As part of a series on post-Katrina housing in New Orleans, NewsHour correspondent Betty Ann Bowser interviewed University of New Orleans history professor Arnold Hirsch about the history of public housing in New Orleans and the rest of the United States.

***

ARNOLD HIRSCH: I'm a professor of history at the University of New Orleans. My formal title is the Ethel and Hermann L. Midlow Endowed Chair for New Orleans Studies and University Research Professor of History.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Your area of expertise is public housing, right?

ARNOLD HIRSCH: My area of expertise is race and urban development and I've done work on housing policy.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: So when this country decided to build public housing, what was the goal of doing that?

ARNOLD HIRSCH: There were a number of goals in the initial public housing program. One was simply a jobs program to help us get out of the Depression. The second facet of that was the desire to get the construction trades going in the industrial sector. And third, there was housing reform and the attempt to give temporary help to the transient poor -- people who were seen as being down on their luck, through the circumstances beyond their control, and then just needed a helping hand to get back to work and move up the social ladder again.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: So the initial idea was to give people temporary help?

ARNOLD HIRSCH: It was not seen as permanent developments for people to go and live in through the generations. It was generally viewed as a way station where people could take a timeout, get a break on their rent, get a job, save some money, move on and open it up for the next family to follow....

TOWARD A NEW NEW DEAL:
FDR’S LIBERALISM AND THE FUTURE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

A Conference of the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute and the Roosevelt Institution

Co-sponsored by The Nation, The Economic Policy Institute, The Center for Community Change, NDN, Campaign for America’s Future, Demos, The Progressive States Network, The Drum Major Institute, and The American Prospect

April 9, 2008

9:00 am to 5:30 pm

The Willard Hotel

1401 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington DC 20004

Panelists include: Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT), William Leuchtenberg, Jonathan Alter, Robert Borosage, John Podesta, Harold Meyerson, and Eric Alterman among many others

9:00-9:15 am
Introduction

• Richard E. French, Jr., Co-Chair of the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute
• James Roosevelt, Jr., Member, Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute Board of Governors; President and CEO, Tufts Healthcare Plan
• Nathaniel Loewentheil, Executive Director, Roosevelt Institution

9:15-10:15 am
Opening Address – Professor William Leuchtenburg: The New Deal and How It Changed America

Respondents:
• Moderator: Christopher N. Breiseth, President, Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute
• Robert Greenstein, President, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
• James Roosevelt, Jr., Member, Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute Board of Governors; President and CEO, Tufts Healthcare Plan
• Caitlin Howarth, Director of Operations, The Roosevelt Institution

10:30-11:45 pm
Panel 1 – Continuing the Covenant in an Era of Change: Social Security and Health Care, the Twin Pillars of a Just Society

• Moderator: Philip W. Johnston, Member, Board of Directors, Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute
• Henry Aaron, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution
• Margaret Simms, President, National Academy of Social Insurance
• Eva DuGoff, Senior Fellow, The Roosevelt Institution

12:00-1:00 pm
Luncheon

1:00-2:30 pm
Breakout Sessions

A. The Intellectual Underpinnings of a Renegotiated Social Contract—Taylor Room

• Moderator: Michael Stegman, Director of Policy and Housing, The MacArthur Foundation
• Mike Lux, President, Progressive Strategies
• Simon Rosenberg, President, NDN
• Ted Fertik, Senior Fellow, The Roosevelt Institution
• Deepak Bhargava, Executive Director, Center for Community Change


B. Democracy, Political Communication, and the New Media—Pierce Room
• Moderator: Adam Conner, Senior Fellow, The Roosevelt Institution
• Jonathan Alter, Columnist for Newsweek; author of The Defining Moment
• Harold Meyerson, Editor, The American Prospect
• Eric Alterman, Professor and author, CUNY Brooklyn and CUNY Graduate School of Journalism;
• Mari Castañeda, Professor of Communications, UMass/Amherst

C. Progressive Movements and Policies at the State Level—Garfield Room

• Moderator: Joel Barkin, Executive Director, The Progressive States Network
• Representative Tony Payton, Pennsylvania State Legislature
• Gloria Totten, President, Progressive Majority
• LeeAnn Hall, Director, Northwest Federation of Community Organizations,
• Alan Charney, Campaign Director, US Action

D. Employment, Wages and Unions in an Era of Immigration and Globalization—Main Ballroom
• Moderator: Hilary Doe, Midwest Regional Coordinator, The Roosevelt Institution
• Larry Mishel, President, Economic Policy Institute
• Ana Avendaño, Associate General Counsel, Immigration Worker Program, AFL-CIO
• Mary Beth Maxwell, Executive Director, American Rights at Work
• Miles Rapoport, President, Demos


