:48:13):
Very energetic.
SM (01:48:17):
Let us see, the Missile Crisis of (19)62. Where were you when the Missile Crisis happened?
JC (01:48:31):
Oh my gosh, I was a kid. I remember the Bay of Pigs. We were sitting around the dining room table talking about that to the wee hours.
SM (01:48:38):
How about the astronauts, (19)69, walking on the moon?
JC (01:48:45):
Oh, I remember that. That was my first... I thought that was phenomenal.
SM (01:48:47):
Still remember the astronauts?
JC (01:48:49):
Glenn?
SM (01:48:51):
Well, the three that were on that mission.
JC (01:48:54):
I do not remember all three names. No.
SM (01:48:58):
That is why we do these trivia questions.
JC (01:49:00):
Oh, my husband... You're missing it, Richard. This is your best part. He would have answers to all of this.
SM (01:49:07):
I guess that is about it. I do not have any other questions to ask. I guess the one thing I want to ask you is, you have mentioned the loss of your brother as obviously the event that has touched you the most. But is there another event not linked to your brother or to your family that you remember more than any other that had an effect on you, a specific event during your youth?
JC (01:49:47):
Our housekeeper passing away, she was very dear to us. She was like my grandmother. Actually, I was not really a youth. I was married then. Wait a minute. Let me see if I can... Now when you are saying an event, what kind of an event?
SM (01:50:04):
Like the assassination of John F Kennedy or something that really...
JC (01:50:09):
That really rocked my world back then. I would say that, Kennedy. That was one of those moments in time that you can remember exactly where you were, who was with you, what you were doing. Oh yeah, I can remember that.
SM (01:50:26):
Can you tell me what...
JC (01:50:27):
I was in history class when they came over the loudspeaker. It was the end of the day, and I remember walking home with the same group of friends that I would walk home with, and we were all talking about it.
SM (01:50:38):
Were you around your family like most people were that weekend? Because he died on a Friday.
JC (01:50:44):
He did die on a Friday, yes. I walked home, and the whole family was home.
SM (01:50:54):
It was an unbelievable time.
JC (01:50:55):
It was. It really was. And it was a disbelief, I mean, to come home and turn on the TV and see it over and over and over, replaying that, and Oswald coming through.
SM (01:51:02):
Were you one of those individuals that happened to be seeing Oswald live when he was actually shot?
JC (01:51:09):
No.
SM (01:51:09):
I was. I saw him live, right when the shooting happened. I still remember, Jack Perkins was the announcer for NBC at the time. Yeah. Are there any final thoughts that you would like to mention, that maybe that you thought I was going to ask that I did not ask regarding...
JC (01:51:33):
Well, fortunately, I had copied your questions beforehand, and that was good. I mean, I do regret that I did not go back and look at some of these names, really. I mean, I really did not pay attention to that. I saw them on here, but I did not even look at it, really.
SM (01:51:47):
Yeah. Some people have, during the interview, that-
JC (01:51:52):
Oh, Gloria Steinem.
SM (01:51:54):
Oh, yeah, the women's movement. Some of them have responded in... The gentleman yesterday that I interviewed, he was fantastic. He could not, he said, "Steve, when you mention a name, I cannot just give a quick two-second response." Nixon...
JC (01:52:12):
Barry Goldwater.
SM (01:52:13):
Yeah. Well, yeah. He talked about Barry Goldwater, but he said Nixon was... Nixon has gotten an unbelievable response from just about everybody because of the fact that when you look at the Vietnam Memorial, and you see the fact that when he came in at (19)68, he had a plan to change the war and bring the troops home. Over 29,000 people died after he became president. So that is quite a... And then there is all kinds of things being written about the peace talks, of Paris, and what was really going on there, and that if he really did have a plan that-
JC (01:52:57):
Why did not he enact it?
SM (01:52:58):
... it would not have been in time for your brother, but it would have been in time for 29,000 others.
JC (01:53:02):
That is a lot of people.
SM (01:53:06):
Yeah, because the people were dying through [inaudible]-
JC (01:53:07):
What is your feeling on now, on Iraq?
SM (01:53:10):
My feeling on Iraq? I think it's another Vietnam, and that is the gentleman I spoke to yesterday, but you cannot even bring up... Early on, I felt it was the same. And because we are part of the boomer generation that remembers Vietnam, to even bring the name Vietnam or quagmire up in a discussion is... You just could not do it.
JC (01:53:37):
But have we learned anything from Vietnam? I mean, if this is another Vietnam, did we learn anything from that?
SM (01:53:45):
See, I am going to end right here, and I am going to turn it off. Thank you very much.
JC (01:53:51):
Thank you.
(End of Interview)
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Judith Campbell
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Campbell, Judith ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund; Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Veterans; Sisters; Campbell, Judith--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Judith Campbell is a sister of a Vietnam Veteran who died in the war. She is linked to the group of families of the Vietnam veterans whose names are inscribed on the wall. Campbell is an active participant in The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund (VVMF) ceremonies and programs, as well as a strong supporter of the Education Center at The Wall. Judy C. Campbell lives in Wilmington, Delaware, and works on behalf of Gold Star Families everywhere.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2007-07-15/17
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.61a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.61b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
113:55
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/85675ac05b2f4469cd57b606563e498e.jpg
ae68d53a4e584ba1d6bf13ef7fe11670
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/227288819d85c1196f5c5cd15ecfe6fd.mp3
f701598fe1945579dcd2245f69a9a4d3
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
1997-09-03
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen Mckiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Anthony Campolo
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Tony Campolo is a speaker, author, sociologist, pastor, social activist, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University and former faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Campolo was a spiritual advisor to U.S. President Bill Clinton. He has a Bachelor's degree from Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary at Eastern College and a Ph.D. in Sociology from Temple University."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":5003,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,5099745],"6":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"10":2,"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial"}">Dr. Tony Campolo is a speaker, author, sociologist, pastor, social activist, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University and former faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Campolo was a spiritual advisor to U.S. President Bill Clinton. He has a Bachelor's degree from Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary at Eastern College and a Ph.D. in Sociology from Temple University.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
MicroCassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Generational gap; Ethics; Baby boom generation; Protest; Religion; Cambodian invasion; Vietnam draft; Lottery; Healing; Vietnam War; War photos; Richard Nixon; Gerald Ford."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Generational gap; Ethics; Baby boom generation; Protest; Religion; Cambodian invasion; Vietnam draft; Lottery; Healing; Vietnam War; War photos; Richard Nixon; Gerald Ford.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
54:28
Subject LCSH
Authors; Clergy; Sociologists; Political activists--United States; Campolo, Anthony--Interviews
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Tony Campolo
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 15 July 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:01):
Dr. Campolo, the first question I would like to ask is in recent days, and in fact in recent years, there has been a lot of criticism of the Boomer generation in terms of blaming a lot of the problems of today's society on Boomers. Oftentimes we might hear a question, Newt Gingrich on the floor of Congress making generalizations about Boomers. George Will might write an article on the entire generation, blaming this group, that grew up in that era, for the problems of the breakup of the American family, including the divorce rate, the increase of drugs, the lack of respect for authority, and things like that. I would love to hear your thoughts on the Boomer generation and whether that criticism is a fair judgment of this 65 plus million.
TC (00:53):
I feel that the Boomer generation did rebel against authority. I think that it was a rebellion that perhaps was justified in some respects and in other respects it was not. The (19)60s, particularly, were a period where America was struggling to figure out what is right and what is wrong. [inaudible] Older people had absolute values of right and wrong when it came to personal behavior, and they were absolutistic about sexual activity, about what was right and what was wrong. They had absolute values about personal honesty. They had absolute values about respect, all those things that you mentioned. However, they abandoned any concept of absolute values and grappled with what, at the time, would have to be called situational ethics when it came to societal affairs. Case in point, civil rights, they would say, "Well, of course it is wrong to be discriminating against African American people." They would have said Black people, but it is not as simple as all of that. You got to consider the situation. We did not get into this mess overnight. We are not going to get out-out of this mess overnight. To expect immediate change, to expect that we are going to do everything right immediately on this issue is expecting far too much. We have to in fact be gradualists, very, very much into the situational ethic value system. The same thing can be said about the board in Vietnam. No one ever asked the question as to whether it was right or wrong. I do not think you could ask the older generation how we ever got into that war or what it was all about. There was a sense, however, that whether it's right or wrong, we need to stand behind our president. We have to stand behind our brave soldiers. Even if they are wrong, we must support them. And thus, the question was never, "Was the Vietnam War right, or was the Vietnam War wrong?" The question was always, "Are we going to stand behind the president and are we going to stand behind our soldiers, or are we going to be disloyal?" So, the issue was never phrased in terms of morality. It was phrased in terms of loyalty. This set up a conflict in which each generation accused the other of being immoral. The older generation said to the Boomers, "Look at you. You are smoking marijuana. You are sleeping around. You have rejected the sexual morays and values of our generation. You are libertine. You are immoral." The younger generation was saying to the older generation, "Look at you. You have maintained racial segregation. You oppress women. You propagate a war that is immoral without ever asking any questions about it." So that each generation was accusing the other of being immoral and there was a lack of respect across the line because neither group saw either the good or the evil, who never saw the good in those that stood against them, nor the evil in their own position. I do not think the older generation really understood the evil of maintaining a political economic system that fostered injustice, nor did the kids really understand the evil of deviating from moral patterns that their parents had established. There was a sense in which the kids saw the moral bankruptcy of the older generation on societal issues and hence felt that those people in the older generation had no moral authority with which to speak to them. To a large degree, I think that is right. I think that in fact, we lost our moral authority in their eyes because of our very refusal to deal with the social issues of our time in moral categories. We were very pragmatic, we were very realistic. We were very situational ethics oriented, and our kids lost respect for us, and that was the thing that gave them, I think, a sense that they had the right to create their own morality.
SM (06:33):
Very good. I got one follow-up. It is working. As a follow-up to this, if you were to look in 1997 at the Boomer generation, and Boomers are just hitting the age of 50, Bill Clinton is a forerunner of this. We also realize on some of the interviews that I have been doing that it is hard to define a generation, because people of 55 that I know in this process feel like they are closer to the Boomers than those that the younger Boomers might be, and Boomers being those born between 1946 and (19)64. If you are to look at the overall impact right now that the Boomers have had on America, could you give me again just a brief listing of the positive qualities of the Boomers, maybe some adjectives, and some negative qualities of Boomers, adjectives, knowing that Boomers are still right in their prime now and they still have many more years to live and produce?
TC (07:25):
I think the positive side was that they incarnated the best traits of liberalism. They were in favor of ending racism, sexism. They never really dealt with the gay issue in any significant way, although their openness to gay people was the beginning of the movement for gay and lesbian rights. They had a belief [inaudible] the government could be an instrument through which a just society could be created. They believed in the positive potentialities of political power. I do not think anybody believes in that anymore. I do not think we really see political power as something with positive potentialities. I think we almost see political power these days as a necessary evil that needs to be restrained and constrained. But in that era, they really believed that government could do things. They were the people who gave birth to the environmentalist movement. It's no surprise to me that a Gore and a Clinton should be such strong environmentalists, and an older man like Bob Dole does not quite get it. Decent to the core, but never really could grasp what all the fuss was on the environmental issue. I think that this generation, the Boomers also saw the evils that were inherent in corporate capitalism, and were suspicious of big business, and really raised questions as to whether or not we could have it just society unless big business was in some way constrained. Could we clean up the environment without restraining big business? I think of how they would have reacted if the information about the cigarette industry would have surfaced in the (19)60s rather than the (19)90s. There would have been an uproar on campuses. There would have been a furor that, beneath the surface, this is evil at its worst level. Corporate executives sitting around the table having concrete evidence that they have a product that is going to kill 450,000 Americans in any given year, and for the sake of profit repressing, suppressing that information. To me, the (19)60s, the Boomer generation, when they were in their collegiate years would have march, screamed, yelled, and would have, in fact, used that as a cause celebrity for bringing down the establishment. This is what American capitalism is about. I can just hear them. So, I think that that was their good side, that they saw the evils of corporate capitalism. They believed in government, they were idolists, and they really did believe that a better world was a social possibility. They believed they really could create a better world.
SM (11:28):
Negatives?
TC (11:31):
First of all, their values had no religious grounding. And I do not say that just because I am a religious person myself, but there was nothing beyond their own sense of right and wrong that legitimated their cause. They did not hear it. They did not hear a distant drummer. And so, when they marched out of step with others, they did so out of an existential decision, rather than out of a sense of oughtness from God. For instance, when I meet my friends from that generation, I recognize that many of them have given up and their response was, "You cannot change the system." And they gave up because their confidence was in themselves. And when they failed, there was no power to lean on beyond themselves. Religious people, on the other hand, I am talking about friends of mine like Jim Wallis.
SM (12:50):
He wrote a book.
TC (12:50):
Yeah.
SM (12:51):
On [inaudible], yeah.
TC (12:52):
The Soul of Politics
SM (12:52):
W-A-L-L-I-S. It is-
TC (12:55):
Yeah. But Jim is a guy who was active during the (19)60s. He is still active today. I would fall into the same category. It is an interesting thing, about a year and a half, two years ago, rather, it is a year and a half ago now, a group of us went down and protested the change in the welfare bill and were arrested in the capitol building. But the thing that was so interesting was that we were all older people. It was not the younger people that were there. There were elderly women given their... You went to court, as we had to explain why we did this, what happened? Why were not the young people there of this generation, number one? Number two is why we are the only people there to get arrested? Religious people, every one of us spoke out of a religious value system, so much so that the judge that hurt our case could say, "Instead of putting you in jail, I am going to ask you each to write an essay on why your religious convictions led you to stand against the government at this particular point." The fact that only the religious people are left, and the reason is that we recognize that the struggle is not a 20th century struggle, but the struggle is as old as the human race. And the calling to struggle is a calling from a God who transcends time and space. And hence we keep on struggling because we sense this higher calling and if we lose a battle and we lose more battles than we win, we lose battles in a cause that ultimately triumphs, which is what religion is all about. We do not have to see victory. I think the Boomer generation had to see victory. Victory would validate their efforts. And when they did not see victory, they did not have validation for their causes and hence gave up. And now they are selling stocks on Wall Street and have become part of that very establishment that they were so hard against. I think that the younger generation, that the Boomer generation to a large degree, was spoiled in the sense of being spoiled kids. In a sense, maybe more spoiled than this contemporary generation, because they were the last generation that knew that if they got a college education, there was a lot of money to be made after graduation. They never doubted that they were employable. They never doubted that the establishment would take them in on their own terms. This generation knows if they want to get a job, they would better play the ball game as the establishment prescribes it. I think another sense, I remember when the Cambodian invasion took place, there was a meeting at the Palestra at the University of Penn, and one student after another stood up and spoke against Nixon, the government, and all of that stuff, and a young man who is very religious but very radical stood, and he said, "How many of you believe in God?" Which seemed strange in the midst of this anti-war furor, and very few hands went up. He said, "We are the only ones who have a right to protest this war. And the reason is simple. If there is no God, then the highest law, according to the social contract theory, is the will of the people. Well, the people have spoken, they voted in Richard Milhous Nixon for a second turn. The American people want to pursue this war. We are a minority who oppose it. In a society like ours, we either have to win the election, which we did not, or go along with what the majority has prescribed. On the other hand, if you are religious, you never have to go along with the majority, because you are obligated not to the social contract, but to a biblical revelation." Strong point. And so, they were not grounded in anything beyond themselves. They were spoiled. They looked for, they had to succeed. They marched down to Washington like Joshua's army, marched around the city, blew their horns, and when the walls did not come tumbling down, they went home like spoiled little kids saying, "Darn it, they did not listen to us." So that is the negative side.
SM (18:03):
It is interesting and just a commentary for you in the next question, why is it? You know, I am of that generation, and I know that night when Nixon gave that-
TC (18:10):
Yeah.
SM (18:11):
...speech on Cambodia because it was April 30th, 1970.
TC (18:12):
That is right.
SM (18:14):
And I broke my arm that night. It was my senior year at SUNY Binghamton, and it was two, well, weeks away from graduation. And I was in the operating room at the point that that invasion was taking place. And our campus was just being torn apart before graduation. And I will never forget being in the hospital a couple days later, the doctor, I was in a terrible accident, who saved my arm, and I had the magazine that my parents had brought in of the girls sitting over the Jeff Miller, and the doctor saying, "I wish they would kill all those damn students." And this is the doctor that saved my arm. And it was at that juncture that I knew I had to get in higher ed because of the lack of communication.
TC (18:54):
But I think that Cambodian invasion showed both the best and the worst of us. We stood against injustice and the obscenity of bombing people who wanted nothing more than the right of self-determination. It also revealed the phoniness of us. I was at Penn teaching on the faculty there at the time. They called off final exams. They probably did at your school as well.
SM (19:20):
They did.
TC (19:21):
And the purpose of calling off final exams was that students could participate, so that they could talk over the issues, so that they could develop a strategy for changing America. That was the lofty reason for calling off the exams. If you remember, the day they called off the exams, everybody got in their cars and drove home.
SM (19:42):
I was in the operating room.
TC (19:43):
Yeah. Well, that is what happened.
SM (19:44):
Yeah.
TC (19:44):
That is what happened. The discussion ended at that point, and they shouted and said, "How can you have final exams when we must deal with these issues? How can you have final exams at this time of crisis?" And so, the administration's capitulated and said, "You are right. You are right. We must, in fact, call off exams so that the students can come together and talk, and discuss, and come up with a strategy." They called off exams and the next day everybody was gone, which said beneath this veneer of concern was really not as deep a commitment to social justice as appeared on the surface.
SM (20:20):
See, some of the individuals that interviewed, just your thought on this that when the draft, because one of the big things was to end the draft, and again, Boomers, when they felt that that they had one on that issue, that there were no other issues. And even though knowing that, at this particular juncture in time, in 1970, the evolution of the women's movement, the gay and lesbian movement, the Native American movement, well, Latino Chicano movement, they were all around that timeframe.
TC (20:49):
There is no question that it diffused a lot of the concerns, but I have to say that the anti-war movement predated the initiation of the draft. The anti-war movement, if you trace it out historically, basically before they were ever drafting for Vietnam in any way, there were strong protests emerging on campus. The teach-ins started very, very early on, I would say late (19)50s, early (19)60s, the teach-ins were already taking place. So, when the draft was instituted, that stimulated concern, because all of a sudden, "This is going to involve us." But even then, in the early stages of the draft, there was no real problem for students, because students were exempt, as you may recall.
SM (21:45):
Students.
TC (21:46):
And yet, even though students were exempt, the protest movements against the war were still in pretty high gear. When, of course, the lottery was introduced, then it took on higher proportions. There is no question that the lottery, and which brought in the drafting of young people who were in college threw fuel under the fire, but it was pretty intense opposition to the war long before it. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons for the lottery, intriguingly enough, if you go back and trace it, was that the students themselves were calling for it. They were arguing that the war was incredibly racist because the white students were away at the universities and exempt, leaving the inner-city Blacks as the only people left to draft. And so, there was a strong protest theme that the draft has to end because it is a genocide. Instead of them ending the draft, Nixon said, "You are right, it is racist. Therefore, we will start drafting college students, too." It was not exactly the result of the protest that they-
SM (23:05):
Todd-
TC (23:05):
...imagined.
SM (23:05):
...Gitlin did not say that.
TC (23:06):
What is that?
SM (23:07):
Todd Gitlin did not say that when I interviewed him. He would not, probably. He got a-
TC (23:14):
What would he say?
SM (23:14):
You know Todd Gitlin?
TC (23:14):
Yeah.
SM (23:15):
Because he still is a firm believer that any of those individuals that were in the movement on the left were right on everything.
TC (23:25):
Well, they may have-
SM (23:28):
And he has not changed at all. But you-
TC (23:30):
That is interesting.
SM (23:31):
...raised a good point because, you see, what you are bringing up something that someone else has not said, and that is great about this project, is that, you know, we are getting different perceptions on-
TC (23:40):
Hmm.
SM (23:40):
...different questions. If you were to look at the issue of healing, now, one of the concerns that I have seen at the Vietnam Memorial, I have gone down there the last five, six years at the Memorial itself, and tried to get a grasp on whether there has been healing within the Vietnam veterans, and maybe even the people who come to the wall who are not veterans. I would like your thoughts on the Vietnam Memorial that was put together in that was opened in 1982, your thoughts on its impact on America, whether the job that it has done with respect to healing within the Vietnam veterans themselves and in the Boomer generation.
TC (24:19):
Well, on a psychological level, I am sure that the wall in Washington has had-
SM (24:28):
Would you like some water?
TC (24:29):
No, thanks.
SM (24:29):
No?
TC (24:30):
... has had very positive therapeutic effects. To see these veterans that are weeping at the wall, leaving their medals there, in many instances, reaching out and touching the names of their comrades, all of this has had tremendous therapeutic value on a psychological level. I am sure there are social consequences for that. But I would dare say there is no healing on a societal level about Vietnam, that those who are convinced it was right are more convinced than ever. And those that are convinced it was wrong are more convinced than ever. A good example of this is the whole attitude system towards Bill Clinton, who opposed the war on moral grounds. Once again, the question is not whether was he right? Was he wrong? The question was he was not a loyal American. That is what the American Legion says about him. The question is not morality, the question is loyalty. And he was not "a loyal American." And they are still couching it in those terms. The fact that the President of the United States opposed the war on moral grounds, he was not draftable anyway, he was at Oxford. He was a student. He did not avoid the draft. People seem to forget that he did not do anything different than any other college student in America did. But in the midst of all of that, he said, "I am not going, but because I am not going to be drafted." But, on the other hand, and this is the big issue, "This war is wrong." And I find that all across America, the conservative political establishment still says, "We do not care whether it was right or wrong." We just know that you were over there at Oxford and you criticized the US government." That is where we are. And I do not know that there is going to be any social healing on this issue. And there can be no healing for the same reason why, on the individual level, there can be no healing until there is confession. If you're psychologically messed up because of something that happened 20 years ago, you got to get that out on the table. You got to talk about it. If you did something wrong, you got to repent of it. You got to set things right. You cannot simply repress the past. You have repressed Vietnam. I could go out there tonight and ask a very simple question of all your students. "Can anybody tell us what the Geneva Accord of (19)54 said and how that became the basis for war in Vietnam?" And there will not be one out there that will know, not a one. And these are educated people. We have done what the Japanese have done, we have written out of history those things that we would as soon forget. And so, you look at a Japanese textbook for a high school student, and you are amazed. They were the victims of America. They do not acknowledge the fact that they bombed Pearl Harbor. They do not acknowledge the fact that they invaded. It is all forgotten. And history is rewritten in such a way that they repress these things. And only recently, there are those in Japan who are saying, if we are ever going to heal the wounds of World War II, we have got to face up to our responsibility as a nation. Well, what we are saying, it is about time that Japanese do. My response is it is about time that America does, that we, in fact, still suffer from a guilty conscience because down, deep inside of people, there is an awareness that something went on there that was terribly wrong. We dropped more bombs on this little country than was dropped on all the rest of the world during all of World War II. We used chemical warfare, Agent Orange. We devastated the land. For what? What was the point? And if you were to go out there and say, "Did you know that the whole war was about trying to keep a free election from taking place?" Which is what it was about. The Accord of (19)54 guaranteed a free election in (19)58, and the people in Washington at that time knew that there was a free election in Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh would have been elected overwhelmingly. And so, we went to war to save people from voting, because if they voted, democracy would end. The incongruity of that. And if you went out there and- [inaudible]
SM (29:53):
Out there and asked the students.
TC (29:54):
They would not know that. And yet, that is history. So, we really have to say that, in that sense, these things, there will not be any healing. The healing will not take place because America is not ready to face up to what it is done. And I think it cannot face up to what it's done for a very important reason. A generation or two will have to pass away before we can face up to it. Senator Kerry gave a speech before the US Senate hearings on Vietnam when he was-
SM (30:38):
Senator from Nebraska?
TC (30:39):
No, the senator from-
SM (30:40):
Massachusetts.
TC (30:40):
...Massachusetts.
SM (30:40):
Okay.
TC (30:41):
...when he was the leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and he was still in his uniform, he was still a soldier. I think he never has reached the pinnacle of greatness in that speech which will go down in history as one of the great speeches of history, as he said to the US Senate committee hearing, "How do you tell the last- "
Peggy (31:06):
"How do you ask a man to be the last- "
TC (31:06):
"How you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam?" That is a good question. "How do you say to the families of 50,000 men who lost their lives there, 'It was a waste.' How do you tell them that? How do you tell them that they gave their lives, not only for nothing?" Which I think they are beginning to realize now. "Hey, our sons died, and what happened? Nothing." "But worse than that, your sons went over and died in order to perpetuate injustice. How do you tell American? How do you tell hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people who gave their finest and their best to this country they believed in, that not only was it in vain, it was worse than that, that their sons became the instrument of death for three million innocent people? How do you tell them that? That is the truth and how can there be healing when nobody faces the truth?"
SM (32:23):
You look at the Vietnam War, why did it end? How important were students on college campuses? How important was Middle America witnessing the body bags coming home on national television? Jack Smith said the reason why the war ended was because middle America finally saw what was happening. That was his thought. I interviewed him. But I have had different thoughts.
TC (32:46):
I do not know why it ended. I think that the American people, of course, demanded that it end, that, at a particular point, even Richard Milhous Nixon was trying to figure out how to end the war and he was the one that ultimately did. But let me just say that when I look at the end of the war, it never really ended. It just petered out. They closed in on the embassy, and we got on our helicopters, and we flew away, and there were nothing left. Nobody wants to face this. The war ended for one primary reason. We lost it.
SM (33:31):
[inaudible] that.
TC (33:32):
You do not ask the German people. "Why do you think World War II ended?" The answer is, "The Russians entered Berlin and the Yankees met them on the other side. It was over because we were destroyed." Please understand that the last image that I have of the war in Vietnam is a helicopter taking off and people hanging onto it, trying to get out, the Marines making their last escape. It was not like Hong Kong, where the British pulled down the flag, saluted, turned the country over. We left in the context of sheer chaos, and defeat, and confusion. The very fact that you asked the question is evidence to me why there will not be any healing. We have not faced the fact that not only were we involved in something that was totally immoral, but we are refusing to face the fact that we lost it. We are still kidding ourselves to think that we had a ceremony in which we decided to walk away. There was nothing left of us. They wiped out everything. They closed in, it was over.
SM (34:47):
Yeah. It is-
TC (34:48):
Then, when you ask, "Why do you think the war ended?" Answer, "We lost."
SM (34:54):
You are the first person to say that in 41 interviews.
TC (34:56):
Stop to think about it. Did not make any difference whether you were for the war or against the war. Ford was the President when it finally all fell apart. And when it happened, he introduced into Congress a bill to make another effort. And even the right-wingers voted him down. "We are out of there. It is over. It is done. It is kerplunk." What is it about this country, that we cannot face the fact that we sin and that we lose? Must we always be righteous and must we always win?
SM (35:40):
I want to get back to something. When I was young and a lot of people late (19)60s and early (19)70s, the Boomers who protested against the war, those got involved in many of the movements, used to always talk amongst ourselves, that, "We are the most unique generation of American history. The most unique generation of American history." As a person, I still feel we were personally, that is just-
TC (36:00):
Because you were.
SM (36:00):
...my feeling. But your thoughts on that kind of an attitude, that many of that generation of our generation felt? And then you look at as they have gotten older, and you have already made some commentary about the idealism of their youth waned because they wanted to make money on Wall Street. So, your thoughts on, well, we have had some people who said that, "World War II was the most unique generation of American industry. They fought a war. They won a war, they beat Hitler."
TC (36:30):
Yeah.
SM (36:30):
So, it is just your thought.
TC (36:30):
I think it is wonderful. But we won other wars before. Up until the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War was the climax of something that began during Eisenhower's years. Peggy and I are old enough to remember something you do not remember. It was the U-2 episode. You have no idea what the U-2 episode told us. President of the United States said, "We do not spy. America does not spy." Can you imagine that? Can you imagine a president standing up and saying, "We do not spy. The Russians spy. We do not have spies." And guess what? We believed him. All of America believed Eisenhower when he said that. And the thing is that they dragged out Powers. We will always remember him. And they stood him up in front of the camera, and they said, "What were you doing?" "I was flying a spy plane." Think of the naïvete that we had, that we, as Americans, did not spy. I remember being in school in U-2, when they said, "Do you know what? People in places like Russia, when they read the newspaper, they cannot be sure that what they're reading is true. Aren't you glad that you live in a country where, when you pick up the newspaper, everything you read is true?" You refuse to believe that. But that was not just Peggy and me, that was all of America. We were the nation that did not lie. We were the nation that did not spy. We were the nation that did not commit sins. "America, America, God shed His grace on thee." We were the new Israel. We were the City on the Hill. We were the best hope for democracy. We were the people who were the free. America was the kingdom of God realized in history, and we believed it. We really believed it. And starting with Eisenhower, the disillusionment began to set in. And then beyond that, the cracks began to occur. "Was Jefferson really the wonderful man we thought he was, or did he have slaves? And was Washington really all that good? And what about Lincoln? Well, he abolished slavery. Did not you really believe in the inferiority of Black people?" And suddenly, Eldridge Cleaver wrote a book, Soul on Ice, that was crucial, in which he said, "The heroes of America are falling. We do not believe in them anymore." These heroes played the roles role of saints. They were the embodiment of all that was good, and true, and wonderful. Suddenly they were not that wonderful. Suddenly American was a spying nation, just like the Russians. And suddenly we realized that our newspapers lied to us. We could not believe what we read. And the disillusionment began to set in. And Vietnam was the clash between one generation that was the end of an era, the end of the age of innocence. I am not the first to coin that phrase. The end of the age of innocence. And the (19)60s and the Boomers were the beginning of the age of cynicism. And that was the clash between the two. This generation that came along called the Boomers just did not believe. Think of the songs. (singing) Do you know that song?
SM (40:24):
Mm-mm.
TC (40:29):
See, I do not think you can understand this here unless you understand music. I think Pete Seeger, Tom Paxton, Joan Baez defined the age, the transition came with The Beatles, who made social revolution into a private thing. "You got to get your own head together." That was their message. "Forget the world, get your own head together." But here were the songs of the year. (singing) See the cynicism right at the end? (singing) The cynicism right at the end. (singing) And this song by Tom Paxton. (singing) I remember this song.
SM (41:32):
That is my [inaudible].
TC (41:32):
You remember that song?
SM (41:35):
Yes.
TC (41:36):
"But you must teach me, Sergeant, for I have never killed before." Ooh. "Tell me about the hand grenade. Does it tear a man to pieces with its ... " And people were singing those songs. Bob Dylan singing, "The times- "
SM (41:54):
They are a-changin'
TC (41:54):
" ... they are a-changin'." Your sons and your daughters are beyond your control. There is a new value system out there, a new way of looking at things. We do not believe in you anymore. We do not believe in what you are teaching us. We do not believe in your sense of American history. We are not even sure we believe in American anymore.
SM (42:12):
I know Country Joe and the Fish was another group that sang, and in fact, country, Joe and the Fish did an album recently on Vietnam.
TC (42:20):
Yeah, it was an incredible era in which the music called everything into question. "Little boxes on the hillside, little boxes made of ticky tack." You remember those?
SM (42:37):
Mm-hmm.
TC (42:37):
The suburban dream that we all had. World War II, we were all going to buy a house in the suburbs. And suddenly, as Pete Seeger says, "What is this suburban community? Little houses on the hilltop, and people made of ticky tack and they all drink their martinis dry."
SM (42:54):
You made a very good observation, because most Boomers, and I being one, and others feel that the beginning of the change in the attitude of Boomers was assassination of John Kennedy. A Camelot, the idealism, "Ask for not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country." And you make a very good analysis here by saying, "A lot of the things in terms of cynicism started with Eisenhower."
TC (43:16):
Yeah.
SM (43:17):
The lies. And again, of course the free speech movement really began on the Berkeley campus in 1963. And they saw authority, just, they were not allowed to do something on a college campus. It spread nationwide, and young people got involved, freedom summer of (19)64 and so forth. But your thoughts, you have already talked about Eisenhower, but if you were to pick one major event that you think had the greatest impact on Boomer lives in their youth, what is that event?
TC (43:46):
Martin Luther King's death, maybe, if they were old enough to remember that, had America going up on flames. It had to be a defining moment.
SM (43:58):
We will finish up. It is 7:30.
TC (44:00):
Yeah.
SM (44:00):
I got a lot of questions, but I am at fault because you got our communication [inaudible 00:].
TC (44:04):
But I think that would be a key thing for me, was the death of Martin Luther King. And the reaction to that was not a reaction of, "Let us go on from here and carry out his ideals." The reaction to that was total frustration, the total polarization of the Black and white communities. Up until that time, we were singing Black and White (Together). You remember that song?
S
M (44:33):
Mm-hmm.
TC (44:35):
(singing)
Peggy (44:35):
[inaudible] we shall overcome.
TC (44:36):
We shall overcome, yeah. Suddenly, it was Black separatism, power now, and the Black people basically moved on the scene. This was the era when Muhammad Ali suddenly emerges on the scene and says, "I am not going to fight this war in Vietnam. So I got nothing against those people." You know?
SM (44:58):
Mm-hmm.
TC (45:00):
"And why should I fight to protect this America, this white America, that has trashed me and trashed my people? And we listened to him because there was a sincerity about him that could not be ignored. All of America saw a sincerity. Even those that despised him, despised him because of his sincerity. But I think that the death of Martin Luther King was the watershed for most young people, in which they had the sense that there would not be a peaceful, democratic solution to the agonies that were tearing this country apart.
SM (45:44):
This leads me into a question dealing with the issue of trust. Do you think we will ever be able to trust again? Now, you made reference to Eisenhower, and certainly, we know what happened with Watergate, and we saw what McNamara did, and the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, President Johnson was not really honest with the American public. So, we had a succession of leaders not being, and just basically-
TC (46:07):
Bipartisan.
SM (46:09):
... crooks. And as young people, as growing up, they see this. And certainly, maybe the first lies we are seeing with Eisenhower lying to the public. Just your overall thoughts about trust, and then, most importantly, when we look at today's young people, the people that you are going to be talking to tonight in this audience, I do not think they trust. And so, where have the Boomer parents been, raising their kids?
TC (46:31):
My argument would be that cynicism had its raise in [inaudible] the (19)60s, but cynicism has now taken on a life of its own. Cynicism is cool. It was a cheap excuse for ignorance. Namely, you have students in a campus who want to look sophisticated. They have not read anything. They do not know anything. But if they walk around with an air of cynicism, it will be a cheap duplication of intelligence. "But I do not believe in politics." "Why," should be the question. "Because they are all a bunch of liars." "Oh? What is the empirical evidence that you have rounded up for that?" They have no reason for their cynicism? It is cynicism without a hook to hang it on. And it's part of the cultural milieu. It is part of what goes with being cool. And if you want to be cool on Westchester's campus, you better act cynical. And if you cannot explain the faces of your cynicism, that is all right. You can put people off simply by using obscenities like, "It's all a lot of bullshit." That is their word, bullshit. Everything's bullshit. And they sound like they have been there, and back, and they know it all. They have read it. They have experienced life. They know what life is all about. The truth is they do not know anything. It has become part of a garb that displays itself as intelligence when in fact it is just a cool way to be. And when cynicism is admired, the cynic should always be cynical, with tears in his eyes, not with the sneer on his lips. The cynic says, "I cannot believe in America anymore." And the tears are running down his cheeks because he cannot believe anymore. But to do it with an arrogant sneer, that, of course, is unbefitting any human being.
SM (49:07):
I am going to close over this question. The final question was going to be actually asking you a lot of names, here, and just getting your response, but I think the basic thrust of what I am after is in the meat of the interview in the beginning. I want to get into your thoughts on the concept of empowerment. Going back again to when Boomers were young, there was a feeling, a sense that, "We can be the change agents for the betterment of society, that we could possibly be the ones to end the war, that we could be the ones to bring Black people and white people together," you know, "because we see the injustices in- "
TC (49:38):
Mm-hmm.
SM (49:38):
" ...society, the injustices against women, injustices against gay and lesbians," all that whole period. Just your thoughts on this concept of empowerment that supposedly so many Boomers had as when they were young, and what has happened with a concept of empowerment today as they have gone into adulthood.
TC (50:01):
Well, I think that the best example of that may be with Bill Bradley, who still believes in the ideals of the (19)60s. I think he is really the best example of the answer to your question. He thought if he went to Washington and became a senator, and maybe even president, he could change things from the top down. He has not given up the idea of empowering people. "But you do not empower people," he is concluded, and I have talked to about this, "by seizing control of the government and doing what is right from the top down. Empowerment begins from the bottom up." And so, he has now gone on to identify with the communitarian movement. "And what we need to do is we need to people together on the grassroots level. We need town meetings. We need to gather people together in a given neighborhood, and have them exchange ideas, and determine what is best for their neighborhood. We need to stop looking to Washington for the answers and start looking to ourselves for the answers." And there is the initiation, I would say, of a whole new politic in America, that maybe is going to be led by the Boomers, who said, "We took a shortcut. We really made a mistake. We said, 'The way for you to have power is to elect me, and I will make the decisions.' No, the way to make power is for me to step out of office." That is why I say Bill Bradley, as a model, is me to say, "The answer is not you elect me. See, you have power, now. No, you do not have power. If you elected me, I have power. And all you have done is given me power." I love Bradley's comment, "People do not live in a democracy just because they are able to elect their kings. If the person up top functions like a king, the fact that he got the crown through tradition and inheritance or that he was elected king makes no difference if he functions like a king." And so, you have a Bill Bradley that said, "I thought that the way for people to be empowered is for them to elect me. I now see that the way for the people to get power is for me to give up my office, and go back, and organize grassroots meetings to get people to seize control of their destinies. And if they cannot do it on a national and international level, at least they can do it on the community level." That is why organizations like Habitat for Humanity are thriving, because the X generation has picked up that theme. "We, too, want to change the world, but we're going to change it from the bottom up, not from the top down. We are not going to go to Washington and ask them to put in a new government housing program. We are going to build a house up the street and we're going to do it ourselves. And when it is done, we are going to look at it and say, 'See, we did not change the world, but there's one family now that has a house.'" And Habitat for Humanity now is picking up momentum. And I was on the executive committee of Habitat for Humanity in its earliest stages of development. And we thought it was great when we completed 1,000 houses a year. Now we're completing 50,000 houses a year across the country. It is picking up momentum all the time. And there is a bottom up change. And so when you go to Washington and hear the State of the Union address, there is Newt Gingrich wearing a Habitat for Humanity button on his lapel, and there's Bill Clinton wearing his Habitat for Humanity button on the lapel. Both of them are committed to Habitat for-
SM (54:09):
Democrat-
TC (54:09):
...Humanity.
SM (54:09):
... nd Republican alike.
TC (54:10):
Yeah. So whatever is going on up here, there is a sense that real power and real change is going to take place from the bottom up and not from the top down. And I think that is the great discovery of the X generation as opposed to the Boomers.
SM (54:24):
Well, thank you very much.
TC (54:25):
Okay.
SM (54:25):
I will let you get some-
(End of Interview)
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Dr. Tony Campolo
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Campolo, Anthony ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Authors; Clergy; Sociologists; Political activists--United States; Campolo, Anthony--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Tony Campolo is a speaker, author, sociologist, pastor, social activist, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University and former faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Campolo was a spiritual advisor to U.S. President Bill Clinton. He has a Bachelor of Arts from Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary at Eastern College and a Ph.D. in Sociology from Temple University.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1997-09-03
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.62
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
113:55
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/a73477c7381dda5dfbb74d27b5374aa2.jpg
5b519108f549cf81b1bcf629e2327546
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/4f23f9ef29681b252439fb2059692ef0.mp3
3389dbc1b78fd7e2a2db0fd57b21b7b3
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
2009-11-22
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Alan Canfora ; Roseann Chic Canfora
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Alan Canfora is a survivor of the Kent State massacre who was shot in the wrist by the Ohio National Guard on May 4, 1970. Canfora is an activist, student organizer and political activist who earned a bachelor's degree in General Studies and master's degree in Library Science. Currently, he is the Library Director at Akron Law Library in Akron, Ohio."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":8403713,"3":[null,0],"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,4995385],"15":"Arial","16":10,"26":400}">Dr. Roseann "Chic" Canfora is an educator. She received her Master's degree in Journalism and Public Relations at Kent State University, where she also earned a Ph.D. in Educational Administration. Currently, she is a Chief Communications Officer at Cleveland Metropolitan School District. Dr. Canfora is the sister of Alan Canfora and an eyewitness to the Kent State massacre on May 4, 1970. <br /><br />Alan Canfora (1949-2020) was a survivor of the Kent State massacre who was shot in the wrist by the Ohio National Guard on May 4, 1970. Canfora was an activist, student organizer and political activist who earned a Bachelor's degree in General Studies and a Master's degree in Library Science. He was the Library Director at Akron Law Library in Akron, Ohio.<br /></span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
MicroCassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Vietnam War; Kent State; 1960s; Baby Boomers; SDS; Political activism; Protests; College students; Counterculture; Democratic Party; Republican Party; Watergate; Black Panthers; Richard Nixon; Ronald Reagan; Lyndon Johnson"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":4993,"3":{"1":0},"10":0,"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial"}">Vietnam War; Feminism; Civil rights movement; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy; Cuban missile crisis; Kent State; Black Panthers; Pacifism; Timothy Leary; Drug culture; Exclusion of women; Joan Baez; Cesar Chavez; March on Washington; Harvey Milk; Vietnam Veterans Memorial; Baby boom generation ; Students for a Democratic Society; Political activism; Protests; College students; Counterculture; Black Panthers; Richard Nixon; Ronald Reagan; Lyndon Johnson<br /></span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
201:57
Subject LCSH
Educators; Kent State Shootings, Kent, Ohio, 1970; Canfora, Roseann Chic--Interviews; Political activists--United States; Library directors; University of Akron. School of Law. Library; Canfora, Alan
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Alan Canfora and Roseann Chic Canfora
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: Benjamin Mehdi So
Date of interview: 22 November 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
00:02
SM: Is- It is basically a question I am only asking the people that were activists during the (19)60s. And that is: what made you become an activist? Was there something in your life in your growing up years, whether it be in high school or even before what happened on May 4, 1970? What was it within you in your background that made you become an activist in your life?
00:33
RC: Well, I grew up in a house with a father, who was always politically involved as a city councilman. But also, as a labor activist, I lived in a, in Barberton, Ohio, which was at the time a factory town. And so, every little league team has URW or UAEW, you know, the United Rubber Workers or Auto Workers Union, were the sponsors of just about all the teams and most of my friend's fathers work in factories [agreement]. From my earliest recollections, as a child were always hearing my father on the phone, talking about, you know, basically the fights that they were engaging on, on the labor front through the UAW and being a union leader that was a very natural thing in my household that we respected unions, we avoided, we did not cross picket lines, we understood the value of people fighting for their rights and standing up for what they believed in [agreement]. I have to say that-that had a long-term influence on my own political value of people fighting for their rights and standing for what they believe in. I did not come to Kent State as a political activist, however, I was a very strait-laced, honors students in high school, a cheerleader, very socially involved and very politically unaware, because I do not remember my teachers talking about things like the Vietnam War, even though many of my friends were in the same war, had brothers that were coming home injured or, or in body bags. And I think I might have remained relatively uninvolved, politically at Kent State were it not for the draft, which personally affected me, because so many of my friends and my brothers in particular, were eligible for the draft and were dreading going, and it was that alone, that made me begin to question what is this war? And where will they go? And why do they have to fight? And what can I do to stop them from going?
03:29
SM: We get, before I get into my other set of questions here, when you think going back to that period now when you heard, when you experienced the tragedies on May 4, and that whole weekend, 1970. When you saw the news media afterwards, constantly say that of all places, it happened to Kent State, you remember this in the media? You know, there was a lot more activist campus like Ohio State or particularly Ohio University that had been through some major protests. And then they said, believe it or not, it happened to Kent State. How do you, how did you react to that just what the media was doing, and portraying the, your university and the students there?
04:11
RC: Well, I never bought that because I was there in 1968, a college freshman, and from my very first day on campus, SDS had a very visible and viable presence on that campus. I could remember being handed an anti-war leaflet my first week of school, even though I was inclined to throw it away, and not pay attention. You know, I was still of the mindset that, you know, like the Tennyson, “Theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die.” I grew up in a very military family. My mother was an Army nurse. My father had served in World War II. They met in a hospital in Battle Creek, Michigan, where my father who was recuperating from an injury and I remember you know, as a child always going through their scrapbook and always envisioning my brother's someday going off and joining the army too. In fact, I even looked forwards to joining the ROTC, as you know, kind of been following in my mother's footsteps at one point. But even though I was largely expectant of, of young men going off to service, I was aware that there was growing opposition on the campus at Kent. And it was a very constant level of political activity with SDS. I marveled at that I was very impressed with that even though I did not pay much attention to what they were saying, I was paying attention to their determination. And it always, it always fascinated me that whether it was raining or freezing cold outside, or whether it was fall, winter, or spring, they were there. They were in the Student Center, and they were always working, they were always organizing, they were always engaging with theater, they were always passing out leaflets, always walking with bullhorns and marching on that campus. And I watched it grow. And with that growing, not with those growing numbers, my growing interest in them. So no, I was, I was never of the mindset that Kent was not what the people placed it was sort of a surprise that a major anti-war protest happened there, whoever said that was clueless about what was going on there and never paid attention.
06:41
SM: Yeah, that was a lot of what the media was doing right around that time. One of the questions I wanted to ask, too, is, you know, about the generation gap between parents and students and between parents and boomers. And most of the World War II generation, obviously, you had some very quality parents who were inspirational role models to you, was there any kind of a generation gap between you and Alan and the rest of your, your family and your parents? And secondly, when you used to eat at the dinner table in high school did you ever had, did they listened to you to where their conversations at the table were not only, they were giving information to you about the experiences, but they respected your point of view too.
07:26
RC: So, we always talk politics, but disagreements in our family were very, very common things I can still remember Alan, supporting Robert Kennedy and my dad supporting Hubert Humphrey and, and you know, them debating about which one was the better candidate. And, you know, I do remember when Alan was beginning to question the war and be critical of the war. My mom and dad disagreed with them. But I also remember when I watched Johnson, on television announcing the invasion of Southeast Asia. And I remember looking at my mother's face, and I saw a worry on her face, I did not see what a very pro-military woman to look, the look I thought would be different. But I saw the worry on her face, I knew that going into Southeast Asia was probably not right, and even though my dad disagreed with a lot of the tactics that were being used I think by activists, it was-was more so because he was worried, we would get in trouble, we would go to jail, to see if we participated and get hurt. He never really stifled our opinions or told us we were full of it, he always listened, my parents always listened and even debated with us over the dinner table. We were Italian family, so we argued a lot. And we never made it feel we could not vent our opinion
09:01
SM: Did any of your brothers go off to war?
09:04
RC: No.
09:06
SM: Okay, when you think of the (19)60s and the early (19)70s, of course, why I had an interview yesterday with Rennie Davis. He was the guy I ended up interviewing in Washington because he was there for speaking event. And he looked at the (19)60s as from 1960 to 1973, which I kind of believe as well, when but when you think of the (19)60s and early (19)70s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind?
09:33
RC: So, when I think of the (19)60s and (19)70s I, the first thing comes to my mind is the civil rights movement and the anti-war movement that those, those are the two I think most polarizing and inspiring episode of the (19)60s and the (19)70s.
09:55
SM: Obviously, I think I know your answer to this, is, is there one specific event that shaped your life when you were young? I would assume it was what happened on May 4?
10:05
RC: Well, certainly that stands up there at number one, also affected deeply by the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and particularly by the assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Bobby Kennedy. I mean, I was just graduated from high school when, when Bobby Kennedy gave us so much hope for ending the war, and so much focus on bringing a real president to the White House. And, you know, seeing those dreams dashed and seeing those heroes extinguished, so, you know, suddenly and tragically was devastating to me. And, and it was very confusing. I never knew how to put that into perspective until I was much older.
10:55
SM: Where were you when you heard John Kennedy died? You remember the moment?
11:00
RC: Yes, I was in a social studies class at Highland junior high school. I was 13 in the seventh grade. And I remember the public address system came on, there was no announcement by the principal, they just literally turned on the public address system and allowed the radio report to come through. I remember watching my social studies teacher grab his stomach, almost as if he has been shot himself in a gut reaction. And then I remember everyone kind of pouring into the hallways, and teachers were crying and crying. And that just began that horribly, long week there, I will never, ever forget the drumbeat of that funeral processional and all the stores closing and all of the grief on the faces of so many people. I grew up in a very democratic town. And so, it was an entire town in absolute grief.
12:03
SM: It is like watching television from Friday through Monday, without ever turning the TV off.
12:09
RC: Right, And I remember we were at church. And walk in the door, just as my father was reacting to the assassination or the killing of Lee Harvey Oswald. And it was just like, wow, to be that young, and see so much tragedy back, back-to-back has to have played a significant role in my own political activism later. I was stunned by all that tragedy and outrage, you know, in ways that I was too young to be able to express then. But I am sure it manifested itself in my activism later.
12:49
SM: Right then getting into 1968, which had seemed to be one event after another that traumatized people. And certainly, you would have been five years older in 1968. So, you, what as a young person, what were your feelings? You, after King died, and then finding out that Bobby Kennedy died two months later. I mean, what did you think about America?
13:16
RC: Well, I remember feeling so hopeless, because being in a family where so, so much was put on election with, you know, I mean, as little kids, as very, very young kids, I could still remember my, my brother Alan and my brother Sonny and I, running from precinct to precinct with a little notepad and a pencil. So, we can write down to the vote tallies, as they were posted outside the door. And that was the way they used to do it for my father's election. It was always a very exciting thing for us to run from precinct to precinct on election night, and then run back into the house to tell my father he won his election. So, we always valued democracy and always actively participated in democracy, and then to see people rising to positions of power, rightfully so, to be gunned down. People do not even have the opportunity to elect them was probably the most closest feeling I had as a child that, you know, anybody who tries to do it the right way that tries to go through the system to effect change, that there is no hope for them to do that meaningfully. I became very disillusioned with my, with America, the American that I was coming to know.
14:40
SM: The, one of the- Newt Gingrich when he came to power in 1994, and the writer George Will in US News and World Report always have, always, whenever they get a chance, they like to downplay and actually criticize the boomer generation as a whole for all the reasons why we have problems in America today. They will generalize the breakup of the American family, the tensions between black and white, those who support the troops, those who are against the troops. The whole issue of, you know, lack of respect for authority, when you, they basically condemned the generation, what are your thoughts when you hear the Newt Gingrich’s and the George Wills of the world, make those kinds of comments.
15:28
RC: So, they are ignorant, they are absolutely ignorant, because when I looked back at the generation that I was a part of, I mean, certainly a difficult time in which to live, but it was a time that I would not for the world have missed living. It was a generation of youth that was not afraid to disagree with their parents. And so while some may call that rebelliousness, I really see it as an age of enlightenment. There was an overall rejection of the value of the generation before us, a generation that, like, you know, that worships, worships war, you know, was, was, you know, and instead of, I mean, then they polluted our air with, you know, their industries, and their-their focus on capitalism and focus on, you know, just getting ahead and, you know, being, you know, that whole dog-eat-dog world that they lived in, it was inspiring for me to be part of a new generation, that value peace over war that values the earth over the capitalism and pollution and, and, and we were a generation that fell in love with music, and fell in love with the earth and fell in love with peace. And, you know, the Woodstock generation was, to me, probably the greatest thing I have ever been part of, because it was that rejection of the value for us, and this collective statement that we are different. We are different, we lived differently. And you know, some, some rejected the whole era of free love and off of that, well, you know, that whole puritanical kind of stuff-shirted attitude of our, of our parents was rejected. So, I think people like Newt Gingrich are yucky, and Jerry Rubin who, you know, whose slogan, “kill your parents” made us seem violent and rebellious. When really it was a value system that said, we are different. And we reject the values of our parents, we are not afraid to form a new society, with values that put people first rather than profit, that put peace first, rather than war, something above something vaccines? I do not know. I am proud to have been part of that.
18:18
SM: What, what do you think, if you were to put down some characteristics and qualities that you feel the strengths and weaknesses of the boomers were, and again, we are talking about, some people have a hard time talking about 75 million people when maybe only 15 percent were activists. But, but, but I have also talked to people that if you were in the non-activist group, the subconscious, obviously is part of who you are as a human being. So really does in a way affect the entire boomer generation. What do you consider some of the strengths and weaknesses of the boomers and boomers are those born between (19)46 and (19)64?
19:00
RC: To me, we were really very much a product of our upbringing, because when I remember mostly the division on the Kent State campus, that kind of I saw, my first glimpse of it was at the music and speech building. When the Kent Four were about to be expelled. It is my first political action. And I was just, I was outraged that the four leaders that I had seen for two years walking with bull horns and leading so many people against the war on campus, were about to be expelled and I thought that was wrong. And so when I followed them to the music and speech building, the, the protest, people were protesting the expulsion, waiting at the music and speech building was another set of boomers, a different set of boomers but fraternity guys who then were pissed started, you know, fighting with the SDS followers, and that to me, was a very visual reminder of the polarization in this country, that pitted not just the Woodstock generation against parents. But pit for war against anti-war boomers. You know, pro-materialism, pro-materialist against anti-materialist. And, and I really do think it had a lot to do with who we were when we were growing up during those years, if we were kids who really were affected by the assassination that we talked about a moment ago. Because I mean, when I was at Highland junior high school, and I was sobbing at the death of President Kennedy, I still remember a girl who was on my cheerleading squad saying, “Thank God,” because she hated Kennedy. So, you know, we were, we were divided against each other as we were divided against those that have come before us. And I think it has a lot to do with those in our generation that bought into the materialistic values of our parents. And they were usually the ones that were a little more well off. And I think that the working-class kids were far more influenced by the labor movement, and the civil, and the civil rights movement, and the anti-war movement, combined. So, to me, that is our strength and our weakness. Our strength is being reared in, in the, you know, the working class town, that was the strength for us, being reared by, by parents who served this country and expected to get something in return versus those in our generation who never knew the value of labor in making, you know, improving the quality of life for everyone with health benefits and vacation benefits and safer factories and safer food products and all the things to me that are the strength of that whole era of the (19)60s and (19)70s. Labor is at the heart of that. And I think labor, and the value of that is what really divided our own generation.
22:13
SM: There have been a lot of setbacks in labor because of Ronald Reagan, it all started with Ronald Reagan and remember the airline strike, I remember the airline situation. And from that day forward, labor unions have gone down in terms of the number of people participating in them. And leads, leads me into my next question, which is, what has been the overall impact of the boomer generation on America as a whole? Now we are talking 70 million, we have had two presidents, totally different presidents in Bill Clinton and George Bush, who are boomers. And actually, President Obama is a very late boomer. I mean with him being very young. But what has been the overall impact on America forget what George Will and Newt Gingrich say, but you are just your thoughts as a proud, a proud boomer.
23:01
RC: Well, actually, I, I think that it would, I am not really sure I know what you are asking me. When you say Newt Gingrich, he is blaming us for the current problems of today?
23:14
SM: Well, he, he goes back to the era of that generation, he did this in 1994. And occasionally he has opportunities to say it. George Will writes it all the time, that the drug culture, they look at the negatives, they look at all the negative things and, and they-they say, that is the influence we have on our society. They have very permissive society, no one talks to each other people do not listen, people are getting divorced. There is still the tensions between black and white, and in all the “-isms.” They go back to that era. So basically, what my question is just, forgetting what they said, what you believe, has been the impact of this boomer generation on America and the world?
24:01
RC: Well, I think that that image, the positive image, throughout the world, of what America represents, is embodied in the boomer generation. Because if there was ever a generation in the history of this country, since the revolution, that truly exemplified and put through their greatest test those constitutional guarantees of freedom, and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, it was the boomer generation. There was no other time since the revolution that anyone can point to where the people put those rights to the test. And not only were gun down for it but got back up and continued to point out the wrongs of this government. And I think that in the same way that the corrupt Gingrich’s and others in Congress who see that, I mean, they saw what we were capable of doing with free, with a free press in the (19)60s with the Walter Cronkite types of reporters, but as long as people know the truth, they can act on this truth. And they can effect meaningful change with the truth. Everything that we have seen in those volatile years of the (19)60s and (19)70s, we have seen a reaction to that. That was why we could not see flag faced coffins anymore. That is why we no longer have a media that is not controlled by profit, and governments. Because when the people are as aware as the boomers were, and act on that awareness, then then government is not safe. So, I think that is the greatest contribution of our generation is we put those-those rights to their greatest test. And we are still here advocating for a return to the freedoms that that we enjoyed then that are, you know, frozen and eroded, time and time again today, by a government afraid of that kind of people power returning,
26:17
SM: Obviously, you are living those feelings and expressing them even I am seeing you at some of the events at Kent State. And democracy is very important to you. But when you look at as boomers have aged, and now the early boomers or the late, they are now on social security for the first time this year for the, for the, for the boomer generation, how many of them really have lived up to what they did when they were young? It can you, can you put, can you put you have seen over the years, even some of your friends who were activists, like you were back in the (19)70s, early (19)70s. And have seen what that, how they lived their lives. I guess, what I am really asking is, have they lived up to their, their beliefs of that particular era? Or did they fall into the same trap of many previous generations of, you know, just going back and making money raising families not really caring about your fellow human beings because they got to put bread on the table, or-
27:22
RC: I think there is a lot of people, and I am included, in part because I remember, my parents never had, we never had money, we never, my mother was a stay-at-home mom, my dad worked in a factory, money was always an issue when I grew up. And I remember my dad telling me that he could not afford to send me to college, because he had three boys to put through school, and I was just going to get married and have kids anyway, and so on and so forth. So, I know that as a parent, today, I gave my kids far more than I otherwise might have. I expected them to work less than my parents expected me to work because I never wanted them to work and to go through what I went through. I mean, I it took me eight years to do my undergraduate work, because I always had to work to pay for it myself. And I had to work, sometimes go to school, sometimes, work while going to school, sometimes drop out and work for a year and then go back. And so, I find myself as a parent, saying to my kids, as long as you are in school, I will pay for it. You know, I want you to get through in four years. And I think that there is a lot of boomers like me who overindulge their children to begin with. And then some of them got, I think, trapped in that whole materialistic, you know, giving, give our kids what we did not have. And therefore, the material possessions became as important as they were to our parents, you know, so what they rejected in the (19)60s, they embrace in the (19)80s. And so, I remember being part of that myself, until I really got a good look at you know an America that does not, you know, it does not have its priorities straight. You know, it is more and more people are going homeless and hungry, as more and more people are losing their jobs. I cannot imagine where all the boomers are now fighting for healthcare now. They were, they have just, they have not only lost their way they have lost their mind. How can they not see that the issues we face today are even more critical than before, you know, to have a record, you know, to have, you know, such a huge number of people in my generation, support George Bush for eight years. It is mind boggling. People who said that they marched in the (19)60s, but now you know, they you know, this is the, this is the new way that they support America. I do not I do not know that any one part would do so, I would not, and I would like to believe I know when America has gone wrong, and I am willing to still stand up to it against the powers that be if they are taking us in the wrong direction. I do not know where the half a million strong Woodstock generation is. They rejected those values back then they moved on and adapted their values and their hearts are not there-
30:19
SM: There were so many activists in the late (19)60s and (19)70s. And I, I have often wondered whatever happened to their parenting in respect to raising activist mentalities and, and their sons and daughters. Now, and of course, when we talk sons and daughters now, we are talking about two generations here because the generation that followed the boomers are the Generation Xers that seem to always have problems with boomers, and now Millennials are the current college group. There is some activism lots of volunteerism. But do you see where, you see much activism on college campuses now yourself?
