The FBI tracks Studs Terkel and comes up with...

Um . . . yeah, reading a Communist paper WAS actually radical.

The Communist Soviet Union was trying violently to spread its hateful control around the world including in the US. Millions died because of their successes and millions more suffered. Had the Communists succeeded in America, they would have jailed snarky reporters like Mr. Warmbir. That is, if he remained brave enough to be as snarky against a murderous Communist regime as he is against our own free and democratic government.

>>"our own free and democratic government"????

free and democratic - but still secretly spying on private citizens???

you surely have swallowed a load of horsehockey in one gulp with a smile on your face "L"

interesting that what Mr. Terkel faced in the 40s and 50s continues to this day- but in an ever more pervasive and systematic way...

Why, it was just this past June that the US government’s very own special investigators found the National Security Administration's routine "overcollection" of American's private phone and e-mail communications (yes, private citizens, just like the heroic Studs Terkel- who have done nothing wrong, committed no crime, and who's privacy was invaded by the government with no court order ~ you know the kind that is required by the US Constitution)was so offensive and violative of our country's laws that one member of the congressional panel that oversees the government agency that spies on its own citizens concluded that the NSA's collection of private conversations was a "flagrant" violation of the law.

That sounds neither "free" or "democratic" to me...

I am sure glad that folks like Studs Terkel were/are there to protect me from the illegal overreaching of my government through fearless reportage and tireless advocacy.

I can't fathom, however, how complacent and credulous citizens such as L can protect anyone from "murderous" foreign governments, or for that matter, our own torturing/invading other country for trumped up reasons/feel free to spy on all Americans/hold uncharged detainees forever "free and democratic government" - -

It's time to stop cannonizing Terkel.

He was a Communist Party member and even worse, he was one of their main fundraisers.

The money that Terkel raised (notice how often he gave the collection speech) went to pay the bills for their functionaries to travel. Terkel's fundraising paid for
printing, phone bills, publishing and promoting the Communist program to overthrow democracy. He raised money to fund disruptions and demonstrations.

The FBI did not release all his files and I am sure they would make even more interesting reading.

