One hundred pre-selected activists representing numerous organizations attended an hour and a half long seminar with Howard Zinn. A diverse group of young and veteran activists, students and workers, Americans and internationals, but only a small number of progressive African Americans attended.

Directly after his talk with the left activists, Zinn spoke to a capacity crowd at Shriver Hall on the JHU campus as this year’s Rick Pfeffer Memorial lecturer and guest of the Johns Hopkins University Milton S. Eisenhower Symposium. Other sponsors of the event included the ACLU, AFSC, and Johns Hopkins Student Labor Action Committee.

The famous writer, historian and political analyst addressed both groups for nearly three hours, continuing discussions with students, teachers, and local activists well into the evening. The Rev. Chester Wickwire, former JHU chaplain and long-time peace activist introduced Howard Zinn (see photo).

#file_1#
Chester Wickwire, former JHU chaplain and current peace activists poses with Howard Zinn

During the pre-speech seminar, groups of about ten individuals each developed key questions about the problems they face in trying to bring about progressive change. There Howard Zinn was introduced by famous peace activist Liz McAllister.

#file_2#
Liz McAllister introduces Howard Zinn

The following summarizes the questions and Zinn’s responses:

Q – Would you say history works like a pendulum, swinging between conservatism toward liberal beliefs and back, and if so, does that inevitability change what we should be doing?

A – I don’t agree that history is like a pendulum…The progress we make is not easily fit into a graph. Progress goes in a crazy zig-zag erratic fashion…even when you’re set back though you’re not set back in the way you were before…Let’s not get bogged down in theories which discourage us – which make us think that there’s an inevitability. There’s no inevitability, we can make history. The Vietnam War there was a time when people were discouraged, but the movement grew until it couldn’t be stopped.

Q - What should the peace movement be demanding about the war in Iraq? Should they be supporting the opposition (in Iraq)?

A - Support the troops, bring them home. That’s a good slogan. Does anyone think that’s a bad slogan? Because there are people who criticize this answer (about bring the troops home). Many people respond by saying, “if we leave, it will get worse.” This is a common argument to defend atrocious behavior. This is often said about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is also racist and patronizing to tell people that we will teach them how to govern and how to hold elections. This sounds like the language of imperial power.

Q - What social spaces are progressives not taking advantage of?


A – High schools are good places for organizing. There are all these young people who haven’t had years of bombardment of media and government. They don’t know very much – because they’re not educated. But, the high school students are more open, I’ve found. They’re important. We should talk about why this is an immoral war. Talk with students about the war.
Also, we should write letters to the editor. People read letters to the editors more than they read any other part of the newspaper.

Q - A lot of universities, like JHU, have large military grants. What should we do to make our universities more for peace?

A – Educate the students. Students are very bright.

Q – Why has Afghanistan fallen off the antiwar movement’s agenda?

A – Naturally, Iraq has taken over the attention of people. But there are horrible things going on there (Afghanistan). The drug trade has become the dominant economic activity in Afghanistan. The puppet leader of the U.S., Hamid Karzai can not even step outside of the capital because there is chaos.
Remember, we are fighting in Iraq supposedly because it is part of the “war on terror.” This is a farce. We should widen the circle of attention by talking about the war on terror. It’s a tough job to take the attention away from the central theme – but it throws a light if you widen your circle not only what’s happening in Iraq, but what’s happening all over the world.

#file_3#
Zinn addresses activists
Q – Third parties are a viable alternative – how do we build them?

A – During the election the left became paralyzed by the two-party system. The election put the left in the impossible no-win situation. It was not an honest election. The country was forced to choose between two candidates, one who was slightly better. All the bold agenda was pushed into the background while first we have to elect John Kerry. The elections have a way of diverting social movements. It’s not that we shouldn’t engage in elections, it’s just not the most important thing happening. It’s a pitiful exercise. It’s over now. Now people don’t have to be corralled into that kind of box. Now the left is free to speak its mind. And also start building a third party movement. If a strong movement is growing it will be a signal to the Democratic party that they will be heading into oblivion.

Q – How do you get an economic justice movement going?

A – There’s no one magical answer. There’s no trick to galvanize people. I think we all have to engage in a wide variety of actions. In front of supermarkets, write letter to editor, parade, picket and organize workers, boycott big corporations, fine…We have to go as far as we can go. Not everyone can go as far as everyone else. But we need to stretch ourselves. It will take a whole variety to make a national movement.

Q – How do we move beyond preaching to the choir? How do we get people in America to start thinking about sexism, racism, ageism, without alientating them from the left?

A – By being on the streets, in sports stadiums, shopping centers, churches, schools…. It takes more nerve to stand on your own street corner – because your neighbors see what you are doing. Boldly talk to the people you work with. Very often we have jobs where people aren’t in the choir. Take risks. Ask questions, too. Try to understand where people are – why they hold the positions they do. They have been propagandized by government. We shouldn’t batter them with our most ferocious arguments. One of the most effective ways of getting people engaged with you is don’t make firm decisive statements – ask questions. Do you think this war is stopping terrorism? People don’t change their thinking on the spot. You will never see an immediate success. Sometimes that spurs you on into a more ferocious argument. People don’t change their thinking on the spot. Later they will have second thoughts.

Q – How do we talk with people who are coming from a religious standpoint?

A – Zinn asked Liz McCallister to respond. “I can’t talk to them. It’s not a conversation. My experience with people in the religious right is I can’t talk to them – I’m a total failure.”

Zinn: I’d like to follow up on that point. There are 78% of people we can talk to. The other 20-25% of people in this country are immovable on the question on fundamentalism, religion, patriotism, etc. That leaves us 78%. Okay, 78% of the people we need to talk to.

Q – Why do we constantly have fragmentation of the left – how do we get the diverse groups together on a single strong issue?

A – We will always be fragmented. We need to accept the fact that there will always be differences. That’s okay. So long as at certain points in history we will come together on single life and death issue. – Examples are the civil rights movement in the south – The NAACP, SNIC, SCLC all had different opinions, but came together to fight for civil rights. The same was true with the war on Vietnam. People ask me, you signed on to something signed by the Socialist Workers Party? It doesn’t matter, I agree with the their main focus – against the war. Don’t think we can’t think about victories until we are all the same.

Q - How do we talk outside the single issues and address the longterm struggle?

A – We refuse to go along – embolden people to refuse. Seek out those situations of the disappeared –and make sure they are not forgotten. Most Americans don’t think about the system. We don’t think to talk about people about systems. There are established socialist movements in other countries. In Europe they talk about socialism. Very few of the left in America talk about this. We get so involved in the immediate thing, like the minimum wage, the next piece of legislation that we don’t think to talk to people – make a connection between these immediate problems and the larger ones. What is the kind of system that produces these problems? In other countries – movements undertake to do that. They talk about socialism. They raise the question about the economic system. What’s behind the failure of the health system, behind constant unemployment, lack of housing. We live in a system where human beings come last. Corporate profits come first. In polls that ask Americans, “do you think that a small number of people run this country?” - about 80% of the people say “yes.” Most Americans are class conscious. They just don’t know what to do about it. Our job is to get people to pay attention to the long term project. And that’s why, it’s important to not just to talk about the Iraq war – but just talk about war. After the Iraq war there may be another war. It’s about the war system. Which also happens to be tied up with the capitalist system.”

Q – What do you think about participatory economics?

A – Why not? We can have economic democracy. Cooperating as consumers and in production.