( Originally Published 1952 )
`The fountainhead of our democracy, elementary and secondary school education, is drying up at the source.'
Senator George D. Aiken December 28, 1947.
THE POST-WAR PLIGHT OF AMERICAN EDUCATION ADDS TO THE country's psychological and moral crisis, to its ideological insecurity.
One of the reasons for the surpriSing poSt-war decline of education is the lack of funds. The school system has been receiving barely half its needs. Elementary school teachers are So badly underpaid that there are far too few, and many of them require additional jobs to eke out a living. Only one of every five school buildingS is in good condition, and millionS of children start life in what experts call 'educational slums'. Fewer continue through high school than during the Great Depression, and one out of every five school children has to have a job.
`There is no doubt that we can slip backward with alarming speed if the deterioration which has taken place in our [educational] system these past few years continues unchecked', President Truman said in September 1947. The financial situation of our public school system iS something disgraceful in the richest country in the world', he repeated in May 1948.
`We are rapidly going downhill; we are getting worse off each year', Dr Willard E. Givens of the N.E.A. (National Education Association) told the World Organization of the Teaching ProfeSsion on July 19, 1950. Dr Finis E. Engleman, chairman of the N.E.A.'S Commission on Teacher Education, warned on July 1, 1951, according to the New York Times, that 'the plight of American education was as desperate today as the military forces' was after Pearl Harbor'. And the U.S. Commissioner of Education stated on March 22, 1952 that the situation is 'rapidly approaching a major national catastrophe'.
The school system is still one of the numerous spheres of American social life in which the 48 states have never really been united. Each state or state-controlled community remains the jealous master of the destiny of its 'own' children and finances its schools as best it can or cares. In recent years, rich New York, while far from providing enough, has been spending $234 a year on each pupil; well-to-do Pennsylvania, $122; frugal Vermont, $74; and miserable Mississippi, though straining her resources much more than wealthier states, a mere $25 per child. Yet all are bringing up young Americans.
To make things worse, public school funds are largely dependent upon local house and land taxes. This gives the propertied classes which average the smallest number of school age children, a vested interest in keeping educational expenses down. It is why the nation as a whole, despite the inflated costs of running the schools and the large increase in the number of school children, actually reduced its school funds one-eighth below their notoriously inadequate pre-war level, according to figures of the N.E.A.
`If a stranger were to pick up the report on the needs of New York City's schools . . .', a City Councillor wrote to the New York Times in December 1947, 'he would be shocked indeed to find that he was reading about the richest city in the world, which ranked "twenty-eighth in the country last year in support of its schools".'
But even if the pre-war level of school finance had been restored, another $3 billion or nearly as much again as was annually spent on the schools in the late forties, would have been required to bring the poorer states of the union to educational parity with the wealthier ones. A further $2 billion a year would have been needed to help all of them reach fairly adequate standards. Moreover, $10 billion are urgently required for new school buildings.
Impoverished Europe has been doing better than rich America. 'Despite the destruction caused by the war, educational facilities in most countries of Europe have been restored to pre-war standards', the New York Times reported on November 7, 1949. America spends only two per cent, or so, of its national income on public education, but 'three per cent could be spent and not exceed the efforts of nearly bankrupt England', an official of the N.E.A. told the American Council of Education on May 4, 1947. 'More than 7 per cent should be spent if we expect to surpass Russia in her effort to educate her youth', James H. McGraw, Jr., president of the McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, wrote on May 24, 1948. 'That comparison is really something to worry about. . . . The crisis presents a major emergency.'
America lacks 150,000 to 175,00o teachers; and nearly one-eighth of the 88o,000 who teach are officially listed as 'sub-standard'. 'Our whole educational system is crumbling at the very foundation through the lack of elementary teachers', stated a spokesman of the N.E.A. in February 1948. 'If we permit this condition to continue, it is nothing less thin educational suicide.
The salaries of elementary school teachers in New York State, averaging $3,230 in recent years, equalled the wages of the manual w0rkers in the shipbuilding industry. Pennsylvania's averaged $2,100, as much as earnings in the low-wage apparel industry. Minnesota teachers received $1,910, the average wage in America's lowest-paying industry, tobacco. Arkansas paid a mere $1,100.