2:45-4:15 pm
Panel 2 – Defending the Middle Class: The Glass-Steagal Act, The Mortgage Crisis, and Income Disparity
• Moderator: Christopher N. Breiseth, President, Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute
• Bob Kuttner, Founder, American Prospect and Economic Policy Institute; Author; Senior Fellow, Demos
• Representative Paul Kanjorski (D-PA)
• Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT)
• Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
• Nell Minnow, author and advocate on corporate social responsibility

4:15-5:15 pm
Panel 3 – New Times, New Coalitions
• Moderator: Nate Loewentheil, Executive Director, The Roosevelt Institution
• Robert Borosage, Co-Director, Campaign for America’s Future
• Andres Ramirez, VP for Hispanic Programs, NDN
• Andrea Batista Schlesinger, Executive Director, Drum Major Institute
• John Podesta, CEO and Executive Director, Center for American Progress

5:15-5:30
Closing Remarks –Framing the Vision for the New New Deal
• James Roosevelt, Jr., Member, Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute Board of Governors; President and CEO, Tufts Healthcare Plan

Boston University professor emeritus Howard Zinn has turned to a new platform to give his version of US history -- the graphic novel, with "A People's History of American Empire."

Illustrations are by Mike Konopacki.

Alon Confino is a professor of modern German and European history at the University of Virginia and an expert in the culture of memory. In an article he published in the periodical Alpayim - A Multidisciplinary Publication for Contemporary Thought and Literature (in Hebrew), Confino calls for eliminating history from the discourse between Jews and Arabs in Israel, "to get rid of the arrogance of the past" and to overcome it. The debate as to what did and did not happen in the past only deepens the rifts, in his opinion.

"It may be strange that a historian, whose craft is to construct representations of the past, posits such an argument," writes Confino, "but I don't think that the role of the historian is always to recommend a recipe that includes another dosage of the past in order to reinforce identity [preferably three times a day]."

At the same time, he also calls for suspending the debate on the question of whether the State of Israel should be "Jewish and democratic" or "a state of all its citizens." This is a call in favor of pragmatism: "The Jews must desist from the obsessive need to turn the Palestinians into Zionists, to be loved by them, and to hear how wonderful, justified and humane Zionism was [as a whole]. It certainly was not so for the native Palestinians. The Palestinians must get used to the Jewish nation-state that is supported by 80 percent of the country's inhabitants." Confino is talking about the Israeli Arabs, not those in Gaza and the West Bank.
Advertisement
Both Jews and Arabs do in fact draw their identity from history, as do most of the nations of the world. The conflict over the Land of Israel is anchored in the past, as are many conflicts between nations. But "the past is not necessarily the best tool for shaping the present," says Confino. "We must exist in the present, we must dream, build, create. We must live." There is no need to forget everything, he says, but neither is there a need to remember everything.

Confino does not spell out what should be remembered and what forgotten, but asserts that holding on to the past exacerbates the tension, especially in conditions of inequality. Instead of arguing about history, he suggests therefore that we concentrate on creating political, civic and cultural equality between the Jews and the Arabs in Israel, including the payment of compensation to the Arabs for property that was confiscated from them, and a recognition of their right to return to the villages they were forced to leave, "insofar as possible." In his opinion, more equality will reduce the tension between Jews and Arabs, will improve the integration of the Arabs into Israeli society, and then it will also be easier to work on shaping memory, in order to harness it for everyone's benefit. ...

Although the war in Iraq can be characterized as turbulent and controversial, the American publics interest in U.S. foreign policy is increasing.

Guest lecturer and military historian Andrew J. Bacevich spoke Wednesday night in

the Indiana Memorial Union about U.S. foreign policy and Iraq to a packed room of students, faculty, staff and Bloomington residents.

Bacevich said his underlying theme was not “what do we do about Iraq ... but how are we as a nation to deal with the consequences of Iraq?”

Bacevich stressed failures of President Bush’s Freedom Agenda by refuting three broad assumptions laid out by the agenda: the belief that American military power is unlimited in its range of action and size, Iraq is an impressionable region in the Middle East and the overwhelming confidence of the Bush administration that democracy is the answer to all troubles in the Middle East.

“We are in a season of cynicism,” Bacevich said of President Bush’s Freedom Agenda.

By drawing references from the previous world wars, the Cold War and Vietnam, Bacevich defended his claim that liberal democracy will not save the Arab world. He acknowledged that although there have been instances when free and fair elections have taken place in the Middle East, corruption and illegitimacy have ultimately plagued these elections.

As a foreign policy and military scholar, Bacevich outlined his interpretation for proper U.S. strategy. He underscored the importance of the U.S. to stay realistic, moderate and prudent in military strategies and foreign policy.

Bacevich said the United States should “encourage justice, tolerance, respect” and demonstrate these themes in our society, not force them on other countries.

He also advocated a return to the just war theory, a philosophically rooted principle that is the basis of international law today. The just war theory highlights the role morality plays in waging war and encourages leaders to carefully question when war is morally justifiable.

“Force should be preserved as a last resort,” Bacevich said. ...