30:58
RC: Well, yes, there is pockets of activism. But so much of campus activism has to do with, with causes, you know, I suppose, if there were a draft, and most of the kids that age were being sent off to war as it was for us you would see far more activism than you see now. But I also see a decrease in activism by design. If college education was affordable to me, my parents could not pay for my college. But I could work all summer long and pay for my tuition for an entire year. My tuition at Kent was $197 a quarter in 1968, it cost $400 a year to live full time in a dorm with a meal ticket for three meals a day. Today’s college student does not have that affordable, affordability. And I think that is by government design. So that never again we will witness what we witnessed in the (19)60s, today's college students are burdened with debt, they are burdened not only with tuition debt, they are burdened with credit card debt all by design. Because if you can keep them working jobs while they are in school, if you can keep them so fretted over the, you know, the, without the fear of being expelled or the fear of having, of not being able to graduate, so on and so forth. Then they are going to be less inclined to take up causes, causes beyond themselves. And I think that, that- that was- that was what has happened. That they knew that the Woodstock generation’s children were coming to college. And they did not want a repeat of what they had in the (19)60s. So, they made college unaffordable, they made both parents have to work they made college students have to work. I truly I mean, I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist. But I think unaffordable colleges, this was by design.
33:04
SM: Well, you, you said something very important. I have always mentioned I may have mentioned to you the title of my book is “Magic Moments.” And-and that was because in each interview, there has been a magic moment, you just created a magic moment. Because I did not expect that. But it is very well put, because I felt for a long time. And this is not my interview, it is yours. But that activism is a term that scares college administrations to death. And it is like they do not want a repeat of what happened back in the (19)60s and early (19)70s. And because of the fact that they know that this generation of students or parents are very close to their kids, and anything that upsets the apple cart, they will take their kid out of college, and it is all about the bottom line. So, you raise some really good points there.
33:55
RC: Look at some of the laws that are being passed. I was a teacher for 31 years in high school classrooms. High school teachers today are well I mean, and my, my son, my son, Ian is going to be a math professor, and now well, they have laws on the books right now where you can have a teacher removed from the classroom, but something as simple and vague as conduct unbecoming of a teacher. We have to worry that any teacher who speaks his mind, or you know, a few years back, I stood in front of the White House with a sign saying, “Impeach Bush”. And on the other side it said, “The Bush-Cheney Occupation, who will reconstruct America?” This is right after we went into Iraq. I was out there for six hours. And I remember these policemen coming over to me, they knew I was a teacher. And they said, “How long are you here for? Aren’t you teaching a summer school,” I mean, like they had they knew who I was, and where I taught? And that was, that was chilling.
34:54
SM: Wow.
34:56
RC: And I remember as our union kind of briefed us, our Teachers Union briefed us two years ago on how all the laws were changing. So that we had to be more careful about our political affiliations and our political activism. Because if a school board saw us as looking rebellious for participating in conduct unbecoming a teacher, then you know, we could lose our jobs even, even if we had tenure. That is a small example of what I think is occurring on a larger scale. Our government learned a great deal from us in the (19)60s, they learned a great deal of about what can happen when people mobilized and when, when, when the opposition grows, and so on and so forth. And how does it grow? You know, Walter Cronkite showed us live feed pictures of the Mai Lai Massacre. You know, we saw more and more coffins coming home. That is why we do not have access to that kind of information anymore, that that makes Americans turn, you know, that is why we have the radio waves and the television stations flooded with government propaganda, because they would have to counter any anything that might have done what happened in the (19)60s, encouraged people to, to know the truth about what was happening in Iraq. I mean, we had so few people questioning the weapons of mass destruction. And the New York Times had to take out a full-page ad and apologize to its readers around the world, that they did not do their jobs, the apologies of the Judith Miller's and all the people who were taking their talking points and Karl Rove, it is a whole different ballgame now, and it is all because they learned what can happen when there is a press. They learned what can happen, when there are not-not enough laws on the books to stop us from, from protesting. And then when they shot us down in 1970, they did so with impunity, no one has paid a price for that. They were emboldened in; they have been emboldened by their ability to shoot down college students during the protests and get away with it. Do not think for one minute that did not have a chilling effect on a lot of boomers, who did not see that we got anything accomplished, beyond getting shot down, when we stood up.
37:25
SM: Very well put, well, I am actually, I am one of those because Kent State affected me my entire life and I and I was not there. The, how important, and, were the college students in ending the Vietnam War in the end, and-and how important were the boomer generation and all the other movements, because when you think of the antiwar movement, the civil rights movement, we also had to think of obviously, the women's movement, the gay and lesbian movement, the Chicano movement, the Native American movement, the environmental movement, and all the all the movements that all kind of looked at the civil rights movement, as an example, on how to do a movement, how important were boomers and those movements.
38:10
RC: Well, They, they all emanated from our generation, and in the (19)60s and (19)70s, were all of the above, all the things that you mentioned, were, you know, pretty much defining who we were, as a generation of youth. And, you know, you have to, you have to take a look at what the (19)60s really were, you know, after World War II mothers were sent home, because they had, they were all in the factory supporting the war effort. But they were sent, they were sent home to just support their husbands and have, have babies and whatever and it was, so idyllic, you know, the music of the time, sort of, you know, represented that complacency, that feeling that the only thing that matters was getting a color TV, having a nice car, having a home which you own, and those became the values and all of the things that you mentioned, the values that involve not material possessions, but involve human rights. Were those that became the causal laws of the (19)60s and (19)70s. Because it became apparent that while America while the American middle class was, was growing, and while opportunities, seem to be abounding for a majority of Americans. There was still this painful minority that was being shunned, that was being discriminated against, who did not have those opportunities, who were not given those jobs, who were not getting elected to positions whose voices were not heard. And thank God that among us, in that middle class, who is still enough people to say this is not right. This is a government of the people, by the people for all of the people you know. This is you know; we have first amendment rights that all voices will be heard, yes, the majority will rule but the minority is heard. And so, if, if their voices were not being heard, we had, thank goodness, a sufficient enough number among the boomers that took up their voices for them. And, you know, we had a very, you know, lots of, we had a good number of white people that were killed, along with black people fighting for civil rights in the south, and the sufficient number of men that fought for women's rights and a sufficient enough number of whites that continue to fight alongside their Latino brothers and sisters, and their Native American brothers and sisters, and their black brothers and sisters to achieve the equality that is the true promise of America. That, to me, is not the entire boomer generation, but it was a very significant part of the boomer generation and I always called it the Woodstock generation is part and parcel of the boomer generation. But it was the enlightened segment of the boomer generation, and I think there is still a significant number of those who raise their children, right. And their children were out there pounding the pavement for Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton, strong people who represent that famous line that is about the true values of what it means to be an American.
41:38
SM: I am going to turn my tape here, hold on a second. Because I always looked at, I got the tape back on now, I always look at the boomers as a very passionate group to begin with. So, in life, if you do not have passion for what you believe in, that is- that is that. this this next question I am going to ask you is, I am going to read it to you this on all the other stuff going on in my head, because I have done it quite often. But I have to read this to make sure everything stated, do you feel that boomers are still having a problem with healing from the divisions that tore the nation apart in their youth, and division between black and white, divisions between those who supported authority and those who criticized, criticized it, division between those who supported the troops and those who did not. And I know that is very still big in the veteran community. And, and, of course, what did the Vietnam Memorial do in Washington in terms of healing these divisions within the Vietnam generation, but Americans as a whole, and do you feel the boomer generation will go to its grave like the Civil War generation not truly healing? Am I wrong in thinking this? Or has 35 to 40 years, made the statement “Time heals all wounds” the truth? In other words, this this comes up because I want to do a little anecdote here. We took a group of students to see Edmund Muskie before he passed away, mid (19)90s. And in that meeting, we asked this very same question, we thought he was going to come back to the 1968 convention and all the protests and the divisions in the country. And he had a one-minute melodramatic pause, and he had just come out of the hospital. And he said, “I just watched the Ken Burn series when I was in the hospital. And my only answer to you is that we have not healed since the Civil War.” And-and then we went on into a 20-minute discussion with the students. Your thoughts on whether within our generation, the boomer generation, the 70 million, are having a problem with healing? Or am I just or am I just thinking something that is not really there?
44:04
RC: Well first of all, I am not sure what you mean, when you say healing. If you think that we were a generation that is looking to heal. It is unrealistic to me, as long as there is racism and discrimination, and, and inequality in this country, it is a gaping room with no hope of healing. It is not like there is a band aid on it. And you are hoping that it pulls together and starts to heal. It is a gaping wound to me every bit as evident as it was in the (19)60s. When, when we have a situation in this country, where a significant number of boomers are fighting to keep their children protected from the message of the President of the United States two weeks ago. That is racism, every bit as racist, as we saw, in the (19)60s, when we look on television, at people carrying signs in front of the White House, labeling the first African American president, a socialist, a terrorist and an illegal alien, then we have racism every bit as prevalent as we did in the (19)60s. You have, for the first time in recent history, I have never seen it, a congressman, who screamed out “You lie,” to the President of the United States during a joint session of Congress during a televised address to the nation in need, desperate for health care. That is blatant racism, like I have not seen, since the (19)60s when they were still using the “N” word you have got even today, for the first time in, in my lifetime ever, seeing people dressed in camouflage, with guns on their shoulders, at political healthcare rallies with the President of the United States there proclaiming their second amendment rights and, and being protected by their first amendment right, to be able to express their opposition with a gun in their hand. You know, there are people that are on talk radio applauding them even. I do not know if you saw that television, on television, the Baptist minister, a white minister using biblical scripture, the day before Barack Obama was coming to speak on health care in his town, citing biblical scriptures as justified praying for the death of the African American president. We have seen a significant rise in hate groups since 2000. And that has a lot to do with fears of immigration that are promulgated by a biased media, the failing economy and the election of a black president. We have people that are still saying when the African American president wins the Nobel Peace Prize, instead of celebrating as a nation, that our president is so honored, they were saying, “It is not time, it is too soon.” Now you tell me, we do not have a gaping wound when it comes to racism in this country. We have not come far enough to say any healing has begun. Because I fear every single day that will not happen.
47:46
SM: This is kind of an offshoot, does this say something about the boomer generation, their failure to live up to some of the things they were fighting for in their youth?
47:54
RC: I am sorry, but I cannot blame a generation. Because it was, I say, I mean, I believe that. In large part, the, the liberals and the African Americans, and the minorities, who were a big part of the anti-war movement, and the civil rights movement of the (19)60s, are the ones who played a significant role in getting Barack Obama elected. So, we are here. We are here and we were heard. And to be honest with you, I think we were not so muffled during the Bush years, because I still believe in my heart, he did not win either of those elections. They have the power and the connection to rig both of those elections. And I do think that the anger that was built within our rank in those eight volatile years. It played a significant role in our numbers doubling. And I think we reared our ugly face again, for the first time, since the (19)60s, in this last election.
49:03
SM: Good point. What, if you were to be in a room at Kent State University with students that you went to school with in the in the late (19)60s, early (19)70s, say a room of 500. And, and you were to ask them, of all the events that took place in their lives. And again, the people at Kent State might say what happened on May 4, 1970. But if this was a, from all over the country, from all universities, what was the one event that had the greatest effect on them in their lives? What event would that be?
49:43
RC: Oh, so the Vietnam War. I would say the Kent state killings and the shootings at Jackson State are a part of that answer. I mean, you cannot separate the Vietnam War from the shootings at Kent State. Because it was the most polarizing war, it was one of the most unjust wars, one of the most protracted, it has taken 58,000 from our generation, it was a huge blight on our generation. And it was our generation that fought that war and that brought that word to its knees So that is the single defining moment of our generation, number one that, I mean not being affected, those of us who survived the shootings there, most profoundly. But all of us were profoundly affected by the Vietnam War. Everyone, whether they were there or not, they know somebody who died there or whose life was greatly affected by that war.
50:44
SM: When. when did the (19)60s begin? And when did it end?
50:50
RC: I would say it began with the election of John F. Kennedy in 1960. Was it 1960? Yeah, because he died in (19)63. Because that has when labor prevailed. He was seen as a president that that was accepted and supported by labor. That election was dominated by labor. And he was seen as a proponent of civil rights. And he was a- he was a Democrat. That, that the working class looked at it.
51:39
SM: And when did the (19)60s end?
51:43
RC: The (19)60s ended in 1970 [inaudible] was probably the most chilling and polarizing reaction to the strength of the voices that emanated from the women's movement, the civil rights movement, and the anti-war movement.
52:05
SM: What do you think was the main reason the Vietnam War ended?
52:10
RC: Because of Kent State, no question. Within six weeks of the shooting at Kent State, Nixon began withdrawing troops from Southeast Asia. If you look at any of his memoirs, or those written by his closest advisors, Ehrlichman and Haldeman they all say that the days after Kent State were the most dark of his presidency, it was after Kent State that he was most fearful. I mean, they had buses lined up around the White House. There were people in the streets in every, every, 750 college campuses shut down in protest. I believe it was that year that Harvard did not even have their, their graduation on time. Campuses were shut down. And when you tell the businesses out there that their Ivy League schools, and their colleges are not sending their graduates out to build their companies. That is a, that is a damning moment in this country. They never anticipated I think, when they conspired to-to hear era and stifle our voices, the students of Kent State. And I do believe it was planned everything ahead and-and funnel down through Governor Rhodes in the, Ohio. I do, I do believe that they did not anticipate the reaction it would bring when you when you shoot down four middle class, white students on the Kent State campus. Then all their efforts to brand them as outside agitators failed. Cause you know, they, they, every student hit with a bullet was a Kent State student. 24, or 25, 24 students and a faculty member indicted by the Ohio grand jury as part of the Kent 25, these were student and faculty, these were not outside agitators.
54:08
SM: One of the other issues besides the healing that I tried to get to in this interview is the issue of trust. There are a lot of examples that the boomers saw when they were young of leaders failing them in many ways. Some are very obvious, and some we found out in later years. Obviously, we knew about Watergate and Richard Nixon, and certainly Lyndon Johnson in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, and then Dwight Eisenhower on the U-2 incident when he lied to the nation on national television. And then in recent years, obviously, even President Bush and weapons of mass destruction there was also the issue John Kennedy, being involved with the coup in Vietnam and a lot of other things. What, why, I preface this question by something that a professor said to me in class, in psych 101. And it had nothing to do with what was going on the world it had to do with how people deal with each other. And that is that he, this professor said that trust is a very important quality, we must have in ourselves toward others. Because if there is, if we cannot trust anybody, we probably most likely will not be a success in life. And that always stuck with me in a 101 class. And then that was in the mid to late (19)60s when I was in college, and then all this stuff is happening. And the boomer generation has always been looked at many times as a generation that is distrustful of all leaders, no matter what position they were in, whether it be a university president, a rabbi, a priest, a head of a corporation or a politician. And certainly, college administrators, your thoughts on how important this issue of trust is, within the generation? Is this a negative that this generation did not trust? I guess what I am getting at how important the lack of trust within the boomer generation has played in their lives and passing this on to their kids and their grandkids.
56:13
RC: First of all, the lack of trust does not emanate from the boomer generation. This is something that occurred over time. And I would say that that stands with the Watergate era, where, for the first time we were confronted in our democracy, with the reality that even the people we entrust in our fair elections, to be in government, and even with all of the laws and with a rock-solid Constitution, which by the way, is I understand, the oldest constitution in the world that has survived. With that in place, if we could have such government corruption, as we witnessed in the Watergate era, where every branch of government was involved in that cover up: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branches of government were all, and the CIA and the FBI, intelligence, were all involved in criminal conduct and in cover up of that criminal conduct. That was the first time in our nation's history where we were confronted with how far reaching that deception can be. And we have spent a great deal of time since then, devising laws that would make it more difficult for that to happen again. And yeah. In the last eight years, we saw where many of those protections that came in the wake of Watergate, were undermined and ignored and overturned by the Bush administration. And we saw more illegal wiretapping. We saw more corruption; we saw rigged election. We saw unprecedented corruption and greed. And we had none of the safeguards that it seemed we had that brought down the Nixon administration, we still have not brought down the Bush administration. Because that deception remains, as long as money controls our government to such an extent, we cannot trust anybody that we elect, because the majority of them who are in those offices are beholden to their lobbyists, and their corporations that are promising them huge golden parachutes, when they come out of Congress, and it is a one man show, every man for himself in government, and I do not view any of that trust in other people being restored. And it is not just trust in other people. But if this is a government of the people, by the people, for the people, if we have no trust in government, then we cannot trust that we the people can effect change, even in the ballot box, and so on. So, we go to public financed elections and take the money out of the realm of corporate corporations that can buy those votes, then trust will never have any hope of being restored.
59:37
SM: Music played a very important part in the lives of boomers, and you have made reference to Woodstock generation, of course Woodstock anniversary was this year, 40th anniversary and all the great musicians that were around in the (19)60s and in the early (19)70s. Your comments on how important music was in not only aiding but assisting a lot of the causes that were that the boomer generation was linked to. And of course, when we talk about this tour, we are not only talking about rock music, we are talking about Motown, which was a very popular music of this of the year, your thoughts on the musicians and music and people who were musicians, and may have had the greatest influence on the boomer generation.
1:00:26
RC: Well, you know, prior to the music that you are referring to, you know, we were listening on AM radio in the early (19)60s, to Johnny Angel, you know, and Leader of the Pact, and all these, you know, love songs and songs about rock and roll and the bandstand, you know, kind of dance music. And then suddenly, I can still remember the first time I heard Bob Dylan singing “The Times They Are A-Changin.” And it was poetry, you know, it was a method. I have never heard music like that. I have never heard a voice like that. I have never heard people just sitting down and listening to lyrics, until I got to Kent State and saw people not dancing, [inaudible], but sitting on the floor, listening to the words, the song, like, like, go, and like, you know, the folk songs would be Joni Mitchell “paving paradise and putting up a parking lot” and all of these voices telling us that things are not what they should be, and that there is a better way, and that we have a responsibility to change it. The antiwar song that came, you know just, “something happened in here, you know, there is a man with the gun over there.” You know, just the song itself “War, what is it good for?”. I mean, they, every single day, we were being challenged to think. And before that we were not, we were just, you know, kind of dumbed down to, to just feel. Feel good about what we had, feel good about our dreams and out plans but not think about anybody else in the picture. And suddenly there were these musicians that were making an entire generation aware of the ugliness of war of the unfairness of things and of the responsibilities we had to be part of what was happening, “the times they were a-changing” And it was inspirational. To watch that music not only grow in popularity, but draw half a million people to upstate New York, to celebrate the fact that, you know, we were born again, as-as, as Americans, we rejected the values of the generation before and we were going to look different. We were going to sound different. You know, we were going to wear different clothing, different hairstyles, and we were falling in love, not just with peace and music and [inaudible] but with the belief that we have in the power of people to change the world.
1:03:14
SM: That leads right into what do you think the lasting legacy will be of the boomer generation, best, the best history books, there has been a lot, a lot of great books in the (19)60s coming out right now and over the years. But historians often say that it is 50 years before the best history books start arriving on a period. So, when the boomer generation is in very old age, or is passed on, and then the best books are being written about that 1946 anon period for boomers, what do you think they are going to? What do you think the sociologists and historians might say about this generation?
1:03:52
RC: I think more than any other generation in our nation's history, we had an entire generation that was, that became what I think all college students have historically been. Because we were the generation that our relatively non-college going parents made sure would all go to college. We were like the generation that arrived on college campuses when it was affordable and when it was part of the American dream. And college campuses have traditionally been a haven for protest, a place where ideas are debated the ideas of the day are debated and where people prepare and plan to become effective participants in American society. And as part of that dream of our parents, we became more than any other generation, the conscience of America and on college campuses. When we look war in the face and said: We do not like the war, you wage in our name and we are not going, we do not care that you are drafting us, we are not going. We will go to Canada before we fight. We are not going. We will stand in the streets and lock arms in Washington and keep you from going to your businesses and keep governments from going to their offices, no business as usual. As long as this for as long as long as this war is taking our generation, and fighting something that is just unjust, we were the conscience of America. And I think that is why as I said before, it is by design since then, that they have made sure that college students today do not have the time to do the thinking and the dreaming that we had. They do not have time today, [inaudible] because we are a nation right now. Without a Conscience.
1:05:49
SM: Before I go into the last part of the interview, which is basically some of the personalities and terms of period, where we just make a few comments. This this one I would like you just do, like John Filo did when I interviewed him early summer, what was it like to be? I was not there. But in your own words, what was it like to be there on May 4, 1970, maybe just to give a little description of the day. And I remember John told me that, you know that he never planned to be there that day, he was an off-campus reporter was called to the event, was studying for working on a paper, and then he was thrust right into it. Just your thoughts of what transpired on that day, May 4, 1970.
1:06:41
RC: Well, I planned to be there. The shooting occurred in the backyard of my dormitory. But when that day started, I remember most even as we walked through the campus, looking at other cadres, as we call them, the Kent SDS was no longer but I was part of a cadre of activists that for that entire year had gone to demonstrations in Washington and Chicago and Cleveland and, and we had just gone to Ohio State to support them the Friday before when they were getting shot at with buckshot and, and tear gas. And I remember as I was walking up to the campus, and I saw another group called the Elm Street gang, and it was like, I felt as part of something significant, I felt a part of something important. We were committed to putting that war to an end, Nixon had announced the invasion of Cambodia only days before. And the campuses across this country were up in arms. students across this country were saying no to war in record breaking numbers. And it is mind boggling to me that we had such a connection to one another, from campus to campus across this country. And we did not have what kids have today, internet. We did this all with telephone long distance calls and leaflets on our own campuses. And with a media that covers what we did. We were as united on that morning, as I had ever seen anyone, I felt a part of something so much bigger than myself. It was not about an action that the crazies were going to do. It was not about an action happening on the Penn State campus. It was about a call made at Rutgers University for a National Student strike. And we were part of that we were part of something that was happening across this nation. And so, I entered the campus feeling inspired, feeling, feeling energized, feeling empowered. And even as the National Guardsmen advanced on us with tear gas again, and with the bayonets that proved, you know, so devastating to the kids who had been stabbed the night before. I never felt the sense of fear, even in the midst of all of that opposition, all of that military might, I still had trust in our lie, in America, and in our Constitution and its guarantees of the right to free speech. I still had trust that as long as we protested peacefully, they would never open fire on us. And that was a rude awakening. Which is quite an understatement, to, to see them lift their weapons in aim at us on the practice football field was shocking enough, shocking enough that as my brother walked toward them with his black flag, I walked up to Alan and said, “Alan, they are aiming right at you. Let us get out of here.” I actually said to him because it was the first time ever it had crossed my mind. Do they hate us so much that they could open fire on and even as they left the practice field and made their accent up the hill? I still watch and even as I turn them turn, even as I watched them turn in unison and lift their weapons and even as I saw the puffs of smoke. My first instinct was to run far because students at Ohio State had been shot at with buckshot. It never occurred to me; they would have lived military ammunition. And if it were not for Alan's roommate, Jimmy, who pulled me behind a parked car, I might also have been hit because as soon as we got behind the car, it was obvious that this was live ammunition was zipping by our heads and piercing the steel bodies of the cars and something into the grass to our left and the pavement to our right. It was the most horrifying 13 seconds of realization that, you know, when the gunfire ended, my first thought was, “oh my god, they shot they shot us” and then to come out from behind that car and see Bill Schroeder lying on his back with blood on his shoulder, three feet behind me and I can see over in the premise yard. My friend Sandy Scheuer, being carried with a shot a bullet through her juggler vein and then remembering where I had last seen Alan would have put him directly in the line of fire. I went running across the pavement to the foot of Blanket Hill seeing, someone lying in a pool of blood and dreading that it was Alan only to find Jeff lying in a pool of blood and then my friend Eddie running up behind me and yelling into my ear, Alan and Tom both got hit. You know that is-that is a, that is a moment that has never left me, the shock of it. The fear, the, the sound, the colors, everything is as, as vivid in my mind as it was on that day. To see American soldiers turning their guns on American people is something that I hope nobody in America will ever witness again.
1:12:12
SM: Did you go to the funerals of any of the students?
1:12:16
RC: No, I did not. We, Sandy's funeral was in Youngstown. And Allison's was in Vicksburg. They were huge media events at the time. And it was, I do not know how to explain. We were getting a lot of phone calls from press, we were getting a lot of hate mail, and death threats. Because Alan was one of the wounded. He was seen as one of the instigators and FBI was calling and whatever. It is not surprising that we all went home and stayed there for a while. We did not seek out anything, any, any of the places where the media was, I almost regret that because I think we should have been telling the truth that we knew immediately. But any of us who were really actively involved when we had our own family members, like my aunt who barged into my mother's kitchen that night, looking at Alan with his arm bandage still, from his wound, yelling, “you know, there was a sniper, you know, there was a sniper.” I mean, like to have your own family members believe that American soldiers would not turn their guns on American people without provocation and without a reason to do so. You know, you are living in a country that sees you not as a victim. But as an enemy. You do not want to- you do not want to leave the house.
1:13:50
SM: Even leading up to that weekend or over the last the two years when you were an activist at the university and going to other schools. Did you feel that you were being watched at all by, like the student leaders of Kent State were being watched by the FBI or the CIA or did you have any sense of that or was all this realization came, not trusting the government right on that day?
1:14:14
RC: I never experienced any of that paranoia until 1977. When we moved on to the campus intent to protect the May 4 site from destruction. It was during that time that it was very obvious we were being followed. I mean, there was a cop car following my-my Ford Pinto everywhere I went on that campus. We were being, we had charges dredged up against us, I was charged with criminal trespass at an action when I was on when my lawyer actually me on the good time had to-to keep me far away from Kent because they kept jailing the leaders of the May 4th coalition. There were so many trumped up charges on us in 1977 that our attorneys were successful in bringing in members of the US Justice Department to follow us around so that we had proof that we were not breaking the law. So, we could avoid having more of the trumped-up charges against us.
1:15:14
SM: When you heard about-
1:15:16
RC: That was the only time I have been paranoid about being followed.
1:15:19
SM: When you heard about Jackson State. How did you react to that? The Jackson State killings?
1:15:24
RC: Oh, well, we were not, that that was our, that is our sister in tragedy. I mean, we were still reeling from what happened to us only days later to hear that it was still happening on this campus. But what bothered me most was the outrage was, was so minimal, compared and I was not sure if it was strictly racism, or just an America too numb to care anymore. You know, because had had they had succeeded in having the chilling effect that they desired, that they could continue to shoot students, and not have any action, any reaction would be, you know, decreased rather than in-, would there be an increase? I think, I do not know if it was a test, test run, or what. But it was always, to me very tragic that the students at Jackson State, the deaths of their students at Jackson State, did not meet with the widespread protests of four white kids at Kent State.
1:16:22
SM: Thanks for sharing the experience. My note still, I can tell in your voice, when we were talking here that even brings a lot of emotion to you even now, and probably will forever.
1:16:40
RC: How Could it not, How Could it not, [Pardon] How could it not?
1:16:41
SM: Oh, yes, that is right. And again, I think I have mentioned to you and Alan, the effect that this has had all over the country that I often wonder how many people there are in the United States, who are our age who that that event on that day has shaped their lives. I wish someday-
1:17:01
RC: I would like to believe that it did not make them more reluctant to stand up for what they believe in. I would like I would like to believe that they have not taught their children more about the risks of campus activism than, you know, the historical significance and the gains of that of that activism. I think that student activism is still alive on our college campuses. I just think that, like I said before, we have made it more and more difficult for students to be there more and more students live, you know, off campus, or for have to commute or have to go to jobs, after they are, when they are not in classes that they do not congregate the way, we did. We used to hang out in the hub by hundreds every day, and play music and talk we talked about the shooting. I do not see that-
1:17:56
SM: There used to be guerrilla theater tours. But I have not seen that since I was a college student.
1:18:05
RC: I loved it, SDS always had a guerilla theater committee.
1:18:07
SM: The, the end of the interview, we are just going to be just real quick responses to, to words or terms or our names of people. Woodstock.
1:18:17
RC what do you want me to do? Come up with a word or a phrase?
1:18:21
SM: A word or just-just a couple of words and just your thoughts when you hear the, these names or terms of the (19)60s, Woodstock?
1:18:30
RC: The birth of a new era-
1:18:35
SM: 1968
1:18:39
RC: Robert Kennedy's assassination-
1:18:42
SM: Counterculture. [Woodstock] What I did not hear?
1:18:48
RC: Woodstock. [laughter] Or more the Yippies, I kind of thought of them both at the same time, the, the hippies and the Yippies-
1:18:58
SM: Yeah, that was my next, how did you know that? ESP here, that was my next one. The hippies and the Yippies.
1:19:06
RC: Counterculture.
1:18:58
SM: Students for democratic society.
1:18:58
RC: [undecipherable]:
1:18:58
SM: Weathermen?
1:19:13
RC: Absolutely, the best idea, the most organized, the most inspirational and the start of it all. If it were not for SDS at Kent the impact, May 4th would not have happened, and I do not blame them for the shooting. I blame them for the movement that brought the attention to Kent State. So, that Nixon hated Kent SDS. I think he chose Kent to be the, the martyr, the victim rather, Kent to be the, I take that back. He chose Kent to send, as the place to send his message that student protests will not be tolerated because of SDS. They were, they were the most significant, organized catalyst for the student anti-war movement in this country-
1:20:12
SM: The Weathermen?
1:20:15
RC: Well, I would just say, not misinformed, what was I, there is a word I am thinking of misguided. [chuckles]
1:20:25
SM: The Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
1:20:29
RC: Powerful. Powerful. They were among us. We had friends who came home from Vietnam and joined Vietnam Veterans Against the War and VVAW. And they walked alongside us, they were with us, they were shot at with us. I had one friend with his dog tags still around his neck, who survived the shooting at Kent said he was more afraid on May 4th than he ever was in Vietnam. So, they played a very significant role joining our protests and-and I think giving-giving credibility to the anti-war movement.
1:21:04
SM: How about the Young Americans for Freedom? I am not sure if you are aware of that group.
1:21:08
RC: I do not remember who they were.
1:21:10
SM: They were the conservative group that was against the war.
1:21:13
RC: I did not, I obviously, I think that now that you say that I do have a vague recollection of them. I did not pay much attention to them. I do not I do not remember having any experience with them. I do not remember them having a viable presence on the campus. I only remember hearing about them. And so, I felt detached from them.
1:21:33
SM: The enemies list?
1:21:36
RC: Oh, well, I would say we probably have a bigger one now.
1:21:43
SM: Abbie Hoffman-
1:21:46
RC: You know what? I have, I have a very positive reaction when I hear the name of Abbie Hoffman, because he and Jerry Rubin and the Yippies, and the Chicago Eight, I think did more to, for publicity. Did more to give a face and establish the humaneness to the anti-war movement. We were not just, you know, a bunch of radical, you know, to the cause. I mean, I think people always had a tendency to believe that anybody that protested was like the labor movement, the civil rights movement, just this group of people that had that had like, a single agenda, sort of thing. When, when the Yippies came on the scene and Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman and the Chicago A they brought humor to it, and they made people relate to it. You know, everybody knows what it means to be to be treated unfair, and to have things not make sense when someone tries to justify that unfairness. And I think nobody brought that to light more than Abbie Hoffman during the Chicago Eight trials. I mean, people who would never pay attention to anything involving both sides, reading and laughing and following what was going on there. And I think they are by learning things they otherwise might not have learned about. American injustice.
1:23:15
SM: That is amazing. Because just today when I interviewed Rennie, he talked about Abbie and in one of the MOBE events where they were facing 20- (audio cuts out).
1:23:28
RC: I mean it is like the whole Doonesbury, you know, that they play, you know, cartoonists, and then there are people will never read the front page about war, but they will read the cartoons and they will learn about the war. You know, Abbie, Abbie, played that role. [How Bout…] I think, I think brought a lot more people to the movement because of his humor and how he, you know, made it a human experience. And, you know, like, that, people were just so ruled by that with television sitcoms were so big at the time, whatever it became like watching a television sitcom every day.
1:24:02
SM: Right. Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda?
1:24:07
RC: A perfect match for a perfect time. [chuckles] I, I admire both of them. I never understood Jane Fonda going the Christian route when she did, but you know, I remember the wonderful work she did with the winter soldiers. And I always admired Tom Hayden and I always saw him and Rennie as the intellectuals in the Chicago Eight. And I, I always I have, I have long admired Tom Hayden and his continued activism. And I just think that the time when he and Jane Fonda were working together was, was a very important time for two brilliant minds to work in concert.
1:24:50
SM: Yeah, I came to Kent State with those students from OU (Ohio University) the year that they came to Kent State, it goes the fourth anniversary [yeah], and I was in a room with them. They were walking around the campus, and we were in this small room, and I do not remember what building, but we were in there for an hour talk and they were great. The Black Panthers, which was Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, Angela Davis, the Cleavers, Kathleen and Eldridge. Just your thoughts on black power and the black power movement.
1:25:18
RC: I will tell you I admired the Black Power movement when I moved to Boston right after May 4, the one because I stayed involved with, I left after Kent State and moved to Boston, with the intent to get away from politics. I was so disillusioned with what I just witnessed that I did not want to be part of anything political for a while. But the one organization that I visited, when I was sitting in Cambridge, I was walking down by the Charles River, and I saw the storefront for the Black Panther Party, and I went over there, because they had a profound impact on me in in understanding the plight of black Americans that that was much more serious than anything I have seen through the eyes of Martin Luther King. You know, I mean, I, I was always aware of the civil rights movement, and always impressed and inspired by those that follow Dr. King, but it was the Black Panther Party that showed us a darker side of racism in this country, and really illustrated, you know, how many blacks were being gunned down in their communities and the atrocities, you know, committed by the Oakland Police and it was a I was kind of educated when the Oakland Police came to recruit at Kent State. And SDS protested vehemently. That was my first exposure to the Black Panther Party and everything that they did in their neighborhoods, with their breakfast programs and their protection programs and whatever, to me, was every bit as impressive as everything I have seen in SDS
1:26:55
SM: Let us get straight into Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X.
1:27:01
RC: Oh, well, you know, they both played a very, very important role in the lives of African Americans because even though you know, there were most of the people followed Dr. Martin Luther King's advice about keeping protest peaceful and whatever, Malcolm X also legitimized, you know, protecting yourself and doing what, what is absolutely necessary to protect your family. And, you know, he, he put a face on government as a violent government in a way that Martin Luther King did not in his rhetoric. And, you know, I think that that was an important, that was important awareness to the edibility went one step further than Martin Luther King, because there were some that knew that they had grown more weary of, of just marching and petitioning. There were others that realize we have got to be a lot more proactive in meeting the man face to face. Malcolm X played that role.
1:28:03
SM: Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew.
1:28:09
RC: Oh god, criminal-criminal, Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew laid the groundwork for the bloodshed at Kent and Jackson State, Nixon called campus protesters, Agnew called, likened us to Nazis and Klansmen. Okay, they inspired those to, inspired the rhetoric of Governor Reagan who said if these students want a bloodbath, let us get it over with then Governor Rhodes at, in Ohio. He said these are worse than the night riders and vigilantes. He is the worst type of people we harbor in America. It is over within Ohio. We are not going to treat the symptoms we are going to eradicate the problem. It began with Nixon and Agnew's dehumanizing us and treating us as, as what we would be seen as today as terrorists. And then with Reagan and Rhodes following suit, it was easy for armed gunman to come on our campus and not see us as idealistic youth, but to see us instead, as target and as an enemy in a combat situation. I blame them for the deaths at Kent state and Jackson State.
1:29:19
SM: Lyndon Johnson and Robert McNamara.
1:29:22
RC: Well, I had some very negative feelings, well negative feelings about both good feelings about Johnson when it came to civil rights, negative feelings about Johnson when it came to the Vietnam War. Negative feelings about Robert McNamara for living a lie as long as he did about the Vietnam War when he knew the truth that it was unwinnable. But when everyone was chastising him for coming out with the truth with his book later, when he admitted that, that people died for nothing in Vietnam, while other people were, were shunning him. I said, You know what, how many people have gone to their grave like Nixon and Agnew with the truth that they knew and never told that before, before they died, Robert McNamara could you know, truth at any time is valuable to me, truth at any time means something to me. And so, it was easier to forgive McNamara, because he owned up to his mind while he was still alive, so I have some respect for a man that I thought only was the same for many decades.
1:30:23
SM: The two Kennedy’s, John Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy.
1:30:25
RC: I love the Kennedy’s. I mean, for all the faults of John F. Kennedy that have come out in the history books since then. I do not ever remember being more inspired. And, you know, seeing I mean, I never saw the White House through those kinds of eyes until they were in there. They, it was a focus on family and focus on civil rights, a focus on America, the values of America that were always in our history books, and that seemed to disappear with his assassination. And then more so, even more so in the assassination of his brother, who I think was the better of the two. I still cannot watch films of Bobby Kennedy and seeing him riding on the train. I sobbed for days afterwards. Whenever I watch any live footage of Bobby speaking and campaigning, before he died. I was so I am so affected by it, it is too painful for me.
1:31:28
SM: Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern.
1:31:32
RC: Oh, Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern. Well, you know, they were there, it is hard to even say anything definitive about them. They were, I would say they were important candidates to the anti-war movement, because they were politicians who campaigned on anti, anti-war agendas. But I never felt that they were strong enough candidates, they all paled in comparison to the Kennedys. So that is all I remember, was never really feeling like we had to return to the strength of the candidates that we had before them.
1:32:10
SM: Timothy Leary.
1:32:13
RC: Oh, Timothy Leary. I worked at Harvard while he was still there. Now there was some- this guy's had a lot to do with painting the image of the Woodstock generation as just a bunch of drug crazed hippies. So, I do not know, to me he was just a Harvard professor who, who was played a significant role in branding the Woodstock generation as a generation where drug use was rampant, kind of delegitimize and seem to glorify that whole as the generation, psychedelic generation, so I, I do not see him as being political, even though he was part of the anti-war movement. I more associate him with drugs that would change.
1:33:10
SM: How about George Wallace and Ronald Reagan?
1:33:16
RC: George Wallace I think I think of him as a racist, still. Ronald Reagan, I see him as a joke. I never I do not know how people can continue to praise a presidency where maybe he as an individual did so little. Ronald Reagan was made out to be a great president, after his death by a right-wing media that decided to create an icon. So I see them both as. I think George Wallace was significant in in polarizing the south, and I see Reagan was significant, showing that we are our values. Our, our selectivity for president's presidential candidate was continuing to decline significantly
1:34:09
SM: Which leads into just Jerry Ford and Jimmy Carter.
1:34:13
RC: Jerry Ford, I just thing of Chevy Chase, when I think of Jerry Ford, my strongest recollections of Jerry Ford are tripping and falling and standing up at state dinners and on his own two feet still falling over. Jerry Ford was a pasty. Jerry Ford was president only because he agreed to pardon Nixon. He was a sellout and a cop out. And probably one of the worst presidents we have ever had. Who was the other one you just asked? Jimmy Carter. You know, he had the presidency at an awful time. I think he took the reins at a time when we were on the verge of a terrible recession. And I was living in New York at the time we were waiting in gas lines, and I think he is probably one of the most misunderstood presidents. And he was just like Reagan being defined after his presidency. Jimmy Carter really became the president that I think people hoped they were electing. Afterwards, I admire him tremendously for the work that he has done with Habitat for Humanity and world peace, promoting world peace, he is certainly deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize. And I was never more proud of him than when he was the first what was happening in Congress with calling Obama a liar, racism or the racism that was, I have, I have as much respect for him as one of the few-
1:35:40
SM: Daniel Ellsberg and Benjamin Spock.
1:35:45
RC: You know, I think of them as being again icons in the anti-war movement. Daniel Ellsberg. And he is when you think about the Pentagon Papers, and the role that they played, that was huge in bringing Middle America to understand what took Robert McNamara how long to tell the truth about that we were lying. We had done what we have come to do so well, today, lied America into an unjust war and sacrifice an entire generation of youth for that lie. Ellsberg Put his, his life and freedom on the line to get that truth, tremendous respect for him. And Benjamin Spock was, again, you know, when you have professional people like that, who have a good life and a good reputation, and then they create a whole new image of themselves as part of an anti-war movement. I think that was a bold response and he suffered a lot of criticism and was misunderstood a great deal. But again, like Abbie Hoffman, these are people that all were responsible for bringing a certain awareness from a certain segment of the population to the anti-war movement, they all played a part.
1:36:58
SM: That brings right into Daniel and Philip Berrigan, the Berrigan brothers and Barry Goldwater.
1:37:05
RC: I would say, Berrigans’, same as above, they played a significant role, and everybody has their part to play in the anti-war movement, but Barry Goldwater was probably one of the only republicans that that understood the danger of the kind of partisan politics that we see today. Because it was probably the last of the great Republicans who could work in a bipartisan way in Congress and who truly did see the danger of the military industrial complex, like Eisenhower was not as good a Republican, I do not think. But Barry Goldwater was a brilliant man and a humanitarian. And even though I have never ever in my life supported a Republican, I think he was one of the last ones that truly stood up to traditional republican values.
1:38:09
SM: How about John Dean? I am almost done. John Dean.
1:38:12
RC: John Dean, one of the greatest contributors, were it not for John Dean, I do not think we would know as much as the truth of Watergate that we do. And more importantly, is being at the heart of the Watergate scandal has done, has given him a perspective unlike any other Americans in how much more corrupt the Bush administration was, how much more they were able to get to get away with because they, they, you know, they could act, they did not have to worry about the tape that exposed Nixon, they made sure they went through the Republican National Committee with their secret email system that probably cost the life of what was his name, Mike McConnell, who died mysteriously in a plane crash in December, because he knew the extent of that it was called [inaudible]. Libyan underground communication system, but we know about-about Watergate, mostly because of John Dean's brilliant I mean, he is-he is a brilliant writer. He is a brilliant and-and probably one, what it is said that book that he just wrote, oh, “Conservatives without Conscience.”
1:39:04
SM: He wrote “Worse than Watergate too-
1:38:12
RC: He Wrote “Worse than Watergate,” which is very good, but his book “conservatives without conscience” more than any book I have ever read about republicans helped me to understand the difference between a Goldwater Republican Reagan Republican, Cheney Republican, and Bush Republicans. He knows theory and he know research on authoritarian personalities and the danger of having authoritarian personalities in positions of high office-office, where if you do not have a conscience, people will suffer and die and pay a huge price for your greed and corruption. And it made my blood went cold when I read his book because I realized the extent to which we had authoritarian personalities in high positions of office in the Bush administration. John Dean is, I was, I would campaign for him for President if he were ever to run.
1:40:31
SM: He lives in California. I think right now, but he comes to DC a lot.
1:40:36
RC: I think he may, he may be one of the most brilliant critical writers of our time.
1:40:40
SM: You know, he is from Binghamton, New York.
1:40:42
RC: One with-with more insight into the inner workings of government than anybody. He should be on. It should be on any advisory staff in the White House.
1:40:52
SM: But he is good. I have seen him on TV. The women, Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug, Betty Friedan.
1:41:00
RC: You know what, all these women played a role in legitimizing women in positions of power, women in positions of influence. You know, I mean when I think of Bella Abzug, I think of her hat. But I also really think of just, I mean, I have never seen a woman with-with so much strength and-and could just to speak off the cuff like that, you know, I mean, she was just, it was a mover and a shaker. You know, Gloria Steinem did a lot for the women's movement and continues to write, I think, some pretty brilliant treatises on, on the role of women, I was so glad to see her coming out. With I think Gloria Steinem take on women, and the role of women in politics in particular, is exactly what we have seen the opposite of what Sarah Palin.
1:41:53
SM: Oh, yes,
1:41:54
RC: we need we need more analysis so that women understand when they are being misled by men to use token women to convey a man's message. There is no question in my mind. For example, the Sarah Palin is today the Stepford wife of Dick Cheney.
1:42:13
SM: [laughter] Now that is another magic moment.
1:42:16
RC: There is no question about it. Because, Cheney, if you notice, as soon as Obama was elected, he came out, and he kept talking, he went, he made his rounds on all the talk shows, and then everybody was kind of laughing at him, like, “go away Dick, your policies were voted out.” So then, mysteriously, he started using his daughter, his gay daughter, and who's the other one, Liz? Liz Cheney.
1:42:40
SM: Yes-yes. She is on TV a lot. Yeah.
1:42:44
RC: It is like, where do these women come from, they were never spokesperson for the Republican Party or for any political agenda. They were never political. But suddenly, they had all of these talking points. And it was like, I truly believe in, and logic tells me this and everything I am seeing tells this, Dick Cheney spent eight years using George Bush for his talking points. So, all he had left was two girls in his family that he could put out there. And then, they say right before the right before and right after Sarah Palin gave up her governorship, she was on the phone with Cheney. I think it was orchestrated by Cheney; I think he was educating her. I think he was handing her, her talking points. I think he was- he was behind everything. Every single- everything she was doing all these things, and still trying to run the country [indecipherable] still be a significant following of women [indecipherable]-
1:43:49
SM: What, what do you see in the two Boomer presidents that are that are linked to the qualities of boomers and that is Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
1:43:59
RC: Oh, I have never thought of George W. Bush as a boomer is that terrible. I have always seen him as this. Otherworldly. Bill Clinton is brilliant. I always say his wife, is the more brilliant of the two. When I read her book, “Living History.” I imagine what it must have been like for her the second time he sat down on her bed and said we have to talk about his ridiculous, you know, discretion with you know, women are not weak in that way. I am sorry. I have to say it, a spade a spade here. You do not see women leaders experiencing the shortcomings when it comes to setting, you know, women discretions, as we have seen with governors and-and people like Bill Clinton, you know, who risk so much in there, he was doing such important work. And he was effecting such important change, that he did not know how easy it would be to fall. If it were known those kinds of indiscretions in the White House and such, you know, in a public place like that, that I think somebody like a Hillary knows that and understands that, and I am not I do not need to minimize it to it just being a point of who is stronger. That is not succumbing to sexual pressure and advances in temptation. But in reading about their political walk together, she always struck me as the more knowledgeable, the more decisive, the more inquisitive, and the more strong, person between the two, but you know, things being a as they may, women were not seen in the same light as men. And so, he was the one elected unfortunately, rather than her, I think it would have been a different America, had she got into the White House before him. And I will support her when she runs next. So, I have a lot of respect for Bill Clinton, I lost a lot of respect for him because he just was so stupid about little things that overshadowed his brilliance on such big things. But George W. Bush is not a self-made man. He is a father, you know, he is a Bush family made. man. He is an idiot. He cannot string two sentences together. I do not think he had an original idea when he was in the White House. And I think that he did not win either election. I think both of them were stolen and he was a pasty of Dick Cheney the whole time. This was all the neoconservative dogfight, Dick Cheney, all of those people from the original PNAC, you know, Progress for New American Century, ran our government for eight years. And George Bush was their patsy.
1:46:44
SM: Down to my last two questions. One is the books of the year, when you were in college, were you or were any of your peers’ reading books that had an influence on you? Were there authors or-
1:46:57
RC: You know, authors that had a tremendous influence on me were Bernard Shaw, I remember when my brothers got their draft notices, as I was reading a lot of what Bernard Shaw was saying, just to understand the historical context for the war in Vietnam, when I actually started to imagine my brothers being sent off to Southeast Asia to fight, I kind of wanted to know where it all began, I knew that I wanted to do the play a part in keeping them from going, but I also knew the importance of knowing what I was talking about. Because even as I said, I was against the war, I was really only saying I was against my brother's going, and I was not able to articulate a reason why. And so, I remember reading a lot of things by Bernard Shaw, but I would say, without question, it was a lot of what was happening in the papers, the newspapers were a critical part of my, of my newspapers and television were a critical part of my growing sense of dissatisfaction with the war with my growing awareness of the wrongness of it. And I really do believe that the Chicago Seven Trials, eventually the Chicago Eight Trials were instrumental, those books, like “do it” and feel this book. Again, were very, very, they were fun to read. And they were inspirational. They made it seem not just important to be part of the movement, but fun and cool. To be part of the movement-
1:48:26
SM: Particularly when, when remember when Jerry Rubin went in, into the bank.
1:48:31
RC: Yeah.
1:48:32
SM: Yeah, he wanted to go to the bathroom. And they said, you get out of here, and he went right in the middle of the bank. [laughter]
1:48:38
RC: I know, and people laugh at that, and they become heroes for dropping out and, you know, turning on as they said, and so I would say that those were very important influence.
1:48:53
SM: The last question I have because we have been talking about the (19)60s and the (19)70s and everything afterwards but the (19)50s and you mentioned about you know, being around your parents and the labor union talking at the dinner table and everything but what kind of an influence did the (19)50s have on you it was portrayed as the era where the World War II generation want give everything to their kids because they grew up in the depression and then they went through war and they wanted the kids to have everything many of them are boomers were the first ones to ever go to college. People, we watched television, the black and white TV, we watched Howdy Doody, Rootie Kazootie and all the kids, the TV shows and everything about family and seemed like everybody was happy and-and then of course, the Mickey Mouse Club and TV westerns and of course we have read about those in recent years how been the good guys and the bad guys and we have portrayed to a lot of the boomers and the Indians being the bad guys, but just your overall. Well, how did the (19)50s shape you, you know, and I have always wondered that because you got to talk about the (19)50s when you were talking about boomers.
1:50:07
RC: Well, I had to stay at home mom, like most of the kids. You know, I, I went to school in Barberton, a working-class town where it was, it was an anomaly if anybody's mother work. I used to- I remember saying to my mother, what, you know, I am so proud that you were a nurse, why do not you go back into nursing, I would have been very, very proud to have a working mother, but she said, no, your father wants me to stay home with the kids. My mother never drove a car, I had to sneak to take drivers training, so that I could drive a car, because my father believed that women shouldn't drive cars and his answer was always your mother does not drive, you do not need to drive. So, you know, I not only had that very personal influence that women's places in the home and women do not have mobility upward or even outward, they have to rely on a man to get around they have to rely on a man for everything. But I also had, you know, the influence of television which you know, had the- you know, Ward Cleaver and-and June you know, where even when it came to making important decisions about the children or the home, it was always “wait till your father gets home,” she could never decide anything for herself Ward had to always kind of put everything into perspective. And he was the intelligent one. And even the few role models that I had, like on Sky King, you know, you had Penny, who also could fly but of course, she had to, you know, rely on-on, you know, her uncle for whenever things got tough. So, women could, women could be involved in things, but they could not run things. And for the most part, I grew up in, I, we lived right next door to the high school. And so, my greatest aspirations were not to be the valedictorian of my school, even though I was in gifted classes from the time I was in fourth grade, but to be what look like television wanted us to be, you know, with the Miss America pageant, showing that we are supposed to be pretty and complacent. And so American and I would always sit on my porch and watch the girls arriving for prom and homecoming with their gowns and watch the cheerleaders practicing and the major at marching. You know, with that sizing, when I first went off that can say that I wanted to just be an extension of what I was in high school, I tried out for cheerleader Kent State. I tried out for the [inaudible], I instantly got involved in social activities. And I was the social chairman for my dorm, planning the rowboat regatta and passing out lollipops and roses to the tune of Burt Bacharach with my brother and his friends came marching through Lake Hall, honest to God, “champion 1234 we do not want your fucking war.” And I called my brother just devastated: How could you do that? You ruined my moment. You know, we are playing Burt Bacharach and passing lollipops and roses, talking to little sisters and they are talking, you know, throwing the F bomb and talking about war. And, you know, I desperately in the first year at Kent State hung on to that upbringing and that stereotype that I was conditioned to become a mindless, you know, complacent girl who, you know, even if I had the presence of mind to get myself to college, I was only going to be a teacher or a secretary or a librarian, you know, and I certainly was not going to be an anti-war activist or have thought of my own.
1:53:33
SM: Very well said, I had no more questions. Is there a question that I did not ask that you thought I might ask?
1:53:43
RC: I had no idea that I had no idea what you are writing or what you are looking for. I just responded saying that I can, with far, far more words than I prefer. But so, I hope you'll choose the best. And not make me look like a long-winded attorney-
1:53:58
SM: No, it is all every see, every interview has been different. And sometimes I do not even ask all the same questions in each of the interviews. So, you are the 85th person and then Alan. Alan, I actually interviewed him a little bit when he was at Westchester University, but he was, it was 30 minutes and then he had to go to dinner with us. And so, then that so-
(End of Roseann Chic Canfora’s Interview)
(Start of Alan Canfora’s Interview)
1:53:58
SM: The first question I want to ask and first off, thanks again for agreeing to be interviewed. What was it in your personal background? You are growing up years in the (19)50s. Was there something that happened in your life that made you become an activist? Was there something even before what happened at Kent State?
1:54:51
AC: I think I became a compassionate person because of my father and my mother. They were both World War II veteran my father lost his right eye in an accident in the Philippine Islands at age 19 when he was in the army, and he then went into a hospital, ultimately Battle Creek, Michigan, where he met my mother, she was an Army nurse. My father became a union organizer and leader starting in the 1950s, that your aerospace in Akron where he was a union worker at Goodyear. He became active in the liberal movement as a union organizer and activist. But then he went on to the Barberton city council as a democratic City Councilman in 1964. I think I gained some compassion from my mother, who was a nurse, and political activism from my father, who was a union organizer and a liberal democratic politician.
1:55:47
SM: How did you pick Kent State? Did you were you thinking of other colleges or knew was that the one was always on your mind?
1:55:54
AC: Well, I went to Kent State because it is nearby in my hometown of Barberton and where I still live. It is about 13 miles to the east. And most of my high school friends were all going to Akron University, which is about maybe five miles away. So, I wanted to get away from my high school friends, and they wanted to go someplace new. So, I really chose Kent State also, because I had attended some basketball games there. While I was in high school on some high school, regional and district championship basketball games. I thought it was a beautiful campus and a lovely little city. And that was another reason I chose again-
1:56:35
SM: What was your major there?
1:56:37
AC: Well, I started out as a prelaw major, and then I transferred into education and business. I made a few changes concerning my major and then I finally ended up with a bachelor's degree of general studies. No major.
1:56:56
SM: Besides your parents, who were obviously role models, did you have any political figures or historical figures from your readings in high school or that you really looked up to? Like that may have been mentors as well?
1:57:11
AC: Can you repeat the question please?
1:57:13
SM: Were there, when you were in high school or when you were young, were there any other mentors like either historical figures or political leaders or people you read about when you were young that inspired you?
1:57:24
AC: Well, no doubt John F. Kennedy, President Kennedy inspired me. My family visited Washington. Soon after he was elected. Around 1961, we went on a vacation to Washington, and we stood outside the White House, and we idolized President Kennedy, before and after he was assassinated. But I think his assassination in particular, had an impact on me to follow in my father's footsteps. Later on, that my dad became a city councilor in 1964, shortly after President Kennedy was killed, and I always paid attention to politics. For example, in 1957, my earliest political memory is kneeling at the side of my bed praying, that Adlai Stevenson would defeat Dwight Eisenhower for president in 1956. [oh my gosh] Actually, yeah, and because my dad was always a Democrat, and I can remember he was watching the presidential conventions in 56 and 60 and 64. So I was always very political minded. And I really prefer the democrats greatly over the Republicans, always My father always said to me that the worst democrat is better than the best Republicans. And I took that to heart. I just kind of idolized the Democratic politicians. But on the on the literary side, I also started reading a lot of Edgar Allan Poe, when I was around in the seventh grade. And so, I read a lot about Edgar Allan Poe, and I read a lot about his life. And I always thought that I would like to be a writer. Try to write in the style of Edgar Allan Poe. And so, I was fascinated by his style of writing.
1:59:08
SM: When you think you know, this is mostly a lot about the boomers and the (19)60s and (19)70s. But, you know, the boomers when they were in their elementary school years, it was the (19)50s. And was there something during the (19)50s besides your parents now, how important was television in your life? in those early years when you were in elementary school, particularly with the television shows there were so many westerns on television at that time? Well with the good guy and the bad guy and the bad guy was always being the Native American or the Indian. But then we had Howdy Doody and the-the Mouseketeers. Was there anything- it almost seems like, and I liked your perception on this, that it was children were so protected by their parents during the (19)50s. Even though we were going through the Cold War, it seemed like such a happy time. Your thoughts on that?
