Institute for Social Research

The prejudice study shows one clear way the Institute's work reached American research. The Institute and Berkeley team used surveys, interviews and written analysis to study personality and political views. The American Jewish Committee supported the work. ^[10], preface; ch. I, §A

The study asked what made a person open to fascist ideas. It did not treat every person studied as an active fascist. Nor could its sample show how common these attitudes were across America. The authors said those studied were younger and more educated than the urban middle class. ^[10], ch. I, §A; ch. VIII, sampling-bias discussion

The book also drew criticism. According to Peter E. Gordon, Edward Shils argued that it neglected authoritarianism on the Left. Sanford defended its approach. The original exchange still needs to be checked. ^[11], introduction, discussion of Shils and Sanford

Davis gives a direct account of what she learned from Marcuse. She credited him with showing that study and political action could go together. She recalled resuming study with him in 1967. She also contrasted his support with Adorno's response, which had discouraged the link she sought. She wrote this account years later. ^[3], pp. xi–xii

Davis then put some of Marcuse's ideas to a new use. She drew on his book An Essay on Liberation and its ideas about political language to challenge how people talked about crime and prisons. She wanted language that could help build a society without prisons. But she also criticized parts of his views on art. She chose and changed ideas rather than accepting them all. ^[3], pp. xiii–xiv

She also recalled helping organize the 1998 Critical Resistance conference. Her comment about Marcuse was imagined: she described how he might have joined in had he been alive. It was not an account of his taking part. ^[3], p. xii and n. 9

Marcuse supported student protest. In 1968, however, he said he was not the students' spokesman. He thought few had read him closely. He described a meeting of ideas more than a direct line from his books to their actions. This was his own view of the link. ^[3], pp. 100–101

The sources show a clear link from Marcuse to Davis. They also show his public support for student revolt. Wider claims about his role in the New Left need evidence from the groups and people who received his ideas. Their own records can show what they read, adopted and changed.

The Institute's American reach grew through several routes: exile, joint research, books and teaching. Each route deserves its own history. Work on other Marxist groups and thinkers can help show how these paths met or developed apart.