Yet the nation spends $10,000 a year for the training and keep of each soldier, including the $2,064.60 a year the First Class Private receives in cash.*
It is not surprising that, among male teachers, '81 per cent had to spend more for ordinary living expenses than they earned at their school jobs', according to a survey of the Teachers' Union in 1948; that 'the average amount by which expenses exceeded school salary was just under $1,000'; that, `to make up for this deficit, 20 per cent had to borrow money. . . . 56 per cent took after-school jobs. . . . 50 per cent drew on savings that had been set aside for emergency'; and that 'savings from present income have been out of the question for 88 per cent'.
These two case histories were heard by a Senate committee in 1947: 'Mrs Flora Harriman of Hampden, Maine, teaches thirty children in three grades, tends furnace, cleans the schoolroom, old-fashioned toilets and the drinking fountain, displays the flag, shovels snow, supervises playground ... has worked up from $540 to $1,000 a year. —Mrs Nannie A. Rucker, Negro School, Emery, Tennessee, teaches eight grades, forty-one children from families all but two of which are sharecroppers; takes them to county clinic, conducts all community drives, and in addition to janitor work of all types, does carpentry such as window sill repairs and propping up coal house. She said any position she could get as waitress, cook, factory worker or beauty parlour operator, would pay more, but "teaching is my calling". She gets $886 a year.'
Within a decade, America will require 1,045,622 new elementary teachers, estimated the N.E.A., to provide for the quickly growing school population, reduce badly overcrowded classes and replace teachers who die, retire or are unqualified. But barely 20,000 young people have been graduating from the nation's colleges each year to take up the penurious career of teaching and, often enough, submit to
'When it comes to the cost of upkeep, the man in uniform is rapidly catching up with the blonde in mink and pearls. The next time you see a soldier, sailor or marine walking along the street, you can say to yourself, there goes a man it takes $10,000 a year to support.' (Associated Press, February 12, 1951, about `information of the Department of Defense'.) the bigoted control of their thoughts and morals by local schoolboards. Year after year the teacher problem is discussed in and out of Congress, but nothing is done.
The condition of many school buildings has long been a public scandal. All states 'realize that they face a serious educational crisis because of inadequate school buildings', reported the New York Times on April 4, 1949 after a nation-wide survey. 'Public school buildings, on both the elementary and high school levels, are in "deplorable" conditions today Millions of children now attend classes in buildings that are obsolete, potential firetraps or totally inadequate to meet the needs of a modern educational program. . . School officials emphasize that several million children are not receiving an adequate education because of the poor school buildings. . . In some communities the children attend classes in garages, church cellars, private homes and abandoned shops.'
Even in New York City, one-quarter of the school children spend their lives in 'educational slums', reported the Public Education Association. Billy Rose, a widely read columnist, was moved by these facts to see for himself. 'They made me ashamed of the town I'm always bragging about', he wrote. 'There's a building up in Harlem [the Negro quarter] that used to be a prison. Twenty-five years ago the Police Department decided it was unsafe and abandoned it. Today it's called Public School 125. The school kids eat their lunches in the cells. The wealthiest metropolis in the world has not even bothered to remove the bars. As I walked home, I remembered a line about kids in the Constitution of the United Nations: "Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed."
`With part-time pupils in idleness or running the streets, victims of safety hazards, prey to questionable diversions, our overcrowded schools are a community problem of the greatest magnitude', the executive secretary of the N.E.A. said on June 25, 1950.
Not all Americans are literate. Nearly 3 million are unable to read and write. Over P0 million more, with only a few years of schooling, are 'functionally illiterate, which means that they can't read a newspaper or a bock or write a letter', according to Collier's magazine of April 13, 1946. During the war one-and-three-quarter million soldiers, 13 in each loo, fell short of the Army's modest minimum standard of fourth-grade. education and had to be put through special classes for months before they could qualify for duty. 'This is a rifle—the rifle shoots', these grown-up men learned to read and write while others fought. 'I keep my rifle clean.'
Prospects seem no better for the growing generation than they were for their parents. Four million school age children, r in every 8, were not attending elementary school in 1951, according to census figures. In the Southern domain of Negroes and 'poor whites', things are even worse, as the Arkansas State Commissioner of Education told the U.S. Senate: '. . 10 per cent of the educatable youth are not in schools at all. . . . 27 per cent attending so irregularly as to get little benefit... . 5o per cent in overcrowded classrooms. . . . 4o per cent of the teachers having less than two years' college and 20 per cent none at all'.
High school education is compulsory. Thirty-seven states have an official school-leaving age of 16, in six states it is 17, and in five, 18 years. But this is theory; in practice, 547 out of every 1,000 boys and girls left school prematurely, reported the N.E.A. in 1948. Bef0re the war this educational 'mortality' rate on the high school level was only 487 out of every 1,000.
