2 Students Criticize History 164b; May Schedules 'Open Discussion'

Two leaders of Students for a Democratic Society have written a critique of History 164b--"the United States in World Politics"--charging that the course consists of little more than "cold war anti-Communist rhetoric."

As a result of the critique, the course's two instructors--Ernest R. May, professor of history, and Samuel R. Williamson Jr., instructor in history--agreed yesterday to an "open student discussion" on foreign policy issues like the war in Vietnam to be held January 11.

Mrs. Ellen Klein '68, co-chairman of SDS, and Peter J. Bilazarian '69, member of the executive committee, distributed their two-page mimeographed "white paper" after yesterday's 11 a.m. lecture. Bilazarian said last night that the critique, which also bears the names of Lawrence M. Robinson GS-1 and Steven W. Raudenbush '68--both SDS members--was not officially approved by SDS.

The critique charges that the United States is "the major counter-revolutionary force in a revolutionary world." It claims that "only one point of view is really being offered in the lectures and assigned reading of History 164b--that the U.S. has been the protector of the Western and underdeveloped world from Communist domination."

A spontaneous hour-long discussion of the critique, in which about 20 of the course's 240 members participated, took place in the lobby of Emerson Hall following yesterday's lecture. After the gathering, several students sent notes to May expressing interest in an open meeting to discuss the course.

"Foreign policy is obviously a complicated subject," May said. "Otherwise there wouldn't be an entire course devoted to it. Therefore I doubt if it's fair to respond quickly. I want time to learn more about the specific criticisms. The critique is a very abbreviated thing, and a course is complicated--you don't alter it quickly."

Williamson said he is "happy to have generated so much interest in the course." He said that he was not surprised by the critique, but called it "ironic" that he had discussed many of the points it made--particularly those concerning United States involvement in the Dominican Republic--in a critical lecture yesterday.