AS History – Unit 1
A World Divided:
Communism and Democracy in
the 20th Century
Revision Guide
1
How to answer the questions:
Your introduction should:
1. INTERPRET the question
2. EXPLAIN your line of argument. In a causation essay this should include how
the causation factors link together and which are the most important. In an
interpretation essay this must outline the extent to which the interpretation
is accurate by considering a variety of factors.
Each paragraph should:
POINT
Interpretation questions:
Causation questions:
Make a point that answers the
question. This should contain a
factor, a judgement and a reason for
this judgement
Link this point to your overall line of
argument
Make a point that answers the
question. This should contain a factor,
a judgement and a reason for this
judgement
Link this point to your overall line of
argument (the causal chain)
EVIDENCE This should be detailed, precise and
EXPLAIN
LINK
relevant. It must be selected to
prove your point.
It must include evidence FOR and
AGAINST in a balance that is
necessary to support the judgement
in your point
Explain throughout and at the end of
your paragraph how your evidence
proves your point
Explain how your point supports
your line of argument
This should be detailed, precise and
relevant. It must be selected to prove
your point.
It must include evidence FOR and
AGAINST in a balance that is necessary
to support the judgement in your point
Explain why this factor is a cause (what
is the explicit link between the factor
and the question)
Explain throughout and at the end of
your paragraph how your evidence
proves your point
Explain how your point supports your
line of argument (causal chain)
Your conclusion should:
1. SUMMARISE your line of argument
2. EXPLAIN how this argument has been proven
2
Writing Frames
Why?
(Analysis and judgement of causation)
Introduction:


The question concerns the causes of .....
The line of argument to be proven is .....
Paragraphs:





The most/least/another important cause of..... is.....
The evidence for this is .....
... caused ... because ...
This evidence clearly shows that ..... is the most/least/another important cause of ..... because .....
This points supports the line of argument that ... because ....
Conclusion:


The line of argument is.....
This has been proven because.....
How far/ To what extent was ______ caused by ______?
(Analysis and judgement of causation)
Introduction:


The question concerns whether the main cause of .... was ....
The line of argument to be proven is .....
Paragraph 1 (consider the factor in the question):






.... was caused by .... to a large/small extent
The evidence that proves this is....
.....was not caused by..... to a small/large extent.....because of the evidence that .....
....caused.... because
....caused.... to a large/small extent because....
This points supports the line of argument that ... because ....
Other paragraphs:





The most/least/another important cause of..... is.....showing that.... caused.... to a large/small extent
The evidence for this is .....
... caused ... because ...
This evidence clearly shows that ..... is the most/least/another important cause of ..... and
thus....caused.... to a large/small extent because .....
This point supports the line of argument that ... because ....
Conclusion:



.... caused.... to a large/small extent because....
The line of argument is.....
This has been proven because.....
3
How far was______ a success/failure?
(Analysis and judgement of consequence)
Introduction:


The question concerns whether.... was a success/failure
Line of argument: This is accurate to a large/small extent because ....The area that shows.... to be a
success/failure to a large extent is....This is because .....Other areas that show this are .....This is
because .....The area that shows.... to be a success/failure to a small extent is....This is because .....
Paragraphs:




....shows.... to be a success/failure to a large/small extent because....
The evidence that proves this is....
....shows.... to be a success/failure to a large/small extent because....
This points supports the line of argument that ... because ....
Conclusion:







The area that shows.... to be a success/failure to a large extent is....
This is because .....
Other areas that show this are .....
This is because .....
The area that shows.... to be a success/failure to a small extent is....
This is because .....
Overall.... is a success to a large/small extent because....
How far did______ change/improve in the years______?
(Analysis and judgement of the extent of change)
Introduction:


The question concerns the extent to which..... changed/improved
Line of argument: The area that changed/improved the most is....This is because .....Other areas that
changed/improved are .....This is because .....Areas that showed least change/improvement are .....This
is because .....
Paragraphs:




The area that showed most/least/some change/improvement is.....
The evidence for this is .....
This evidence clearly shows that ..... showed most/least/some change/improvement because .....
This points supports the line of argument that ... because ....
Conclusion:






The area of life that most changed/improved is.....
This is because .....
Other areas that changed/improvement are .....
This is because .....
Areas that showed least change/improvement are .....
This is because ....
4
How important was______ to______?
(Analysis of significance)
Introduction:


The question concerns how important.... was to....
Line of argument: This is accurate to a large/small extent because ....The area that shows most
importance is....This is because .....Other areas are .....This is because .....The area that shows least
importance is....This is because .....
Paragraphs:




.... shows importance to a large/small degree because....
The evidence for this is .....
This evidence clearly shows that ..... shows importance to a large/small degree because .....
This points supports the line of argument that ... because ....
Conclusion:







The area that shows most importance is....
This is because .....
Other areas are .....
This is because .....
The area that shows least importance is....
This is because .....
Overall.... was important to a large/small degree because....
How far is it accurate to describe______ as______?
(Analysis and judgement of key features)
Introduction:


The question concerns the extent to which..... can be described as....
Line of argument: Overall this is true to a large/small extent because....The factor that most shows
that....can be described as.... is....This is because.....Other areas that show this are .....This is
because.....The factor that least shows that.... can be described as.... is....This is because.....
Paragraphs:




....shows that.... can be described as.... to a large/small extent because....
The evidence for this is.....
This evidence clearly shows that..... can be described as.... to a large/small extent because....
This points supports the line of argument that ... because ....
Conclusion:







