Research Paper Annotated Bibliography: SDS

Annotated Bibliography

October 24, 2016

Secondary Sources

Benello, George C. “Participatory Democracy and the Dilemma of Change.” The New Left: A Collection of Essays, Priscilla Long, 1969, pp. 404-419.

Community/Identity

George Banello argues in his essay “Participatory Democracy and the Dilemma of Change” published in 1969, that revolutionism (as opposed to resistance) is neither an acceptable nor appropriate approach to social change. He develops this thesis by use of SDS, and the participatory democracy it employed, as an example. His purpose is to illustrate the inappropriate nature and ineffectiveness of such political models, so that analyses of social movements may be adjusted accordingly. He specifically addresses his audience in his essay, speaking directly to scholars interested in the same field of study, particularly those involved in analyzing political ideologies and their utilization in social movements.

Bradley, Stefan. “‘Gym Crow Must Go!" Black Student Activism at Columbia University, 1967-1968.” The Journal of African American History, vol. 88, no. 2, 2003, pp. 163–181.

Historical Context, Protest Context

In Stefan Bradley’s 1968 essay, “Gym Crow Must Go!”, he argues that SAS protestors had a huge victory in the takeover of Columbia University in 1968 against racial oppression because they separated themselves from the white protestors (SDS members and supporters) and used the black community to pose a significant threat to the university. Bradley develops this thesis through significant research and reference to not only famous historians and sociologists, but also by pouring through the primary literature on the subject matter. The purpose of this thesis is to identify a key victory for the black community in the 1960s, and the importance of making the protest exclusively a racial equality and civil rights protest in order to be successful. Bradley addresses his audience, scholars and students interested in the civil rights movement in the 1960s, and establishes a relationship with them through addressing African American issues as they pertained to a protest that was very divided in what the individual protest organizations wanted from the university.

Breines, Winifred. “Whose New Left?” The Journal of American History, vol. 75, no. 2, 1988, pp. 528–545.

Historical Context

Winifred Breines discusses the protest groups and social movements of the 1960s in “Whose New Left?” broadly, encompassing an array that is not just isolated to SDS and democracy. Breines develops this thesis through a comparison of publications by her fellow historians on similar subject matter while contributing her own research and hypotheses. In doing so, she aims to compensate for the narrow scope by which here peers have analyzed the Movement, which she claims results in an over-generalization of the events of 1960s. Breines directs this toward the historians she criticizes, addressing them (and their “narrow” essays) by name, and other individuals who are interested in perusing the literature, indicating the literature said individuals should be wary of.

Connery, Christopher L. “Marches Through the Institutions: University Activism in the Sixties and Present.” Representations, vol. 116, no. 1, 2011, pp. 88–101.

Community/Identity, Historical Context 

In Christopher Connery’s 2011 essay, “Marches Through the Institutions: University Activism in the Sixties and Present”, he draws a comparison between modern student protests and those in the 1960s, and analyzes the protests by SDS as a success despite all the opposition and eventual disintegration that the organization experienced. He develops this thesis by creating historical timelines between the student protests, modern protests and those that occurred in the 1960s. His purpose in doing this is to show the long lasting impact that massive and complex student led protests had on modern day student protests, how they served as a model to be followed and learned from. He speaks to an audience that is interested specifically in student led protests through his in depth historical analysis that is supported with a significant number of resources, including many renowned historians and sociologists.

Harrison, Benjamin T. "The Waning of the American Student Peace Movement of the Sixties." Peace Research 21.3 (1989): 1-15. Web.

Community/Identity, Historical Context, Protest Context

“The Waning of the American Student Peace Movement of the Sixties” by Benjamin Harrison answers the question: why did the widespread activism of the sixties die out prior to the commencement of the new decade? He creates this thesis by breaking down the demise of the activism of the New Left into several clearly defined components (the visionaries, disillusionment and escapism, appeals to violence, government repression, legal repression, the turn of the media, shift in the political and economic climate, and “the death knell”) which illustrate crucial aspects of the historical context as well as specific experiences within the movement that left to its ultimate demise.  Harrison aims to identify key points to accurately examine the decline in its entirety and to base future studies off of, he speaks to an audience that is interested in dissecting this tumultuous decade (scholars and students), glancing over information which his intended audience would already have and diving into specifics which this audience could easily follow.