2:00:03
AC: Yes, I think the (19)50s were very enjoyable years for my family. My father had a very good job as a union worker at goodyear, he had a good paycheck and good health benefits. We were living in a house that my parents were buying downtown Barberton, the backyard was a double size compared to all the other lots in downtown Barberton. And so, we had a huge backyard, where we were constantly playing baseball, and football and then we would go down to the playground to play basketball during the fall months. So constantly, we were playing sports. Now at the same time. We did spend a lot of time indoors watching television, and also going to the movies, the movie theater was only about three or four blocks away, it cost a nickel or a dime to get in. And we had walked down there, the streets in Barberton and were very safe to just walk around everywhere. It was a town of about 33,000. It was most industrialized city in Ohio per capita, a lot of factories, and most of my friends or parents or fathers worked in factories as mine did. So, it was an idyllic childhood. Really, I have no complaints whatsoever. But we go to the movies all the time. And I can remember seeing the movie High Noon and a lot of monster movies and a lot of cartoons, very enjoyable weekends going to the movie theaters, but during the week we watch a lot of television. Yes, we watched the Mickey Mouse Club. I remember in the (19)50s and (19)60s also watching a lot of Band Stand, American Band Stand, which stimulated by music, my interest in music and my parents always had on the radio WHAR radio in Akron, which is where Alan Freed had his radio show broadcast his first rock and roll program on the radio. In fact, he coined the term rock and roll. And my parents were very much into rock and roll they loved it. They would often jitterbug around in the living room. My parents were good dancers. And so, we just had constantly had music playing we had the TV on but in particular, I think the Mickey Mouse Club stands out a lot of cowboy TV shows but also, American Bandstand. We love to watch the young people of Philadelphia dancing on TV. And that was a lot of fun.
2:02:15
SM: When you think of the (19)60s and the early (19)70s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind?
2:02:20
AC: Well, in the early (19)60s, I remember before the Beatles we had a lot of the American bands, would refer to the girl groups, the Shirelles, the Shangri La's, bands like that. We used to sit there in my junior high school classes. We would go to lunch, and they would play music at noon, and the girls would go on the gym floor dancing around to this music. And I just remember, you know, starting to take an interest in girls, I was very popular in school I along with my sister, we were both in the major Work Program, which was for the intellectually advanced classes, the gifted program they call it, so we went to the same schools with the, you know, the regular students who were all our friends and my sister was very popular. And so, as I and we have, you know, we have participated in school functions, I was always on different sports teams and, but I played baseball professionally, I was the captain of the Little League All Star team. One of the best players in the league, I was not only on the all-star team, but I was the captain of the all-star game when I was 12. And then I, I played Little League Baseball when I was 10, 11 and 12. And then when I was 13, 14 and 15, I play what they call senior Little League Baseball. I was by the time I was 15 for that league, I was also the captain of the all-star team there. So, I had leadership skills. I look back on it. Now of course, I am a political leader in my hometown. I am the chairman of the Democratic Party for the last 17 years. But I think I really did learn my leadership skills as a baseball player on the baseball diamonds. I remember I remember a lot of playing baseball, attending elementary school, junior high school, the I remember the launch in elementary school, the launch of the satellites and the Sputniks and all that that really created a big interest in my mind concerning science. And I had a great interest in that all through my school year, as well as both during-during junior high, then the Beatles, of course came when I was in ninth grade the British Invasion of music and that had a big impact on the instead of letting my hair grow a little bit long I think 1964, (19)65 trying to copy the Beatles and of course, we listened to all the Beatle albums, we knew all the words and everybody was just fascinated by the British music but also when the Rolling Stones started playing I started gravitating more liking the Rolling Stones more than the Beatles and that was kind of unusual in my hometown. Everybody else heard the Beatles. I kind of like the bad boys and the Rolling Stones.
2:04:46
SM: Is there is there one specific event and I remember I said ask this to your sister yesterday and-and I know that what happened on May 4th is probably the most, the biggest event in your life but when you think of, is there one specific event in your life that had the greatest influence on you before what happened at Kent State?
2:05:10
AC: I cannot think of one, Steve No, quite honestly, I think it was just kind of, I am trying to think of the proper word here. I mean, I had a very colorful and eventful life, a very enjoyable life. I Just cannot think of one, no.
2:05:29
SM: One of the things over the years and you have watched television, you are up to date on politics. In 1994, when Newt Gingrich came into power, and republicans came into power, I can remember him commenting on the (19)60s in the (19)70s, and really attacking the entire boomer generation, he loved, he loved to do that. George Will done quite often in his written articles, anytime he can get a shot back at the boomer generation. And basically, what they are saying is that the breakdown of American society all happened because of what happened in the (19)60s and (19)70s. Regarding the drug culture, problems between blacks, blacks and whites in America, the lack of respect for authority, all the break or divorce rate, permissive society, not trusting anybody in positions of responsibility. So, your comments on the Gingrich’s and the George Wills who, anytime they have a chance they are going to shoot back to that period and really condemn the boomers.
2:06:33
AC: Well Steve, I understand perfectly what you are saying, of course, you are referring to the culture wars,
2:06:36
SM: Right?
2:06:38
AC: People, these conservatives, these republicans, they love to rewrite history, in a distorted way, they are revisionist, in the worst sense of the word. They can focus on the negative aspects of the (19)60s. And I know David Horowitz is the lead cheerleader in that regard. But I would like to point out that we also had in the (19)50s, in the (19)60s, gross racism, sexism was rampant, homophobia reigned supreme, those were primitive years in our culture. And for some people in the 1950s and (19)60s, it was starting, I think, with Elvis, and starting with rock and roll in the (19)50s, that young people started to take a stand and blaze their own trail. And this really perturbed conservatives and people like Newt Gingrich and people like George, well, it wish- it was still Ozzie and Harriet in America forever, but those days are gone. People stood up, people blaze their own trail, they started listening to their own music, wearing their own clothing. And the young people in particular, led the way in forging the new cultural traditions in America. And the people that prefer the old 1930s, (19)40s, and (19)50s, the primitive conservative religious culture, those years are gone. And they are upset about that. And they always complain. And it is too bad for them, because those years are gone forever. Now, you did ask me about one event that did change my opinion in the 1960s. And I do remember, you kind of caught me off guard there for a moment, but I would like to say what I think entirely changed my path was, as I mentioned, I always watched the convention, the political convention. Not much the republicans but the democrats starting in 1956, (19)60s, (19)64. Well, let me say, Steve, in 1968, when I was sitting in my parents living room on Newell Street in downtown Barberton, and I was 19 years old. I was I had just finished my first year of college, and I was watching the Democratic Convention. And I saw 1000s of students beaten in the streets of Chicago. Live on television, I was shocked. I was appalled. I knew there was going to be a demonstration there I read about in the newspapers. But I was completely overwhelmed with anger. When I saw those Chicago policemen crushing the skulls of the young boys and girls in Chicago, I will never forget the feeling that I had that. I knew at that moment, I was going to join those protests, I was turning against the war in Vietnam, in a very slow way, in an evolutionary sort of way. During my first year in college, another significant event, yes, I do remember this one. I was sitting in one of my first political science classes as a freshman. And the professor was talking about the war in Vietnam almost every day and in a negative way he was he was against the war in Vietnam. And so were several of the students in the class. Most of the students in the class were like me just sitting there listening, trying to absorb this new information, which we never considered before, antiwar opinions and believe me when I was in Barberton, until I graduated from high school, I never heard a single person object to the war in Vietnam, not one. And I was for the war in Vietnam. I totally supported our troops and the government. I never thought for a minute the government would do anything against the interests of our people. That was how naive and trusting that I was because of my upbringing. With my mother and father both being World War II veterans, loving our country and loving the military, I was not against the military or government at all. Until my freshman year when I started hearing, my political science professor and some, a few of my fellow students are passionately arguing against the war. And one day this this one young kid in the class said, during his opinion statements he was making that day, he looked around the classroom and he goes, for example- [audio cuts]
I will never forget that moment. And I was, I felt days, because I had never considered whether or not I was going to make up my own mind about Vietnam. I love my government, the newspapers, my teachers, my parents, I let others think for me until that day, and I really was done. I remember, I walked out of that classroom after the class was over, I walked out to my car, which was a 1957 Chevy. And I sat in my car for about 15 minutes. in kind of a dazed state, thinking, oh, my God, I have to think for myself, I have to make up my mind about this important issue of war in Vietnam. I was thinking about my friends who were over there at the time, my schoolmates, my baseball, fellow baseball players and others who were in Vietnam at that time. And that was 1967 in October, I believe. I was greatly changed by that one particular day in my political science class, where I realized I had to start thinking for myself. And then from there on out after that, after, during the fall of (19)67, the winter of (19)68, going into the spring of (19)68, I was evolving, slowly, letting my hair grow longer, still listening to a lot of rock and roll music, and starting to change my opinions about the war in Vietnam. In 1968, in August, when I saw the Democratic Convention, that was it, that was the that was the determining factor, which really compelled me then to decide to join the antiwar movement. And as fate would have it, the next month after the Democratic Convention was when I moved into the dormitory on the Kent State campus, a campus address in Johnson Hall. And two weeks later, I did join the campus SDS.
2:12:21
SM: Very well put, it leads right into my next question. And if you were, I asked this to your sister yesterday too. If you were in an auditorium at Kent State University, and with a with a group of boomer generation, student people who had gone to college at that particular time from all over the country. So, it is not just Kent State, it is that students from other parts of the country. And do you, they were asked what is the one event that may have shaped their lives more than any other? And this is thinking outside the box even beyond you, what would you think most boomers would say?
2:12:59
AC: I say they probably say the war in Vietnam. I think they might, they might say the assassination of President Kennedy. Well, and I really do believe my own heart. I think it was the assassination of President Kennedy. That event does stand out. Also, as far as your earlier question. I remember, I was in ninth grade, I was sitting in my Latin class at Highland junior high school, November 22, 1963, when suddenly the loudspeaker came on. Without any introductory comment by the school officials. It just went right to a radio broadcast from Dallas, Texas, announcing the President Kennedy had been shot. And then a few minutes later, then President Kennedy was dead. My Latin teacher, Mrs. Barker, burst into tears in front of our class, she was sitting at her desk. And she said to our class, you young people, remember this day, she says, I have seen things like this before in the past, she goes, suddenly history changes, events change, politics changes. She says you do not know what is coming. She goes, I do not know what is coming. But she said, I think this is going to mark a great change for the worst for our country. And she was sobbing. [wow] So that had a big effect on me when I was sitting there at age 15.
2:14:22
SM: When did the (19)60s begin in your eyes? And what would you believe was the watershed moment?
2:14:29
AC: The 1960s? I would say two things. The assassination of President Kennedy and the Chicago convention of 1968. [agreement]
2:14:38
SM: Describe the qualities that you, you are a boomer but obviously you-you have seen your generation as they have grown older, because now the oldest boomers are 62 years old, hard to believe first year that some of them are getting Social Security. What do you think are the some of the greatest strengths of the boomers and what are their weaknesses? If you were to look at the generation?
2:15:02
AC: I think some of the strengths of the baby boomer generation include the courage that our generation showed to take the stand against the primitive conservative morality of our parent’s generation. You know, we respect our parents, we respect their generation, because they survived the war. They survived the Great Depression. They triumphed in World War Two, but at the same time, they clung to a conservative, religious, primitive, backward morality. And I think we resented that. So, we had to show courage and blaze our own trail, with new music, new culture, new clothing styles. And so that required a great deal of courage. And we paid a price for that, especially those of us who grew our hair longer and took a stand against the government about racism or the war in Vietnam. Very often, we suffered government or police repression. And still, we persevered. And so, I think that is another good trait of our generation, we have great perseverance in the face, in the face of great opposition from the government, from the church, and from the police, and the military. We persevered, and we stood strong against racism, against poverty, against the war in Vietnam. And I really think that the achievement of our generation stopping the war in Vietnam, I do not think I exaggerate. And I do not know how many people agree with me, but I think it was probably one of the greatest achievements in the history of the twentieth century, when you think about it, the power and the might of the greatest military operation in the world, the United States government military, that the citizens of our country brought that to a stop, we stopped the military draft, we stopped the criminal war in Vietnam. I think that is a tremendous achievement of the 1960s generation, but often overlooked in history books. But, of course, because the history books are generally written by conservative individuals trying to preserve the old order. But I think that stopping the, I think, also the civil rights movement of our generation, in particular, our African American brothers and sisters, they deserve a great deal of credit for taking a stand in the streets of the South, especially where there was such fierce and violent opposition people like Martin Luther King, people who were from the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the white students who supported them and the Students for a Democratic Society. That is the group that I joined, at Kent State, I think so these organizations and these leaders and these individuals stood strong. And it made a huge difference in the history of our country. Can you hang on a second Steve? I have got a call; let me call you back after I get off.
2:17:49
SM: Do you have my phone number?
2:17:50
AC: Yes, I do.
2:17:52
SM: When we were talking last time, you were answering halfway through a question on the strengths and weaknesses of the boomer generation. You had just talked about their strengths in pretty much detail. What are some of the weaknesses within the boomer generation in your eyes?
2:18:08
AC: You mean nowadays or back then?
2:18:10
SM: Back then and if you are disappointed in, let me get into the next question after that, which is, have you been disappointed in, in the boomer generation as they approached now senior citizen status?
2:18:25
AC: Well, I think one of the weaknesses of our generation back in the day was we had youthful excesses, both politically and socially. And culturally, basically, because we were blazing a new trail of our own, without any kind of a serious precedent within memory. We made a great break from our parent’s generation, even though we were anti fascists, as they were like, for example, during World War Two, our parents’ generation took a very principled and proud stand against fascism. Unfortunately, some of us well, we had to do the same thing during the Vietnam War. And when our government was going in a criminal wrongful direction, and we had to take a stand against our own government, we thought our government was becoming fascistic. So, we took a stand against them. And I think we did that very well. We helped stop the war in Vietnam. And we helped to bring great changes socially and culturally in our country, and politically. But I think, among those weaknesses, because we were blazing a new trail, and we did not have any kind of a previous example to build upon. I think there were some excesses with drug abuse, which is regrettable. We had learned the hard way we were, one friend of mine said we were kind of like a bunch of guinea pigs back at that time. And we had to learn the hard way sometimes about that stuff. And I think there was some excesses in that regard. And also, I think, politically, for example, some of the tendencies were a bit extreme in the political movement, the anti-war movement because we were too idealistic, which is natural for younger people to be excessively idealistic, but it was, had some bad effects. For example, the Weatherman and the some of the other political tendencies were a bit extreme and out of the mainstream and did not build a mass movement, did not unite broadly with the masses of the people and I think it is regrettable. And other examples of that, but I think for the most part, our generation, I think the plus, the minus the, far outweigh the minuses. moment, hang on, I have another call.
2:21:04
SM: Okay. We finished with that particular question, or that-
2:21:09
AC: was finished with that part. But I was going to talk about the current feelings about our generation nowadays.
2:21:15
SM: Yes, definitely.
2:21:17
AC: I think that, as our generation matured, unfortunately, many of us forgot the lessons of Vietnam, and left behind our activism that we felt so passionately during the Vietnam War, once the war was over too many from our generation, regressed politically and socially, socially. And seems that too many of us just took a stand once against the war in Vietnam and did not remain politically aware and active. That is one big regret that I feel. But at the same time, even though we did elect a progressive president, like Barack Obama in 2008, I think it was very shameful that our generation chose George W. Bush, as a president to represent the baby boomer generation for the first time. That was a very regrettable choice. Too many people from our generation were deceived by the republican lies and propaganda. And they fell into a big trap by George W. Bush and our country paid a very fair price. But that was one great regret that I feel about our generation.
2:22:15
SM: How do you respond to people who say when well, the reason why the Vietnam War really ended was because mothers and fathers in the Midwest realize that their sons, sons, and few daughters are coming home from war in caskets, as opposed to and lessening the role that college students played in ending the war. And your comment on the role that college students actually played in this. You know, against the war itself. And if they played, what was the major reason why we the war ended?
2:22:52
AC: [Cough] well sure I think that college students played a huge role. But not the only role. It was true that there were businesspeople against the war, mothers against the war, grandmothers. a broad range of people oppose that war. And that really, that is a broad movement did help to end the war. But I do not think you should emphasize one segment of the antiwar movement over the other, except to say that among the students, it was our generation during the war in Vietnam that protested more vigorously than any other generation in American history, there is no doubt about it, that the-the peak the pinnacle, the high point of student activism occurred in May of 1970, for example, when the national students break occurred, after the Kent State massacre and Richard Nixon's invasion of Cambodia, almost 5 million students protested, over 800 colleges and universities shut down. And it was a tremendous tidal wave of protests that swept across the country, forcing Nixon not only to pull the troops out of Cambodia within six weeks, but also to help to bring the war in Vietnam to a more hasty conclusion. So, I think it is wrong to minimize the role of students, but it is also wrong to exaggerate that role and say that it was the only segment of the antiwar movement.
2:24:08
SM: I do not think I asked before but I, I, I talked to something like Boomer friends, even in the past year, and they still feel that the most unique generation in American history, they have not changed, even up to age 61, 62. And, of course, when I was on the college campus, I was on a different campus then you were. there was this feeling of the unity of togetherness that we are one that we can change the world. And there was a feeling that there was a uniqueness within this generation, your feelings on the attitudes that boomers had about being unique number one than and whether they were unique. Number two.
2:24:46
AC: I think that is true. For example, among the counterculture movement, the hippies, the longhairs. These were young people that were really trying to rebel against the old order, against the government against the war. Against conservative morality. And I think as a result, we were under attack by the government, and by the conservatives and older people who misunderstood there was a serious generation gap. We were under attack by the police and the government. So, it is kind of forced us to circle our wagons and feel a great sense of brotherhood and sisterhood. And I think that was one of the most beautiful aspects of our earlier time together as a generation. So, I think that that is definitely true.
2:25:31
SM: You mentioned already about that one of your disappointments in the boomer generation was their inability to carry on their idealism into as they got older. And, of course, a lot of it. You know, some people always say that that is always takes place in any generation, because of the fact that, you know, as you get older, you do not have as much energy or time. But barring that, what-what are your thoughts on the impact that boomers have had on their kids, and now grandchildren, because now 85 percent of all the college students are actually the sons and daughters of generation Xers, which are those born after (19)64. And it is the next generation sending their kids to college. But there is still about 15 percent, who are boomers who hit children late. So, there is still a lot of Boomer parents, but mostly they are heading into grandparent hood, just your thoughts on the impact they have had on them with respect to activism and sharing the experiences they went through and seeming caring, caring like they had when they were young? Just your thoughts?
2:26:38
AC: Well, I think first of all, it should be pointed out that many people from our generation continues to be progressive, not everybody abandoned their youthful idealism. For example, quite a few people from our generation became union leaders, Democratic Party officials and activists, leaders in the fields of journalism and computer science. And so, in the news media, so I think our generation continued to have a very broad impact, not everybody abandoned their political ideals. And I think in a positive sort of a way, we have changed the world. Now as for the younger generations of children and grandchildren, I think that does. For example, we are not nearly so conservative politically or morally. Religion, for example, does not dominate our culture, as it did back in the 1950s. And (19)60s, many people are rejecting the conservative force, morality, their religion tried to foist upon people wrongfully. And so, I think you can see that now, throughout our culture. For example, in Ohio, one out of every six citizens now say that they are not religious at all. And so, I think you can see that the-the legacy of the 1960s is a very profound and very positive, I think, in our society. And that has got to have had an effect, there must have been an effect on the children and the grandchildren.
2:27:57
SM: So, a lot, you know, depending on who you talk to a lot of colleges are very proud of today's college students, millennials, because they are somewhat, sometimes they compare them to the World War II generation, which was they kind of shun over the boomers and the silent generation. And that is because the current college students have already been interviewed by whatever, high school or whatever, and they want to leave a legacy. But they, the one question that comes up is that they want to leave the legacy when they are 40. Not when they are 21. They want to raise kids get a job. But they do care about other things. And of course, the boomers at that when they were young, they wanted to do it immediately. I do not know if you have any thoughts on that.
2:28:41
AC: I was like Jim Morrison used to saying we want the world we want to know that is how we felt back at that time. We were impatient because it was our generation that was under attack and Vietnam and by the military draft and by the police, and the government. But we did want to change we wanted it quickly because we were literally under attack. Now as time passed by the Vietnam War ended, and the government mellowed, and the people of America became more accepting of the counterculture and people that maybe looked or acted a little bit differently. So, I think that times have changed, and I think they have changed for the better.
2:29:16
SM: This is some question I want to read to you because it has to deal with the issue of healing. Do you feel boomers are still having problems with healing from the divisions that tore the nation apart in their youth, divisions between black and white divisions between those who support authority and those who criticized it, divisions between those who supported the troops and those who did not? We know the wall in Washington DC for the Vietnam Memorial has helped the divisions within the Vietnam veteran generation. But there is still a question about whether it has done much for the nation itself. Do you feel that the boomer generation will go to their grave like the Civil War generation not truly healing? Am I wrong in thinking After 40 years, or is the statement Time heals all wounds the truth? I say this Alan because we took students to see senator muskie before he passed away about a year and a half, when I was working at Westchester University, and we asked this very same question to him thinking that he will talk about 1968, the Democratic Convention and the tremendous divisions and he paused for about a minute. And then he responded by saying, it is we have not healed since the Civil War. And he went on to explain the divisions between North and South and the-the coming together and Gettysburg and how they never really truly healed. Do you think there is a problem with healing within the boomer generation? Or am I just imagining this?
2:30:47
AC: Well, I think it depends on how you look at it. My perspective is there has been a great deal of healing. For example, nowadays, you see very few people who are still hardcore, pro Vietnam War, who think that we could have won that war, we should have won that war, although there are a few of those people. Based on my experience, after over 10 years now of having my own internet websites, and having quite a few people contact me by email, I think I have my hand on the pulse pretty good here. Very well, here. Rather, there are still a few conservative Vietnam veterans who remain very angry. And I think those people probably never will become deals. On the other hand, I think the vast majority of Vietnam veterans, in the vast majority of people who mistakenly supported that war in Vietnam, I think very few of those people still hold to their wrong ideas. Most people now understand the war in Vietnam was a terrible, tragic error, that are 58,000 of our young people died for no good reason, and that it was avoidable, it should not have happened. So, I think there has been a great deal of healing and many people who support the war in Vietnam. In fact, I think most people who supported the war, and who supported President Nixon now see those events and those conservative people who were pro war as wrong. So, I think there has been a great deal of healing. But on the other hand, amongst some hardcore conservatives, and you do find some people in the modern Republican Party, and the conservative movement who are revisionist in their thinking, they always try to rewrite history in a wrongful way they tried to exacerbate or exaggerate the divisions and keep those divisions alive. But I think most people are doomed to failure.
2:32:27
SM: It is interesting, because Barney Frank, you know, the congressman from Massachusetts, wrote a book, maybe about in the mid (19)90s, called “speaking, frankly”. And in that book, he said, the Democratic Party was basically destroyed back in 1972. When McGovern ran for president, so many people split, and they have gone a different direction. So, when we talk about the boomer generation, and the and the issues there, we can also talk about the Democratic Party and what happened to them, because most of them-
2:32:57
AC: Well, I think that is a good example. But again, I am more optimistic. I think if you look at 1972, which was a fiasco, because George McGovern was not part of the mainstream. And his ideas were a bit to do now. And he obviously did not appeal to very many people in America, and he was suffered a serious landslide. At the same time, he was the victim of the Watergate crimes of that era. And if those crimes have been exposed more thoroughly, earlier by the news media, and the government and others, immediately, McGovern would have won. But at the same time, I would like to point out that many people from our generation did get active in the Democratic Party, even though some of us including me, were alienated from the democratic party after 1968 because of the serious tragedy that occurred at the Democratic Convention there in Chicago. But some of us eventually evolved back into the Democratic Party. And I think we have resuscitated that party to the point now that we have a- an African American president who is very openly progressive. And we are now having a great impact on the world. I think it is very clearly because the baby boomer generation took charges from the Democratic Party,
2:34:06
SM: Good points.
2:34:08
AC: I know I have in my own hometown; I am the chairman since 1992.
2:34:12
SM: That is very commendable, because you have continued to be you be an activist and also to be involved in politics and voting. And then and that is obviously a very big plus. You are an example to many young people. Two of the qualities I would like you to respond to is that the quality of movements which is part of the boomer generation, all those movements that took about kind of use the civil rights movement as a as a role model, because you have the antiwar the Native American Chicano gay and lesbian movements, the women's movement and the secondly the issue this is a very important thing is the effect of trust. The seams it is my feeling that the-the boomer generation was a very distressful generation because of the way the leaders had lied to them. Not only During the time they were of college age, but even before with President Eisenhower lying on national television to 59, about the U2 incident, which was really a big news item, no one could believe that he lied. Then, of course, we all know about the Gulf of Tonkin with LBJ Watergate with Nixon, some of the revolution revelations even about Kennedy in later years about the overthrow of regimes around the world. And then we get into Reagan and Iran Contra and all. And now even recently with George Bush and weapons of mass destruction. So, these are examples throughout the boomers live from the time they were basically in elementary school. And the reason, I am asking this question, Allen is the fact that oftentimes psychologists will say that the ability to trust is a very important quality that we must have in a person to be a success in life and to be a successful society. Your thoughts on whether the boomer generation is a very distrustful generation? And have they passed this distrust onto the children and grandchildren?
2:36:06
AC: Whether the boomer generation is a distressed generation-
2:36:10
SM: No, a lack of trust generation-
2:36:16
AC: lack of trust generation-
2:36:17
SM: Yes.
2:36:17
AC: It means that our generation does not deserve to be trusted-
2:36:19
SM: No-no-no that they are not trusting anybody else. And they think it is true.
2:36:23
AC: I think that is true. You know, we were we were raised up, for example, I was born in 1949. And I was raised up in the 1950s, which was a very idealistic time, of high employment, low poverty, there were plenty of jobs and healthcare for most people. And it was a time of rock and roll and Elvis Presley, and there was no war going on. So, it was a very idealistic, hopeful, positive time to be raised. But then in the 1960s, we saw the ugly side of American modern history, the ugliness of racism, sexism, homophobia, police brutality, war in Vietnam. And our government was turning in a criminal way toward being involved with excessive repression against minorities and others. So, we felt that we were betrayed, we have because we were raised up to have great hope in America, we felt that we found what we became of age in the 1960s, what are their hopes were betrayed? So that was why we took a stand. And I think Ever since then, you look around now you see very few people who have blind faith in their government, you know, was our generation that started that trend, I think nowadays is a very healthy thing, not only in America, but in any country, for people to look at the government skeptically and to question the government, especially their policies, because we have learned the hard way that they are mistaken policies have a drastic effect upon the common people. And whether it is the war in Vietnam, or recently, the abuses of Wall Street, which are now causing widespread suffering and unemployment and poverty, I think that our skepticism has been warranted.
2:38:06
SM: Truly interesting, if you look at some of the journals, a lot of people are fearful that Obama is going to become the next LBJ in Afghanistan, he is going to continue to bring troops in and he is never going to admit he is wrong. [right] You think there is a possibility that he could be, you know, another LBJ even though we lost love them in terms of, you know, there is-there is that possibility there.
2:38:34
AC: Yes, it is, But I think Obama is smarter than that. And I think people are going to be generally surprised when he brings peace to Afghanistan and Iraq soon and brings our economy back to life and we have national health care. I think Obama is going to be seen as a new Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
2:38:49
SM: How do you look at the music of the era because the musical obviously was very important. You hear it on the radio today, and you hear constantly on TV advertisements. I, I interviewed William Earhart a couple weeks back, you know, the great Vietnam poet, Vietnam veterans against the war leader and everything. And he took me to the back of the room. And he wanted me to read this small article. He is a teacher, at a school outside Philadelphia, and the article was a member of the birds who said, I will refer two of the members of the birds wanted to sell their music for car advertisements. He refused, he refused. And he said, even the musicians are betraying us now because of the fact that they are selling all their music to corporations. And they were the musicians that were the role models for the generation of the boomers. Just, your thoughts on the music of the (19)60s and the music of the boomers, whether it be the (19)50s, (19)60s or (19)70s and how important it was in their development as individuals and human beings. And you might want to talk about even the art that was going on in that era too.
2:40:02
AC: Well, the art, the especially the rock and roll had a tremendous impact politically and socially on our generation. In fact, I have always said that it was the rock and roll and some of those songs that inspired our political activism and even our militants, which helped to end the war in Vietnam. So, I do not think that is regrettable, and I think the fact that we mixed culture with politics is was one of the finest factors about our generation. As for some of the people selling out or selling their songs to make money, you know, some of these people have bills to pay and kids in college and health expenses. And I have never really thought it was a problem when they sold their music for TV commercials and cash down a little bit. Because I think that their intellectual property does have value and they need to have that value recognized. So, I do not really have a problem with them being compensated for their labor that way.
2:40:54
SM: When you listen to these three quotes, which do you think better defines the boomers or do you think they are they all in their own lane define them? Peter, Max used to have a poster out all the time that was on I know, it was all over Ohio State when I was there in graduate school in the early (19)70s. And the words where you do your thing, I will do mine. If by chance we should come together, it will be beautiful. The second? [I remember that] Yeah, the second quote, obviously, is Malcolm X by any means necessary. And that was out there long after he passed in 1965. And the third one we all know after Bobby Kennedy was assassinated. He had said it in Indianapolis, but he had also said in many other places, it was a Henry David Thoreau quote. And that is, some men see things as they are and ask why I see things that never were and ask why not? What I listened all three of those I, I see individuals that I knew back in the (19)60s and (19)70s, your thoughts on those three quotes, and if any one of them better defines the boomer generation?
2:42:00
AC: Well, it depends on which aspect of our generation you are talking about Malcolm X, I think spoke very eloquently for those of us who felt that we had to take a stand against our government, by any means necessary. And sometimes we were even compelled to pursue militant protest actions, because the government was not listening to peaceful protests. I think Malcolm X was the flip side of the coin. And on the other side was Dr. King who offered the peaceful solution. Our generation tried to pursue many different paths, but all trying to reach the same goal, which was peace and love. Peter, Max spoke for the-the love the hippie generation, the hippie side of our movement, the counterculture of people just trying to be groovy trying to be peaceful trying to come together. But sometimes people feel differently that gets people to get frustrated people who knew that just by waving the two fingers in the air, giving the peace sign and hoping for peace and love that that was not going to work without some kind of a militant stand, because the government itself was militant, pursuing a genocidal war in Vietnam, which killed 2 million Asian people. Those people became the victims of our military machine. Some of us could not stand idly by and just wave the peace sign, and hope and pray that the government would stop the war because that did not work. So, we had to turn to a slogan like Malcolm X's slogan, which really many of us took to our hearts. I know I did. And so, I think all of those statements spoke to the dichotomy as we saw it. We were torn, you know, we wanted peace and love. But we were again, like we said earlier, we were impatient. And so, we tried to do all those things. And even Bobby Kennedy, I s think spoke for the-the idealism of our generation, which even goes back to the earliest centuries of America. People always have high ideals and high hopes and dreams. But sometimes you have to take a stand and pay a price. Bobby Kennedy paid a price. Malcom X paid a price. And we did at Kent State but still we had those ideals. And those dreams, which were sometimes very costly, and we had to pay with the price of blood.
2:44:03
SM: Very well said, what do you think the lasting legacy of the boomers will be after the last Boomer has passed away? I remember in reading about when the last civil war veteran died, they have a statue in Gettysburg. And I thought when I first went there years ago, I said what are the statue here? This he was a last person who fought to get us. Well, they actually had a program about it around the time after he died, talking about the lack of healing, but so what are your thoughts on what do you think the legacy of the boomer generation will be as time passed-
2:44:38
AC: I think will be seen as the greatest generation in American history. I disagree with Tom Brokaw and other conservatives who try to say that the World War II generation was the greatest generation. I think, you know, it is true, they did survive the depression and they did help stop fascism and Japanese imperialism. But on the other hand, look at the look at their legacy after that. They were the generation in the greatest the war in Vietnam, they were the generation that tried to prop up racism in the 1960s. And, and other backwards traditions in America, racism, homophobia, damage to the environment and other negative aspects. So, I think that it was our generation, that made a serious break with those wrongful traditions and-and we had to take a stand against that so called Greatest Generation. And we helped stop the war in Vietnam. And we brought down Richard Nixon. And we helped to bring an end to some of these backwards tendencies in our politics in our culture. So, I think in that regard, I am very confident. And I am contented to say that ours was his greatest generation.
2:45:41
SM: Getting back to you know, President Kennedy, because we I was just listening to the inaugural speech. And of course, Today is November 22, which is 46 years ago, he passed away. And you gave very eloquent comments, the last time I spoke to you on the phone about the impact this had on you and your teacher when you were in ninth grade. But when you look at that inaugural speech, I encourage you to look at it again Allan, and some of the comments that were made, and ask not what your country can do for you, and what you can do for your country. And then all the comments about that. We will-we will go anywhere; we will help anyone. You know, there is some mixed messages even in his inaugural and now that you can reflect on it. So just your thoughts on President Kennedy and what his-his role here and obviously, the Peace Corps was very important. But you know, how did he shape the boomers just his presence?
2:46:43
AC: I think he inspired our generation, and no doubt about that. And his assassination left us with a great feeling of anguish, which caused us then to begin to awaken about the situation with our government and the situation with politics. Because many of us to snap out of the stupor, that was the inevitable result of being raised in this country and the soporific 1950s. So, he paid a very dear price. And our generation as a result, I think, began to wake up and snap out of it and pay attention. And his words, were always foremost in our minds, when he said, ask not what your country can do for you ask what you can do for your country, we started to-started to get a sense of obligation, that we had to take a stand that our generation had a role to play. And so, I think that we always revere his memory in our hearts. I know I do, especially on this day, November 22, when I always pause and remember that tragedy, which I will never forget, in 1963, when I was only 14 years old. So, we revere his memory. And I think his-his tragic death, and also the example set by his brother, Bobby Kennedy in 1968. I think that whole identity impact is a very large part of the inspiration of our movements for peace and justice. And in the 1960s-
2:48:12
SM: Yeah, 46 years ago, and this happened on a Friday, and it was around 1:30, then East Coast time that we found out about it. And of course, it was beautiful skies, just like today. The weather. That is the irony. It is not always that way. What were some of the books that that you read in some of your peers read in the late (19)60s, early (19)70s books that may have influenced you writers, whether it be fiction or nonfiction?
2:48:37
AC: Well, I think the one writer that influenced me, the most that inspired me the most was Albert Camus. In particular, his book called The Rebel, I read that book, and it really caused me to see the world differently, and to see my role in a more clear manner, I knew that I had to take a stand and I think above all the philosophers that did impact me at that time, it was Albert Camus. Also, Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche talked about the great noon and the need to destroy the old morality and the old order that had a big impact on me. And I know my roommates, some of them were reading jack Kerouac, and some of the beat poets and people like that. But also, I think the philosophers from our generation Tom Hayden had a big impact on us. So, we read the [inaudible] report, we knew about the call to action from Mr. Hayden and the SBS, student activists, leaders, and also people like Martin Luther King, we were very aware of his writings and his philosophy, but also Malcolm X on the other side of that same coin. So, I think we had a broad range of people that did impact us at the time-
2:49:49
SM: any of your friends read the greening of America by Charles Wright.
2:49:53
AC: And he wrote after it came out after the 1970 shootings right after right, we all read that of course, I think it did. have an impact that helped us summarize the positive aspects of our generation and the impact that we were having on the society.
2:50:07
SM: And another book was Theodore Roszak the making of a counterculture, which was another eye opener in the late (19)60s.
2:50:15
AC: I have that book now. But I did not read it at that time, but I read it afterwards.
2:50:19
SM: I am for the section of the interview now where I just want you to respond to various personalities of the period and or terms. And of course, you know, I asked this to everybody but and I know I have already said this, but what does Kent State and Jackson State mean to you?
2:50:39
AC: Well, I have studied the history of American student activism. So, I am aware that it was the Kent State and Jackson State tragedies, following the invasion of Cambodia that sparked the only national student strike in US history. So, on the one hand, I feel a great sense of anguish about the tragic loss of life. Alison Krauss, Jeffrey Miller, Sandy Scheuer, Bill Schroeder, also games all green and thought is killed down there at Jackson State, but I cherish those memories. But at the same time, I looked at May of 1978, in Jackson State as a reason to be proud it was the time when our generation by the millions, almost 5 million young people on our campuses across the country took a serious stand against our government, some of us paid a very big surprise with life and was blood. But I think it was a shining example of how our generation was willing to take a stand.
2:51:36
SM: Well, my famous picture that [inaudible] family took of you with the flag, which everybody in the world has seen. If you could just describe I know you have done in your books, and you have done it in your speeches, and you do a great job of that. But that that time frame, that very short timeframe, and when you walk up that hill, to Taylor Hall, and then walk past the, the metal structure on the left and down the hill, and, and then all of a sudden, the cracks of the guns. How often does that come back to you? And you know, just just-just your thoughts.
2:52:19
AC: Oh, it comes back to me all the time. I cannot avoid that issue. I have two websites where I am constantly getting email messages from students, scholars, researchers, and others from across America and around the world. I am not trying to escape my obligation to history, I have always felt that I have, I have a duty to speak for my friend Jeffrey Miller, who was shot through the head and killed that day and cannot speak for the others. They were silenced forever. And I feel that some of us have to take a stand nowadays for truth and for justice as a way to speak for them. They cannot fly out from the grave; we have to speak for them. So, I have never really tried to walk away from this issue. I have tried to embrace it and address my duty that I feel and to work with many other people to try to bring a semblance of truth and justice. I deal with this every day. But I do not let it consume my life. I am not, as some conservatives have tried to say, stuck in a time or nothing about this tragedy. I have a life way beyond May 4. I am the chairperson of the Democratic Party. I work for the government; I have a 40 hour a week job. I spent a lot of time helping democrats defeat the dastardly Republicans. So, I have a full life. I am not one dimensional by any means. But at the same time, I refuse to just walk away from my obligations that can say-
2:53:40
SM: very good, Alan. What is the wall mean to you? The Vietnam Memorial.
2:53:46
AC: I think it is the most beautiful, powerful Memorial in Washington, I have been there several times. It has a great emotional impact on anybody who has a heart. If you go there, and you walk down towards the center of that gash in the earth, and you see the 58,000 names, I think inevitably has to have a powerful effect on you. You see the reflection, you see your own face, though you realize you are still on this earth. While those 58,000 are gone. They have paid a very dear price, and that is a beautiful memorial and attribute to their memories.
2:54:19
SM: What does Watergate mean to you?
2:54:23
AC: Watergate was the exposure of the criminality of the Nixon administration and the I think it is a reminder of the general tendency of the republican party ever since. You know, it was Richard Nixon, who initiated the concept of dirty tricks in politics. I know politics has always been dirty down through the years, but it seems to be having become institutionalized in the republican party ever since.
2:54:47
SM: James Rhodes.
2:54:49
AC: James Rhodes was the criminal governor of the state of Ohio back in 1970. It was his rhetoric. The words that he used that inspired the Kent State tragedy, blood remained on his hands until he died and now, he is, as a result burning in hell forever.
2:55:04
SM: No, it is interesting Alan. Now I lived in Ohio and Gilligan was governor and I am shocked that state voted him back in.
2:55:13
SM: Rhodes was the master of manipulating the people of Ohio. He had his hand on the pulse very well, I will say this. He was a master politician. But at the same time, he was only a high school graduate, he did not really have done college. He was basically a country bumpkin who had the great gift of speaking and talking to common folks’ language. I do not think he would ever have a chance of getting elected now in the modern age. But back at that time, he was a really a reflection of it backwards. Thinking of too many Ohioans
2:55:45
SM: How about the counterculture, hippies and hippies.
2:55:50
AC: I have mixed memories about the counterculture, the hippies and the hippies. I think that there were excesses. And there were there was too much idealism, and too much wasted energy. I wish that we had been more enlightened, and more focused and more effective
2:56:06
SM: Students for democratic society and the weathermen.
2:56:10
AC: I think the students for a democratic society is one of the greatest organizations that ever existed in America. It was a broad ranging group, which encompassed everyone among the student generation, which included pacifist, anarchists and everybody in between. They pursued a wide range of tactics from peaceful tactics to militant, I think basically, they responded to the tragedy of Vietnam. They also opposed racism and, and damage to the environment, and the oppression of women and other minorities. So, I think I am very proud that I was a member of SDS. And I think I SDS remains a very misunderstood organization.
2:56:49
SM: How about the Vietnam Veterans against the war? And then the Americans for freedom, which was the conservative group against the war?
2:56:57
AC: What is the second group? You mentioned?
2:56:58
SM: The Americans for freedom?
2:57:00
AC: You mean the young Americans for freedom?
2:57:03
SM: Yeah, young Americans for freedom? Yeah, yeah.
2:57:05
AC: The Young Americans for freedom was a basically an outgrowth of William F. Buckley in the conservative movement in the 1960s. And they were very backwards and primitive in their ideology trying to defend the old order. And I think they were widely discredited. And that is why they do not really exist anymore. On the other hand, what was the other group you mentioned? I am sorry, I got distracted YAF-
2:57:28
SM: The Vietnam veterans against Vietnam veterans against the war.
2:57:30
AC: Yeah. That was a very principled and proud organization, which still exists. Those were veterans of the War [audio cuts]-
2:57:42
SM: Testing one two [audio cuts]
2:57:50
AC: Ring home that inspired the students and the others in America to take a stand against the war. Those veterans saw the war, they knew how long and how horrible and awful the world was in Vietnam. And they compelled us to take action. And they joined us in the frontlines of the movement. So, I have nothing but the greatest respect and admiration. Still, for the Vietnam Veterans against the War-
2:58:13
SM: I think I lost the first two lines because they had to change my tape. But I think, I do not know if you remember what you said. Anyway, yeah, you got it. Okay. I am going to get into some personalities here. And you know, Jane Fonda-
2:58:29
AC: Jane Fonda is a misunderstood individual. I think she had good intentions, but she did some things that she regretted. She went to Vietnam and posed on that anti-aircraft battery. And she was, I think, typical of many people from our generation two excessively idealistic, because she did make some mistakes. But basically, I think her heart was in the right place. And I wish them more Hollywood stars and other famous people have taken a stand like hers.
2:58:57
SM: Well, if you go to the Vietnam Memorial, she is the one person that seems, and no one ever forgives most of Vietnam-
2:59:04
AC: I was there-there and I saw that they had a bunch of those stickers there. Those bumper stickers, Hanoi, Jane and all that. And I had a big discussion with some of those Vietnam veterans, about her and about Vietnam. And when I was discussing Vietnam and Jane Fonda with a bunch of those pro-war, Vietnam veterans, those conservative Vietnam veterans there in Washington, crowd gathered about 100 people gathered around as we had about a 60 minute discussion, really, and by the end of it, I had those conservative Vietnam veterans shaking my hand because I explained to them about Kent State and why some of us had to take a stand and ended up shaking my hand. I think maybe they might have seen Jane Fonda in a different light after that day.
2:59:45
SM: [Agreement] How about Tom Hayden?
2:59:48
AC: Tom Hayden was one of the greatest heroes of the 1960s he wrote for here on stage and he helped to found SBS. And he helped them lead the movement against the war in Vietnam but also against racism against blacks. Ain New York and elsewhere, and I think Tom Hayden is one of the great, great heroes of the 1960s-
3:00:08
SM: had a brand-new book out again too Amie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin.
3:00:15
AC: I think there was a Crown Princes of the 1960s antiwar movements. They were basically I think, anarchistic comedians, I do not think that they were so effective politically as they could have been if they, if they have been less idealistic, and more realistic. I think the Yippies were correct in their enthusiasm against the war, but wrong in many of the tactics that they use, which were counterproductive.
3:00:43
SM: Timothy Leary.
3:00:46
AC: Another example of the idealism of the 1960s I think his heart was in the right place. But encouraging people to experiment with LSD i think is regrettable. I think that he did inspire our generation, though, to question the government and to question our reality as it existed, but encouraging the use of LSD I think is wrong
3:01:09
SM: the Black Panthers and I say, again, I mentioned about six people here, which is Eldridge Cleaver, cannot link cleaver, Bobby Seale, Huey Newton, Angela Davis, that group.
3:01:22
AC: I think they are very inspirational for the African American population in our country. They started things like the free breakfast program, which is now instituted by our government across the country. They encouraged African Americans to take a stand of defending their neighborhoods, I think that was a good thing because the neighborhoods were under attack. If the Black Panthers were not effective, they would not have been subjected to the cruel repression, the deadly repression by the government. The government saw them as a legitimate threat. And they were, they were revolutionary. They wanted to change America drastically. And they succeeded. Rather than have the data very depressed, including all the people that you mentioned, they all spent time in jail. Some of those people then went bad let people like Eldridge Cleaver ended up becoming a conservative pro government person. I think that was regrettable. But-but the rest of the activists have all remained very principled and proud and stayed active in the movement.
3:02:17
SM: About Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern.
3:02:21
AC: I supported McCarthy for a while 1968. But I think then later, he played a bad role when he continued to oppose Bobby Kennedy, he should have stood aside gracefully and allowed Bobby Kennedy to easily have access to the Democratic nomination. So, I think that was wrong of McCarthy. He stayed in the race too long then. And afterwards, he just seemed to be a frustrated man. But I think Eugene McCarthy should be recognized for his great courage and taking a stand against Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War. During that time period-
3:02:53
SM: And George McGovern-
3:02:55
AC: George McGovern, I have mixed feelings about George McGovern, on the one hand, he was victimized by the crimes of the Nixon administration in the Watergate scandal, think he could have been a good president. But afterwards, I think McGovern to me, I do not think has played such a good wall through the years. I know at Kent state he came and spoke in 1990. While we had 40,000 people protesting in the rain, nothing against the reduced Memorial at Kent State which was reduced by 93 percent. It was a national controversy. And McGovern came in and just acted like it was business as usual. And he regretted the protesters. I do not have very good feelings about George McGovern right now.
3:03:33
SM: The nonviolent protest movement and I give you two examples. The scene of Stokely Carmichael standing next to Martin Luther King, basically telling them Your time has passed. That is a historic picture and Martin Luther King has his arms folded, you can sign attention and the other one was the debate that Malcolm X had been about three months before he was assassinated with Byard Rustin, who was of you know, worked with Martin Luther King basically telling him that Your time has passed, challenging me, you know, the civil rights leaders of the era, which were Whitney Young, James farmer, Ray Wilkins, Byard, Rustin and Martin Luther King, you know, your time has passed your thoughts on Moses.
3:04:16
AC: I think people like Stokely Carmichael, and Malcolm X had a tremendous impact on the nonviolent civil rights movement. For example, I think it was the pressure from people like Stokely Carmichael and Malcolm X that caused Martin Luther King eventually to take a real strong stand against the war in Vietnam. Personally, I think that was why Martin Luther King was assassinated, because he was becoming very powerful and it was broadening out his impact beyond the civil rights movement, and the government had to kill them.
3:04:45
SM: Yeah, Yeah, Martin Luther King and Malcolm were my next to people here. You are just your-your thoughts on them.
3:04:53
AC: Martin Luther King and Malcom X? [yeah]. I think there was a great American patriot way. They loved America enough to take a stand to try to change it. they pursue different tactics and different strategies. But I think together they made a powerful team and had a tremendous lasting impact. And that is why they were killed. Sometimes in America, if you take too strong of a stand if you become too much of a threat to the government, they feel they have to kill you. And I really do believe that government killed both of those individuals.
3:05:23
SM: Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew.
3:05:26
AC: That is quite a dynamic duo. Both criminals. Both admittedly, criminals. One of them went to jail. The other did not. I think it was unfortunate that Nixon escaped prison time. If President Nixon was jailed for his crimes in office, I think then we might have not had Ronald Reagan committing his crimes with the Iran Contra scandal, Reagan should have been jailed. George Herbert Walker Bush his illegal actions. And also, George W. Bush. These were all criminal republican presidents that all escaped prosecution, and they all should have been sent to prison, in my opinion, and I do not say that lightly. I know that is a serious charge. But at the same time, unless we have these people paying a price like Nixon should have better price than other presidents will be a bit Cavalier with their own criminal activities, thinking they also will escape punishment. For example, in recent years, George W. Bush is clearly an international war criminal. He has killed hundreds of 1000s of people with his wrongful policies in Iraq, Alone women and children, old people, and others. And he has escaped prosecution as well. This is wrong this has to stop.
3:06:41
SM: This gets right in then to Gerald Ford comments on Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan.
3:06:52
AC: Gerald Ford, had to pick up the pieces from the damage of the Nixon administration, I think Gerald Ford was put into a tough situation. Although he was not exactly the brightest intellect in the history of our presidents, he surely was not very bright. But then unfortunately, Jimmy Carter followed and was relatively ineffectual he had economic problems he had to scandal, the hostages in Iran and followed by Ronald Reagan. So that was a really difficult period of our country where we went from bad to worse went from Nixon to Reagan. And I think our country suffered as a result.
3:07:32
SM: One thing, your thoughts that Ronald Reagan used to always say, well, we are back it was really a slap at the (19)60s in the (19)70s. Because he could, we are bringing him we are bringing America back, we are bringing, we are going to the military is going to be stronger, and that that may have been okay, because even the people in the military realize there was something wrong. And then when George, George Bush Senior came in, he said, The Vietnam syndrome is over. So, both Reagan and Bush Senior, you know, had very strong comments, really on an era.
3:08:06
AC: Well, that is traditional for conservatives to try to rewrite history. For example, it was Richard Nixon, who first talked about the ending the Vietnam syndrome, Ronald Reagan declared it to be dead. But still, if you look at Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, this is a time period during the late (19)70s, early (19)80s, where there was serious talk of bringing back the draft. Well, they could not do that, because the American people would not stand for that. So that is the positive legacy of our generation. We stopped the military draft, and it has not been resumed ever since. So, they cannot destroy the Vietnam syndrome. The fact that there is no draft proves that the Vietnam syndrome is alive and well. Also, we have not had another war like Vietnam ever since Vietnam. During Vietnam, we would lose 6000 gives me, sorry 4000 of our soldiers in a six-month period, we would lose over 400 soldiers in a week, sometimes, we have not had a war like that ever since Vietnam because the American people remember Vietnam, Vietnam syndrome is still alive. We remember the legacy of the war in Vietnam and our antiwar movement. So, we do not have a draft and we do not have another war like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are nothing compared to Vietnam. We started to see the level of casualties as we saw during Vietnam. Again, we would have another antiwar movement just as strong. So, when Nixon, Reagan and George HW Bush or George bush tried to announce that they are back and the conservatism is a reigning Supreme, while there is only so much that they can do because the legacy of Vietnam remains alive and well-
3:09:36
SM: Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey.
3:09:41
AC: I think they were both decent men, a good Liberal Democrats who tried to do the right thing in certain regards with social policies, but their tremendous failing their Achilles heel was Vietnam. Lyndon Johnson suffered to the point where he had to withdraw from the 1968 presidential race and the remains a very haunted man until his death, haunted by Vietnam and Hubert Humphrey similarly suffered because he was so closely linked to LBJ, even though they did try to bring some racial harmony in our country and provide a transition as President Kennedy promised to do. I think they tried to be good liberals that way. But Vietnam proved to be their albatross-
3:10:24
SM: Barry Goldwater and Robert McNamara.
3:10:30
AC: Well, there is two different guys there. Barry Goldwater, of course is the father of the modern conservative movement. And he but even Barry Goldwater moderated in his later years, and he was not as frightened as some of these very errant conservatives that we have now. Like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the Fox TV network. So, I think Barry Goldwater was a very principled individual, and he was proud to be a conservative, and I think he was an honest man. Later on, he saw the dangers of modern conservatism, and he condemned that he made a break from that. So, who was the second person you said against-
3:11:09
SM: McNamara, Robert, who just died-
3:11:12
AC: Another tortured individual who was haunted by Vietnam to his grave. And McNamara to his credit, did tried to distance himself from the war in Vietnam and from those policies, and he admitted that they were wrong. I think that was had a tremendous impact on the healing that our nation needs.
3:11:30
SM: Daniel and Philip Berrigan.
3:11:33
AC: Great heroes of the movement, religious men who proved that they tried to be like Jesus and trying to bring peace and understanding and healing to the world. And they paid a price for that, just like Jesus said-
3:11:49
SM: George Wallace.
3:11:50
AC: George Wallace was a strident conservative, a racist, openly, 1968 he helped to draw attention to the conservative right wing racist movement. But he failed and inevitably proved to be a failure in-
3:12:08
SM: The Free Speech Movement at Berkeley in (19)64, (19)65.
3:12:12
AC: Mario Savio and those guys out there in Berkeley were great heroes. They inspire the 1960s student movement greatly. They had a great impact on future generations of students, I think, even to the present day today, defending the First Amendment and helping to spark the antiwar movement later. The students of Berkeley were great heroes even though they paid a dear price.
3:12:33
SM: The beats like Galen Ginsburg, Jack Kerouac, Neal Cassady, Ken Kenzie, Ed Sanders are happening in that group.
3:12:43
AC: The beats inspire the Ken Ekezie 60s movement. Of course, they blaze their own trail, they were younger, before we were, and so they took a stand against conservatism and apathy. And they helped to awaken the 60s generation. Those guys were very cool
3:12:58
SM: And then in the women's movement, which is Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug, Shirley Chisholm, Betty, for Dan, the list goes on and on. Some of the female leaders-
3:13:11
AC: Very courageous women are sisters, and they help to blaze a trail, which provides many benefits now for women all across America. The women's movement remains alive and well, of course, and that is how it should be. I am a great supporter of women's rights and freedoms. I was always inspired by those women, although I will admit and my own opinion, and not just in the women's movement, but I think in various movements from our generation, there were excesses and they were, there was extreme idealism and political correctness. And I think sometimes that is regrettable.
3:13:45
SM: Dr. Benjamin Spock.
3:13:48
AC: Dr. Benjamin Spock, a great hero, took a stand against the war in Vietnam, even though he could have just continued to be popular, maybe book doctor and lived a nice, comfortable life. He paid a price for his activism, and he was correct to take such a principled stand against the war in Vietnam.
3:14:08
SM: John Dean.
3:14:09
AC: John Dean’s another courageous man who stand to bring truth and feeling to our country at the time of Watergate.
3:14:24
SM: TET [referring to Tet Offensive].
3:14:25
AC: TET, 1968 especially as remembered, although it is an annual holiday in Vietnam, 1968 was the period where the Vietnamese Vietcong basically took a stand all across South Vietnam and helped to awaken the American people that we were not winning the war that the light was not at the end of the tunnel that there was no real end in sight, and that it really did help to inspire the antiwar movement here as well-
3:14:50
SM: How about the ERA that did not quite succeed, but women were trying in the (19)70s. Their early (19)70s.
3:14:56
AC: Regrettable, that it did not become a constitutional amendment. I supported the era Just as I always support women's rights and freedom. I think However, even though that amendment was not passed, still the-the impact of that attempt, and the women's movement is still very strong today and women are enjoying great rights and freedoms. Of Course, they always have to be defended, because those are always under attack by the conservative movement.
3:15:21
SM: The individual or groups that you felt were the greatest musicians that had the greatest impact on the boomer generation-
3:15:27
AC: I think that clearly it was the Jefferson Airplane, Jimi Hendrix, the Grateful Dead. John Fogarty and cleared Creedence Clearwater Revival bands like that. I think they had a tremendous impact on our generation. They helped me to stop the war in Vietnam-
3:15:44
SM: April 30, 1970, the Nixon speech about the invasion of Cambodia.
3:15:54
AC: Very provocative and controversial, basically an invasion of Cambodia. Although Nixon denied it was an invasion. That was the event that triggered the four days of protests at Kent State which culminated in the massacre. But it provoked a revolt all across our country. Richard Nixon grossly miscalculated the impact. He-he knew there would be an impact he knew there would be a price to pay. But he totally miscalculated and misunderstood the fact that he would trigger the only national student strike and US history.
3:16:27
SM: Down to pretty much toward the end here. Allan what do you feel are the best books on can stay. I know that we have talked about this before that some you really do not like, I know that Michener wrote a book right away. That was well known. I.F stone had a paperback that came out. There is the one I just mentioned that I just found out about. There is the breath. And Peter Davies wrote one on Kent state, but in your opinion, and in the opinion of your peers, you know, the students that were there, what are the ones that they feel is the best book on Kent state.
3:17:02
AC: Peter Davies wrote a very good book in the early 1970s. I think it is failing- is that it was early and there has been a lot of evidence has come out ever since. But Peter Davies very courageously attacked the cover up of murder at Kent State, he joined with Reverend John Adams of the United Methodist Church. And he put out that book the truth about Kansas State, which was very helpful and pressuring the government to create a federal grand jury, for example, which did occur in 1974. Another good book was Joe Keller, our attorney, he wrote a book called the Kent State cover up, which was published around 1989 or (19)90 or so. And it was a very good book, dealing with the file and the evidence that occurred from the court case. So that was an excellent book did deal with a lot more of the evidence that Peter Davies did not have access to a lot of the testimony that came out on the court and the investigations. But even these books did not focus on the order to fire enough, which I focused on in my own research. And which causes me to think that the books that I am going to be coming out with will be the best books about Kent State that have ever been written. My roommate from 1970, Tom grace, was a PhD in history also is coming out with a new book about the history of the Kent State student movements in the 1950s through the 70s. [Excellent] He is going to focus a lot on 1970 something his book will be very credible. Also. I.F stones book was very good. It was basically his rant against the cover up of murder, very good. And there has been a few good books, some mediocre books and some terrible books.