The inequality of educational opportunity among young Americans varies from state to state. In Montana no more than 269 in every ,000 had to drop out before high sch0ol; in New York the number was 435 of each 1,000; in Washington, D.C., it was 574; in Texas, 6o8; in Mississippi 796 of every r,000 boys were unable to continue through high school.
It might be thought that schooling is of secondary importance in a country of self-made men, where character, drive and enterprise are supposed to count more than education, as the films suggest; and where most of the great corporation presidents and other typical `American successes' are believed to have grown up in poverty without much schooling. But a report of the Committee on Education of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on the close relationship between education and earning power proved that those with the least schooling mostly were the first to lose their jobs in a depression and the last to be re-employed. The U.S. Census reported that men who finished grammar school earn 28 per cent more than those who did not. High school graduates earn 44 per cent more than the unschooled. Men with at least one year in college earn 82 per cent more than those without formal education. Of the Americans who became prominent enough in business to have their names listed in Who's Who in America, over 90 per cent are college graduates.
To deprive millions of children of a high school education therefore means depriving them of a good part of their chance in an increasingly competitive life.
If educational results are often meagre, it is largely due to economic handicaps. For, nearly every fourth pupil of 14 to 17 years holds a job while going to school, according to a Census report of June, 1951. Nearly one-third of all boys and one-sixth of all girls cannot devote their entire working time to school and homework. While 694,000 school children work on jobs less than 15 hours a week, 693,000 work up to 34 hours a week, and over 150,000 work 35 hours or more, to gain a living while they are supposed to learn and enjoy their youth.
The rate of job-holding school children in post-war years has been almost six times as high as in 1940, the semi-depression year with its low employment opportunities. But this does not indicate progress for America's youth since very few indeed of these boys and girls are of the legendary Horatio Alger type, strong and mature enough to do well in school while already on a 'business career', thriving on overwork in mind and body and grateful for their hard but glorious `American opportunity'. Many suffer in health or education or both and develop psychological imbalances from this enforced combination of learning and earning.
Altogether, America is far from providing a healthy atmosphere for the upbringing of millions of children. The financial and social problems of their parents weigh heavily on them from infancy; and government does less than in many a poorer country to help and protect them in their formative years.
About one-quarter of the mothers even of the youngest children have to work outside to help support the family; but there are relatively fewer creches and kindergartens than in other modern nations. Even in the prosperous year 1947, the families of over one million children were dependent upon some form of public or charitable assistance; yet it is generally agreed that such aid is not sufficient to give them a fair chance of healthy development.
Post-war inflation has made the children's life more difficult, as attested by the Family Service Association of America in its report Family Troubles Grow As Living Costs Soar, based on surveys of 114 member agencies all over the country. 'The severe difficulties of making ends meet are contributing to the frequency of marital friction, separation, divorce and the insecurity of children ... [There is] a gain in the number of mothers who no longer find it possible to afford adequate care and supervision of their children while they are away from home . . . an increase in the number of "problem children". . . Children having recurring illnesses . . . because parents can afford less milk or have to cut down on other items necessary to good nutrition. . . . Couples having first child, and some having third or fourth, are requesting this child to be placed for adoption since they are unable to provide for it adequately . . . Parents' inability to pay t0tal board cost for children placed in foster homes.. . • Mothers going to work to help pay for houses bought at very high cost and asking to place children, daytime or fullume.
Then at school age : 'Children failing to enter school or attending poorly because of lack of clothing. . . . Children being put to work earlier to supplement inadequate incomes. Behaviour problems growing out of the inability of parents to provide things they would normally give their children. . . . Friction with older children who need allowances, and a general lowering of family living standards and harmony. . . . Teen-age children run out of spending money for school, even though they have after-school jobs....'
The schools, in many cases, fail to improve the mental health of children whom their home environment impedes or damages. Teachers —too few, overworked, underpaid and often too little qualified—sometimes add to the children's psychological problems. Putting the number of Americans of all ages in need of 'mental hygiene treatment' at 3o million, Professor Esther Lloyd-Jones of Columbia University's Teachers College said: 'Teachers .. . contribute to making these figures as large as they are.'
Appalling numbers of children have become delinquent. Juvenile crime 'has attained proportions of a national threat', Attorney General Torn Clark said. 'Children—persons between the ages of 7 and i 5—today commit 56 per cent of the nation s crimes', the New York Times Magazine Section wrote on February 15, 1948.