Thank you, Florence, for your succinct rejoinder to particle61's rebuke of L. If Mr. Terkel was indeed a Communist "sympathizer", I can only sympathize with him, albeit posthumously. What a narrow view of human potential for a person who was lauded for decades as a man of the people? The freedom of one man or woman to exercise his free will to create and produce and be rewarded for his or her efforts was an exclusive to Americans for two centuries. Now, given the level of animosity towards "the rich" that is drummed up by lazy journalists and flaming liberals who still can't stomach doing their homework while eating their quiche and drinking their Starbucks, we are ripe for the making of more fans of Mr. Terkel in journalism classes, the reading of "The Audacity of Hope" and the wane of entrepreneurial courage, and worse, mulch for a man named Ayers and shovels to rationalize horses that leave hockey loads down Michigan Avenue when the mayor speaks. The AP won't print stories or talk about an 11 year old girl who shoots two men to death while home alone, because she was taught owning a gun is essential to freedom, AND to shoot that gun with calm accuracy when under attack and protect her home, BUT--it can send 11 professional fact-checkers to comb through Sarah Palin's new book for errors, imagined or real. The scourge of our nation is not those listening to our conversations and tracking our email--it is those who intrude on our daily lives with drivel, the absconding of our journalism schools and the brainwashing of generations of young people that government is evil on the one hand while supremely qualified to rescue us on the other. Neither is true, and neither is our mainstream media qualified or interested enough to keep us free, nor, it seems, even capable of such a task. Mr. Terkel was most likely a capitalist socialist at heart like most liberals. I know; I bought his books, well, one of his books, and I'm quite sure he didn't surrender all of his profits to City Hall. I'm not sure what he did with his workday profits; that seems to be conveniently omitted from the bios I've read thus far. I can "sympathize" with all people who want for subsistence--but I would not surrender the freedom I have to starve on my own for the sake of imprisoning my neighbor for having paid off his mortgage, stocked his freezer and picked the right mutual funds to keep him in new wing tips and a Lexus. I'd gladly sweep his floor for a hot bowl of soup if it keeps the government out of my life AND the media from taking sides and becoming proselytes for those who threaten our freedom with Communism, Islamo-fascism, bigotry or tree hugging global warming fanatics. If Mr. Terkel was more of a fact-finding journalist-author-reporter than he was a Communist supporter, we can find redemption in the fact that no one forced us to listen to him or read his diatribes. Notwithstanding the curriculum requirements of my own college choice of classes, I was able to read Mr. Terkel and come away unscathed by the Communist underpinnings and see the human aspect of his subject matter for what it is worth, that being the reverence for the lives of others as precious, uncommon and divinely authored. Having read "Working", and then read that Mr. Terkel suggested to Mr. Obama via Edward Lifson that he needs to get back to FDR's New Deal and read the FDR's second inaugural, AND give up on a national health care plan, which he termed as a "waste of time", I'm inclined to side with Studs in the face of his declaration that Saul Alinsky was an honoree of the Catholic Church. I'm quite sure this or any future Pope is not going to include that fact in any sermons or speeches aimed at ending Communism or Fascism or tyranny. Being a fan of Pope Paul and his role in bringing down the Berlin Wall and ending the Cold War, I can say that Mr. Terkel had very little to do with that, and neither did Mr. Alinsky or Mr. Obama. The bottom line is I am quite sure that if that wall ever gets rebuilt, those carrying the hod will more likely be citing Studs and Alinsky than remembering who the Pope was who stood alone against the most evil regime known to mankind in the last two centuries of human history. It is not hard to make a choice between the paths taken to protect freedom by leaders of this country, for all of their and its imperfections, and the reign and rise of Communism and its jealous cousin Fascism anywhere on earth. For Studs to hold onto the hand of FDR on the right and Communism on the left is a strange and interesting dichotomy indeed. The difference here in America is we can converse about it openly, at least for now. When that ends, only God and individual courage will wrest us from that hell. In short, those canonizing Mr. Terkel are capitalists first, and self-appointed arbiters of what the rest of us can do with our money second. True liberals are more curators than entrepreneurs, and the funding of museums to folks like Mr. Terkel creates jobs for those who otherwise would be clamoring to register as candidates in the next election. I say let the canonizing escalate--a peaceful solution to keeping liberals out of government, out of our personal lives, and far from the decisions made by the NSA. Those of us who see the value of national security have no fear of their intrusion--because we also believe as George Washington believed--""Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence." The problem with liberals who fear someone listening to their conversations in the process of trying to protect us from terrorists is that they also want to take away our own ability to protect ourselves in our own homes from crazed invaders and thieves and drug dealers and rapists and child molesters--all scenarios far more dangerous and infinitely more likely than any G-man having the proclivity of voyeurism become prosecutorial actions and overwhelm his or her orders to protect and preserve those being inadvertently watched in the process of their duties to track, stop and jail terrorists. From my perspective it seems persecution is the hallmark of liberals just as much if not more than conservatives who reached for the puke bag when the latest Nobel prize was announced. So, I say, Hail to Studs, wherever you are, you "cowardly atheist" (his own self-described words). It is clear that you and others like you helped to bring down Joseph McCarthy, but helped little in the way of anti-communist hysteria and certainly not much in the way of eradicating communism's hold on entire countries and their freedom-deprived peoples. If you can be blind to the Iron Fist that lay on Poland for half a century, for example, while writing a Pulitzer Prize winning book about WWII, than hanging an Iron Curtain in your living room was a problem more for the "studs" in your walls than for your housekeeper. That ultimately is the downfall of all liberals and conservatives alike--we live off of our critiques and our story telling, and decorate accordingly, while forgetting what it took to fight the real battles that made our lives possible. The pen and the cannon shall for freedom ride on the same horse, and horse-hockey-swallowing is just a by-product of that great American dream and the liberals stock in trade we all can identify with--the consolation prize.

Dear h2oeddie,
You are my new hero! Have not had one since the 1980's. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts as it had given me a ray of hope in an otherwise dismal look ahead at the future. I only wish I could put my thoughts together as succinctly and beautifully as you have done.
Gratefully.
A Fan in Chicago

Almost two pages of block text is "succinct"?

