DOCSLIB.ORG

Brave New Neighborhoods: the Privatization of Public Space

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Brave New Neighborhoods: the Privatization of Public Space Brave New Neighborhoods Brave New Neighborhoods THE PRIVATIZATION OF PUBLIC SPACE Margaret Kohn ROUTLEDGE NEW YORK AND LONDON Published in 2004 by Routledge 29 W 35th Street New York, NY 10001 http://www.routledge- ny.com/ Published in Great Britain by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane London EC4P 4EE http://www.routledge.co.uk/ Copyright © 2004 by Taylor & Francis Books, Inc. Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group. This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “ To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to http://www.ebookstore.tandf.co.uk/.” All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission from the publishers. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISBN 0-203-49511-X Master e-book ISBN ISBN 0-203-60373-7 (Adobe e-reader Format) ISBN 0-41594-462-7 (Print Edition) ISBN 0-41594-463-5 (pbk.) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research for this book was made possible by an Andrew W.Mellon Fellowship for Junior Faculty from the American Council of Learned Societies and leave time from the University of Florida. I would like to thank the Department of Political Science at the University of Toronto, where I was affiliated during my leave. Members of the Committee for the Study of Political Thought (Toronto) and the Urban Studies Program at York University provided useful feedback on parts of the manuscript. I am particularly grateful to the following people, who commented on individual chapters or drew my attention to interesting illustrations of the privatization of public space: Leslie Paul Thiele, Keally McBride, Joe Carens, Melissa Williams, Simone Chambers, Asma Abbas, Neal Katyal, Ronald Beiner, Stephen Elkin, Patricia Wood, Engin Isin, Dan Smith, Ana Kogl, Patricia Woods, Aida Hozic, and Mark Belnick. The final version owes a lot to Ryan Hurl who read the entire manuscript. This book emerged out of a short article that I wrote for Dissent several years ago. Without the interest and support of Eric Nelson, my editor at Routledge, it probably would never have taken the form of a book. I am also grateful to David McBride who took over the project early in the editing stage. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 2.1 Demonstration in Central Park. 28 3.1 Designated Public Forum in Muir Woods, California. 40 6.1 Haile Plantation, Gainesville, Florida. 98 6.2 A house on Bertmount Avenue, Toronto. 99 7.1 Guardhouse, Battery Park City, New York. 114 7.2 The Upper Room by Ned Smyth, Battery Park City, New York. 117 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 2 Weapons of the Wobblies: The Street-Speaking Fights 18 Chapter 3 The Public Forum Doctrine 36 Chapter 4 The Mauling of Public Space 54 Chapter 5 God, Caesar, and the Constitution 72 Chapter 6 Brave New Neighborhoods 89 Chapter 7 Battery Park City 109 Chapter 8 Homeless-Free Zones: Three Critiques 130 Chapter 9 Conclusion: Three Rationales for the Provision of Public Goods 147 Chapter 10 Afterword: No Central Park in Cyberspace 161 Index 174 1 INTRODUCTION On March 3, 2003, a lawyer named Stephen Downs was arrested for trespassing at the Crossgate Mall in Guilderland, New York, a small town near Albany. He did not sneak into the mall after hours or enter some “employees only” part of the property. He was arrested for wearing a T-shirt that he purchased at the mall with the slogan “Give Peace a Chance.” On the eve of the war with Iraq, the message was too political for the mall. Security guards ordered Downs to either take off the T-shirt or leave the premises. When he refused, they summoned local police and he was taken away in handcuffs. This was not an isolated incident.1 Although the charges were later dropped after a local protest and international uproar, the management did not change its official policy against political expression on mall property.2 According to Downs, the security guards tried to convince him to comply with their orders, arguing that the mall was “like a private house” and therefore he was acting inappropriately.3 Downs believed that his right to political expression was protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. His mistake, however, was trying to exercise this right in a privately owned place. In the landmark decision Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner (1972), the Supreme Court found that the right to free speech only extends to activity on public not private property.4 The reason is that the Bill of Rights states that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech….” Over the course of the twentieth century, this provision has been interpreted expansively to apply to all levels of government but the debate about whether to apply the First Amendment to some private entities remains unresolved. In Lloyd Corp., the Supreme Court rejected the argument that shopping malls are the modern equivalents of old town centers and should therefore be treated like public places. But the secu-rity guards were wrong in asserting that the mall was “like a private house.” In a subsequent decision, Pruneyard v. Robbins (1980), the Supreme Court recognized that a shopping mall, unlike a home or private club, issues an invitation to the general public and therefore opens itself up to certain kinds of regulations.5 This means that political speech in publicly accessible but privately owned places, although not protected by the United States Constitution, could be protected by state statutes. The incident at the Crossgate Mall is emblematic of restrictions on political expression proliferating across the United States. It illustrates the political impact of the