DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | Middle Earth various issues, 1967-1968

Transcribe
Translate

Middle Earth various issues, 1967-1968

Page 10

To Stop A War (contd. from pg 3, ccl 4)
Each of these things point, as it seems to me, in the same direction: We have passed the stage of demonstrating our concern to a system that ignores us. We are entering into a phase of nonviolent resistance to, and disruption of, a system which attempts to command our obedience and allegience but gives the majority of the American people no part in the decision-making process. This resistance will be local because it will be undertaken by groups such as ourselves. It will be massive in that it will be happening continuously throughout the country. In doing so we begin the process of radicaliizng the base of support that has developed against the war. This is both dangerous and a crucial moment in movement history and it will determine what the new character of the movement is going to be. The context for this new movement is not fully manifest. We can go a number of different ways from here. There are a variety of directions shaping up that clamor for support. While on the one hand we do not want to respond to anything that manifests itself as a call to action, merely because it IS a call to action; on the other hand, we let this moment in the development of the movement pass at our peril. For, one way or another, gropingly and stupidly, sensibly and strategically -- and this depends on what kinds of energies what kinds of people are willing to give to that development -- one way or another, the movement is going to move from here. There are movement people beginning to feel their way toward domestic sabotage and disruptive violence to undermine the war -- who see the attempt to remove the Marines from the U of I as a kind of futile tactic that assuages our conscience, purifies the campus, but does not inhibit the war. These people want to look beyond nonviolent resistance to a vaguely and romantically defined 'something else.' Yet for the moment they are willing to go along with the non-violent phase until it either plays itself out or proves itself futile, just as those who were looking forward to this phase went along with demonstrations until they had played themselves out. We are, then, at a moment in which a greater commitment is demanded, and at a moment in which those of us who are von-violently inclined have a bit of breathing space -- tactically at least. For, as the SDS meeting Monday night, with its decision to remain non-violent in the demonstration showed, non-violent thinking prevails for the moment. It is up to us to make what we can of that moment; we must demonstrate that we can end this war and begin the change in American society in our non-violent way; before we must give out to those that would persuade us to the armed struggle. If we allow our timidities or our refusal to agree on all the minute particulars while history runs madly around us, it will outstrip and engulf us -- and rightfully so. We stand at the forward edge of a new kind of dissent -- a dissent whose context will be determined by the kinds of people willing to commit themselves to it. What form that dissent will take, and what it means, will become clearer over the next weeks as it begins to actualize itself. Everett Frost

ANTI-POLITICS
John H. Bunzel, ANTI-POLITICS IN AMERICA: REFLECTIONS ON THE ANTI-POLITICAL TEMPER

John H. Bunzel, Anti-politics in America: Reflections on the Anti-political Temper and its Distortions of the Democratic Process, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1967.

Any analysis of American political extremes would be one of divergent interests -- the Goldwater movement of 1964, the Students for a Democratic Society, the American Communist Party, the John Birch Society. Professor John H. Bunzel of San Francisco State University has contributed such an analysis in his book, Anti-Politics in America: Reflections on the Anti-Political Temper and Its Distortions of the Democratic Process. He ties the whole extremist menagerie into one bundle and stamps it 'anti-politics.' Bunzel's definition of anti-politics is: that kind of activity which seeks either to bypass the convention of democratic politics in the attempt to achieve its ends or to subdue the political process itself in favor of a monistic doctrinaire society -- in its most extreme form, a dictatorship. In seven long, but lucidly composed chapters, Bunzel analyzes the variants of 'anti-politics,' ranging from the extreme right-wing fanatics of the John Birch Society to such left-wing ideologies as C. Wright Mills and Robert S. Lynd. He also discusses such limpid phenomena as the American Communist Party, the Society of Friends (or Quakers, as they are more commonly known), and the sterile virtues of psychological determinism in analysing political behavior. One could quarrel justifiably with a number of Bunzel's conclusions, but on the whole, Anti-Politics in America is a competent, if not rewarding, book to read. It abounds in pungent, though at times pietistic, observations, such as: '. . .anyone who either understands or is sympathetic to the ways of politics in this country knows that many businessmen, bankers and other 'elite' members of the community are often too indifferent to public affairs for the simple reason that they are too busy making money.' Certainly, this is true as a generality. Bunzel might also have added that because so many members of the Establishment are so materialistically egoistic, they tend to leave the actual practice of 'politics' to factions which do little justice, in many cases, to their political inclinations: larks such as the Birchites, the Goldwaters and the Reagans. But Bunzel spares neither extreme of the political spectrum in his searching analysis. He examines the Birchites and finds them to be fanatical as well as hapless: fanatical because they accept no compromises, and hapless because, as a group aspiring for power, they attempt to bypass the existing order of the society in which they live. In short, the Birchites contribute nothing but gassy miasma and, as such, their fulminations about Earl Warren, Social Security, fluoridation and the Tennessee Valley Authority -- to name but a few -- fall on deaf ears when aired to the broad majority of the American public. Admittedly, states Bunzel, the liberal has his own shortcomings, but it has been the 'liberal tradition' which has pervaded the American political spectrum since 1932, in spite of McCarthy, Welch, Goldwater -- and the current phenomenon in California Ronald Reagan. 'But,' warns Bunzel. 'there is a larger and more important point to be made about the radical right in the United States than their hyperthyroid anti-communism. The right-wing extremist stands apart from both the liberal and the conservative in that he lacks a full commitment to the democratic process. It is in this sense that he approaches this country's problems with not only an alien mood and temper but an unmistakable hostility to the complex procedures by which our political differences are normally resolved. The conservative and the liberal differ seriously on everything from the nature of man to the necessity and desirability of social reform. One is prone to rely more on instinct and tradition while the other prefers planning and reason. If there is reason to lament the unreasoning rhetoric of the right wing, then certainly one can find cause for equal disenchantment with their opposite numbers on the left. Here Bunzel disputes with theoriticians such as Mills and Lynd, and all but gives a funeral oration for the American Communist Party, which -- says Bunzel -- failed because the doctrines espoused by Marx and Engels in nineteenth-century Europe and implemented by the Bolsheviks in Russia were on sterile ground in pluralistic, two-party America. The same is true of the Socialist Party, regardless of their leaders -- whether it be ideologues such as Eugene V. Debs or more realistic and less doctrinaire men, such as Norman Thomas. He goes after other categories with equal piety -- the Quakers, the pacifists and all those who would abandon or disregard in any small way what he thinks is the only valid political method for attaining power and administering justice: 'democratic politics.' While this is generally a dispassionate and at times an eloquent treatment, it suffers from a pervasive tendency of the holier-than-thou technique, which is not an uncommon tendency among non-fiction writers. In full view, though, one can be more than grateful for Bunzel's timely contribution, despite the author's penchant for highly relativistic, if not prissy, assertion. Anti-politics in America is an edifying book, as it renews the call for a sober perspective - away from simplistic absolutes as well as from he aversion from the democratic process itself. Bunzel's mastery of his subject matter is impressive, his prose is quite readable and his conclusions are, for all their tentative piety, based on well-pondered alternatives. This book is to be recommended as either supplementary material in a college syllabus, or as good, unlazy autumn reading.