"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite!" --Groucho Marx

There've always been relatively powerless members of society, and Terkel made a career of helping their voices be more widely heard. To me, that works toward equalizing the unequal power a little bit, and is a good thing.

If you want to be like previous commenters and redbait or criticize that, or hang your political-science dissertation on it, knock yourself out! Just be aware you sound every bit as brainwashed as the bolshies ever did, when you do that!

Dear Particle 61,

Are we to assume that you are an anarchist? I can respect your opinion if you are. However, you can't be suggesting that our form of government (be it bush or obama or george washington) is more intrusive than any Communist governments that the world has given to us.

The bottom line is that the average person is, well, average (and average is getting dumber) and needs to be governed and some even need to be spied on lest enough dumb ones get brainwashed enough to think that the solution is to first bring an end of our way of life, as imperfect as it is, and then install a more 'friendly' government which will really only be friendly to its ruling class while the rest of us work for them.

I'll roll the dice and make my own way through life even with Republicans possibly spying on me rather than believing in some other power/money hungry organization which claims to be looking out for me. Organizations of all sorts, even charities, look out for their financial interests first. Everything else is takes a distant second. It is naive to believe that any organization is going to put the individual citizen first. However, the USA provides many more opportunities than any other country. We are free as free has ever been short of anarchy.

Ha ha ha, communism. As if it ever really was a threat to this country.

History has proven that those who believed communism to be a threat were, in fact, more of a threat to our nation than a bunch of jackass 20-somethings upset with their stake in the world.

My now deceased grandma used to March on Washington for a variety of political causes. She was an original sufferette and supported womens rights, and civil rights. In the late 1990s.. because Grandma has immigrated from Kiev in 1902, I found that the US govt had labled her a radical.. Because she was interested in people being free around the world, after coming from a place of serious oppression as a Russian Jew, and a woman. I was shocked to find those documents , and later in life when i was working for the US Center for Disease control, found I was followed around by my superiors in the SF office i worked at. Wasnt surprised years later that i was a victim of illegal survellience and phone tapping that to this day has never been resolved.. I wonder if the old school spies take it from generation to generation. Grandma used to read STUDS TERKLE and liked his books very much. she listened to FREE Raido programs and watched public television. I think we are all at risk for opening our minds and staying informed. The Patriot ACt seems to give anyone the right to do that to You. but not to the perpertrators who violate your civil freedoms.

Unfortunately quite a few of these comments seem to come from people who misrepresent the Communist sympathies of the 1930s-1950s. This form of American Socialist leaning came as a direct result of The Great Depression. After the economic collapse there were no safeguards for every day people against the financial decisions made by wealthy investors. The average family was not responsible for the collapse of the economy at that time, and yet they were directly hit by job losses and a lack of government support. Social Security, Medicare and Unemployment Insurance came as necessary government policy changes made to keep millions of Americans from starvation. It's important to acknowledge that people did starve to death during the Depression, and this is why people began to stand up. Capitalism had failed them, and it's failing us now.

As a young person who works hard and has been unemployed for over four months despite actively searching for work, I can say that Older McCarthy-ites post misinformation here because they don't have to worry. They have their pensions and their nest eggs, and they have their empty rhetoric. In the minds of the retirees, all young people are lazy. Of course, it's all our own fault and we should stop complaining.

This is exactly what the wealthy told people during the Great Depression and it is exactly why people learned that there was strength in numbers. American Communism was about the people uniting to fight greed and the hording of wealth, and working toward fair treatment for all. Communists made major headway in the treatment of minorities, immigrants and women. I'm sure many of the old dinosaurs posting on this blog would love to return to a white, male dominated society where a small group of ridiculously wealthy Protestants rule the nation with an iron fist. But you're regime is over and you're time is limited. History repeats itself.

Phrases like "promoting the Communist program to overthrow democracy" as offered by Florence Kennedy are pure business propaganda. Communism was a really really scary idea to extreme capitalists who wielded substantial amounts of human labor. Communism, even if it were a totalitarian monolith as suggested here, could never "overthrow democracy".