The factor that most shows that....can be described as.... is....
This is because.....
Other areas that show this are .....
This is because.....
The factor that least shows that.... can be described as.... is....
This is because.....
Overall.... can be described as.... because....
5
How your essays will be marked:
Level 1
1-6
Mostly simple statements supported by limited factual material
of some relevancy
Grade: U
Level 2
7-12
No focus on the question
Series of simple statements supported by relevant factual
material
Grade: U
Level 3
13-18
Implicit analytical focus for the majority
An attempt at an analysis
Grade: E-C
Some understanding of the focus of the question
Some material only implicitly relevant to the focus of the
question
Level 4
19-24
Some coherent writing
An analytical response
Grade: C-A
Well related to the focus of the question
Some understanding of key issues in the question
Supported by accurate factual material which is mostly relevant
Level 5
25-30
Some logical development of argument
An analytical response
Grade: A
Directly addresses focus of the question
Explicit understanding of all key issues in the question
Supported by accurate, relevant and appropriately selected
material
Logical development of argument
6
Practise Exam Questions:
Specimen Exam
1. How far is it accurate to describe Black Americans as second class
citizens in the years 1945-55?
2. How far is it accurate to say that the Black Power movements of
the 1960s achieved nothing for black Americans?
3. How far was the Korean War a military and political success for
the USA?
4. How important was the Tet Offensive of 1968 in changing US
policy in Vietnam?
January 2009 Exam
1. How important was the contribution of Martin Luther King to the
civil rights movement in the years 1955-68?
2. How far had the status of Hispanic and Native Americans
improved by the late 1960s?
3. How far was the fear of the spread of Communism responsible for
the increasing involvement in the affairs of south-east Asia in the
years 1950-64?
4. Why was the USA unable to defeat Communism in south-east Asia
in the years 1965-73?
June 2009 Exam
1. How far did the position of Black Americans improve in the years
1945–55?
2. How far do you agree that the Black Power movement hindered
Black civil rights in the 1960s?
3. How significant was China’s intervention in deciding the course
and outcome of the Korean War?
4. How far was opposition within the USA responsible for the United
States’ withdrawal from the Vietnam War?
7
January 2010 Exam
1. To what extent was the Federal Government responsible for
improving the status of black people in the United States in the
years 1945-64?
2. How far was the effectiveness of the Civil Rights movement in the
1960s limited by internal divisions?
3. Why did the United States become so deeply involved in the
Korean War in the years 1950-53?
4. How far was the growing conflict in Vietnam in the 1960s due to
the policies of President Kennedy?
June 2010 Exam
1. How accurate is it to say that the status of black people in the
United States changed very little in the years 1945-55?
2. How far was peaceful protest responsible for the successes of the
civil rights movement in the years 1955-64?
3. Why did the USA become increasingly involved in south-east Asia
in the 1950s?
4. To what extent were changing attitudes among the US public
responsible for the reduction of the number of US troops in
Vietnam in the years 1969-73?
January 2011 Exam
1. To what extent was the National Association for the Advancement
of Colored People (NAACP) responsible for the successes of the
civil rights campaign in the years 1945-57?
2. How far were the forces opposed to civil rights responsible for the
failures of the civil rights movement in the 1960s?
3. How accurate is it to say that the Korean War was a conflict
without winners?
4. To what extent can the Tet offensive of 1968 be described as the
key turning point in the Vietnam War in the years 1965-1973?
8
June 2011 Exam
1. How far do you agree that the impact of WWII was the main
reason why the position of African Americans improved in the
years 1945-55?
2. How accurate is it to say that Martin Luther King’s policy of
peaceful protest was the most important reason for the successes
of the civil rights movement in the years 1955–68?
3. How accurate is it to say that Eisenhower and Kennedy must share
responsibility for the escalation of US involvement in south-east
Asia in the years 1954–63?
4. Why did it take Nixon so long to withdraw from the Vietnam War?
January 2012 Exam
1. How successful was Martin Luther King’s campaign for civil rights
in the years 1955–68?
2. To what extent did the status of ethnic minorities, apart from
African Americans, change in the 1960s?
3. To what extent was the outcome of the Geneva Conference
responsible for growing US involvement in south-east Asia in the
years 1954–63?
4. How accurate is it to say that the Tet Offensive of 1968 was the
most important reason for US withdrawal from Vietnam?
9
June 2012 Exam
1. How far do you agree that the years 1945-1955 only saw limited
progress in improving the status of African Americans?
2. How accurate is it to say that the growth of Black Power was the
most important factor in the weakening of the civil rights
movement in the 1960s?
3. Why did the Korean War last so long?
4. To what extent was growing opposition in the USA responsible for
Johnson’s failure to defeat the communist forces in Vietnam in the
years 1963-68
January 2013 Exam
1. How accurate is it to say that peaceful protests were the most
important reason for the improvement in the civil rights of African
Americans in the years 1955-68?
2. How far did the status of women and Native American Indians
change during the 1960s?
3. How far was fear of communism responsible for growing US
involvement in south-east Asia in the years 1954-64?
4. Why, despite a massive increase in the number of American
troops in Vietnam, did the USA fail to win the Vietnam war in the
years 1963-68?
10
Equality in the USA – Revision Notes:
SIGNS OF CHANGE BY 1955:
To what extent had life improved for Black Americans in the years 1945-55?
Life had only improved to a small extent. There was only limited progress in solving
the problem of segregation, the violence continued, new employment opportunities
and voting rights were not readily available and whilst there was de-jure change in the
areas of transport and education, de-facto change was lacking.
Segregation:
Truman established a committee to investigate race relations and to safeguard the
rights of minorities. The report of this committee published in 1947 was called ‘To
Secure These Rights’. It called for many drastic changes to be made to the law e.g. to
secure black voting rights, to pass anti-lynching legislation and to end a range of
segregated facilities. Limited action was taken in the areas identified, but this report
did put Civil Rights on the political agenda.
He also prevented the Federal Housing Administration from lending money to
building projects which resulted in segregated housing. As part of his ‘Fair Deal’
programme he committed the government to building houses in deprived urban areas
in order to address some of the economic problems faced by African Americans. The
Fair Deal housing programme demolished badly constructed houses but fewer houses
were built than was anticipated; thus reducing the amount of housing actually
available.
He also desegregated the army and signed an Executive Order which guaranteed
‘equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without
regard to race, colour, religion or national origin’. His commitment to desegregation
was also shown at his inauguration ceremony when he allowed black and white guests
to sit alongside each other for the first time
Thus, no significant civil rights legislation was implemented during the Truman
presidency.
During 1945-55 Black Americans developed the tactics of direct action. This is a form
of protest that involves large groups of people and draws public attention to injustice.
The NAACP organised a series of protests in the southern state of Louisiana. For
example they picketed New Orleans’ four biggest department stores for refusing to
allow black customers to try on hats. In Alexandra in 1951 they protested at the fact
that the local black school would close during the cotton harvest so that the black
children could work in the fields. In 1953 they organised a boycott of a newly built
school in Lafayette protesting that its facilities were inferior to a local white school
11
Violence:
Lynching continued unabated in the south. In 1946, several war veterans were killed
in rural Georgia for voting whilst a soldier in South Carolina was blinded because he
did not sit at the back of a bus.
The Brown Case caused a revival in the activity of the KKK and the Emmett Till case
followed a year later. He was a 14 year old black boy who was lynched and murdered.
The two white men were found not guilty by an all-white jury.
Employment:
Truman used his power as President to appoint African Americans to important roles;
most notably Ralph Bunche who was appointed American Ambassador to the United
Nations., he mediated between Israelis and Palestines and thus won the Nobel Peace
Prize in 1950. William Hastie was also appointed as the first black federal judge.
Truman also used government power to ensure that lucrative government defence
contracts would not go to companies that discriminated against black Americans; the
Committee on Government contract Compliance enforced this
Truman’s achievements were limited. The FEPC was underfunded and the CGCC
could not force defence companies to adopt fair employment practises.
Transport:
The Supreme Court started to interpret the Constitution more liberally in the field of
civil rights. Thus, during the Truman presidency, it rulings in a number of cases
appeared to challenge Plessy v Ferguson e.g. 1946 Morgan v Virginia prohibited
segregation on interstate transport.
The Morgan v Virginia case did not lead to a change in practise. As a result in 1947
CORE launched a Journey of Reconstruction. A mixed race team planned to travel by
bus from the northern to southern states; their aim was to draw public attention to the
fact that many states were not following the Supreme Court. Public attention was
gained but it failed to achieve change.
The UDL organised a week-long bus boycott in Louisiana’s capital Baton Rouge in
June 1953.
Education:
Their first successful challenge to segregation in education came in 1950. The
NAACP argued that Sweatt was entitled to an education equal to that of whites at the
Law school. The courts decided that they did not have to integrate the white Law
school and set up a law school for blacks. The NAACP rejected this and went to the
Supreme Court; they argued that the new law school was inferior. The Supreme Court
agreed and ordered the University of Texas Law School to accept Sweatt as a student
12
1950 McLaurin v Oklahoma State University upheld the rights of black students to
receive equal Higher Education.
In 1954, this case came to the Supreme Court. It had been sponsored by the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The lawyer used by the NAACP
to present this case was Thurgood Marshall, who was later to become the first black
Supreme Court justice.
The case revolved around whether the Board of Education for Topeka, Kansas had
violated the Fourteenth Amendment rights of Linda Brown by the failure to provide
her with an elementary education close to her own home. The nearest school to her
home was an all-white segregated school.
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that segregation in education “deprive(s)
children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities.” This meant the
reversal of the Plessy v Ferguson decision in education.
Although Eisenhower ordered the integration of schools in Washington DC
immediately, the rest of the south was very much slower to follow suit.
Although Eisenhower ordered the integration of schools in Washington DC
immediately (after the Brown case), the rest of the south was very much slower to
follow suit. Middle class whites set up White Citizens Councils to demand that
segregation continue in schools.
After the Brown case Senator Harry F. Byrd called on white southerners to put up
‘massive resistance’ meaning that white people of the south should defend
segregation with all their strength. He led 101 southern congressmen who signed the
‘Southern Manifesto’. They argued that the Brown case was unconstitutional because
the constitution did not mention education. They called on the doctrine of ‘separate
but equal’
In 1955, the Supreme Court followed up its earlier ruling with Brown II. This said
that the change to desegregated schools was to take place “with all deliberate speed.”
Even this was not sufficiently specific and many southern states continued to delay
the implementation of desegregation.
By 1957 only 750 of 6,300 southern school districts had desegregated
Eisenhower refused to comment on the Brown case. He criticised the ruling arguing
that it would do nothing to change the hearts and minds of southern white racists. He
believed that it was counterproductive. It had just infuriated white citizens and
whipped up tremendous opposition to Civil Rights. He claimed that his decision to
make ‘Earl Warren’ Chief Justice was ‘the biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made’
Voting Rights:
Between 1940 and 1957 the CNO organised a voter registration campaign in the
southern state of Arkansas
13
Smith v Allwright (1944). This ruled that the Texan white primary was illegal because
all citizens had the right to vote, according to the 15th amendment. Consequently this
outlawed all white primaries across America. In Primary elections parties elect who
will stand in subsequent elections.
Dawson and Powell remained the only black Americans elected to congress up until
1955.
In recognition of the growing political power of northern blacks, American Presidents
began appointing African Americans to positions within the Federal government. For
example William Haist was appointed as a federal judge in 1949
What caused seeds of change to develop between 1945 and 1955?
Impact of WWII:
This raised the awareness that Black Americans had of the change that could be
achieved
Over 1.2 million black men joined the United States army during WWII. The
experience radicalised them. Northern blacks were often trained in the south and this
was their first experience of segregation. They were appalled at the rhetoric of the war
with its focus on liberty and equality seemed increasingly hypocritical when southern
blacks could expect to be subjected to discrimination and lynching. Black soldiers
were struck by this contradiction and thus they used the ‘Double V’ sign meaning
they were fighting for two victories: victory overseas and victory over racism at home
The courage of black soldiers changed the attitude of many white soldiers. Following
the war black heroes who had often risked their lives for their country expected
recognition for their achievements.
Segregation continued through the war and black soldiers had different canteens and
were transported to the battlefield in different vehicles. Many were denied the right to
fight and were employed as cooks and cleaners. Black soldiers who did make it to the
front line were given less training and the worse equipment
Black soldiers also experienced European society during their stays in Britain and
France. They experienced no formal segregation in either country and white people in
Europe treated them as heroes
The extermination of over six million Jews and other racist atrocities carried out by
the Nazis showed the dangers inherent in racism and in doing so convinced many
people that racism should be opposed in all circumstances
The migration north continued unabated during the War - nearly three-quarters of a
million blacks made the journey from the south to the north. They found work in
industrial cities such as Chicago, Detroit and San Francisco; the number of
unemployed African Americans fell sharply from 937,000 (1940) to 151,000 (1945).
14
However the workers were unlikely to be paid the same as their white colleagues and
white workers objected when African Americans were promoted.
In 1941, A. Philip Randolph called for a March on Washington to publicise the
discrimination experienced by black Americans in every aspect of their lives.
Roosevelt’s response to this was to issue Executive Order creating the FEPC. (Fair
Employment Practices). This prohibited discrimination in defence and federal
employment practices.
Presidential Action:
Symbolic actions and small changes placed Civil Rights on the political agenda
Truman was deeply moved by stories of black war veterans who were victims of
racist attacks after bravely fighting in WWII and furthermore was aware of the
importance of the black vote to the Democratic Party. Furthermore in the Cold War
Truman believed that America had a moral duty to fight Communism and promote
freedom but he recognised that America could not fight for freedom while segregation
oppressed black American’s in the south. Thus he became committed to challenging
southern racism.
Truman established a committee to investigate race relations and to safeguard the
rights of minorities. The report of this committee published in 1947 was called ‘To
Secure These Rights’. It called for many drastic changes to be made to the law e.g. to
secure black voting rights, to pass anti-lynching legislation and to end a range of
segregated facilities. The report also highlighted the racist violence widespread in the
American police force. This included ‘bullwhipping’ which was the denial of medical
treatment to black prisoners and in some cases black prisoners being tied up and
drowned.
Truman was not able to achieve everything that the report recommended sue to a lack
of support in Congress. However some limited action was taken. Truman used his
power as President to appoint African Americans to important roles; most notably
Ralph Bunche who was appointed American Ambassador to the United Nations., he
mediated between Israelis and Palestines and thus won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1950.
William Hastie was also appointed as the first black federal judge. Truman also used
government power to ensure that lucrative government defence contracts would not
