PERFORMATIVE MEDIA POLICY: SECTION 230’S EVOLUTION FROM FOOTNOTE TO LOYALTY OATH

This study examines the legislative evolution of Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, a widely discussed and frequently misunderstood dimension of American telecommunications policy that provides a “safe harbor” provisionally shielding internet companies from liability for law-breaking content published by third parties who use their platforms and networks. Though this provision originated in the mid-1990s as an effort to minimize the legal and economic risks facing fledgling internet startups, we argue that efforts to reform it during the Trump era reflected an unprecedented transformation of an arcane policy point into a highly public subject for “messaging bills” intended principally to signal political loyalty to the president.

“A Swissman in the Middle of Germany”

In the summer semester of 1930, Barth moved to Bonn. He was soon drawn into a conflict with German nationalists about the German pacifist and theologian Günther Dehn, whom Barth defended. A few months after Adolf Hitler’s appointment as Reich Chancellor in 1933, Barth wrote Theological Existence Today!, declaring that church and theology constitute a boundary for every state, even a totalitarian one. At the same time, Barth’s domestic situation grew more difficult, leading him to consider divorce. In 1934 Barth co-authored the Barmen Theological Declaration of the Confessing Church. Barth didn’t conform with even minor regulations at the university and refused to swear the loyalty oath to Hitler without an addendum. This led to Barth’s suspension as professor, followed by a disciplinary criminal process, in which Barth protested that Hitler was treated as a second God. The process led to Barth’s compulsory retirement in 1935.

“Cursed Be He That Keepeth Back His Sword from Blood”

Americans turned to scripture to address various wartime needs in 1864. In the South, Confederates executed deserters while warning soldiers that the Jesus story was an execution story marked by betrayal. The biblical theme of loyalty came into play in the South as Lincoln tried to entice southerners into signing a loyalty oath in exchange for pardon. Loyalty and morale were not just southern problems, however. In 1864 Grant and Lee faced off in some of the war’s fiercest combat. Americans had seen Shiloh, Antietam, and Gettysburg—surely the worst was over, they had thought. Yet the devastation of 1864 surprised them again with lists of casualties that seemed only to get longer as the months dragged on. Americans grew more war weary than ever, which prompted Frederick Douglass and others to call on the Bible to remind Americans of the war’s sacred meaning.

An event that impacted the Transylvanian pharmacist education 100 years ago

In Kolozsvár, on 17th of September 1872, a Hungarian royal university was founded with 4 faculties 1- Law and Political Sciences, 2. Medical, 3. Arts (liberal), Language and History of Science, 4. Mathemathics and Natural History faculties. In 1881 the University picked up the Ferencz József University of Science name. There was no independent Medicine trainingfacultyt at this time yet. Pharmacists were taught in the Medical and Natural History faculties. In December 1918, during the first world war, Kolozsvár was moved under Romanian rule. On the 9th of May in 1919 the Romanian authorities called the acadamic senate (school staff) to do loyalty oath for the Romanian king.This was refused by the university teachers. After this event, teachers were moved out from this building along with the entire equipement of the University, and the place was occupied by the Romanian university. As, by this, theHungarian language acadamic education became impossible the first stage of the life of(Hungarian King) Ferencz József University of Sciense ended. First, the major part of theprofessors and students emigrated to Budapest while later on in 1921 the University wastemporarily established in Szeged. The University in Szeged took not onlythe legal continuity of the institute through its name but its professors also maintained and cherished all the traditions of the institute through many long coming years. Starting from 1921/1922 many student with transilvanian origin obtained pharmacist’s degree here many of whom later returned and worked in their native country.

Ernst Kantorowicz

This is the first complete biography of Ernst Kantorowicz (1895–1963), an influential and controversial German– American intellectual whose colorful and dramatic life intersected with many of the great events and thinkers of his time. Born into a wealthy Prussian-Jewish family, Kantorowicz fought on the Western Front in World War I, was wounded at Verdun, and earned an Iron Cross. Later, he earned an Iron Crescent for service in Anatolia before an affair with a general's mistress led to Kantorowicz being sent home. After the war, he fought against Poles in his native Posen, Spartacists in Berlin, and communists in Munich. An ardent German nationalist during the Weimar period, Kantorowicz became a member of the elitist Stefan George circle, which nurtured a cult of the “Secret Germany”. Yet as a professor in Frankfurt after the Nazis came to power, Kantorowicz bravely spoke out against the regime before an overflowing crowd. Narrowly avoiding arrest after Kristallnacht, he fled to England and then the United States, where he joined the faculty at Berkeley, only to be fired in 1950 for refusing to sign an anticommunist “loyalty oath.” From there, he “fell up the ladder” to Princeton's Institute for Advanced Study, where he stayed until his death. Drawing on many new sources, including numerous interviews and unpublished letters, this book tells the story of a major intellectual whose life and times were as fascinating as his work.

The Fundamental Issue

This chapter focuses on the most difficult time in Ernst Kantorowicz's life. He had supposed that he would be remaining in Berkeley for the rest of his career. Everything was going well. But in June 1949, a bitter controversy broke out at the University of California. Driven by principle, Kantorowicz involved himself in struggle until late August 1950, when he was defeated and fired. At issue was the loyalty oath that President Robert Sproul required all university academic employees to sign. At the time, America was obsessed about communism. Concerned about the possibility of the legislature interfering directly in the university's affairs and curtailing financial support, Sproul asked the Board of Regents to introduce an enhanced loyalty oath to be signed by all university academic employees. Kantorowicz refused to sign the oath, which led to his firing.