Juvenile gangsterism, stimulated by Hollywood radio and 'comic' books, is a real problem. 'Pitched battles between schoolboy gangs in the streets of New York have taken the lives of ten youths in the last year', reported the New York Times on May 8, 1950; 'a study of New York's teen-age gangs shows that the slaughter and street violence go on.. . . Young hoodlums in third generation,"
Gangs on the West Side are terrorizing children and intimidating adults whose homes they invade. In Harlem, teachers continue to gather large harvests of knives and other weapons from pupils. The Police Department has an active file of sixty youth gangs. . . . The department's Juvenile Aid Bureau has cards on 1,500 members of these gangs. . . .
Narcotics have made their way into the schools, dragging not a few of the young and very young into an abyss of addiction, black-marketing, gambling, prostitution and general demoralization. 'Narcotic addiction among juveniles has reached epidemic proportions in nine major cities from coast to coast and is at its worst in New York, federal narcotics officials said', according to New York Times reports in June 1951. 'A nightmare picture of teen-age boys drugging themselves in school buildings with heroin and marijuana bought from classmates was developed yesterday at the state inquiry . . . a 17-yearold student boasted . . . that he had been the chief bookmaker in a Brooklyn high school and had won most of the profits from the school's No. 1 narcotics peddler, whose sales averaged $300 to $400 a day. . . . One out of every 200 high school boys and girls probably is a user of narcotic drugs, Superintendent of Schools William Jansen conceded at an open hearing. . . . A 16-year-old Bronx high school girl . . . who had smoked her first marijuana "reefer" at a party when she was 13 years old told of her conversion to cocaine and heroin and how the need for money to satisfy her craving had led her to burglary and prostitution.'
`Juvenile delinquency is on the rise in the city, the state and the nation', the paper reported again on April 20, 1952. 'This extreme behaviour of youth, authorities suggest, may reflect the impact of the Korean war and the psychological effects of national and international insecurity. . . . One-tenth of the 1,000,000 children apprehended annually by the police are sent to jails (sometimes alongside hardened criminals) because communities have no place for them. . . .'
The economic problems of higher education, too, have become more acute, despite post-war prosperity. Wealthy donors who, over the generations, gave billions of dollars of endowment funds to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia and other famous and less known private universities and colleges have become less responsive to the constant clamour for more funds. The annual yield of existing endowments has not kept up with inflation-swollen costs; and the growing number of students-2,300,000 in 1950 against 1,500,000 before the war—has required more and more funds. State institutions, too, have been kept relatively short by thrift-minded legislatures.
The nation's colleges and universities are 'in desperate straits' and running deeper and deeper into debt, the Association of American Colleges warned in 1948. The situation grew worse in 1949 and 1950, even though enrolments began to drop and about $1 billion worth of fresh private gifts were given or promised, often by businessmen aiming for community prestige, research benefits, or influence. But at least $5 billion are required to improve teaching facilities, replace the large numbers of obsolete buildings and increase the salaries of that majority of college teachers and professors who, too, are badly underpaid. Many a college and university dean or president has turned full-time fund raiser. New appointments to those positions of scholastic and educational responsibility are made more and more on the basis of a candidate's connections with business.
This financial dilemma has made a good many institutions of higher learning appendages of business and submitted many more to growing commercial influence. Executives of the giant corporations play a major role on the boards of colleges and universities. Together with other businessmen they have become the intellectual mentors, apart from the financial backers, of much of America's higher education.
Many colleges and universities are now in business themselves, investing their endowment funds in industrial and c0mmercial enterprises and acquiring vested interests in business—which inevitably colours the social outlook they impart to their students.
'Colleges today are a long way from being just dealers in higher education', wrote Business Week on September to, 1949. 'In the last few years the schools have come to look more and more like corporate holding companies. Some 4o per cent of endowments are now directly invested in businesses or real estate. Much of the college news now belongs more on the business-financial pages than in the educational columns. . . . To make ends meet, universities, either as owners or as sole beneficiaries, have taken over the operation of a wide range of businesses .. from airports and bus lines t0 piston-ring plants. Schools also operate fruit and walnut groves, farms, cattle ranches and creameries, printing plants, laboratories, office buildings, and apartments. . Except for life insurance companies, schools are probably the largest owner-lessors of retail stores. .