go to companies that discriminated against black Americans; the Committee on
Government contract Compliance enforced this. He also prevented the Federal
Housing Administration from lending money to building projects which resulted in
segregated housing. As part of his ‘Fair Deal’ programme he committed the
government to building houses in deprived urban areas in order to address some of the
economic problems faced by African Americans.
He also desegregated the army and signed an Executive Order which guaranteed
‘equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without
regard to race, colour, religion or national origin’. His commitment to desegregation
was also shown at his inauguration ceremony when he allowed black and white guests
to sit alongside each other for the first time
15
Truman’s achievements were limited. The FEPC was underfunded and the CGCC
could not force defence companies to adopt fair employment practises. The Fair Deal
housing programme demolished badly constructed houses but fewer houses were built
than was anticipated; thus reducing the amount of housing actually available.
Eisenhower refused to comment on the Brown case. He criticised the ruling arguing
that it would do nothing to change the hearts and minds of southern white racists. He
believed that it was counterproductive. It had just infuriated white citizens and
whipped up tremendous opposition to Civil Rights. He claimed that his decision to
make ‘Earl Warren’ Chief Justice was ‘the biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made’
Civil Rights Organisations:
They began the fight for change
The NAACP was created to fight for the rights of black people and to oppose
discrimination and racial hatred, mainly using legal methods; court cases which
challenged the legal basis for segregation. Their strategy was to challenge the ‘Jim
Crow’ laws by appealing to the 14th and 15th amendments. In practise they provided
funds and experienced lawyers.
Their first successful challenge to segregation in education came in 1950. The
NAACP argued that Sweatt was entitled to an education equal to that of whites at the
Law school. The courts decided that they did not have to integrate the white Law
school and set up a law school for blacks. The NAACP rejected this and went to the
Supreme Court; they argued that the new law school was inferior. The Supreme Court
agreed and ordered the University of Texas Law School to accept Sweatt as a student
In 1954, the Brown case came to the Supreme Court. It had been sponsored by the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The lawyer used by the
NAACP to present this case was Thurgood Marshall, who was later to become the
first black Supreme Court justice. The case revolved around whether the Board of
Education for Topeka, Kansas had violated the Fourteenth Amendment rights of
Linda Brown by the failure to provide her with an elementary education close to her
own home. The nearest school to her home was an all-white segregated school.
There were other Civil Rights Organisations. The United Defence League (UDL), the
Committee on Negro Organisation (CNO), the Congress of Industrial Organisations
(CIO) and the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) also used the tactic of direct
action in this period
The UDL organised a week-long bus boycott in Louisiana’s capital Baton Rouge in
June 1953. Between 1940 and 1957 the CNO organised a voter registration campaign
in the southern state of Arkansas
Work of the Supreme Court:
This provided the justification for campaigns that would try to change de-jure
change into de-facto change
16
The Supreme Court started to interpret the Constitution more liberally in the field of
civil rights.
Smith v Allwright (1944). This ruled that the Texan white primary was illegal because
all citizens had the right to vote, according to the 15th amendment. Consequently this
outlawed all white primaries across America. In Primary elections parties elect who
will stand in subsequent elections.
During the Truman presidency, it rulings in a number of cases appeared to challenge
Plessy v Ferguson e.g. 1946 Morgan v Virginia prohibited segregation on interstate
transport.
1950 McLaurin v Oklahoma State University upheld the rights of black students to
receive equal Higher Education.
In the Brown case the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that segregation in education
“deprive(s) children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities.” This
meant the reversal of the Plessy v Ferguson decision in education.
In 1955, the Supreme Court followed up its earlier ruling with Brown II. This said
that the change to desegregated schools was to take place “with all deliberate speed.”
Even this was not sufficiently specific and many southern states continued to delay
the implementation of desegregation.
Direct Action:
Tactics were developed which would prove so successful in later years
During 1945-55 Black Americans developed the tactics of direct action. This is a form
of protest that involves large groups of people and draws public attention to injustice.
The NAACP organised a series of protests in the southern state of Louisiana. For
example they picketed New Orleans’ four biggest department stores for refusing to
allow black customers to try on hats. In Alexandra in 1951 they protested at the fact
that the local black school would close during the cotton harvest so that the black
children could work in the fields. In 1953 they organised a boycott of a newly built
school in Lafayette protesting that its facilities were inferior to a local white school
The Morgan v Virginia case did not lead to a change in practise. As a result in 1947
CORE launched a Journey of Reconstruction. A mixed race team planned to travel by
bus from the northern to southern states; their aim was to draw public attention to the
fact that many states were not following the Supreme Court. Public attention was
gained but it failed to achieve change.
17
Martin Luther King and Peaceful Protest: 1955-1968
Why had America experienced a Civil Rights Revolution by 1968?
Presidential action:
They were compelled to act because of the white violence that the tactics of
activism caused
American Presidents played a role in advancing racial justice. However, for
Eisenhower, and to some extent Kennedy, it was a role that they played reluctantly.
Little Rock and Freedom Rides showed that they needed to be pushed to act by civil
rights activists. Eisenhower believed that the position of black people would improve
of its own accord in its own time and thus did not think that it was the job of the
government to improve conditions for black people. Thus he was reluctant to become
involved in Little Rock and only did so when public safety became an issue. Kennedy
claimed that he was sympathetic to the plight of Black Americans during his election
campaign but initially he did little as he needed the support of southern white
politicians in congress. His initial actions were largely symbolic, for example he
appointed five black judges to the federal courts; including Thurgood Marshall. The
Birmingham Campaign forced Kennedy to show his decisive leadership and fulfil his
promise of a Civil Rights Act. Following the March on Washington in August 1963
he threw his weight behind the Civil rights Bill.
Johnson was more proactive and used his position as Senator to ensure that the Civil
rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 became law. However he followed the campaigners as
well. The impetus behind the 1965 Voting Rights Act was the voter registration
campaigns such as the Mississippi Freedom summer and the Selma campaign. The
Presidents played an important role in convincing Congress to act but it was the civil
rights campaigns and not the Presidents that kept the issue of racial justice on the
political agenda. Johnson saw the ‘Civil Rights Act’ as part of a range of methods
collectively known as the ‘Great Society’ which were designed to make America a
fairer place.
Johnson distanced himself from the Civil Rights Campaign once leaders criticised his
policies in Vietnam. He was critical of Martin Luther King’s Chicago campaign and
did not support the proposed Poor People’s Campaign of 1968. He took the view that
the campaigns were too provocative and that further voter registration, rather than
direct action, was more likely to lead to better conditions.
Congress:
They became more liberal and supported legislation for the first time; this was
because Birmingham had completely changed public opinion in favour of Black
Americans
Congress is the body empowered by the American Constitution to create nationwide
laws and thus its support was essential for progress in terms of civil rights legislation.
However the Southern States had a significant voice in Congress and as a result it
18
obstructed legislation from 1945-1960. However its attitudes changed for many
reasons.
The Birmingham Campaign expressed the horrors of segregation and racial violence,
civil rights campaigns had won over so much support that Congress could no longer
oppose the Civil Rights Bill, Johnson knew how to support Congress to ensure that
the Bill was passed, the 1964 Congressional elections had replaced conservative
Democrats with liberal Democrats and Johnson persuaded Congress that the Act
would be a fitting tribute to Kennedy. Thus it did back the Acts of 1964 and 1965.
Work of the Supreme Court:
They provided the justification for campaigns. Their rulings meant that
protestors could campaign to change this de-jure change into de-facto change
During the 1950s the Supreme Court showed considerable leadership on civil rights
issues. Eisenhower’s 1953 decision to appoint Earl Warren as Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court was extremely important. Supreme Court decisions in cases such as
Brown, Brown II and Browder v Gayle picked apart the legal basis of segregation.
Civil Rights Activists were then able to use these rulings to force change in
campaigns such as the sit-ins across the southern states of America
The events in Little Rock could not have started without the Brown case which was
used as a precedent. The Freedom Rides were designed to test the violation of the
1960 Supreme Court case of Boynton v Virginia that had declared segregation in bus
and train stations that were used for inter-state transport (i.e. transport that crossed
state lines) as unconstitutional. Morgan v Virginia (1946) was also cited. James
Meredith used both the Brown case and Maclaurin v Oaklahoma state university as
his justification.
Martin Luther King:
His organisation, tactics and inspiration was crucial for the success of the
campaigns that compelled the government to act
King undoubtedly played a great role in the campaign. His great strength was his
ability to inspire. He was a highly charismatic and gifted orator who could convey the
injustices of segregation to a national audience. In this sense he was an ideal
spokesperson for black Christians in the southern states and as a result he was a good
speaker for the television age. His campaigns and speeches were responsible for
growing public support behind the legislation of the mid-1960s.
He was also a divisive figure. Conservatives criticised him for taking his campaigns to
the streets as they argued that in a democracy campaigners should work through the
courts and through Congress. Radicals, on the other hand, thought that he was too
cautious and that he was too close to white politicians. For example he was criticised
for stopping a march during the Selma campaign, at Johnson’s request. Young
activists were also worried that he was trying to dominate the campaign. SNCC
leaders, for example, felt that he wanted to make the SNCC a subsection of the SCLC.
19
He was also criticised for misunderstanding the situation in the north; as evident in the
1966 Chicago campaign. Local leaders claimed that he did not appreciate the scale of
the problem and that he did not propose workable solutions. Many, even in the SCLC,
believed that the Poor People’s campaign was impractical and poorly focussed. He
was unable to unite the black working class as many did not share his Christian faith.
After 1965 his oratory and charisma failed to persuade the public of the need to tackle
the poverty or problems of ghettoization.
Peaceful protest and mass Activism:
The tactics led to presidential action
Behind the leaders stood countless activists, campaigners and ordinary black people
who put their life on the line to campaign for freedom. Without a mass following the
leaders would have had less authority when speaking to the media and bargaining
with politicians.
The scale of the protests during the 1950s and 1960s is staggering. During the
Montgomery Bus Boycott, 85% of Montgomery’s black people boycotted the busses.
70,000 people took part in the sit-ins and these were not organised by a specific
organisation or leader. 250,000 marchers took part in the March on Washington (80%
were black); demonstrating the popular desire for justice.
Peaceful protest was also highly effective because it attracted media attention.
Television pictures of police brutality against unarmed peaceful protectors persuaded
the American public that segregation should end. However the campaigns in Albany
and Chicago showed that the methods did not always guarantee success.
White Reactions:
This was necessary for activism to be successful; it led to Presidential action and
a more liberal Congress
White reactions in Little Rock led to governmental involvement (Eisenhower) and
thus change.
White reactions during the Freedom Rides led to Robert Kennedy integrating
interstate transport.
The lack of white reactions in Albany led to no real change.
White reactions in the case of James Meredith led to the involvement of Kennedy’s
administration
In Birmingham the police subjected the marchers to a range of physical attacks. They
came under fire from high-pressure water hoses and police dogs attacked them. The
photographs that appeared in the media of children being attacked were highly
damaging to those who wished to protect segregation at all costs. This meant that
Kennedy had no choice but to demonstrate decisive leadership
20
In Selma sheriff Jim Clark was seen on camera behaving in a brutal fashion towards
the non-violent demonstrators. This convinced Johnson of the need for further
legislation
How important was Martin Luther King to the Civil Rights Movement?
Organiser of campaigns:
With the exception of Albany, the campaigns were successful in the south but
they lacked the same impact after 1966 when he moved north
To co-ordinate the Montgomery bus boycott, an organisation called the Montgomery
Improvement Association (MIA) was created. The President of this was Martin
Luther King. As President he successfully organised the practicalities of the boycott
of which carpooling was most important. This was crucial in keeping the boycott
going.
The Albany Movement grew out of the arrest of the Freedom Riders in Albany,
Georgia. During 1961 – 62 Martin Luther King and other leading civil rights activists
visited the town to lead protests and meetings demanding an end to segregation. The
tactics pursued were entirely those of non-violence. This was the first campaign that
King organised himself but it failed to trigger any significant change in Albany and
revealed two problems that faced the civil rights movement. The first problem was
that non-violence would not necessarily work unless the white response to it was
violent. In Albany, Laurie Pritchett, the chief of police understood that he needed to
prevent any white violence, which limited the media interest and hence the
effectiveness of the non-violent strategy. The second problem was that the various
civil rights groups (most notably SNCC, NAACP and SCLC) had different
approaches to the most appropriate tactics to pursue and were not following a
common policy of co-operation.
The momentum of the civil rights movement had been lost at Albany and Martin
Luther King aimed to regain this at Birmingham in 1963. He hoped that by engaging
in acts of non-violence, a confrontation with white racists would be triggered that
would lead to action by the Kennedy administration. A range of demonstrations
demanding an end to segregation in Birmingham were organised. At each
demonstration, protesters were arrested and the jails of Birmingham began to fill up.
The Birmingham police subjected the marchers to a range of physical attacks. They
came under fire from high-pressure water hoses and police dogs attacked them. The
photographs that appeared in the media of children being attacked were highly
damaging to those who wished to protect segregation at all costs.
The consequence of the events at Birmingham was that there was some end to
discrimination – there was to be desegregation in the stores and greater rights in
employment. Furthermore, the events in Birmingham had persuaded Kennedy of the
need for federal intervention in civil rights in order to prevent a complete breakdown
in law and order.
21
In early 1965, Martin Luther King joined the campaign to increase voter registration
in the south. Selma was selected because only 1% of its black population were
registered to vote. There were several months of demonstrations and attempts at
registration in which a number of black protesters were arrested. Sheriff Jim Clark
was seen on camera behaving in a brutal fashion towards the non-violent
demonstrators.
The climax of the campaign was to be a march from Selma to Montgomery. The first
attempt was violently broken up. The second attempt was banned due to the lack of a
federal order and the third march went ahead, with this order, protected by the
National Guard.
The positive result of the events at Selma was that it led both Johnson and popular
opinion to the view that further legislation was necessary. Thus, in 1965, the Voting
Rights Act was passed.
In 1966, Martin Luther King took his tactics of non-violence to the north to try to
address the problem of de facto segregation. Chicago was selected as the target.
There were significant problems to be surmounted in making this transition from the
south to the north. King had not fully thought through the tactics he intended to use
and Richard Daley, the Mayor of Chicago, was unlikely to react to demonstrations in
the same way as Connor or Clark. King assumed that he could end de-facto
