David Joel Horowitz was an American conservative writer and activist. He was a founder and president of the David Horowitz Freedom Center (DHFC); editor of the Center's website FrontPage Magazine; and director of Discover the Networks, a website that tracks individuals and groups on the political left. Horowitz also founded the organization Students for Academic Freedom. Horowitz wrote several books with author Peter Collier, including four on prominent 20th-century American families. He and Collier have collaborated on books about cultural criticism. Horowitz worked as a columnist for Salon. From 1956 to 1975, Horowitz was an outspoken adherent of the New Left. He later rejected progressive ideas and became a defender of neoconservatism. Horowitz recounted his ideological journey in a series of retrospective books, culminating with his 1996 memoir Radical Son: A Generational Odyssey.
I started Grinnell College at the very end of the sixties, right after they'd made the dorms co-ed, elected a male homecoming 'queen' and gotten the members of the student government association bailed out after their nude protest at a lecture given by a representative of Playboy. Having been a delegate to the last convention of the SDS in Chicago, I joined the college's chapter; got involved in Pterodactyl, the local underground paper; and started attending the 'free school' classes held evenings after regular classes ended. It was likely at one of these that this book, edited by one of the editors of Ramparts, was recommended.
The essays within are by some big names, Domhoff being my particular favorite then and now.
Finally, I'm not 100% certain which professor recommended this book. If it wasn't Terry it was likely Alan Nassar.
This exhaustive study of how corporations benefited and developed via the Cold War is all well and good, but it was written in 1969 before the final dramatic conclusion and so therefore mainly focuses on Vietnam and the Marshall Plan.
There are a few good articles included in this text, Eakins' in particular, but overall, the pieces selected are either poorly researched or are embedded quite obviously in a strict left-economico-political frame work. Williams' piece is particularly disappointing and ideological.