3:18:41
SM: Where do you put Michener’s book?
3:18:43
AC: Michener’s book I would say is either mediocre or poor. He has been exposed as fabricating many of his quotes or misquoting many of his sources. His book was very early. In fact, it was the earliest book of all, so it suffers from that flaw. There has been a great deal of evidence that is come out ever since, but Michener did a good job of talking about the four victims or martyrs, talking about the kinds of people that they were and about their last days. They did a good job that way. But when it came down to his final conclusion that there was no order to fire and that was just an inevitable tragedy, and he did not focus enough on the National Guard and their criminal shooting of the students. I do not put the blame myself on the triggerman so much now as they do on the officers and Michener, basically let the officers off the hook-
3:19:30
SM: Your thoughts on john filo? Oh, that courageous student photographer I interviewed him for the book and being called into that. And he his story is unbelievable. And Marian [inaudible] the 14-year-old who just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Your thoughts on both of them not only about the experiences that they both gone through, but you have known them your whole life. Just your thoughts on them.
3:19:57
AC: Well, I love both of them dearly. John, Marian My dear friends, hang on a moment, I have another call.
3:20:05
SM: Okay. What was the question about john Filo and Marian Becky?
3:20:13
AC: So, I think they both played a great role in history. That photograph is one of the most famous photographs ever. And on the one hand, it has helped John Filo’s career but on the other hand, it has a Mary Vecchio and unforgettable icon, and she has had to pay a price for that. With social ostracism, sometimes and unwarranted criticism. She has healed very nicely from that, and they have become good friends. And they both come back to Kent State on a regular basis to help raise awareness about the 1970 tragedy. So, I admire their courage and not only refusing to turn their back on the situation, but also trying to help other people understand.
3:20:58
SM: I know I have been trying to interview Marian Becky, and she hasn't responded to me, but I hope I eventually will be able to get her interview a phone number. Yeah. Oh, no, I do not have her phone number. But I have emailed her so many times. And so, I do not have a phone number though.
3:21:19
AC: I will email you her phone number, if you remind me-
3:21:20
SM: Okay, great. And one final thing, and I know you are going, is there a question that I did not ask that you thought I would have asked in this email?
3:21:28
AC: Or you were very thorough, Steve, I have no. I cannot think of another question.
3:21:34
SM: Okay. Could you email me also, Dean Taylor's email address and Joe Lewis, I would like to interview them?
3:21:43
AC: Email me to remind me, Stephen. I will do that-
3:21:46
SM: Have a great day Allan and continue doing what you always do. Yep. Take care. Bye now.
(End of Interview)
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Description
3 microcassettes
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Alan Canfora and Dr. Roseann Chic Canfora
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Canfora, Alan ; Canfora, Roseann Chic ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Educators; Kent State Shootings, Kent, Ohio, 1970; Canfora, Roseann Chic--Interviews; Political activists--United States; Library directors; University of Akron. School of Law. Library; Canfora, Alan
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Roseann "Chic" Canfora is an educator. She received her Master's degree in Journalism and Public Relations at Kent State University, where she also earned a Ph.D. in Educational Administration. Currently, she is a Chief Communications Officer at Cleveland Metropolitan School District. Dr. Canfora is the sister of Alan Canfora and an eyewitness to the Kent State massacre on May 4, 1970. <br /><br /><span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Alan Canfora is a survivor of the Kent State massacre who was shot in the wrist by the Ohio National Guard on May 4, 1970. Canfora is an activist, student organizer and political activist who earned a bachelor's degree in General Studies and master's degree in Library Science. Currently, he is the Library Director at Akron Law Library in Akron, Ohio."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":8403713,"3":[null,0],"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,4995385],"15":"Arial","16":10,"26":400}">Alan Canfora (1949-2020) was a survivor of the Kent State massacre who was shot in the wrist by the Ohio National Guard on May 4, 1970. Canfora was an activist, student organizer and political activist who earned a Bachelor's degree in General Studies and a Master's degree in Library Science. He was the Library Director at Akron Law Library in Akron, Ohio.</span>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2009-11-22
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.63a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.63b ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.63c
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
201:57
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/69d6cb641196f02deb3452d3f57456d9.jpg
7cc41ed419b30db37fa445298f1be9f1
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/31dbe466ed189aaf264365ce4666040e.mp3
75404e8e4e6fa8b3d7569773616e5444
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
ND
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Art Carey
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Art Carey worked as a reporter, staff writer, editor and columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer for 34 years. He has a Bachelor's degree in English from Princeton University and a Master's degree in Journalism from Columbia University. Carey has won several state- and national-level journalism awards for his newspaper and magazine articles."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":515,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792},"12":0}">Art Carey worked as a reporter, staff writer, editor and columnist at the <em>Philadelphia Inquirer</em> for 34 years. He has a Bachelor's degree in English from Princeton University and a Master's degree in Journalism from Columbia University. Carey has won several state- and national-level journalism awards for his newspaper and magazine articles.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
2 Microcassettes
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Radicals; Social activist; Students for a Democratic Society; Vietnam War; Liberation movements; Journalism; Tom Hanks; Voluntarism; Gordon Gekko; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Lunar landing; Watergate; Bill Clinton; Robert F. Kennedy; John F. Kennedy; Activism"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Radicals; Social activist; Students for a Democratic Society; Vietnam War; Liberation movements; Journalism; Tom Hanks; Voluntarism; Gordon Gekko; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Lunar landing; Watergate; Bill Clinton; Robert F. Kennedy; John F. Kennedy; Activism</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
116:47
Subject LCSH
Journalists; Editors; Philadelphia Inquirer; Carey, Art--Interviews
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Art Carey
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: Not dated
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
AC (00:00:08):
Testing one, two.
SM (00:00:09):
That should be going.
AC (00:00:12):
Testing, testing, one, two, three. Are we recording?
SM (00:00:15):
Yes, you will see it right there if it is moving.
AC (00:00:17):
It is moving.
SM (00:00:17):
It is moving.
AC (00:00:18):
Mm-hmm.
SM (00:00:18):
We are okay now.
AC (00:00:18):
Okay. We are in.
SM (00:00:26):
Okay. Well, I am going to be reading some of these questions, and some of the questions may be repetitive.
AC (00:00:29):
Sure.
SM (00:00:30):
I am trying to get responses to each of our interviewees. First question is, the boomer generation in the (19)60s and early (19)70s is being attacked as one of the reasons for the breakdown of American society. Could you respond to this criticism and comment on the period and its impact on present day America?
AC (00:00:49):
Well, I am afraid I agree to some extent with that accusation. I feel that the boomer generation was very self-absorbed and self-centered, a very opportunistic generation in many ways. It had a knack or a penchant for self-mythologizing and for glorifying its baser hedonistic tendencies in the cloak of some kind of greater movement of progressiveness or enlightenment. And I do not think the baby boom generation deserves that. I think, for instance, all that counterculture stuff that happened in the (19)60s was basically just a huge generation-wide adolescent rebellion that was politicized and embellished with all these trappings of ideological transcendence, when, in fact, it was just a bunch of spoiled-brat kids acting out and rebelling against their parents.
SM (00:02:32):
This thought that a lot of the young people at that time had, the boomers, that we are a unique generation, we are going to change the world for the better, looking 25 years down the road and some of the way that the young people at that time prophesied those kinds of thoughts, is there any validity to that? Or is it too early to evaluate them?
AC (00:02:54):
Well, I agree with you that I think we had that conceit. We were arrogant. We were cocky. We did feel that we were a unique generation, and to some extent, certainly in terms of sheer numbers, we were. We were a demographic bulge. I guess there were people who enjoyed the illusion that we were going to change the world, that we were going to make the world a better place. But I do not think that we have. In fact, if anything, I think that the world is worse in many key respects because of the "contributions" of the baby boom generation. I think you could make a case that the breakdown of the family, the breakdown of morality, is attributable to some extent, to a lot of the libertine philosophies that were championed during that period. I think you could make a case that AIDS is a result of the sexual revolution that we championed; this whole idea of if it feels good, do it. The zipless fuck, copulation without responsibility, was an idea that my generation promoted under the guise of individual freedom and self-fulfillment and self-realization. And I think it has been disastrous. It is certainly contributed to the rise of divorce, which is a terribly destabilizing thing for the family. Not only divorce among our- ourselves, not only divorce among baby boom peers, but divorce in other generations. I think that a lot of our parents, people in our parents' generation, saw what we were doing and thought, "Well, if they can do it, why am I denying myself? Why am I missing out on the fun?" A lot of them were tempted, perhaps, to jettison marriages that otherwise they might have been inclined to stick with, just because of that whole spirit of self-indulgence and hedonism and sexual gratification at any cost. I think you could make that case. I think also that you could make the case that the crack epidemic and the drugs that have ripped apart our cities are a direct result of the glorification of drugs that occurred during the (19)60s. Again, another thing spearheaded by our generation, this idea that the drugs are not only harmless, but a way to enhance your appreciation of life, à la Timothy Leary, and a way to experience things more deeply and more profoundly. We, of course, the white, upper-middle class kids who were active in the SDS and who organized the student strikes, had this attitude that drugs are bad for certain people who cannot handle them. But we are intelligent. We are enlightened. We have the sophistication to handle drugs in a proper recreational manner. And for us, drugs will be an enhancement. For us, drugs are positive, and they are a badge of liberation and a badge of membership in the Age of Aquarius. Those are three things that I think have happened because of the generation that was going to save the world and instead ruined it.
SM (00:06:55):
You really believe that?
AC (00:06:57):
I do, in a lot of ways. I am very cynical about my generation.
SM (00:07:00):
Let us check, make sure that it is working.
AC (00:07:02):
Still turning.
SM (00:07:06):
Let me make sure of it. I double check on this, to make sure that this is right. We are okay.
AC (00:07:08):
Okay.
SM (00:07:08):
Let us work.
AC (00:07:08):
It is okay, bandit. It is all right, buddy.
SM (00:07:10):
It is okay. Bandit, it is all right.
AC (00:07:13):
He always gets nervous with a picture. I have always been very cynical about it and started when I was in college, because I was so aware of the hypocrisy and the phoniness, and the theater involved. I love that scene in Forrest Gump where he decks the SDS twit after he slaps around his girlfriend. To me, that really captured a lot of the duplicity and phoniness involved in the anti-war movement and all that radical politics. It was an affectation. It was so riddled with contradictions and spoiled-brat cynicism. But I remember at Princeton one time, the Black students took over an administration building called New South, and I was friendly with a lot of the students. The day of the demonstration, they were out there throwing Frisbees and cavorting in the sunshine and having a good time, and just acting like kids. As soon as the TV station showed up, they all put on their berets and their dashikis, linked arms and got real hard-looking in their faces. It was theater. It was just a game. Just a game.
SM (00:08:40):
How would you consider yourself when you were a college student? Were you a conservative or a liberal or moderate? Or you really did not have at that juncture-
AC (00:08:41):
I would say I was pretty much apolitical. I was very naive about politics. Even though I grew up on the Philadelphia Main Line and was influenced by a lot of conservative Republican type people, I was also aware of the shortcomings of conservatism and sufficiently alienated or repelled by the hypocrisy and phoniness of conservatives. Not to cast my lot with them. I went to college fairly uninformed about politics, uninformed about the Vietnam War, uninformed about social injustice and civil rights. And I learned a lot. I guess my philosophical sympathy tends to lean with Democrats and the left because I feel like the Democratic Party is the party of the disenfranchised and the disadvantaged. It is a party that tries to help the people at the bottom, whereas the Republicans try to preserve the power and money and privileges of the people at the top. I often say, I do not think you can be a true Christian and a Republican. They are innately a contradiction. I do not see how you can be both. I know that if Jesus Christ were to come back now, He would not be voting for Bob Dole. He would not be a Republican. He would be helping out other people, comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable, which has always been the implicit mission of Democrats. One reason I am very hard on the radicals and the social activists is that I, in some ways, hold them to a higher standard. I expect more of them. I was very disillusioned and disappointed when I saw them being phonies and being hypocritical. SDS guys, talking about sexual liberation, and meanwhile calling their girlfriends chicks and expecting them to run the mimeograph machines. Or talking about power to the people and helping the disenfranchised and the disadvantaged, and talking a good game when it comes to abstractions in the Bantu, in South Africa, but being incredibly inconsiderate and supercilious and disdainful toward the Italian janitors who had to clean up the beer can and vomits and pizza boxes after their weekend binges on campus.
SM (00:11:19):
I want to ask, again, a question dealing with 1996. What has been the impact of boomers on America? And of course, you have gone into some of the positives and negatives. If you were to look at the ideology, in fact, there is no question that the young people of the (19)60s were one of the main reasons why the Vietnam War ended, and people will say it. Some people will say via Senator McCarthy, there has not been any other generation in American history that had such an impact on foreign policy. He knows history. He said there were some terrors, but nothing to the magnitude with what happened in the Vietnam War. Looking at that, that they did stop the Vietnam War, that many boomers were involved in the civil rights movement and went on down South and many continue today in the universities' fight for issues like affirmative action, our foreign policy has really never been the same since. The whole concept of the women's movement and feminism really came out of that era. The environmental movement in 1970 with Senator Nelson at the helm, that movement has continued. Looking at a lot of the things that have ... Again, I am a boomer. I am supposed to be unbiased in my interviews with each individual, but isn't there some validity to the fact that the boomers have created some positives in this society via the showmanship that you talk about?
AC (00:12:44):
Sure, I think they have. Right. Right. I was answering that question to respond to the way you framed it, which is that they are attacked, and I think that some of those attacks are justified. In other words, I do not have an unalloyed, rosy view of my generation. I tend to be somewhat cynical about the generation and its accomplishments. But there have been accomplishments. There is no question that the Vietnam War was a bad war, it was a wrong war, and that my generation was instrumental in stopping it. There is no question that they spearheaded a number of liberation movements, beginning with civil rights, that they certainly promoted their progress. The sexual liberation and the women's movement, and I guess to some extent, the liberation of homosexuals, which is still continuing today. I guess they can justly take credit for that, breaking down a lot of racial and class barriers in American society. And also, holding the government accountable, making sure that the government lives up to its promise, tells the truth, lives up to its high ideals and its lofty image of rectitude and righteousness. To me, I guess the biggest accomplishment of the generation is that it showed that the government can lie, and it showed that the institutions of America are wonderful and awe-inspiring, and deserving of honor and respect. The people, the human beings who hold those offices and who represent those institutions, are often very fallible and capable of mendacity and deceit and treachery. I guess that was one of the great lessons, the Vietnam War, is that people in power make mistakes and it is the habit of the powerful to try to cover up those mistakes. And that led to as a lot of disillusionment and a long period of self-examination, self-flagellation, to some extent, I guess.
SM (00:16:02):
Certain people in positions of power and responsibility were President Johnson, certainly Robert [inaudible] at that time. Certainly, the Nixon Administration and what happened with Watergate and so forth, left most of the boomers, I would say most of them, with a lack of trust about who to go to, whether they be leaders, and even leaders on the pulpit. Ministers, leaders in the corporate boardroom. Leaders, period. This leads into my next question. Has that continued today, and can today's generation of youth learn from the boomers? What can the boomers teach today's college students? This question is based on the fact that many of today's students often look to (19)60s and early (19)70s as a period of activism, drugs, and single-minded issues. Though many of the same issues remain, there are new ones, and the lessons of the past are either not taught in schools or never discussed between the parents, which is today's boomer in today's generation. Please give your thoughts on the issues in boomers' lives and how they can have an impact on students' lives today. For particular emphasis, has this concept of lack of trust in leadership directly gone now to their kids, and that is why we are seeing very few kids voting, and very few kids continue to have trust in leadership, even though there is a tremendous rise in volunteerism? 85 percent of today's young people are bound to some sort of volunteer activity, but they're really not showing true citizenship. They are really not voting, and they do not care about politics. Is this is a direct relation to their parents, the boomers?
AC (00:17:44):
Right. That is an interesting question. When I did my book on incompetence, one of the people I interviewed was Digby Baltzell, the University of Pennsylvania Sociologist. He feels that one of the reasons there has been a breakdown in the family and a breakdown of morality is that there has been a huge decline in respect for authority. And he blames my generation for that. Again, it was double-edged. In some ways, it was good. The authority figures of that era did not deserve to be respected, did not deserve to be obeyed. It was an accomplishment, a victory for my generation, that those people were exposed and defied. But the downside of that is that it led to a much more widespread and pervasive cynicism that had the effect of undermining all authority, and a society cannot function without institutions of authority and figures of authority. I would attend to agree with the premise of the question that that disrespect, that derogation of authority has continued, and it has had a very corrosive effect on the fabric of our society. It is really broken down its cohesiveness. It is very hard for government and corporate figures to command respect. And I think that is one reason why so many corporations are being run by groups now, are being run by a committee, being run by committees and boards and are less hierarchical. There is much more emphasis on decision-making by consensus, and there are advantages and disadvantages to that. One of the advantages of having a paternalistic authority figure is that a person often has a very powerful vision and is able to implement that vision quickly and efficiently. A corporation that has a person like that at the helm often gets a huge head start and is able to capitalize on things much more quickly and dynamically. The downside, of course, is that those people are often ... What is the word? Just bear with me for a second. I will get it. Well, they are authoritarian, that goes without saying, but the word I am thinking about is despotic. They are despots and dictators often, and that management stock can backfire. When they are gone, oftentimes the company flounders, is left at loose ends because there is a power vacuum or a leadership vacuum. But we are getting a little bit off the track there. But to go back to your question, I do think that it continues, and I do think it is a problem. Often, without trying to, I think that the baby boomers impart that attitude to their progeny, without doing so explicitly. I think just their general attitude about politicians and government figures. It is like a...
SM (00:21:21):
What you are saying is that the kids oftentimes just pick it up, not by sitting down at the supper table and saying, "This is the way it is," but it's just the way they live their lives?
AC (00:21:36):
Yeah. It is so saturated in our culture now. Every public figure ends up getting lampooned and parodied. It is almost like we have this Saturday Night Live ethos where anybody who comes to the fore ends up in an SNL skit, being mercilessly lampooned, à la Ross Perot.
SM (00:22:04):
I think that in many respects, what young people today see as an impact from the boomers is that "I do not want to become a leader. Because if I do become a leader, I will be critiqued and criticized."
AC (00:22:08):
Ridiculed.
SM (00:22:08):
"Ridiculed. They will try to find the weaknesses in me, as opposed to my strengths."
AC (00:22:30):
Yeah. Yeah. I am not sure you can pin that only on the baby boomer. There are so many factors that are involved there. The media have certainly changed the way they report and cover people and what they consider to be fair game. You really almost have to be insane, I think, to run for public office today, because the scrutiny is so intense. And there are no holds barred. You basically give up all vestiges of privacy. Your life is totally exposed and as you said, you are subject to that kind of criticism, constant criticism and ridicule. I would think that a lot of young people are discouraged by the price of public service. I would call it the price of public service in the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate era. Again, that is more fallout, I think, from my generation. There was a book written a couple of years ago called Scandal, by the wife of Nixon's ... Suzanne Garment, G-A-R-M-E-N-T.
SM (00:23:40):
Yeah, I read it.
AC (00:23:40):
That was supremacy. The nature of the press and the nature of political coverage changed as a result of an influx of baby boomers, as a result of an influx of people who grew up during Vietnam and Watergate and had a very cynical attitude toward authority figures and towards power in general, and powerful people and specific. This had led to this scandal mongering, this almost pathological obsession with finding the skeletons and the smoking guns and the dirty secrets that every politician, ipso facto, harbors or hides. The premise of her book was that this is basically resolved in the paralysis of government. Anytime we have a new political figure, somebody starts digging up all this dirt. And then we have this endless round of hearings and congressional investigations, à la Whitewater, which prevents people from governing and moving the ball ahead, just tackling the real problems of America.
SM (00:24:56):
It is almost like whenever a new president comes in, his theme song [inaudible]. The beat goes on, this humming tune.
AC (00:25:03):
Yeah, exactly.
SM (00:25:03):
Continue.
AC (00:25:06):
But I look at the newscast and I see all these people, these mobs of people at these congressional hearings on Whitewater. All these reporters, all these intelligent people using their brains for this, all these Congressmen digging up all this crap, and all these special grand juries and all these lawyers and lobbyists, and I think, what a waste of manpower. What a waste of brain power. Let us take these people and fix the healthcare system, figure out how to provide decent housing to people. Let us tackle some of our environmental problems. Do not waste your time on all this junk.
SM (00:25:36):
Well, I feel like asking a question here, and if you can, give me some brief responses, just some adjectives to describe it.
AC (00:25:37):
Sure.
SM (00:25:43):
If you were to describe the youth of the (19)60s and early (19)70s, I think the early 70s, please describe the qualities you most admire. And please describe those adjectives, or the sentences, to describe five or six apiece, the good things, the bad things.
AC (00:26:02):
And the bad things.
SM (00:26:02):
Which I hate doing, by the way. Still running?
AC (00:26:02):
Still running.
SM (00:26:02):
Great.
AC (00:26:03):
Well, I guess the good things about the generation was that it was idealistic. It was energetic. It was passionate. It was committed. It was persevering. It was hopeful. It was positive in the sense of being able to envision. Visionary. Visionary and positive in the sense of being able to envision a better world, and entertaining the illusion that we could make a difference, that we could realize that better world, we could bring that better world into being. That is pretty much what I would say on the positive side.
SM (00:26:43):
How about the negative?
AC (00:26:43):
On the negative side, again, repeating what I said earlier, I think that it was hypocritical. It was phony. It was cynical. It was self-serving, self-absorbed, hedonistic, selfish, very short attention span, very little grasp of history, conceited, unrealistic, spoiled. Was that enough?
SM (00:27:20):
That is, it.
AC (00:27:23):
Okay. I could go on, but you get the picture.
SM (00:27:26):
Okay. I think you have already answered this. Could you comment on the importance of the boomers' perspective of the Vietnam War? Well, you discussed that.
AC (00:27:35):
I think so. Yeah. You see, I think a lot of the boomers really benefited from the fact that they had the material abundance and prosperity and affluence to afford to worry about self-fulfillment and self-realization and liberation. All these liberation movements can only take place in a society where people's basic needs are taken care of. It is really a symptom of abundance, a symptom of affluence and bountifulness. The baby boom generation is, I use the word spoiled because they really were spoiled. Many of them were the progeny of parents who worked their butts off during the depression and who were determined to give their children everything that they were denied and did not have. They really had the luxury. It was really a luxury to be able to worry about making a better world, and to protest efficiencies in American's design.
SM (00:28:38):
You make a good point, but there is a couple questions here that might challenge that. Number one is that in the civil rights movement, there were a lot of people that went down South. Freedom Summer of (19)64, they were predominant. Actually, most of them were actually Jewish that went down South to work with some of the young and upcoming African-Americans. Some of those young leaders like John Lewis, who is still a Congressman in Washington today, they came from different backgrounds. Many of the people involved in the civil rights movement especially were poor Blacks. Fannie Lou Hamer came out. She was not a young person. You say that there is no question that there was time for many people to be involved, like today's college students have no time because they got to work, they go to school. Whereas these students worked when I was in college. But you still had many poor people at that time getting involved in the civil rights movement.
AC (00:29:31):
Yeah. I think the civil rights movement is a little bit different from what I witnessed. I did not participate in the civil rights movement. It came a little bit before my time. I was only 12 or 13 years old in those years, so my perspective is skewed or warped, or whatever word you want to use by what I, in fact, witnessed, which was basically the anti-war movement on campus in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s.
SM (00:30:00):
Then you also had the fact that a lot of the people that went-
AC (00:30:03):
And I went to an Ivy League School.
AC (00:30:03):
... (19)70s.
SM (00:30:03):
Then you also have the fact that a lot of the people went to-
AC (00:30:03):
And I went to an Ivy League school, so I was dealing with upper middle-class kids. That is what I saw. Princeton and Columbia. So again, that skews my perspective. It was not... I did not see... I think it was a real class thing. It was not a working-class thing; it was an upper middle-class college educated thing. The working-class kids were getting sent over to Vietnam, they were the ones who were coming back in caskets. They did not have the luxury of protesting the Vietnam War. They did not have the wherewithal; they did not have political connections. They did not have the student deferments. They just went.
SM (00:30:41):
And they did not have the knowledge of how to get out.
AC (00:30:43):
No, they did not.
SM (00:30:43):
But many of the middle-class kids did.
AC (00:30:43):
Exactly.
SM (00:30:47):
And probably many of them would have taken advantage of that if they knew how.
AC (00:30:51):
If they knew how, sure they would have. But they did not have the connections. They were not privileged. They did not have the privileges, that is really the word.
SM (00:31:01):
Number seven here. Have you changed your opinion of the youth of the (19)60s over the last 25 years?
AC (00:31:12):
The question was- have I changed my opinion of the youth of the (19)60s in the last 25 years?
SM (00:31:16):
And when you were a college student, you have already revealed some of the things you felt then, and you have already been very open about how you feel today. But have you been pretty steady in your feelings? Or has there been something that has changed it, or mellowed?
AC (00:31:29):
I think basically my feelings about the generation are the same. I mean, as I said, one of the things...
(00:31:39):
I have always been this way, maybe that is why I ended up being a journalist, is that I have always been something of an outsider. And I have always had the ability to see the discrepancy between image and reality, or appearance and reality. I have always been sensitive to that, the way things appear, and the way things are. I went to a private school called Episcopal Academy and the motto is Esse Quam Videri. V-I-D-E-R-I. Essa, E-S-S-E. Quam, Q-U-A-M. Videri, V-I-D-E-R-I. And that means to be rather than to seem to be. And so, I have always been attuned to that. So back in the (19)60s, I was very aware, as I said earlier, of the phoniness, and the hypocrisy, and the double standards, and the moral and ethical contradictions of the student protest movement and the anti-war movement. And a lot of these drug and sexual liberationists. And I have basically retained that attitude. I have retained the feeling that the generation did do some good things, but the generation also had lots of flaws and shortcomings. And I do not think it deserves to be deified, or canonized, or sanctified, or mythologized the way it has been in some quarters. And I always make that point. And I think a continuation of that is what you saw at the Academy of Awards when Tom Hanks got up there and accepted the award for Philadelphia and talked about gays being angels in our streets. Give me a break. I mean, this glorification of the latest sort of liberation movement of homosexuals being somehow saints. Not only are they martyrs, the victims of AIDS, they are martyrs, they are saints. It is the same kind of conceit of our generation that we are special, and that anything that we embrace or do is somehow holy. It is not holy. I mean, it is great to tolerate homosexuals. It is great to... But it is not necessary to glorify them.
SM (00:34:04):
How would you define this? And this is getting off this question for a bit. Strictly, Ray, what you are saying right now. And that is, one of the terms that really turns young people off today is the term do-gooder. And so even when the students that I work with get involved with Habitat for Humanity, they feel a little sensitive. That they are feeling good about something, they're helping others. And then when they feel good about helping others, they say, "Should I feel this way?" And this gets right back to the people from the (19)60s, because I thought... Again, this is only me. I went to a state university, SUNY Binghamton. Which is also a very good school, most of the kids are from Syracuse and New York City. And a lot of them could have gone to an Ivy League school but did not have money, so they went to SUNY Binghamton. But they were also middle class, they had all the time to protest, all had time to get involved in these activities. But I always, from afar, thought that a lot of these young people were doing it out of the goodness of their heart. They cared about the issues, they truly cared. And I guess what I am getting at is the sincerity. You said here that you felt that a lot of the boomers were not sincere, and certainly there were many cases of that. But I feel that a lot of boomers today are still living their lives like they lived at that time, but it is not kosher to be the way they were back in the (19)60s today. And that is to care about the minority, to care about the environment. And the fact is today that all the time, whether it be the Christian Coalition with Ralph Reed who has come to prominence representing Pat Robertson, or the Republicans in Congress who you hear all the time, even some of the Democrats, even moderate Democrats, the old Democrats from the South now really vote like Republicans. Is that the problems with society today is all going back to that time, they are pointing fingers. It is always someone else's causing the problem, they never look at themselves. So, the question I am really getting to you about is, is it really fair to look at the boomers in a way that all the problems in society today are related to them?
AC (00:36:25):
No, I do not think you can do that, I do not think you can blame everything on the boomers by any means. I just think that it is very problematic, whether we improve things or made things worse. I mean, to me, that question is still not answered. And I think that people who say that my generation screwed things up have a case to some extent. And you were talking about do good-ism being somewhat out of fashion. Well, my feeling is that to some extent that fashion has always been determined by my generation, just because it is so sizable and influential. And one of the things I wanted to point out about my generation is I feel it has been very morally plastic. And that is what I was trying to hint at when I talked about being opportunistic, because it was a generation that rejected the materialism and the status seeking of its parents. Back in the (19)60s, there was this nostalgie de la boue, that French term, that it is a nostalgia for the mud. And so, the whole Woodstock idea of becoming a peasant again, and frolicking in the mud, and skinny-dipping, and free love, and free sex, and all that junk, and communes. And there was this whole idea that this generation had renounced that materialism. But during the (19)80s, who were the people who spearheaded the age of greed? Who were the people? Who were the Gordon Gecko type people? Who were the people flocking to make a killing as investment bankers? They were baby boomers. Suddenly that became the chic thing to do, get ahead. It was no longer chic to sort of drop acid and tune in and drop out, or whatever they were doing. It was chic to make your killing, to become an arbitrager, and to arrange those leverage buyouts. And I remember bumping into kids who were big SDS long-haired radicals on the [inaudible] local, in their pin striped suits and they are suddenly clean cut, toting the Wall Street Journal. And I was astonished by the flip-flop. I mean, I feel like I was more true to the (19)60s since that, well, I did not embrace it wholeheartedly. I went into journalism, which is sort of a do-gooder profession mean. I mean, it is a profession where you feel like you can have a chance to make a difference and help and to teach. And I did not do this complete flip-flop sellout like a lot of these people did. So, it is unfashionable, because all those erstwhile do-gooder hippie liberal types are now driving Volvos and living on the main line. And they have shifted their energy into other channels which are more meaningful for them. And they have become more conservative, which is a natural thing that happens to people as they get older, because they suddenly realize that a lot of the stuff that they thought was restrictive and stupid and non-liberated and non-progressive makes sense. It holds society together. It is a good thing for parents, for couples to stay married. Divorce is not a good thing for kids, it wrecks up families. And families are good things. Not only for the individual kids involved, but also for society. I mean, of the basic unit of society we need to stabilize the society, you need to stabilize the family. Witness the complete social chaos in the ghettos in the city, where you have no fathers involved and you have single mothers trying to raise five or six kids.
SM (00:40:01):
And yet when you talk about this too, there are many boomers... I do not say now the boomers control higher education, because they are the liberals that control what is going on in schools.
AC (00:40:15):
Well, you have all that insanity of political correctness and diversity training and all that. That is a bad thing.
SM (00:40:21):
But the thing is that anyone who is teaching, anyone in social work, many lawyers did go into law not to make money but to help others. So, with every attack, there are other stories of people really that still are living community [inaudible], from my perspective. Because teachers, to me, are very underpaid. And they went in hopefully not to money, but to teach.
AC (00:40:49):
Do you think they are still underpaid?
SM (00:40:50):
A lot of people in higher education... You do not make money as a professor or an administrator [inaudible].
AC (00:40:57):
Do you think teachers are underpaid? I mean, the Council Rock School District, they are making 70,000, 80,000 a year, which is more than I make for nine months of teaching. I do not know, it is hard for me to work up a lot of sympathy for teachers anymore.
SM (00:41:07):
Well, a lot of teachers in the US are getting paid $25,000.
AC (00:41:07):
Still?
SM (00:41:08):
Yeah. And then still [inaudible] a lot of the schools around here. But on average, I think they are probably about on average 35,000, I think. That is still good, I think, because a lot of them are underpaid. And then they reach a [inaudible] they cannot get paid any higher than that. And I know professors in the university are not paid much. 30,000 for assistant professors, and associate professors get around 45,000. And I am not quite sure what full professors get, but they reach a max and they cannot get any higher.
AC (00:41:48):
Is that right?
SM (00:41:48):
Because of tenure, and that is it.
AC (00:41:48):
Well, some of these fancy colleges, they are making big bucks, some of the professors. I mean, at Princeton, I mean, they are getting full professors make at least 90. But they are all doing outside consulting. And, I mean, some of those guys are hauling in 400,000 or 500,000 a year. And not doing any teaching, they have graduate teaching assistants. I mean, that is a scam, but that is a separate thing.
SM (00:42:10):
Yeah. Would you describe, and this is just yes or no answer, would you describe the boomers as the most unique generation in American history?
AC (00:42:20):
Well, I think I would have to defer to Senator McCarthy on that one, I do not think I have enough knowledge to say one way or the other. I think it was a unique generation, just because of its size and because of the social conditions at the time that it matured and came to the fore. I mean, again, some of the things I talked about, the affluence, the privilege of being able to worry about larger problems, not worrying about how they are going to feed themselves and house themselves. And the fact that so many of them were products of college. I mean, it was a huge one. Another thing that made it possible was that these kids had a lot of time on their hands. They were in college, and instead of drinking beer and I guess lighting bonfires and going to pep rallies, they were trying to shut down the Institute for Defense Analysis or whatever. But again, they had the privilege and luxury of time before they became adults.
SM (00:43:28):
As a boomer, if you were to list five events that had the greatest impact on you as a boomer?
AC (00:43:31):
As a boomer? Well, I think the assassination of President Kennedy certainly had a huge impact on my perspective. I guess the things that everybody says in terms of zeitgeist events, I guess Robert Kennedy, assassination of him, Martin Luther King, his assassination, only because they brought things into such sharp focus. And the lunar landing was an interesting thing. I mean, it had a kind of double-edged effect. In one way, it was both the beginning and the end of a sense of possibility. It showed us the miraculous and amazing things that we could accomplish by harnessing technology and by setting our will to something. But at the same time, it was sort of the symbolic end of the space program, to me. It was sort of like the end of that frontier. We had done about as much as we could feasibly do. I mean, that was such a single achievement and such a millennial kind of accomplishment. And I think there was a great sense of letdown after that, a kind of postpartum depression that we'd done it. And now what? And I really do not think the space programs recovered. The space shuttles just do not have the glamour. And sending probes to Mars, it is not the same as putting a man on the moon. So that was another thing, another event. And obviously the Vietnam War. Although I at the time, again, was not real passionate about that one way or the other. I mean, I was more curious and listening, trying to figure out who was right. And then Watergate, I think, was a very searing kind of experience, because it really cemented the idea that you cannot trust anyone over 30, or the idea that our parents are flawed. It was a very kind of edible sort of experience, that these people that you were brought up to respect and honor and believe can betray you, can tell lies. And it was also very influential in that, in a sense, we have pulled daddy off the pedestal. I mean when Nixon resigned, it was like the kids succeeded in punishing this great father figure, this parent figure, who had betrayed them or had deceived them.
SM (00:46:58):
Those are very good points. When I was a [inaudible] understand, one thing that struck me is we had Fred Thompson in our campus at Ohio University in 19... Did that thing click off? Is it still moving okay?
AC (00:47:15):
Yep, still moving.
SM (00:47:16):
We [inaudible] to our campus in (19)74 before the final decision was made on Watergate. And he was our Kennedy lecturer at Ohio University. And I had a chance to be with him for a solid day, stayed overnight, for a solid day. And we took him to Sherman's home in Lancaster, Ohio, this little branch campus of our university. But what I am getting at here is that I had very tremendous distrust of leaders. And he was on the committee and the minority council, the youngest member of the committee. And when I took him back to the airport, I was going to do my test with Fred Thompson. And I asked him, and I let him off at the airport, I said, "You send me a letterhead with all the signatures of the members of the Watergate Committee." And he said he would do it. Well, okay, this is my test, because I thought he would not do it. And [inaudible] and will not follow through. So, I waited a month, two months, got involved in orientation. It was very late summer as we were heading into the fall, I finally get this envelope in the mail. And when I saw and opened it, I flipped. And my attitude was, "I cannot believe it, here is a leader that followed through." With all the activities that he had. It was a signed letterhead and it was all the real signatures, with different color rings. And he said, "Please rest assured, Steve, that the workers of the government are always slow." And from that day forward I have always had tremendous respect for Fred Thompson. Now he is a senator from Tennessee.
AC (00:48:43):
What a great souvenir of that era.
SM (00:48:45):
Yeah. And I have it, it is in a safety deposit box. And I got a letter from him. And actually, I am going to interview him for this. He is up for reelection. And I am going to interview him next February, I think, after the election is over.
AC (00:48:58):
That is great.
SM (00:49:00):
Because he is a very important person. That is a story that there are good people there. And I am a democrat, but I have tremendous respect for Fred Thompson.
AC (00:49:05):
Is he a Republican?
SM (00:49:06):
He is a Republican. Watch out for him. People are talking about who is going to be the presidential candidate of the year 2000. My prediction is Fred Thompson will be the Republican at that time. He is only 53 now. He was only 33 when he was on the committee. So, he is 54, I think. And watch out for him. And he is very close to Senator Baker, he ran his campaign. He is a good guy.
AC (00:49:29):
Good.
SM (00:49:30):
It has often been quoted that only 15 percent of the boomers were truly activists or involved in some sort of activity linked to the civil rights, Vietnam War protest, women's movement, gay and lesbian movement, environmental movement, and active overall in politics and the issues of the day. Is this true? Or is this another way to lessen the impact this group has had on America since the (19)60s?
AC (00:49:53):
Well, I cannot say whether it is true, whether that number's exactly right. But I would tend to concur with the notion that the people who were really on the front lines were a rather small minority of the generation at large. And the rest were just sort of fellow travelers and what I used to call weekend radicals, who did it because it was sort of fun, and the mode, the thing to do, is fashionable. And you sort of had to do it if you wanted to score with chicks and be part of the scene, part of the action. You wore bell bottoms and... I mean, even I wore a running jersey. I was a big jock in college, but I wore a running jersey with a clenched student strike red fist on the back, just because it was kind of cool looking. And I went to one of the marches in Washington, not because of any great political fervor or resolve to change the world or stop the war, but because I knew that there was a pretty good chance that there would be some topless women there cavorting in the reflecting pool. And sure enough, there were. So that was the only reason I went. And I suspect there were a lot more like me.
SM (00:51:11):
Good analysis there. We took students over to High University back at the remembrance ceremonies at Kent State after the killings that [inaudible] there two years in a row. And it was basically to listen to some of the national leaders at that time, like Jane Fonda, Tom [inaudible], those remembrances. But it was very obvious that the majority of the people were just having a good time, were not really serious. There were some darn serious ones, well students I brought were dead serious. They would not have come with me if they were not. But you hit it right in the point, that I think that 50 percent is pretty accurate.
AC (00:51:46):
I think it is. I think it is. It is probably true of almost all movements. It was party time, that is all.
SM (00:51:54):
This is a very important one, because when you look at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, the reason why Jan Scruggs put that together is to create a non-political entity in remembrance of those who served and those who paid the ultimate price with their death. So, his goal was to try to heal the nation, and to try specifically with Vietnam veterans and their families. This question, do you feel that the boomers are a generation that is still having problems with the [inaudible]? The Vietnam Veterans Memorial did a great job with veterans, and in some respect the families of veterans. But do you feel that healing has really taken place in large numbers? And there is a follow-up to that, do you feel that some of the tremendous divisions, and the lack of dialogue between people, and the uncivil language that we see today is directly linked to that, the ability to heal?
AC (00:52:51):
Yeah, I think that is a factor to some extent. I mean, I think that there are certain things from which we have not recovered completely and that the scabs are still fresh. I guess Vietnam would be one of them, and Watergate might be another. In the sense that it led to this very cynical... Sense of cynical, pervasive sense of disillusionment. But I think another aspect of it too is that we not only mistrust others, we not only mistrust authority figures, we mistrust ourselves. Because a lot of us realize, again, how phony, and hypocritical and theatrical so much of it was. And there is a lot of class resentment involved too. And there is a sort of internal... And when you talk about the baby boomers, if you are talking about all the people born between 1946 and 1964, you are talking about a huge group of people. There is almost another generation in that span. And you are also talking about people of all different socioeconomic classes. And a lot of the things that are attributed to the baby boomers, again, are attributed to a very small group of privileged, white middle class kids who went to college. They are the kids who got all the ink, and got all the attention, and got mowed down at Kent State. You are not talking about the kids that went right from high school to factories, went to the [inaudible] works in Bucks County, or went to Vietnam and got maimed and then ended up in a veteran's hospital somewhere. And so, I think that there is still residual class antagonism. There is a disdain, a kind of supercilious disdain on the part of the middle-class kids who kind of conned the system, who got the student deferments, and got their graduate degrees, and did the yuppy thing in the (19)80s. And looked down on those other kids, their peers, the lumpen proletariat, the kids who went to Altamont not Woodstock. Looked down upon them as schmucks and suckers because they did not have the strings, they did not know how to pull. And then the kids at the bottom, the kids who actually came back in the body bags, who did not have the luxury, did not have the time to protest, and all that, I think resent the other ones, again, for their phoniness and hypocrisy and their moral plasticity. The fact that they were able to mold themselves to fit any kind of contingency and opportunity as the zeitgeist shifted. Does that sound cynical enough?
SM (00:55:22):
Yeah. And [inaudible] here all the time. I have been to several Vietnam [inaudible] on Memorial Day, and the dislike for Bill Clinton is real. The lack of forgiveness, they do not want to ever forgive him. And I find it ironic, and I have said this to everyone, that this law was supposed to heal. Yet we see veterans there who have not healed. And they will make commentary on Jane Fonda, "Bitch," still hate her. Bill Clinton, they will not forgive him. And certainly, even with Peter Arnett this past year, there is some of the media people they will not forgive, because they brought the stories home about Vietnam veterans, and maybe some of the bad things about Vietnam veterans in linkage with the good. So, there is something about the Halberstams, the Arnetts, the Sheehans, that there is dislike toward them. So, I am wondering about this for you.
AC (00:56:13):
Well, that is part of... Yeah, I do not think it is happening. And I think that in some ways... There is this expression that the Irish are good haters. And I think to some extent Americans are good haters. And in some ways the rancor continues to fester and to become more gangrenous as time goes on. It is not healing, it is getting worse. And it is becoming, in some ways, more irrational. I mean, blaming the David Halberstams and the Neil Sheehans for Vietnam, I think, is irrational. It's another case of blaming the messenger.
SM (00:56:50):
And I never thought of that until I heard these four veterans sitting in the front row who were thinking about [inaudible 00:56:58]. Well, Peter Arnett had done a favor, because I guess he was over in someplace in Europe, and he flew in just to give us less than five minutes speech for Jan Scruggs. And I said, "That is tremendous commitment to the Vietnam Memorial." "Now, who wants to listen to him? He is the guy that wrote about us."
AC (00:57:09):
Mm-hm.
SM (00:57:14):
And that was just a commentary from four veterans. But I just thought, "My god..." There is lack of healing in that, was very obvious." Only four, but I am wondering if that permeates throughout.
AC (00:57:24):
Well, you mentioned Bill Clinton being despised by these people. I think he is the perfect symbol of exactly what I was talking about. A guy who conned the system, who did what was necessary to save his own butt and to promote his own welfare and career. And who was in many ways a phony and a hypocrite. I mean, I will probably vote for him again, just because I think he is a lesser of two evils when posed against Bob Dole. But I think he is a sleaze ball, a total sleaze ball. And every time I see him, I think he is an actor. I mean, I think he is just a real consummate face man actor. And I think that a lot of people resent him for that. I mean, he really is a wonderful avatar or embodiment of what we have been talking about, the kind of schizophrenia of this generation. I mean, he is a very... Cosmically, ideologically, philosophically, he is very appealing. He stands for the right things; he fights for the right things. He has a heart, seemingly. But on an individual personal level, I think he is very cynical. I think he is very manipulative. I think he is very selfish. And I think he is very untrustworthy.
SM (00:58:38):
What are your thoughts on former left leaders who state that their past activities and those of their peers had more negative [inaudible], particularly to the people of the Horowitz and [inaudible], to the people that were pro the [inaudible]. But they are just the tip of the iceberg of former left leaders who now have [inaudible], and now are blasting their whole past. And what are your thoughts on them, both types of people?
AC (00:59:04):
Well, I guess my feelings are mixed on... I am not real familiar with what they say specifically. But just based on your report, I would probably be sympathetic to some of their critiques, some of their attacks in their broadsides, because it sounds like it would jibe with some of the stuff I have been saying. But I am always, I guess, amused and aggravated by people who renounce their past when it is convenient to do so. Fitzgerald said, "There are not any second acts in American life," but clearly there are people who feel... A lot of lefties. You know it is, again, another example of the moral plasticity of my generation, that they kind of reinvent themselves every decade, whatever seems to be fashionable. And when conservatism is [inaudible]-
AC (01:00:03):
... whatever seems to be fashionable, and when conservatism is fashionable, suddenly, they are conservative and they are repudiating their past and everything that they stood for, because this is a way to get it on now.
SM (01:00:14):
How do you feel about those boomers, though, that were on the front lines, who have lived their whole lives like they were on the front lines, and have not deferred?
AC (01:00:23):
Have not changed?
SM (01:00:27):
Have not changed. In other words, they were not [inaudible].
AC (01:00:30):
They have not compromised.
SM (01:00:30):
They have not compromised. They have lived their whole lives [inaudible].
AC (01:00:34):
To some extent, even though, I may not agree with what they are doing or I think they are excessive or extreme or myopic or monomaniacal, I have more respect for those people, for their consistency and for their philosophical and ideological fidelity than I do the ones who have flipped flopped every decade to [inaudible]. We are shaded by this tree, thankfully.
SM (01:01:02):
It is a great tree.
AC (01:01:03):
Yeah. It is a wonderful old sycamore. Unfortunately, it just drops stuff all the time, twigs, the bark, leaves, and it is not a good tree to have over a swimming pool.
SM (01:01:12):
This is a question where I ask ... I just mention a name and I just want you to [inaudible].
AC (01:01:20):
Okay. We are off the air here. Oh, no. It is still going.
SM (01:01:21):
It is still going.
AC (01:01:23):
Yeah.
SM (01:01:23):
Are you supposed to be on there?
AC (01:01:25):
I guess it must be.
SM (01:01:26):
Yeah. I got ... We have [inaudible].
AC (01:01:29):
Okay.
SM (01:01:29):
If you were to try to place the following names in the minds of [inaudible], what overall reaction would you foresee for the following names? You are a boomer, so when you respond to this, your initial gut-level response to this as an individual and what you feel today [inaudible]. Number one, Tom Hayden.
AC (01:01:48):
You want me to give my personal reaction or the reaction of the ... My presumed reaction of the...
SM (01:01:52):
Your personal reaction, plus how you feel today's boomers look to these people.
AC (01:02:03):
My personal reaction is I dislike the guy. I suspect that a lot of my peers in the baby boomers are suspicious of him, because he seems like, again, one of these...
SM (01:02:11):
[inaudible].
AC (01:02:11):
Yup.
SM (01:02:26):
Okay. We were talking about Tom Hayden.
AC (01:02:28):
Yeah. Tom Hayden, I think I finished up on him.
SM (01:02:31):
The next one is Lyndon Johnson.
AC (01:02:36):
Well, Lyndon Johnson is just a fascinating figure to me, because in some ways, he embodies so much of America, both its generosity and its good instincts and its tragic self-defeating flaws. Having read some of Robert Caro's work on Johnson, I just find him to be a fascinating American phenomenon. That is all I could say about him I think.
SM (01:03:09):
I want to mention that when I interviewed Senator McCarthy, he said that when you are in Washington, DC and you are going to the airport, there is a statue of Lyndon Johnson on the way to the airport and [inaudible] it is not done. It is an incomplete work.
AC (01:03:24):
Is that right?
SM (01:03:30):
He said ... That is what he said, Johnson was an incomplete work.
AC (01:03:31):
Right.
SM (01:03:31):
Because, in fact, he could have [inaudible] secretary. Bobby Kennedy.
AC (01:03:33):
Yeah. I think there was a lot of possibility for redemption there and, I mean, I think there was a man who was really growing and if he had had more time, I think he might have really ... He might have been great in the sense that he grew and overcame previous earlier limits and mistakes. Robert Kennedy? I guess I sort of regarded him as being inspiring and idealistic and scrappy, pugnacious. I think he would have been fun to watch. I am sorry that he got snuffed out so soon. I have very mixed feelings about the Kennedys, and I admired them, I almost worshiped them when I was younger. Now I have a much more realistic attitude toward them. But, again, I think that there was great possibility for growth with both of those guys, both John and Robert.
SM (01:04:37):
Yeah. I put John on there too, because he is on the list.
AC (01:04:39):
It would be interesting, and it is interesting to speculate how the course of American history would have differed if Kennedy had not been assassinated, if he had had a second term and, I mean, one of those people ... You ask me about seminal events or high impact events, baby boom generation, his assassination I think seared everybody and really ended that wonderful kind of buoyant American sense of hope and optimism.
SM (01:05:15):
The one question always comes up would the Vietnam War have ever happened if he had been president? [inaudible] you cannot judge what may have happened.
AC (01:05:24):
Right.
SM (01:05:24):
[inaudible].
AC (01:05:24):
Right.
SM (01:05:26):
We do not know. Huey Newton?
AC (01:05:29):
He is a phony. I went to a ... He spoke at Princeton and Pat [inaudible] Cage, which is our big gymnasium, back in 1970 or (19)71 and I went to listen to him, because I wanted to find out what is this guy all about. It was just a lot of gobbledygook. It was garbage. It did not make sense. People finally ... People had the guts to stand up and walk out. I stuck it out, because I wanted to give this guy as much of a chance as possible, but it was just ... He was just a lot of hyped-up propaganda.
SM (01:06:10):
[inaudible] Bobby Seale category? Bobby Seale and Eldridge Cleaver, they were all in the Black Panthers.
AC (01:06:12):
Well, I do not know as much about Bobby Seale and Eldridge Cleaver. The only reason I react so strongly to Huey Newton is that I actually saw him and listened to him, his harangue for two hours, and it was incoherent gibberish.
SM (01:06:29):
Brings up two more, Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin.
AC (01:06:34):
I think of them as, basically, as flamers. You know what a flamer is?
SM (01:06:42):
A flamer?
AC (01:06:44):
A flamer is...
SM (01:06:45):
Create problems or trouble?
AC (01:06:47):
No. A flamer is sort of a hot dog. Sort of a ... They were just self-aggrandizing, very theatrical ... How shall I say? [inaudible] sort of like the court jesters or radical chic.
SM (01:07:11):
Yeah. As they aged, Jerry Rubin went off to ... He was kind of a hypocrite to the cause.
AC (01:07:17):
Oh, yeah. He sold out completely.
SM (01:07:18):
He sold out and Abbie Hoffman ... It is almost like the theatrics of his early years destroyed the validity of it, the activism in his later years.
AC (01:07:26):
Yes.
SM (01:07:27):
To save the Hudson River.
AC (01:07:28):
Right.
SM (01:07:28):
He was dead-serious about that. One of the tragedies too was that Abbie Hoffman, when he died, I remember the year when he died over in Bucks County.
AC (01:07:35):
Bucks County.
SM (01:07:37):
$2000 in the bank and that is all he had.
AC (01:07:40):
Right.
SM (01:07:40):
They said he was fighting depression at that time and that no one was listening to him anymore.
AC (01:07:45):
Right. He had become a caricature of himself.
SM (01:07:49):
Is that the legacy of the boomers? That no one is listening to them anymore. Is he a symbol of all boomers as they age with respect to the upcoming generation, the future generation?
AC (01:08:01):
I think in some ways, he is. He is a symbol to the extent that he did not seem capable of coping with real life. He never grew up in some respects. He was not able to translate apparently that sort of youthful, in-your-face, confrontational activism into a more mature effective activism, where you actually achieve results, you actually get things done, you actually persuade people, you actually ... I mean, to me, that is effective activism and it is one thing to carry signs and co-opt the media and make a big name for yourself. It is another to actually solve the problem, and I think that there are lots of people who are very activist, who you have never heard of, who worked behind the scenes and do the research and gather the facts and have meetings at which they are civil and polite and they learned how to accomplish things through the system, and I do not think he made that transition. Evidently, he did not make that transition. The other guys, Eldridge Cleaver and his cookbook and...
SM (01:09:19):
Bobby Seale's [inaudible].
AC (01:09:19):
... cookbook and I do not know what Eldridge Cleaver is doing, but all those guys seem to have sold out and they did the flip flops that were necessary to survive or to keep the con going, and I think they are symbols of the generation, very valid symbols of the generation and, again, its small plasticity, to get back to that again, the fact that we are able to mold ourselves to whatever situation or set of circumstances would work in our best self-interest.
SM (01:09:51):
Timothy Leary, I think I know your answer.
AC (01:09:57):
I think he was an evil person. I think he was an evil person, because he gave the drug culture kind of intellectual respectability. I do not think ... It would be a waste of my breath and your time for me to talk about all the evils and tragedy that has flowed from the drug culture.
SM (01:10:23):
How about Dr. Spock?
AC (01:10:24):
I really do not feel like I know enough about him and have sort of a full sense of him to comment. I know a lot of people blame him for the permissiveness of the baby boom generation, and perhaps he should be held accountable for some of that, but I think that is very simplistic. I think there is more to him and more to his influence than that, and I do not know enough about him to say.
SM (01:10:46):
How about the Berrigan Brothers?
AC (01:10:47):
I think that those guys were very passionate and committed about stopping the war. There is a sense of mild development and growth there. I think that those guys were the real thing. Again, I have not followed their histories real closely but I think they are true people.
SM (01:11:20):
Yeah. A good point is Dr. King, when he used to ... That is the next person I am going to [inaudible] prophesied that some people would be upset when they had to go to jail. He says, if you are not willing to go out and march and be arrested, then do not go out and march, if you are not willing to go to jail for your beliefs or pay the price for your beliefs, and the Berrigans did, whether you liked what they did or not, they knew that they would be penalized for it. Dr. King?
AC (01:11:43):
I just think he is a great hero, a great hero of our time. I mean, I am familiar with all of his human foibles and all of the revisionist stuff that is come out about him, about how he did some plagiarizing apparently, and had a weakness for white women and was not exactly the most faithful husband but he was a human being. I mean, in terms of what he did for the social justice and civil rights and African Americans, giving them a place, their rightful place in American society, I think he was wonderful. I think his message still resonates. [inaudible]. Yeah.
SM (01:12:28):
Okay.
AC (01:12:29):
I think, again, he was the real thing in terms of his passion and commitment to his cause. I am astonished to think that he made that ... I did a little magazine piece during the last presidential election and I was astonished that Martin Luther King was only 34 years old when he delivered the I Have A Dream speech.
SM (01:12:52):
Isn't that amazing? It was all off his head. Daniel Ellsberg?
AC (01:13:02):
I guess he is a hero of sorts, in that he acted on his convictions, and was instrumental in exposing the folly and duplicity of the Vietnam War through the Pentagon Papers, so I guess he deserves credit for that. He seems like the real thing.
SM (01:13:22):
George Wallace?
AC (01:13:25):
Another figure like Lyndon Johnson, to me. Another man who is very American, very American, embodied a lot of American traits and qualities and history and evolution and I think that he would have been interesting to watch, if he had continued to be active on the political stage, because I think there was a man who had great capacity for change and growth and, in some ways, was an emblem of America. Being a fierce segregationist, to becoming a much more ... Almost a statesman-like figure at the end, a person who evoked sympathy, even among Blacks, who detested him as a symbol of racism at one point. You know, he reminds me of ... He is like Lyndon Johnson. He is very tragic and flawed but there was a sort of like ... Like grass sprouting up in the cracks of a sidewalk. You saw glimmers of the possibility of redemption and regeneration.
SM (01:14:45):
George McGovern?
AC (01:14:45):
I think he is a very good man, a good man, a good human being, a very decent human being. F. Scott Fitzgerald once said, wrote, that the sense of a fundamental decency is parceled out unequally at birth, and I think of George McGovern as somebody who is very fundamentally decent, a decent human being. I also think he was very naïve and somewhat quixotic. That is about it for him.
SM (01:15:22):
Hubert Humphrey?
AC (01:15:35):
I think of him as sort of about as decent as a professional politician can be. I think of him as a professional politician, more so than McGovern. I do not think McGovern was as practiced and cunning a politician but I think Hubert Humphrey was but I also think that he was a decent man who had good instincts and wanted to do the right thing. It's too bad he talked like Bugs Bunny, he sounded like Bugs Bunny.
SM (01:16:01):
Another one of those figures you never know what may have happened if he had gone against the war.
AC (01:16:03):
Indeed.
SM (01:16:08):
Some people believe he probably would have [inaudible]. Jane Fonda?
AC (01:16:10):
Phony. Another symbol of our generation. I mean, there she is with Ted Turner, a great capitalist buccaneer. Then she went through her aerobics phase, her intensely narcissistic Jane Fonda get a great butt workout phase. She is a phony.
SM (01:16:33):
How about Robert McNamara?
AC (01:16:42):
A tragic, morally corrupt, parental figure. Another one of these people like Nixon.
SM (01:16:52):
I think it is the symbol of today that he [inaudible], veterans, a lot of them will not even read it. It is a little bit too late. A lot of people feel that he wrote the book, because to set the record straight before he died and [inaudible] and others will say that he never should have written the book, and thought it was great not revealing what he did reveal was that in (19)67, [inaudible] against the war at that juncture in (19)67. Of course, Johnson was (19)68. But he did not have the courage to tell him and then went off to Aspen, some people say he went off to Aspen [inaudible]. You have Jan Scruggs, the Vietnam veteran’s memorial would invite him to the Vietnam veteran’s memorial, if he would come, and [inaudible] I believe and I got to know him briefly, before he killed himself, [inaudible].
AC (01:17:51):
Right.
SM (01:17:55):
A firm believer that these are the type of [inaudible] he brought to the war to start the healing.