segregation using the same methods as in the south but failed to realise that trying to
remove poverty could not be achieved using the same tactics as those required to
remove un-just laws. The first rally in Chicago was disappointing as only 30,000
people attended. A heat wave meant that the black people used fire hydrants to cool
themselves. The authorities wanted these shut off to preserve water in case of a fire.
Police arrived to enforce this and a riot erupted. The Black Americans were now
reacting violently.
King then tried to engage the community in peaceful protest and organised marches
through all white areas. In Chicago the whites fought back. At the Gage Park march
King was bombarded with rocks and 1000 police officers could not stop the violent
white crowds. King said that he had never seen mobs as hostile. The violence did
cause Daley (mayor of Chicago) to compromise and made promises to reform
housing. Following re-election these promises were ignored.
In response to Chicago King planned the Poor People’s Campaign. King aimed to
create a coalition big enough to tackle the social and economic problems identified
during the Chicago campaign. This would include ALL poor people. King no longer
felt that he could work within the current system but had to make significant demands
to end the ghettos. President Johnson, due to a lack of money made it clear that he
could not support the campaign.
Tactics and Philosophy:
His philosophy underpinned the whole movement, including that of other
organisations in the south, but it was not wildly accepted in the north
22
The Montgomery bus boycott led to the creation of the Southern Christian Leadership
Conference and the emergence of Martin Luther King as a leading light within the
civil rights movement.
His contribution reinforced the philosophy of a non-violent approach to the
achievement of change. Martin Luther King espoused a philosophy of civil
disobedience. He often broke the unjust laws of the de jure discrimination of the
south. He encouraged mass support for these actions. He insisted that no resistance
should be offered to those who tried to stop them, whatever the treatment that they
meted out. He believed in integration – that all should live together, whatever their
colour, in harmony. The fact that passive resistance was likely to reduce the threat of
violence and therefore encourage greater participation in the movement by ordinary
people. That where there were violent responses, the attendant publicity would
undermine those who opposed civil rights and encourage support for the protestors.
His philosophy developed into activism and was used in all the campaigns that he
organised including Albany, Birmingham and Selma. They were successful because
support would be gained for the peaceful Black Americans as they campaigned to
change un-just laws whilst facing violent resistance from the whites who tried to
defend them.
Martin Luther King was among those who were arrested in Birmingham. While he
was in prison, he wrote the ‘Letter from Birmingham City Jail’. This clearly set out
his reasons for the use of non-violence.
This philosophy was adopted by a range of other Civil Rights Organisations and used
in the campaigns that they organised. Examples include the SNCC when they were set
up to co-ordinate the sit-ins and CORE in the Freedom Rides. The philosophy gained
the same success when used by others.
The philosophy was not successful in the north, notably Chicago, where poverty could
not be solved by activism. Instead those in the north quickly rejected his philosophy,
instead believing that Black Power offered more successful and realistic alternatives
Speeches and Marches:
These were largely successful but lacked impact in his later years
On the first night of the Montgomery Bus Boycott King gave a rousing speech which
spurred the boycotters to keep going. Eventually it lasted for 365 days.
During the sit-ins King gave a speech at Shaw University. The SNCC grew out of
this.
The March on Washington was the largest civil rights demonstration in American
history. It was impressively staged, peaceful, in complete contrast to the behaviour of
the whites in Birmingham and thus persuaded congress to pass Kennedy’s Civil
Rights Bill into a Civil Rights Act. King’s ‘I have a Dream’ speech provided the final
nail in the coffin for segregation.
23
King’s marches were not always successful. The climax of the Selma campaign was
to be a march from Selma to Montgomery. The first attempt was violently broken up.
The second attempt was banned due to the lack of a federal order and the third march
went ahead, with this order, protected by the National Guard. It was King’s decision
not to carry on with the second march which meant people started to turn away from
his philosophy.
Inspiration:
King was an inspiration to many and caused the campaign to gain momentum
In Montgomery King was arrested for speeding (at 30 mph in a 25 mph zone) and
following this his house was bombed. Despite this he still carried on and this acted as
an inspiration to the boycotters as they would not experience discrimination as bad.
On August 28th 1963, the largest civil rights demonstration in American history took
place. Over 200,000 protesters, black and white, from across the entire range of civil
rights pressure groups, marched to the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC. Martin
Luther King addressed the crowd with his emotional and memorable ‘I have a dream’
speech. The event was an inspiration to Kennedy and confirmed his decision to move
towards civil rights legislation. He was beginning to initiate this when he was
assassinated in November 1963.
Relationship with the Government:
His positive relationship resulted in new legislation but the deterioration of this
relationship after 1965 prevented any further action
King’s relationship with Kennedy was necessary so that the Civil Rights Bill could be
proposed. His relationship with Johnson was crucial so that this (1964) and the Voting
Rights Bill (1965) could be passed.
This relationship was not always seen by black Americans as a positive. The climax
of the Selma campaign was to be a march from Selma to Montgomery. The first
attempt was violently broken up. The second attempt was banned due to the lack of a
federal order and the third march went ahead, with this order, protected by the
National Guard. It was King’s decision not to carry on with the second march which
meant people started to turn away from his philosophy.
The relationship deteriorated as a result of King’s rejection of Johnson’s compromise
with regards to the delegates from the Mississippi Freedom Summer being allowed to
attend the Democrat Primary but not being allowed to vote.
The relationship worsened following King’s attack on the Vietnam War in which he
said that America was standing before the world ‘gutted by their own barbarity’. This
meant that no further Civil Rights legislation was passed by Johnson or Nixon.
24
Why were Martin Luther King’s campaigns less successful in the north than they
had been in the south?
Incorrect Tactics
The different causes of discrimination in the north meant that the successful
tactics in the south would not be successful in the north
King has been criticised for misunderstanding the situation in the north. He aimed to
use the techniques of nonviolent direct action that had been successful in the south, to
challenge the de-facto segregation of Chicago’s education, housing and employment.
This plan would not work because segregation had been ended in the south by
changing the law; in contrast social and economic changes required high levels o0f
financial investment. Thus local leaders claimed that he did not appreciate the scale of
the problem and that he did not propose workable solutions. Chicago was ten times
bigger than Birmingham and one hundred times bigger than Selma; some of the black
ghettos themselves were bigger than entire southern towns
Furthermore he made mistakes during the Chicago campaign, such as his decision not
to break the court injunction restricting further marches. This meant that many of
Chicago’s citizens lost faith in the SCLC and turned to more radical black leadership.
King did change his tactics for the Poor People’s campaign. The Chicago campaign
taught him that more radical demands, coupled with more radical methods, were
required to ensure real change. Thus his new campaign to demand a better standard of
living for the poor involved nationwide civil disobedience, occupying government
buildings and boycotting businesses. However many, even in the SCLC, believed this
to be impractical and poorly focussed.
Lack of support from Black Americans
The successful campaigns in the south relied on mass support; this was not
forthcoming in the north
Many black Americans in the north did not share King’s Christian faith and thus only
30,000 people attended the first rally in Chicago in 1966; King had hoped for
100,000. The campaign failed to win the support of the churches.
During the first rally in the Chicago campaign a heat wave led people in black
neighbourhoods to use fire hydrants to cool themselves. The authorities demanded
that the fire hydrants to be shut off to preserve water and a riot ensued upon police
arrival. King’s insistence on peaceful protest was ignored.
Increased violence
The increased violence shocked the government and thus they distanced
themselves from the Civil Rights Movement
Following The Chicago riots, King tried to engage the black community in peaceful
protest by organising marches through all white areas. However Chicago’s whites
25
fought back. At the Gage Park march, King was bombarded with rocks and over 1000
police officers were unable to subdue the white crowds. Worse violence looked even
more likely when Jesse Jackson planned more marches.
In Memphis the city authorities refused to recognise the workers’ union and used tear
gas to break up their marches. Thus leant his support and organised a peaceful march.
This was not a success as the peace lasted less than an hour. Marches began attacking
shops and looting and the police responded with tear gas. King was criticised for both
organising a violent march and for fleeing when the march turned violent
Lack of local and national government support
The campaigns in the south were so successful because they received government
support. This support was not forthcoming in the north and the incorrect tactics
ruined the relationship between the campaigners and the government further
The threat of increased violence in Chicago caused Mayor Daley to publically
negotiate. However secretly he obtained a court injunction banning further marches
which reduced King’s position at the negotiating table. There were promises to
respect the city’s fair housing laws but these promises were ignored following Daley’s
re-election. President Johnson refused to involve the Federal government in the
campaign because he was no longer willing to work with King following his attack on
the Vietnam War.
President Johnson made it clear that he did not support the Poor People’s campaign as
the Vietnam War had created splits between civil rights radicals and liberal
politicians. Additionally the war diverted resources away from projects designed to
promote social justice.
How far do you agree that the actions of the Federal Government were a result of
the actions of the Civil Rights Protestors?
Response to white violence
Eisenhower was reluctant to help but violence (which resulted from actions of
civil rights protestors) forced him into doing so. Kennedy made lots of promises
but it was only following the white violence that he implanted decisive action
Eisenhower believed that the position of black people would improve of its own
accord over time. Thus he did not think that it was the government’s job to improve
conditions for black people. Thus he was reluctant to become involved in Little Rock
but had to do so because of the unrest caused when a white mob refused to let the
students into the school. The National Guard was put under Presidential control ad
was used to protect the white racists
Despite his promises Kennedy was slow to use his power to help black people as he
needed the support of southern white politicians in Congress; thus his early actions
were largely symbolic. It was the Birmingham, Campaign that forced him to show
decisive leadership and fulfil his promises of a civil rights act. He said he was
‘sickened’ by the images of police violence; referring the Connor’s use of police dogs
26
and fire hoses on the peaceful protestors. After the March on Washington he threw his
weight fully behind the Civil Rights Bill.
New legislation
Eisenhower passed weakened legislation; it did not result from the actions of
protestors but was passed for political reasons. Johnson’s legislation resulted
from the white violence which resulted from the campaigns organised by the civil
rights protestors. However the 1968 legislation was limited and thus the actions
of the protestors were less successful
Eisenhower proposed two acts at the end of his presidency. However both faced
considerable opposition in congress and thus were weakened. The 1957 Civil Rights
Act proposed the establishment of a Commission on Civil Rights which would
monitor the voting rights of America’s black citizens. However individuals found
guilty of preventing registration would face a fine of only a $1000 or a maximum
sentence of six months; this was not a deterrent. The 1960 Civil Rights Act narrowly
extended the powers of the Commission as local authorities had to keep records of
voter registration. However these acts only increased the % of black voters by 3%
Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the
Civil rights Act of 1968. The first outlawed the segregation of any facility or public
place, the Commission on Civil Rights was given the power to enforce desegregation
and the FEPC was made permanent. The second outlawed all ‘tests’ that prevented
voting and ended the ability of local governments to deny the right to vote. The third
outlawed discrimination of any form in the sale or rental of housing. This was an
attempt to address the issue of ghettoization but gave the government no new powers
to enforce the law and thus was limited.
Changing views of Congress
Congress weakened Eisenhower’s legislation and changed their stance following
the horrors of the violence in Birmingham and Selma. This violence resulted
from campaigns organised by the protestors.
The Birmingham Campaign expressed the horrors of segregation and racial violence,
civil rights campaigns had won over so much support that Congress could no longer
oppose the Civil Rights Bill, Johnson knew how to support Congress to ensure that
the Bill was passed, the 1964 Congressional elections had replaced conservative
Democrats with liberal Democrats and Johnson persuaded Congress that the Act
would be a fitting tribute to Kennedy. Thus it did back the Acts of 1964 and 1965.
Leadership of the Supreme Court
In many cases Supreme Court rulings (part of the Federal government) actually
prompted campaigns rather than vice versa
During the 1950s the Supreme Court showed considerable leadership on civil rights
issues. Eisenhower’s 1953 decision to appoint Earl Warren as Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court was extremely important. Supreme Court decisions in cases such as
27
Brown, Brown II and Browder v Gayle picked apart the legal basis of segregation.
Civil Rights Activists were then able to use these rulings to force change in
campaigns such as the sit-ins across the southern states of America
The events in Little Rock could not have started without the Brown case which was
used as a precedent. The Freedom Rides were designed to test the violation of the
1960 Supreme Court case of Boynton v Virginia that had declared segregation in bus
and train stations that were used for inter-state transport (i.e. transport that crossed
state lines) as unconstitutional. Morgan v Virginia (1946) was also cited. James
Meredith used both the Brown case and Maclaurin v Oklahoma state university as his
justification.
How far do you agree that opposition to the Civil Rights Movement did more to help
the movement than to hinder it?
Local police:
In the majority this opposition actually did more to help the movement than
hinder it
Police forces in the southern states were some of the main obstacles to racial equality
and they adopted a range of tactics to oppose the campaign. For example Connor
authorised the use of the water cannon as a weapon against the protests. His tactics
were counterproductive as they attracted huge media attention which forced the
federal government to support the protests. In Selma the use of cattle prods backfired
as it too created public outrage and thus new legislation
Police violence did not always aid the protestors. For example the use of police batons
and tear gas in Memphis did not provoke government action. Laurie Pritchett in
Albany used more sophisticated methods as by ensuring that the police behaved in a
respectful manner, he denied the protestors the media attention that they needed to
force the federal government to take action. Northern police were also an obstacle as
in Chicago the police’s attempts to force the closure of fire hydrants led to a riot.
Presidential Opposition:
Eisenhower’s opposition hindered the movement. Kennedy’s assistance was
hindered by the actions of the campaigners which he did not agree with. In the
later years Johnson did not agree with the methods and his opposition to them
hindered further progress
Eisenhower did not believe that it was the government’s job to improve conditions for
black people. Thus he was reluctant to get involved in Little Rock and his 1957 Civil
Rights Act was a nauseating sham. It established a Civil Rights Commission and
Division (to investigate attempts to stop black Americans voting) with limited powers.
The 1960 Civil Rights Act introduced Federal Court Referees to aid this but the act
was not much stronger
28
Despite his promises Kennedy was slow to use his power to help black people. This
was because he disagreed with the methods of the campaigners. For example he was
horrified by the violence caused by the Freedom Rides and called for the campaign to
stop. Instead he wanted the campaigners to put their efforts into voter registration and