privatization of public space. If someone cannot wear a T-shirt emblazoned with a Hallmarkesque endorsement of world peace, then it is hard to imagine union picketers or antisweatshop activists being able to target the Nike or Disney stores at the mall. Even activities that do Brave new neighborhoods 2 not challenge commercial practices, for example, gathering signatures on behalf of political candidates and ballot initiatives, are routinely forbidden in malls. When private spaces replace public gathering places, the opportunities for political conversation are diminished. Ironically, just as new malls are increasingly designed to recreate the atmosphere of old-fashioned downtowns, they are restricting the civic, political, and religious activity that gave city centers their dynamism and variety. Mall managers are not the only ones using property rights to limit the circulation of heterodox views. In California, an apartment complex prohibited the tenants’ association from distributing a newsletter under the doors of residents (see Chapter 5). In Maryland, the United States Postal Service had members of a political organization arrested for handing out literature on a sidewalk in front of the post office (see Chapter 3).6 In Utah, Salt Lake City sold a block of the downtown core to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- Day Saints, which subsequently banned nonsanctioned political and religious activity on the public-private plaza (see Chapter 6). Each of these cases poses similar questions about the relationship among private ownership, public space, and political activity. In this book I argue that public life is undermined by the growing phenomenon of private government. Gated communities proliferate in the suburbs and Business Improvement Districts—now numbering over one thousand in the United States alone— create privileged zones within the city. Furthermore, the suburban shopping mall, a private alternative to the marketplace and the town square, has been so successful that it has become the model for retail development in city cen-ters. This book considers how these changes affect democratic politics. It asks what can be done to protect and revitalize public space. There are two different approaches to this question. Some commentators call for more civility and vigorous enforcement of community norms in the form of policing and laws against begging and loitering.7 Others take the opposite tack, arguing that the vitality of public space comes from its diversity, heterogeneity, and even its disruptive quality.8 The two opposing views have been forcefully articulated in a series of American and Canadian legal cases that highlight the tensions among private ownership, the public sphere, and “outsider politics.”9 Drawing upon political theory, cultural analysis, and free speech jurisprudence, this book shows why the disappearance of public space has negative consequences for democratic politics. But before delving into the details of this argument, I want to provide an overview of the three themes that link the various examples of privatization. SPACE, SPEECH, AND DEMOCRACY This book shows how the privatization of public space undermines the opportunities for free speech.10 Although there is a fairly strong consensus that opportunities for political criticism, organization, and dissent are vital for a democratic polity, the dependence of free speech upon spatial practices is not always clear. The usual rationale for free speech goes something like this: free speech protects the circulation of dissenting ideas that can challenge orthodoxy and, perhaps, limit the despotic exercise of power. Free speech is crucial because it facilitates exposure to a wide range of arguments and makes it possible for citizens11 to reach informed decisions about public policy. Furthermore, free speech is Introduction 3 essential if the minority is to have the opportunity to convince members of the majority of its dissenting views and build a coalition in favor of change.12 Yet the widespread support for free speech in liberal democracies often belies an underlying discomfort with face-to-face politics.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • American Bolsheviki: the Beginnings of the First Red Scare, 1917 to 1918
    Steeplechase: An ORCA Student Journal Volume 3 Issue 2 Article 4 2019 American Bolsheviki: The Beginnings of the First Red Scare, 1917 to 1918 Jonathan Dunning Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.murraystate.edu/steeplechase Part of the European History Commons, Other History Commons, Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Dunning, Jonathan (2019) "American Bolsheviki: The Beginnings of the First Red Scare, 1917 to 1918," Steeplechase: An ORCA Student Journal: Vol. 3 : Iss. 2 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.murraystate.edu/steeplechase/vol3/iss2/4 This Feature is brought to you for free and open access by the The Office of Research and Creative Activity at Murray State's Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Steeplechase: An ORCA Student Journal by an authorized editor of Murray State's Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. American Bolsheviki: The Beginnings of the First Red Scare, 1917 to 1918 Abstract A consensus has developed among historians that widespread panic consumed the American public and government as many came to fear a Bolshevik coup of the United States government and the undermining of the American way of life beginning in early 1919. Known as the First Red Scare, this period became one of the most well-known episodes of American fear of Communism in US history. With this focus on the events of 1919 to 1920, however, historians of the First Red Scare have often ignored the initial American reaction to the October Revolution in late 1917 and throughout 1918.