The commercial ventures of America's academic institutions sometimes arouse the ire of competitors in small business; for college-owned or operated enterprises are exempt from federal tax on corporate earnings. The leadership of Big Business, however, gladly encourages the interlopers, sharing the views of college and university presidents whom Business Week quoted as saying: "It is certainly an infinitely healthier thing . . . for colleges to add to their living by business investment than to rely on outright federal subsidies . . . as has been urged even by some leading educators"? For what can be better for 'free enterprise' than to have the teachers of America's academic youth still more securely in their camp?
Even in the lower reaches of the educational system business invests much money to strengthen its influence. 'American industry and commerce spend about $100,000,000 annually for cooperating with schools and educational institutions', Dr Paul B. Gillen of the public relations consultants firm Hill & Knowlton was quoted by the New York Times on February 5, 1949. And Howard M. Cool, educational director of the National Better Business Bureau said, according to the New York Herald Tribune of March 12, 1948, 'that in distribution of educational materials schools should be considered as a regular advertising medium.
The economic problems of many college and university students are no less serious than those of their schools.
From 1900 to 1946, tuition and other fees rose four-fold in private universities, and ten-fold for non-resident students in state institutions. By 1950, the cost of tuition went up still further. The annual cost of attending colleges, universities and technical schools, in the New York Times' estimate of November 27, 1950, was between $877 and $899 for the average student. This may still not be much for the upper-income groups which, according to a study of a Harvard University group, are sending 90 per cent of their children to college. But it is a good deal for many of the middle-income families who give 15 per cent of their boys and girls a higher education. And it closes the doors of colleges and universities to many of those mere 5 per cent of the children of lower-income families who, so far, have somehow managed to get in. (Only few scholarships cover most or all of the cost of study, apart from those which, for some years, permitted veterans of the second world war to study under the G.I. Bill of Rights.)
In post-war years, one-quarter to one-third of all students aged eighteen to twenty-four had to have jobs to pay part of their way through college, against 16 of every hundred before the war. Many of those who give up their studies without graduating (half of all who start) are the victims of ambition unsupported by adequate family means, rather than unable to 'make good'.
America is indeed 'allowing the opportunity for higher education to depend so largely on the individual's economic status', as a special commission of distinguished citizens set up by President Truman reported in December 1947, that 'we are not only denying to millions of young people the chance of life to which they are entitled [but] are also depriving the nation of a vast amount of potential leadership and potential social competence which it sorely needs'. For the mere one-sixth of the nation's youth of college age who study are barely half the number of young Americans the Commission considered `mentally capable of higher education'.
Yet, what use is it suggesting a vast government aid scheme that would give free college education to all promising students—as the Commission did, without much h0pe of ever seeing the proposal passed by Congress—when it is evident that the American economy is unable in peace-time to absorb even the poverty-restricted crop of college and university graduates?
'Many graduates will be unable t0 find jobs in the occupations for which they have been trained', read a typical fob Outlook report of the U.S. Department of Labor on June 1, 1949. 'Jobs are to be fewer in 1950 . . . while the number of jobseekers with new diplomas will be the greatest in history', wrote U.S. News & World Report on March 24, 1950. lobseekers in the 195o flood of graduates are being told to expect the worst.' Only the Korean war changed this somewhat, at least for the time being.
Greater even than the economic problems which trouble American education are its intellectual dilemmas.
One of them is the 'constant competition of the press and other mass information media (which seek) to vulgarize the human mind', Dr Robert M. Hutchins, Chancellor of Chicago University and author of the Report on the Freedom of the Press, was quoted by the New York Times of October 6, 195o. 'He said that one university such as the University of Chicago (among the largest and best in the United States) exercised much less influence in the public mind than a motion picture company in Hollywood.'
No matter how much parents, teachers and social workers may object and how conclusively investigations may have confirmed the immeasurable harm the mass opinion industries do to the mind of youth, 'free enterprise' has been winning the battle for the children's minds over the ill-equipped school system. Under public pressure some radio network may postpone its regular evening 'murder mystery' to after-supper time, or some comics producer may choose a few 'wholesome' subjects to offset their normal fare of brutality- and stupidity-inducing trash but things are steadily becoming worse, especially since television has made new inroads into the 'juvenile and adolescent markets'.
Much of young America is in a bad way intellectually, General Omar N. Bradley, U.S. Army Chief of Staff, complained in an article in Collier's magazine on February 26, 1949 about 'the political illiteracy of our young troops'. He was 'moved to charge education with gross dereliction' and blamed 'the people as a whole [for] their shocking apathy to the sterility of their school curricula . . . responsible even today for the political immaturity, the economic ignorance, the philosophical indifference and the spiritual insolvency of so many young men'.