set up the Voter Education project (VEP) in 1962; this offered grants to groups of
activists who would abandon direct action to focus on voter registration. However the
Birmingham campaign forced him to show decisive leadership.
Johnson was the most radical of the Presidents and between 1963 and 1965 he worked
with civil rights campaigners to bring about change. Johnson distanced himself from
the Civil Rights Campaign once leaders criticised his policies in Vietnam. He was
critical of Martin Luther King’s Chicago campaign and did not support the proposed
Poor People’s Campaign of 1968. He took the view that the campaigns were too
provocative and that further voter registration, rather than direct action, was more
likely to lead to better conditions.
Opposition from Congress:
Legislation was hindered by the attitudes of Congress in 1957, 1960 and 1968.
The alliance of southern Democrats and Republicans had done much to weaken the
Acts of 1957, 1960 and 1968. Filibusters were used to obstruct the passage of
legislation. This is when a member of Congress or a team talk continually until all the
time allocated is used up. This means that there is no time for voting and thus the bill
cannot be passed into a law. For example Thurmond staged the longest one-person
filibuster in American history to try and kill the 1957 bill; he spoke for 24 hours and
18 minutes. 18 southern Democrats worked together to block the 1960 bill by keeping
the filibuster going for over 125 hours. Congress weakened the 1968 Civil Rights Act
in such a way that the new rights it promised could not be enforced by the federal
government
The FBI:
This hindered the work of the civil rights movement
They used their power to undermine the Civil Rights movement. Hoover was head
from 1924-1972. He suspected that the organisations had links to the Communist
party and therefore posed a threat to democracy, thus he set up COINTELPRO to
investigate radical groups. They spied, broke into their officers and harassed activists.
Their main tactic was infiltration.
Opposition from State and Local Government:
They were successful in hindering progress
Local politicians were generally more opposed to racial justice than national
politicians. State Governors often did everything that they could to resist change.
Faubus, for example, used a combination of violence, propaganda and legal methods
to stop the integration of Little Rock High School in 1957. He was aided by local state
29
law makers who passed new laws allowing him to close schools rather than
desegregate them. He also used state funds to pay for lawyers to fights against
desegregation.
Local politicians in the north were also opposed to civil rights campaigns. Mayor
Daley proved very effective at preventing progress in the Chicago campaign of 1966.
He publically agreed to negotiate with King but behind the scenes his lawyers
managed to legally prohibit further large-scale protests. Daley also made a series of
impressive promises but did little to implement them once the campaign was over and
his position was secure after the next election.
Public Opinion:
In the majority this hindered the work of the movement
The majority of Americans supported an end to legal segregation but the majority did
not want to live in integrated neighbourhoods. This is obvious from the phenomenon
of ‘white flight’. This was the movement of white people from racially desegregated
residential areas to those populated exclusively by white people. The white population
of America’s major cities declined by 9.6% between 1960 and 1970; there was mass
movement to the suburbs. Those leaving were often the well-off high status
professionals and as a result the tax revenues of America’s cities declined and the
provision of public services suffered; this further disadvantaged urban black
communities.
Opposition to economic equality and fair housing was obvious in the violent reaction
of many of Chicago’s whites to King’s Chicago campaign of 1966
How successful had peaceful protest been by 1968?
Education
There were some considerable improvements but access to quality education was
still limited for many Black Americans
The campaigns of the 1950s achieved some major legal victories. Sweatt v Painter
established that black and white people were entitled to equal educational resources.
The Brown case went further that a segregated education could never be an equal
education. Brown II attempted to speed this up.
However progress was slow and in 1957 only 750 out of 6300 school districts had
been integrated. 97% of black students remained in segregated schools. The 1964
Civil Rights Act gave the government the power to enforce the segregation of schools
but by 1968 58% of children remained in segregated education.
Nonetheless Johnson’s Higher Education Act of 1965 led to a fourfold increase in the
number of clack students attending college and university during the late 1960s and
early 1970s
30
Transport
Transport facilities were largely integrated
The 1946 Morgan v Virginia had ruled that segregation of interstate transport was
illegal. However the Freedom Rides of 1961 were necessary before the government
enforced this; by September all signs enforcing segregation had been removed from
the terminals.
The 1956 Browder v Gayle established that the desegregation of buses was illegal;
however defacto change across the south was slow. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was
necessary to give the government power to enforce this
Public Places
Many towns and cities became integrated
The sit-ins that begun in 1960 proved to be very effective for challenging segregation
in public places; by the end of 1961 161 had been successful in integrating restaurants
and canteens. However local authorities often took measures to avoid rather than
enforce segregation. For example Albany closed parks and removed chairs from
libraries rather than integrating. The Birmingham campaign did not even achieve the
general desegregation of the city. The civil rights legislation of 1964-65 was used to
force a further 53 cities to integrate and 214 had been integrated by the end of 1965
Voting Rights
There was some definite improvement but many Black Americans were still not
registered to vote
Eisenhower’s Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 were largely ineffective in
increasing voter registration. Between 1965 and 1966 a further 230,000 black people
registered to vote across the south. Nonetheless by 1966 four of the southern states
still had fewer than 50% of their black citizens registered to vote.
The Voting Rights Act was more effective in the north where the number of black
voters jumped from four million in 1960 to six million in 1965. This led to an increase
in the number of black people elected to governmental positions in the north. Robert
C. Henry became the first African American to be elected as Mayor (Mayor of
Springfield)
Employment
There was definite improvement but black unemployment was significantly
higher and average wages lower than white unemployment in 1968
There was a definitive improvement during the 1960s but full equality was not
achieved. Popular pressure on state governments resulted in 25 of the 31 states (with
the highest proportion of black people) introducing Fair Employment Practise Laws.
The federal government under Kennedy attempted to ensure fair employment
31
practises for government jobs and for jobs with companies working for the
government. However during the 1950s and 1960s black unemployment was twice the
national average.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed racial discrimination in the job market but the
1965 Moynihan report highlighted that the income of black workers was only 53% of
the national average income. Things had improved by 1968 but black unemployment
was 7% and white unemployment was 5%. The average income of black workers had
risen by 1968 but it was still only 61% of the income of white workers.
Housing
Access to quality housing remained a major problem, especially because of
weakened 1968 legislation
The American census of 1960 reported that 46% of America’s black population were
living in ‘unsound’ accommodation. Also 73% lived in urban areas where housing
stock was old and the amount of suitable housing was decreasing. Finally 25% lived
in inner city areas in the largest ten cities; these areas were almost exclusively black
because of ‘white flight’
By 1967 22 states and 8 cities had some form of fair housing law; however the
majority were symbolic. The exceptions were New York State and Massachusetts
which had comprehensive enforcement agencies.
The 1968 Fair Housing Act prohibited discrimination in 80% of the housing market.
However Congress toned down the act and refused to set up an enforcement agency.
Additionally the maximum fine for racial discrimination in the housing market was a
mere $1000; this was not a deterrent.
32
Black Power and the use of violence:
Why did the Civil Rights Movement become fragmented after 1966?
Methods
The SNCC and CORE only stuck with non-violence in the south because it
worked. When it stopped working in the north they believed violence in selfdefence to be justified
In the late 1950s and early 1960s King and the SCLC proved the effectiveness of
direct action as a weapon for challenging segregation. This commitment to nonviolence was based on his heartfelt belief in Christianity. SNCC and CORE also
organised campaigns using peaceful protest; however they used them for pragmatic
rather than ideological reasons.
The SNCC, however, believed that self-defence was compatible with the non-violent
protest and the 1966 shooting of James Meredith prompted their commitment to selfdefence. He was shot and injured on his March against Fear to encourage voter
registration in Mississippi. Stokely Carmichael argued that this shooting underlined
the need for black people to use violence to defend themselves. The SNCC became
even more radical in 1968 when Carmichael proposed using revolutionary violence
against the US government. CORE also moved away from non-violence during the
1960s; prompting the resignation of their leader James Farmer.
Collaboration
Success in the south relied on the support of the white government. The violence
that white communities displayed in the north forced some movements to feel
that they did not understand Black Americans
The movement was split over the question of whether black people should collaborate
with white people in the fight against racism. The NAACP and SCLC welcomed
black and white members; arguing that co-operation would make the movement
stronger. Radicals, on the other hand, argued that black people should liberate
themselves. Other people went further and argued that white people simply could not
understand the experience of black people or the problems that they faced.
The SNCC and CORE moved away from mixed membership in the late 1960s; for
example in 1966 the SNCC expelled all white members. IN 1965 CORE decided that
black people must form the majority of the organisation; in 1968 whites were
officially excluded from membership
Effectiveness of legal change
Legal change justified southern campaigns, however many now believed that
legal change would not change the de-facto segregation of northern ghettos
The NAACP, NUL and SCLC all fought for legal change. In this sense they wanted to
work within the American system. However the absence of legal segregation in the
33
northern states meant that northern blacks gained little from legal victories. Thus the
SNCC and CORE began to focus on the economic and political issues faced by black
citizens in northern ghettos.
Integration
Campaigners in the south fought for integration into white society; white racism
in the north meant that many did not see integration as a solution to their
problems
Racial integration was at the heart of the campaigns of the NAACP and SCLC. The
SNCC and CORE fought for the same cause in campaigns such as the sit-ins and
Freedom Rides.
However in the mid-1960s the SNCC began to stress the importance of black control
over public services rather than integration. Traditional integrationist campaigns only
worked for a handful of Black Americans (Brown case) and thus black people should
campaign for control over black schools in order to ensure a high standard of
education.
The Nation of Islam went further and argued that white people would never stop
trying to enslave black people. Consequently freedom was only possible in an all
black society. Thus Malcolm X rejected integration in favour of separatism.
Personalities
King was seen as an ‘Uncle Tom’ and the dominator of media attention; many
felt that he was not the spokesman for them
The SNCC and CORE were critical of King for treating them as junior partners; for
example King suggested that the SNCC should become the student wing of the SCLC.
CORE felt that he was not supportive of their campaigns; for example he did not play
a dominant role in the Freedom Rides.
There were criticisms that King dominated media attention. In fact leaders and
organisations competed for the media spotlight. Farmer wanted to use the Freedom
Rides to gain attention for CORE and the SNCC used the Freedom Summer in a
similar way. Competition was fierce as media attention was crucial to raise funds.
SNCC and CORE were concerned that King was working too closely with the white
government. Radicals objected to working with the government because they felt that
it had failed to protect protestors during the civil rights campaigns.
Personal relationships reached a low point in 1966 during negotiations over a protest
march following the shooting of James Meredith. Carmichael argued that he would no
longer work with the NAACP due to their conservatism and willingness to work with
white lawyers and politicians. The NAACP walked out after Carmichael showered
them with white abuse
34
Vietnam
This divided the movement as speaking out against it would alienate a
government that had been so helpful in the south
Leaders of the NAACP supported the war as they believed that any criticism would
drive a wedge between campaigners and the government and thus slow down
progress. The SNCC, however, believed that the war was a racial war between the
white American government and the Asian people of Vietnam. King initially refused
to criticise the war and thus the SNCC were critical of him. As time went on King felt
a moral obligation to speak out against the war as it violated his commitment to peace.
This heightened tensions between King and the NAACP.
How far is it accurate to say that Black Power achieved nothing for the American
people?
It may seem that it achieved nothing because: the movement was overshadowed
by violence, it brought divisions to the movement and because the aims of Black
Power were not clear. However in reality a lot was achieved: there were
numerous political and economic achievements, it instilled a sense of pride in
many Black Americans and it led to a more positive portrayal in the media. Even
King was influenced to an extent.
Influenced King
King became increasingly concerned with emphasising that black people had
a lot to be proud of. King also now stressed the importance of social and economic
issues (as well as segregation issues). Black Power helped change these attitudes
Therefore in response to Chicago King planned the Poor People’s Campaign. King
aimed to create a coalition big enough to tackle the social and economic problems
identified during the Chicago campaign. This would include ALL poor people. King
no longer felt that he could work within the current system but had to make
significant demands to end the ghettos. However King’s reputation had already
became damaged and it showed that he was not really the spokesperson for every
black citizen.
Political and Economic achievements
Practical help was offered to people living in ghettos.
Black people began to control their own communities. SNCC’s Free D.C. Movement
(headed by Marion Barry) aimed to bring ‘home rule’ to the community of
Washington DC. By the end of 1966 they won the right to elect their own school
boards and $3 million of government funding was invested to improve policing.
35
In New York an SNCC campaign saw black people take control of the ‘Intermediate
School 201’ in Harlem. In Mississippi they set up the Child Development Group of
Mississippi. They raised $1.5 million from the churches to set up 85 Head Start
Centres to support young children.
The initiatives of the Black Panthers helped tens of thousands of people. 49 Black
Panther Clinics were set up to treat sickle cell anaemia. The Illinois People’s Free
Medical Care Centre treated 2000 people in its first two months alone.
Gave black community sense of pride
Gained confidence in their race and culture that they had not previously had (King did
not give them this and that’s why Malcolm X predicted violence would erupt)
Carmichael and Newton emphasised the study of black history in order to connect
them with their past and link them to powerful figures. Malcolm X stressed the need
for them to understand their heritage. African history was full of examples of black
radical groups overthrowing oppressors and gaining independence for themselves.
Recovering the past and recognising that they were part of a global struggle with
Africa at its heart was crucial to the development of self-esteem, self-respect,
independence and pride for many young African Americans. Thus the Afro hairstyle
became a popular symbol of black identity. This change in identity also
fundamentally altered the American vocabulary. Activists rejected terms such as
‘Negroe’ as it was associated with segregation and instead referred to themselves as
‘black
There was also a profound effect on black music. The jazz composer and musician
Miles Daves is an excellent example of this; he pioneered new musical styles and
mixed jazz with electric instruments. His albums used non-Western instruments and
incorporated ideas from African music as well as modern black styles pioneered by
black artists such as James Brown and Jimi Hendrix. He also fought with his record
company to have pictures of black women on his album covers
Media portrayal:
The movement caused a change in the way they were portrayed in the media. Star
Trek broke new ground with a black character who was highly trained and technically
competent (Lieutenant Uhura). She represented the new emphasis on African identity
