The World & I Online Magazine, ONline Archive and Educational Resource  
World & I School | World & I Homeschool | World & I College | World & I Library
Username:   Password:      Subscribe Now   Register   About Us | Contact Us | FAQs      
The World & I Archive Peoples of the World Book Reviews Worldwide Folktales Fathers of Faith
Search  
Sort by: Results Listed:
Date Range:    Advanced Search

The World & I Magazine
 
Current Issue
The Arts
Life
Natural Science
Culture
Book World
Modern Thought
  Resources
American Waves
Book Reviews
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Profiles in Character
Traveling the Globe
Writers and Writing

Why I Am a Neocon


Article # : 11661 

Section : MODERN THOUGHT
Issue Date : 9 / 1986  2,349 Words
Author : Herbert London
Herbert London is dean of the Gallatin Division of New York University and Senior Fellow of the Hudson Institute.

       As a college student in the mid-1950s, I imbibed the liberal shibboleths offered by Columbia College professors as gospel. Nonetheless, I shunned facile theories of human behavior. I happened to believe that what was liberal was right. Despite my orientation and that of my professors and fellow students, there was an openness about campus life. One would not have won an argument at Columbia College by supporting Eisenhower over Stevenson in the 1956 election, but there were standards of rhetorical rectitude that militated against open-and-shut cases. In fact, every issue was debated; it was really a matter of honing undeveloped minds. I would argue as vigorously about the virtues of the 1955 Brooklyn Dodgers as Dostoyevskian literary ploys.
       
        There were, however, some matters that evoked student and faculty consensus. By the 1950s, it was accepted that quotas for admission into the college were wrong. That didn't mean, however, that quotas were not applied by university officials; it meant only that the issue could mobilize the political will of an overwhelming majority of liberals and a handful of conservatives.
       
        Similarly propaganda, which most of us could readily identify, was to be criticized, particularly in the classroom. If one were to say, "That's propaganda!" it was a put-down as harsh as "nonsense." That rule of thumb applied to students and faculty members alike. "Put up or shut up" was the ultimate rhetorical challenge; one had to prove his argument was sound. Nothing was taken for granted. At times students went to absurd lengths to demonstrate the truth of their claims, but this was in the interest of promoting truth as we understood it. McCarthyism for me meant the arbitrary closing of discussion. It was as much a ... (1997 of 14445 Characters)
Read Full Article

Copyright © 2004 The World & I Online. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy