History of the Honeywell Project Part 1

This article begins a Five-part history of the Honeywell Project.
This paper will examine the mutual benefits gained by the United States government and the Honeywell Corporation. These benefits came at a great cost to the citizens of the United States and other victims of the United States counterinsurgency mission in Vietnam. The U.S. government enlisted the aid of an insidious corporation called Honeywell to create weapons of human destruction. Honeywell was able to reap huge economic gains while enjoying the accolades attributed to patriots.

Honeywell, which began in 1885, is one of the largest corporations in the United States. The Honeywell name is linked with an image of productive enterprise and interest in the common good and security of the United States (Honeywell 1999). However, there was at least one radical group that refused to accept the shining, clean public image, which the Honeywell Corporation tried to project. This group, calling itself the “Honeywell Project”, was founded by ex-Freedom Rider Marv Davidov in 1968, in an effort to expose the United States’ counterinsurgency plans and to halt weapons production by Honeywell, Minnesota’s largest weapons producer at the time. Undoubtedly the CEOs of Honeywell were displeased with their radical opponent’s choice of name. Honeywell’s world headquarters location in Minneapolis has been a source of pride for many Minnesotans. However, despite the fairly positive image Honeywell enjoyed, the Project questioned how the production of weapons for the United States was productive or a security measure that was in the best interest of the general population. The Honeywell Project saw the importance of questioning and changing Honeywell’s weapons production and exposing the United States counterinsurgency plans in Vietnam. The Honeywell Project, which began during a time when the relatively powerless American populous was exercising democratic responsibility in ways other than voting, served as a prototype for popular involvement in social change by exposing the U.S. counterinsurgency plans, and by fighting to stop Honeywell’s weapons production, change the corporation’s production to peace-time products, and assist workers in gaining control of the corporation.

Theoretical Framework

As a social activist it is important to study how organizations such as the Honeywell Project facilitate change. Active members of these organizations are a crucial resource because of their experience. Shared identity does not always translate into personal relationships. For many activists concern for the community, as a whole, is often the motivating factor. Personally, many of the activists I know are solitary people but they are extremely loyal to their movements. Their loyalty fuels the progression of mobilization. Movements have varying degrees of momentum. Della Porta and Diani, in their book, Social Movements: An Introduction, discuss the degrees as “ ‘visible’ and ‘latent’ phases” (Diani: 89). For example, the Honeywell Project organized three thousand demonstrators outside and inside Honeywell’s April 1970 stockholders meeting. When Honeywell abruptly adjourned the meeting after only fourteen minutes a very visible coordination of collective actions followed. Honeywell Project’s efforts were buttressed by organizations such as, the American Indian Movement, American Friends Service Committee, and the Yippie Party. All the activities that people associate with social movements were utilized such as, leafleting, picketing, and teach-ins. Today, there are still activists involved with protesting Alliant Techsystems, a spin-off company of Honeywell, but this is a “latent” stage characterized by smaller individual relations.

History has a significant influence on collective action identities. Activists often look to past movements for strategies, guidance, and inspiration. When a movement has a long history it offers a rich base for new identities but it also has room for progression. The vitality of a movement is determined by its ability to evolve. This thesis provides an example of a conceptualized social movement. It explains the various components of its conception, development, identity, and collective action.