as she came from Africa and spoke Swahili. It also featured an inter-racial kiss
between her and Captain Kirk; this caused a political storm. Catwoman in batman was
an assertive black figure. Bill Crosby’s role in I Spy is another example.
There was also a radical shift in the portrayal of black characters in films. Melvin van
Peebles’ ‘Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song’ dramatised the story of a Black
panther and depicted the racist violence of the LA police. This was a box office hit
and led to new mainstream movies reflecting the new powerful black identity. Shaft
tells the story of a black detective who teams up with the Black panthers to defeat the
New York mafia and save the city from a race riot
36
Black athletes (Smith and Carlos) kept Black Power in the news giving the Black
Power salute in the 1968 Mexico City Olympic Games whilst receiving their medals
for the 200 m race. The Olympic committee was outraged by the gesture and
demanded that the American team suspend both athletes.
It brought division to the movement
Some campaigners developed increasingly militant policies and groups like SNCC
were broken by the strain
However these tensions had some very positive effects; experienced campaigners
could use the tensions to their advantage. Young (NUL) argued that every time
Malcolm X or Carmichael criticised the NUL it became easier to work with white
politicians and business leaders. White leaders became persuaded that the NUL was a
respectable organisation as the criticisms implied that they were moderate. Whenever
the NUL were having difficult negotiations, Young would mask Malcolm X to
telephone the employers. One call from Malcolm X was usually enough to scare the
employers into talking to the NUL.
Problems with violence
Violence undermined King’s policy of maintaining the moral high ground. Thus the
movement lost white sympathy that King worked so hard to gain (e.g. government)
For example Johnson was dismayed by the rioting after the Voting Rights Act and
King’s weakness was evident during the Watts riots when the crowds ignored his plea
to end the violence
Lack of aims
Never quite clear what the aims of black power were
Separate state? / Return to Africa? / Revolution + overthrow of white rule?
Some of the aims were unrealistic
37
Protest Culture: The sixties and a generation
What caused the emergence of counterculture?
The late 1950s and 1960s witnessed the growth of a counterculture that challenged
some of America’s deepest traditions. The counterculture was made up of hippies
(who promoted communities that focussed on ‘free love’ and experimented with
drugs), Black Panthers, Feminists and Peaceniks (a term of abuse used to describe
anti-war campaigners).
Economic Boom:
The increased prosperity meant that people were both less worried about the
economic advancement of others and were now willing to make sacrifices for a
good cause
The 1950s were a period of low inflation and negligible unemployment. 60% of
America worked in professional and non-manual jobs (White Collar occupations).
The number of Americans owning their own homes increased dramatically. Wages for
the working class leapt dramatically. This created a consumer boom. Everyone
seemed to be living in some measure of luxury. Wages for production workers leapt
by 70% between 1950 and 1970. The number of car owners rose dramatically; one in
two owned cars by 1970. America had entered an age of 'Populuxe', a time when
everyone could afford to live in some measure of luxury. The affluence of this period
made the middle class feel less anxious about greater opportunities for black people.
The attitude of the Great Depression was lost in which they believed for others to
benefit, they would have to lose
Young people became affected by the long period of affluence. The generation born
in the decade following WWII became known as ‘Baby Boomers’ because they had
never known poverty or economic depression. They were better educated than any
generation before them and thus were less materialistic and more interested in
political issues. They were willing to make sacrifices for a good cause and this
idealism became expressed in the counterculture.
Examples included the Hippies who were from a middle class background; not a
single cheque for Woodstock bounced.
Liberal Politics
Kennedy and Johnson both spoke of a fairer society. However, neither President
was able to deliver the reform that idealistic young Americans wanted. This
turned citizens away from mainstream culture
Kennedy launched a number of ground breaking initiatives that appealed to the
ambition and optimism of the youth. He urged them ‘Ask not what your country can
do for you but what you can do for your country’ He established Peace Corps which
sent volunteers to the developing world. He also committed the government to a
multi-million dollar space programme with the aim of landing a man on the moon by
the end of the 1960s. Both of these ideas appealed to the ideals of self-sacrifice and
38
ambition. By 1966 15,000 volunteers worked as part of the Peace Corps and in 1969
the Apollo mission landed on the moon.
Kennedy aimed to introduce better healthcare and increase funding for education.
This was known as the ‘New Frontier’. Congress blocked most of his policies.
Johnson also had a vision of a more equal society. He believed that the new found
wealth should be used to help the poor. Johnson worked with congress to pass 435
bills which committed $1.5 billion to improve schools and $2.9 to regenerate inner
cities. His 1965 Social Security Act guaranteed free healthcare to all people aged 65
and over
The conformity of 1950s and 1960s mainstream culture
Mainstream culture was increasingly seen as un-American and thus they started
to challenge its ideals; they found comfort in the counter-culture
The 1950s and 1960s introduced a mass new culture in which books, newspapers and
television programmes were mass produced and consumed by society. Many said that
this filled Americans with worthless ideas and distracted them from poverty. The
dominance of large companies changed the culture from independence and
individualism. Big business valued conformity and this was unattractive to the
American youth who turned to protest.
Teenagers were targeted by television such as Disney. Disney films contained many
counter cultural values. For example rock music (The Mickey Mouse Club), African
and Hispanic dance (The Three Caballeros) and references to a drug culture
(Fantasia). The heroes were often rebels who stood up to mainstream culture. For
example Robin Hood who steals from the rich and gives to the poor and who stands
up to the corrupt government, in the form of the Sherriff of Nottingham
Films and novels that appealed to young people focussed on a mis-match between the
young heroes and the society they found themselves in. In the 1955 film, Rebel
without a Cause, James Dean played a teenager who rejects the authority of his
parents and his school teachers. Writers questioned American morality and the
beatniks encouraged writers to experiment with drugs and sex. Naked Lunch (1959)
described the journey of a drug addict across America. They rejected the ‘square’
American work ethic in favour of leisure in which to read, think and experiment with
art and life. This was reflected in the way they dressed: goatees, sunglasses, black
tops, berets and shoulder length hair that used phrases such as ‘cool man’
Hippies rejected the mass produced mainstream in favour of a more natural culture;
they wore natural fabrics, handmade clothes and long hair. Their communities
provided a refuge for those that had run away from home. They rejected traditional
ideas of ownership in favour of communes in which goods were shared
The New Left questioned the criticism of communism and were critical of the huge
inequalities in wealth. Communism and socialism were attractive to young radicals as
they stressed economic equality. The first group was the SDS (Students for a
Democratic Society); they had been part of the SNCC. On the 1st October the
University of California declared that handing out political leaflets on campus was
39
forbidden. As a result the students established the FSM (Free Speech Movement). The
leader (Mario Savo) was critical of American society as a whole: he said it was a
machine which trapped Americans; it was time to destroy the machine.
Development of youth culture
Youth culture emerged and became a target for the ideas that counter-culture
represented
Young people growing up in this period were very optimistic about the future. They
had never known poverty and thus were willing to contemplate sacrifices for a good
cause. This became expressed in the counter-culture that emerged during Kennedy’s
presidency
A new social group emerged called the Teenager. They spent $10 million a year. Thus
there were new clothes, magazines, films, TV programmes to appeal to young people.
There was a difference between the experimental culture of young people and the
conservative main stream of the older generation
Rock ‘n’ Roll and Elvis Presley shocked conservative opinion; he was described as
‘sexhibitionist’. He mixed black gospel and blues music with white-Southern country
music. The Beatles dominated the music scene and shocked conservative opinion
because their 1967 album (Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band) was clearly
influenced by hallucinogenic drugs.
Hippie communities provided a refuge for young people who had run away from
home; they rejected private ideas of ownership in favour of communes in which
goods were shared.
Inspiration of black civil rights protests
Black Civil Rights Protestors inspired the youth to protest to make America a
better place
Not everyone gained during this boom period and certain groups such as black people
and the elderly were excluded. American society was richer but not more equal.
Counterculture groups emerged hippies, black panthers, feminists and peaceniks, who
believed that America was corrupt and that the ideas of politicians to change this were
empty words (Vietnam War distracted Johnson). They believed that elections could
not deliver change and took their protests to the streets
The first prominent New Left group was Students for a Democratic Society (SDS).
They had been part of the SNCC. They wanted individuals to share in the decisions
which control the direction of their life.
The Free Speech Movement was set up in response to the University of California
banning the handing out of political leaflets on campus. The leader (Mario Savio) was
critical of American society as a whole. He said that the American society was like a
machine which trapped Americans.
40
The SNCC was involved in the teach-ins (against the Vietnam War). Martin Luther
King also spoke out against the war and led a march of 5000 anti-war protestors
through Chicago in 1967. Muhammad Ali (member of the Nation of Islam) refused to
fight in the war and famously told reporters: ‘I ain’t got no quarrel with tem Viet
Cong...They never called me nigger’
The Vietnam War
Outrage at America’s actions in Vietnam led to the search for a new culture for
many. The war meant that many idealists who had initially supported Kennedy
and Johnson became alienated
The war became increasingly unpopular. The SDS believed that this was clear
evidence that the government was corrupt and that it cared more about money and
power.
The majority of soldiers fighting were between 19 and 22 and as a result all students
knew someone who had been injured or killed; many university students lived in fear
of being drafted into the armed forces
Anti-war rallies were organised and the SDS encouraged students to speak out against
the war. Teach-Ins were used to cancel lectures and debate the war. Following their
success various groups came together to form the VDC (Vietnam Day Committee) to
organise further protests. A March on Washington in 1965 demanded an end to the
war.
Another form of protest was the burning of draft cards. This became a symbolic act of
resistance. The government responded by criminalising the act.
How far had the status of Native Americans improved by the late 1960s?
Land
Some improvement
Self-governing tribes had their own police force, law courts and tribal councils but
they were managed by the BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs). This was a largely white
bureaucratic organisation which held power over the reservations. The Native
Americans made little advances against them in the 1960s and relations between
them were tense.
The National Congress of American Indians tried to bring legal action against the
government for taking so much of their reservation lands over the years. This was
especially due to Eisenhower’s policy of ‘Termination’ in which he tried to remove
the special status of Native Americans in the hope that the problems would be solved
by forcing them to become part of mainstream culture. The legal action against this
had made some progress. In particular Kennedy set up 56 reservation lands as
‘Redevelopment Areas’. This was a response to the publishing of the ‘Declaration of
41
Indian Purpose’ at the Chicago conference in which they outlined how power should
be devolved from the government to local tribal leaders; an alternative solution to
termination. One of the examples was when Californian tribes were given
compensation for the millions of acres taken from them during the previous 100 years.
However this compensation was a mere 47 cents an acre (the market value in 1861)
A new body, critical of the slow progress, emerged in the 1960s; called the National
Indian Youth Council. In 1968 a ‘fish-in’ was held after the Washington State
Supreme Court ruled against North American treaty rights to fish. This action was
not successful but land was recovered by legal action in New York and
Massachusetts.
Living standards
Some improvement
The increase in Native American population was not matched by an increase in
living standards. TB, trachoma, alcoholism and illiteracy were seen as major
problems. Life expectancy was 20 years lower than the US average. Suicide rates
(among 16-25 year olds) were also well above the national average. 84% of arrests on
the Navago reservation were alcohol related in 1960.
Native American had little desire to integrate into white society. Thus their chiefs
were concerned that, considering the rapid increase in population, they would move
away from the reservations and into towns. Government assisted re-location
programmes raised these concerns. These included the initiative by Johnson in 1967;
his Indian Resource Development Act allowed Native Americans to sell and mortgage
their land for funds to improve their living conditions. Unfamiliar patterns of work
coupled with the loneliness in an impersonal society, led to continued poverty
and discrimination.
Housing in the towns was dilapidated, makeshift, unsanitary and in a crowded
position. The majority had no running water. In 1968 Johnson set up the ‘National
Council on Indian Opportunity’. This gave 400 million dollars to the improvement of
social problems, including the tackling of discrimination in the health service and the
raising the standard of vocational training. The 1968 Housing Act outlawed
discrimination in the Housing Market but this could not be fully enforced
The Education Act in 1965 set up a ‘National Advisory Council on Indian
Education’ to increase literacy rates
Education and Employment:
Little improvement
This was Johnson’s policy to ensure that any organisation receiving federal funds
operated a satisfactory policy to racial minorities.
42
Thus educational applications from racial minorities would be more favourably
received that those of white applications. This provided new opportunities for
smaller minority groups.
In 1968 unemployment was estimated to be 42%. Many Native Americans received
no welfare benefits and many of those who were employed were only working in lowpaid seasonal farm activities.
Not surprisingly 300 Native Americans joined the Poor People’s Campaign in 1968.
Pride
Most amount of improvement in this area
Black power influences became apparent by 1968 with the founding of the American
Indian Movement; ‘Red Power’ was the chant used.
In 1969 a group of red nationalists (Indians of All Tribes) occupied the disused prison
on Alcatraz Island, demanding that the island be returned to the Native American
tribes. They were not successful but as a result Nixon officially announced the end of
the policy of Termination.
How far had the status of Hispanic Americans improved by the late 1960s?
Living Conditions
Campaigns did not result in a lot of real improvement by 1968
The ‘national origins’ system was abolished which led to an increase of Hispanic
entry to the USA. (1965 Immigration Act). This increased the scale of their economic
plight since the standard of living was lower than that of an average American
Chicanos were Mexican Americans. Many worked in the Californian farming industry
and generated 43% of the fruit and vegetables sold in America. They were only
employed seasonally during the harvests and thus only worked an average of 134 days
a year. They often migrated across California harvesting one crop after another. This
all meant that they lived in extreme poverty with an annual average income of $1,378.
They lived in low quality rented accommodation or makeshift farm camps with very
basic facilities
Cesar Chavez had a strong desire to achieve better conditions for the Chicanos of the
west. His family was so poor that he did not have shoes and they were forced to live
in tents on very basic rented accommodation. He founded the National Farm
Workers’ Association in 1962. Cesar was strongly influenced by Martin Luther King
and in 1968 he went on hunger strike in support of non-violent methods.
The NFWA hoped to organise a national campaign to gain greater economic rights.
They provided a series of services to its members including a credit union and an
insurance scheme. Their first big campaign was in 1965 in which Filipino farm
43
workers walked out of the vineyards in Delano (California) starting a strike. The
NFWA voted in support of the strike. This marked the beginning of La Huelga, a
strike which lasted five years and involved over 10,000 workers. Agricultural firms
refused to negotiate and attempted to break them up by evicting them and employing
strike breakers.