THE BEER GARDEN
206 North Linn
Park in the Rear

[drawing of woman, words are in her hair]
HAWKEYE BOOK STORE
ANNUAL FALL RECORD SALE
STARTING TUES NOV. 7
OHN HANDEL 
CLASSICAL
VERDI
MOZART
BACH 
HAWKEYE   
MONO 
STEREO

 [other words on her body]
REGULARLY $3.98 - 4.95
NOW $1.98
OTHERS $4.95 -> $5.95
NOW -> $2.98

Saving...

To Stop A War (contd. from pg 3, ccl 4) Each of these things point, as it seems to me, in the same direction: We have passed the stage of demonstrating our concern to a system that ignores us. We are entering into a phase of nonviolent resistance to, and disruption of, a system which attempts to command our obedience and allegience but gives the majority of the American people no part in the decision-making process. This resistance will be local because it will be undertaken by groups such as ourselves. It will be massive in that it will be happening continuously throughout the country. In doing so we begin the process of radicaliizng the base of support that has developed against the war. This is both dangerous and a crucial moment in movement history and it will determine what the new character of the movement is going to be. The context for this new movement is not fully manifest. We can go a number of different ways from here. There are a variety of directions shaping up that clamor for support. While on the one hand we do not want to respond to anything that manifests itself as a call to action, merely because it IS a call to action; on the other hand, we let this moment in the development of the movement pass at our peril. For, one way or another, gropingly and stupidly, sensibly and strategically -- and this depends on what kinds of energies what kinds of people are willing to give to that development -- one way or another, the movement is going to move from here. There are movement people beginning to feel their way toward domestic sabotage and disruptive violence to undermine the war -- who see the attempt to remove the Marines from the U of I as a kind of futile tactic that assuages our conscience, purifies the campus, but does not inhibit the war. These people want to look beyond nonviolent resistance to a vaguely and romantically defined 'something else.' Yet for the moment they are willing to go along with the non-violent phase until it either plays itself out or proves itself futile, just as those who were looking forward to this phase went along with demonstrations until they had played themselves out. We are, then, at a moment in which a greater commitment is demanded, and at a moment in which those of us who are von-violently inclined have a bit of breathing space -- tactically at least. For, as the SDS meeting Monday night, with its decision to remain non-violent in the demonstration showed, non-violent thinking prevails for the moment. It is up to us to make what we can of that moment; we must demonstrate that we can end this war and begin the change in American society in our non-violent way; before we must give out to those that would persuade us to the armed struggle. If we allow our timidities or our refusal to agree on all the minute particulars while history runs madly around us, it will outstrip and engulf us -- and rightfully so. We stand at the forward edge of a new kind of dissent -- a dissent whose context will be determined by the kinds of people willing to commit themselves to it. What form that dissent will take, and what it means, will become clearer over the next weeks as it begins to actualize itself. Everett Frost ANTI-POLITICS John H. Bunzel, ANTI-POLITICS IN AMERICA: REFLECTIONS ON THE ANTI-POLITICAL TEMPER John H. Bunzel, Anti-politics in America: Reflections on the Anti-political Temper and its Distortions of the Democratic Process, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1967. Any analysis of American political extremes would be one of divergent interests -- the Goldwater movement of 1964, the Students for a Democratic Society, the American Communist Party, the John Birch Society. Professor John H. Bunzel of San Francisco State University has contributed such an analysis in his book, Anti-Politics in America: Reflections on the Anti-Political Temper and Its Distortions of the Democratic Process. He ties the whole extremist menagerie into one bundle and stamps it 'anti-politics.' Bunzel's definition of anti-politics is: that kind of activity which seeks either to bypass the convention of democratic politics in the attempt to achieve its ends or to subdue the political process itself in favor of a monistic doctrinaire society -- in its most extreme form, a dictatorship. In seven long, but lucidly composed chapters, Bunzel analyzes the variants of 'anti-politics,' ranging from the extreme right-wing fanatics of the John Birch Society to such left-wing ideologies as C. Wright Mills and Robert S. Lynd. He