Bill Ayers: Not “Just Some Guy in the Neighborhood”

“I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” That is what University of Illinois at Chicago education professor Bill Ayers, a self proclaimed communist, had to say on September 11th, 2001 when he was questioned about his own acts of terrorism some 30 years prior. Bill Ayers helped lead a radical domestic terror group, the Weather Underground Organization, which was active (in at least some capacity) from 1969 to 1981. Emmy award winner and best-selling author Jack Cashill accurately described the Weather Underground as “anti-capitalist and anti-American.” The terrorists, known as “Weathermen,” attacked several locations across the country. Their primary bombing targets included police stations, banks, and government buildings/offices.

On May 21st, 1970, Bill Ayers’ wife, Bernadine Dohrn—a fellow Weather Underground leader, current Northwestern law school professor, and ACLU Advisory Board member—made a declaration of war against “AmeriKKKa”. Earlier that year, on March 1st, 1970, the Weather Underground bombed the U.S. Capitol building.

Jack Cashill pointed out that the Weather Underground “moved towards blowing up things, not people.” Aside from the U.S. Capitol building bombing, other notable attacks included a bombing of the Pentagon on May 19th, 1973 and a bombing of the U.S. State Department building on January 29th, 1975.

What business, then, would a terrorist like Bill Ayers have here at Purdue? He was chosen to be the first speaker as part of a larger guest lecture series. This year, Robert and Carolyn Perrucci began the first annual lecture series for three fields of study: Sociology, African American Studies, and Women’s Studies. The topic/theme of the lecture series is Class, Race, and Gender Inequality. One speaker is to be chosen each year from one of the three fields of study (they alternate). This year, the speaker was chosen by the Sociology Department.

According to Irwin “Bud” Weiser, the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts, a committee of three to five faculty members was appointed last spring to come up with ideas for a speaker for the inaugural Perrucci lecture. The number of people considered for the speaking role and the identity of the candidates remains unknown. Their anonymity is important, particularly in this case. It would seem that in the interest of sparing people from considerable shame, it is best that these individuals not know that Bill Ayers was chosen instead of them.

The lecture was intended to be a small event. It took place in a classroom in Lawson (capacity 100). The event was not advertised, although it was not supposed to be “quiet” either. “Quiet is the wrong word,” said Chris Sigurdson, Purdue’s Assistant Vice President for External Relations, “No one was hiding anything.” It is unclear whether or not the faculty committee had anticipated the tremendous outrage from students, faculty, alumni, and community members that came as a result of the selection of Ayers as the speaker.

No taxpayer money, tuition money, or alumni donation was used to pay for the event. The lecture was funded by the private endowment established by the Perruccis. Regardless, any campus group (student or faculty) is allowed to bring whomever they want to speak. The debate is not over the right of the Sociology Department to host Bill Ayers. They acted within the rules established by Purdue University. The debate revolves around the merit of Ayers as the speaker.

If another set of faculty members was formed, would they take Bill’s terrorist involvement into account and ultimately choose a different speaker? I would certainly hope so, but there is no way of knowing. Had the decision been mine, I would have chosen an individual who does not have a history of domestic terrorism, even if it meant sacrificing a potentially distinct and topically valuable message from someone like Ayers who is regarded as an expert in education reform. If Pentagon attackers are the standard, will we invite Osama bin Laden and tell everyone he is an expert on recruitment strategy (Either that or hide and seek)?

Come to find out, Bill Ayers has visited Purdue before. He came prior to the 2008 Presidential Campaign when he was relatively unknown. Ayers was brought in to the national spotlight during the 2008 campaign because of his close ties with Barack Obama. The widespread recognition of Ayers and his militant past undoubtedly led to the large turnout of protestors at the Perrucci lecture. The event was protested by students and adults alike. According to Captain Tim Potts of the Purdue Police Department, “The protesters were a spirited group, but they complied with the rules.”

Before the event, word had spread that the police would be searching the building for bombs. My first reaction (half kidding) to that news was, “Are there bombs being set by or against Ayers.” Captain Potts said that there were between 12 and 15 police officers for the event, including shift officers and the bomb squad sent by Tippecanoe County.

He went on to explain that it was routine for officers to check the location for anything suspicious before a speaker comes to campus. In other words, the bomb squad was not sent in just because Bill Ayers is a terrorist who used bombs as his medium of destruction. One protestor pointed out that it was ironic that police officers were assigned to protect a man who had so much disdain for the Badge that his terrorist organization bombed several police stations.

Some of the protestor’s signs targeted the school specifically by saying “Shame on you, Purdue.” Others targeted Ayers communist values and his ties with Obama. However, the overarching theme appeared to focus on Ayers as an unrepentant domestic terrorist. The question loomed, “Why did Purdue invite a terrorist to speak?” Chris Sigurdson explained that Bill was invited because of his expertise in education. Entertaining a similar question, Dean Weiser told the press, “If universities aren’t places where anyone can speak, we’ve lost our way.”

Near the beginning of speech, Ayers said, “Purdue endorsing my past and my politics is false.” He was there to speak about education and he stuck almost exclusively to that topic. He started by explaining that in order to bring about change of any kind, individuals must take it upon themselves to act and not stand by and expect others to do bidding for them. Ayers discussed the importance of how one frames issues of education. He denounced the notion that education is a commodity that can be bought. Instead, he believes it is a right (as stated in the UN Declaration of Human Rights).

He emphasized that he strongly believes in the “incalculable value of every individual” and that schools should foster “imagination, courage, and entrepreneurship.” Most of all, Ayers stressed that a successful curriculum is one in which students are allowed to engage and question. After his prepared remarks came a question and answer session.

All comments and questions pertained to education. In answering those questions, Ayers expanded on his earlier points saying, “Anything can be the object of interrogation… be critical by asking questions.” In response to a question about engaging in the classroom, he said, “The challenge of being a teacher or parent is seeing things from the child’s perspective.” He continued on with his emphasis on allowing children to participate and ask questions.

Between the questions that were asked and a handful of cheers during the speech, it became clear that the audience was overwhelmingly unphased by Bill Ayers’ past terrorist activities. In fact, before asking her question, one woman (referring to the protestors) told Ayers, “We regret the unfortunate incidents outside.” All I could think was, “Who’s we? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?"