Freeman, Jo. "The Tyranny of Structurelessness." Berkeley Journal of Sociology 17 (1972): 151-64. Web.

Community/Identity, Theoretical Source

Jo Freeman argues in “The Tyranny of Structurelessness” that organizations lacking structure are ineffective in creating the democratic environment with they strive for. Freeman develops this theory through the experiences of women involved in organizations within a social movement that lacked a specific structure. The purpose of this essay is to develop an understanding of why these organization models do not work, where after sociological and political theories may be adapted to better analyze social movements. In this essay Freeman speaks to scholars in her field of study, aligning herself with them in her cautionary statement that complete rejection of loosely structured organizations would be to “deny ourselves the necessary tools to further development” (152).

Gautney, Heather. "Political Organization on the Global Left." Berkeley Journal of Sociology 51 (2007): 150-82. Web.

Theoretical Source

In her “Political Organization on the Global Left” published by Berkeley Journal of Sociology in 2007, Gautney analyzes the left’s social movements and the ongoing struggle to balance autonomy with the necessity of organization that is essential to a successful to a large-scale protest movement. Gautney does this through consideration of several individual activist organizations, current and past, in the context of classical political organization theories to analyze issues concerning autonomy and centralization. It is with this approach that she hopes to illuminate the significance of activist’s application of the autonomous theories on the global left. She speaks to her audience, scholars of theoretical research on political organization, by use of theories uniquely appropriate to this field of study.

Glazer, Nathan. "The New Left and Its Limits." The Radical Left: The Abuse of Discontent, William P. Gerberding, 1970, pp. 11-30.

Community/Identity, Historical Context

In his 1968 essay "The New Left and Its Limits," Nathan Glazer disagrees with the New Left's proposed alternative to the established institutions: revolution and participatory democracy. He develops this thesis by analyzing three main flaws in their system: assuming the problem is solely a problem of power, the assumption that there is an alternative model is inherently wrong because societies are always changing and therefore there is no final solution, and a direct dependence on people (who are permanently in session) is not possible for the length of a revolutionary movement. He hopes to show that radicalism cannot achieve its goals by tackling one issue in one way, because the complexities of issues for which radicalism is an appropriate response are issued with a large network of problems to be individually addressed. Glazer writes to other scholars who are also skeptical of the analysis and actions of the radical left and looking answers.

Michels, Robert. Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. Kitchener, CA: Batoche Books, 2000. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 23 October 2016.

Theoretical Source

‘The Iron Law of Oligarchy’ is a commonly referenced political theory created by Robert Michels, a famous German sociologist, and defined in his book Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. His thesis is that a large of complex democratic party will always become oligarchical because of the organizational demands, and he develops this thesis through acknowledgement and response of popular political party theories of the times that may oppose his theory and using specific examples to support his claims. He hopes to convince his audience, scholars who believe a true completely democratic organization is possible regardless of complexities, of the Iron Law of Oligarchy such that it will be accepted as a plausible theory in this field of study.

Raskin, Eleanor. "The Occupation of Columbia University: April 1968." Journal of American Studies 19.2 (1985): 255-60. Web.

Historical Context

Eleanor Raskin gives a first-hand account of the protest which received the most attention in the Ten Days campaign by SDS, the protest at Columbia University, in “The Occupation of Columbia University: April 1968”. She develops this thesis through her own, slightly biased, personal experience as a student of law at Columbia University during the protest. In doing so, she hopes to give a depiction of the events that occurred through the eyes of a student protestor, uninfluenced by the passing of time or outside opinions and judgements. Her report is directed toward her friends in England (where she had spent three years, prior to her acceptance at Columbia), as addressed in her essay.

Sale, Kirkpatrick. SDS. Random House, New York. 1971.

Community/Identity

In SDS, Kirkpatrick Sale provides his audience with an in depth analysis and historical timeline of SDS’s tumultuous history and how it influenced not only other activist movements of the time, but also our history as a nation. Sale develops this thesis through extensive utilization of primary resources and his own knowledge of activism. It is though this elaborate narrative that he intends to lay a reliable and detailed foundation for which future analyses of SDS (or other student-led, anti-war, or civil rights activist groups) and social movements of the twentieth century may be based upon. Sale speaks to scholars and students who intend on learning and studying any of the aforementioned concepts, or additional relevant topics.

Slonecker, Blake. "The Columbia Coalition: African Americans, New Leftists, and Counterculture at the Columbia University Protest of 1968." Journal of Social History 41.4 (2008): 967-96. Web.

Protest Context

Blake Slonecker captures the importance of more recent analyses of protest in the 1960s, as new definitions and methodologies have emerged, in The Columbia Coalition: African Americas, New Leftists, and Counterculture at the Columbia University Protest of 1968 in the Journal of Social History through his modern approach to evaluating the rapid rise and fall of the united organizations at Columbia. He does so via thorough historical research on coalitions protesting civil rights and the Vietnam War and how the structural organization was influenced by radicalism, gender representation, and leadership amongst the activist groups. Slonecker intends to provide an updated presentation of the Columbia protest, and how it may serve as an example for the direction of protest in the 1960s, from the scholarly works on the subject matter that were created roughly thirty-five years prior. He establishes a relationship with scholars in the same field through an acknowledgment of previous discussions on these protests, and suggesting new conclusions that may be drawn from the same events in light of new resources and approaches.

Stone, Dale. “SDS and the ‘Iron Law of Oligarchy.’” Kansas Journal of Sociology, vol. 8, no. 1, 1972, pp. 59–64. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23255150.

Community/Identity, Historical Context, Theoretical Source

In “SDS and the ‘Iron Law of Oligarchy’” Dale Stone examines SDS utilizing theories proposed by renowned historian Alexis de Tocqueville and sociologist Robert Michels concerning democracy. He develops this thesis with a synopsis of the two theories, and interjects historical information concerning SDS to compare and contrast with these political postulates. The purpose of Stone’s essay is to highlight the successes and shortcomings of SDS’s political structure (specifically, participatory democracy) in accordance to respected political theories. Stone establishes a relationship with his audience by referencing well-known sociologists and historians who his audience (students and interested scholars) would be familiar with, and utilization of technical terminology.

Stryker, Sean D. “Knowledge and Power in the Students for a Democratic Society, 1960-1970.” Berkeley Journal of Sociology, vol. 38, 1993, pp. 89–138.

Historical Context

Sean Stryker argues that the decline of SDS can be traced back to the transition from resistance to revolution, and that this decline is indicative of the death of Marxist and Leninism as an ideological foundation for social movements in the United States, in his essay “Knowledge and Power in the Students for a Democratic Society”. Stryker develops this thesis through an analytical interpretation of SDS’s historical experience in the context of the New Left as a whole in the 1960s. The purpose of this essay is to answer the question of how an organization can continue to commit to and promote cultural diversity and equality with a structure formed on the basis of agreed shared principles (civil/human right, social classes, and political freedom), and in doing so, will hopefully provide new techniques for interpreting social movements or influence relevant sociological theories.

Vickers, George R. The Formation of the New Left: The Early Years. Lexington Books, 1975.

Historical Context

George Vickers corrects early scholarly analyses of the New Left, which are overly critical and narrow in their view of the New Left as a group that is both small and psychologically defective, and provides a wealth of empirical data to a conversation that had previously been lacking through his book The Formation of the New Left: The Early Years. He formulated this thesis by seeking out particular types of data and focusing on national organizations of the New Left only, while presenting this material as a comparison of the relationship between the Old Left and the New Left. It is through this scope that Vickers aims to realign scholars’ and students’ view of the New Left with the view of those who were involved in its conception and evolution.

Primary Source

Levine, Eric. “The Berkeley Free Speech Controversy.” The Free Speech Movement, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), 1965, Berkeley, CA. Speech.

Oglesby, Carl. “Democracy is Nothing if it is Not Dangerous.” March on Washington, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), April 1965, Washington D.C., VA. Speech.

Students for a Democratic Society (U.S.). The Port Huron Statement. Port Huron, 1962.