To organise the strike the NFWA merged into the UFW (United Farm Workers).
Chavez’s strategy was to attract media attention and thus expose the appalling
conditions. He organised a 340 mile march to the offices of California. Chavez went
on a 25 day hunger strike. They also boycotted California’s grapes which led to 17
million Americans to stop buying them.
No real change by 1968.
Segregation and Land
No real improvement by 1968
Little activity was seen for Hispanic Americans to solve this problem. They were
victims of insulting comments and experienced segregation in schools and public
entertainments throughout the 1960s
Black power ideas were also starting to have an impact on Mexican-Americans, with
the slogan ‘Brown Power’. Reies Lopez Tijerina was the militant leader of the
Alianza who campaigned for the return of Mexican-American grazing land recently
taken away by the national Forest Service in New Mexico.
From the mid 1960s ‘camp-ins’ were held and Forest Service Land was attacked and
set on fire.
Education and Employment
No real improvement by 1968
In the late 1960s the in the late 1960s the Young Chicanos for Community Action
(YCCA) was established. They campaigned for better education and employment
practises for Chicanos in LA. They were involved in the Chicano blowouts of 1968, a
series of school walk outs, demanding higher standards of schooling for Hispanic
students
Political representation and voting
No real improvement by 1968
In certain areas (for example San Diego) they were the majority of the population but
prevented from electing their own representatives. Gerrymandering was the process
drawing electoral boundaries so that Hispanic Americans would not be in a majority
in any district
44
In 1960 the MAPA (Mexican American Political Association) was created to
encourage Mexican Americans to register to vote and to support Mexican Americans
running for public office. In 1962 MAPA President, Edward Royal, was elected to the
House of Representatives
Police Treatment
No improvement by 1968
Police Treatment of Mexicans was prejudiced. A case where a white police officer
was alleged to have shot and killed a Mexican was abandoned on the grounds that a
conviction in the case was unlikely.
There were very few Mexican policemen
How far had sexual equality been achieved by 1968?
Economic equality
Campaigners caused some change but many changes lacked impact
In 1960 women had limited opportunities in the work place; 3/5ths of women over the
age of 16 were not at work and only 30% of married mothers had any kind of
employment. In 1961 the average annual income for a man was $27,000 whilst for a
woman it was $15,000. Women were also responsible for 79% of America’s unpaid
work such as child care. In order to address these issues feminists campaigned for an
Equal Rights Act that would outlaw sexual discrimination in terms of hiring and pay.
After the election of Kennedy feminists began lobbying the government and thus the
Presidential Commission on the Status of Women was set up. In addition an
amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act was proposed that would outlaw sexual
discrimination as well as racial discrimination. This was passed and became known as
‘Title VII’ of the Act. This provided the justification for future court campaigns.
This was a hollow victory for women because the government refused to enforce the
aspect of the act that protected women. The gap in earnings between women and men
was wider in 1969 that it had been in 1963.
The radical group NOW focussed on employment and they lobbied President
Johnson’s government. By 1967 they had achieved many legal victories: an Executive
Order outlawed sexual discrimination in any company that worked for the
government and Johnson promised to appoint 50 women to top government posts.
Identity
Campaigners were not successful in achieving their aims. In many cases the
demands undermined the campaign
45
Radical feminists argued that women’s identity had been defined by men. Betty
Freidan’s ‘The Feminine Mystique’ (1963) argued that women’s lives and identities
had become focussed on their husbands and on their children. Freidan’s solution was
further education and greater involvement in work
Some radical feminists advocated even more far reaching solutions. For example
Atkinson argued that love is a psychological trap set by men to force women into
submission; he advocated celibacy or lesbianism as a solution
NOW’s aim was to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of
American society, in an equal partnership with men. NOW campaigned for an Equal
Rights Amendment; a change to the American constitution guaranteeing equal rights
to men and women. This was never passed.
Awareness and Belief
Some improvement in this area
Government inaction spurred women to more radical action and a new campaigning
group was formed: National Organisation for Women (NOW). This feminist group
grew because the white members excluded from CORE and SNCC looked for new
campaign opportunities, black campaigners had inspired women to become politically
active and women saw other campaign movements as male dominated.
NOW used the courts, in the 1967 case ‘Weeks v Southern Bell’. The court ruled that
Southern Bell had violated the Civil Rights Act by promoting a man in spite of the
fact that Lorena Weeks was better qualified. This set a precedent opening the way for
other women to challenge sexist practise in the work place.
Many feminists split away from NOW as they thought that it was not radical enough.
For example Kate Willet left because it would not discuss lesbian rights and Atkinson
left to join ‘The Feminists’ which campaigned against pornography and marriage in
favour of abortion on demand. The NYRW (New York radical Women) organised
women’s ‘speakouts’ where women would ‘speakout’ about their abortions. The
meetings caused many to rethink their perspective on America’s restrictive abortion
laws. There was no legal relaxation of abortion laws by 1968 and many women found
many of these radical demands unattractive.
Criminal Law
This was an area of greater success
NOW addressed inequalities in criminal law. In 1966 Jane Daniel was convicted of
robbery and received a longer sentence than her male accomplice. As a result of the
amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act this was reversed by Pennsylvania’s highest
court.
46
The USA in Asia – Revision Notes
UNIT 1: KOREAN WAR
Why did the US get involved in the Korean War?
Desire for US influence in the Pacific:
The US had seen its initial influence in the Pacific decline after the ‘fall of
China’. Furthermore the US seemed to be losing the ideological war against the
USSR; thus intervention in South Korea was crucial.
Japan surrendered in 1945 and America perceived itself as the dominant force in the
Pacific. The Pacific was its sphere of influence. Thus intervened in Korea to maintain
its influence. Especially considering how Truman was annoyed at how the Soviet
Union has swept across Eastern Europe, creating a large sphere of influence for itself;
this hardened Truman’s resolve to maintain a strong influence in the Pacific. A
communist South Korea would swing power away from America and towards the
Communist bloc.
However in 1950 Dean Acheson made a speech outlining US interests in the Pacific.
He did not include South Korea
Economic rehabilitation of Japan:
America’s main concern in the Pacific was Japan. It was believed that the
defence of South Korea from Communism would maintain trade links and thus
stop Japan from going Communist
In October 1949 China had fallen to Communism. Thus the USA had to find an
alternative market for Japanese goods or risk Japan descending into Communism. The
defence of South Korea would provide Japan with an economic partner with which to
trade products and ensure economic stability. The Korean War resulted in US$3
billion worth of products being ordered which included jeeps, trucks and construction
materials. Toyota truck production led to production leaping from 300 to 1500 a
month in 1950. This economic rehabilitation was vital for the Japan’s protection from
Communism.
Protect Japan from attack:
Furthermore America believed that Communist forces could easily invade Japan
from South Korea; thus defence of South Korea from communism was even
more crucial
Korea and Japan are separated by less than 160 kilometres of sea. Truman feared that
South Korea was a good place for communist forces to launch an invasion of Japan.
Truman did not want Communist forces to be in such proximity to Japan as it
threatened US interests. The geographical importance of Korea can be seen as vital.
47
Uphold democracy:
The US was founded on the principles of freedom and democracy; the continuing
spread of communism threatened these ideals
The US collaboration with the UN shows that they wanted to defend democracy.
America went to the UN as soon as the north invaded the south. Two resolutions were
passed condemning North Korean actions. Therefore they intervened to uphold the
democratic values of South Korea.
However the government of South Korea was by no means a model of democracy and
freedom. It was a ruthless dictatorship and Syngman Rhee depended on police and
army officers, a large number of whom had been trained by the Japanese.
Cold War:
The origins of American involvement must be seen in the context of the Cold
War; America felt that their ideology was continually threatened and thus they
sought to defend ‘liberty’ from communism all over the world
The North Korean forces were Communist and thus the Korean War was turned into
an ideological war. America felt threatened by Communism following the fall of
Communism to China in 1949 and the testing of the first atomic bomb by the Soviet
Union. Thus America had a desire to gain ground against the Communist bloc. They
wanted to restore their position in the world.
Impact of Truman:
Truman was blamed for the ‘fall of China’ and had to be seen to be tough on
communism, thus he decided to follow the policy of containment
In 1947 Truman introduced the Truman Doctrine and followed the policy of
Containment. Thus they would defend any country threatened by a Communist
aggressor. The Republicans accused Truman of being soft on Communism and
blamed him for the fall off China. Truman was therefore adamant to uphold his new
policies. In this case the North Koreans were the aggressor and wanted to contain the
Communist threat. This desire was expanded upon considering the events of the Red
Scare in which Communists were believed to be working in the American
government; thus Truman wanted to counter Communism wherever he saw it.
What were the turning points causing the continuation and outcome of the
Korean War?
The initial North Korean attack
This caused North Korea to gain huge areas of land in South Korea
48
At 4am on the 25th June a devastating artillery and mortar barrage fell on unprepared
South Korean troops; this was an all out assault by Kim Il Sung to reunite the
peninsula. Seven well equipped and well-motivated combat divisions were used;
supported by 200 Russian built aircraft. Kim commanded an army of 135,000 men
who had extensive experience in the Chinese Civil War. In comparison the South
Korean forces were under equipped with 95,000 men and a lack of tanks. The
conscripts to their army had little love for their government and disintegrated under
the attack
Arrival of US troops
After some initial failures the border was pushed back to the 38th parallel
US forces were rushed to Korea but the first units were underequipped as a result in
the cuts in military spending. MacArthur, US supreme commander underestimated the
enemy and overestimated the US troops. The US was forced into retreat.
Reinforcements from the Commonwealth arrived and the sheer fire power of the US
air force and artillery started to tell on the North Korean Army. General Walker
issued ‘Stand or Die’ order and created a defensive line known as the Pusan
perimeter. Furthermore the sheer brutality of the North Korean troops led to a reaction
in the south and the corruption, inadequacies and cruelty of Rhee’s regime was totally
outclassed by the evils of Kim IL Sung. The south now chose to support a lesser evil.
MacArthur, a national institution, launched a daring stroke aimed at the North
Koreans and launched a landing at Inchon, behind enemy lines. The attack was
successful and then the US forces pressed on to Seoul; massive bombing destroyed
the city and gained victory. Kim’s army retreated north of the 38th parallel
US decision to move north of the 38th parallel
This was to result in a humiliating war against the Chinese
MacArthur was convinced that the Chinese would not intervene and was determined
to follow the policy of ‘rolling back communism’. Truman supported the decision as
it was widely believed that the north would invade again. AS new group of politicians
in Moscow believed it was essential to respond to the challenges from Moscow in
order to discourage them in the future. Public opinion seemed to be behind this
aggressive stance.
The approaching winter and division of the north by a mountainous spine presented
challenges which MacArthur brushed aside and by the end of October the narrowest
point in the Korean Peninsula had been reached; an obvious place to draw a defensive
line.
MacArthur was having none of this approach and ordered his troops to advance to the
Yalu River
49
The involvement of the Chinese
Their involvement was to send the US into humiliating retreat beyond the 38th
parallel
China was under pressure from Stalin to get involved but Mao distrusted the Soviet
Union and could see that they wished to use China for their own benefit. However
they recognised arguments for intervention: they did not want US forces on their
border and their industry depended on electricity generated in North Korea. There was
also sentiment to be gained from the Chinese public for the new regime.
On the 1-2 November a large force of Chinese troops struck an elite force of US
troops 5o miles south of the border. Then the Chinese broke off their attacks and
retreated into the border hills. The Chinese were drawing MacArthur on; MacArthur
fell for this and took the bait. The USA walked into one of the greatest ambushes of
all time.
The Chinese troops were masters of camouflage and the surprise attack; they launched
attacks in the hours of darkness at night. On the 25 November the Chinese offensive
in the west began and US forces faced being surrounded. The decision was taken to
retreat; units pulled back 300 miles and morale plummeted. In the east the US troops
had to use fire power to break out of their encirclement. The Chinese were finally
halted 50 miles to the south; thus the retreat came to an end in February 1951.
MacArthur gave an interview to an American journal blaming the restraints put upon
him for the retreat; namely that he was not allowed to bomb Chinese bases. This
interview outraged Truman. MacArthur then issued a press statement that his goal
was still entire unification and wanted to poison the Yalu River with radioactive waste
to cut off Korea from China. Truman wanted a ceasefire at the 38th parallel.
MacArthur then demanded the use of nationalist troops from Taiwan to achieve
unification; a direct challenge to Truman. In April MacArthur was fired. There were
howls of protest at home. MacArthur addressed congress in April and said that he was
the victim of appeasement.
Armistice talks hindered by both sides
The endless sticking points and desire to ‘save face’ delayed peace by two years
In March 1951 the US sought an armistice on the 38th parallel. However China agreed
to a further ‘Spring offensive’ to capture Seoul; it failed. The first negotiations at
Kaesong were used as a propaganda exercise by the Communists that the USA was
pleading for peace. Furthermore they were hindered by Stalin who felt that a bubbling
conflict would weaken the USA and tie China more firmly to the USSR.
The talks continued until 1953 where there were endless sticking points concerning
the exact boundary and the issue of the return of prisoners; Truman was adamant that
he would not force Communist prisoners to return against their will. North Korea was
50
heavily bombed to make them sign an armistice and a ceasefire, not a peace treaty,
was signed.
How far was the Korean War a military and political success for the USA?
Defeat of initial North Korean attack
This was a huge success
Throughout July 1950 the NKPA pushed UNC and ROK to the south east corner.
General Walker issued ‘Stand or Die’ order and created a defensive line known as the
Pusan perimeter. General McArthur knew that more troops would be needed.
General MacArthur planned the Inchon landings; attacks behind enemy lines. This
destroyed communication lines and trapped and isolated a large part of the NKPA in
the south. By the 1st October the UNC forces were back at the 38th parallel.
Eventual holding of the Chinese
The involvement of the Chinese caused the biggest US military retreat in history
The NKPA would always pose a threat to the existence of South Korea. This coupled
with the long term UN aim of reunification of Korea led to a change of policy to ‘Roll
Back’. The risk was Chinese involvement in the war. The US convinced the UN that
further action was needed based on the idea that North Korea should be liberated; thus
the UN passed a resolution calling for a unified Korea.
It was felt that China would not intervene as it would hamper any opportunity to gain
a seat on the UN Security Council.
The US did not know that at the time of the passing of the resolution, China had
already decided to enter the war. It was the Soviet Union that wanted China to send
troops as Stalin did not want to be involved in direct combat against the US (in
annoyance to Kim II Sung). China was reluctant to get involved due to their poorly
equipped army because they did not want US troops on their border.
The Chinese forces lost the first major battles in October 1950 and the troops fighting
for the south crossed the 38th parallel. The Chinese losses were a carefully calculated
strategy to convince the UNC that the Chinese were weak forces. This allowed the
UNC troops to become overconfident and thus eventually encircled by UNC troops.
By 25 November they were cut off in North Korea.
Truman was unwilling to move the war to mainland China due to the expense and risk
of alienating their European allies. In 1951 MacArthur was removed from office as a
