| This dissertation explores the extent to which political dissent, by students, faculty, and blue collar workers, was found tolerable or beyond the pale during the changing circumstances at Yale University from the late 1920s through the 1950s. The limits of acceptable dissent at Yale were not shaped by the university administration alone, but also by the degree of support mobilized by the dissenting group for its activities. The dissertation focuses on left of center dissent, those who supported an expansion or broadening of decision-making power, and of access to information, freedom of speech and assembly, and improved wages and working conditions. The assumption of the dissertation is that free speech within a university includes freedom to challenge capitalism openly and to assert left alternatives to it, as well as the freedom to challenge the division of decision-making power within capitalism, and particularly within the university.;The dissertation argues that to understand dissent and academic freedom at a university, it is important to look at blue collar workers as well as students and faculty. Many controversial issues bridged the idea marketplace and the workplace. At the root of controversies over dissent were often conflicting notions of the purpose of the university--to be a marketplace of ideas or a vehicle for inculcating particular ideas; of who constituted the university--were blue collar workers valuable members of this community; and of whether ideas that challenged hierarchies of power, especially at the university, were acceptable--particularly when put into practice. While the conception of the university as a free market of ideas was most commonly embraced, the reality of a free market was undermined by the hierarchical structure of power within the university. Nevertheless, the ability of students, workers, and faculty to mobilize support, separately or in coalition, could sometimes shape the outcome of challenges to power, if not determine it. The university administration negotiated pressures from these groups, as well as from alumni, business, and government, particularly the FBI and government investigating committees. |