AC (01:18:03):
Yeah. It is an interesting question, an interesting debate. I guess I feel I am getting a little bit cynical and tired of people who made huge mistakes and committed gross breaches of decency and morality when they were in positions of power, and then suddenly, they have this kind of coup de foudre. You know, this road to Damascus, [Foreign language] later in life where they recognize their wrongdoing and write a confessional book and come to us begging for forgiveness. You know, the Charles Colson’s and the Robert McNamara’s and, in his case, his mistakes cost thousands of lives. I mean, I believe in forgiveness but some people are very hard to forgive and I think he's a person who is very hard to forgive. It is not that he made a ... It is one thing to make a mistake, because of a misjudgment. It is another thing, though, to cover up that misjudgment by repeatedly lying and refusing to admit it, and that is what I hold against him, not so much that he made a foolish decision or made an unwise decision but that he ... But refused to admit that he made a mistake initially and continued to pursue that course of action, and lied about it and covered it up, and was not forthcoming with the truth.
SM (01:20:01):
If he had revealed to President Johnson that he was against the war and resigned and left, certainly, many of the lives would not be lost but then Johnson still may have continued his policies but, at least, then they would look at McNamara as a person who [inaudible] conviction and gave up power and responsibility, knowing it would change.
AC (01:20:23):
Yes.
SM (01:20:24):
You know, that truly upsets me [inaudible].
AC (01:20:26):
That would have been an act of heroism. That would have been a very admirable, moral act.
SM (01:20:32):
[inaudible] in the book, if he had left but then he never revealed it for protection of the president but as he got older, he wanted to reveal this before he died. Then maybe the respect would be there. But he is another interesting figure. Richard Nixon?
AC (01:20:51):
Well, again, you have another figure who sort of fits in with George Wallace and Lyndon Johnson in my book, a guy who embodies many characteristics and traits that are uniquely American. I mean, his ambitiousness, his lust for power, his desire to be a national and global player, and his spunk and his almost preternatural capacity to reinvent himself, to come back from all these crises and all these crushing, in some case, crushing failures to come back, to get up off the mat again, and trust his way into the political scene. I mean, all those things are so uniquely American and, in some ways, admirable but he also ... You know, he was clearly a very tragic figure and, clearly, he made some awful mistakes but, again, at the end of his life, he had the sense that he was a guy who had some capacity to redeem himself and to regenerate himself and, in ways, he was extremely practical and ... What is the word I am looking for? Not expeditious but his normalizing relationships with China, his opening up that whole thing I think was brilliant and represented an example of his practicality and his...
SM (01:22:54):
Here was a man that obviously did not trust others.
AC (01:22:57):
No.
SM (01:22:57):
Of course, his enemies list came forward. Of course, that is probably why he was in the... Gerald Ford?
AC (01:23:15):
I think Gerald Ford is basically dumb, and pretty vain. I actually met him, had an encounter with him and it was very disillusioning, because, for a while, I just thought he was sort of a good guy, kind of a get-along good guy who was not really blessed with terrific instincts or shrewdness or smarts but when I met him, I realized that on top of that, to make matters worse, he was also very vain. We had to film an interview with him for a joke tape and he agreed to participate but when we met him, we met him in this little chamber in the Capitol Building and he shook our hands in a very insincere way and then went over to the mirror and was spending a whole bunch of time primping himself and combing his hair. I was just shocked. I was shocked. I did not think he was that kind of guy. I did not think ... I guess all those guys are that way but it was disillusioning.
SM (01:24:12):
Spiro Agnew? I got one more.
AC (01:24:15):
He was just a sleaze ball. Just a cynical, conniving, out for himself sleaze ball.
SM (01:24:28):
And he hated the boomers.
AC (01:24:28):
He hated the boomers.
SM (01:24:29):
He did.
AC (01:24:30):
Well, they brought him down. I can see why he would be furious at them.
SM (01:24:36):
John Dean?
AC (01:24:43):
I view him as sort of another morally plastic yuppie squirt. He was a yuppie before it became popular, before it became an acronym. All those guys, you know the John Deans and the ... Who is the other guy?
SM (01:25:01):
Ehrlichman and all those [inaudible] and all that?
AC (01:25:04):
Yeah. There was another guy that was more like John Dean, though, a guy who went to Williams [inaudible]? Yeah. Went to Williams College and...
SM (01:25:11):
Right.
AC (01:25:11):
Silver spoon kids.
SM (01:25:12):
He is a minister now.
AC (01:25:13):
Yeah.
SM (01:25:17):
Sam Ervin?
AC (01:25:21):
He was a lovable, folksy embodiment of American rectitude and perfect for the part, at the time.
SM (01:25:34):
I did not realize that ... I thought he was fantastic on the Watergate committee but [inaudible].
AC (01:25:47):
Is that right?
SM (01:25:47):
Yeah. He came south [inaudible].
AC (01:25:49):
Right.
SM (01:25:51):
John Mitchell?
AC (01:25:53):
John Mitchell? I thought he was a very sinister, corrupt establishment figure who sort of confirmed all of our worst suspicions about Republicans in power, and lawyers. He really seemed evil to me, Machiavellian, but I did not ... I almost could say I hated him. For an extremely conservative guy, he was appealing in that I thought he was very principled and I thought he really believed in his conservatism and I guess I have some respect for him. I think that ideologically I would disagree with just about everything he espoused but he did seem like a principled person to me.
SM (01:27:08):
Gloria Steinem?
AC (01:27:10):
Phony.
SM (01:27:13):
How would you put Bella Abzug and those ... These are the people [inaudible], Bella Abzug, Gloria Steinem, and the women's movement.
AC (01:27:21):
I think Gloria Steinem is a phony. I think Bella Abzug seems more ... She seems more sincere and real to me, and especially Betty Friedan. I have more respect for Betty Friedan, mainly because I do not think she is as blindly ideological as Gloria Steinem. I object to feminists who are ... First of all, who lack a sense of humor and who hate men, but also feminists who are blindly ideological and put ideology above common sense and who seem to be dedicated to sexual or gender divisiveness above any kind of understanding of human and sexual relations.
SM (01:28:12):
How are we doing there on that...
AC (01:28:13):
Still running.
SM (01:28:18):
Okay. We are getting towards the end here. We have about three more, and then the last one regarding individuals, it is just the music people, Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin, the Bob Dylan, the people who did the music of the era.
AC (01:28:27):
I did not like the music of my era at all. I was turned off by it. I really have nothing to say except that I think Bob Dylan is immensely untalented. I just never have been able to understand this appeal, the hoopla about him. He is an annoying, irritating voice and I do not think his lyrics are particularly profound. I just do not get it. Janis Joplin, at least, had some kind of raw, animal vigor. I could see... I mean, she just wailed and I could see the appeal in that. Jimi Hendrix seemed to be a talented guitarist but, in general, I feel those people are all overrated, especially Bob Dylan. I mean, he had this aura of profundity, like some oracle, and I just never got it.
SM (01:29:15):
Number 15, do you feel that you have made an impact on American society? Again, let me follow this up by this question will be asked to all participants in the interview process and as a follow-up, do you feel you have made a positive impact on the lives of boomers and members of the current generation called generation X? As a boomer, do you feel that you have made an impact on American society?
AC (01:29:36):
Well, that is a pretty... That invites...
SM (01:29:39):
Do not talk about vanity.
AC (01:29:40):
It invites some immodesty and it is a pretty vaulting concept, to think that you, individually, have had an impact on society. I think that I guess I feel comfortable with myself in that I feel I have chosen a profession where there is a possibility to do good, and I feel that I have been true to the best of the...
AC (01:30:03):
Best of the spirit or the ideals of my generation and that I chose a profession where I knew I would not make a lot of money, but where I knew that I might have a chance to have an impact on the course of public affairs and it's a teaching. I regard journalism, especially what I do now, as-
SM (01:30:21):
Are you teaching full-time now?
AC (01:30:24):
No, I am not teaching formally in a classroom, but it is a teaching profession, I think. I mean, I regard myself as a teacher, an educator, except instead of having a class of 30, I have a class of potentially numbers in the tens of thousands. I mean, that is what I try to do. Horace said that great poetry should dulce et utile, which in Latin means to be sweet and to be useful, and I feel that that is what I try to do.
I try to teach and delight, to inform and to entertain, and I do that now through these comms I write about physical fitness. That is the satisfaction I get, is that I am helping people. It is not really about physical fitness, it is really about happiness. It is how to lead a successful, full life by respecting both your body and your mind. I have also written all sorts of other stories. I wrote that book on incompetence, and I have written magazine articles on lots of subjects. important issues like euthanasia. I wrote a letter to the president the last election asking whoever the president might be. It is an open letter to the president, asking that person to be true to the idea of faith, hope, and charity. I mean, those are the rubrics for the story. Have I had an impact on American society? I would not go that far, but I think I have had a small impact in my little sphere of influence, in my little realm. The people who read the Inquirer, the people who read my book, the people who perhaps read my comm. I think I have gotten them to think I have provoke them. I have tried to be true to certain principles that I feel are important. The idea of fundamental decency, the idea of being what you pretend to be, of what we were talking about earlier, the Episcopal motto. To be rather than to seem to be. That is what I try to do.
SM (01:32:16):
How about influence you made on the people in the generation following you?
AC (01:32:24):
Well, I think I have had an influence indirectly in that. I mean, I have really tried to be honest. I mean, I have been a real big opponent of political correctness and I have had the guts to speak out about it. It has not been a good thing for my career at the Inquirer, to object to diversity training, to object to a lot of that phoniness and hypocrisy. A lot of people think I am a racist because of some of the things I have done. There's been a lot of name calling, and so been a price to pay for that, but I feel that I have been set an example for others, and maybe even some generation Xers, of the importance of adhering to your principles and speaking up when you feel that something is phony or hypocritical or a violation or an abridgement of the spirit of liberalism. I believe that I am a true liberal and that I am for maximum freedom. I am for maximum freedom. What I was saying earlier is that I feel that I am a true liberal and that I feel that I am a believer in maximum freedom. That is what liberal to me means, means free. Maximum freedom. Maximum freedom of expression. I do not want anybody telling me how to think and what to say. I do not want anybody telling me the politically correct [inaudible]. I do not want any institution forcing me to get a diversity training where I am going to be told, I am going to be forced fed propaganda about how to think about certain groups in our society, how to treat people. I do not think that has any place in an academic institution or a newspaper. I am for maximum freedom of expression. I am for maximum diversity, political diversity in the true sense of that. Not this cosmetic Benetton ad diversity of skin color and sexual organs, but real diversity of ideas. I mean, I would love the Inquirer to have some more, and I think David Boldt is a [inaudible] conservative. We need some raving conservatives on that paper and we need some raving radical lefties. I want to see a free for all of ideas and not this phony diversity that we have now, of if you have a Hispanic surname, then you are diverse. Even if you buy into the left liberal orthodoxy and group think of the newspaper. That is where we need the diversity, in terms of ideas and political outlook. I have battled that stuff and I think that, I hope that that is been an inspiration or an example to other people.
SM (01:35:01):
I am coming down to the end.
AC (01:35:02):
Okay.
SM (01:35:02):
I got three more here and make sure that is working.
AC (01:35:06):
It is turning.
SM (01:35:07):
Could you comment on the generation gap in the (19)60s and early (19)70s and the generation gap you sense between boomers and Generation X?
AC (01:35:15):
Well, there was certainly a generation gap during the (19)60s, between us and them, and them I guess was anybody over 30. It was our parents' generation and people who we deemed insufficiently progressive and hopelessly benighted. As I said earlier, I think there was actually the baby boomers, if you used the definition that people like, went... Oh, what was his name? Brandon Jones uses in his book Great Expectations for people from between (19)46 and (19)64. I mean, that almost to me encompasses a couple generations. I feel like there is a big difference in outlook between people born in 1950 and people born in 1960. As far as generation X people go. I mean, there is clearly a difference in spirit and a difference in expectation and the difference in outlook. In some ways, the young kids, the generation Xers, are very cynical. Much more cynical than even baby boomers, like myself, who were skeptical about the generation from the get go. I guess they expressed their cynicism in a kind of apathy, in a slacker. Backward baseball cap. Unwillingness to participate or aspire to anything. I mean, Digby Baltzell talks about how this generation seems to be aspiring downward. The whole notion of white middle class kids embracing ghetto rap, and to me it is symptomatic of that. It is sort of like we are going to admire and emulate to the lower or lowest elements in society as a way of basically shooting a finger at the establishment.
SM (01:37:36):
What, in your opinion, is the lasting legacy of the boomer generation?
AC (01:37:47):
The lasting legacy.
SM (01:37:52):
Is it too early?
AC (01:37:54):
It may be too early. Maybe our lasting legacy is that we will not leave a legacy that lasts. It is just quite possible that we were so morally plastic, that we were so spread all over the landscape, and that we were so bent on our own self-gratification that we kind of nullified social good that we purported to do in our more youthful, idealistic stage. I guess that is my feeling, is that we sort of canceled it. We canceled it all out, and that a lot of the things that we thought were so nifty and great and liberating and beneficial, that were going to advance the human race, that were going to represent an evolutionary step forward, tended to have tragic and awful unforeseen consequences. As I said earlier, I think that AIDS could be viewed as a direct result of the sexual revolution. I think that the crack cocaine culture that has destroyed American cities can be traced to Timothy Leary and the glorification of drugs, I think that we are responsible. I think that the fact that the American economy to such an extent is a house of cards and that we do not make things, we make deals today. All that is a result of the greed of the (19)80s, which flowed out of the me decade of the (19)70s, the self-absorption of the (19)70s and all that la-la land stuff that happened then. Which again, which flowed out of the age of Aquarius. If it feels good, do it. You only go around once in life, so grab for all the gusty you can get. That stupid poem that used to be on everybody's poster, that kind of declaration of that creed.
SM (01:40:24):
Do your thing.
AC (01:40:25):
Yeah, I will do your-
SM (01:40:26):
If by chance we should come together, it will be beautiful. Peter Max.
AC (01:40:29):
Exactly, that creed, which you saw it every single black lit room in hippiedom which was-
SM (01:40:36):
Peter Max.
AC (01:40:37):
Yeah.
SM (01:40:41):
Put that piece in back. What role, if any, does activism in the boomer generation penetrate the lives of their children's generation? Do you think there is any of that going into the children at all?
AC (01:40:53):
I do not see it. I do not see it, but I guess I have not really been studying it.
SM (01:41:03):
We did this, but I just want to read it. Do you think it is possible to heal within a generation where differences in positions taken were so extreme? Is it important to try to assist in this healing process? Should we care? Is it feasible? For example, during my many trips to the wall, I have been at several ceremonies of veterans in the audience. They hate Bill Clinton. They hate Jane Fonda, hate those who protested the war and never gave veterans a royal welcome on the return to the mainland. The wall has helped in a magnificent way, but the hate remains for those on the other side. Should an effort be made to assist in this healing beyond the wall? Your thoughts? Are you optimistic? Other words, what I am truly trying to say is, what I am trying to do with this project is to, in some small way, interview people who I think have some important things to say from all sides without being prejudiced or biased toward anything. I may have my own personal views, but my ultimate goal in this project is to do something to maybe, in my own small way, heal the boomers and heal American society in some small way. Some will say, I have already had some people say, "You have got to heal the generation? Impossible." I still want to try, based on the meeting that I had with Senator Muskie, that we had with our students who I may have reviewed to you over the phone, and certainly my Lewis Puller sending me a note saying, "Go for it." Things like this. I want to do it. It is something that has been driving within me.
AC (01:42:30):
Well, that is good. I mean, you're an example of the best that you have that passion you think and you think you can make a difference. That belief that you can make a difference. Other people may say, "You're an impossible idealist. You are just a Don Quixote and you're not going to do that. You cannot heal a generation." I think one person can make a difference. In my incompetence book, I told people that, and that was my message, is you are not going to change everything, but you can change things. You can have an impact in your own sphere of influence and that stuff ripples out and you do not know how it is going to affect.
SM (01:43:06):
Two years ago, I never thought I would be doing this, so I am doing it.
AC (01:43:06):
That is great.
SM (01:43:12):
I even thought of possibly developing this into a trilogy. The first one being the reality, which is the voices of boomers and veterans and the boomers, the book being the young people, the next generation, which is Generation X. The third one being a symposium on nine university campuses in the next, somehow three years. I do not know how to get the funding, but possibly the first two efforts would help with the funding, and that is on nine university campuses starting with September, October, November, December, whatever, bringing different panels together to try to bring the healing. That means to bring a Jane Fonda, if she'd be willing to do it, even though how you might feel, to bring her on the same stage with Don Bailey, our former auditor general who when he came to Jefferson, would not even sit down with us, who put the memorial together because he thought it was a political entity in Philadelphia and he was our auditor general. I think he had won a Purple Heart. That was another one of those magic moments where the divisions, my God, he would not even talk with Harry Gafney and Dan Fraley and the people involved in the memorial in Philly because he felt that this is just a political move. I am going to just ask these final two questions. Do you think that we will ever have trust for elected leaders again after the debacle of Vietnam and Watergate? If boomers’ distrust, what effect is this having on the current generation of youth? I think I asked that earlier, so I do not know if you have anything else to say.
AC (01:44:37):
I do not know. I get discouraged because I think that the system as it is presently constituted is so inherently corrupt that it is impossible for an honest, truly honest, decent man to let us say become president. I think you almost have to be insane and also somewhat pathological to succeed. I mean, to some extent, I think the people who run for that office are probably, if you evaluated them clinically, are pathological narcissists and megalomaniacs. As long as you have politicians who are willing to do anything or say anything to please lobbyist, to get campaign contributions and to get votes, you are going to have cynicism and distrust of certainly a political authority. People are just resigned to it. They are just resigned to the fact that politicians are cheaters and liars. Unfortunately, the ones we have at the moment have done nothing to disabuse us of that notion. I mean, Clinton and Dole, I think are what we have come to expect. I do not see, I mean, I cannot see that changing unless, well, I think a key step would be political finance reform. If these guys, and what Paul Taylor's trying to do, and there is another example of a single individual having impact trying to change things. Paul Taylor, the former Washington Post reporter who is trying to get the TV networks to give free time to political candidates, he used to work at the Inquirer. I know him a little bit. There is a guy, I mean, I do not know what he did during the, he is a baby boomer. I do not know what he did during the war. He went to Yale. I do not know. He is like a year or two older than I am. I do not know what he did, whether he was active in the anti-war movement. I do not think he was. He was a jock, but there is a guy who's continuing to act on his, he is still an activist.
SM (01:46:46):
Station one?
AC (01:46:47):
Yeah, I think he is. He got together with Walter Cronkite. You have not read about that?
SM (01:46:53):
No.
AC (01:46:54):
He got a lot of press and he has been on TV, public television a lot. They got a couple of the networks to agree to it to some extent. Remember I talked about effective activism, mature activism. There is a guy who is an effective activist, who is getting things done, changing things. Not by using four letterer words and placards and stuff like that, but by working within the system. He was a chief political writer of the Washington Post, and he quit because he just felt the whole system was diseased. How did I get off on that tangent? Oh, well, that is a step to this finance reform, relieving politicians of the burden of having to raise all this money for media time, TV time. If you do that, then the chances of getting some truly honest people, people who are able to maintain some semblance of integrity and run for higher office, is enhanced. I think once that happens, once you get people in office who act on their convictions and say what they mean and take on popular stands and defend those stands and explain why they took them, then I think you are going to see a regeneration of trust for political authority.
SM (01:48:08):
I am almost done. Make sure that is still running.
AC (01:48:11):
Still running.
SM (01:48:13):
When the best history books are written on the growing up years for the boomers, say 25, 50 years from now, what will be the overall evaluation of boomers? [inaudible 01:48:23]. Then how did the youth of the (19)60s and early (19)70s change your life and attitudes toward that and future generations?
AC (01:48:36):
Well, again, I guess it is hard to say whether I brought this with me or whether it was inspired by the (19)60s, but I am very skeptical generally, and again, I am very attuned to this discrepancy between appearance and reality. I am very, I guess Hemingway once used the phrase in describing someone as having a built-in shit detector. I have a very good built in shit detector. Having seen the theater and the moral and ethical transparency of my generation firsthand, I am very loathe to canonize or deify or hero worship anybody, but particularly my peers. I guess the bottom line is that I regard them as human beings, and therefore I know that they are probably as bad as they are good or as good as they are bad. That you get both. Both come with the package when you are dealing with human beings. While I think the baby, boomers are special in terms of their numerical preponderance, I do not think that they have any special claim to moral superiority or enlightenment or social beneficence.
SM (01:50:28):
Last question. Here it is.
AC (01:50:29):
Okay.
SM (01:50:33):
You believe they could have impact on society and government policy in the (19)50s, (19)60s and (19)70s vis a vis Vietnam policy, the draft, civil rights legislation, non-violent protests, multiple movements. In other words, a sense of... How is society resisting this today and why, in your own words, do the sons and daughters of boomers feel less confident about their ability to have an impact on society and sometimes a less desire and seemingly less opportunity? Am I wrong in assuming this in the question? Let me just mention that I work with a lot of college students and I have been in higher education for 17 years at four different universities. I left for a while, but my love for higher education was such that I came back. One of the things that I see overall since that a lot of today's college students that I come in contact with are either wish they lived in that era so they could have meaning to their lives, or they look upon it as a nostalgic period. Oftentimes we will criticize boomers when they talk about civil rights and issues that were important in their day but are still important today. When we try to say that the impact on race relations in society is still we have a long way to go, they will say, "Oh, the civil rights, I mean, you are just bringing up something that was very important to you, but it is not as important to us." That concerns me. If we could get beyond this image of what the boomers were all supposedly about, what the media has portrayed them as, and look at some of the substance of the issues that were involved in that time, that some of that still carries over. I think we are failing to do that today with a lot of the young people. You ask a lot of young people, what is the most important thing? The most important thing is getting a job, making money. That was certainly a takeover from the (19)80s, but making money is very important for them and volunteer. A lot of want to volunteer in their community. We are not saying that students do not care about others, but I get a sense that they are looking out for number one. In the long run, number one is all that really counts, and that concerns me.
AC (01:52:45):
Well, I think you are right. I mean, I am not as close to the kids as you are clearly. I mean, you I am sure have a very educated sense of who they are and what they feel and what they stand for. That is my sense. That is my long-distance sense of the kids today. I think that they have a feeling that they missed out on the big battles and they missed out on the fun. When they look back at the (19)60s, they feel like they missed the boat, that sort of all the major challenges have already been addressed and to some extent conquered. That all that rebellious adolescent fun is over as well. We had the luxury of kicking up our heels and doing it with high moral dudgeon, having a blast while at the same time fostering the illusion that we were doing some good. Clearly the times have changed and the kids today do not have the luxury, I do not think, to do what we did. As I said earlier, we had the privilege and luxury of dealing with these big issues and these big problems. We did not have to worry about getting jobs right away. We were not living in an era of shrinking resources and diminished horizons as these kids are. I mean, we were living in a time when we expected to do better than our parents and to enjoy a better standard of living than our parents. We expected the American engine of plenty and affluence and cornucopia to continue and that this tide would continue to rise and that we would be buoyed with it. I do not think the kids feel that way today. They know that the American century is over, even before the century has closed. They know that they are likely not to enjoy the same standard of living as their parents, and to live in a much more Darwinian, dog eat dog kind of world, a global multinational kind of world, which is much more unpredictable and scary. These are the kids who come out of college with $100,000 worth of debt and have to go back home and live with mom and dad sometimes till they are 30 years old. It is not the same time. It is not the same time and not the same world. I can see why they feel resentment and a sense of wistfulness and nostalgia, and I can see why they are contemptuous of us as a bunch of spoiled brats who kind of got it all, who were hogging all the good jobs and who were irresponsible and want to prolong it. I mean, I can see why it maddens them to see us try to prolong our youth. These 45-year-olds cavorting around being obsessed with fitness and getting plastic surgery and acting like they're still in college.
SM (01:56:24):
I guess I am done, but do you have any final comments you wanted to say at all? Any general concluding remarks?
AC (01:56:30):
My only concluding remark is to carry on. You are doing the Lord's work. It is a good idea. Good luck with your endeavor.
SM (01:56:38):
Well, thank you very much for being involved. Thank you very much.
AC (01:56:43):
You are very welcome. It is my pleasure. Snap. You are very welcome.
(End of Interview)
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Art Carey
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Carey, Art ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Journalists; Editors; Philadelphia Inquirer; Carey, Art--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Art Carey worked as a reporter, staff writer, editor and columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer for 34 years. He has a Bachelor's degree in English from Princeton University and a Master's degree in Journalism from Columbia University. Carey has won several state- and national-level journalism awards for his newspaper and magazine articles."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":515,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792},"12":0}">Art Carey worked as a reporter, staff writer, editor and columnist at the <em>Philadelphia Inquirer</em> for 34 years. He has a Bachelor's degree in English from Princeton University and a Master's degree in Journalism from Columbia University. Carey has won several state- and national-level journalism awards for his newspaper and magazine articles.</span>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
ND
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.64a; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.64b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
116:47
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/3b91fb2ecf3f3e25b2f67097ddfb8e39.jpg
7ee80168ea72382994af99a9a0fc8d33
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/73e62013f7973248eaf08f6339ca5d03.mp3
12b65d907f5dfb040b48788033df4dd2
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
2009-11-09
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Joseph T. Cox, 1946-
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Joseph T. Cox is a retired army officer, educator, author and the former headmaster of Haverford School. Cox was also an English professor at West Point. He earned a Bachelor’s degree from Lafayette College and a Master’s degree and Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":15105,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Joseph T. Cox is a retired army officer, educator, author and the former headmaster of Haverford School. Cox was also an English professor at West Point. He earned a Bachelor’s degree from Lafayette College and a Master’s degree and Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
2 Microcassettes
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
109:05
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"The nineteen sixties; Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Vietnam War; Colin Powell; Baby boom generation; Cold War; Nineteen fifties; Assassination of John F. Kennedy."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">The nineteen sixties; Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Vietnam War; Colin Powell; Baby boom generation; Cold War; Nineteen fifties; Assassination of John F. Kennedy.</span>
Subject LCSH
Soldiers; College teachers; Cox, Joseph T., 1946--Interviews
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Joseph Fox
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 23 July 1987
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:12):
Testing, one, two, testing. Okay. So again, some of these are specific questions, and some are general. And I will keep looking at this, because the one time, the thing stopped. When you think of the (19)60s and the early (19)70s, or that period of the (19)60s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind?
JC (00:00:33):
Well, I graduated from college in 1968, so I think of the things that happened, the first thing probably is Martin Luther King's assassination. I was a senior in high school when Kennedy was assassinated, and then I had graduated from college when RFK was assassinated. But the real turning point in my head was when Martin Luther King was assassinated. It was just a kick in the gut, and just, "What is going on," kind of sense of things. I felt like we had started to slide with JFK's assassination, and you did not think it could get too much worse. And then the next two assassinations just really, I think, affected me.
SM (00:01:31):
Now, when you went to Vietnam and you came back home, what was the kind of America that you saw upon your return? Now, was it a welcoming America, or were you disappointed in the country that you came back to as opposed to the country when you left?
JC (00:01:50):
Well, I graduated in (19)68 and went off to Airborne and Ranger School, and then went to Fort Carson Fifth Infantry Division, assuming I was going to go right to Vietnam. And I remember the battalion commander called me in and said, "What do you want to do next?" And I said, "Oh, command B Company if you let me." I said, "I expect to go to Vietnam." And he said, "Well, we have got other plans." And they sent me to Germany to be a General's Aide. So I went to Germany for almost two years before, when I went to Vietnam from Germany. So, I had been out of the country, living in the country for three years. And when I came back it was totally different. I mean, I went to Germany in 1969, early (19)69, and I got back three years later. What is that? (19)71? It was just a-
SM (00:02:47):
(19)70s?
JC (00:02:49):
Late (19)71. It was just different... It seemed very, very different. And I felt alienated from that country that I came back to. I was told on the... I left Vietnam in my tan uniform, and we were told, "Going into Travis, do not wear your uniform," which made me a little bit stubborn. I just made.... I was going to wear my uniform. Nobody is going to tell me I could not wear my uniform. And I felt like people were staring at me. I felt ostracized. I thought the price of beer in the San Francisco airport was outrageous. It was probably a buck 75 or something like that. And I just felt kind of alienated to some things. And I remember that the 4th of July after I got home, I actually went down on a Gettysburg tour, and the buses that were touring Gettysburg, while Vietnam was still going on, were practically empty. But it was something I did just to kind of reconnect with soldiers and organize my thoughts about whatever. And I just felt a bit like an outsider. And as a funny piece to this, because I ended up staying in the Army for 30 years, and I am not sure why I stayed in the Army for 30 years. I could give you a lot of reasons. Probably the main reason was I enjoyed the people I worked with, and every job you have in the Army, the next job is kind of a challenge. You do not think you are really ready for it, and I liked that. But I stayed in for 30 years. And right before I was going to get out, I really had this anxiety over getting out. I could not understand it. And I reread Tobias Wolff's In Pharaoh's Army and that section where he is thinking about riding the bus and thinking about getting out of the army after he got back from Vietnam. All of a sudden, I identified with it, and I honestly thought, "Okay, this is what you were afraid of all the time. It is one reason you probably stayed in the army." And it really kind of put my mind at ease. And I retired after 30 years and a day and never looked back and felt very good about it. But it all was still connected with Vietnam, and it was all still connected with coming back to a country that had changed, seemed like that was different. And another thing that happened in coming back, all of a sudden, I had this huge passion for baseball. I could not play enough softball, I could not watch enough baseball. And I never had this passion prior to that. I liked baseball, but I did not play in high school, played little league and stuff. But I, all of a sudden, had this passion for baseball, and it was unexplainable except that I had been away from the United States. And that is when I came back, I identified baseball at the United States. It was strange.
SM (00:06:13):
When you went in, what college did you go to?
JC (00:06:15):
I went to Lafayette.
SM (00:06:17):
When you went to college, did you know you were going to go into the military?
JC (00:06:20):
No.
SM (00:06:20):
Or what were your goals when you first started?
JC (00:06:23):
Well, I grew up in Springfield, Mass. I went to Springfield Technical High School, and I thought I was going to be an engineer. I had a wonderful English teacher in high school, and he prepared me better than I realized. I got to Lafayette, I started, and I realized coming out of probably a pretty good high school, but I realized it was a lot of work in college. It was tough. And the only thing that came easy to me was writing in my English course, thanks to the guy who actually had a PhD and was teaching in a big inner city technical high school. So I ended up an English major, because I got my best grades in English, and I knew I was going to have to concentrate on something eight hours a day. And in addition to going to classes, and it turned out it was what I enjoyed. So I had no idea what I was going to do. I thought I would probably coach and teach English. When I went to Lafayette, they had mandatory ROTC. And I was in the ROTC program, and my father had been a sergeant in the Second World War, and then was a warrant officer, a full-time warrant officer in the National Guard. So, he did not make a lot of money, and the bills were piling up, college bills. And they offered a two-year ROTC scholarship at Lafayette. I think another guy and I were the first two to get the full scholarship, books, tuition fees, and a hundred dollars a month. So they paid for everything. There probably were not a lot of takers in 1965, (19)66. And I got that scholarship. And then I knew I was going to have to serve in the Army, but I wanted to serve in the Army. I wanted to go to Vietnam. I had read too much Hemingway, probably. So I had kind of a perverted sense, a perverted desire to go to war. And as I said, I graduated in 1968. I was a regular army officer and was sure I was headed to Vietnam. When I was in Vietnam, my boss was a man named Bill Reno, retired as a Lieutenant General. And in Vietnam, I was planning to get out of the Army, and General, or Major Reno, then I was a captain, asked me what I was going to do, and it was back to the same plan. "I am going to teach. I am going to go somewhere, get a Master's degree in English, teach and coach." I did not really know the prep school path, but I probably would have ended up at a prep school as an English teacher/coach. And that was always my plan. He said, "You can do that in the Army." I said, "Oh, I doubt that." And he said, "No, you can." And he paved the way, and I ended up going up to West Point, getting an interview. And the Army sent me to University of North Carolina for my Master's degree. And when I got up to West Point, I think those of us who were not West Point graduates were in a minority. And I ended up teaching four years at West Point before I went back into the regular Army.
SM (00:10:12):
[inaudible]. When you went to Lafayette College, what was the environment like? Obviously, there was a lot of anti-war people going on at that time on most college campuses. Did you feel the pressure that was going on in America regarding the anti-war movement? And how did you feel about your fellow peers that were your age who were against the war? And how did they treat people like you, who were in ROTC? Because I can remember when I was in college at Binghamton, we banned, they banned ROTC from the campus.
JC (00:10:47):
Lafayette was all male. And it is a fairly conservative school. Out of about 400, I guess in my class, I think 52 of us were commissioned in one service or another. It was small. People knew each other. I was in student government, I was elected to the student council. Also, I washed pots for my meals in a social dorm. There were 19 fraternities, and there was this social dorm. And I ate all my meals in the social dorm, and the social dorm had the radicals. So I would sit at supper time, and we would read Jim Reston's editorials in the New York Times and discussing, or breakfast and then discussing. So some of the guys who were the biggest "protestors" were the people I broke bread with, so they were friends. I was in student government with them. Actually, at that time, and again, this is (19)66, (19)67, things were falling apart, (19)67, (19)68, my senior year in Vietnam. But I did not have a sense, it was not Berkeley. It was much, much more conservative and much more civil. And it was funny, I was one of the two battalion commanders in the ROTC unit, and we would march through our drill and go back, put our weapons away, and guys would bomb us with water balloons. They were the same guys I would have supper with a half an hour later. And it was not as confrontational and as bitter as it might have been in other places. I think it probably got more difficult, but at least I came into Lafayette in kind of an innocent period in (19)64. They still had us wearing beanies and singing. We could still sing the alma mater, because they made us memorize it. And it was a big fraternity dominated school. So it just was a little bit different, because it was a smaller school. And you had formed friendships, and there were differences of political opinion. But it was all actually pretty healthy. One of my best friends is a man named Lowell Lifschultz, who is a lawyer now. Not as often as I would like, but we still talk to each other. But Lowell was a very, very bright guy, and intellectually would give me a hard time over it. But I was destined. I had signed the paperwork, and I was getting the scholarship. And I knew where I was going, and I had no illusions about that.
SM (00:13:58):
Did you feel that when you were over in Vietnam that a lot of the things that were happening in America were divisions between Black and white, drug culture, the different styles, different political viewpoints forward against the war was actually also taking place within the Army and the Marines? Someone said to separate the Marines, Army. Someone told me separate the Marines, because they were gung ho. I am not sure if that is true. Because the hip people would say that the Military went really down during that (19)67 to (19)71 period, and then around (19)71, (19)72, it started changing. So just your thoughts that some of the issues that were actually happening in America were happening in the armed forces in Vietnam.
JC (00:14:45):
Well, I think units that... I think every experience was different depending on where you were, and especially when you were there. And I think things were a lot different in 1968 than they were in 1971. And I think by 1971, there were deeper racial divides. There were drugs... There were real lines between the people who used alcohol and the people who used marijuana. And then I know I was with a combat engineer unit. There was hardcore heroin use, where the heroin was so pure and so plentiful, the guys would melt it and put it on a cigarette. And the efficiency of that is fairly low, but it was so plentiful they could do it. So, you were dealing with those things. And I think people had no illusions about winning the war. My role as an Army captain with essentially seven platoons that were spread out in MR2, building roads, was to make sure that I did not do anything stupid to get somebody hurt. And my year started, what? My countdown started the day I got there, and everybody else had a different countdown. So, there was not a real cohesion, which did not help things either. But all the tensions that were there, I thought, as I said, from Germany to Vietnam, it was probably racial tensions were higher in Germany. And there were few by the Germans too than they were in Vietnam where people were more isolated and had a common mission. But they were there, and I am not... It was still a draftee army. So that created interesting combinations of people. I also had McNamara Project 100,000 soldiers in my unit.
SM (00:17:05):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:17:06):
I had a young man, and I wrote about him in one of the poems, who was just an incredibly hardworking young man. And he was very efficient, and I wanted to promote him. And I sat him down, and I said, "Larry read this." And he said, "Sir, I cannot read." And I said, "Quit kidding around. Read this. I want you to go before the board, and I want to promote you to sergeant." He said, "I cannot read." He started talking about his life. He had had a child when he was 14. He was from Fort Wayne, Indiana, and he had dropped out of school. And there was a project, 100,000 soldiers who were not mentally up to it, but I do not know if it was 100,000, but they brought some soldiers in. I looked at his records and realized that he was one of these soldiers. And it was just a very interesting social experiment. In the same unit, I had a guy who had a Master's in classics from Columbia, and then I had Larry, and another kid who... Larry was very, very productive. The other kid was like a little kid, and we had him take care of the dogs and paint the walls, and he was like everybody's little 12-year-old brother, who was kind of sad. But it was an interesting microcosm.
SM (00:18:29):
Did most of the people you served with feel that they could have won this war if the government had given you more support? And it depends on who you talked to again, but how many people really were against the war that was in this service over there? And how many were upset that they were not given the [inaudible] necessary to win the war? So, there is two different questions there.
JC (00:18:57):
Yeah. I think again, it is what time you were serving. And I was serving late in the war, and I do not think anybody had those... Honestly, I do not think anybody really felt... And again, we were building roads, we were trying to... We were turning the war over to the Vietnamese. So, I do not think anybody had a sense of not having permission to bomb here, or do this, or do that. I never really got into those kinds of conversations with folks. It was, again, taking care of ourselves, doing what we had to do. I did not have a sense of that kind of frustration, and I did not sense that even among my peers subsequent to the war. That was never really a big part of the conversation. And again, it was because we were so late in the war.
SM (00:20:12):
And you were there from what time to what time?
JC (00:20:15):
I am trying to think now. It was 1971 till, I may have come home in February of (19)72, so it was a year.
SM (00:20:27):
Before the last people really came out in (19)73.
JC (00:20:30):
Yeah.
SM (00:20:30):
The helicopter.
JC (00:20:31):
Yeah. Yeah. So it was later in the war. And all those kinds of thoughts were kind of... I think those had gone away. The being for against the war, that too was shaped by the inevitability of our withdrawal, which we were there to withdraw. And I remember going into Vietnam, and I had a choice. I could have gone to the 101st, or to, I think, the 25th. And I deliberately asked to go to an engineer unit, because I did not want to... We knew the combat units were getting pulled out, and I did not want to go to a combat unit and then go and get pulled out. I was there, I wanted to experience it. And I deliberately remember not making that choice. And they were pulled out while I was there. A lot of our security was turned over to the Vietnamese, which was an interesting experience, because we did not feel as secure. And it really created a whole different feel about it. It made it a little bit more wild west. It was just different, because we were coordinating with the Vietnamese for security. And in the Koreans, the White Horse Division, it was very much, I think, a different experience than some other people had, because the fighting actually was being done by the Vietnamese than the South Korean units.
SM (00:22:25):
When do you feel, individually, that the (19)60s, the genre, the (19)60s actually begin? Was there a specific event? Was there a series of specific events? Was there a specific year that separated, say, the boomers when they were in the (19)50s, when they were elementary school kids, basically? And I have had a lot of different responses to this. Just your thoughts of, was there anything, do you feel-
JC (00:22:58):
November 23rd, 1961. That begins the (19)60s. And I think that is the assassination of JFK, isn't it?
SM (00:23:03):
It was (19)63.
JC (00:23:03):
(19)63. Okay.
SM (00:23:03):
Yeah. November 20-
JC (00:23:03):
Yeah, (19)63.
SM (00:23:03):
November 22nd.
JC (00:23:11):
November 22nd, (19)63. Here I am, so sure my date. (19)63. That, to me, was the beginning of the (19)60s, because that was a loss of innocence, and that was a turning point. And for me, it was the beginning of the (19)60s, because I was a senior in high school. So, I am just starting to come into my consciousness of the world around me. I remember the Bay of Pigs. I remember the tension. I remember thinking... This tells you more about maybe what a weird kid I was, but I remember getting off the bus and walking to high school, thinking, "Should I go down, lie about my age, and enlist in the Marines?" Because something is going to happen, which is-
SM (00:23:59):
Yeah.
JC (00:23:59):
...pretty dumb on my part. But that was a period I remember. But I honestly see the turning point is, and I do not know why I keep saying (19)61, because maybe that is the Bay of Pigs.
SM (00:24:14):
Yeah.
JC (00:24:14):
(19)63-
SM (00:24:14):
Or (19)62 was the Cuban Crisis.
JC (00:24:17):
Yeah.
SM (00:24:19):
Do you remember the exact moment when you first heard the Kennedy was shot?
JC (00:24:24):
Yeah.
SM (00:24:25):
A lot of people that were boomers were in school, and they heard it in a class, or a teacher said it. How did you first find out about it?
JC (00:24:29):
I was a teacher's writer for our high school newspaper, and it was the newspaper period. So those of us who worked on the newspaper, we were fairly close, and it was informal. And Mrs. Shea was crying and told us, and we just could not believe it. It was an afternoon, I guess, near the end of the day in school.
SM (00:25:02):
Yeah.
JC (00:25:03):
And it was interesting, because I just had my 45th reunion, and we were talking about-
SM (00:25:08):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:25:11):
... about that. And there were about three of us, or four of us at the 45th year of reunion, who actually had first heard it together. So we were sharing that memory, and Mrs. Shea. It was-
SM (00:25:28):
And you lived on the East Coast at that time?
JC (00:25:29):
I lived in Massachusetts.
SM (00:25:30):
Yeah. So if you were in class, it was probably close to the end of the school.
JC (00:25:33):
It was the end of the school day.
SM (00:25:35):
One period left. Probably one period left.
JC (00:25:35):
Yeah. That was our last period.
SM (00:25:36):
Yeah.
JC (00:25:37):
And my father, being a Boston Irishman, non-practicing Catholic, but he had the Boston Irish stubbornness. And I remember one time in Holyoke, Massachusetts, they used to paint the center stripe green. And one time, John Kennedy was leading the parade, and they went by, my father got right in my face and said, "Someday, he's going to be president." I did not say this to my father, because I did not talk to my father this way, but I am thinking, "Do not get mad at me, dad. I am not sure... Why are you..." And it was that stubborn Irish pride. And my neighborhood was very... It was Italian and Irish. So I grew up in a very ethnic Catholic part of Springfield. So, it was a big deal.
SM (00:26:38):
But you just said it was a magic moment. See, that reason why I am titling my book A Magic Moment is that in every interview I have had, there has been magic moments that I did not expect. And I only picked that when I think I was on my 30th interview, and I had not gone up for the title yet. And someone said, "We have already talked about the magic moments that you have had in some of these interviews. That would be a great title for your book."
JC (00:27:03):
Somebody else has had said the same, Kennedy assassination, have not they?
SM (00:27:03):
Yes, they have.
JC (00:27:03):
Oh, yeah.
SM (00:27:03):
Yeah. And other-
JC (00:27:03):
Not that magic.
SM (00:27:10):
Some said Kent State.
JC (00:27:11):
See, I was out of the country.
SM (00:27:13):
Yeah. Kent State. Well, that was the one that... No, when you look at the boomer generation, which is those born between (19)46 and (19)64, and of course, a lot of the people that were in the anti-war movement were born in (19)43 and (19)44. And a lot of the people I have interviewed, over half are not in boomers. They lived during the time that boomers were young. So all their opinions count. What is your thoughts on the boomer generation, this generation of 70 to 74 million, depending on... The millennials now, the young people that are here in this school, now are part of the largest generation in American history. They are 80 million strong. And I think boomers would be a little sensitive to know that they are no longer the biggest group. But just your thoughts on the boomer generation, what you-
SM (00:28:03):
But just your thoughts on the boomer generation, what you think are some of their strengths or their weaknesses?
JC (00:28:08):
Well, I think boomers were idealistic, obviously idealistic in both left and right causes. I saw Vietnam as part of the Kennedy's column. I was idealistic. I do not think I had any illusions about it, but I still saw it in those terms. And so I think very, very idealistic. Very, I think selfish in many ways. I think for whatever reasons, I think boomers think of themselves as a chosen people. Special time in history, unique time in history, deserving more than perhaps we think we should. In contrast to my father's depression era attitudes, we always just thought that things should be ours, material things should be ours in ways that I do not think too many generations before us felt that way. And I think we are selfish in... Although there is an awful lot of rhetoric about one world. I think Americans are, I think, we are uniquely ethnic centric about our experiences. I do not think we are very open-minded, even those who... I just do not think we are that open-minded. I think the kids today have a much more real sense of how flat the world is. I do not think we still even have that sensed the way we should. Let us see. It is hard to characterize a group of people. I think we... I do not know. I have a sense that something has owed us and it is an unrealistic sense that something he has owed us. And it is going to be interesting as we become the non-productive age, the non-productive part of our society, how that is going to work itself out. Because I do not think other generations have that sense of entitlement as much as our generation does.
SM (00:31:21):
That was one of the questions, and you already answered it, that there was a feeling of uniqueness. That we are the most unique generation of history. And not only when they were young, there was this feeling, I remember being around it, that we can really make a difference in this world by ending war, by bringing the races together, by showing equality toward all groups, stealing the... Like a panacea, a cure-all. We are going to be the group that is going to be able to do it. And even talking to some people today that are our age who still feel... Some have gone on and made a lot of money but some still feel it.
JC (00:31:59):
That is good. I am encouraged. I just felt... I do not know. I understood all that and felt that a lot of people feel that way. And there is a lot of generosity. Part of it too is the Vietnam experience. Paul Fussell said, "Once a pissed off infantry man, always a pissed off infantry man." And I could always tell when I met somebody in the army, a career soldier in the army, I could always tell a fellow officer who had served in Vietnam or one who had not, there's an element of cynicism in the person who had served in Vietnam and there is a skepticism there. Part of my more pessimistic take on the idealism of our generation is probably a result of that Vietnam skepticism because so much was promised there and so much in the delivery was so short.
SM (00:33:12):
How do you feel when... George will does this all the time. He will write an article, and he has done it for years in all his books. He loves to take shots at the older generation, the (19)60s generation and prove that he was against the war and then supported McGovern (19)68 and (19)72 and the whole history there. And certainly in (19)94 when Newt Gingrich came to power, he loved it too. He has made a lot of comments about it. I tried to get him to be in this project, he has rejected twice and I know people close to him. But what are your thoughts when you hear people like that who will just condemn the generation as all the reasons we have problems in America today. That all of our problems will go back to that time when things were loose, the sexual revolution, they just had a television show on that the other night and we saw it. It was unbelievable, there were things I never saw before. And division between black and white, those who supported the war, those who were against it. Just your thoughts. The blame game.
JC (00:34:18):
I think that is too easy. I just think there is certain tensions in society that exist, have always existed. Lots of good people trying to do good things to relieve those tensions, and the tensions are still there. I think a lot of it is a function of just society. And I think trying to blame a period or trying to blame a generation, that is a cop out. That is just too easy. I never really had that sense. Here is an interesting moment for me. Going back to graduate school, coming back from Vietnam, playing softball for the English department softball team, graduate team at University of North Carolina. One of my teammates was a man named Gordon Ball. Gordon Ball wrote Ginsberg Verbatim. Gordon Ball was my fellow graduate student at Carolina and he gets nominated for one of the best... He gets a Pulitzer nomination for a critical book, Ginsberg Verbatim. Gordon was a North Carolina farm boy. When Ginsberg started a farm, a co-op or whatever, Gordon's there and he actually knows how to run a farm. He is part of it and he takes the notes and writes Ginsberg Verbatim, which is a pretty good book. Well, he likes to play softball, I like to play softball. We are teammates, we are friends and both of us from probably different directions are completely outraged by Watergate, completely outraged by the abuse of the presidency. And so Gordon and I at University of North Carolina manned a petition booth together. And we are about as far away from each other politically and in every other way that you can imagine. And we are both just upset about what happened and just outraged by the abuse of power and the abuse of fundamentals and the constitution and so on. That is a bookend event for my generation.
SM (00:37:01):
It is a very interesting thing that, Max, because when I interviewed Chic Canfora, who is the sister of Allen who was a Kent State, she is a professor, she is a dynamic professor there. But she was one of the students that was at Kent State. And when I was listing the names as I would do at the very end of the interview and I mentioned the name John Dean, some people just revile and maybe just a lot of negative stuff. But for this anti-war activist who was there the day the four students were shot, she looked upon him as a hero. And she went on and said, "I wish he had run for president because he was a Republican who has been very critical of Republicans and Democrats and his recent writings he is on the conservative movement, liberals. He is just fair in every way." It is interesting how...That is what the whole Free Speech Movement was all about at Berkeley. It was not about being a liberal or conservative, it was about that Dr. Kerr tried to shut down a booth on campus and the students that were against that group, they did not like him politically, did not like him personally, but when the president tried to shut them down to hand out literature, they all came together, Liberals, Conservatives, because it was students, It was students uniting on a cause, so you made a very important point here. One of the things too is just your thoughts on the movement. Before I get to that, what kind of parents have boomers been? When you define the boomer generation you also oftentimes think of the term activism, it was an activist generation, both Liberals and Conservatives. Young Americans for Freedom, which is a very conservative group, was very anti-war and were involved in the movement. And just like Harry talked about, let us get the military point of view on war, we need to get the conservative anti-war movement war, which has been excluded from the books. But just your thought on how they have raised their kids and their grandkids. Have they shared their ideas with them? Have they created another generation of activists? Because it does not seem like they are. How have they been as parents and grandparents? You're dealing with probably parents of these kids now who are in that generation and there seems to be a tremendous link. There does not seem to be a generation gap between the parents and their kids like there was between our generations.
JC (00:39:29):
I do not know. I put myself in this category, I think the parent... Probably my generation, boomer generation parents are much more tolerant. I would hope. Maybe because I did not have kids until I was a little older, a little bit more open to all the crazy stuff that goes on. I think there is another generation of parents who are the younger parents now who are very anxious. And I am not sure, I think parents are getting even more anxious as we go on. I am not sure what the reason for that is, but I think... And it is funny, I have met kids who parents have really grown up as loose as possible who were in the army. We have got a friend who is the head of the school in San Francisco and he called me and I could tell by his voice something was really bad and he is a dear friend and I said, "What is it?" He said, "My son wants to fly a helicopter and he's enlisting in the army." It was like the end of the world for him. I am exaggerating a bit, but you could tell he was concerned. And I calmed him down. I just said, "Well, he will do this and this and this." And he calls me and he said, "I was just out at the basic training," or whatever, maybe it was a helicopter school, and he said, "They are just like us, they are teachers," talking about the sergeants in the army. But it was such a foreign experience to him. And his son obviously had these desires to do that. And maybe he did it partly in rebellion, I do not know. But thank God his son is safe. And this guy who did not have any experience with the military has I think a very favorable experience. It is just difficult to generalize.
SM (00:41:53):
Do you sense that just from young people you deal with, not only here but the other schools that you are aware of, that there just does not seem to be activism anymore? There are activists, students are involved in a lot of different things that we may not be aware of just the media just is not covering them.
JC (00:42:10):
I think there is a real strong service ethic among our kids. Kids here, actually, because I belong to that social dorm and my friends had organized... I actually poled for McCarthy when I was ROTC.
SM (00:42:32):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:42:33):
But I went out and I did it because I was living with these guys.
SM (00:42:37):
Clean for Gene.
JC (00:42:38):
Neat and clean for Gene.
SM (00:42:39):
Yes.
JC (00:42:44):
You about the motivation, I was doing it just to help a friend, and my motivation was not that strong. I think kids today... I will tell you the kids I am around, they really want to make a difference. And I think they are much more generous and honest in their desire to help other people. At least the kids that I have seen in the past 10 years around here.
SM (00:43:18):
Do you think that, this is important, volunteerism is activism. On university campuses 95 percent of students are on volunteer duty. Some that is mandatory like in fraternities and sororities, so many hours, some groups are required to do it. The key question here is, I am not saying it is not activism is, when they leave school, is it more of, I am going to do this every two weeks for two hours-
JC (00:43:45):
No.
SM (00:43:45):
... or is it a mentality of 24 to seven and it is part of who I am as a person?
JC (00:43:49):
I think it is part of who they are. We do not have mandatory community service and we do not even call it community service. We call it service learning, it is integrated into the curriculum. It is part of what you do as a frame of mind. It is a state of mind and it is a piece to the larger global state of mind that I think our kids have too. It is a sense of, we are all in this together. It is a real strong sense of what is right and wrong. Fairness issues. I think I could go out and grab a kid out in the hallway and we start asking him those questions. I think you would be very, very positively impressed with... It is part of their ethical makeup. I am very optimistic about that. And the kids will make fun of a lot of things, but they do not make fun of that.
SM (00:44:50):
Your views are very important because I had many that are very negative, not about young people because they all believe in young people. You would not be in higher ed if you did not believe in people. Some people may develop at a different time. You may not see them activists when they are a junior or senior in college, but you can darn tooting they will be doing something in their 20s or 30s. It is just they involve at different times and we have to have respect that amongst younger people. But some of the people I have interviewed have been very negative about today's generation with respect to the lack of activism but the sense of volunteerism is there, but whether it is really part of them as a human being. This gets right into the issue of movements. One of the things that defines often times the boomer generation are the movements. Obviously the Civil Rights Movement was already happening when boomers were in their teenage years. You have got the Women's Movement, the Gay and Lesbian Movement, the Chicano, the Native American movement, the Environmental Movement, all these movements that came about, anti-war movement around the late (19)60s and they just abound through today. Your thoughts on how important they are in America, but if you really can link them to define part of what the boomer generation is?
JC (00:46:07):
Obviously, I think they are historical, really significant. I think they were focused on in ways that raised everybody's attention to certain issues. And they are unique for the boomer generation and obviously the boomer generation were people then and... I am not sure I am answering this question fully. I think, again, this is probably the post- Vietnam skepticism. I am a little skeptical of movements, whether they be the kind that were bigger and more boisterous in my younger days. But even in terms of I am a registered Independent and proud of it. I am just skeptical of things being... Just skeptical of movements in general and I think that is probably left over from my experience. I am not sure I was ever fully invested in a movement.
SM (00:47:48):
I am going to read this one because this is a very important part of the project. There is two big issues that I have shut in on. One of them is this issue of healing and the second one is an issue of trust. The question I am asking right now, and I want to read because I feel I have missed something. Do you feel that the boomer generation is still having problems from healing from the divisions that tore this nation apart in your youth? The division between black and white, the divisions between those who supported authority and those who criticized it, the division between those who supported the troops and those who did not. Of course, I will throw in here too. What role did the Vietnam Memorial play in healing divisions, not only within the Vietnam veteran community and their families, but also the nation as a whole, or do you feel that the boomer generation will go to their graves like the Civil War generation, not truly healing? Am I wrong in thinking this or has 40 years made the statement, time heals all wounds the truth? And I prefaced this question by something. I took a group of students from Westchester University to meet Senator Muskie before he passed away, he was not well. I got to know [inaudible] quite well and he set up some meetings with us on our Leadership on the Road program to talk about his leadership. And I asked the same question to him and I have it on tape. And he did not respond right away to this question. He gave a melodramatic pause and actually had to show tears coming up. The tears that we saw that when he was attacked because he'd showed he was more feminine because he cried. And his response was that, "I just got out of the hospital. I just had an opportunity to see the Ken Burns series that was on public television about the Civil War." He went on and talked about the 400,000 men who had died in the war. And then he said, "I am not going to answer your question because I know you're asking the question regarding 1968 and all the things that happened in that convention. And I am not going to answer it that way because I cannot. The way I am going to answer it is that we have not healed since the Civil War. I just ask you to go to Gettysburg and just drive on each side you will see." Your thoughts on whether this is really even an issue. Some people will say, "Steve, people do not walk around Washington with lack of healing on their sleeves." But then others have said, "This is a very serious question because if we have not healed as a nation is what we are seeing today, not what you just explained to us about people from different points of view coming together, but this constant, you are the problem, you are the enemy, you are the..." This division of not coming together and no healing and the effect that it might be having on the boomer generation, and then that is having on their kids and their grandkids by witnessing these feelings. Is healing an issue in your viewpoint?
JC (00:50:59):
Absolutely. I think the issues that were at the root of the Civil War were never fully resolved, that is why the Civil War looms so large in our imaginations. To a certain extent those issues were revisited in the Vietnam War and they are still unresolved so intellectually it is still part of our...
SM (00:51:25):
Please speak up too.
JC (00:51:28):
It is still part of what's going on. However, I do not know if Bill Ehrhart explained how we met. We met at Vietnam Reconciliation Conference in 1992 at Notre Dame and Father Hesburgh brought people together for this Vietnam Reconciliation Conference. I think it was one of the first times they included Vietnamese voices and the Vietnam War took place in Vietnam, but it was all about the American experience, but the (19)92 conference made us a little bit more honest about it. And I may be naive, but I think a lot of the sharp edges are smooth. Bill Ehrhart and I are best of friends. We still have our probably fundamental political differences and I think most people are like that. And I may be naive because the past couple of presidential elections, not the last one, but the ones before it were so evenly split down the middle. You worry about that and it seems like we could go back to that 49/51 split and everything that you see in politics, in the way people position politics, it does seem to be a zero-sum game and it does seem to be a 50/50 split down the middle. I may be completely, absolutely wrong in my gut feeling that time does heal wounds, but maybe I am being naive in that. But I honestly believe that. I would not blame the boomer generation for what we see today. I do not think the roots of that 50/50 split is in the boomer generation, I think it is in the issues that are around us today. I am not going to take the blame for that one.
SM (00:53:52):
To me, the wall moves an awful lot. It is just one person. I lived in California in 1980 through (19)83 in the Bay Area for a while. And first thing I had to get to the wall as soon as I moved to Philadelphia to work at Thomas Jefferson University. And within a week I was on the train and got done to DC because I had not gotten a car yet. It means an awful lot, and I am not a Vietnam veteran. How important has the wall been? I know already it has been important for vets and their families. As Jan Scruggs says in the title of his book, To Heal a Nation...
