Since Michael Rossman thought my attempt at humor was an "unseemly taunt"
let me stick to facts.
The Goines books is full of errors of both omission and commission. But his
list of "dramatis personae" is pretty inclusive, with lots of people whose
contribution to events was fairly obscure. I'm listed twice: as Jo and Joe
Freeman, but with different roles (and assessments). Neither Bill Mandel nor
Michael Lerner are listed among the "personae", though Lerner has a brief
mention in the index and text (described in an earlier post). Mandel isn't
in either.
I did not see Lerner's name in any of the thousands of pages of other stuff
I read, including unpublished interviews with FSM participants, and notes of
meetings taken by Rossman and Anastasi. Bill Mandel is listed occasionally as
an alternate to the FSM Executive Committee (which acted as sort of a general
assembly, not as an executive body) from a non student group. Lerner is not
on any list of anybody, including office staff and volunteers, or arrestees.
The FBI sent me thousands of pages in its FSM file, after seven years of
FOIA requests, and numerous letters from various Members of Congress from
whom I requested help in prying these loose. Most of these pages are news
clippings (which would have been useful when I began my research, but by the
time I got them, told me little I didn't already know), blacked out pages, or
extensive reports of various groups in different parts of the country where
the FSM got a mere mention. Also included are numerous copied documents,
including the FSM songbook (twice), magazine articles on the FSM, and a com
plete copy of Student by David Horowitz. All at ten cents a page, paid in
advance.
From these I learned all sorts of arcane details, such as that Michael
Rossman was registered to vote, but did not declare a party preference (Jack
Weinberg was a registred Democrat). I also learned virtally everyone with
a CP connection or who were members of a "subversive" group (DuBois Clubs and
YSA). These names were not blacked out. Bill Mandel is not among them.
Given his past, how did the FBI miss him? It named people I never heard of
until I read these files, including Leon Wofsy, a new professior in the
Dept. of Bacteriology and Immunology, whom J. Edgar Hoover was convinced was
the "brains" behind the FSM. Bettina, of course, gets lots of ink, including
copies of her articles in Political Affairs. Even Carl Bloice shows up (he
wrote about the FSM for the People's World). But not Bill Mandel.
As for debating Clark Kerr; That may have been a Michael Lerner fantasy,
or even a Bill Mandel fantasy, but that's all. There is nothing in anything
I read, or wrote, or remembered, to indicate that anyone ever thought of that
as a possibility. Nor would Kerr have agreed (I've read a lot by and about
him, as well). 1) Kerr agreed with the FSM on the basic issue, and said so
in public print as early as 1966. 2) He had nothing to gain by debating any
one in public on anything even remotely connected with campus disruption. He
even fought (and lost) a subpoena to be a witness for the defense in our trial.
(But the judge sustained all prosecutorial objections to most of the questions
our attorneys asked, so it was a useless victory). 3) Kerr's focus was on
protecting the University, mostly from the legislature, and particularly
from the Senate Fact-Finding Subcommittee on UnAmerican Activities, which
attacked it (and him personally) in its 1961, 1963 (and 1965 and 1966) reports.
The Chairman of that committee was the powerful Hugh Burns, President pro
tem of the California Senate. Burns (and his Committee counsel R.E. Combs)
tried to have him fired several times (as did the FBI), because he was insuffi
ciently concerned with rooting out subversives at the University. Given
these concerns, the idea of Clark Kerr debating Bill Mandel, or Mario Savio
or Hal Draper is downright funny.
Bill Mandel's memory of decision making in the FSM is rosier than real.
Michael's is closer to the truth. Social Movements by their very nature do
not have well established decision making procedures, and don't always follow
the ones they think they have. How decisions were made in the FSM varied enor
mously with time and event. Sometimes crucial decisions were made by one or
two people, and sometimes they were debated by mass meetings. Sometimes
those whose views differed from the leadership were treated with respect, and
sometimes they were trashed and ostracized. The full story of the FSM has
not yet been told. Goines excerpts interviews done by others to tell part of
it; I tell a different story in my forthcoming book; Clark Kerr gives his
views in his forthcoming memoir; other members of the Administration (Strong,
Williams, Sherriffs, Towle) tell theirs in their oral histories; and more
remain to be told. There are a lot of myths about the FSM (including the
one that it was started by the Administration's capitulation to Oakland Tribune
owner Bill Knowland's complaint about recruiting picketers from Bancroft and
Telegraph). It's time to look at it from the many perspectives, unclouded
by wishful thinking.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 10/13/00 EDT