also discusses such limpid phenomena as the American Communist Party, the Society of Friends (or Quakers, as they are more commonly known), and the sterile virtues of psychological determinism in analysing political behavior. One could quarrel justifiably with a number of Bunzel's conclusions, but on the whole, Anti-Politics in America is a competent, if not rewarding, book to read. It abounds in pungent, though at times pietistic, observations, such as: '. . .anyone who either understands or is sympathetic to the ways of politics in this country knows that many businessmen, bankers and other 'elite' members of the community are often too indifferent to public affairs for the simple reason that they are too busy making money.' Certainly, this is true as a generality. Bunzel might also have added that because so many members of the Establishment are so materialistically egoistic, they tend to leave the actual practice of 'politics' to factions which do little justice, in many cases, to their political inclinations: larks such as the Birchites, the Goldwaters and the Reagans. But Bunzel spares neither extreme of the political spectrum in his searching analysis. He examines the Birchites and finds them to be fanatical as well as hapless: fanatical because they accept no compromises, and hapless because, as a group aspiring for power, they attempt to bypass the existing order of the society in which they live. In short, the Birchites contribute nothing but gassy miasma and, as such, their fulminations about Earl Warren, Social Security, fluoridation and the Tennessee Valley Authority -- to name but a few -- fall on deaf ears when aired to the broad majority of the American public. Admittedly, states Bunzel, the liberal has his own shortcomings, but it has been the 'liberal tradition' which has pervaded the American political spectrum since 1932, in spite of McCarthy, Welch, Goldwater -- and the current phenomenon in California Ronald Reagan. 'But,' warns Bunzel. 'there is a larger and more important point to be made about the radical right in the United States than their hyperthyroid anti-communism. The right-wing extremist stands apart from both the liberal and the conservative in that he lacks a full commitment to the democratic process. It is in this sense that he approaches this country's problems with not only an alien mood and temper but an unmistakable hostility to the complex procedures by which our political differences are normally resolved. The conservative and the liberal differ seriously on everything from the nature of man to the necessity and desirability of social reform. One is prone to rely more on instinct and tradition while the other prefers planning and reason. If there is reason to lament the unreasoning rhetoric of the right wing, then certainly one can find cause for equal disenchantment with their opposite numbers on the left. Here Bunzel disputes with theoriticians such as Mills and Lynd, and all but gives a funeral oration for the American Communist Party, which -- says Bunzel -- failed because the doctrines espoused by Marx and Engels in nineteenth-century Europe and implemented by the Bolsheviks in Russia were on sterile ground in pluralistic, two-party America. The same is true of the Socialist Party, regardless of their leaders -- whether it be ideologues such as Eugene V. Debs or more realistic and less doctrinaire men, such as Norman Thomas. He goes after other categories with equal piety -- the Quakers, the pacifists and all those who would abandon or disregard in any small way what he thinks is the only valid political method for attaining power and administering justice: 'democratic politics.' While this is generally a dispassionate and at times an eloquent treatment, it suffers from a pervasive tendency of the holier-than-thou technique, which is not an uncommon tendency among non-fiction writers. In full view, though, one can be more than grateful for Bunzel's timely contribution, despite the author's penchant for highly relativistic, if not prissy, assertion. Anti-politics in America is an edifying book, as it renews the call for a sober perspective - away from simplistic absolutes as well as from he aversion from the democratic process itself. Bunzel's mastery of his subject matter is impressive, his prose is quite readable and his conclusions are, for all their tentative piety, based on well-pondered alternatives. This book is to be recommended as either supplementary material in a college syllabus, or as good, unlazy autumn reading. THE BEER GARDEN 206 North Linn Park in the Rear [drawing of woman, words are in her hair] HAWKEYE BOOK STORE ANNUAL FALL RECORD SALE STARTING TUES NOV. 7 OHN HANDEL CLASSICAL VERDI MOZART BACH HAWKEYE MONO STEREO [other words on her body] REGULARLY $3.98 - 4.95 NOW $1.98 OTHERS $4.95 -> $5.95 NOW -> $2.98