    [Show full text]
  • Failing Malls: Optimizing Opportunities for Housing a Research Report from the National Center June 2021 for Sustainable Transportation
    Failing Malls: Optimizing Opportunities for Housing A Research Report from the National Center June 2021 for Sustainable Transportation Hilda Blanco, University of Southern California TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. NCST-USC-RR-21-09 N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Failing Malls: Optimizing Opportunities for Housing June 2021 6. Performing Organization Code N/A 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Hilda J. Blanco, Ph.D., http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7454-9096 N/A 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. University of Southern California N/A METRANS Transportation Consortium 11. Contract or Grant No. University Park Campus, VKC 367 MC:0626 Caltrans 65A0686 Task Order 021 Los Angeles, California 90089-0626 USDOT Grant 69A3551747114 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered U.S. Department of Transportation Final Report (November 2019 – March Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology 2021) 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590 14. Sponsoring Agency Code USDOT OST-R California Department of Transportation Division of Research, Innovation and System Information, MS-83 1727 30th Street, Sacramento, CA 95816 15. Supplementary Notes DOI: https://doi.org/10.7922/G2WM1BQH 16. Abstract California, like most of the country, was facing a transformation in retail before the COVID-19 epidemic. Increasing Internet shopping have ushered the closing of anchor stores, such as Macy's, Sears, as well as the closure of many regional shopping malls, which have sizable footprints, ranging from 40-100+ acres.
    [Show full text]
  • Trials Under the Espionage and Sedition Acts During World War I
    Where was the First Amendment? Trials Under the Espionage and Sedition Acts During WWI by Kathryn Horrocks HST 499 June 2, 2005 First Reader: Dr. Jensen Second Reader: Dr. Lowe Before the passage of the Espionage and Sedition Acts of 1917 and 1918, the United States government sought to curb anti-war efforts with prosecutions under remaining Civil War conspiracy statutes. However, these statutes were not effective on persons acting or speaking out against the war alone because by definition a conspiracy requires more than one person. 1 To close these loopholes and successfully control public discussions and actions that may have harmed the war effort, Congress passed the Espionage Act in June of 1917 2. This Act censored speech, behavior and publication of information that intended to undermine the US war effort, or aid her enemies.3 However, this element of intent allowed some anti-war speech to go unpunished. Occasional acquittals under the Espionage Act, and violence against political dissidents prompted congress to pass the Sedition Act almost a year later. The Sedition Act was very similar to the Espionage Act, except for the inclusion of a section which forbid the utterance or publication of “disloyal, scurrilous or abusive language” regarding the US, her flag, her military or her government. 4 This closed the loophole created by the element of intent, and its effect was to “ban dissent of any kind.”5 These Acts and their effects came into direct conflict with the First Amendment of the Constitution which clearly prevents congress from “abridging 1 Shirley J Burton, “The Espionage and Sedition Acts of 1917 and 1918: Sectional Interpretations in the United States District Courts of Illinois,” Illinois Historical Journal 87(1) (1994), 41.
    [Show full text]
  • Espionage Act of 1917
    Communication Law Review An Analysis of Congressional Arguments Limiting Free Speech Laura Long, University of Oklahoma The Alien and Sedition Acts, Espionage and Sedition Acts, and USA PATRIOT Act are all war-time acts passed by Congress which are viewed as blatant civil rights violations. This study identifies recurring arguments presented during congressional debates of these acts. Analysis of the arguments suggests that Terror Management Theory may explain why civil rights were given up in the name of security. Further, the citizen and non-citizen distinction in addition to political ramifications are discussed. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 are considered by many as gross violations of civil liberties and constitutional rights. John Miller, in his book, Crisis in Freedom, described the Alien and Sedition Acts as a failure from every point of view. Miller explained the Federalists’ “disregard of the basic freedoms of Americans [completed] their ruin and cost them the confidence and respect of the people.”1 John Adams described the acts as “an ineffectual attempt to extinguish the fire of defamation, but it operated like oil upon the flames.”2 Other scholars have claimed that the acts were not simply unwise policy, but they were unconstitutional measures.3 In an article titled “Order vs. Liberty,” Larry Gragg argued that they were blatantly against the First Amendment protections outlined only seven years earlier.4 Despite popular opinion that the acts were unconstitutional and violated basic civil liberties, arguments used to pass the acts have resurfaced throughout United States history. Those arguments seek to instill fear in American citizens that foreigners will ultimately be the demise to the United States unless quick and decisive action is taken.