Democracy would have to exist somewhere for it to be overthrown. We are speaking of the U.S. where claims of democratic ideals are rampant but the government itself isn't even nominally a Democracy; it is clearly specified as a Republic. There are infrequent, nominally democratic elections, but governance in the U.S. is principally the province of elected specialists who are funded largely by dominant business interests.

As posited in the Communist Manifesto, Communism did not assert itself as a challenger to Democracies or even Republics. The ideal of eliminating concentrations of wealth, a hallmark of Communism, is not precisely nor necessarily antithetical to Democracy. One could say that It simply depends upon how many people support the idea of Communism whether it is democratic or not. Thus communistic policies can (and have) be introduced into government through democratic processes. Communism certainly can impose a tyranny of the majority however. Capitalists under Communism would most likely suffer, against their will, a severe reduction in their ability to wield wealth without accountability to others. But accountability seems very Democratic to me. I am a business owner myself and I think that business law in the United States is corrupt and perverse in ways that ludicrously shield businesses from accountability.

Communism has a very very poor record in the world, but again, the failed Communist governments of history are simply nominally communist -- I don't believe that human civilization is intellectually and spiritually capable of founding a viable communistic government yet.

Communism is junk yet we are being herded into it.
There are no dead dinosaurs they simply have evolved.
There is still a ruling class, you and I are simply not included.

One simple question: Where did the reparation Gold disappear to which was given to the Japanese at the end of WWII?
It was given as a gift, from the U.S. Government to be shared with
the citizens but was never distributed. Who has it?

Anyone who thinks that communism has a justifiable future is just another part of the herd.

Wow.....um, can anyone just say Studs was a great writer?

Who cares what his political views were....it is not like he was in DC plotting to "over throw" the government. When did opposite political views in AMERICA turn into the worst thing alive. Please!!!! Look at where we are now, we NEED different viewpoints.

Plus, the FBI needs to look out for ther real bad guys, the ones that are selling drugs all day in this city making millions and better yet the international organizations bringing it all in to this country. Not some old man who writes...jesus!!!

Communism is an economic system, not a system of government, democracy, which our country is NOT, is a form of governemt. We are a republic. Capitalism without safeguards does not work, and communism without some privatized business does not work either. I see why so many people hate all those old communist and social reformers from back in the day, I mean, what 12 year old doesn't want to do back breaking labor for 10 hours a day for pennies? Ignorance is killing this country, thank you and have a magical evening.

I read Studs' book Working as a teenager, what struck me then was just how unhappy most people are with their lives, work in particular. My career choice was partly because the person in his book remained happy after decades at it, as am I.

I recently re-read the book and still enjoyed it but noticed something different. For instance Studs questions a custodian ( I think) who confessed to giving the police or FBI information about drug dealers. Studs' repeated line of questioning was "so, they asked you to spy on your neighbors" (paraphrasing) to which the man repeatedly said "No". Seemed to have an agenda other than just an oral history.

Not saying Terkel was a bad guy or commie or whatever,for me maybe just a different perspective over 30 years later. But it was disappointing.

If you think what the FBI was doing to MR.Torkal is undemocratic and not free.Then look what the liberals and the democratic party is doing to this country.

Just finished Terkel's "The Good War" and amazed by the power of how a variety of authentic voices can provide a better understanding of World War II than most historical works. He definitely has a new fan of his writings, no matter what his political leanings may have been. He seems to be a man that truly appreciates the voice of the many and of the unheard; I wish we had many more people like him in the world (than simply those that they portray themselves in this way).

Hey Ho, Joe! Stick it to Torkal! I look forward to other stinging analogies like:

"If you think the Packers regret losing Favre. Then look what the liberals and the democratic party is doing to this country."

Good heavens! Don't you have freedom of association in the USA?

Yes, in the 1940s reading a Communist newspaper would have been radical. Today, the Republican party would like you to believe that reading any paper is radical; they're calling the mainstream media "left wing" when in fact, most of the media is almost entirely owned by Republican supporters.

