|
|
Defending the ACLU: A Response to Bill Donohue
| Article
# : |
12647 |
|
|
Section : |
Modern Thought
|
| Issue
Date : |
6 / 1987 |
4,094 Words |
| Author
: |
Samuel Walker
|
When Lt. Col. Oliver North invoked the Fifth Amendment last winter he dramatized the truth of an old ACLU adage: "Sooner or later everyone needs the Bill of Rights."
What Ollie North probably does not realize is that thirty years ago his friends, the fanatical anticommunists, nearly destroyed the Fifth Amendment. At the height of the Cold War witch-hunt anyone who took the Fifth was branded a "Fifth Amendment communist." Few if any of these people were accused or even suspected of any overt criminal activity. They were investigated solely because of their political beliefs and associations. The anticommunist movement turned the Fifth Amendment upside down. If you invoked the privilege against self-incrimination you were presumed guilty. Many lost their jobs simply for exercising this constitutional right. CBS fired stage manager Joseph Papp in 1958 because he took the Fifth before the House Un-American activities Committee (HUAC). Papp is now recognized as one of the leading figures in the American theater.
Ollie North has a lot to be thankful for. Many people sacrificed their reputations, their jobs, and their careers to defend the Fifth and the rest of the Bill of Rights in the face of the Cold War onslaught. He is right when he says a lot of people "died facedown in the mud" to defend American democracy. But a lot of other people sacrificed in other ways as well. Ollie should be especially thankful for the ACLU, which has, since 1920, been the most consistent defender of the constitutional protections he now uses. In fact, Ollie North has incurred a bebt that he ought to discharge by becoming a member of the ACLU. He might even want to send an additional tax-deductible contribution to the ACLU Foundation.
The Defense of Civil Liberties
These thoughts are prompted by William Donohue's attempted hatchet job on the ACLU. Donohue accuses the ACLU of pursing a "partisan" defense of civil liberties, of advancing only a liberal social agenda, and of being highly selective in deciding who it represents.
Donohue's charges are serious and deserve a detailed and thoughtful reply. What exactly is the ACLU's agenda? How has it conducted itself over the past sixty-seven years? Is it partisan and hypocritical, as Donohue charges? Does it have a covert social agenda? Actually, these questions relate to a far more serious issue regarding the role of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in American life. The current bicentennial celebration of the constitution is additional reason to examine these questions.
Unfortunately, Donohue is not the person for the job. As a historian he has failed to research his subject in depth and does not understand the broad sweep of American history. In particular he does not grasp the contours of the major political developments, the evolution of modern liberalisms (or conservatism, for that matter), or of civil liberties as a legal doctrine. Repeatedly he rips events out of their historical context to score cheap debater's points. If his article were a term paper, it would not get a passing grade in a decent undergraduate history course.
The ACLU has been the most consistent defender of individual rights in American society. It has defended the right of Nazis and communists alike, and abortion
...
Read Full Article
|
|