    [Show full text]
  • ELIZABETH GURLEY FLYNN Labor's Own WILLIAM Z
    1111 ~~ I~ I~ II ~~ I~ II ~IIIII ~ Ii II ~III 3 2103 00341 4723 ELIZABETH GURLEY FLYNN Labor's Own WILLIAM Z. FOSTER A Communist's Fifty Yea1·S of ,tV orking-Class Leadership and Struggle - By Elizabeth Gurley Flynn NE'V CENTURY PUBLISIIERS ABOUT THE AUTHOR Elizabeth Gurley Flynn is a member of the National Com­ mitt~ of the Communist Party; U.S.A., and a veteran leader' of the American labor movement. She participated actively in the powerful struggles for the industrial unionization of the basic industries in the U.S.A. and is known to hundreds of thousands of trade unionists as one of the most tireless and dauntless fighters in the working-class movement. She is the author of numerous pamphlets including The Twelve and You and Woman's Place in the Fight for a Better World; her column, "The Life of the Party," appears each day in the Daily Worker. PubUo-hed by NEW CENTURY PUBLISH ERS, New York 3, N. Y. March, 1949 . ~ 2M. PRINTED IN U .S .A . Labor's Own WILLIAM Z. FOSTER TAUNTON, ENGLAND, ·is famous for Bloody Judge Jeffrey, who hanged 134 people and banished 400 in 1685. Some home­ sick exiles landed on the barren coast of New England, where a namesake city was born. Taunton, Mass., has a nobler history. In 1776 it was the first place in the country where a revolutionary flag was Bown, "The red flag of Taunton that flies o'er the green," as recorded by a local poet. A century later, in 1881, in this city a child was born to a poor Irish immigrant family named Foster, who were exiles from their impoverished and enslaved homeland to New England.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S5005
    July 17, 2018 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S5005 USS Indianapolis, in recognition of tect the administration of Federal United States Courthouse in Amarillo, their perseverance, bravery, and serv- elections against cybersecurity Texas, as the ‘‘J. Marvin Jones Federal ice to the United States. threats. Building and Mary Lou Robinson S. 2105 S. 2823 United States Courthouse’’; to the At the request of Mr. BOOZMAN, the At the request of Mr. HATCH, the Committee on Environment and Public names of the Senator from Pennsyl- name of the Senator from California Works. vania (Mr. CASEY) and the Senator (Mrs. FEINSTEIN) was added as a co- Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask from Oregon (Mr. WYDEN) were added sponsor of S. 2823, a bill to modernize unanimous consent that the text of the as cosponsors of S. 2105, a bill to mod- copyright law, and for other purposes. bill be printed in the RECORD. ify the presumption of service connec- S. 3051 There being no objection, the text of tion for veterans who were exposed to At the request of Mr. HOEVEN, the the bill was ordered to be printed in herbicide agents while serving in the name of the Senator from Florida (Mr. the RECORD, as follows: Armed Forces in Thailand during the NELSON) was added as a cosponsor of S. S. 3222 Vietnam era, and for other purposes. 3051, a bill to require the Secretary of Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- resentatives of the United States of America in S. 2131 Transportation to establish a working Congress assembled, URRAY group to study regulatory and legisla- At the request of Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Geoffrey R. Stone Edward H
    Statement of Geoffrey R. Stone Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law The University of Chicago Hearing on the Espionage Act and the Legal and Constitutional Issues Raised by WikiLeaks Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives December 16, 2010 The proposed SHIELD Act1 would amend the Espionage Act of 19172 to make it a crime for any person knowingly and willfully to disseminate, in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States, “any classified information . concerning the human intelligence activities of the United States or . concerning the identity of a classified source or informant” working with the intelligence community of the United States. Although the Act might be constitutional as applied to a government employee who “leaks” such classified material, it is plainly unconstitutional as applied to other individuals who might publish or otherwise disseminate such information. With respect to such other individuals, the