The lack of knowledge of even fundamental aspects of American life is appalling', the educational expert of the New York Times summed up a nationwide college survey on June I I, 1951. The amount of misinformation is unbelievably large. . . . Less than half the college students know even the approximate population of the United States. . . . Despite the role that this country is now taking in world leadership, the college students know very little about the world beyond their own borders. For example, only seven 0ut of the 4,752 students—and all were upperclassmen—could name the countries that border Yugoslavia. . . Few could even name one country that touched Yugoslavia; others named such nations as Belgium, Egypt, Manchuria or Portugal. One student even named Canada.'
The 'sterility of American school curricula' not only has remained unchanged; but educational standards and school morale have deteriorated further under the two-fold impact of economic anaemia and Cold War pressures the school system has been suffering.
These are some symptoms of the unhealthy atmosphere in American education.
New York police 'used 150 men of the foot patrol, forty police recruits, thirty detectives and twenty mounted men' against high school students demonstrating in support of their teachers' demands for salary increases, the New York Times wrote on April 29, 1950. 'An alerted and augmented police detail kept the main bodies of the students from assembling in and around City Hall. . . . Police-student clashes were frequent. — . The skirmishes resulted in twenty-one persons being taken into custody. . — By noon, the police had the students well out of Foley Square, but each time the bluecoat line slackened or moved back toward the Square, the student lines reformed and sallied back, the girls screeching, the boys shouting.'
`Frequently the schools do not take up controversial issues in the classrooms, because of community pressures or because the teachers fear that they will be labelled "Red" or denounced as "radicals" [and because] unjust accusations directed at teachers for "un-American activities" often tend to create fear and insecurity among the teaching staff', the same paper reported on January z3, 1950; so that, as one school superintendant said: 'Teachers are now afraid to discuss current issues which might even lead to the bare mention of Russia in the classroom.'
'A dismal picture of banned textbooks, mutilated courses of study, intimidated teachers . . . was unfolded', the paper wrote on August 21, 1951, about the convention of the far from 'radical' American Federation of Teachers, whose president spoke of 'an epidemic of vicious, unwarranted firing of teachers', in some cases with 'the specific charge of union participation', and 'a tightening of the noose around the neck of free education'.
On the university level things are even worse: 'A subtle, creeping paralysis 0f freedom of thought and speech is attacking college campuses in many parts of the country, limiting both students and faculty in the area traditionally reserved for the free exploration of knowledge and truth . . . a narrowing of the area of tolerance in which students, faculty and administrators feel free to speak, act and think independently', the New York Times summed up its study of seventy-two major colleges on May 10 and 11, 1951.
`Many members of the college community were wary and felt varying degrees of inhibition about speaking out on controversial issues. . . . Such caution, in effect, has made many campuses barren of the free give-and-take of ideas, [created] a seemingly insoluble problem for the campus liberal, depleted his ranks and brought to many college campuses an apathy about current problems that borders almost on their deliberate exclusion. . . . A shying away, both physically and intellectually, from any association with the words, "liberal", "peace", "freedom", and fr0m classmates of a liberal stripe. . . .The willingness of instructors to express their own honest viewpoint has been slowly ebbing. .. . A number of the teachers offer qualifying apologies during their lectures, particularly when they move from the black-and-white realm of the textbook to analysis and interpretation, saying, "Don't get me wrong," and "Don't think I'm a Communist". . .. [On one campus] there was an atmosphere, as in most of the country, which tends to equate criticism with disloyalty and liberalism with Communism.
`In the college placement office, Miss Ruth Houghton, director, said the word "liberal" was "a poisonous word" to many would-be employers, who conceived of the "liberal girl" as an "obstructionist" and "organizer against employer interests".... At the University of Michigan Dean Erich A. Walter explained that students were quite obviously more careful in their affiliations, recognizing that Federal security [F.B.I.] officers were making careful checks on the membership of liberal organizations. . . .
Repressionism continues to make inroads not only on freedom of speech, thought and action on the college level, but at each echelon of the nation's educational structure.'
The World The Dollar Built:
Death And The Dollar
The Other America
Oh, To Be Secure
Big Labor And Big Business
Global Chain Reaction
A Floor Under The Risks Of Peace
Read More Articles About: The World The Dollar Built