The University of Oklahoma • Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Comunication
Photo providedReview of 'Perilous Times'
Book explores free speech issues during times of war
When historians tell stories of war, they often focus on political motivation, battlefield strategies, the fragility of alliances, the frailty of truth or the positioning of specific conflicts in the evolution or devolution of civilization. Geoffrey Stone’s war story explores none of that. There is no description of physical destruction, no narrative to illustrate military genius.
Instead, Stone focuses on the domestic human collateral, the people whose lives on American soil become threatened by government zealots practicing what is perceived to be passionate patriotism. Most of these victims – tens of thousands in Stone’s narrative – are far less threatening to the democracy than the secrecy and deception that seems even more acceptable during war.
Stone’s study is framed in six episodes of war in American history and informed by three key principles outlined by the Supreme Court – government paternalism is not permitted; the actor, not the speaker, should be punished; and certain forms of expression – obscenity, false statements of fact, commercial advertising and threats – are of low value and deserve lesser protections. In each of the six wars, Stone asserts, politicians “exploited public fears for partisan political gain . . . fomented public hysteria in an effort to unite the nation . . . (or) caved in to public demands for the repression of ‘disloyal’ individuals” (p. 13).
The victims in Stone’s exhaustive study date to 1798, when Congress, after inspired debate, approved the Sedition Act, which established defamation as a crime against government just in time for the anticipated war with France. Stone’s re-creation and interpretation of these raw-to-eloquent dialogues show “how easily a nation can slide from disagreements about policy to accusations of disloyalty.” The result, Stone writes, “is not only the suppression of individual dissent but the mutilation of public discourse and government decision-making” (p. 75).
From there, Stone leaps to the Civil War, when Abraham Lincoln lays waste to the writ of habeas corpus. Those whose loyalty to the Union was questioned simply had no way to get to court to argue their case or, most probably, prove their innocence. Stone is careful to distinguish between Lincoln’s tough but acceptable intent and his restraint and between Lincoln’s ability to check his own instincts and his inability to stifle repression by his military leaders and advisers.
In World War I, Woodrow Wilson pushed the prosecution of thousands of draft opponents. In World War II, Franklin Roosevelt locked up 120,000 men and women because they were of Japanese descent. With great fervor, Roosevelt also pursued critics of his war, arresting them, revoking their citizenship or, worse, deporting them for speaking out.
But Stone’s historical interpretation singles out the Cold War as “perhaps the most repressive period in American history,” a time in which the government launched brutal efforts to punish subversives or those perceived as disloyal. Thousands of Americans were victims of the government’s campaigns against the Communist Party. Most evil about the period was that elected public officials knew they had little to prosecute but much to publicize. It was the government’s first concerted, unprincipled effort to ruin lives by insinuation and innuendo through media pseudo-events.
The Vietnam War brought violence to the streets, prompting crackdowns on draft dodgers and antiwar protestors burning flags and draft cards. Richard Nixon’s attempt to suppress the Pentagon Papers, the government’s own history of blunders in prosecuting the Vietnam War, was the first ugly sign that damaging, reckless and spiraling paranoia had enveloped the White House.
Stone’s conclusion, titled “The Secret of Liberty,” struggles not only with summation of these six episodes but with the realization that the book is unfinished for now, and will be for the period of the War on Terrorism – a conflict that, like the Cold War, has a beginning but no middle or end. Also like the Cold War, it will be sustained by a constant fear campaign.
Though Stone’s book predated revelations that the Bush White House was buying favorable treatment from select columnists, the chapter on World War I deals directly with similar activities during that conflict. Recognizing no constitutional prohibition against such advocacy, Stone writes, “there are certainly limits on how far the government should (author emphasis) go. The line between responsible advocacy and irresponsible manipulation of public opinion may not be legally enforceable, but it is critical as a matter of sound governance, especially in wartime” (p. 154).
Stone focuses a great deal on lessons learned (and those not). His constant reminders that we’ve been here before are chilling and dramatic. “Perilous Times” is a must-read grounding book for all who teach suppression casually or thoroughly and for students whose understanding of government-media relations is defined primarily by patriotism.
– Fred Blevens, associate dean for student affairs, left OU in August 2006 to become associate dean at Florida International.