Act violates the First Amendment unless, at the very least, it is expressly limited to situations in which the individual knows that the dissemination of the classified material poses a clear and present danger of grave harm to the nation. The clear and present danger standard, in varying forms, has been a central element of our First Amendment jurisprudence ever since Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes first enunciated it in his 1919 opinion in Schenk v. United States.3 In the 90 years since Schenck, the precise meaning of “clear and present danger” has shifted,4 but the principle that animates the standard was stated eloquently by Justice Louis D.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Amendment in Its Forgotten Years
    The First Amendment in Its Forgotten Years David M. Rabbant TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Free Speech Before the Courts 522 A. Supreme Court Cases 524 I. Avoiding First Amendment Issues 525 Resisting Incorporation into the Fourteenth Amendment 525 Excluding Publications from the Mails 526 Neglecting First Amendment Issues 529 Limiting the Meaning of Speech 531 2. Addressing First Amendment Issues 533 Justice Holmes and the Bad Tendency of Speech 533 Review of Statutes Penalizing Speech 536 The First Amendment as the Embodiment of English Common Law 539 3. Hints of Protection 540 4. Summary 542 B. Decisions Based on State Law 543 1. The Bad Tendency Doctrine 543 Speech by Radicals 543 Obscenity and Public Morals 548 2. Libel 550 3. Political Speech 551 4. Labor Injunctions 553 5. Speech in Public Places 555 C. The Judicial Tradition 557 t Counsel, American Association of University Professors. 514 Prewar Free Speech II. Legal Scholarship 559 A. The Social Interest in Free Speech 563 B. The Distinction Between Public and Private Speech 564 1. Schofield's Formulation of the Distinction 564 2. Other Scholarly Support for the Distinction 566 C. The Expanding Conception of Free Speech 568 D. The Rejection of Blackstone 570 E. The Limits of Protected Speech 572 1. The Direct Incitement Test 572 2. Pound's Balancing Test 575 3. Schroeder's Test of Actual Injury 576 4. The Benefits of LibertarianStandards 578 F. The Heritage of Prewar Scholarship 579 III. The Role of the Prewar Tradition in the Early Develop- ment of Modern First Amendment Doctrine 579 A.
    [Show full text]
  • USA and RADICAL ORGANIZATIONS, 1953-1960 FBI Reports from the Eisenhower Library
    A Guide to the Microfilm Edition of Research Collections in American Radicalism General Editors: Mark Naison and Maurice Isserman THE COMMUNIST PARTY USA AND RADICAL ORGANIZATIONS, 1953-1960 FBI Reports from the Eisenhower Library UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS OF AMERICA A Guide to the Microfilm Edition of Research Collections in American Radicalism General Editors: Mark Naison and Maurice Isserman THE COMMUNIST PARTY, USA, AND RADICAL ORGANIZATIONS, 1953-1960 FBI Reports from the Eisenhower Library Project Coordinator and Guide Compiled by Robert E. Lester A microfilm project of UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS OF AMERICA An Imprint of CIS 4520 East-West Highway • Bethesda, MD 20814-3389 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The Communist Party, USA, and radical organizations, 1953-1960 [microform]: FBI reports from the Eisenhower Library / project coordinator, Robert E. Lester. microfilm reels. - (Research collections in American radicalism) Accompanied by printed reel guide compiled by Robert E. Lester. ISBN 1-55655-195-9 (microfilm) 1. Communism-United States--History--Sources--Bibltography-- Microform catalogs. 2. Communist Party of the United States of America~History~Sources~Bibliography~Microform catalogs. 3. Radicalism-United States-History-Sources-Bibliography-- Microform catalogs. 4. United States-Politics and government-1953-1961 -Sources-Bibliography-Microform catalogs. 5. Microforms-Catalogs. I. Lester, Robert. II. Communist Party of the United States of America. III. United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation. IV. Series. [HX83] 324.27375~dc20 92-14064 CIP The documents reproduced in this publication are among the records of the White House Office, Office of the Special Assistant for National Security Affairs in the custody of the Eisenhower Library, National Archives and Records Administration.