JC (00:54:30):
Saving electricity.
SM (00:54:37):
Okay. To Heal a Nation, "We really heal the nation from the wall beyond just the mess."
JC (00:54:44):
My personal experience with the wall is interesting. I was in the Army, I did not really get involved in it. I knew the controversy. There was a part of me that wanted some kind of recognition, there was a part of me that heard, obviously, an abstract representation of it. I did not have a problem with that as much as some other people did, wanting a more literal representation. I think for me it works the way it is supposed to work in an abstract sense. I had not visited the wall and I was at the Army War College in Carlisle and we were on a trip to Washington and I got up in the morning and I ran to the wall at Sunrise and I looked up the names of the four or five people I knew that were on the wall. And it was an incredibly moving experience, primarily because it was an individual experience. I do not think there was anybody else around... For me it was a very, very good experience. If I'd gone there when people were...
JC (00:56:03):
... if I had gone there when people were walking around and it was a busy mall, I do not think it would have been the same. It worked for me. There is an interesting guy named John Wolf, who is an artist and he is a good artist. I hope he is still going strong. He actually got hit by two RPGs and it blew off one of his legs and he died on the operating time two or three times. He actually writes about dying on the operating table, and I was doing a Vietnam summer workshop at West Point, and I think we had Bill come up but we had lots of Vietnam veterans come, and John came down from New Rochelle ... I am sorry. Not New Rochelle. [inaudible]. He has a studio in [inaudible]. He is a successful artist but he is the kind of guy who would not park in a handicap spot. He is on crutches. He is an exclamation point and very interesting guy. One of the female cadets asked him what he thought of the wall, and he looked at her and he said it is a fucking abomination, and I am speaking both as an artist and a Vietnam veteran. It represents nothing of what my service in Vietnam or the army was, and then he went on to really get vulgar about the [inaudible] in the earth. It was interesting. When the younger officers met Bill Ehrhart and they met John Wolf, they said, "We got to bring them together" but they would have fought ... Back then, Bill ... They both would have fought like cats and dogs and it was really a surprise, to me, to somebody who is an artist, who was so badly wounded, had such strong feelings about the wall, and I tried to explain to him my experience and that I really felt like I was honoring the people that I knew, who were on that wall. He did not get that. He just thought it was a political statement, so to say that it ... Does it bring people together? It brings some people together I guess but ...
SM (00:58:38):
It is interesting. When I came to Jefferson, [inaudible] posttraumatic stress disorder with Dr. Schwartz up at Jefferson, I am not sure if he's still there, the [inaudible] going to be about PTSD and it ended up being [inaudible] all the Vietnam vets that I guess [inaudible] Dwight Edwards, the whole group that was involved with the wall in Philly, and they had this politician from Pittsburgh. He had a Purple Heart. I cannot remember his name. He was a Congressman, and he came, but he refused to shake the hands of any of the other vets, because they supported the wall in Washington and he did not. He would not even talk to them and they were all... I did not quite understand that.
JC (00:59:27):
I do not get that.
SM (00:59:28):
And they never did and then he kind of blasted Dr. Zuckerman, for being an anti-war person [inaudible] were still there but...
JC (00:59:36):
I do not know.
SM (00:59:37):
You know, Lewis Puller, who wrote Fortunate Son, which I think is the best book ever written, I just reread the book in the last month and hoping to interview his wife Toddy, if I can get her to be interviewed, that would be a coup, but he loved the wall, and they tried to make it as non-political as it is, a non-political statement but even I, as an observer, who sits there, has a sense that some of the comments being made, not by Jan Scruggs but by others, are very political and so he might ... Jan might have to rethink some of the things some of these people are saying and the wall. Some of the other questions here... The issue of trust is one I want to bring up. This is very important, because I can remember in the psychology 101 class when I was in college, I think, and a professor talking about do you trust your neighbor? Do you trust your friends? Do you trust your parents? He would go around the room. He also, the next class, [inaudible] and we were all stuck with this guy. We wanted to get him fired but he was [inaudible] distinguished professor of philosophy, his father was well-known at Johns Hopkins and all the other stuff. He was new then. He really struck something that was very important to me. He said that if you cannot trust someone in your life, then you will not be a success. You have to trust people. That has always stuck with me, not as a college student but as I have gone on into my life, because I am wondering... I have a sense that many of the boomers... I know boomers were distrustful of the leaders. It is very obvious. They did not trust presidents, they did not trust college presidents, they did not trust religious leaders. They did not really accept corporations. They did not trust anybody in a position of responsibility, including all the college administrators I was around, because they had been lied to. The lies came from Watergate, they came from the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. They came from Eisenhower, who lied to the national public about U2. They lied on [inaudible] 1959. Then the continuation of here in the Reagan administration, of course, the... It is a long story here but boomers have seen it. But in their youth, they did not trust leaders and that is why they went out [inaudible] so many times. Do you think this quality of lack of trust in many a generation, and I preface this by stating that only 15 percent were truly active, so we are talking about 85 percent who were not, but subconsciously, that 85 percent had to be affected also by what was going on in their youth. Do you think they have passed this lack of trust onto their kids and their grandkids? Again, it's a long question but it has a lot of meaning. The fact is if you are a study of history and political science, which I am, a lack of trust in your government is healthy. It is the first thing you learn in political science. That is how you learn and then that makes government better. But just your thought on the issue of trust, whether we really have a problem here in the nation, not only today, but throughout the boomer’s lives, because of experiences they had when they were younger.
JC (01:03:10):
Well, it is interesting and I will bring it back to my experiences. I was a company grade officer in Vietnam and there was a sense and, of course, I was a military region too ... Actually my corps commander was John [inaudible].
SM (01:03:27):
Oh, wow.
JC (01:03:28):
He was in charge while I was [inaudible] there. Yeah. You talk about trust and so on, but I, obviously, did not know him or work closely with him. However, there was this sense, at least ... I do not think I am speaking entirely for myself. Part of it is those bastards at platoon headquarters mentality that is in the army. You know, the higher the headquarters, the more screwed up, but there was another dimension to it and it was I had ... You will read in the piece I gave you, there is a perspective on somebody who is trying to get a star, and a distrust of that next level of leadership in the army, and as I stayed in the army, I worried about the generation of leaders, the next generation of leaders, and I was unbelievably pleasantly surprised with the Colin Powell or the commanders, the ... My direct boss in 101st, when I was a battalion commander, was a man named Herb Watson, who got killed with the president of Pakistan when the president of Pakistan's plane got blown out of the sky. The commanding general of the 101st and the 82nd airborne, two units, I would ... Just incredibly trustworthy, wonderful leaders. It was like they saw what was happening in Vietnam and they were not going to repeat it. Colin Powell, I think stands out, because [inaudible]. He stands out as that kind of exemplar. I ended up with the healthy skepticism and the natural, "Those bastards at platoon quarters" mentality that is always in organizations, I came out with a lot of confidence and trust in that next level of commanders. It really sustained me through 30 years in the army, because I would not want to be in an organization where I did not have that trust. That said, maybe one reason I stayed in the army, because I was working for people I trusted, and maybe I had a fear of going out into another world where you did not have that trust. The other side to that or the larger piece to that I guess is the whole notion of politicians and there is a deep distrust of politicizing things, drawing up lines, making arguments based on political motivation rather than what is the best decision, and, again, I agree, that is healthy skepticism. Maybe there is more of that when it comes to politics among boomers, and now are you infecting your kids or your grandkids? I do not know. I think there ... I just got an email from a friend and he could verify these numbers for me, like out of the two million whatever Vietnam veterans who served in Vietnam...
SM (01:07:00):
Three million. Three million served and I believe 450,000 and 500,000 were on the front lines.
JC (01:07:08):
Okay, but of the 380,000 or whatever it was, only 270,000 left. It was mind-boggling. I could pull up the email. I remember having a colleague, a guy I actually taught at West Point, his name is Elliott Gruner, who wrote a book about POWs, it is pretty controversial, and he would always... We had discussions, he was a colonel, and he was a major I guess at the time, but he would ... He would always just cut the conversation with, "You're still my favorite burnt out Vietnam vet." Actually the person who sent me those statistics I think is kind of a dig that you are a dinosaur, assigned it your favorite burned out Vietnam vet, so there is that I think stigma and there is probably some truth to it but I do not think... I think most of us look at it with some fabrication and some sense of humor. I do not think we're really trying to make everybody else that skeptical.
SM (01:08:26):
What do you feel is the number one reason the Vietnam War ended? How important were college students on the campuses in ending the war?
JC (01:08:36):
I think it is what is going to end Afghanistan and Iraq, just exhaustion, just our attention span is not that long. I do not think college students were a huge factor. Although, it was a strong voice that contributed to the overall exhaustion, but I do not think it was a primary cause. I think we are going to declare victory and get the hell out of Iraq, and we probably have a right to declare victory.
SM (01:09:19):
Do you worry that when you read articles, Afghanistan is another Vietnam? How do you feel when you hear that people get upset by every comparison of conflict around the world? Or they always bring up Vietnam. I sense in the university, they get very uptight. It's just a bunch of boomers, again, trying to be nostalgic or remember but that is not the purpose. Vietnam had so many meanings. Just to bring the word of Vietnam in a conversation with fellow boomers who may be in leadership roles in the universities, like, "There he goes again."
JC (01:09:59):
Well, it is a useful metaphor but it is ... I think it is an oversimplification. You worry about ... I worry about Pakistan. I mean, I worry ... That is the nexus of what you really have to worry about I think. I think we have probably exhausted ourselves in many ways in this. That is another story.
SM (01:10:31):
When did the (19)60s end? Just the (19)60s itself. Was there a period that you knew it was over?
JC (01:10:36):
Maybe Watergate.
SM (01:10:36):
Okay.
JC (01:10:40):
The Kennedy assassination, Watergate, that is a good 10 years...
SM (01:10:44):
How important was the music? Because when you think of the music, it had so many social messages in it.
JC (01:10:48):
It was great music.
SM (01:10:49):
It was great music and it is still being played today [inaudible 01:10:53] showed you the article he has on the wall in there, about one of the (19)60s ... A member of the Who refuses to sell his music for TV commercials. I think that is a lesson for students, he is not selling out.
JC (01:11:10):
Yeah.
SM (01:11:12):
He wrote the music for that generation to not be selling out. How important was music within this boomer generation in terms of not only their anti-war and their involvement but just your thoughts on the music? Who were your favorite musicians?
JC (01:11:31):
I remember my first wife, our first date, we went to a movie, the Cardinal, and then we went and saw the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show at my friend Jacques [inaudible]'s house.
SM (01:11:45):
Right.
JC (01:11:47):
There was a ... The Beatles were ... I remember waking up and hearing on the radio and just, "Wow. This is ..." But there is the ... You go from the Beatles to more of a Stones fan now, so that is the loss of innocence. I became a Stones fan pretty quickly.
SM (01:12:15):
I think I would ... Well, I like rock music but my mom used to watch As The World Turns, which is a TV show in the afternoon. I can remember coming home once and I had a day off or a two day break or whatever. She was watching it and on the background music on As The World Turns, they were playing I Cannot Get No Satisfaction. I said if it gets on TV like that, it is certainly getting into the mainstream and that was around 1967. Yeah. The folk music of that period, all the messages and, certainly, the Motown sound.
JC (01:12:47):
Yeah. Very-very important.
SM (01:12:49):
It was important.
JC (01:12:50):
You know, it brings you back in the best ways I guess but...
SM (01:13:01):
Before I get into the names here, just were there any books that were an influence to you that you read when you were young? Novelists or non-fiction books.
JC (01:13:14):
Yeah.
SM (01:13:14):
That you can think of in the (19)60s or (19)70s.
JC (01:13:17):
Well, they are not... I was a 19th century American guy, so I read a lot of Walden and Emerson, Moby Dick is my favorite... If I had a favorite book, Moby Dick and Absalom Absalom, but I remember I was reading Herman Hesse in Vietnam and I can actually remember sitting on an air strip reading...
SM (01:13:48):
Herman Hesse?
JC (01:13:49):
Yeah.
SM (01:13:49):
Wow.
JC (01:13:51):
You know, just... You got free books in Vietnam. I still have books probably on that shelf that I got from the Red Cross.
SM (01:13:57):
Hard backs?
JC (01:13:58):
No, paperbacks.
SM (01:13:58):
Oh, paperbacks.
JC (01:14:00):
Nobody in the unit was getting them, so I... English major. I brought lots of books back from the Red Cross book boxes.
SM (01:14:11):
They might be valuable if they are first editions. Even paperbacks.
JC (01:14:15):
I do not know. They were pretty beat up. I had them in a rucksack. There was a lot of time... A lot of time to read. I did have a reading experience, which isn't directly related to your question but when did Going After Cacciato get published? About (19)76 or so. (19)77.
SM (01:14:38):
I do not know.
JC (01:14:39):
I remember being in a bookstore and picking up Going After Cacciato and looking and reading, reading, reading and looking at my watch and it is about two hours, two and a half hours later. It was the first time anybody had written about and processed and written about, for me, the Vietnam War.
SM (01:15:01):
Wow.
JC (01:15:04):
In a way. I had become good friends with Tim O'Brien.
SM (01:15:08):
Oh, yeah. Book one [inaudible].
JC (01:15:10):
Yeah. I remember the first time I met Tim O'Brien, I met him in a ... He was doing a reading at University of North Carolina Wilmington, and I was actually camping on the beach in Wilmington and was in the men's room and Tim came in and we were standing there. I explained how important his Going After Cacciato was for my processing. I said, "Did you ever read J. Glenn Gray, The Warriors?" Tim stopped and he goes, "Not too many people know about that book. You appreciate it because [inaudible]." J. Glenn Gray...
SM (01:15:46):
Is that G-L-E-N?
JC (01:15:48):
J G-L-E-N-N Gray.
SM (01:15:54):
J. Glenn...
JC (01:15:56):
J, just the letter J.
SM (01:15:58):
J. Glenn.
JC (01:15:58):
Gray, The Warriors. He got his draft notice for the Second World War the same day he got his PHD of philosophy from Columbia, and he went and was a military intelligence officer, and saw action all through Italy and all the way up. Then he had a Fulbright and went back to Germany, and then his Fulbright, he took topics in war and analyzed them as a philosopher would analyze them, so attitudes toward the enemy, all the different attitudes toward the enemy, love in war, he analyzed that like a philosopher would, [inaudible] experiences. It is a fascinating book and it is exactly I think what incredibly influenced Tim O'Brien, like you cannot believe and I think he... It is one of those books.
SM (01:16:53):
Yeah. Well, I am at the part of the interview now where I just mention some names or terms of the period and you just give short responses to them. Some may have a greater effect than others. We already talked about the wall. What does Kent State and Jackson State mean to you?
JC (01:17:12):
Again, I was out of the country, so the full impact did not affect me. I am sure if I were in college or in the States, it would have been a different impact.
SM (01:17:24):
What did you think when you heard that four college students were killed on a university campus?
JC (01:17:32):
Well, it was... This sounds small but it was an undisciplined National Guardsman versus a disciplined regular army. It said something about the National Guard was a way to avoid the draft, and like Lieutenant Calley, there were people in positions they should not have been in. It was an insult to the profession of arms, and to the profession period. I, obviously, have a regular army officer view of it. It was a breakdown.
SM (01:18:07):
Watergate. You already mentioned a little bit. What did Watergate mean to you? How do you think it affected the younger generation?
JC (01:18:18):
Well, I think it was something I did not want to believe and when all the facts came out, it was really disheartening. It reinforced skepticism and cynicism but it also, at the same time, gave me great confidence in the system, the justice system.
SM (01:18:41):
Woodstock?
JC (01:18:43):
Again, I missed it. It just was not part of my life, because I was in the army with my head shaved.
SM (01:18:58):
[inaudible] this year. It has had a lot of different meaning. Everybody seems to [inaudible].
JC (01:19:01):
You know, if I could live my life over again, I might want to be there but I probably would not want to not do what I did in the army.
SM (01:19:14):
All the cars going down the 81 heading toward that area, and I can remember ... I never thought once about it. I was a student [inaudible] and I never thought about it.
JC (01:19:24):
I am surprised you were not there.
SM (01:19:25):
I did not have a car and that did not stop anybody, though. 1968?
JC (01:19:34):
Year I graduated. Some great movies, Cool Hand Luke, Bonnie and Clyde. Martin Luther King's assassination.
SM (01:19:55):
The conventions.
JC (01:19:56):
Yeah. The conventions... I was in ranger school during that stuff, so I was in a gulag.
SM (01:20:07):
How about counter-culture? Just the term counter-culture?
JC (01:20:11):
Useful term. Does not give me any feelings.
SM (01:20:16):
How about hippies and yippies? There was a difference.
JC (01:20:21):
I guess the yippies were more political. I do not know. The hippies were just laissez faire. I liked San Francisco.
SM (01:20:30):
Yeah. SDS, Students for a Democratic Society.
JC (01:20:34):
I think a bit of... I think I am not sure of the best motivated.
SM (01:20:49):
Of course, the Weatherman were [inaudible].
JC (01:20:49):
A hard line.
SM (01:20:49):
The Vietnam Veterans Against the War, which was real big in (19)71. They kind of took over the anti-war movement through their throwing their awards away. Your thought on that? John Kerry has always identified he is the man who spoke but the biggest names in that group were not John Kerry.
JC (01:21:09):
Bill Ehrhart.
SM (01:21:10):
Yeah. He is very proud of it. [inaudible] was in the group.
JC (01:21:15):
You know, I was out of the country. I may have been in Vietnam during a lot of that. I do not have real strong feelings one way or another. I did not see it. I was not here to witness it.
SM (01:21:31):
What about... These are names now. Jane Fonda?
JC (01:21:38):
I watched Jane Fonda movies. Barbarella. I have got friends who... I mean, that is the trigger name. I just think somebody is not the brightest.
SM (01:21:52):
How about Tom Hayden? Her husband at that time.
JC (01:22:03):
Well, he was a politician, and became a politician. I do not have feelings one way or another.
SM (01:22:03):
How about Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin? They were the yippies.
JC (01:22:09):
Kind of comic characters. There is a certain very prankster part to that that I may not have the full story but that is my impression.
SM (01:22:21):
Timothy Leary?
JC (01:22:23):
Yeah. [inaudible] LSD. Seemed like an interesting guy.
SM (01:22:29):
Dr. Benjamin Spock?
JC (01:22:31):
Obviously, I am part of the boomer generation and he supposedly influenced... I think he probably gets more credit than he deserves.
SM (01:22:41):
How about Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew?
JC (01:22:47):
I think petty politicians.
SM (01:22:52):
Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern.
JC (01:22:55):
I really respected Eugene McCarthy. I do not know why I liked him as much as I did, but I think it was partly because he was kind of above it all. George McGovern, consistent, basically very good man. I liked McCarthy better. I would have voted for McCarthy. I did not vote for McGovern.
SM (01:23:29):
The ultimate mystery that I asked him is why he did not... Why he just dropped out. He said, "Read my book." He is a nice guy. I am Irish, he is Irish. I had met him twice before I interviewed him, but he... The one question where he really got upset is when I mentioned the name Bobby Kennedy. He said, "Read my book." I mean, he was dead serious. He did not want to talk about it. I go right into it now, John...
SM (01:24:03):
That meeting was dead serious. You do not want to talk about it. And I go right into it. Now, John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy.
JC (01:24:13):
Well, again, I shared some of that. I was very idealistic, and obviously Western Massachusetts and really worshiped Kennedy. Actually, here is a boomer echo. I honestly feel that Obama is the first president we have had since Kennedy, who has that kind of ability to synthesize things, makes sense, and talk public policy. I just live in fear that somebody is going to kill him.
SM (01:24:47):
I worry that, too, and I know the students at Westchester worry about that. The fact is he is a boomer, you know. He's a very late boom. He was born in (19)62 or something like that. (19)61. He is 48 now, but he is the real youngest boomer. But I had the same kind of fears and let us pray to God that does not happen.
JC (01:25:07):
But I have got the idealization of JFK. RFK I think was probably a shit, but he was a good shit. He was good at the-
SM (01:25:16):
The last two years of his life.
JC (01:25:20):
He was a pragmatist. I thought it was a real loss. I got a little bit of my father in me, I guess. My father used to scream and holler at Teddy on the TV and then go out and vote for him. It is that kind of whatever. Whatever gene it is that happens to Boston Irishmen.
SM (01:25:50):
How about Lyndon Johnson now?
JC (01:25:51):
Oh, I think he became such a cartoon of himself, and I think that was just sad.
SM (01:26:05):
Robert McNamara?
JC (01:26:05):
I am not a McNamara fan. I think he knew he was sending people to die. I blame him more than probably a lot of other people.
SM (01:26:09):
George Wallace?
JC (01:26:28):
I think he was kind of a caricature of a lot of different projected hoops. I was in Georgia when he was running.
SM (01:26:30):
Oh, when he was shot?
JC (01:26:30):
Well, no, when he was running.
SM (01:26:30):
Oh.
JC (01:26:31):
I was at Fort Benning, Georgia. I will tell you what, for a northern boy had never been south from the Mason-Dixon line to drive down there and to see that and to live that, where the majority of people really thought he was going to be president. Then I was an aid to a general from Mississippi. One time I said something about how stupid I thought all this was and he said, "Well, I completely disagree."
SM (01:27:07):
Yeah. I forget how he took a lot. Well, he got a lot of votes.
JC (01:27:09):
Yeah. Yeah.
SM (01:27:10):
Eight or 9 percent. It was a lot of votes.
JC (01:27:13):
And it was just such, for somebody like me, it was just... I cannot believe it.
SM (01:27:20):
How about Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford?
JC (01:27:25):
I think Gerald Ford was a good man and did the right things to heal the nation. I actually think, I know, I think I know because a friend of mine was a military aid to Reagan, that he was not the buffoon everybody portrayed him to be. He was a pretty sharp guy and he played that role pretty well.
SM (01:27:46):
I want to mention Jimmy Carter, too, because he is the guy that created the amnesty for those that went to Canada.
JC (01:27:53):
Even at the time, I think I was there at West Point at the time, that was fine. It was part of the healing process. Jimmy Carter, I think was just too smart for his own good.
SM (01:28:09):
Your thoughts, you always talk about the Vietnam syndrome. We got to get rid of it. Well, during the Reagan administration, we're back. It was basically a statement saying love America again. Love the American flag again. And certainly bringing the military back to stature. But also with George Bush Senior, you talked about the Vietnam syndrome is over, and he talked about it when he was president. Your thoughts on, looks like they were also making a criticism of that particular era, both Reagan and Bush. What are your thoughts on...?
JC (01:28:45):
Well, it is interesting because I was in the Command General Staff College. I think all of us felt that Carter was going to get us in a shooting war. I think the weaker your position, the more vulnerable you are. One reason I went to the 82nd was I wanted to be in the best unit I could be in, because I honestly thought I was going to war. Then when Reagan came in, it was all of a sudden it is an era of triple volunteers. Volunteer for the Army, volunteer for the Airborne, volunteer for the 82nd. All of a sudden you have got equipment that you can use, so it really was a turnaround. I put it in professional terms. I do not think I thought in terms of Vietnam or not Vietnam. I remember being in the, maybe it was, I think it was Battalion Commander on 101st when Platoon came out. I remember coming out of a theater and my younger soldiers were there, and it was an eye-opener for them. I remember saying to them, I said, "It is not pretty, is it?" And I had Oliver Stone come to West Point.
SM (01:30:06):
Oh, wow.
JC (01:30:06):
I taught his trilogy. It was in the sense of the use of Vietnam from a professional point of view was, I think Platoon was a very, very accurate movie. It is not pretty and there's a lot of... It is obviously a drama. All that did not happen, but all that did happen and Oliver Stone has put it together properly. But I think first President Bush is sitting on a hill, too. I actually have a theory about, we have been using the same myths to talk ourselves into war since the periods. There is the John Smith myth that one European can take on 200 Indians or any other non- Europeans. And we're using that I think in our thinking even today. And then there is the God [inaudible] city upon the hill and chosen people and war is a purifier. To a certain extent, we use that, too.
SM (01:31:19):
When we think of Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush, they are boomers.
JC (01:31:27):
Yeah. Interesting.
SM (01:31:29):
So, what is it about those two that really... They have the characteristics of boomers. A lot of people do not like to answer that. A lot of them say they are typical booms.
JC (01:31:38):
Yes. Yes.
SM (01:31:43):
How would you define them as typical boomers?
JC (01:31:54):
I do not know if I want put this on tape. So full of shit. No.
SM (01:31:54):
[inaudible]. Hey, I have only got to come up 10 more. Well, I might go-
JC (01:31:54):
I do not know if I want to be directed that way, but there was that element to both of them, I think, that more of a common denominator than a difference. We go back, you were talking about the characteristics, the sense of entitlement, the sense of uniqueness, self-serving part of it. I am not sure they are the best representatives of the boomer generation, but they did seem to... I do not know; the mental laziness of Bush and the self-indulgence of Clinton are two things that...
SM (01:32:38):
Yeah, enough said. Your thoughts on Dr. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X? Because they were the predominant figures there.
JC (01:32:47):
I have got a funny story. I also was a dorm counselor for my room. I was trying to make money any way I could. AI got a call right before my senior year and they said, "We got a guy," and he was the founder of the Black Student Organization at Lafayette. He was from New Rochelle. His name was Jerry Gill. He died a couple of years ago. Got a picture of him. We became very good friends because we ended up rooming together. They said, "Can we put him on his floor?" Because they were worried about him. They wanted somebody to watch him because he is this Black radical.
SM (01:33:34):
Want this on tape?
JC (01:33:34):
Sure.
SM (01:33:34):
Yeah?
JC (01:33:37):
I just hired a woman, English teacher, who graduated from Tufts. She's sitting here and I am interviewing and I said, "Do you remember Professor Gill?" She burst into tears. He had made that much of a difference in her life.
SM (01:33:51):
Wow.
JC (01:33:52):
But Jerry, then they called me and said, "Cannot find a roommate." I said, "I will room with him." So, we are in a room and it is not very big, and over Jerry's bed is big picture of Malcolm X. About a month after we have been rooming together, I walk in and Malcolm's gone and there's a big picture of The Supremes. He goes, "I did that for you."
SM (01:34:17):
Oh, wow. That is nice.
JC (01:34:19):
So, we became very-very-very good friends. Obviously, he got honored by Lafayette College and when he came back, I went up there and he gave the talk. He said the best thing about rooming with Joe Cox was I realized there were white people that were poorer than I was, which is-
SM (01:34:41):
Economics. Economics. Dr. King talked about that.
JC (01:34:41):
Which is on the record. I knew Dr. King from my lenses, and obviously he was such an elegant person and such an articulate person that even as a dumb kid, that made a big difference. Malcolm X, I probably did not know him through my own lenses. What I learned, I probably learned from a young Black radical. And I saw the movie, so I think I know Malcolm X. But I thoroughly understand it. I understand the Black Muslim movement and thoroughly understand, I think, where he was.
SM (01:35:32):
What is really interesting when you talk about Malcolm X, "By any means necessary," which is that there is an indication that use guns if you have to. Of course, he changed the last two years after he came back to Mecca. That is what is amazing when you compare, I worked at a piece once on Malcolm and Bobby Kennedy, because Bobby Kennedy was always known as a ruthless guy. But the last two to three years, he had done great things with his brother. All you have to do was read 13 Days to understand that. But something about his personality changed. He was more likable. He was more empathetic, more passionate and caring. So, I have always compared the two of them and the fact that people can change in their lives. But when you look at three quotes by any means necessary by Malcolm X, then the Peter Max, who I always thought had the best quotes on his paintings to define the generation, which is, "You do your thing, I will do mine. If by chance we should come together, that will be beautiful." Of course, the third one was the quote that Bobby Kennedy used when he was in Indianapolis, and it was actually a quote from I think Henry David Thoreau. Is something about a time, "Some men see things they are and ask why I see things that never were and ask why not." When you look at those three statements, which one best defines the boomers? "By any means necessary," "You do your thing, I will do mine. By chance we should come together, it will be beautiful," and then Bobby Kennedy's, "Some men see things as they are and ask why. I see things that never were going to ask why not." Are they all part of the generation?
JC (01:37:04):
Well, I think they are all part of it. I think the cynic would say, you do yours and I will do mine. I think most would pop for the Bobby Kennedy.
SM (01:37:14):
Is that the quote?
JC (01:37:16):
No, it is the one from South Africa, but it is a good one.
SM (01:37:23):
I will read this to the tape here if you do not mind. "Each time a man stands up for an ideal or acts to improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope in the crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current, which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance," Robert Kennedy. Wow. Very nice. Just a couple more names here and then we're done. The Black Panthers, which is Huey Newton and Bobby Seal and Eldridge Cleaver and Angela Davis and Kathleen Cleaver and that group. Just your thoughts on Black power.
JC (01:38:08):
Well, in Vietnam, one of the books I got out of the Red Cross was Eldridge Cleaver's book.
SM (01:38:16):
Soul On Ice?
JC (01:38:17):
Yeah, Soul On Ice. I think they were criminals, but they were fashionable criminals. They are accepted-accepted.
SM (01:38:27):
How about Daniel Ellsberg in the Pentagon Papers?
JC (01:38:32):
Well, I think what he did ultimately was, I mean shedding light on things is good. I wonder about his motivation. I do not know him at all, but it is people with towering egos, boomer egos, who are going to shine a light on themselves no matter how they do it. So, there's a piece of that you kind of resent, but at the same time, the product is... I try to operate; do not do anything I would not want to see on the front page of the New York Times. You hope a lot of people work that way.
SM (01:39:11):
Yeah. How about the women, the Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug and Betty Friedan? They were three names that really come to the forefront. Shirley Chisholm's in that group. The Women's Movement.
JC (01:39:23):
They were pioneers and good spokesman. It is funny, though, I had a situation of someone I knew at North Carolina that was a student and worked with Bella Abzug, and Bella Abzug stood her up and kept the money. So, she did not come across as a nice person from that one experience. Of all of them, I have got this sense of Bella Abzug is not being a person of character.
SM (01:39:55):
How about the Daniel and Phillip Berrigan, because-
JC (01:39:58):
Yeah, good judges. Good judges.
SM (01:40:03):
Yeah. I actually had both of them on our campus, and we actually had Phillip on our campus. He gave his last public speech there at Westchester University before he died. A couple other quick things here. Barry Goldwater?
JC (01:40:22):
I understand why he lost, but there is almost a, I do not know, there is a nostalgia for... He seems from a different time, not even the (19)60s. He seems from even an earlier time. There is a certain elegance to what he said. I remember the campaign and I remember given my- I could not vote, but it was a bit shocking to me where he was coming from. But it did not...
SM (01:41:00):
I think there is a lot. Bill Buckley admired him, and Bill Buckley has been standing a lot of today's conservatives. He has passed away. But I can remember that when you think of the irony of a man who was destroyed by Lyndon Johnson, voting wise, numbers wise of the (19)64 election. And the fact that in 1974 it was himself and Hughes Scott, the senator from Tennessee, that were asked to go to the White House to ask Nixon to resign. His stature as a senator is very honest.
JC (01:41:34):
Well, there is an elegance and an integrity to him that at least looking back now, I appreciate much more.
SM (01:41:41):
He was a Korean War vet, too, I believe. A fighter pilot.
JC (01:41:44):
He was a general in the Air Force. My father looked a lot like him, too, so there is that part playing on it.
SM (01:41:53):
Two or three more here and then we are done. Tech. Tech was obviously very big in the military, big in Vietnam, big in the United States. There may have been lies on this in terms of the American public, too, about the impact. It really, really changed things.
JC (01:42:09):
Yeah-yeah. Walter Cronkite saying we have lost. Again, that is where Larry Summers, I think, gets it right. And that is why when I went to the Army War College, we were studying Clausewitz. There is a larger impact than just what happens on the battlefield or in one place. So, it was a victory because it impacted so many different areas. It was not a military victory, but it was a victory. It was a turning point.
SM (01:42:43):
The last person I was going to say was John Dean again, because he is the guy that went before the hearings there. Just your thoughts on John Dean. He was Nixon's lawyer.
JC (01:42:54):
Yeah. I think obviously there is a, in retrospect, you got to respect what he did. I probably should not end on this, but I remember thinking he had a very nice-looking wife.
SM (01:43:08):
And she came. They are still together. They live in California. Although, there are rumors that she had been a call-girl at one time. That really got him upset. Remember the bombshell that was... I forgot the congressman. Wanda.
JC (01:43:20):
Oh, yeah. Dancing in the fountain there.
SM (01:43:23):
Yes, there is that. The last question I want to ask you, because we have been talking about the time that boomers were basically teenagers and the rest of their lives. How important were the (19)50s? The (19)50s themselves in shaping the boomer generation. I am always fascinated because when I think of the (19)50s, I think of my parents giving me all they could give. Great Christmases, great Thanksgivings, great birthdays, just always being there kind of good times. But we knew there was racism, we knew what was going on in the South, but it was kind of hidden. It seemed like a time of peace, but the Cold War was on. We came so close to nuclear bomb. But as children, though, maybe they do not have a sense of understanding. We'd watch Mickey Mouse Club every week and we would watch the TV westerns. We did not really see the difference between good and bad. The bad was always the Native American Indian. Hop Along Cassidy, all the shows seem like a time of peace. And all of a sudden you start getting into the (19)60s and everything is kind of rebelling against the parents. What was it about the (19)50s that shaped the boomers?
JC (01:44:41):
You watch Mad Men?
SM (01:44:42):
Yes, I do. Yes, I did.
JC (01:44:47):
I think all those hidden tensions. I just think that is one of the best shows I think I have ever seen. There is so much of maybe what I want to remember, the tensions and the unspoken frustrations. In the (19)50s, I think that lack of confrontation led to more of an over confrontation. My parents were products of the depression and products of the Second World War.
SM (01:45:34):
So were mine.
JC (01:45:34):
My father never really got over at the Second World War. He was a pretty hard man until he moved back to the Catholic Church later in life. Claire used to say, "Your father is wonderful. Why cannot you talk to him?" I said, "Claire, that is not the man I grew up with. You have changed him." I grew up obviously wanting to please my father in so many ways, but not ever going to acknowledge him in an open way. I think that probably creates a certain schizophrenia that showed itself in the boomer generation.
SM (01:46:17):
Yeah, those times. I had nothing but good memories of those times, but then I am always deeply reflecting on things. I remember, my dad used to win trips. He worked for Prudential and he won trips to Florida for sales and (19)57, (19)58, (19)59. We took trips for two weeks, got out of school and we drove. You had to drive by the poor homes in the South. It was just eye-opening. One time we were at a restaurant and it was like Aunt Jemima was doing all the serving there. I started to, as a little boy, started to put things together. If you saw them, I met John Kennedy when I was... We were coming back from a vacation during the summer that he was campaigning, and he had been trying to get on a Roosevelt support. I have only read about this in later years. But my mom was tired. She said, "On the way back from vacation, let us stop at Hyde Park." So, we got there. My mom was tired, she crossed the street. They had a place where you could buy pictures back then, it's now gone. But my dad and my little sister and I, we walked in. We did not know what all the promotion was all about. Well, John Kennedy was in the library with Eleanor Roosevelt. So, we got in there and we were all waiting for him to come out the side door. I have been there many times since, and they got rid of the drive there where he was. But came out the side door, or someone was yelling, "He is coming out the side door," and so I ran over there and only one person shook his hand. Well, I got to be honest. I did not catch the grant, but I catched the top as a little boy. And he looked at me with his pin striped suit with that million dollar smile. My sister was on my dad's shoulder and she touched his suit and whatever. Little did I know that he would end up beating Nixon and then becoming president of the United States. When I went to college, that was my first one-minute speech, the most memorable moment in my life up until that point. So anyways, are there any, last question I always ask, is there a question that you thought I might ask that I did not ask that you'd like to make a final comment about the boomer generation and the generation that you grew up with? Or just some final thoughts on them as a whole? Because do not forget, they are approaching 62 now and they have still got their old age, the impact with their old age. So, any other final thoughts?
JC (01:48:50):
No, I think you covered an awful lot of ground. Pity you having to make sense out of it.
SM (01:48:58):
Well, I love doing it because... Thank you very much. Now, to turn this off.
(End of Interview)
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Dr. Joseph Cox
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Cox, Joseph T., 1946- ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Soldiers; College teachers; Cox, Joseph T., 1946--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Joseph T. Cox is a retired army officer, educator, author and the former headmaster of Haverford School. Cox was also an English professor at West Point. He earned a Bachelor’s degree from Lafayette College and a Master’s degree and Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2009-11-09
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.65a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.65b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
109:05
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b627f0b93c60a89e01915fd579024b23.jpg
53f237a85d73da43846c712fc1a7bc96
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/70ee3688d055cc44c17ef43b1707035f.mp3
600d4541e81acb61f48296e17022f2dc
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
2011-08-11
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Courtland Cox, 1941-
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Courtland Cox spent his childhood between Trinidad and New York City. He went to Howard University and eventually became a civil rights activist. He joined a group called the Non-violent Action Group (NAG) to fight against white supremacy and segregation and then became a member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). Throughout his years as an activist, Cox helped organized groups in order to prevent segregation from occurring in the world."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":4483,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,5099745],"10":2,"11":4,"15":"Arial"}">Courtland Cox spent his childhood between Trinidad and New York City. He went to Howard University and eventually became a civil rights activist. He joined a group called the Non-violent Action Group (NAG) to fight against white supremacy and segregation and then became a member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). Throughout his years as an activist, Cox helped organized groups in order to prevent segregation from occurring in the world.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
2 Microcassettes
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Trinidad; Harlem; Island Scholarships Projects; Bronx; Throggs Neck Projects; Poverty; Caribbean; Segregation; Freedom rides; Bobby Mitchell; Ernie Davis; Racial equality; Discrimination; Black colleges; Black Panther; Montgomery Bus Boycott; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Baby boom generation; Gay Power; Cultural Boundaries."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Trinidad; Harlem; Island Scholarships Projects; Bronx; Throggs Neck Projects; Poverty; Caribbean; Segregation; Freedom rides; Bobby Mitchell; Ernie Davis; Racial equality; Discrimination; Black colleges; Black Panther; Montgomery Bus Boycott; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Baby boom generation; Gay Power; Cultural Boundaries.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
142:55
Subject LCSH
Political activists--United States; Cox, Courtland, 1941--Interviews
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Courtland Cox
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 11 August 2011
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:04):
Testing one, two. Just hold these tapes as we go. One of the first questions I like to always ask is, how did you become-
CC (00:00:16):
Would it be better if we sat at a table that you could just-
SM (00:00:19):
Oh, no, this is fine. I sat many couches.
CC (00:00:25):
There is a table. Let us look at the other room. You want the lights on here or just-
SM (00:00:31):
Oh, no, we are fine. Yep, we are fine. Got my new glasses too, these cost me a lot of money. How did you become who you are? The first question I always ask is, what were those early years in your life when you were in elementary school and secondary school before you went off to Howard? And I always like to find out a little about where you grew up, your family, what your parents did. Who your mentors, role models were, before you ever met Bayard Rustin.
CC (00:01:04):
Well, I was born in the United States in Harlem, actually. And my mother had moved here from Trinidad. And when I was four years old, my mother sent my sister and myself back to Trinidad to live with my grandmother because she was a single parent in the United States, so it was very difficult. So we went back and I lived in Trinidad from the time I was four, until my grandmother died in (19)52, and came back here around 11, 12 years old. I think probably the biggest influence on me, in that period, was the emphasis on education that my family had. Even though my mother's generation did not go to college, my grandmother had nine children and probably about seven survived. And each of them, education was big for their families and many of them, and those who were ahead of me, had won at that time what they called island scholarships. Some attended Cambridge, some attended Oxford, some went to LSE, London School of Economics, others came to the United States. So probably the first big influence in my life was the huge stress for education and becoming educated. When I came back to the United States, around 12, we were moved out of Harlem into the projects in the Bronx, called Throggs Neck Projects. And at that point, I observed America from that vantage point. And so in (19)53, (19)54, America was a much different place as it dealt with the question of race. But a lot of the pathologies that we see today were present at that point. Kids were getting on drugs. There was heroin at that point, smoking marijuana. A lot of them were not going to school. There were no jobs. People overtly told them, "Why go to school? You are not going to have a good college education." So all of that was emphasized in the society very openly. They absorbed it. And as kids 15, 16, 17, by that time, their initiatives were already destroyed. But the thing for me was the background that I had from Trinidad in terms of education, in terms of emphasis, in terms of my mother's view, that kind of inoculated me from that environment. And so therefore, while all of them were dropping out of school, I was going to school, I was fit. My sister and I were probably two of the four people that continued to go to high school. But we dealt with high school anyhow. So that is before I got to Howard University. The whole emphasis on education, my upbringing in the Caribbean was probably the major influence of my life.
SM (00:05:12):
At what point when you were young, you could be junior high or senior high, when you're reading about the history of the United States, and you come from Trinidad and how important education is in your family, that you read the history of the United States and there was a point in time when African Americans were not allowed to read. They were punished if they were caught reading. And this is going back to even to the founding of the nation and what happened in the 1800s.
CC (00:05:49):
I think the discussion I had with the guys who were 15 and 16 years old, it was now I think about it, their analysis of the society and what was open to them and what was real or not real was very profound. I am now understanding a lot better. I think my discussion, because coming back to the United States was a culture shock in the sense that all the frames of reference that were here was something I did not really have. I was coming from one culture to another culture, but my understanding of the American environment really, my first impressions were really developed with talking to the young people who, at the end of the day, whether they be in jail, killed or so forth, but they understood what the discussion was.
SM (00:07:05):
If you were to talk about mentors and role models as you got older, obviously Bayard Rustin was one, and there were many others, Dr. King. Was there, even in your schooling here in the United States, you had your grandmother, you had your family, but was there a teacher, was there some teacher in school or some figure in the news that in the 1950s that stood out for you as a young [inaudible]?
CC (00:07:36):
I would say the name that comes to mind, but this was in the Caribbean, Ms. Curry. But when I came back to the United States, my mother sent me to Catholic schools to make sure that that shield was there. My sense is that when I came back, I went to a school that was, finishing the eighth grade or so, was the all black order of nuns at St. Aloysius School. I think it was the name after St. Martin De Porres. So that was my first thing. And then I went to Catholic high school. But that was a different shock because there were four blacks in the whole school.
SM (00:08:39):
And how many were in the school?
CC (00:08:41):
Probably hundreds of kids. Literally the whole school. And I think we were the first class. And by the second year of high school, I was the only black, no, I think there were two of us, but third year I was the only one. So coming from the contrast from Catholic school where you're the only black or one or two in back to the projects, the contrast was quite interesting as I remember it.
SM (00:09:22):
And were there any books as a young boy or young man that you read early on? Writers that inspired you?
CC (00:09:35):
I do not know inspired but the one that James Joyce, The Portrait. Reading that in Catholic school, that was quite, and also my sense is that the other one that impressed me was Zola's book. The title does not come to mind right away.
SM (00:10:12):
Émile Zola?
CC (00:10:14):
Émile Zola's book. We talked about the trial. But I think at that point, the whole discussions of right and wrong and good and bad, seems to me those kinds of things attracted my attention, the things that focused on that, right and wrong and good and bad and so forth.
SM (00:10:43):
My next question gets into the Howard years. How did you end up at Howard University? Why did you pick that school? And talking about your years in Howard, how did you become an activist for the first time? And do you remember the first time that you ever spoke up about a subject that upset you and you really became vulnerable for the first time?
CC (00:11:09):
My sense is that after I got out of college, no, while I was in high school, my mother's place was the place, that was the stop that everybody came to from Trinidad, my relatives. And my cousin, Erskine, had been accepted to Howard. So he was going back and forth to Howard, I think I was working in the post office and I was 18 or 19, I was making in 1958, (19)59, I was making $2 an hour plus 20 percent plus 10 percent night differentials. So I was making $2.20 an hour, which was a lot of money during that time. But I said to myself, "I really do not want to be doing this all." I was a postal clerk. It was not like I was-
SM (00:12:27):
This is after you graduated high school?
CC (00:12:30):
The year after I took the test, I became a postal clerk, which was a career for most people. And I was, after six months, I said, "Nah, there must be a better way. Must be a better way than this." And so I talked to my cousin about Howard, Erskine Arlene, because at that time Howard just gave a test entrance exam. You did not have to take SATs and all that. You had an entrance exam. So one day got on the Greyhound bus, came down to Washington, I remember it was snowing in New York, when I got to Washington it was sunny. And took the test and went back home. And short time later, they said, "Hey, you passed. You are good if you want to come." And at that point, it cost $7.50 a semester hour to go to school. And so it was like $107.50 for 15 hours, $40 room and board, $40 for food. And so I was working at post office making serious money and so I saved my postal money and came down to Howard to go to school.
SM (00:14:08):
And you were there four year.
CC (00:14:08):
Four years, that is right.
SM (00:14:10):
What years were those now?
CC (00:14:13):
I came down in (19)60 and left (19)64.
SM (00:14:18):
Harris Walford went there, but I think he went to law school there, did not he?
CC (00:14:21):
Who is this?
SM (00:14:21):
Harris Walford.
CC (00:14:23):
Walford? I do not know. I am not sure. He was a little ahead of me, I am sure.
SM (00:14:28):
I think he went to law school.
CC (00:14:30):
Law school there, right.
SM (00:14:36):
During those years, what was being a student at Howard during those years?
CC (00:14:39):
I am telling you a lot of energy. I think we started out, we did a number of things at Howard. We did the civil rights discussion. We did the newspaper. We did a Project awareness. We did a bunch. We were the energy bunnies. We started out-
SM (00:15:11):
Who is "we" now?
CC (00:15:13):
People like Stokely Carmichael, Bill Mahoney, Mike Thelwell, Ed Brown, people like that. We were at Cleve Sellers, who's now president of Voorhees. We started out in trying to, when I came here in (19)60, a number of things were in Washington. First, Glen Echo, the amusement park was segregated. The Washington Post had ads for coloreds and whites. They were huge swaths of the city that blacks could not live in. A number of stores, the better stores, blacks could not try on clothes. The police force was mainly guys from the south who could not find jobs elsewhere being put on the police force by the congressional people. The district was run hands on by the Congress of the United States. So we came into this environment and we started off by, right after the Freedom Rides and right after the whole question of the sit-ins, we started testing the kind of segregated facilities that they had in Washington. And we formed a group called the Non-Violent Action Group, which was one of the student groups that comprised SNCC, Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee. So that is how I started getting into it. Looking at the situation that was here in Washington in terms of the segregated facilities, the segregated political structure. The segregated economic structure. Not only does that mean Washington Redskins had no black players. So one of the first things I did was picketed RFK, what we call RFK Stadium now, because they had no black players on their team.
SM (00:17:45):
Was Bobby Mitchell the first?
CC (00:17:47):
Yeah, he came the year after.
SM (00:17:49):
From the Cleveland Browns.
CC (00:17:51):
He came in after. I think the first thing they were going to do was they were to get, what is his name from Syracuse who died?
SM (00:17:59):
Ernie Davis.
CC (00:18:01):
Ernie Davis, yes. But he died and then they brought in Bobby Mitchell. And the Redskins owner name is not coming to me now. What's his name?
SM (00:18:16):
[inaudible]
CC (00:18:16):
No-no-no. I am talking about why back, because the Redskins was a team of the South. Because remember, most football teams at that period in 1960 did not exist in the South. They did not go to the south till later on. Most of the teams, they had maybe 12 teams. You were talking about the Cleveland. The football was an industrial, northern industrial phenomena. Pittsburgh, Cleveland, New York, places like that. Philadelphia. So when you talk about the South and the West, they did not come until after (19)60 when you had the AFC and all these other guys coming in. So you got to remember that the Redskins were the team of the South. That is what everybody, there was no Dallas Cowboys, or there was no North Carolina Panthers or Atlanta Falcons. They did not have all that. They had the Redskins. This was their team. And so if they are broadcasting in the South they were not going to have a lot of black people on North's teams. So that was particularly important.
SM (00:19:34):
It is interesting because Ernie Davis, I am from Syracuse, right? So Ernie is dead from Leukemia, so sad.
CC (00:19:45):
He had a lot of potential. A big guy. We started with that non-violent action group. We had a group coming together, as I mentioned some of the people, Ed Brown, Cleve, Stanley Wise, Stokely, Mary Felice Lovelace, Muriel Tillinghast. We had a group of very, very bright people.
SM (00:20:20):
How big was the student population at that time? And were you the rare group, the ones that were really activists?
CC (00:20:29):
We were the rare group, the student population I could not tell you. Probably had to be, I do not know, probably at least maybe 15, 16, maybe 2000. I am not sure, but about at least that. But we were the group that we were seen. Interestingly enough, we were seen by the students as unusual. We were seen by the professors as their children of hope. So we were treated by the professors, at least certain professors, but I think a number of them, with a certain kind of, "We are behind you. We want to talk to you. We want to nurture you." And probably the lead in that was Sterling Brown. Sterling Brown, he did for us a number of things. He would come and he would lecture about the blues in our dormitory. We could get him to do it. He would come and talk. He would read his poetry. He would talk about jazz. But more importantly, for a small group of us, Butch Khan and Ed and Tom Khan, and people like that. Tom and Butch were also very key in this discussion. He would take us over at his house, open up some bourbon and talk about the voice, talk about the people that he knew. So it was not a book discussion. He is talking about friends. Because one of the things that interests me today, because when I am talking to people in SNCC, it is always a discussion about your life. It is always a discussion about memories. It is always a discussion about a number of things. My perspective is really just, these are the things I did. That is what it is. It is only when people are talking to me that there is a sense of history. And so what Sterling Brown did was took us inside the lives of the voice, about what he liked, what he liked to eat, what did he like to drink, how'd he wear his pass, what people would say about it, the whole discussion. He gave us a sense, there were people like Conrad Snow, who was a professor up there. People like Emmett Dorsey. They were all people who really said to us, "You are not radicals. You are not outside the mainstream." The message to us constantly from those professors were, "You are the hope of our future." And I think enough has not been said about a lot of those professors who, like Patricia. Patricia, she ran for mayor. Patricia Roberts Harris, she was secretary of HUD. She was also an ambassador too. And I remember in a little while, but she was also Dean of Women at Howard University. And Mary Felice Lovelace, who was going out, she and Stokely were an item for a long time. They went out. And when she would come back late from demonstrations, while it was a strict rule for the other women, Harris, "Well, you are coming in from demonstrations. All right." So they gave us space. And so I think on that side of it, we did that at Howard. While we were also viewed as a small band, people also looked at what we were doing. And I think probably Stokely had the biggest impact on this, is that he would also involve the other students, and going out to demonstrate. He would tell them that we were going in a demonstration, but there was a great party afterwards. And so to go to the party afterwards, these kids would go demonstrate. So we would swell our ranks with that. Now, I think for both Stokely and myself in particular, and Tom Khan, Tom obviously was very close to Bayard, but we also knew, coming from New York, both of us, knew about some of the discussions that were going on. So one of the things that we did, and this is really Tom Khan's brainchild, we created a thing called Project Awareness. And the same NAG people who were doing the demonstrations were the same NAG people who did the organization of the Project Awareness. And the first event was a debate between Bayard Rustin and Malcolm X on separation versus integration.
SM (00:27:14):
Is that the one where they are on the stage and it was taped?
CC (00:27:17):
Yeah.
SM (00:27:18):
That is a story.
CC (00:27:19):
Yes, it is. But it is interesting. This work in a number of ways. First of all, it revealed to us a split at Howard University. The head of the political science department, his name was Martin, Professor Martin, thought that it was unworthy to have Malcolm X at Howard University. Emmett Dorsey, who was a professor who was very strong on the African American status in the United States, shot pool down at the pool hall with the guys and so forth, embraced Malcolm and then moderated the debate. And he was the one that did that. Now, this was our first debate. Cramton Auditorium had just opened up. It held 1500 people. And you asked me how many people we had. We had 1500 people there. The place was packed to the gills, not only packed to the gills, they were people banging all night on the doors trying to get in. And Bayard did something that was very interesting. Each speaker had, I think, half an hour to present their case, and Bayard was up first, he spoke on the question of integration. Malcolm was speaking on the question of separation. Bayard spoke for 15 minutes, and he said, "You always-"
CC (00:29:03):
... 15 minutes. And he said, "You always hear my point of view. I am going to give Malcolm 15 minutes of my time so that you can fully hear his." And I am telling you, Malcolm was one of the best speakers around. You could not believe... I mean, he had a profound effect. So after that first event, people looked at us even more... And the professors were even more embracing, and the students were amazed. "God, how could you do that? How could you pull that off?" The next event we had on the Project Awareness was called Whither the Negro Writer. It was moderated by Sterling Brown. We had Ossie Davis, we had John Killens. We had Jim Baldwin. And it was just, again, another fabulous thing. And we used to have little after parties for the guests. Sidney Poitier flew in, said, "I heard you guys were in town. I just thought I would come and party, hang out." I mean, it was like... So now we really think, "Wow, what is going..." And then the third thing that we had was on thermonuclear warfare with Herman Kahn from, I think it was the Hudson Institute, and Norman Thomas debating the issue of thermonuclear warfare. So now we have established not only the demonstrations about trying to go against the large society, but on the big issues of the day, we are now driving that train. And in addition to that, also, Mike Falwell, who was part of the NAG.
SM (00:31:12):
Group, was the editor of the newspaper, The Hilltop, which received award after award. So not only now we are part of a group that does this in terms of outside the campus, this in terms of the campus, and then Stokely and Tom Kahn were on the student council. And Tom was very smart. He says, "I do not want to be the president. I just want to be the treasurer." He ran for being the treasurer. And he understood that was where it is. So basically we had spread, we had an entity, an organizing entity that functioned both inside and outside the campus that had a profound effect on what was going on. And the other thing was that we were probably some of the best students in the campus too. So this is, I think for even today when I talk to the people we were in school with today, they remember that, the energy we brought to the discussion. So I would say that the profound discussion at Howard to me was that. Now I think off-campus, I think probably, I would say the smartest person I had ever seen politically in terms of these things was Bayard. Because he had seen a lot of these movies. He had understood the politics. And at that point we had a lot of things with the Trotskyites and the Stalinists and all that kind of stuff. And he had been through all of that whole era, and he was able to help us sink through and deal with all of it because we had a focused message. We did not need to go into the battle of who lost Moscow and all that kind of stuff. We wanted to know what is it we were going to do here? Where were we going to go? So my sense is that, at least at Howard, through that whole Howard period, there are a number of things I found to be very important. First, I guess sense from the professors that we were Children of Hope. I think the second thing was that the energy that we were able to bring to the discussion, whether we were dealing with demonstrations or whether we were dealing with the newspaper articles, we were able to practice our craft of being very good at whatever we did. We did not lose. The whole organizing discussion, we were very good at it. The third, we were big influences of the young people who were on campus as to what was going to be their future, breaking the barriers that they had come into. And so I think in the political sense, probably Bayard was the most important. I think on the cultural historical sense; Sterling Brown was the most important. Whatever became of Sterling?
CC (00:35:16):
He died.
SM (00:35:17):
How long after?
CC (00:35:20):
Sterling was in his high (19)80s. Sterling was in the high (19)80s, and I assume Sterling died maybe, it seemed like 15, 20 years ago.
SM (00:35:36):
Okay.
CC (00:35:36):
Yeah.
SM (00:35:38):
Hey. That is a great description of your time in Howard. And the thing is, I did not know Stokely was there. I knew Ed was there.
CC (00:35:47):
Stokely was there.
SM (00:35:48):
Stokely was very-
CC (00:35:50):
He was very profound. And Cleve Sellers, Stanley Wise, Muriel Tillinghan. I mean, those people were very... Not only that, let me just also go one other point. In terms of SNCC. You had two kinds of views coming out of SNCC. The one is John Lewis's view about nonviolence. And his view was that this was a philosophy, a way of life. And what you were trying to do was appeal to people's better selves. The Howard people did not have that view. Howard people believed, thought that nonviolence was important because you did not have enough to be not non-violent. And that at the end of the day, that people operated out of their own interests, not out of any kind of goodness at the heart. So I think probably the thing while at Howard and the big debate, the NAG group in terms of SNCC, was from the beginning, our views were much sharper, much more political than the Nashville group with John and Diane Nash Bevel, and those others.
SM (00:37:30):
That is James Bevel's wife, right?
CC (00:37:32):
Yes.
SM (00:37:32):
And he died at about two years ago.
CC (00:37:33):
He died about two years ago.
SM (00:37:35):
We had him on campus twice.
CC (00:37:37):
Right. Yeah. Right.
SM (00:37:37):
And so you really met Bayard right there at Howard.
CC (00:37:41):
Yeah. Met Bayard at Howard.
SM (00:37:42):
In that debate.
CC (00:37:43):
He came to the debate. Yeah.
SM (00:37:47):
Now, how did he continue to influence the people? He came to the debate and Nelson came and they went on. You guys were with SNCC and you had your issues on campus. You were involved with many other people. Did you still stay in touch with them?
CC (00:37:58):
Oh yeah.
SM (00:37:59):
And the Congress of Racial Equality too?
CC (00:38:01):
Yeah, because one of the things, especially in terms of the demonstrations, I stayed with in touch with Bayard a lot, probably more than the others. But I think that he was very helpful in terms of trying to get us through the political thickets that we found ourselves, particularly in the demonstrations in Baltimore and the various kinds of people interests who wanted to come and take over. So, Bayard, I remember once we were in a big fight with some people in Baltimore, and Bayard got the national headquarters of court to make him a representative. So he came into the meeting as the National Representative Corps, and he just devastated the people who wanted to go against us. But the other big thing was, you remember also, Bayard was the organizer, I guess for the second March on Washington, second proposed March. So... That is definitely you.