In its day, the East German secret police, now known as the “Stasi,” was one of the most feared spy agencies in the world. But despite its reputation and seemingly unlimited access to James Bond-like technology, the best national security system couldn’t help an ailing communist regime, according to an MSU historian.

In her new book, “Seduced by Secrets,” MSU’s internationally recognized historian and Lyman Briggs associate professor Kristie Macrakis debunks the myths surrounding the East German Ministry for State Security, while offering insights into the workings of all spy agencies.

“Most people have a script in their head about what the Stasi was,” said Macrakis, who is currently a visiting scholar at Harvard University. “They want to tell a different story than the one I’m trying to tell.”

The perceived script is that husbands spied on wives, children on parents and neighbors on neighbors. And while this story is true, it’s also an old one. In her book, Macrakis offers example upon example of the technology used by all spy agencies. Most of the techniques showcased are still classified in the United States.

“Seduced by Secrets” tells the story of how a spy agency was “seduced by the power of technological secrets to solve intelligence and national problems,” Macrakis writes. Unlike other books and films, Macrakis looks at the Stasi through the lens of espionage history.

For example, the CIA still refuses to publish invisible ink formulas dating as far back as World War I. Macrakis found an invisible ink recipe in the Stasi files and reproduced it working with a chemistry colleague.

“Even when the goals were achieved,” Macrakis writes in her book, “the daily activities of the spy world -- the running of agents, catching spies, tracking enemies of the state, and making spy gadgets, to name just a few -- led to the emergence of an insular spy culture more intent on securing power than protecting national security.”

In this sense, it was no different from other spy agencies.

Born during the Cold War division of Germany, the Stasi, according to Macrakis, “developed in the image of the KGB with a German personality.” And at the heart of its operations against the United States and the West was technology.

But not only did it steal much of that technology from abroad, it also created some of the spy world’s most inventive technological gadgets or techniques at home. Some of this fiction-like technology included methods we know from the movies, such as hiding spy cameras in household objects, but others were unique, bizarre and sometimes dangerous....

Mary Beard, a professor in classics at Cambridge, says in her blog that it is time to ditch the Olympic torch:

I don’t quite understand how we have forgotten that the “Olympic Torch” ceremony was invented by Hitler and his chums.

If ever there was an “invented tradition” well worth stamping out, it is this ridiculous, Fascist-inspired waste of money – which sends a Bunsen Burner around the world at tremendous cost for several months before the Games, manned (and womanned) by people dressed up in pseudo-ancient Greek costume, no doubt feeling very silly....

Hardly any commentator stops to mention that this silly torch ceremony has nothing to do with the ancient Greeks, and was really invented to be a magnificent shot in Leni Riefenstahl’s movie (choreographed by Carl Diem). This is one of Hitler’s most pervasive legacies.

They also don’t stop to mention that the ancient Olympics – far from being that sweet haven of peace -- were pretty political anyway. Even in their hay-day, they were often interrupted by the rough hand of Politics.

The classic case is the eligibility of Alexander the Great’s ancestor, Alexander 1 of Macedon. When he turned up to compete in the early fifth century BC , the other Greeks said that he was a foreigner and so wasn’t eligible. Eventually the gate-keepers allowed him to take part, but -- although he finished first (equal) – he didn’t get his name written into the official list of winners. (Hence, he is an awkward example on both sides for the modern argument about whether “Macedonia” is “Greek”. Does Alexander 1 prove the Greekness of the Macedonians, or vice versa?).

But there were plenty more political controversies. The worst was in 364 BC when the Games happened while Olympia was under enemy occupation, or more accurately in the middle of a war zone. In fact, the Arcadians (Olympia’s neighbours in the Peloponnese) invaded during the Pentathlon event and some of their soldiers looted the sacred treasures. So much for the “Sacred Truce”.

A range of school subjects could be swept away under new teaching proposals.
The attack on the National Curriculum, which has dictated school timetables for 20 years, could spell the end of separate classes in history, geography, literature, languages, art and music.

Instead, schools would be allowed to decide how they teach big themes such as global warming, conflict and healthy living.

The present list of subjects would be reduced to little more than English, mathematics and computing. The National Association of Head Teachers, responding to a select committee inquiry into whether the National Curriculum is "fit for purpose", said its structure of 14 compulsory subjects should be replaced by a "minimum framework" that would be "skills and competence-based, rather than prescriptive and knowledge-based".

Growing calls for flexibility, coupled with a series of curriculum reviews ordered by ministers, represent a serious threat to the future of the traditional timetable.

Academics defended the National Curriculum, saying it was the best guarantee that children were exposed to vital areas of study.

"We haven't arrived at these subjects by accident," said Prof Alan Smithers, of Buckingham University. "We have discovered a number of ways of making sense of the world which have been formulated as the sciences, humanities, social sciences and expressive art. It is reasonable to require young people to engage in these vital subjects for a spell of time."