Zinn cautions against capitulation

Historian and author Howard Zinn addressed the importance of dissent and skepticism in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks during a speech on Oct. 11 as part of the Milton S. Eisenhower (MSE) Symposium.

With continual references to historical crises, Zinn upheld the integrity of First Amendment rights and urged the audience not to capitulate to the mindless fervor for war. Zinn particularly opposed the current emphasis on national unity and patriotism.

"Unity is one of those words. Everybody's for freedom; everybody's for democracy; everybody's for unity," said Zinn. "But what does it mean? For what are we united?"

Zinn mocked anchorman Dan Rather's promise of obedience to President George W. Bush, comparing it to the mindset of citizens in a totalitarian state. Then, he attacked former Vice President Al Gore's affirmation that President Bush is his "commander-in-chief."

"Gore hasn't read the Constitution," Zinn said. "The President is the commander-in-chief of the army, not the commander-in-chief of us."

Instead of blindly pledging allegiance to the government, citizens must foster skepticism and dissent, said Zinn. Otherwise, war and crisis can be used as tools of suppression.

"The rationale for the suppression of free speech is security," explained Zinn. "So whenever we are in a crisis situation, the First Amendment is put aside. Now, if the first amendment is put aside in times of crisis, what is it good for? For cocktail parties?"

In junior high school, said Zinn, he was taught that the ingenious system of checks and balances would ensure that the government adhered to the Constitution. Specifically, it is "the Supreme Court's job to see to it that the Constitution is followed." Yet the Supreme Court has continually failed to fulfill its obligation, particularly with regard to the First Amendment.

"We cannot depend on the structure of government, on the Constitution, on checks and balances, on the formal apparatus which is often presented as democracy to secure our liberties, to secure our lives, or to make good the promise of the Declaration of Independence that this government is set up to ensure everybody life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," Zine said.

It is the citizens themselves that must protect their rights through protests and dissent, said Zinn. "Democracy is dead until people bring it alive, until citizens get together," said Zinn. According to Zinn, dissent even flourished during the American Revolution, an essential key to the American identity.

"There were soldiers in George Washington's army who mutinied," said Zinn. "Yes, there were mutinies, and they were needed. Dissent in a time of crisis is needed." People dissented in the Mexican War, said Zinn. "Soldiers looked at the corpses strewn around on the route to Mexico City, and so several regiments deserted on the way," said Zinn. "I'm the grandson of one of those people."

And Zinn insisted that this history of dissent, this tradition of skepticism toward the government, must be rigorously maintained in the current conflict, because the government and Constitution themselves are not dependable.

In fact, he compared Congress's recent resolution in support of President Bush to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution of 1964, which authorized "LBJ to do whatever he wanted in Southeast Asia and then [led] us into a nine, 10-year brutal, bloody war in which 58,000 Americans were killed."

Zinn accredited the nation's extrication from the conflict primarily to citizen involvement and protest.

"Yes, 6,000 people lost their lives - that should cause us to think, not to blindly rush out and act," Zinn added. "But what did we do? We bombed. That's what we do when we don't know what to do."

Instead of condoning military action, Zinn urged the audience to adopt a global view of the crisis and not to combat terrorism with further violence.

"People must begin to think outside national boundaries," said Zinn. "That means you must take the principles of the Declaration of Independence and extend them to everybody in the world."

He said this precludes violence since all humans deserve peace and prosperity. Zinn proceeded to compare the terrorist attacks to his own experience in World War II. Although initially horrified by the frightful scenes in New York on Sept. 11, Zinn realized that the bombs he dropped as a bombardier in World War II may have wreaked the same misery and destruction. Zinn went on to claim that Americans must stop considering opponents in other countries as mere ciphers and must oppose terrorism.

"And the problem is not just the fanatics, but it's governments that commit terrorism in order to do something about terrorism," said Zinn. "We must set ourselves against other acts of terrorism, terrorism committed by other people and terrorism committed by us."

After his speech, Zinn answered audience questions and said that the U.S. should consider the causes of the current situation and rectify them.

Program coordinators Audrey Henderson and Gregor Feige felt Zinn provided a good contrast to previous MSE speaker, Lt. Colonel Oliver North, thereby encouraging political discussion among the Hopkins and Baltimore community.

"Zinn's viewpoints really go to the opposite end of the spectrum from Ollie North," said Henderson. "That's what the symposium is about, presenting different viewpoints."

"I thought it was unbelievable," added Feige. "The interaction between the crowd and Zinn was really good for intellectual discourse."Others expressed doubts about the seemingly blind support and applause of the audience.The fanaticism of the audience was frightening, and I don't think that's what Howard Zinn is about," stated Douglas Rodgers, a senior at Peabody Conservatory.

"People clapped too much, and I couldn't hear his points," said freshman Robert Jacques. "It was almost like a pep rally after a while."

The extreme liberal quality of the audience may have been due to the attendance of local liberal organizations. Henderson invited local groups with a potential interest in Zinn's political views,including the local Green Party. Zinn also provided a brief definition of terrorism: "the taking of innocent life for some presumed important purpose."

"If you define it this way, governments commit terrorism, too," Zinn said. "So I'm suggesting now that we think in global terms and stop thinking it is important that we be a military superpower of the world. Instead, let's be a nonviolent, modest country. Let's be a moral superpower.