SM (00:39:30):
Hello? Hello? How would they get my number? Bye. Amazing. I am on Facebook a lot.
CC (00:39:53):
Oh you are?
SM (00:39:55):
Yeah, I am on Facebook and I have friends, and I belong to certain organizations through Facebook. They sell your name to everything.
CC (00:40:03):
Well, guess what? I avoid that.
SM (00:40:06):
Facebook?
CC (00:40:09):
Yeah.
SM (00:40:09):
I am starting to see the dangers of it. Definitely seeing the dangers of it. Now, I will get back here. Amazing that they got up. They should have my home phone. They should not be having my cell phone number.
CC (00:40:22):
Well, that is easy to get.
SM (00:40:23):
Yeah. One of the things, you worked on the March on Washington.
CC (00:40:30):
Right. Yeah.
SM (00:40:31):
And you were the-
CC (00:40:32):
Representative of SNCC. And let me say to you that I am not sure SNCC would have been represented at the march in Washington, unless it was reason I argued for it. And I argued because my trust with Bayard. The people in SNCC were not at the initial points just ready for it, because you have got to remember, there were a number of competing interests in March and Washington, Dick Gregory and others had a view of something much more radical in terms and much more disruptive. And Bayard had something in a much more organized, much more important in terms of that. So SNCC people were torn in this discussion. And because of by my trust in Bayard, I was able to convince the SNCC people to participate. And their view was, since you want to do it, you go represent us. And that was that. So that is how we got into it. Now, I think it was an important for us to be there historically, as history has proven it was an important event. And to see Bayard having to maneuver where those guys, Roy Wilkins and the rest, I mean, he did have the protection of A. Phillip Randolph. Nobody was going to separate him from me, because as you remember, that time, the whole question... There are two issues that are much different now at this point than they were at that time. The question of homosexuality, that was just death. And the second was the question of communism and did you ever, or whatever. And Bayard had both of those on him. And so his ability to maneuver his organizational skills in terms of pulling that off under that kind of weight, political weight, because absent A. Philip Randolph, these guys would have never given Bayard the time of day if they could not deal with Randolph. And Randolph was going to have this march, especially after what happened in (19)41.
SM (00:43:18):
I read about how you were involved with changing John Lewis's speech, and I was reading in another interview that it was happening as the event was happening.
CC (00:43:29):
Yes, yes. Oh, there's a picture up there that showed we were doing it. One of those pictures we were back at the Lincoln Memorial-
SM (00:43:39):
Oh, that is that picture there?
CC (00:43:39):
Yes. Yeah.
SM (00:43:39):
Oh my God.
CC (00:43:39):
Yeah. That is what we are doing. I basically, as I said, I was representing the march of SNCC. And John's speech came out the day before, they sent the speech, then I distributed-
SM (00:43:58):
How come you did not give a speech?
CC (00:43:58):
Me? No-no. It was John's center. I do not know.
SM (00:43:59):
Yeah, he was picked by SNCC to be the man?
CC (00:44:01):
No, he was the chairman at that point.
SM (00:44:02):
Okay.
CC (00:44:05):
So John's speech was written, probably a lot of it by Julian. And I distributed it because I wanted make sure that John and SNCC did not get lost in the crowd in terms of the speeches. So I sent it out, gave it out the day before. And what happened was the Kennedy people saw it. And so they called Cardinal O'Boyle, who was a member of the March on Washington group representing the Catholic Church. And he threatened to pull out of the speak thing. And when Bayard came to us about it and asked for our support in terms of that, we told Bayard that it's all right if O'Boyle leaves. But then Bayard brought A. Philip Randolph, and A. Philip Randolph talked about how he had worked with this for 20 years and how it was important. And once he did that, then what we did was we had an old typewriter, you can see we had a portable typewriter, and Jim Foreman, John Lewis, Mildred Foreman and myself in the back of the Lincoln Memorial making the changes to the speech.
SM (00:45:35):
Unbelievable, the pressure.
CC (00:45:35):
Oh yeah.
SM (00:45:35):
The pressure is intense.
CC (00:45:42):
Oh yeah. But what it did at that point was that this country loves controversy, so basically it made John's speech much more memorable because of the controversy, because it now had something to add to it. So we published a speech at first, and we published the changed speech. Now the SNCC people did call me a sellout, John, Jim Foreman for changing the speech. But we thought that it was better to go ahead and do that. And it got much more historical recognition because of it.
SM (00:46:20):
That is amazing. And this is important. John Kennedy obviously had reservations about this whole thing.
CC (00:46:26):
Oh yes, he did.
SM (00:46:28):
And historically, at the time, correct me if I am wrong, the Southern Democrats, even in his run for the presidency, he was concerned about the Southern Democrats because if he became out too strong towards civil rights he might lose the Southern vote and all the other stuff. Then he becomes President of the United States. And we know the whole history of LBJ and what he did in civil rights. But from your experiences and from talking to John Lewis and Julian Bond and all the people, Bayard, was Kennedy just a pragmatic politician? And did he sincerely care about civil rights? Or was this just a pragmatic move on his part to get support?
CC (00:47:13):
I think that Kennedy was a smart politician, and I think he began to see the future. I do not think that Kennedy, Jack Kennedy, in any way had any strong belief in civil rights. I think he had an intellectual support of it. But in terms of if he had to choose between his intellectual kind of thing, doing good and doing well, he would choose doing well because he wanted to be president. I mean, it is an ambitious family. And so his call to Martin King was a symbolic thing that would help solidify the, at that point, the Negro vote against... Because you have to remember that Nixon had Jackie Robinson on his side, and most blacks, until (19)36, most black people were Republicans. Because remember, the Republican party was the party of Lincoln. And was only until the Depression and Roosevelt that it started turning around. And so you have people like Jackie Robinson who were Republicans who were supporting, and Jackie Robinson was a big hero. So King was a counterweight to Jackie Robinson on that side. The other thing is that I do truly think that probably the one that started to get it later on in life was Bobby Kennedy. I think that after his brother was shot, I think he became a lot more introspective. And I think only somebody who had really understood what the deal was could have given that speech the night King got killed. He's only one that you really... This was not an off the top of the head speech. This way a, I understand this. I understand this more than any of you really understand it. And I think that he understood it after his brother got killed. But before that, they were, for example, Tom Khan, Butch Khan, Stokely, and myself, we sat in his office, in Bobby Kennedy's office. And what was funny is that they decided, okay, just leave him. Wait until the building closed down and then take some wheelchairs and wheel him them out. So they knew that... And Bobby Kennedy, at the end of the day, when they had to face... They did not want to be pushed. But when they were pushed, they took the right decision in terms of sending in troops. But even at the same time, they were trying to isolate Bayard and others from Martin King because they thought they were quote, "the radical communist element." So they were doing both things at the same time. So they were very scared, both of the Southern discussion, which was centered on race, and the communist discussion, which was huge at that time.
SM (00:51:06):
And even Dr. King, if I remember correctly, he was at that group with Miles Horton. He was in the audience and they said, "He is a communist" for being at that. They were making comments about Dr. King.
CC (00:51:24):
Yeah, obviously, look, and Bayard and Martin parted ways on this issue of communism because they did not want to take the heat. And the only group that really did not care about it was SNCC. I mean, we associated with Anne Braden, we associated with Miles Horton. We went out to his place. I was in Mississippi in 1963, and a lady came up to me and she said, "I am sure glad you communists are here to help us." So she got the message about communists, communists, communists. But she said, "Well, if these guys are scared of the communists, they must be here to help us." So I just think that at the end of the day, the thing I think that SNCC did that, especially in the early days, they did two things that were very profound. Well, maybe three things. First, they broke the back of this communist discussion because they did not care and they were not old enough to be influenced by the discussion. Two, they were able to organize and stay in the communities with the people that they worked with. They did not come in and go out. And the third is that because of that, they were able to function and not be paralyzed by terrorist tactics. I think those three things, I think distinguishes SNCC in a lot of ways, especially in the period from (19)60 to (19)64.
SM (00:53:22):
And of course, did you go down to the South yourself during the Freedom Rights?
CC (00:53:28):
Yeah, yeah. No, I did not go down South for Freedom Rights, no. Stokely was there. Bill Mahoney, John Moody, a number of people from Howard, but I did not go. Dion Diamond.
SM (00:53:38):
Freedom Summer was a special year.
CC (00:53:43):
It was (19)64. Yeah, yeah.
SM (00:53:43):
Yeah. And the Schwerner, Chaney, Goodman. Boy, that must be-
CC (00:53:45):
Yeah, that was terrorism. I mean, that is basically send the message and these people, kids, would get scared. And while people were scared they were not paralyzed. And that is seems to be the key question.
SM (00:54:03):
I have a question here. Did you or your family personally experience racism? Do you ever remember yourself experiencing it personally?
CC (00:54:15):
Yeah. My sense is that at that time it was just pervasive. The messages were very clear. You never saw any people of color on TV. You got to remember that. It is just profound how... I mean for me, you never saw anybody of color. You were always told, "We could not find any qualified." You were always told that. I mean, I never went to an apartment and somebody told me, "No, you cannot rent here." That was not never the case. But it does seem to me that the ability to move within the society without barriers... I mean, I give up racists, okay. During the demonstrations and so forth, I would go to restaurants and we would be refused and that, so we knew that. I guess it is just, so we were told "We do not serve you" or "we do not serve your kind." And what's really funny, especially on Route 40, where we were demonstrating, of course remember at that point, 95 was not the major route to New York, it was Route 40. And it was only after-
SM (00:55:42):
We went through that route when we went to Florida.
CC (00:55:45):
Okay. But I remember Stokely and I, after they decided on Route 40 and so forth, to open up and desegregate the restaurants. Because frankly, we have been to hundreds of restaurants and they turned us away. So we went in to eat breakfast. And the food was god awful. And so we said to each other, is this what we have been fighting for? This is bad food. We just go back into the black community, and get some good food. We're not coming back to this food. We're not coming back to this anymore. So I just think that there were several barriers that were known and unknown by us and experienced and anticipated by us coming. And I guess the other thing is police brutality in terms of, we went down in Washington, DC, Butch Con, Ed Brown and myself. We went down to the police station to talk to them, complain to them about what we thought was police brutality. So it was an all-white station. So the desk Sergeant said to us, "Well, when you start paying my salary, you can come in here and tell me what is going on and what we should be doing." And Butch Con spoke up and said, "Well, as a matter of fact, because we citizens, we do pay your salary." The desk Sergeant reached across the thing and punched Butch in the face.
SM (00:57:48):
Oh my God. So did Butch sue him?
CC (00:57:52):
No-no-no-no. So what we did, and it was a guy named Wayne Moss, who was the union guy in town. I forgot what union it was, but so we called him.
CC (00:58:03):
... in town. I forgot what Union he was with. So, we called him. And he also knew a guy at the Justice Department, who was African American, Duncan. And I think his name... I know his father's name was Todd Duncan, the musical guy. And Duncan was, I forgot, I am not sure what his first name was. So, this African-American comes in, and so we walk back in with this African-American guy whose name is Duncan. So, Duncan says, "I'd like to speak to the person who is in charge." So, they say, "Okay. Well, here is some more of these Black people coming in here, we saw them before." So, the guy says, "Well, we do not exactly know who's in charge." Just dismissive. So, what Duncan did, he ripped out his Justice Department credentials, and said, "If nobody is in charge, I am in charge." They were like flummoxed. They could not believe. Poom! They could not believe it. Then, he took over and directed these guys what they had to do or not do. So, I am just saying to you... And Julius Hobson, who used to, he was with CORE, as you know, he would call us for demonstrations all the time. So, yeah, for me, the reason I do not focus on events of discrimination, because I was always on offense, I was always trying to break the barriers down. Therefore, I never got offended because I was always on offense. So, that is my perspective on it.
SM (01:00:10):
I see here, just, people that are going to be reading the interviews, a lot of them do not know their history, as you well know, young people. In your own just a few words, what was SNCC, when did it start, why did it start, and what were its basic goals, and who were its leaders? And I know Bob Moses was leading...
CC (01:00:37):
Oh, yeah, okay. Well, SNCC, really SNCC came as a result of the need to test the law of the land that had just been established. So, you have got to remember, in 1896 this country had declared, separate but equal, the law of the land. So, that went on till about 1954 with the Brown v Board of Education. But with the Brown V Board of Education, and later with the in-Interstate Commerce Commission laws and rulings, all of it was talked about with all deliberate speed. So, for most young Black people, we saw the same thing, the status quo, and therefore, the need to challenge and to say, "If the law on our side, we want the country to act like the Lord is on our side." So, you had the sit-ins, and then you had the freedom riots. So, the sit-ins said, we are challenging the whole concept of our right to be like everybody else and that barrier to go away. The freedom riots said, we can...
SM (01:02:05):
Hey, you are doing fine.
CC (01:02:20):
Sure.
SM (01:02:22):
Yep, that was all right. I am sorry.
CC (01:02:26):
There you go. So, you have got that the freedom riot said, we have a right to travel without being treated as second class citizens, which means, you have to sit in the back of the bus, you have to give up your seat to any White person, and when you want to use facilities, the toilets and so forth, you do not go to a nasty, dirty place which is labeled "Colored", if you want to drink water, you should drink it from the best fountain. So, all those public accommodation barriers, we were challenging that whether we had a right to do what this country now said, after the 54th Supreme Court decision and other rulings said we had a right to do. So, those two events triggered SNCC. So, what happened was, Ms. Ella Baker called together a meeting at Shore University in February 1st 1960, to talk about how you coordinated all these activities. Therefore, you got Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee. And at first SNCC was a group of campus organizations. So, as I mentioned, you had the group out of Nashville with John Lewis and them, you had a group in Atlanta, the Atlanta Student Movement, you had a group up at Howard called the Non-Violent Action Group. You had groups like that, mostly on historically Black colleges. And that is how... And SNCC functioned like that, probably from 1960 to early 1962, where they were coordinated groups of campus people. Then, what began to happen was, again, some people started dropping out of school and beginning living in the communities, or had finished school, like Bob Moses, and started living in the communities. And there was a whole big debate about whether you continued public accommodations like looking at desegregating theaters, desegregating housing, desegregating lunch counters, or whether you move into the next phase, which was the political phase, deal with voting rights. At the end of the day, people in SNCC decided to go into voting rights. Therefore, with that kind of agenda, the nature of SNCC changed. So, we were no longer just campus organizations where you could, demonstrations all over the place, but you had voting rights in the most dangerous places; Mississippi, Alabama, Southwest Georgia. So, those students... And most people, we were between 17 and 22. Julian, somebody accused Julian of saying, "Well, they were 26 years old." Julian resented that. "No, I was 21, 22 years old." And that is what-
SM (01:05:57):
He is on my Facebook.
CC (01:06:00):
Yeah. So, here is a guy, here you have people, if you try to talk to them about whole groups of fear and communism and all this other baggage, no, they see right and wrong, they see people who are supposed to be voting in the United States cannot vote, they see barriers that exist. Therefore, SNCC came in at the tail end of what I characterize as the legal fight with the NAACP and people like that, brought us Brown v Board and all the issues around that, and all the stuff that King brought in terms of testing the legal things. So, my sense is that the period of beginning to either challenge the law, test the law, really came with the sit-ins and the freedom riots. Then, the political era, I would say SNCC was very much involved in that discussion. Started in (19)62 and probably ended in 2008, where the political barriers, where you no longer had poll tax and educational tests and all that stuff to be become a voter and a citizen in the United States. So, my sense is that SNCC went from a campus organization, particularly dealing with public accommodations and public accommodations issues, to moving to become a centralized organization dealing with voting, voting rights, and political organization. And probably, the two huge things that had big impact because of SNCC, at least on the voter registration side, was the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party and what it did in the challenge in (19)64, and the Lowndes County Freedom Organization. Those two, I think, had profound impact on this country.
SM (01:08:21):
It is interesting, Fannie Lou Hamer... I have a question that I have asked a lot of people. A lot of the reason why the women's movement abound was because of sexism that took place within the anti-war movement, which was really strong. And even, I talked to members of the gay and lesbian group, and they also said it was very prevalent in there. And Civil Rights too. So, when you look at the march on Washington in 1963, we know that Rochelle was involved and Bayard had many young mentees under him and he was delegating them, but obviously, it was not publicized in the media that much, unless you read the bio of Bayard and others. Because when you see all the people in front of the Lincoln Memorial, you see Dorothy Height standing over to the right, and you see Mahalia Jackson singing, but it is all men.
CC (01:09:23):
That is true.
SM (01:09:23):
It is all men. And-
CC (01:09:24):
I think, with the exception of Dorothy Height, there was nobody at the leadership level who was a woman. And she was there and probably there because of Bayard. I think that the involvement of young people... Because the other piece is that some of those guys, particularly Roy Wilkins, did not particularly embrace the involvement of young people either now. So, Roy Wilkins said, "I am not going to have you...," he told me, "I am not going to have your young people come in here and destroy everything we have worked for-for all these years. You will do it over my dead body." So, it seems to me that these guys had built themselves a structure, and were resistant to women, to young people, and other people that they were not "comfortable" with coming into that arena.
SM (01:10:38):
I think Whitney Young was in the same boat.
CC (01:10:40):
Oh, no question. He went into his thing, they would coveralls... Oh, he had a fit. He just could not understand how these young people could be so disrespectful, come into this building that Rockefeller gave them, I think on 48th Street, in coveralls. And do we care about any of that? We did not care.
SM (01:11:04):
The other thing is, James Farmer, who was arrested, I believe, and he was not at the march, he was the one leader that was not there, I believe-
CC (01:11:13):
Yeah. But I think, by that time, Farmer had given it up to what is-his-face, and he was in Black Mind, Louisiana. But he was down in-
SM (01:11:19):
Floyd McKissick?
CC (01:11:19):
Floyd McKissick, right. Yeah-yeah.
SM (01:11:24):
No, he was not resistant though, was he? He is-
CC (01:11:27):
No-no-no. I think Farmer came of the tradition much more like Bayard, being Fellowship of Reconciliation, that kind of stuff. He is much more in that kind of tradition than say Roy Wilkins or Whitney Young, and so forth.
SM (01:11:47):
Some of the transition you are talking about here too, which is really... I have done a lot of reading on Dr. King, and I am really looking forward to the week that is coming because it is long overdue. But one of the things that is interesting, I can remember reading Charles Silverman's book, In Black and White. I was in college, and it was just a tremendous book. And I still, I have got a first edition of it, mint condition. However, my other one's all marked up. But he talked about Thurgood Marshall and Jack Greenberg and the more gradualist approach, again, the Brown v Board of Education, which is so crucial, and then, you saw the resistance that took place right on the part of states to follow the law, and so forth. Then, you have got Dr. King coming along, which is basically, he respected Thurgood Marshall, but he was not a gradualist type of person. He was a guy-who-want-it-now kind of a person, and that is why he was doing the protest. Then, you get the next group, which is the question I want to ask is, did SNCC get into the Black Power issue because Stokely became so unbounded, and they trapped Brown-
CC (01:13:01):
No-no-no.
SM (01:13:03):
No?
CC (01:13:03):
No. I am going to give you a piece that I wrote. I think the Black Power discussion really came after the Atlantic City challenge.
SM (01:13:21):
And that is (19)64?
CC (01:13:24):
(19)64. I think up to 1964, the whole concept of SNCC and everybody else was that if you bring the problems out and you make it part of the conversation of the country, then people will in fact deal with it, and that, in fact, it was that your role was to make this situation known, to deal with, so that these guys who were in the centers of political, economic, cultural, and so forth, power, would do whatever they want, do the right things. One of the things leading up to the, and I will never forget this, one of the things leading up to the (19)64 summer project, I think this was (19)63, there were probably maybe 30, 35 bodies found in the Mississippi River. And it was raised with the people in New York Times, and it was about that much space. Nobody cared.
SM (01:14:59):
More than Emmett Till then?
CC (01:15:01):
Yeah. It was about 36 bodies found and it was not big news. The reason that Emmett Till was big news was because his mother decided to show the absolute brutality, and it shocked the Black community, and they reacted. And that is one of the profound things that affected me. And it affected a number of people who were in SNCC because they were just coming into their teenage years, therefore, they saw a lot of it. I think Emmett Till had a profound effect. But let us go back to this whole transition to Black power. Basically, what people realize at the Freedom Democratic Party is that even if you brought the issues and even if you played by all the rules and even if you were representing people who had been harmed all these years, the interests of the power structure did not care any of them, by the by. So, you see Ms. Hamer making a brilliant speech building sympathy, and Johnson cutting her off. You see that we have 13 votes to make a minority port, and then people, and Diggs and others betraying us and crumbling the thing. You see that in the church in Atlantic City, everybody, I am talking about Joe Raw, I am talking about Walter Luther, I am talking about Martin King, I am talking about Bayard Rustin, I am talking about everybody sided with the discussion of the Democrats must win, and therefore, the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party cannot win what they're rightfully there to do. And we are given some fig leave of two things in the balcony. Therefore, the message to the young people, we were saying, okay, you are told, all right, right and wrong if, it is wrong to discriminate, if it is wrong to do this, it is wrong to do that, and you play by the rules and you do the right things, this is supposed to happen. And we saw we were in a right/wrong game, and people were in a win/lose game. So, basically, we now saw what it meant in terms of win/lose. Therefore, people said it is no longer important to ask those who caused the problem to deal with the nature of the problem. We now have to look after ourselves. We now have to think through what we are doing. So, in Lowndes County, which was 80 percent Black, our model was this, we were not going to go and ask the sheriff to do a better job, we were not going to ask the probate judge and a tax collector and a tax assessor. Basically, the concept of the Lowndes County Freedom Organization was regime change. We were going to get rid of every officer who was there. Now, they want to argue, "Well, these people are not qualified. They are sharecroppers, and so forth." What we did was we created comic books that broke the law down, that people could see the law and understand their roles and responsibilities. We had a bunch of things that encourage people to vote. We had the Black Panther as a symbol because we understood that people, the literacy rate was not high. So, basically, we're using what the Indian, Mahatma Gandhi did and other people did, with people who do not have high literacy rates, they vote for a symbol. So, basically, we said, "Pull the lever for the Black Panther across straight party line vote, and then go home. Do not think about this, that or the other. Pull the lever for the Black Panther, and then go home." So, basically, what you had... And we wanted the Black Panther... And basically the Black Panther, the Democratic Party had a rooster as their symbol for the Right. We wanted a strong black symbol, so they got the, I think the panther is the mascot from Morris Brown, or one of those schools in Atlanta. Either Morris Brown or something like that. I think it is Morris Brown. And I think Ruth Howard brought the idea to us, and Jennifer drew it. So, it was a symbol, big, it was black, and we told people, "The whole thing is pull the lever for the Black Panther, and then go home," because basically, that is a strategy that is been tried with high [inaudible]. And our objective was regime change where our view was, if you are going to get rid of police brutality, then you need to be the sheriff. If you are going to get rid of unfair tax practices, then you need to be the sheriff. If you want the federal dollars that come into the county to work in your way, you need to run the county. So, that is basically the basis on which Stokely starts saying, "You cannot ask these people, after what we saw in Atlantic City, to keep doing for you what you need to start doing for yourself." Therefore, the Black people, which is what he would be dealing with in Lowndes County, needed to assume power. And during the Meredith March, that whole discussion was capitalized in the phrase Black Power. Now, I think that in (19)63, King said, that is why you have that money, "I have a dream that is deeply rooted in the American dream." What the younger generation was saying is, "We do not believe that that dream exists for us unless we, in fact, bring it about ourselves, and therefore we have to move for power." Now, you have got to also remember that at that point, and you said you were doing stuff on jazz and arts, and so forth, you have got to remember, and if you look into this whole discussion, at that point we were Negros, Black was a fighting word, we were considered ugly, our features were considered ugly, things that we were not beautiful were us. So, the whole discussion on Black power, at least on the cultural side, had a very profound effect in terms of how Black people saw themselves, because in this sense, in this country, because of what was going on, you had a situation where the closer you were to White, the better you were off, the blacker you were... So, the whole thing about if you are White, you are right, if you light, stick around, and if you're Black, get back. There was just all, just, negativity. So, my sense is that while, in terms of the White community, in terms of the White activist community, there was a sense where you are rejecting us, and on the White community in terms of the power structure, you are challenging us, you are not connected to us. In terms of the Black community, I think at least on the cultural side, it was very profound in terms of changing their sense of themselves. But also, I think, on the political side, it started bringing the Black communities to start thinking about how, within their communities, they take responsibility for their own existence. So, I think that people really do not understand, at least for me, how profound that Atlantic City thing was, because it basically said, even if you play by the rules, you cannot win. There is no such thing as right and wrong, there is only win and lose. It is a power discussion. It is a discussion of who will run and who will control. It is not about good and bad, and wrong, it is about win and lose. That was the message I got. And at 23 years old, it was very interesting to me.
SM (01:25:00):
I know there has been two biographies out on Fannie Lou Hamer, and that convention in (19)64 is mentioned in history books, on Johnson doing what he did, and those kinds of things. I do not think there has been an in-depth-
CC (01:25:15):
You are right.
SM (01:25:16):
... that there has not been an in-depth concentrated, just on that convention, on that movement, on those few days. Someone needs to... I am just bringing this up.
CC (01:25:29):
No-no, I agree with.
SM (01:25:30):
Someone needs to write a book that just needs to cover what happened there, what led up to it, what happened during the days, what followed, the impact it is had on history or why history has not covered it better. And Fannie Lou Hamer has really risen-
CC (01:25:54):
But not only that, not only that. In addition to the Black Power discussion, that convention was responsible for the shift of the Dixie crash of the Republican Party. Basically, there is a straight line from that convention to them shifting to the Republican Party.
SM (01:26:16):
Wow.
CC (01:26:18):
So, I think this is a very big event.
SM (01:26:23):
Fannie Lou Hamer did not live very long, did she? I know she was overweight and she had high blood pressure and-
CC (01:26:31):
She was on a sharecropper, you had been beaten. Other than that, yeah, I do not think she made it to 60.
SM (01:26:38):
Yeah. I think, getting that same timeframe, maybe it is how the media tries to portray things, but there has always been this perception of, well, when Thurgood Marshall did the Brown... the decision came through based on his efforts at the Supreme Court, Dr. King was there to make the comment as the younger person, "Well, the gradualist approach is fine. Congratulations for doing this, but we're doing non-violent protest..."
SM (01:27:03):
Congratulations for doing this, but we're doing nonviolent protest and all the other things. And the Montgomery Bus Boycott was happening and then-
CC (01:27:10):
Yeah, but King did not volunteer. He was drafted now.
SM (01:27:17):
I know. But then you got the picture and the picture I am talking about, the historic picture of Dr. King with his arms crossed and Stokely's talking to him. But basically, it is a picture, it is a scene from, I do not know, they were together on some stage and I think basically, he told Dr. King, your time has passed.
CC (01:27:39):
Well, you know-
SM (01:27:41):
It was referring to Bayard Rustin. He was referring to the big four. He was, your guy's time has passed.
CC (01:27:46):
It's interesting. We, in 1968 and before King, and it must have been two or three months before King died, was killed. Excuse me. He did not died. I mean, well he died as a result of being shot. We had a meeting at the Pismo Hotel here with SNCC people and they wanted to know if we were going to participate in the Poor People's March. And we told him no. Said, are you going to disrupt it? No. He said, are you going to disrupt it? Because the rumors were going to disrupt it. No. Are you going to participate? No. And because we had always been competing, we had always been all this stuff with King. We had a great deal of respect for King, even though we were always in competition with him. And everybody from SNCC was there. Everybody from SCLC was there. And we said to him, you cannot ask those who press you to deal with the nature of your oppression. And King got quiet and we were told after we let got the press, because I mean he understood that the whole thing that he tried, it was going to be a big, big difference. Because King was coming. Because remember after King gave that speech in (19)63 about which everybody celebrates. King gave some hell of a speeches after that about the Vietnam War.
SM (01:29:29):
Oh yeah.
CC (01:29:29):
About poverty. It is like he never gave those speeches. Mean he understood more than most. When you read King stuff, he was a brilliant, brilliant man. And one of the things I do respect, the older I get the more respectful. Philip Randolph, Bayard, Martin King, Thurgood Marshall, I think we brought a lot of energy and we brought a lot of less fear and so forth. And that is what we should bring. Fortunately we had people like Ella Baker who helped us bring perspective, Bayard, who helped bring perspective and so forth. But that is what younger generations do. They go through barriers that people did not think they could go through. And my sense is that as you point out, there is always the transition. We are always going to the next phase. And that is not a bad thing.
SM (01:30:37):
I remember we had Tommy Smith on our campus, and Tommy, when he gave the Black Power fist, Harry Edwards was the graduate student. He was at Cornell too in (19)69, but Tommy and John Carlos, both of them, the perception out there and he's had to repeat it over and over again and correct people. He said, I was never a Black Panther. I was never a Black Panther that was about Black Power. And he, again, he really got upset. And he was like, now remember, if you're writing an article in the paper about this, I was never a Black Panther. I never supported the Black Panthers. I am a Black Power person.
CC (01:31:19):
Well, they do not care that, they just did not want them to quote you. Basically those guys point is that you embarrassed the United States in that because in the world state, because you got to remember in (19)69 and so forth, there was still that Russian United States Cold War discussion. And therefore the United States trying to portray itself as the defender of democracy. And the Russians can show to the world, particularly Africa, that this is not serious. Their salute in Mexico in (19)68 had profound international implications for the United States vis-a-vis the Cold War discussion in Africa. And that is why it seared into this country. And one of the things that now, and I guess I will do some writing at some point pretty soon, but it does seem to me that all this stuff has context. So an event that functions here has layers all over the place. And I think that salute. And so therefore the people who are writing this stuff want to say, you embarrassed us and we will say the most despicable things that we think we can say about you. And that is what it is about.
SM (01:32:50):
And I think Ralph Boston, he did not do the fist, but he did something comparable. He was doing the long jump. And there were many female African American athletes who did the same thing and they concentrated on those two guys.
CC (01:33:06):
Yeah, because remember that was the elite. See 100 and 200. That is the elite. That is the glamour piece. So therefore when you have in the competition of supremacy, use supremacy, my guys are faster than yours, our guys are stronger than yours, all that kind of stuff, boxing was all that. To get those guys and the heavyweights, those the heavyweight boxers to get those guys saying, making their statement at that time was a profound issue. If these guys were 6,000 meat runners, nobody would have cared.
SM (01:33:54):
George Foreman though with the-
CC (01:33:56):
He put the American flag.
SM (01:33:56):
Flag-
CC (01:33:57):
I mean they loved it. They loved it.
SM (01:33:59):
Muhammad Ali was against the war and he paid a heavy price for it. It is interesting. I was up in California and I went to the statue. I had to drive to San Jose because I wanted to see it after Tommy came to our campus. He is a great guy.
CC (01:34:14):
Well yeah, he was.
SM (01:34:15):
Ah Mike, and he is well-educated. Smart as a-
CC (01:34:17):
And not only that, they said in terms of running, he really has some techniques because he broke... you also have to realize that in (19)68, I remember Jim Ryan, I do not know if you remember him.
SM (01:34:33):
Yes, I do.
CC (01:34:35):
Okay.
SM (01:34:35):
Long distance runner.
CC (01:34:35):
A long distance runner, 1500 meters. And I remember I was with my wife in Montreal and remember listening to the announcer say, blacks will win the short distance races because there is no strategy involved, it is just muscle. And where talks about strategy and so forth, whites were going to dominate that. And that was the year Kipchoge Keino came up. I mean-
SM (01:35:06):
Since then-
CC (01:35:07):
Since then, I mean it is Africa, East Africa and East Africa has been dominant. If it is not Somalia, it is Kenya, so forth. Well keep going with your questions cause-
SM (01:35:19):
Yeah, this is a kind of general question here. I did want to mention that something that maybe you did not know the third person, the guy who finished second, Carlos was third.
CC (01:35:31):
Right Carlos was third.
SM (01:35:32):
And he died just before Tommy came to the campus. And I believe Tommy went to his funeral. I forget what country he was from, but did you know that guy supported them a hundred percent?
CC (01:35:45):
Oh yeah.
SM (01:35:45):
And Tommy said, do you want me to raise my fist too? That is not known by a lot of people, but Tommy explains it in the book. They liked that guy, the guy that finished second who was totally in support of what the athletes were doing there. And now he said, no, we have to do this and thanks, but no, do not put your fist up.
CC (01:36:07):
Yeah. Right.
SM (01:36:09):
So when you look at the boomer generation as a whole, and of course boomers are those born between (19)46 and (19)64.
CC (01:36:17):
Yeah (19)65.
SM (01:36:17):
And including all ethnic backgrounds now, all backgrounds. What are your thoughts on that generation? How important were they in the Civil Rights Movement? Because some people are saying, well, they were only 18 or 19 years old when most of the Civil Rights Movement in its heyday was the (19)50s through to maybe (19)65. And so in the boomer generation, they're only coming into, they're going to college starting in (19)65. But they were involved in Freedom Summer, they were involved in a lot of things. But what are your thoughts on this generation now, 70 million strong, that is now reaching the age of 65 this year?
CC (01:36:58):
One of the things that really is interesting, I think the boomer generation helped to change America. And one of the things that is not generally talked about but seen by people like myself is that the boomer generation fed off of a lot of what we did. And what surprised me, if you look at the letter that Clinton wrote to his draft ward where he talked about the Civil Rights Movement, and he did not know what the hell he was ever running. People thought that they were trying to embarrass him by putting out that letter that he wrote. They were profoundly impacted in terms of what we were trying to do. I think, also, that they opened up for people who may not have been boomers, technically, some space, for example, one of the things that you got to remember right after, let us talk about the Black Power thing discussion. Right after that, you had, and coming out of the Civil Rights Movement and literally coming out of it, you had the Cesar Chavez piece, and you're talking about some of the SNCC people going out to help Cesar Chavez. You had Mario Savio who was in fact in Mississippi. You had the whole discussion of the role of women in the movement and in the country where Casey and Mary King and those guys started a whole lot of that conversation and amplifying on it. You had, after the Black Power discussion, you had gray power where a lot of senior citizens started-
SM (01:39:27):
They accused.
CC (01:39:29):
Yeah started talking about that. You had the discussion of gay power. You had a whole sense of, so basically while the boomers may not have been old enough to be in central figures in the Civil Rights Movement, they were the megaphones that had kept, or the mechanism, that kept what the discussion was in the Civil Rights Movement reverberating in a lot of places and a lot of things that kept the society. Because what could have happened was you had a situation where you had that and then things closed up. No-no. They not only did it, but expanded in terms of the view of even stuff like [inaudible] giving him space or Richard Pryor giving him space. So my sense is, one of the things that I said about the Black Power discussion, at least in the black community, the cultural boundaries were broken in terms of poetry, in terms of music, in terms of art, all that stuff were there. And I think in terms of the boomer generation, the boundaries were broken. The kind of industrial Father Knows Best, Ozzie and Harriet-
SM (01:41:12):
Leave it to Beaver.
CC (01:41:13):
Leave It to Beaver. All of that stuff started and the (19)60s and late (19)60s and not only that, the other thing that started, and you see it right now with this little stuff you have here. You got to remember in the (19)50s coming out of Civil Rights Movement, you had two or three magazines. You had, Look, you had Life, you had Time. Those were the big dominant things. We had big dominant things. And then people started beginning to diversify. I think what the Boomer generation brought was a sense of diversity in terms of interest. You did not have to fit into a mold in order to be accepted. You did not have to look like this and act like this and be this. Because what happened, it was order in the (19)50s. What you had in the (19)60s was the breaking down of the disorder, particularly in the black community. But then that the breaking down of that order in terms of the hierarchical stuff. So now Look and Life does not exist anymore. People have a thousand magazines. I think what the boomer generation brought to this situation was diversity and the ability for America to be able to have to accept Mao's A Thousand Flowers so that black people could be this, that or the other. They did not have to be in this box. People who were gay did not have to be in that box. Women did not have to be in their place. People who are geeks are now accepted. That is another group that quote been viewed as such and such. So I am saying that I think probably the hallmark of the boomer generation and what is their ability to accept diversity. Now the other thing is that they have things that allow them to facilitate. We were talking about Facebook, we were talking about... Things are not always in the (19)50s when we were coming along in the early (19)60s, it was always from the top down. Now a lot of it comes from the bottom up because people with blogs, people with this, that and the other can communicate to each other that they do not have to watch ABC, CBS TV in order to get the impressions. There are a lot of people who were making other pressures outside of the hierarchy. So the boomer generation disintegrated the hierarchical structure that existed, that was brought to us by guess by the industrial age.
SM (01:44:33):
You hit it right on the target there. It is almost as if when we discussed the culture wars that we have seen since the (19)80s, (19)90s or whatever, and particularly today, it is trying to change the culture, possibly trying to get it back to the way it was. And actually I am really studying what is going on in England right now. And I think the undercurrent in England, there is a bunch of hooligans and taking advantage of things and copycats, yes. But I think this is a deep-seated problem. This has to do with as Dr. King would always say, we got to deal with the economy because it's not always, it is race, but it is also about your economic status. And I think what is happening in London today and what is happening all over England is the fact that the challenge to multiculturalism, and when I see people who start pointing fingers at the reason why we have problems is because of them. It is because it is a reaction. It is very reactionary and it is scary to me. And that is what the culture wars are.
CC (01:45:49):
Well I think also with the guy in Norway, his view was we are going to kill anybody who supports this kind of stuff. So that is my sense. But I think that the next phase, I think big phase we have to fight is the economic discussion. And that is going to be, a lot of it now centers on education. I think that is the next big Civil Rights fight. Where I think we have finished, my view is that we are finished with the political, the vote and so forth. We are going to have counteractions in terms of the Republicans trying to narrow the vote, trying to talk about frauds and cheating and stuff. But with Obama, there is a sense that that last barrier as President is broken. Because when I was coming up, the view of a black man being president was probably one of the for taken absurdities. Now, I think the whole question of who is able to participate in the economy, which is the issue that you talked about in England and other places, who is going to be able to participate in the economy? Do you have such a hierarchical piece where 1 percent of the highest income people all have as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent? How do you now begin to, given the diversity I just talked about and intellectual property becoming the raw materials of driving the economic engine, how do you now and particularly the sciences, how do you now deal with new literacies? How do you begin to deal with math and science? How do you now begin to think through the use of computer literacy? How do you now begin to, this is the new struggle. How do you now, the economic struggle, which has always been the struggle. Not all this other stuff is race and gender and so forth, the real core issue. Because African-Americans not here in the United States, not because white people did not like them, they were economic implements. They were in agriculture and agrarian economy. They were economic units needed for labor and therefore that is why they're here. And the issues that we have, have not reached beyond that. We have not dealt with the economic issues. And we are now given all these other layers, the legal layer, the segregation layer, the political layer. Now we now have to focus on the economic issues.
SM (01:49:06):
And it is interesting because this is a time when labor unions are going down.
CC (01:49:10):
Oh, they are going down.
SM (01:49:12):
And I can remember being in California before I moved back east and we were told where I worked, if you were ever to talk to anybody, a union, we would fire you. We met as a group over in Daley City just to hear someone talk to this whole group of people. And we did not know we were being spied on.
CC (01:49:39):
But here is the thing, labor unions are going down for two kind of reasons. Two or three reasons. But you got to remember, for example, the labor unions come out of the industrial kinds of things or government. Now Google basically what they have, you go out there and see their campus and all that. They get these kids and these young people and they create a different environment. Facebook, all this stuff where the new industries are. It is a whole different reality. So the same diversity that destroyed the look and the life and so forth is the same diversity that also mitigated the influence of the unions. Right now you and I do consulting. Right now. All I need is a computer and a cell phone and I have a laptop or I right now it is getting down to where all you need is a iPad and you can be anywhere and be your office. It is a whole different work environment. And so unions are going to have a tough time if they do not think through different models of what's going to go on.
SM (01:51:10):
When we are getting down there. We are going on to my next tape here in a second here. But when you look at the presidents, during the time that boomers have been alive, we are talking about Truman through Obama or basically in your lifetime, who are the presidents that, I think the word I want to use is genuine, who generally they may have passed legislation that helped people of color and African Americans. But in your studies, in your life experiences, you worked for President Clinton, but you have seen all these presidents in your life. Who are the genuine ones and who were the fakes?
CC (01:51:58):
In terms of the issues like-
SM (01:51:59):
In terms of caring about people who are having a harder time in this society?
CC (01:52:07):
Well, I think it is interesting. I think probably if you talk to black businessmen and people in that group of people, the president that they think was most helpful to them is Richard Nixon. Because remember Nixon was the one, remember Nixon came in after the riots, the rebellions and Nixon's statement was, what we are going to do is make all these guys entrepreneurs. And he opened up at Commerce through secretary Stands, Sue secretary Stands a minority business development agent was called OBME, Office of Business Minority Enterprise or something like that. Basically Nixon truly believed that the path to salvation was to create businesses that would do that. So he believed in that. I think the other person I think who was familiar and on the voting rights piece and so forth, I would say Johnson was on the voting rights piece. I think he was particularly helpful and he knew the passing of voter rights legislation and so forth. He knew that it would have a huge impact on the Democratic Party in terms of what would happen to it, particularly the Dixiecrats. So he put skin in the game and at the end of the day, while I disagree with him on the war and so forth, I think that on this issue mean he was very important, given as much as presidents can be important. I think the other one who had a profound impact I think was Clinton. And I think Clinton's contribution was his point was, I am going to have a cabinet that looks like America. And so therefore Clinton had somebody in a lot of positions of authority and power that they were not, including Department of Agriculture. He had Espy there, Commerce, he obviously Ron Brown. So it was no longer if you had a black, you put them at HUD. It was no longer the Weaver Pat Harris discussion. Almost any position in the thing you can have, there have only two positions I guess blacks have not really been cabinet secretaries, that is Treasury and Defense. But if somebody nominates a black person for a position, George Bush did for Secretary of State. It's no longer a big issue. So I think the three presidents that probably on the issue that, Nixon on business, Johnson on voting rights, and Clinton, on having a sense that this country needs to diversify in terms of its cabinet. One of the things that when I was at Commerce with Ron Brown, we went to a meeting, Brown called a meeting of the senior staff and they were all white males. So Ron walked in there and said, I do-
CC (01:56:03):
Ron walked in there and said, "I do not ever want to sit in a meeting that looks like this again." Let me tell you, bells went off. I mean they would ... But the other thing that ... And Ron was good, because I mean, he was very aggressive in terms of promoting American businesses abroad. I mean, the Republicans loved him, because he would be able to open up to Africa, to China, to wherever he went. He was that good in that sense. And he was a fighter in the sense that when Gingrich and them wanted to downsize the commerce, housing, and get rid of education, he fought them tooth and nail. Cisneros gave in, but Ron fought them tooth and nail. And all these guys who were SESs, the top of the food chain who had no respect for Black people before Ron came in, grew to love Ron because he saved their jobs.
SM (01:57:16):
Wow.
CC (01:57:17):
So my sense is, I think that the three presidents, I would say Lyndon Johnson, Nixon, and Clinton, those were the three.
SM (01:57:31):
You talked about the (19)64 convention, but how about the (19)68 convention? Because the one in Chicago that was on TV-
CC (01:57:39):
Oh, the Vietnam allotment.
SM (01:57:40):
Yeah, and the year 1968, the loss of-
CC (01:57:44):
Was quite a year. But I think that year spoke a lot to diversifying. I mean, you began to see the coming apart. I mean, when I listened to Pat Buchanan, I do not know if you ever see him on Morning Joe and stuff like that.
SM (01:58:04):
No.
CC (01:58:05):
I mean, they want to go back to the (19)50s. I mean, basically (19)68 was the continuation of creating diversity, creating a sense of, we all need ... Now, I mean, because we do not need to be a Vietnam. We do not want to be drafted to fight wars that we do not want to fight. Ultimately now what they have done is gotten rid of the draft and mechanized now with drones, and now the people who are poor are fighting. So, I mean, I am not sure the outcomes of (19)68 what everybody wanted it, so they ended the draft. But now people are now forced who are poor. They got no place else to do. But God, when you look at all those deaths, notices, they're either from towns, not in the big cities, and they're all poor people. They are all poor people. And now you also got a lot more mercenaries. I mean, that is, I think what-
SM (01:59:13):
I only got about four more questions here.
CC (01:59:17):
Okay, because I got 10 more minutes.
SM (01:59:18):
Okay. I am trying to remember. It was the (19)68 convention. Oh, my God, I am forgetting what I was going to ask. Had to do with the ... Oh, the psyche. The boomer generation was made up of 70 million people.
CC (01:59:34):
Right.
SM (01:59:37):
And that year was unbelievable in so many ways. It was so tragic. And what happens is when you look at the (19)60s and the (19)70s and the boomer generation, they talk about that really 95 percent were really uninvolved in anything and they were going on with their daily lives and everything.
CC (01:59:53):
That is true.
SM (01:59:56):
Only 5 percent were really involved in any kind of an activism of any kind, including conservatives too, those conservatives. But I have always felt deep down inside that that year, subconsciously along with what happened in (19)63, subconsciously left a permanent mark on all. For the generation to see two major figures assassinated, to see ... The war in Vietnam was, we were supposed to be in control, and then Tet happened. We saw the conventions with politicians pointing and swearing at each other. And then there is so many worries in the city. It is just a terrible time.
CC (02:00:42):
No, I agree with you. See, I think it is, I mean, I would not say "a terrible year." I'd say clearly a year of transition.
SM (02:00:49):
Can you hold- You were [inaudible]
CC (02:01:00):
I think those people who say that basic 5 percent of activists, probably correct, because I think change is never brought about, it is never a mass movement. I think, however, however, just like I was saying at Howard and just like I was saying at varied people, that the people who were not activists but are more passive, tend to look at what's going on and decide who they're going to support in terms of who they will be supportive of. And I think that for a lot of people in America, they were comfortable with the changes, but were made to be afraid of them. I mean, part of the reason that you have ... And disorder is part of the reason you had Nixon. But it does seem to me that ... I think that for a lot of the boomers and for the younger ones, this was where things were going. They were being empowered. For a lot of those who were older at the time, the country was going to hell in a hand basket, and they did not know what to do. Things were moving too fast. How could this happen? So I mean, my sense is that, yeah, I mean, (19)68 was a very profound year. But I think that while it was a profound year, probably only 5 percent of the people really made it a profound year.
SM (02:02:49):
In your opinion, when did the (19)60s begin and end, and what was a watershed moment?
CC (02:02:57):
For me, I mean, I think watershed moment, there's several watershed moments in the (19)60s. The Freedom Rides and the sit-ins were watershed moments. The Cuban Missile Crisis, watershed moment. We became aware of the threat of nuclear warfare in a way that we did not really ... I mean for me, I was in school and I was ... (19)63, a watershed moment. As I said earlier, (19)64, the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, a watershed moment. For me also, (19)67 was a watershed moment, I mean just personally, because (19)67, I went to what was considered a war crimes tribunal convened by Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre.
SM (02:03:58):
Wow.
CC (02:03:58):
I participated in that and understood what was going on. Obviously, as we said, (19)68 was another watershed. So there were several. I mean, the Freedom Rides and the sit-ins began to break down the old order, or challenge the old order that was broken down in (19)54. (19)62, everybody was scared shitless because of thermonuclear warfare. (19)63, how could this happen in America? I think those were the times that made a difference.
SM (02:04:47):
Was Kent State in there too?
CC (02:04:52):
I would say Kent State. I would say Jackson. I would say Jackson State, all that stuff that happened on the campus. I mean, all of it was very ... I mean, the (19)60s were very intense because, I mean, a new order was being established, and as that new order was established, you had some disorder.
SM (02:05:20):
Just a little question, and that is not about Black power, but about the Black Panthers. Some people say when we talk about violence, there was a weather underground. The anti-war movement was not violent because they were very frustrated. Some people say that the Black Panthers, even though they had the food program, that they were violent in their-
CC (02:05:41):
Right. I mean, their argument is that they were self-defense. You know, first of all, I do not know much about the Black Panthers. My sense is they were ... I think it is SNCC. I mean, I think part of the Panthers that felt the need to relate to the community that they were in and move with them to make change was probably the part that I am most sympathetic to. I think the part that felt the need to show machismo and so forth and audacity and the name-calling and so forth, while I think it was all right, I mean, I guess for young people to feel that that was doing something, the older I get, my sense is that it was not a big change. I mean, my sense is, look, the older I get, the more I understand is, that revolution really is the people who you involve in the discussion. It is not guns. I mean, guns will become a reaction, but at the end of the day, basically when you look at the history of revolution, especially our armed violence and so forth, after one side wins or the other, it is always a then what? And generally when one side wins an armed struggle, it is a continuation of the same, because the people who were excluded before are still excluded now. So my sense is that the big fight is, how do you include those who are excluded, and how you bring them into the discussion and conversation where they can find their own voice? I mean, I think that is long term. That is very tough. And so I mean, I think to the terms of question of the Panthers, to the extent that they involved themselves in the urban communities, that is probably a good thing. But I think the kind of leading with your frustration led to a certain kind of violence, and that violence was felt mostly in the Black community with the killing of each other and all that kind of retribution and foolishness. I mean-
SM (02:08:42):
I know in California they surrounded the capital in Sacramento.
CC (02:08:46):
Yeah, I saw that, but at the end of the day, that was nice and a good picture. But probably, at the end of the day, they probably shot more of their own people than they did other than that.
SM (02:08:58):
And then of course, something that was not related to it was the guns at Cornell University in (19)69. The organizer was Harry Edwards, and-
CC (02:09:11):
Yeah, I mean, but it is all theater. I mean, to me, that is all theater. It's nice. I mean, the same way I view Cornel West. He is all theater.
SM (02:09:18):
Two more questions, and this is a very important one because I have asked it to everybody. This was a question that we asked Senator Edmund Muskie in 1995 when we took a group of students to Washington. And they came up with a question because they had seen videos of the 1968 year as a whole. And the question was this, "Due to the divisions that were taking place in the 1960s and the early (19)70s between Black and white, male and female, gay and straight, those who were for the war, or those who were against the war, or for the troops, against the troops, whether ... Will the boomer generation of 70 million go to its grave, like the Civil War generation, not truly healed?" And is healing even an issue here? The Vietnam Memorial was built obviously to try to heal some of the veterans and their families. It was a non-political statement. It was geared toward the vets. But even Jan Scruggs in his book, To Heal A Nation, says that he hopes it goes beyond the vets, that it plays a little part in healing the nation. Do you think it's possible to heal from these divisions?
CC (02:10:27):
Oh, yeah. I mean, oh, yeah. My sense is this. I mean, I am going to go back to what I said earlier. The Civil War, you had two sides. I mean, you had the industrial north conquering the agrarian south and replacing one economic system with the other, and people were locked in, and the whole bunch of stuff that happened where the north brought the Black community in to solidify their power. I mean, so they never got over it. I mean, I am not sure they are over it yet. But I think in terms of the generation, the boomer generation, if you can isolate them out and the people who were activists and so forth, I do not have a sense that ... I mean, I think, as I said earlier, that what the boomer generation is going to be noted for is that it created space for many. And so therefore, the creating of space for Blacks, [inaudible] for gays, women, this, that, the other, I mean, people have this space. I mean, it was not necessarily ... The boomer generation did not so much create. There was a lot of conflict, but it was not a zero-sum game, which the Civil War was. I win, you lose. The boomer generation, I think, created a possibility where you had multiple winners, and I think that is ... I mean, I may hear, some would say, "Well, people thought before Black power was the good part of the civil rights movement and after that was the bad part." Or, women and men, I do not see them going after each other. I mean, I do not see gays and straights. I mean, I do not see ... I think, well, let us take for the gay community. I mean, you now have in several places. You are not going to have it in Alabama anytime soon, or some places there. But at least Perry, even in his ignorance, had to say, "Well, if the people in New York want it, let them have it." And my sense is that space is being created. I mean, even those who say, "Well, there's no place in the United States for this kind of activity," they're not the dominant discussion. People view as, "Hey, if the people in the state want to ..." I mean, and so forth. Or while he had this whole thing about Obama, whether he is legitimate, whether he was born in the United States, now he's being treated like every other president. Why are not you saving me, you dumb son of a bitch? I am just saying to you that, I mean, I do not think that the boomer generation and the actions that were going on and that created a zero-sum game. They created more space for more people, and therefore the diversity allowed various people in various ways to coexist. I mean, I do not have that view.
SM (02:14:32):
My last question deals a little bit about legacy. If you could put it in just a nutshell here, how did your experiences at Howard, your experiences with SNCC, even your relationship with Mr. Rustin and CORE, the experience of being one of the main young leaders of the March on Washington in 1963, how have these played a part in your life post-(19)60s and (19)70s? Because I know that you have been involved in many leadership roles. You still are.
CC (02:15:15):
Right.
SM (02:15:15):
I have read your background and one thing that always sticks out is that you seem to be a person that always wants to help people who really need help.
CC (02:15:29):
Well, if I-
SM (02:15:30):
You stand out there.
CC (02:15:31):
Yeah. Well, my sense is this. Here is my view. I think my worldview has been defined by the things that you talked about, and it was interesting. I was active for a long time and then I was not active, and now I am beginning to think about these issues again. And it seems to me that my view at 22, 23 is still my view today, my worldview today. I am surprised at ... I mean, I have refined it in terms of historical context, influence of more information. But my sense is that, you try to work with the people who have problems and get them to have their own voice about what is to be done. I am now more convinced ... Probably the big change, I mean, I am more convinced that probably if you want revolution, nonviolence is important in that in the sense that it is not important ... I mean, you do not make change by shooting the people who are in power. You make change by making sure that those who are powerless are empowered. I mean, I think that is the big thing in my mind. I also think that time and energy is more important than money. I also think that it is also important to be an actor and not a reactor. I think that change and diversity are important, and even if that the world is much better being diverse than it is being one color, or being Black and white in the sense that ... So, I mean, those are the things that ... I also think that war has no use, because basically it's fought for the interest of the economically powerful, and poor people are the ones who fight the wars, die, and get nothing from it. Those are the things that ... I have not changed my views on any of that.
SM (02:18:13):
Those are prophetic. You have made some very prophetic things, that you need to put these into a book.
CC (02:18:24):
Thank you.
SM (02:18:26):
Because I think that good young scholars and students and...
CC (02:18:29):
Yeah. No, I am going to start writing. I mean, people have said I need to start writing and I need to start doing that. I mean, I am going to probably just do ... I will get there. I will get there.
SM (02:18:48):
I guess the last thing is, I think you have already said it, what do you think your lasting legacy is when people ... You are going to live another 50 years, right?
CC (02:18:58):
Right, whatever.
SM (02:18:59):
Well, what will people say when they think of Courtland? And secondly, the legacy of the civil rights movement and the legacy of the boomer generation, because they are in [inaudible]
CC (02:19:11):
I think the legacy of the civil rights movement is that it broke down barriers that were assumed in the United States. That is going to be the importance of that, the racial barriers. I think the second part of that is that it empowered the boomer generation in terms of music, in terms of lifestyle, in terms of various kinds of things. I mean, it was the inspiration for the boomer generation. I think for the boomer generation, as I said earlier, it created space and diversity for Americans to live in, and they did not have to be in Black and white. They could be in whatever colors they wanted to be. I do not know if you saw that movie where it was Black and white, and I mean, the diversity gave the sense of life and explored it. I mean, and I think that it also brought technologies into the conversation that helped give power to more and more people. I am talking about communications or whatever. I mean, just both with the computer and the cell phone. They made a huge difference. And in terms of, I mean, I do not disagree with what King said the night before he was killed, "Tell them I tried to help somebody." I mean, do not tell them this, that, because material things at the end of the day, I mean, as you know, I am not a person who believes in poverty. I would let you know that right away. But I do not believe that it is what it's about. I believe that working to help people and to broaden the base of democracy is probably the important thing.
SM (02:21:33):
Is there any final comments you want to state, or-
CC (02:21:35):
No-no, I am good.
SM (02:21:37):
Any questions you thought I was going to ask? Or-
CC (02:21:40):
No-no. I got to get out of here.
SM (02:21:41):
I got to take three or four more pictures of you.
CC (02:21:43):
Okay. Okay.
SM (02:21:44):
I guess we will do it this way.
CC (02:21:45):
Okay.
SM (02:21:47):
I guess with your glasses off.
CC (02:21:50):
Okay. All righty.
SM (02:21:52):
Okay. Reset one.
CC (02:21:53):
Mm-hmm.
SM (02:21:57):
Reset two. And that picture in the background looks great. There we go. Ready, set, three. And last but not least, I will do one with grip here. Ready, set, four. That is it.
CC (02:22:16):
Okay, good.
SM (02:22:17):
Good.
CC (02:22:18):
All right. You got a cab up here?
SM (02:22:20):
No, I drove my car.
CC (02:22:21):
Oh, you drove here.
SM (02:22:22):
Yeah.
CC (02:22:22):
I did not see a car.
SM (02:22:23):
Yeah. I will just take this in the next room.
CC (02:22:29):
Okay.
SM (02:22:29):
Thank you very much for spending the time with me.
CC (02:22:33):
No problem. I have a 6:30 appointment downtown.
SM (02:22:35):
Oh, whoa.
CC (02:22:38):
Yeah, I told them that.
SM (02:22:38):
Let me get my stuff out of here. 30.
(End of Interview)
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Courtland Cox
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Cox, Courtland, 1941- ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Political activists--United States; Cox, Courtland, 1941--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Courtland Cox spent his childhood between Trinidad and New York City. He went to Howard University and eventually became a civil rights activist. He joined a group called the Non-violent Action Group (NAG) to fight against white supremacy and segregation and then became a member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). Throughout his years as an activist, Cox helped organized groups in order to prevent segregation from occurring in the world.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2011-08-11
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.66a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.66b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
142:55
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/c821b9f1eb472b8cc3de22f0c389fceb.jpg
d6a55fd77b87963a1f1c9246afc96644
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/74bd2d3e7d136bd3d2d3b682feb60d89.mp3
6031a794024318f0faa053ae62ba756e
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Audio interviews
Title
A name given to the resource
McKiernan Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br />
<h3>The McKiernan 22</h3>
<div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li>
<li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li>
</ul>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Stephen McKiernan
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Language
A language of the resource
English
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright.
Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription
This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field.
This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part.
Date of Interview
ND
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Lawrence Davidson, 1945-
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span>Dr. Larry Davidson is a retired History professor at West Chester University. He is the author of </span><em>Islamic Fundamentalism</em><span> and </span><em>Cultural Genocide</em><span>, and is an expert on the Middle East. As a student, Davidson was an SDS (Student for A Democratic Society) leader at Georgetown University who made the front page of the </span><em>Washington Post</em><span> along with other students protesting the war in Vietnam. Dr. Davidson received his Ph.D. in Modern European Intellectual History from the University of Alberta in Edmonton.</span>
Digital Publisher
Binghamton University Libraries
Digital Format
audio/mp4
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
2 Microcassettes
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; Vietnam War; War protests; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Daniel Ellsberg; John Dean; John Mitchell; Women's Rights Movement."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Baby boom generation; Vietnam War; War protests; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Daniel Ellsberg; John Dean; John Mitchell; Women's Rights Movement.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
96:06
Subject LCSH
College teachers; West Chester University of Pennsylvania; Political activists--United States; Davidson, Lawrence, 1945--Interviews
Accessibility
Copy/Paste below:
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>.
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Larry Davidson
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: Not dated
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:04):
One, two, three, four, five, six.
LD (00:00:08):
... button is?
SM (00:00:08):
Yes, there is. Pause is right here.
LD (00:00:10):
Oh, okay. All right. You want to tap?
SM (00:00:15):
Here you go. You can just kind of sit back and relax.
LD (00:00:18):
It is running now, right?
SM (00:00:19):
Yeah.
LD (00:00:20):
Okay.
SM (00:00:20):
[Inaudible] toward you and everything. Thank you very much for participating in the interview process here.
LD (00:00:27):
My pleasure.
SM (00:00:29):
Second time. First question I would like to ask is a general question. In the news recently, in fact over many years, there has been a lot of criticism of the boomer generation in terms of blaming this group of Americans where a lot of the problems in American society, we have seen it many times from Republicans, we have seen it sometimes from Democrats. We have seen it in a lot of recent books where the boomers are being criticized for the breakup of the American family, the increase in the drug culture, basically any problems facing American society goes back to those times in the (19)60s and early (19)70s. Could you comment on that from your perspective?
LD (00:01:12):
I always thought it was Islamic fundamentalists that were the new enemy of humankind, but now you tell me it is my generation. I imagine by "boomers" you mean those that were born at-
SM (00:01:29):
Between 1946 and 64. Which were 60 million people.
LD (00:01:34):
Oh, okay. Actually, I was born in 1945. That means I am not really one of those. I am a...
SM (00:01:38):
Dude.
LD (00:01:39):
All right. Well, I will not pretend. It is an obviously fallacious position. I cannot see how anyone can blame anyone generation for the troubles of the contemporary world. I mean, generations tend to meld into each other. And clearly, in terms of the generation you are referring to, there are people of all stripes and all colors and all ideologies across the American scene. No one group controlled the thoughts and actions of that entire generation, least of all the radicals of the "radicals" of the (19)60s. And I have a feeling that perhaps those are the ones that these critics want to pin all these problems on, if I am not mistaken. And the radicals, I can tell you because I was one of them, and one of them actually still, were just a very small minority within that generation, albeit a very vocal minority, and at least in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, particularly well-organized group. But still, in all, very, very small minority of that generational population. And if you can put a half a million people on the Mall in Washington DC it looks impressive on television. And in fact, it has some effect if you can do it over and over again on the politics of the time, but compared with the overall number of folks in the generation, half a million people is not a lot. And most of the people in the "radical movement" were really quite moderate in their overall politics. It was only a minority within a minority that you could really describe as consistently left-wing. So one has to look for other motives in terms of the critics. Why would they want to point fingers at this particular small group? They're an easy target. They were vocal. They stood out. They opposed a war that opened them up in the long term and at the time to charges of not being patriotic and that sort of thing. They identified themselves with, at the time, unpopular positions, so they were an easy target. And of course, to just point fingers at them means that you do not have to go into any broader analysis, systems-based analysis of the power structure and how it was operating and that sort of thing. So I do not take it really seriously. Obviously, these people write books and get published, but I do not take it really seriously. I do not think it's very near to the truth at all.
SM (00:05:06):
So when you hear the criticisms of looking back 30 years and blaming the drug problems of today's young people on the boomers of that era and their lifestyles, and the fact that the divorce rate did not happen in the (19)50s, but in the (19)60s, (19)70s and (19)80s, that whole concept of, "You do your thing, I will do my thing; if by chance we come together, it will be beautiful," but that kind of mentality?
LD (00:05:41):
I do not think that the things that you describe really characterize the majority of people of that generation. Those were the sort of quasi-anarchist feelings of a distinct vocal and picturesque minority within that generation. I mean, Abby Hoffman is not a representative member of the boomer generation. He was very picturesque and he was a great guy, from my point of view, but hardly can he be represented as typical. Just so the kind of free love depicted in, say, Arlo Guthrie's movie Alice's Restaurant. That is not typical of the boomer generation. You want to know what is typical of the boomer generation? Our people are kind of Kennedy liberals, probably more so than Nixon conservatives, but I am not sure how much nor more so. When I was in the SDS there were consistently more folks who stood against us than stood for us. So, what is the real boomer generation? Or are these people, when you throw out those kinds of clichés that you did, which are out there in the press, are those really typical of that generation or are they just the position of a colorful, picturesque, vocal minority that one can easily point fingers to?
SM (00:07:25):
Larry, I want to just that one more time. That was really good- Larry, I want to ask you a personal question because you said you were involved in Students for Democratic Society when you were at Georgetown. At what point, why did you join Students for Democratic Society, and what was it when you were a young person at Georgetown University that said, "I have got to belong to this group and be involved, and possibly protest against what was happening in America?"
LD (00:07:50):
It began before I got to Georgetown. I got to Georgetown, I think in (19)68, maybe the September of (19)68. And I had come from Rutgers University, and there was no SDS at Rutgers at the time, at least not on the campus I was at. But I had always been sympathetic to the civil rights movement, and I always knew that I stood against the Vietnam War. And we had a discussion, kind of informal discussion, book reading group, at Rutgers among people who were avant garde. And I guess it was while living and studying among that group of avant garde people at Rutgers that I became really left leaning. Why I was that way? I do not know. My father was a full colonel in the Air Force and I never got along with him. You can delve into some kind of Freudian interpretation of these things. My mother was always a very conscientious, principled passivist, very liberal in her views. I think I have always been just anti-authoritarian. I have always gone for the underdog. So anyway, when I got to Georgetown, there were a bunch of people who wanted to protest not only the war, but wanted to also do analysis and actions around other issues like open enrollment issues or increasing minority participation at Georgetown, getting more blacks and Latinos into the student body and various other civil rights-oriented issues. It was a broad coalition of folks. And at one point, someone said to me, "Maybe we ought to start an SDS chapter if we are really going to be serious about this." And I said, "Sounds good. We should do that. We should organize, at least a leadership cadre, to push this agenda, this sort of liberal... Not even liberal, it is more than liberal. It is sort of a social progressive agenda." And so, it seemed a logical step, so we did it. Subsequently, of course, the House on American Activities Committee chose the Georgetown SDS as a model in its investigation of the organization. And the Georgetown's administration cooperated completely with HUAC in that process. And we all got our ID's pictures turned over to the committee and stuff like that.
SM (00:11:09):
If you look at the boomers now, that group from (19)46 to (19)64, there is obviously even differences within the generation, perception that I have seen that those who were born in that (19)46 to late (19)50s period are different than those born in the latter part, which are now only in their mid-thirties. But the question I am trying to get at here is, in your opinion, when you look at the boomer generation as a whole, which is 60 plus million, and here they are reaching 50 now, knowing that still that there are probably some people that identify themselves as boomers over in their early (19)50s and maybe even their mid (19)50s. Could you say what the positive things that you feel the boomers have done on American society, and secondly, the negatives? But obviously I feel that you're with the boomers and the fact is you have seen what has happened and what they have done in America over this last 30 years, pluses and minus. What are the pluses and the minuses on the boomer generation in your eyes?
LD (00:12:08):
I can only respond to that based on my own instincts and my own political orientation. Obviously, I think the civil rights movement is a seminal achievement. There is civil rights movement to the extent that it managed to change people's attitudes and legislate greater equality and openness, essentially was an eminently American democratic step. So it was a way of approaching the ideal, approaching the theory and the ideal inherent in the Constitution. In practice, [inaudible] there are not too many times in American history where you get a giant step in bringing theory in its best sense into practice. I guess reconstruction after the Civil War was another time. But clearly, I think the Civil Rights Movement is that sort of seminal step, and it should be recognized as a great achievement in the course of American history. So, that is a very positive thing. The prevention of carrying the war in Vietnam to an ideological destructive conclusion is a sort of negative yet positive achievement, as far as I am concerned. The war itself was abominable and a betrayal of American principles. We were not in there to promote democracy or representative government. That is all bullshit. We were in fact supporting a corrupt regime. The only difference between the DM regime, say, and the communists were that DM had an allegedly pro-capitalist orientation while the others did not. But American foreign policy has a tendency, despite all the rhetoric, to find dictators, military dictators or civilian dictators, that they latch onto. Latin America, Central America's full of examples like that. And we used to rationalize that in terms of the Cold War as we seem to have rationalized the Vietnam War in terms of the Cold War, but I do not know. I think we would do it anyway. In any case, it was a betrayal of American ideals and I think that to the extent that my generation stopped criminals like Lyndon Johnson and McNamara and these other folks, who I consider to be just plain criminals, from killing even more of Vietnamese and Americans than they managed to do in a bad, in terms of the ideals, anti-American cause. I consider that to be an achievement that each generation has to, at least those who stick to their principles in each generation, have to stand up against these kinds of anti-human, and in the idealistic sense, anti-American acts and behaviors, whether they are segregationist manifestations domestically, or in terms of recent history this sort of inherently evil attack on subsidization of the poor when there is really no economic alternatives for these people, in other words the welfare bill, you have to stand up for that. You have to stand up for your principles and act against that, stand up against that kind of behavior, or you just sell yourself to the devil that way.
SM (00:16:41):
Those are the pluses, but do you see any negatives in your-
LD (00:16:45):
Well, again, I would point out that those who did all those pluses were a minority within that generation, that the majority within the generation as majorities always do, went along with the government, went along with the war, went along with segregation. That is why systems can continue as they are within democratic societies, because the majority goes along. The majority of folks are just sheep, unfortunately, so what characterizes... And I mean, the majority of these sheep seems to be somehow necessary to a stable society. I do not want to be too hard on these folks, but what characterizes the boomer generation, perhaps, is that it had a more vocal and more active humanistic minority than other generations before or after it in recent times. And that is why it stands out, and that is why it draws so much flack. So, in terms of the negative, the negative part is that the humanistic minority had to fight so hard just to sway the passive, unthinking majority. I mean, I-
SM (00:18:25):
[inaudible 00:18:28].
LD (00:18:30):
Yeah, we are still going.
SM (00:18:33):
Okay, point blank, respond to this question. And I have asked this to all... This year done 27th interview, many, and the answers to this question have been as different... Whether you loved Lyndon Johnson or you hated him. Was the student protest movement on the college campuses the main reason that the Vietnam War ended?
LD (00:18:59):
No, I do not think it was the main reason. I think it was obviously contributive to it, and perhaps like the straw that broke the camel's back kind of thing. I think the main reason that the war ended was that you had a lot of body bags coming back. The anti-war protestors were saying over and over again that this war not only was immoral and a violation of the best principles or ideals that America stood for, but that it was unwinnable, that unless you were willing to use nuclear weapons, ya ain't going to win this thing. And the reason you were not going to win it was because the position that America took was completely and totally unpopular within Vietnam. So, unless you were willing to destroy that country, and we were well on our way to doing that: free fire zones, napalm, defoliation, concentration camps for the Vet, for increasing numbers of the population. I mean, we were well on our way to destroying that country. Unless you were willing to do that and take the casualties that would be necessary to accomplish that, you were not going to win it. And the American people could not see where ultimately South Vietnam was worth, for them, the casualty rates. I knew a fellow who was a Navy medic with the Marines, and he was at... Was it Khe Sanh? Not Khe Sanh. Or Da Nang, or one of those places during the Tet Offensive and the NVA came into the city, and his comment was that the Marines and the other military units in the area could never, ever have stood the assault and won against the Vietnamese at this site during the Tet Offensive for the simple reason that the Vietnamese were willing to take 10 casualties for every American dead. And unless we were willing to match that, we were not going anywhere. This was not World War II, the Vietnamese were not the Nazis, South Vietnam was not France or Normandy, and the American people were not going to sustain those casualty rates. That, I think was the key. Now, the anti-war movement, whether it was students or others, had put forth a message that the war was unwinnable and that in fact, it was a violation of all the best things that America stood for it. Now, that in and of itself would not have changed it, but you combined that with the reality of those body bags, and you can add onto that all the maimed, the injured, the TV, the war was being fought on television and all those visual images, you put all that together and that was it, that is why the war warranted. And even still, it took, what, 10 years to stop it? It is really atrocious.
SM (00:22:32):
Of course, that new book out by McNamara, which came out a year ago, the memoir In Retrospect.
LD (00:22:36):
The guy is a criminal.
SM (00:22:38):
Brought all kinds of feelings about the Vietnam [inaudible].
LD (00:22:45):
McNamara's position, is absolutely, absolutely unbelievable. I believe him when he says that in the rarefied air of the State Department and the Defense Department, they actually thought that if Vietnam fell, the Russians would be at the doorstep and we'd be facing nuclear war. That is what McNamara says in that book-book. I believe that he believed that. But the domino theory was so patently contrived, certainly by the 1960s. You might have been able to go with Kennan in the late forties and early (19)50s, but by the late (19)60s to think that if Vietnam falls you're going to be facing a nuclear war with the Soviets, these guys were in a fantasy world and they killed million Vietnamese and 50,000-plus Americans because of this kind of fantasy they could not shake. So, the guy is a criminal, maybe you can make a claim for...
SM (00:24:00):
So, we [inaudible]? Very good.
LD (00:24:03):
Maybe you can make a claim from mental illness, as far as I am concerned, but he used to be strung up by his genitals.
SM (00:24:10):
One of the things, when we look at the boomer generation, is the differences between white Americans and African Americans or people of color that when you look at boomers, there's a differentiation there. We all know, for example, that in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, many African American students on college campuses would not be seen in protests against the Vietnam War because it was not their war, because many people were being sent over who were of color and dying. The question I want to ask is, when we are looking at the war or we are looking at the concept of civil rights, especially in the area of civil rights, many people were not of age when Freedom Summer happened in (19)64, boomers were very young. So in other common criticism we're hearing, and I want your response-
SM (00:25:03):
Boomers were very young, so another common criticism we're hearing, and I want your response to this, is that the Boomers followed other people in the Civil Rights movement. They were too young, (19)46, (19)56, (19)66, the oldest would have been 18 in Freedom Summer. Could you comment on that, even though it is just an analogy, that really, Boomers were not the leaders of the Civil Rights movement, they followed?
LD (00:25:24):
I think that the leaders of the Civil Rights Movement were African Americans, clearly. I think that those of that generation who were of a socially progressive persuasion, I hate to use the word liberal here, were inspired by King and others like him, and clearly followed in their footsteps, and there damn well was few of us that did that, quite frankly. In terms of the Civil Rights movement, clearly the "Boomers" were not leaders, they were followers in that regard. Now, when I was in the SDS in (19)68, (19)69, (19)70, we had an informal relationship with the Black Panther Party in Washington DC, and I think there is actually a picture that appeared in the Washington Post at some point in (19)68 or (19)69, of myself and Eldridge Cleaver holding a banner, and I cannot remember what the banner said.
SM (00:26:43):
You do not have that picture?
LD (00:26:44):
During some march. Someday I will have to go back and go through the newspaper, and look for it. He is holding one end and I am holding the other end, and it was during one of these demonstrations, or something like that. I should really get that and make a poster out of it, even though I am really disappointed the way Cleaver went fundamentalist Christian subsequently. Anyway, we did have this informal relationship, and I think our analysis basically of American society at that time had a lot of points that touched together. There was a big falling off, or break with African American groups like the Panthers and a lot of individuals within the SDS who happened to be Jewish because of the position that the Panthers and other leaders in the African American community took over the issue of Palestine, Palestinians, Israel. There was a big break there between certain individuals and the African American community leadership. But that is a very specific issue, and I am proud to say that I held to my principles, and did not make a break over that issue. Many Jewish kids left the movement over that issue.
SM (00:28:15):
How would you want to define here on this one, I want to make sure you define this towards the end. Okay. Have you changed your-
LD (00:28:27):
I do not know whether I answered your question.
SM (00:28:30):
Well, it was a commentary that among the criticism that people who were, I would not say anti-Boomer, but critical of the Boomers, is that they lay claim to a lot of things that are not true. They were the Civil Rights movement. They ended the war.
LD (00:28:48):
Well, I do not know who's making those claims. I have not read all the books that you have, but the reality of it is as I described. You can trust me, Steve.
SM (00:29:06):
Would you say when you look at the Boomer generation, one of the terms that was used often at that time is, "We are the most unique generation in American history." I remember that happening when I was in Ohio State University, and it was always, "We had the opportunity of being the most unique generation in American history," because of trying to stop the war, and the Civil Rights movement. The women's movement came to fruition at that time, the gay and lesbian movement came after Stonewall. There was a Native American movement was happening. Everybody remembers Alcatraz, and the Native Americas taking over Alcatraz, Dennis Banks, that group. And then of course, the Chicano movement also and they were all around the same time. Student leaders from a lot of walks, Cesar Chavez came to power, around that time. Are the Boomers the most unique generation in American history?
LD (00:29:58):
Obviously, it was a somewhat unique time. Where, as you describe, many of these socially progressive movements came together at one moment in history. Whether that makes it the most unique generational period in the history of the nation, I really do not know. Probably it makes it one of the most socially active times in the history of the nation. I think that is a safer way of putting it, and probably a more historically meaningful way of looking at it than whether one is the most unique generation or not. I think that a sign of the fact that it is, or was one of the most unique periods in the history of the nation. Maybe one of the ways of seeing how unique, relatively speaking, this period of time was, is in fact all the flack and all the controversy that the activities of this generation, or at least this minority within the generation, this active socially progressive minority within the generation. That is my take on it. All the activities and the progress from my point of view that they generated and the issues that they raised and the gaps between theory and practice that they pointed out. So, they certainly set precedents, whether it is the Chicanos, the gays, the blacks, the anti-war folks. They set precedents for trying to close the gap between theory and practice within the American scene.
SM (00:32:11):
How do you respond to another thing too?
LD (00:32:13):
And that is why they raised so much flack. That is why they have so much opposition.
SM (00:32:18):
In your face mentality of that era, the confrontational approach to dialogue. There was such a thing then. The fact that, again, I am just using this as a barometer of yesterday, there was a survey in Philadelphia on what is wrong with Philadelphia. I do not know if you have not seen that. And one of the things that Philadelphians are never really pleased with anything, and I mean unbelievable things in Philadelphia magazine, but the bottom line was this, that Philadelphians are being labeled as a group of people that are in your face, and that brings a terminology of that period that a lot of the people that were involved in the movement were active, were basically in your face people. And so again, I do not know your thoughts on that, but that is again, going back to a criticism that we have heard that the lack of dialogue in society today sometimes can go directly linked to that era.
LD (00:33:09):
Well, I do not know whether you can trace the lack of dialogue today back to then, but clearly, I mean, you could not be anything but aggressive and confrontational in (19)68, (19)69, (19)70, and likewise, it would be very difficult to be anything other than confrontational and quote in your face during the civil rights period. You were going to get nowhere by polite dialogue. Okay, polite. The desire for polite dialogue is the desire of the establishment, wanting to set the parameters, set the rules for analysis of the contemporary situation. But when you have got a draft, when they are trying to draft everybody into an immoral, unwinnable, deadly war, when people are not allowed to go to decent schools, when black folks get crap and are not allowed to sit at the same lunch counters as white folks and they get crap in terms of their schools' jobs and everything else, what does polite dialogue mean? It means shut up, take it, and if you do not like it, be polite about you are not liking it. I mean, you get nowhere that way. The only way to deal with that is to be in someone's face. It is the only way.
SM (00:34:52):
What I think about the Dr. King analysis, that non-violent protest is not in your face, but it is certainly.
LD (00:34:58):
Sure, it is.
SM (00:34:58):
Well, non-violent protest is, it might be, but it was still a polite, there was a politeness there where they did not create.
LD (00:35:05):
If it was that polite, they would not have brought the police dogs out. I mean, when we say in your face, we do not mean necessarily that you are going to go some slap somebody around, it means that you are going to stop people from just having business as usual. The tactic that you use does not have to be with guns. I mean, you can just bring a 100 or 200 people into an area and sit down. Stops business as usual. And it is by the establishment's definition, not polite.
SM (00:35:37):
That is the deal. Have you changed your opinion of boomers over the last 25 years when you were young and now, have you changed?
LD (00:35:45):
I have simply never ever thought in generational terms. I mean I was part of a minority, political minority and understood that the majority of people of my generation did not agree with me, did not feel the way I did, even though people tend to now use these big categories and lump all people in one generation together as if they all believed the same thing. It's not true. And so when I grew up, I did not grow up thinking of myself as belonging to this generation. I mean, I belong to a distinct political, socially progressive minority that had in it folks of different generations. I mean the people that came together in those anti-war demonstrations, a lot of them, I was in my mid-20s early to mid-20s, and a lot of them were 40 and 50 old 1930s, left-wing working-class type organizers, wobbly types, labor parties, socialist types. So, I never thought of myself in terms of one generation or another, so I really do not care to comment.
SM (00:37:00):
One of the things about this generation is that one of the greatest impacts was their size. That they were the big, well, it was the biggest generation ever. 60 million plus because of the of course.
LD (00:37:09):
Right.
SM (00:37:10):
War and everything. And so again, their size has had a lot to do with their impact too in many respects.
LD (00:37:18):
Well, that might be true, that might be true. But the bigger the generation, the less likely it is to be monolithic in its outlooks. So, it is a simply mistake historically inaccurate to see it as somehow uniform in its outlooks and its behavior.
SM (00:37:38):
One of the constants that the literature states is then you have reiterated this in your commentary and that is that probably only about 15 percent of the boomers ever were ever involved in any sort of activism.
LD (00:37:52):
Yeah, I think that is probably accurate. Yeah.
SM (00:37:54):
Protest on college campuses and all these other movements that we have mentioned here. I am going to lead right into a question here because one of the basic premises behind this project is to look at the impact the boomers have had on American history both then and now and as they come into leadership roles, but it is also the concept of healing. Please comment on this premise. My premise is that boomers in many respects, and especially a lot of those that were involved, the activists, but even many who were not activists are having a problem with healing from the tremendous divisions that took place at that time. Those were for the war, those who were against the war, veterans who obviously have a different healing because they were treated poorly upon their return. And even though when you look at the boomers, they are still a minority. What are your thoughts on that? Because of the fact that in the many trips that I have had to the memorial, I have overheard veterans, I have seen people talking, I have tried to be an observant, and now I have got to be active in trying to do something when I help people hopefully heal the generation a little bit. That the healing, even though the wall was built to help the veterans and to help the nation heal, there's still a tremendous amount of healing that has not taken place. And I am not sure if it ever will. Could you comment on that in terms of the healing and the divisions?
LD (00:39:17):
You are right. I do not think it ever will. Again, I personally have never thought in these terms that I understand, and I accept that my attitudes and my reading of history and my attitudes and towards how this country operates is puts me in a perpetual minority, and I simply accept that. And so, given that position I mean there is no healing. I am not sure what healing means in terms of the veterans of the war except in these symbolic ways like the building of this memorial. There is no way that we can go back and give these guys a hero’s welcome. Quite frankly, they do not deserve a hero’s welcome. They are not heroes. That does not mean that they need to be vilified, they should not be vilified, and they certainly should not be blamed for the catastrophic policies of the people, of the leadership who sent them over there. They are victims, all right? They are not heroes, they are not villains, they are victims. And of course, the people who are dead are the most victimized of all. The only way these, so I do not even think that that veterans should think in terms of healing. I do not think it is possible. I mean, I have a very good friend of mine who lost the calves of both legs in a landmine incident in Vietnam. I mean, in what sense does this man heal? I mean, even if the Congress held a big rally in demonstration in which people, and the same number of people come as were in the largest anti-war demonstration, all to say that my friend and people like him are good guys and great guys and did a great service to the country, is that going to heal this guy? I do not know. Maybe it will make him feel better for the moment, but I do not know whether you can describe it in terms of healing. What they need is not healing. They need some justice, some explanation as to why they were sent there and why this happened to them, and something other than all that patriotic crap. I think that if the leaders that sent them there, those who are still alive could get up and say, this was a really big mistake, and like the Japanese kowtow and apologize to these people or their survivors, maybe that would be in some sense justice, but there can be no healing in there. They can never be compensated for being victimized this way. It is just not going to happen.
SM (00:42:41):
What about the tremendous divisions that happened between those who were for and those who were against the war and bringing them together to try to heal, to understand the passions of the time, whether it be veterans or protestors, those who supported the war?
LD (00:42:56):
Yeah. Well, I mean.
SM (00:42:56):
Both divisions.
LD (00:43:02):
Well, I think that those are useful exercises, but unless those who supported the war can come to understand and admit the erroneous analysis that their position is based on and the disastrous consequences in the physically disastrous consequences, not only for American veterans but for Vietnam, and we have slaughtered over a million of those people. Unless those folks can come to admit that, then I do not see how there can be any coming together unless, oh, I guess also, I mean the people that stood against the war could somehow fall into the trap of saying, oh, we were wrong. And I am, in fact, I know some anti-war folks, leaders who I work personally with, who have subsequently said, oh, we were wrong and we should not have done what we did. That in doing so, these people opened up career doors for themselves. But unless one side agrees with the other side, there is going to be no ultimately no healing. Well, I do not even know what that means, healing.
SM (00:44:26):
I want to make sure it is recording properly. There we go.
LD (00:44:30):
Yeah, it might be that, again, I do not think in terms of healing, I am not exactly sure what it means. And for me personally, I do not feel the need for that process. So, it is hard for me to give advice to others who seem to feel the need for it.
SM (00:44:49):
One of the main reasons this question comes forth is when we took a trip to Washington DC a couple of years back with some, we were on the road students here at Westchester University. We met Senator Musky, and one of the questions that happened during that two-hour session, it came up from yours truly, and it is fact, I talked about the concept of the inability to trust leaders because of what happened during that period, and I have had to deal with that as an individual. But I was especially referring back to 1968 and the protests that happened in Chicago, and he was the vice president as a running mate for Hubert Humphrey and his thoughts about the divisions in America at that time and the healing process. And at that juncture, I did not realize he was not a well man. And he'd been in the hospital and he had a melodramatic pause there for a while and the students looked at each other and did not really respond right away. And then when he did respond, he talked about the fact that he had been in the hospital and that his secretary had been bringing him tapes of Ken Burns civil war series, and he said, you realize a whole generation of Americans were basically wiped out during that civil war. And he says, my answer to your question is thus we have never healed since the Civil War. So you're talking about trying to heal since Vietnam. We have not healed since the Civil War.
LD (00:45:55):
He can push it further back.
SM (00:45:57):
Yeah. And the fact is, and there is still things today about the North and the South and their answers for each other. But the question I am trying to ask here is, and this is the direct question, it says, are we going to be another generation like the Civil war generation who went to their graves with bitterness? Now, in many respects, a lot of people who cares, I am raising a family, it does not bother me one bit, but a lot of people, we look at our lives and what we have done and are we going to our graves, whatever it might be, the bitterness, lack of forgiveness, lack of understanding toward the other's point of view, for example, your point of view should be understood by the person who is totally opposite of you to try to better understand where we come from. That is what I am getting at.
LD (00:46:42):
Well, it is a sweet ideal. This country, its history is a function of division. The American Revolution was the most divisive war this country ever fought, more divisive than the Civil War, even actually. You can look at the personal history of Benjamin Franklin and his son, I mean, which was typical of that. I think that ultimately the lamb does not lie down with the sheep or whatever that biblical analogy is. The lamb does not lie down with the lion. Right? I do not believe that happens. I think that there are very deep serious divisions in this country about social policy and the directions that the country should go in terms of social agenda. I think the vilification of the term liberal is a sign that those divisions are very, very deep, and I do not expect them to be resolved in the foreseeable future. I think that the divisions or around the Civil rights movement and around the Vietnam War are in the same vein as the divisions that we see now between right wing conservatives and liberals, if you want to use that term. That there is almost a hatred on the part of what I consider to be the radical right. I think there is almost a hatred on the part of the conservative elements in this country for people and for ideas of the Democratic left, and I do not think it is the Democratic left or I do not think it is the aging anti-war movement folks who do not want to heal or do not want to dialogue. I think it is the other side. I think it's the people who put up TV ads and other types of propaganda essentially vilifying the concept of liberal, vilifying the Democratic left that are the obstacle here, and not the folks who led civil rights marches or anti-war movements.
SM (00:49:29):
The generation gap was a term that was used a lot during the (19)60s and the early (19)70s, and in the World War II. Now we see would be young people today on college campuses, 20 somethings may not who also have differences with the boomer generation and themselves, and as the boomers get older, we keep hearing prophecies from, again, writings that there will be a major gap between this generation or because of the social security and a lot of other issues. Could you comment on what you thought was the generation gap of that year of the year.
SM (00:50:03):
... [inaudible] what you thought was the generation gap of era of the (19)60s and the (19)70s, the difference between parents and young people [inaudible] between boomers and their kids?
LD (00:50:12):
Well, first of all, there's always a generation gap. I mean, it seems to be a natural flow of generations for children to contest with their parents, at least in Western culture. It is more submerged than other cultures. But in Western culture, every generation of children contests over one issue or another with their parents. So, it is a sort of natural part of the landscape, of the demographic landscape. Now in the (19)60s though, that natural process of contesting between children and parents was sometimes accentuated by the issues of the day. If they are out there trying to draft everyone who cannot somehow manage a deferment, that is going to add tension. Obviously, it is going to add a lot of tension to one's everyday life. And so, it is going to accentuate whatever else is going on between parents and children. If you have got a household of Black folks, African Americans, where the parents have learned that the best survival skills is to just keep your head down and not let the sheriff even notice you, and all of a sudden you have got a kid who wants to go and sit in at the local lunch counter, that is going to accentuate whatever differences there generally would be, naturally would be within the culture of the parents and the child as the child matures and tries to find his own independent space. So, the extent to which the generation gap was greater in the (19)60s than, say, before or after, is a function of the context, the historical context in which those natural tensions and confrontations between child and parent were being worked out. You understand what I mean?
SM (00:52:21):
I do.
LD (00:52:23):
And that is the only thing that makes it different. Now today, I mean, the people who forecast these great problems, the only thing I can say is that I believe ultimately, they are going to if not fix the Medicare and Social Security problems, they will patch it up, perennially patch it up so that it will limp forward. It is just too politically suicidal not to patch it up. So, I have no doubts that they will do that. And in terms of the 20-somethings or the 18-somethings or 19-somethings that I know in abundance here at this university, I do not think most of them could define Social Security for you. And I am not sure if I at 18 could have defined Social Security for you. So I do not want to be too hard on them. So again, I think that the folks that point fingers at these great generation gaps and foretell with great foreboding about future generational gaps are exaggerating, probably for the sake of book sales. I do not know. But I think it is somewhat hyperbole.
SM (00:53:44):
The term activism obviously is a term that is identified with the (19)60s and early (19)70s. What role does activism play in the lives of today's young people, if any? A lot of people will term the boomers says an activist generation, even though we know 15 percent are really the activists, but are there any activists in today's generation now? Do students today have the passions that a lot of the students of the (19)60s and early (19)70s had?
LD (00:54:12):
Well, I mean, actually I think the answer is obviously no, not because they are not inherently capable of exercising those passions, but I do not think the issues are there to bring those passions out. In terms of are they more aware or whatever, I mean, you probably could answer that more than I. I mean, you deal with them, or at least a certain segment of folks on this campus, in terms of their political orientations or issues. And so you probably know the answer better than I do. In terms of my students, my students are not politically aware or politically interested. And I think that goes for like 95 percent to 99 percent of them. I think that if there were riots in the ghettos or a big war and they were drafting everybody, probably that would galvanize a greater percentage of them. You have to have issues that affect people's lives to in order to bring out whatever political potential is there.
SM (00:55:31):
I want to get back to a question. What is the lasting legacy of the boomers?
LD (00:55:38):
Well, again, I will go back to one of my opening remarks, and that generation, working within the historical context it found itself in, dealing with the issues that were forced upon it, created precedence, the ongoing challenge to bring practice closer to the ideals of the nation, which I see not only as in terms of the Bill of Rights, but also in terms of social justice and what have you, economic justice, to try to bring the practice of the nation closer to the ideals. I think that our generation, at least the 15 percent that was active in it, set a great precedent and actually moved the nation a step closer in terms of bridging that gap. I mean, after all, despite the destructive efforts of Ronald Reagan, and despite the destructive agenda of Newt Gingrich and all those guys, this country today is a better country and a country where the gap between theory and practice is more closed than it was, say, before 1956, and Brown v. the Board of Education. And so you have to keep pushing to try to close that sort of gap between ideal and theory. And I think my generation took a big step in that direction. Now, others today want to reverse that, and they might. I mean, it might be two steps backwards, one step forward, sort of one step backwards, two steps forwards. I mean, it can go either way, but you got to keep pushing. You got to just keep doing it, if you believe in social justice at all.
SM (00:57:39):
Yeah. What is your thought following that now? What is your thought of taking one step forward, two steps backward, attacks on affirmative action, attacks on a lot of accomplishments that took place? I know there were problems in the Great Society with Lyndon Johnson and all those things, but there was a genuineness to really want to make change to help a lot of people. And maybe there was some failures along the way, but to pointblank say the times are different now in the (19)90s than they were in the (19)60s and the (19)70s, it is no longer necessary to do the things that we did then, what is your thought on that? Because we see it in the universities too.
LD (00:58:17):
Well, yeah, I mean, if you accept the notion that times are different and it is not necessary to have these programs in place, I will guarantee you that within a generation you will need them again. Because if you take the programs away, you just do not coast at the place where you were when you removed the programs. The inherent instinct of the right is not to stay still but is essentially, from my perspective, to go backwards. And they will do it all in the name of individual rights and the notion of getting the government off your back and all that sort of stuff. But in fact, you just do not stay in idling and neutral. You go backwards if you take away these safeguards. And that is what the programs really are, is safeguards. So, it is cyclical, in many ways. I mean, to a certain extent they will succeed and they will undo a lot of what was done. And sooner or later, you have to just come back and fight all over again. Seems to be one of the imbecilities of human behavior, human organization, that you cyclically go through these things.
SM (00:59:42):
Now, this next segment of the interview is going to be to throw out the names of some of the individuals that were known at that time, and if you could respond in two ways: number one, your thoughts on their impact then, and basically your thoughts on how they are looked upon today by many of the boomers and historians. Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman.
LD (01:00:05):
Well, I liked them, even though actually, in the late (19)60s, the folks in the SDS were critical of Rubin and Hoffman, because we perceived them at the time as being somewhat fools. And they did not have the type of sort of tight political analysis that we fancied that we had. But I think there was a grudging admiration for their daring. And so I have a warm and fuzzy, loving kind of response to them. Now, I think that of course Rubin sort of went over to the enemy, if you want to point it that way. The really truly consistent fellow was Abbie Hoffman. And of course, I mean, his life ended tragically, driven probably to suicide by this picture of the country going back in a reactionary fashion.
SM (01:01:16):
I wanted to ask you, before I ask any other names here, mention any other names. When Abbie Hoffman died, I remember there was a small article written in the Philadelphia Inquirer. And there was a note that he had left saying, "No one is listening to me anymore." And I thought, "Wow, that is pretty heavy." I know it is one individual and I know some people characterized him as kind of a wacko, but then he kind of lived a consistent life, even in hiding, on environmental issues. His whole life was really dedicated to activism. But is that what is going to be written on a lot of boomers' tombstones, is "No one is listening anymore"?
LD (01:01:55):
Well, again, which boomers?
SM (01:02:01):
Okay, right. Say [inaudible] the boomers that were active.
LD (01:02:04):
Right. I mean, it is the boomers who were not listening anymore to Abbie Hoffman, not that most of them ever did listen to him. I mean, most of them probably found him contemptuous. But again-
SM (01:02:20):
Back talking about Abbie Hoffman.
LD (01:02:23):
Yeah, I think what Abbie Hoffman could not deal with is the cyclical nature of the quote, "struggle," unquote. I mean, progress is not linear. I mean, maybe it is in a technological sense. We do not blow ourselves off the planet. But social progress certainly is not a linear, straight line kind of scenario. I mean, there are setbacks. And those setbacks can be serious. But unless you are willing to simply abdicate to kind of a reactionary, segregationist, anti-human attitude that would write off not only minority groups and their position in our society, but the poor as a lazy group that deserves their own fate, unless you are willing to accept that, you simply have to continue to struggle against these folks, accepting the fact that that progress where it can be had is sometimes hard fought and sometimes hard to keep. I think Abbie Hoffman was ultimately just too fragile to live in a world where you have that kind of cyclical shape to the struggle that he really was dedicated to.
SM (01:04:02):
Lyndon Johnson?
LD (01:04:06):
Well, I mean, Lyndon Johnson was a politician who was willing to sell the youth of his country and certainly sell Vietnam down the river for the sake of this sort of Cold War ideology that he had based his politics on. Now, on the other hand, he was perfectly willing to sell the kind of conservative segregationist agenda of his home state of Texas down the river to back the civil rights movement. So Lyndon Johnson was simply a typical American political opportunist. So, you can remember him either way you want to go.
SM (01:04:53):
Richard Nixon?
LD (01:04:54):
Well, I cannot deal with Nixon. He tried to kill me. I mean, this guy tried to draft me and send me to Vietnam. And so I always had great contempt for Richard Nixon. I do not give a damn if he opened up China at all. I do not care. And I do not care if, just like with Lyndon Johnson, if he passed legislation that was good for the American Indians, or whatever. I mean, he did not do that from the bottom of his soul. He did it for the same reason Lyndon Johnson did it, because it seemed politically opportune at the time. But Nixon, and particularly Kissinger, I hate that man's guts, I perceive these people as criminals, not only for what they did in Vietnam, but also for what they did in Central and South America, Chile, particularly with Allende and the Pinochet regime that Kissinger helped bring about. These are murderous, criminal people, and they should be tried for crimes against humanity.
SM (01:05:59):
[inaudible] McNamara, Robert McNamara?
LD (01:06:00):
Well, again, I mean, I think I have commented on McNamara before-
SM (01:06:03):
[inaudible]?
LD (01:06:05):
Yeah, I mean, I guess there is some gradations in the levels of disdain I have for particular individuals. I mean, my gut does not revolt against Russ quite as much as it does against McNamara, but ultimately, they are all of a crowd. And I have not got too much sympathy for any of them. I really do not think that they serve their country well at all.
SM (01:06:33):
Spiro Agnew?
LD (01:06:36):
Man, this is sort of a featherweight intellectual political opportunist who had two sets of standards, one from himself, one for everybody else. I think he is going to be forgotten and well gone.
SM (01:06:55):
John Kennedy?
LD (01:06:57):
I do not particularly care for John Kennedy either. I mean, I know he is sort of an ideal, and he probably saved that ideal image of himself by dying young. It probably would not have lasted if he had lived longer. But I do not have very high regard for Kennedy. I mean, this is the guy who mounted an invasion of a foreign country for no really good reason, in terms of the Bay of Pigs. And quite frankly, I happen to have a certain regard for Fidel Castro. So, I mean, he does not do much for me, Kennedy.
SM (01:07:40):
Robert Kennedy?
LD (01:07:42):
Yeah, I do not have much opinion about Robert Kennedy. I think that his behavior towards Martin Luther King was despicable. And so, Ted Kennedy is probably the best of that family, quite frankly. And so who knows what Robert Kennedy would have turned out to be like if he had lived, but he did not. So, I mean, I just do not have much opinion about him.
SM (01:08:15):
Martin Luther King, Jr.?
LD (01:08:17):
Well, he is a seminal figure on the American landscape in the 20th century. I basically agree with the movement he mounted. I have no inherent attachment to nonviolence, I have no principled detachment to nonviolence, as he did. But I think that it was the right tactic for the time and place, that you want to use violence only when it is the last resort. I would not deny it for an oppressed people as a last resort. But if you live within a culture that will allow you to achieve your purposes without the use of violence, if there is that kind of space, and it seems that in this country there is that kind of political space, then I think he understood that. And his tactics were appropriate and they worked.
SM (01:09:21):
And the same token, Malcolm X?
LD (01:09:27):
I think that, again, I happen to have a high regard from Malcolm X, almost as high as Martin Luther King. It really is yet to be determined whether King's tactics could carry over beyond, say, desegregation of a lunch counter or a school system into being able to achieve the economic justice that King also aimed at. I suspect that if you could sustain a non-violent movement sufficiently long enough and effectively organize it enough, you probably can get a lot of economic justice out of that kind of movement. But clearly, from the perspective of a guy who is coming out of the ghetto, the Northern ghettos, like Malcolm X, you are going to be very suspicious of that non-violence, I mean, because your reality is the cops are coming in, beating you up all the time, as they still do. And so, it is hard to get out there, dress in a suit and go walk down the center of the street, when in fact they put up barricades, they will not let you walk in white suburbs. So, both King and Malcolm X came out of different social milieus, and those different social milieus created a different perspective and led to different kind of tactics. So I do not condemn Malcolm X for his tactics. I know where he was coming from. And I think that Malcolm X was a man who was eminently capable of evolving, as he in fact did evolve.
SM (01:11:29):
What about [inaudible] people here, Huey Newton and Angela Davis?
LD (01:11:30):
Right. Actually, at one point, I think I met both of them briefly. Well, I had regard for Huey Newton. I think he was a man of great organizational skills and incredible bravery, along with the other Black Panthers. Again, he seemed to be doomed to tragedy, as most of these people were, ultimately because unlike the institutional achievements of the King movement, the economic justice that really these folks were aiming at was something that the capitalist system could not accord them very easily. And so they were in many ways doomed to failure. And I think Huey Newton died as tragically as Abbie Hoffman did.
SM (01:12:32):
Oh yeah [inaudible] situation shut and open [inaudible] like that.
LD (01:12:36):
Well, perhaps that is fitting. I mean, it is sort of apropos of the whole situation, but-
SM (01:12:42):
How about Angela Davis?
LD (01:12:43):
Right. Oh, Angela Davis is an incredibly astute and principled intellectual. And she is a rare individual in that she is both an intellectual and a person of action. It is very rare in history that you get people who are truly intellectuals and also people of action. And I think she is an example of that, and I have a very high regard for her on that basis.
SM (01:13:18):
How about George McGovern?
LD (01:13:20):
I think his heart is in the right place. He is ultimately dedicated to the system that he was born and bred to. But I think that that given the limitations of that position, I think his heart is in the right place.
SM (01:13:44):
Senator Eugene McCarthy?
LD (01:13:46):
Well, the same thing. Though many people in the SDS at the time dismissed McCarthy with disdain and felt that the whole Come Clean for Gene phenomena was a clever attempt on the part of the quote, "system," unquote, to co-opt the anti-war movement. And they might have been right. I mean, you have to ask yourself, what would have a man like McGovern or McCarthy done if they had been elected president? Would they in fact have essentially stopped the war, or would they have done what Nixon did, simply continue the war while they try to negotiate their way out of it? So, we do not know.
SM (01:14:43):
Dr. Benjamin Spock?
LD (01:14:48):
Well, I do not know very much about Spock. And he is obviously a man of high principle and willing to stand up for the principles that he believes in. And since his principles aren't completely different than my principles, I mean, I will go-
LD (01:15:03):
... since his principles are not completely different than my principles, I will go with them.
SM (01:15:06):
The Berrigan brothers, two priests.
LD (01:15:08):
Right. Right-right-right. Actually, I knew them briefly because they passed through Georgetown. Again, very, very brave individuals. They not only had to risk the displeasure of a wider society that they were part of, but they had to risk the displeasure of the smaller Jesuit Catholic society that they had made careers in. There were many, many priests Catholic priests like the Berrigans. There was one at Georgetown whose name was McSorley. I do not know what ever happened to him. Yeah, who led anti-war protests, night vigils, candlelight vigils, marches and stuff like that. These were brave people who were willing to risk their futures, their careers, and take on popular positions based on their principles, whether the principles were motivated by secular or religious reasons. And so you have to admire them. You have to admire them. Those types of people are what really the best the society really has to offer.
SM (01:16:30):
Muhammad Ali.
LD (01:16:35):
I do not know. I have no real reaction to a Muhammad Ali. Again, obviously an outspoken, principled kind of guy, probably whose heart is a humane one. And of course, a leading role model in the African American society, for the youth.
SM (01:17:01):
George Wallace.
LD (01:17:03):
Well, again, at least you can say about Wallace is that he had his principles. There was nothing wishy-washy about the guy. So to the extent that you can respect your enemy, because at the very least you can clearly recognize him as the enemy, I will give him some credit. As, again, say Lyndon Johnson, who was kind of a political opportunist. Wallace, he was a politician certainly, but he was clearly a man of his culture. That southern culture. And took a principled Stand for it. It was the wrong stand, it was an anti-human stand. At least you knew where he was coming from.
SM (01:17:55):
Daniel Ellsberg.
LD (01:17:57):
Right. Again, I see Ellsberg as an individual that is deep within the governmental system. That is his career line, that is where he's at. And he finds himself in this sort of conflictual situation where he cannot deal with the Vietnam War. Now, I am unclear as to why he cannot deal with it. Now, is it because, for instance, from my point of view that it's a violation of the best principles of the nation and a contradiction in terms of the ideals of the nation? Or is it just that it is unwinnable? And that we are making a mess, we are getting deeper and deeper into this quagmire and we really ought to have to cut our losses? I am not sure where he is coming from, but he is coming from somewhere out there like that. Probably the latter, but I cannot say for sure. But in any case, has got the gumption to blow the whistle on this deal, where the myriad number of his fellows are just going to go along with it. So, you have to give this guy some sort of credit for having the courage to do that.
SM (01:19:15):
What do you think of John Dean?
LD (01:19:19):
Right, John Dean. Well, I do not know. If the man had never really... Obviously, john Dean would have probably wished to hell that he had come to the forefront in some other administration than this one and the one he happened to be in. I think he was a little man. An [foreign language], to use that kind of Russian phrase. He is a little guy. He is a cog in the machine. He tries to give Nixon the best advice he can and he gets screwed.
SM (01:20:01):
John Mitchell.
LD (01:20:04):
Now, Mitchell is a big cog in the machine. Mitchell is without principle and without conscience. And he, like Averell Harriman, I think it was Averell Harriman during the Truman administration. This is just a short but apropos diversion here. During the Truman administration, there was a debate over the issue of Palestine and whether to support the creation of the Israeli state or whatever. And the State Department and the defense department both recommended against it. And I think it was Averell Herman who was a, and I might be wrong, but it strikes me that is who it was, went and had lunch with a guy who was the assistant secretary of state, whose name I cannot remember now. And the guy said to Harriman, "Look. Recognizing the state of Israel at this moment is going to so screw us up with the rest of the Arab world, where we have real economic interests, that it is not in American national interest to do it." And Harriman looked at him and said, "The reelection of Harry Truman is what is the American national interest." All right? So, I see Mitchell in that light. He confuses the survival of the regime he happens to be tied up with, with American national interests. In other words, ultimately, he confuses his own position, his own outlook, his own ego with American national interests, as I suspect Nixon did too. So, I do not have much regard for those guys.
SM (01:21:51):
[inaudible] the names here, Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan in terms of the women's movement. Thoughts on them.
LD (01:21:57):
Well, I am, in principle, in favor of "women's liberation." So I basically agree with their analysis of the women's positions in society. And also, to a certain extent, the need for an out front, in your face kind of tactic when it comes to women's issues. Because I do not think, for instance, that polite dialogue is going to get women through any kind of glass ceiling. I just do not think it is going to happen. So, you need the analysis that they gave, and you need a sort of confrontational approach if you're ever going to move women forward in regard to entrenched positions for essentially a man's economic and institutional world. Now, that being said, I do not mistake that for any real faith that women can run the world in a more humane fashion than men because I do not really think men and women are that different, that we are both products of our culture. So, you are going to, and particularly in a culture where the definition and concept of family is really very kind of shaky, I think you see just as many conservative women as liberal women out there on the scene. And so, in just switching men for women is not going to make the world all rosy. But in principle, generally, there should be equality and opportunity. And there's certainly equality in terms of intellect. The SDS chapter I moved in in Washington DC, the person who really was the brains behind that out outfit was a remarkably intelligent and organizationally capable woman.
SM (01:24:07):
It was a rarity in that time, because women are really [inaudible].
LD (01:24:11):
Well, the-
SM (01:24:12):
[inaudible] criticism that when people were active in the (19)60s and early (19)70s, men were in the leadership roles, women just were the paper shufflers at the thing that many of the people in the movement talk about.
LD (01:24:23):
Well, this particular woman, she was not at Georgetown, but there was a larger SDS contingent within Washington DC as a whole. Her name was Kathy Wilkerson. Now, she and I had had a parting of the ways when the SDS movement fell apart because she became involved in the Weatherman movement and where I did not. But in terms of conceptualizing an agenda and organizing the daily activities and presenting an analysis of the situation going on, she was the moving force in the SDS of that area at that time. And I have great admiration for her. And it is just my opinion that the differences, the intellectual differences, that are sometimes described between men and women are just false. Women have babies, men do not have babies. And I imagine there is some hormonal and there is some genetic quality differences between the two, but they do not, in my opinion, affect intellectual ability. Even, I think, physical ability is overplayed. There's no reason that women cannot be in combat. Though, quite frankly, I cannot imagine why they or men would want to be. So, there it is.
SM (01:26:10):
I guess two final questions. I just want to ask you, what does the wall mean to you? [inaudible] over the wall, you have been there. What happened to you?
LD (01:26:23):
Quite frankly, I think that, for me, it is a symbol of an immense tragedy. I think there ought to be another wall adjacent to it dedicated to all the Vietnamese that we killed, and then the monument would be complete. And perhaps between the two, we can have another stile, another kind of thing with the names of all the butchers who caused this to happen, with the proper epitaph for them. To me, it is just a symbol of a great tragedy. And to the extent that people do not understand the origins of that tragedy, and simply analyze it in terms of an oversimplified patriotism and betrayal of patriotism, that is a horror.
SM (01:27:32):
The basic premise of that wall was to be a non-political statement. No politics here, just to pay tribute to those who served. What happened.
LD (01:27:40):
Well, they died.
SM (01:27:41):
[inaudible] came of those who died. Of course, many have died since, who did serve, for variety of reasons. And many are still living post-traumatic syndrome lives. But majority of them though, have gone on to be successful, which is something that sometimes the media does not portray correctly. But it is supposed to be a non-political, so if you make a comment that there should be Vietnamese, then we are getting into the politics of the war, which is the war was not meant to be. It is supposed to be a healing.
LD (01:28:09):
I do not care what it is meant to be. I do not care if it is meant to be non-political. It is, of course, inherently political. The war was a manifestation of American politics. Just by saying it is supposed to be not political, does not make it unpolitical. It cannot be unpolitical or non-political because the war itself is a manifestation of politics.
SM (01:28:37):
What are your thoughts on Bill Clinton went to the wall and spoke? And of course, [inaudible] look at him as like, "Here is the typical boomer, Bill Clinton." But he is president of the United States. But he went to the wall and that was a very, for or against it, a lot of Vietnam veterans will never forgive him for what he did, but still he went to the wall.
LD (01:28:55):
What the hell did he do? What did he do? He tried to avoid and successfully avoided going and serving in a beastly war that served no real purpose but to betray the highest American principles. So he avoided being a piece of cannon fodder. Now, if, in fact, the Vietnam veterans cannot forgive him-
SM (01:29:26):
Not all, but some.
LD (01:29:27):
Right. Or some cannot forgive him for escaping their fate, for not being victimized like they were victimized, then their analysis of their own fate, their own history is simply erroneous. Now, people live with erroneous analyses of their condition all the time, but does not mean how they perceive it is true. Though for them it might be true, but historically it's not true. See, I can condemn Clinton for a lot of things, but I am not going to condemn him for trying to avoid getting butchered in Vietnam.
SM (01:30:08):
How about Fonda going over to Hanoi?
LD (01:30:12):
I think it was a brave and necessary act.
SM (01:30:14):
In fact, that is a name I did not mention. Jane Fonda.
LD (01:30:17):
Yeah, I like Jane Fonda. I think it was a brave and necessary act. It was a time when you had to be in their face. Nothing was polite in those days. So, you had had to have some sort of shock value kind of statement that says, "Look, there is a significant minority of Americans who are simply not on the side of the government that is doing this." I do not see the anti-war movement as enemies of the American troops in Vietnam. I see the anti-war movement as their very best friends. They were the ones, the anti-war movement people were the ones who were trying to save the lives of American troops. And, for that matter, Vietnamese. And if they had been listened to, you would have had many, many thousands of Americans alive today who are now dead. So what are you going to do? You're going to point a finger at those who are trying to save your neck and condemn them?
SM (01:31:22):
But how would you respond to, "Well, you're trying to save their neck, but she actually trying to save your own neck"?
LD (01:31:27):
Jane Fonda's neck, she put her neck in a noose by going there. In what sense was she trying to save their- her own neck?
SM (01:31:35):
What are your thoughts on Jane Fonda personally? And Tom Hayden? As a follow-up in terms of-
LD (01:31:45):
I do not know. I do not know. They're divorced now, are not they?
SM (01:31:45):
I know, but their impact on the boomers and what they did, their lives. What do their lives mean to those who lived in that era?
LD (01:31:53):
I do not know. I do not know. I basically agreed with Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden as they acted in the (19)60s and early (19)70s, and I cannot really comment on their careers beyond that.
SM (01:32:06):
This is my last question, which is going back to this whole business about healing, where the divisions were so wide in America back then and this concept of trying to heal today, as boomers go into their (19)50s. Is it important for you to heal and forgive? I am not talking about Robert McNamara now or Richard Nixon, but just in general, the concept of maybe forgiving. Do you think, is it important for you to forgive, to heal from this era? Or do you feel the bitterness will remain?
LD (01:32:40):
Well, I am not sure you can describe my feelings as bitterness or the need to heal. I do not think in those terms. I have certain principles and a certain political position and certain goals, if I can be so bold, for the nation in terms of economic justice, social justice, civil rights, that kind of thing. And those are ongoing struggles. Okay? Now, I recognize that there are people out there who are essentially opposed to me. If I have any bitterness, it is towards the people, of course, who are opposed.
SM (01:33:22):
It is just for woman the next time.
LD (01:33:28):
Well, when I say jackasses, who I believe their position is anti-human, that condemns the poor, condemns minorities to second class citizenship, and gets us involved in wars that kill a whole lot of us and a whole lot of them, to no real use. Who screwed up Central and South America repeatedly. So, of course, from my bias perspective, people that are opposed to me are anti-human. They are really nasty, evil people. So, if I have got any bitterness, it is towards them, not towards some grunt in Vietnam, whose interests I think I was trying to look after in the antiwar movement. And it is ongoing. And it has nothing to do with generations. It has nothing to do with Lyndon Johnson's generation against my generation. There is plenty of people in my generation who stand against me. And there is going to be plenty people in the next generation. And so it just goes on until the day I die. And it is part of what makes life meaningful, to continue that struggle. And quite frankly, while I would like to win, I do not expect to win. And ultimately, I do not think that that is the most important thing. Though, I certainly do want to win. But what is the most important thing is to carry on the struggle and to be consistent to your principles and to be able to sleep at night with yourself. And that is what is important.
SM (01:35:06):
And as we all hope someday, and we all know we are going to pass beyond this planet, that when we reflect on our deathbed, yeah, we might have family around us, but we are alone at the very end and light flashes before us. And oftentimes, it is very important to know that your whole life flashes, but you think of the good about what you have done. And it is not always in terms of the amount of money you have made and the car you had, the possessions you have, but how you have lived your life.
LD (01:35:32):
Right. And at least at the moment, anyway, I am basically satisfied with what I have done. I have never second guessed myself in terms of what went on in those days. I do not think I have changed in any real way. My politics is the same and I am satisfied with that. And I will continue to fight and struggle for the principles that I did in the (19)60s, and that is the way it is.
SM (01:35:58):
Well, Dr. Davidson, I want to thank you very much for participating. Thank you.
LD (01:36:01):
Sure.
SM (01:36:01):
And have a good day.
(End of Interview)
Rights Statement
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.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Interview with Dr. Larry Davidson
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Davidson, Lawrence, 1945- ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
College teachers; West Chester University of Pennsylvania; Political activists--United States; Davidson, Lawrence, 1945--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Larry Davidson is a retired History professor at West Chester University. He is the author of <em>Islamic Fundamentalism</em> and <em>Cultural Genocide</em>, and is an expert on the Middle East. As a student, Davidson was an SDS (Student for A Democratic Society) leader at Georgetown University who made the front page of the <em>Washington Post</em> along with other students protesting the war in Vietnam. Dr. Davidson received his Ph.D. in Modern European Intellectual History from the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Binghamton University Libraries
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
ND
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
In copyright
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.67a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.67b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
McKiernan Interviews
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
96:06