    [Show full text]
  • House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)
    Cold War PS MB 10/27/03 8:28 PM Page 146 House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) Excerpt from “One Hundred Things You Should Know About Communism in the U.S.A.” Reprinted from Thirty Years of Treason: Excerpts From Hearings Before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, 1938–1968, published in 1971 “[Question:] Why ne Hundred Things You Should Know About Commu- shouldn’t I turn “O nism in the U.S.A.” was the first in a series of pam- Communist? [Answer:] phlets put out by the House Un-American Activities Commit- You know what the United tee (HUAC) to educate the American public about communism in the United States. In May 1938, U.S. represen- States is like today. If you tative Martin Dies (1900–1972) of Texas managed to get his fa- want it exactly the vorite House committee, HUAC, funded. It had been inactive opposite, you should turn since 1930. The HUAC was charged with investigation of sub- Communist. But before versive activities that posed a threat to the U.S. government. you do, remember you will lose your independence, With the HUAC revived, Dies claimed to have gath- ered knowledge that communists were in labor unions, gov- your property, and your ernment agencies, and African American groups. Without freedom of mind. You will ever knowing why they were charged, many individuals lost gain only a risky their jobs. In 1940, Congress passed the Alien Registration membership in a Act, known as the Smith Act. The act made it illegal for an conspiracy which is individual to be a member of any organization that support- ruthless, godless, and ed a violent overthrow of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • PILOT the Evolution, Exercise, and Extent of Free Speech in US History
    PILOT TEACHING CIVICS through HISTORY The Evolution, Exercise, and Extent of Free Speech in US History (Middle School) by John McNamara and Ron Nash OVERVIEW This unit is one of the Gilder Lehrman Institute’s Teaching Civics through History resources, designed to align to the Common Core State Standards. The lessons can also be modified to conform to the C3 Framework. These units were developed to provide students with foundational knowledge of the historical roots of current civic and social issues facing their communities and the nation while building their literacy, research, and critical thinking skills. By connecting the past with current events, the program will 1) enable students to understand that history is made of up individual actions, 2) empower students to develop their civic voices and encourage them to take civic action, and 3) help students recognize their ability to influence history in their own communities and nationwide. In this unit, over the course of one to two weeks, students will learn and practice literacy skills that will help them develop knowledgeable and well-reasoned points of view on the history of freedom of speech in the United States. They will examine and assess primary and secondary sources, demonstrate what they have learned through their analysis and assessment of the primary sources by writing a response to essential questions posed in the unit, engage in an analysis of current news articles written from different perspectives using materials presented by the AllSides.com website, and then develop a civic engagement project that integrates their knowledge of freedom of speech in the past and today.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding Aid Prepared by David Kennaly Washington, D.C
    THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS RARE BOOK AND SPECIAL COLLECTIONS DIVISION THE RADICAL PAMPHLET COLLECTION Finding aid prepared by David Kennaly Washington, D.C. - Library of Congress - 1995 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS RARE BOOK ANtI SPECIAL COLLECTIONS DIVISIONS RADICAL PAMPHLET COLLECTIONS The Radical Pamphlet Collection was acquired by the Library of Congress through purchase and exchange between 1977—81. Linear feet of shelf space occupied: 25 Number of items: Approx: 3465 Scope and Contents Note The Radical Pamphlet Collection spans the years 1870-1980 but is especially rich in the 1930-49 period. The collection includes pamphlets, newspapers, periodicals, broadsides, posters, cartoons, sheet music, and prints relating primarily to American communism, socialism, and anarchism. The largest part deals with the operations of the Communist Party, USA (CPUSA), its members, and various “front” organizations. Pamphlets chronicle the early development of the Party; the factional disputes of the 1920s between the Fosterites and the Lovestoneites; the Stalinization of the Party; the Popular Front; the united front against fascism; and the government investigation of the Communist Party in the post-World War Two period. Many of the pamphlets relate to the unsuccessful presidential campaigns of CP leaders Earl Browder and William Z. Foster. Earl Browder, party leader be—tween 1929—46, ran for President in 1936, 1940 and 1944; William Z. Foster, party leader between 1923—29, ran for President in 1928 and 1932. Pamphlets written by Browder and Foster in the l930s exemplify the Party’s desire to recruit the unemployed during the Great Depression by emphasizing social welfare programs and an isolationist foreign policy.
    [Show full text]