Suchergebnisse

It is only fair to begin with an admission that a few years ago I would have regarded the title of this paper as an impossible self-contradiction. Scholarship was one concept; activism another. In those days, the two concepts appeared to me to be incompatible. One could, of course, expect to encounter activists who had been scholars, or who had at least received scholarly training; but one would not expect to find a scholar who was an activist at the same time. In the simplest and most general terms, scholarship implied withdrawal, and activism meant involvement. This, at least, was the tradition with which I was familiar. True, there was such a thing as it applied scholarship, but this applied to subjects with which I was not very familiar, nor was I very comfortable with the concept. It seemed to me that the scholar who was overly concerned with the application of his scholarship was not a true scholar and that he stood in danger of compromising his scholarly objectivity and integrity. Obviously, this was the point of view of a rather standard traditionalist, trained in a study of government which had deep roots in the orthodoxy of the humanities and – in my case — lesser roots in the social sciences, which in my student days still seemed more social than scientific.

1 p. A typed, photocopied list (partially illegible) of episodes of student unrest and activism at campuses across the country.

This text reinterprets a misunderstood and overlooked epoch of the Asian American experience, the Asian American Movement (AAM). The authors argue that, contrary to the common view of the movement as a passing phase limited to college youth, the Asian American Movement spanned diverse political viewpoints and became increasingly sophisticated and effective. Asian Americans were active participants and played unique roles in the social movements that convulsed the 1960s and 1970s, particularly in protestsagainst the Vietnam War. The book traces the history of the AAM from its roots in the 193

Modern Totalitarianism has often been grouped with various forms of authoritarianism in a genus characterized by excessive discipline. Is it not true, though, that the typical totalitarian motivation of our times can be described as revolutionary rather than authoritarian? Is it not a spirit that sees in revolution a vocation, an end in itself, a way of life? A faith in the creativeness of total destruction can be found in Bakunin, Goebbels, and Lenin. Their will to revolution stems not from an identification with the grievances of a suffering class, but from an ideological rejection of everything that exists.

A report on a small portion of data drawn from a mail F survey of Kansas soc studies teachers-only those findings relevant to D. Jaros, SA 0925/E0322, are presented. The following proposition was examined among 316 teachers: Teachers in Ru HSch's are more concerned with community pressures related to what they teach & less willing to bring controversial matters into their classrooms. It was found that Kansas soc studies teachers are not pol'al activists outside the classroom. They do not perceive their communities as threatening their classroom integrity & are not impressed by attempts to influence what is taught. The expression of personal opinions on public-policy matters is strongly approved by the teachers. However, although a very slight majority agree that a pol'ly active teacher is more effective, almost 29% approve the position that a proper response to disagreement with community leaders would be to leave the community. Over 33.3% feel that academic freedom in HSch is less important than in Coll classrooms. There appears to be an initial & important, but not long-lasting, effect of Coll experience on responses of the teacher sample. Jaros' data are more highly suggestive as to the influences of background & training than are the limited data in this study. Nevertheless, the continuing importance of formal educ'al background on teacher att's needs considerably more attention. E. Weiman.

Few behavioural attributes rank higher in the Chinese Communist system of values than that of activism (chi-chi-hsing). In apparent continuity with the Leninist tradition, the Chinese Communists have made the activist the archetype of their new political man, and a key operational figure in their system of political control. This analysis is an exploration of the Chinese Communist use of the concept of activism as a political value, and of the role that the activist plays in Party efforts to penetrate and control Chinese society.