"Free and democratic?" Just look at your opinions of the commenters here if they don't agree with your views.

Wow, I stumbled upon this section for the first time, and I am glad to see that my home state of Oklahoma isn't the only place that's full of hate filled morons.

See, here in Oklahoma, I've been called a "n*@@er lover" for having an Obama bumper sticker on my car. I've been physically threatened for questioning the US invasion of Iraq. Worse yet, I had an employer threaten to fire me for calling Sarah Palin a moron.

Here's a question for the Florence Kennedy's, the Joe Pasternak's, and the h20eddie's on this blog; What are you so afraid of?

Are you really so afraid of ideas that are different from your own?

You remind me of Bible-thumping Christians who scream until they are blue in the face about gays, abortion, and Obama being secret Muslim...as if your God is incapable of handling any and all of these perceived threats.

Why the hate and fear mongering? You sound like a bunch Nazi's...anyone who doesn't agree with you should be rounded up and deported...or worse.

Studs Terkel was an amazing writer and he understood the concept of freedom of speech. Something that you fear mongers rally behind, yet seem so eager to take away from others.

Here's a little piece of advice for ya, stop watching FOX news...stop listening to Rush Limbaugh...and try living life by the righteous moral code you seem so hell bent on cramming down other people's throats.

Dear Jason, I regret that you have suffered so much at the hands of these awful white Christians in your home State of Oklahoma. I cannot believe how they would try to shove anything down your throat as you so eloquently stated. Unlike yourself, my parents came from Istanbul (formerly Constantinople, Turkey) where they were: 1. Taxed for being Non Muslims, 2. had their Churches closed for being infidels, 3. Had their homes and stores looted for being Christians, 4. Where my father was physically beaten (twice 1942 and again in 1980) by the police in Istanbul because he refused to pay them off or give them his gold ring, 5. Where they lost many Armenian relatives and friends in the genocide against non-Muslims back around 1911. Jason, You have suffered enough in Oaklahoma. I suggest you quickly leave that terrible state and move to our former property (for some reason it is still empty)in Istanbul Turkey where you will never have to listen to another Christian as long as you LIVE. Just don't say anything about Islam cramming things down your throat, or your throat will more than likely be "fixed permanently". We all know these things are wrong, but this is what good muslims are supposed to do. If you have not read the koran then do not try to argue with me. It is all in there. Your rant wasn't about Studs, was it? It's about all of us tea-partying Christians, isn't it? That is because we have lived, read and experienced the tolerance of the Koran, Communism, Socialism, Nazism, and Imperialism. We do not want to see it again. Therefore when we see misguided idiots capable of voting for these ideologies, we express our diapproval; sometimes in writing and sometimes in other ways. Jason, you mentioned that you stumbled upon this section. I'll bet you stuble a lot.

Studs was the best interviewer ever, which translated into his being one of the 20th century's finest journalists. Period. End of story. He made no bones about his political leanings -- which in my opinion were something in the neighborhood of Eugene Debs'. My response to that is, so what? Studs' politics had nothing whatever to do with his eloquence, the empathy he had for every person he wrote about, his enthusiasm for his home town, and the authenticity his writing brought to his readers. One has only to go through "The Good War" and "Working" to understand how well he transmitted the thoughts of his interviewees to the reader. I feel proud to have come from the same community he did -- the Chicago area -- and fortunate to have met him (just once, but it was a great moment).

Studs would love that he's still stirring up controversy . . . can see him now ordering another highball and enjoying these posts.

hey "L in chicago" -- "had the communists succeeded"? Don't you know they already have ?!? we now have the obama marxist terrorist network running the country now!!

Studs doesn't need me to defend him. His legacy will live long after
the small minded critics are dead and gone.He collected the stories of the poor and the wealthy, the successful and the not so.And for that he got the Pulitzer. It is so easy to attack someone who can no longer respond. Takes a real low life. Why don't you low lives tell us who are your heroes of today? I wasn't a big fan of the first Mayor Daley but he said something once that has stuck with me.To paraphrase: its easy to take down a tree to destroy something that for decades gave comfort to the eye and soul. But in the end what counts is how many trees you planted. Studs planted a forest
and we are all better for it.

Some real scary stuff here folks...I fear for our children, I really do the vitriol and revisionism being pitched here. Fact is, I knew Studs Terkel and he was more than a decent man, he was a man with a moral compass-unlike most of the phony posters here-what Palinesque nonsense!!

If you like oppressive regimes that manipulate and control the press, you'll love the Obamarx era.

Just to get us into current times, the term is no longer "Communist" or "Communism."

It's "Obamunist" or "Obamunism."

Basically, Obamunism is the current version of Communism, whereby a totalitarian government controls just about everything while local cadre discriminate against and demean anyone who doesn't go along with The Party.

Like Studs, I am an American. That means I may read whatever the hell I wish.

That also means that if I wished, I could read little or nothing. I could focus on a single book. I could put mass media/TV the center of my attentions, then pretend that qualifies me to hold my opinions.

As we can see here, this pretending is a big trend lately. It too is very American.

It is no more a crime to read a newspaper than it is to recognize the bone-deep stupidity of a political candidate who cannot name a single newspaper when asked.

That's because we are Americans, no matter how uncomfortable that makes those who don't fully understand what that means.

We have dragged the proudly unread around forever, shouldering their dead weight on our country. We have weathered their uppity grabs for our books and our newspapers, and have defeated them at every turn using only the protections given all of us by the founding fathers.

We use all the freedoms we have. You, who do not, would take ours from us.

But, you can't. Because we are Americans.

I am always surpised by the heat of the rhetoric from those who are dissatisfied with America. Of course America is not perfect, and of course freedom isn't unlimited. But the freedom America provides to the vast majority of its citizens is virtually unmatched anywere in the world today or throughout world history.

Many of you here who seem distressed about America's imperfections in providing that freedom (unathorized wiretaps, for example, or G-men keeping an eye on Studs Terkel) also seem, based on your comments, sympathetic to notions of "social justice."

I submit to you that you simply wish to exchange perceived limitations on your freedom with which you disagree for actual limitations on your freedom with which you agree. Your concern is not really with the individual's degree of freedom, it is with who's vision of society prevails, and thus who uses the power of government to enforce that vision. I hope you realize these concepts are in opposition.

Here's a quick example. If your vision of social justice is that everyone has a place to sleep, everyone has food, and everyone has health care, and if, in your vision, it is the responsibility of the government to provide these things, then you are necessarily limiting the freedom of the entire population in significant respects. You are saying that certain members of society must be given material goods taken from other members of society, material goods that were earned through investments of time and property by those from whom they were taken.

This direct confiscation of liberty and property is a real intrusion of freedom. And deciding how much is taken, from whom, and under what circumstances becomes a major issue. The governments that have arisen under communist forms of society tend to abridge the freedoms of their citizens more than the governments of capitalist democracies/republics because the issue of who owns what become a collective matter rather than an individual one.

Put in more simple terms, if the collective good is the measuring stick for the success of a society, then the state must determine that good. Thus, communism and socialism tend to directly reduce individual freedom as a necessary consequence of their societal goals.

America stands as proof that individual freedom is superior to collective freedom for one simple reason--it works. It not only protects individuals from the tryanny of the state, but it actually improves the collective as well. Yes, there are people who fall through the cracks, but the poor in America live better than the vast majority of the entire world population. The people in a communist system are abused, oppressed and deprived. The people in America basically have the opporunity to do what they wish, and whether they have the capacity to succeed is much more about their personal ability than in most other nations. The free and open debate we have about what constitutes freedom proves the point.

So, Jason and others, you may be upset that your fellow citizens disagree with you. But when that happens, just remind yourself that in most countries it would be the government, not some ordinary citizen, who wants to do you violence for your views. Here the government would punish your oppressor. There, the government is the oppressor.

Let's try to keep some perspective. Our flaws reveal our inherent strength as a nation--they are not fundamental failures of our way of life.

Paul Robeson praised Stalin even after he was informed that Soviet friends of his had been tortured and killed by the Soviet security organs.