result of his public desire to bomb strategic sites in China.
51
In December 1950 the UN pressurised the US to end the fighting and formed five
principles to end the war. The principles called for a cease-fire, the removal of foreign
troops and the unification of Korea under the supervision of the UN. The Chinese
rejected the principles.
Throughout the spring and summer of 1951 the UNC launched Operation Killer,
‘Ripper’ and ‘Rugged’. The Communists wanted to avoid serious battle and thus
UNC extended territorial control once again in the north.
Defence of an independent ROK
Eventually the US forced an armistice upon North Korea
In May 1951 US made secret contact with the Soviet Union and China indicating that
they were willing to end the fighting. The secrecy resulted from the fact that Syngman
Rhee wanted to keep fighting to unify Korea.
The USSR and China now agreed due to the huge casualties and economic costs
created by war. The negotiations began at Kaesong in No Man’s Land.
The Communists wanted the 38th parallel to be the cease-fire line whilst the UNC
wanted the line to be further north at the Kansas line. This caused negotiations to
break down. Fighting continued and the intensification of air power inflicted heavy
casualties on both sides.
Truman lost the next election due to his handling of the Korean War and the drastic
loss of life. Eisenhower was elected on the basis that he was prepared to use whatever
weapons necessary to bring about a cease-fire. He made the commanders of the
Communist forces aware of this. Thus in June 1953 an armistice was signed.
Syngman Rhee opposed these compromises and his forces continued fighting for
some months.
Involvement of the UN
This provided the US with a moral justification
Truman’s initial thought was to appeal to the UN to use military force so as to give
courage all smaller nations who become threatened by strong Communist neighbours.
The UN viewed the invasion as an act of aggression without provocation. They passed
a resolution calling for NKPA to withdraw its forces (Soviet Union not present)
Truman, convinced that the Soviet Union was providing weapons to North Korea,
called for a second resolution for UN to provide military support for ROK. The
resolution was passed and called for a UN Joint Command force (UNC) to fight
alongside the South Korean troops.
52
Truman actually sent troops before the resolution was passed. US were greater
contributor of troops. General Macarthur to assume overall command.
Deterring of USSR and China from further aggression
The USSR and China actually withdrew for domestic reasons
Conventional views suggest that the war was brought to an end because of the US
threat to escalate the war and its consideration of the use of nuclear weapons. This is
not rooted in evidence.
China needed the money for domestic issues and North Korean morale was at
breaking point. Inflation was destroying people’s lives.
Stalin died in 1953 and the new leaders placed an emphasis on peaceful co-existence
with the USA.
The impact of the bombing by the UN on North Korea definitely had an impact.
Use of war to push a massive rearmament programme through congress
The US was transformed from an economic superpower to a military
superpower
In June 1950 Truman needed support from congress to win support for an increase in
military spending that would allow US forced to counter the Communist troops.
The military budget was increased from 13 billion dollars to 48.2 billion dollars and
the number of troops increased from 630,000 to 1,500,000 by 1955 to meet the threat
of the Soviet Union.
To what extent was the Korean War a ‘war with no winners’
The impact of the war on Korea
The war was devastating
The suffering and devastation was horrendous. 10% of the entire population was
killed, wounded or missing. In total 600,000 homes were destroyed. In the north alone
8,700 industrial plants were knocked out through US bombing.
The peninsula remained divided, despite the aims of Kim IL Sung and Symgnan
Rhee; furthermore it was divided along the line that it always was.
North Korea remains what it was in 1950: a brutal primitive dictatorship with a low
standard of living. North Korea remains locked in a Communist time warp; sealed off
from the 21st century.
53
South Korea remained an authoritarian state for many years. Democracy has slowly
developed with a growing middle class and prosperity. This has fulfilled the hopes of
Truman and the UN; thereby justifying the American involvement
The impact on Japan
They were winners
It was probably the main beneficiary of the Korean War. A friendly South Korea was
established, just 100 miles away from its shores, instead of a hostile puppet regime of
the Soviet Union.
Japan gained hugely from US spending. In 1950 Toyota received an order for 1000
trucks and the defence industry earns 3 billion dollars from sales. This was a massive
stimulus to the economic recovery of Japan and helped create a rich friendly state that
was the cornerstone of US interests in the region.
The Japanese Prime Minister claimed that the war had been ‘the grace of heaven’
The impact on the People’s Republic of China
On balance the war was considered by Mao as a success
Over 150,000 troops were killed and many times this figure were wounded. The war
convinced China that they could not win by sheer numbers and political enthusiasm
alone. They realised that a new technological army was needed which they began to
create in the following years
The economic cost of the war slowed up the modernisation of China and prevented
the defeat of the nationalists in Taiwan. US hostility to China was now greater and
this ensured their exclusion from the UN
On the other hand China had shown that it could stand up to the outside world and
they had forced the most powerful country in the world back. The war also helped
consolidate Mao’s hold on power. The victorious campaign was the mark of a new
dynasty and a new emperor
Impact on the USA
The war changed the USA from an economic superpower to a military one
33.651 soldiers died in the combat and a further 103,284 were wounded. The financial
implications were shocking. Total military expenditure rose from 4% of GNP to 14%
of GNP. The USA had also suffered a humiliating military set back; retreating 300
miles in the face of Chinese soldiers
The war also encouraged anti-Communist propaganda. McCarthy went from strength
to strength denouncing Communist plots that stretched to the Whitehouse.
54
Korea helped Eisenhower into office as he implied that he would end the Korean War
The biggest impact was the vast increase in defence spending and the transformation
of the nation from an economic superpower into a military one. The number of navy
ships rose from 600 to 1000, the air force increased from 42 wing groups to 72 and
the army grew from 10 to 18 divisions. The number of atomic bombs rocketed. The
CIA expanded rapidly. This stimulated the economy and contributed to prosperity but
at the expense of some ‘Fair Deal’ programmes
Impact on the United Nations
They were made to look credible
The UN had shown that it had not gone down the same ineffectual path as the League
of Nations in the 1930s. Many powers joined the USA in the fight against North
Korea. Via the UN the USA had embraced morality
55
UNIT 2: ORIGINS OF AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT IN VIETNAM (19501960)
Why did America get involved in the Vietnam War?
The surrender of the French:
The surrender of the French demonstrated the threat of Communism once again
and the need for decisive action
The surrender of the French in Vietnam had important repercussions for US policy in
Asia. To the USA, it was another example of the spread of communism and brought
their involvement in the conflict in Vietnam.
The USA also developed defensive alliances, on the lines of NATO, to contain
communism in Asia. In 1951 they signed ANZUS, an anti-communist alliance with
Australia and New Zealand.
The French were defeated because they had no plan to combat the guerrilla tactics of
the Vietminh. Instead, they alienated most of the native population with their policies.
For example, in November 1946 a French cruiser bombarded the port of Haiphong,
killing 6000, to ‘give a harsh lesson’ to the Vietminh. They failed to realise the need
to win over the native population in order to combat guerrilla tactics.
French public opinion was divided about the war. Indeed, as French casualties
mounted, the French were to lose 72,000 lives in the conflict, the media and public
turned against the war. The new French government elected in 1953 was preoccupied
with domestic issues and gave little direction to General Navarre, the French military
commander in Indochina. He believed defeat against the guerrilla tactics of the
Vietminh to be inevitable and was looking for some military success to strengthen
France’s hand at the negotiating table. He drew the Vietminh into open battle at Dien
Bien Phu but was defeated. After 55 days of heavy fighting the French surrendered in
March 1954.
At Dien Bien Phu the French believed that the Vietminh would be forced to mount a
frontal attack as it would be impossible for them to move heavy artillery through the
jungle. This would allow superior French fire-power to be effective. However the
Vietminh commander, General Giap, used 200,000 porters to ensure his soldiers were
properly supplied and manhandle artillery through the jungle. The attack came in
March 1954. The Vietminh attacked with 70,000 troops and soon overran the
airfields. The French inside Dien Bien Phu were outnumbered six to one. The French
had underestimated the Vietminh. The Vietminh commander General Giap had been
training his army using modern weapons from China. The French defenders were
outnumbered and soon came under heavy bombardment. In two months the French
56
were forced to surrender and evacuate all of Vietnam. There was a lack of direct
military support from the USA.
The USA was happy to finance the French war in Indochina but did not want direct
involvement, especially having just extricated itself from the conflict in Korea.
However the surrender of the French would lead to further American involvement
The Domino Theory:
American politicians believed that the fall of one country to Communism would
threaten the whole of South-East Asia; notably Japan. This resulted in finance to
French and further political involvement
The justification for the vast finance to the French was the Domino Theory. There
was a belief that there was a ‘communist threat’ worldwide and that this was
orchestrated from Moscow. Nixon (Republican Vice-President) visited Vietnam in
1953 and went on television on his return. On this broadcast he said that if Indo-China
goes under communist domination then the whole of South East Asia will be
threatened and that means that the economic and military security of Japan will be
threatened also. This became known as the ‘Domino Theory’.
President Eisenhower actually used the image of dominoes going over in a press
conference in 1954. The more that the USA seemed to confront international
Communism the more realistic the threat seemed to become. Mao was driven closer to
Moscow because of his confrontation with the USA in Korea and likewise Ho was
driven closer to Mao because of the events so far in Vietnam.
Communist insurgency in Malaya (1948):
The threat to British rule was another example of the threat of Communism;
that had to be contained
The Communist Chinese minority opposed British rule in Malaya. The Malays
opposed the Chinese who feared Chinese domination. A twelve year struggle
followed and the Communists were defeated.
The presence of a threat between 1948 and 1960 added to America’s impression of a
generalised Communist conspiracy. Communism had to be contained or it would
overrun Asia.
Geneva Conference:
The withdrawal of the French led to the division of Vietnam with the prospect of
future elections that would unite Vietnam under Communist rule; this increased
the fear of the spread of Communism and led to US political involvement
57
The Geneva Conference of 1954 arranged a ceasefire and the French withdrawal from
Vietnam. Vietnam was to be divided along the 17th Parallel until elections could be
held within two years to unite the country under a democratic government in 1956.
North Vietnam was, temporarily under the control of the Vietminh. They strengthened
their hold by introducing land reform which led to the death of many former
landlords. The US exaggerated the number, with Richard Nixon claiming that 500,000
died. The figure was probably 50,000 or less.
It was widely believed that the Vietminh would win the elections due in 1956. The US
refused to support the idea of a united Vietnam almost certainly under communist
control. They did not see Ho Chi Minh as a popular leader but rather as an agent of
communist expansion.
They rejected the elections on the pretext that they were not to be organised by the
UN but by an international commission. Instead the US decided to prop up the regime
established by Diem in South Vietnam. In 1956 they gave Diem $250 million and
increasing sums over the next few years.
The USA was propping up a corrupt and brutal regime and used bribes to buy off
some of his opponents and perpetuating the division of Vietnam.
In 1954 the USA set up SEATO to strengthen their attempts to contain the spread of
communism in Asia and justify future intervention in Vietnam. The South East Asia
Treaty Organisation was a collection of states in this area that would act as a bulwark
to communism.
Defend Democracy:
In the context of the Cold War; the pride of the USA was threatened; thus they
wanted to protect democracy where it existed. This provided a justification for
their involvement.
This theory was the key to US policy. Democracy and the pride of the USA were
threatened by the advance of communism in Asia.
However in 1955 Ngo Dinh Diem seized power in South Vietnam and made himself
president and then ruled as a dictator. The elections were not held in 1956 and Diem
became increasingly corrupt and violent. Trade unionists, religious leaders and
journalists were thrown into jail. Diem was a Catholic in a country where 70% of the
population was Buddhist. Increasingly he faced opposition from Buddhists and
replied with greater cruelty. It was actually Diem’s actions led to the formation of the
Viet Cong who launched guerrilla war against the government of South Vietnam. It
was backed by North Vietnam and Ho Chi Minh sent supplies.
58
Eisenhower decided to prop up the Diem regime and ignore the Geneva Settlement.
He set up MAAG, the Military Assistance Advisory Group, to provide military
advisers to South Vietnam.
Substantial aid was given to Diem to promote a policy of ‘Nation Building’ by which
he was supposed to bring in economic and social reforms. He ignored the US advisers
and used the money to strengthen his own regime.
59
UNIT 3: ESCALATION OF AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT IN VIETNAM
(1960-1967)
Why did US participation in Vietnam escalate during the years 1960 – 1967?
Context of the Cold War:
Participation escalated as America could not lose the ideological war that began
after WWII
The USA was perceived to be locked in a worldwide conflict with the Soviet Union in
which revolutionary subversion was the key chosen Soviet weapon. Ho Chi Minh had
received training in Moscow and his regime in North Vietnam could not be perceived
as separate from the world wide Communist conspiracy
The curse of Appeasement:
Kennedy did not want to repeat the mistakes of the world leaders before WWII;
appeasing communism was not an option
It seemed to most that had come through WWII that the great mistake was not
standing up to Hitler in time. It appeared to him that the only way to deal with
dictators was to stand up to them.
Personal concerns of American Politicians:
Kennedy did not want to be tainted with the same brush as Truman; that he was
‘soft on Communism’
Politicians were aware of the power of US anti-communist sentiment which could
break a politician, thus they had to react to this. Thus they realised that it was easier
for the average American voter to see Ho Chi Minh as the little devil in the service of
the greater devils in Moscow and Beijing than as a sincere Vietnamese nationalist
who happened to be Communist as well.
The charge that the Democrats had lost China was still branded about and Kennedy
was determined that he would not be subject to similar accusations. This he rapidly
increased defence spending.
Problems with Containment:
The situation in Laos was showing containment as a failure. The corrupt
government in South Vietnam meant the policy was under even greater
challenge especially following the formation of the Viet Cong
By 1960 Containment in South-East Asia seemed under renewed challenge. This was
most serious in Laos where the North Vietnamese had not fully withdrawn and the
60
native Communist organisation (Pathet Lao) appeared to be on the point of
dominating the whole country. Another domino was about to fall.
In 1959 Hanoi decided to step up aid to Communist supporters in South Vietnam who
were under pressure from the Diem regime and furthermore they reactivated the Ho
Chi Minh trail along the border of Laos and Cambodia. In 1960 an anti Diem coalition
was formed called the National Liberation Front (NLF). The situation was made
worse with the unpopularity of the Diem regime who refused to take advice from
American representatives and who kept power in the hands of his relatives. Madame
Nhu: ‘All power is lovely. Absolute power is absolutely lovely’. The Buddhist
majority were treated with contempt and the Catholic minority openly favoured. In
1959 he dedicated the Republic to the Virgin Mary
Policies of President Kennedy
Kennedy was determined to maintain the survival of South Vietnam
President Kennedy was determined to maintain the survival South Vietnam especially
after Khrushchev, in a speech in 1961, made clear Soviet intentions to support
liberation movements throughout the world. This, at a time, when Diem was more
unpopular than ever.
Kennedy, therefore, greatly increased US aid and involvement. The Green Berets
were sent to train the Army of South Vietnam in guerrilla warfare and the CIA
organised Civilian Irregular Defence Groups to act as local militia. In March 1961 US
planes were ordered to destroy any hostile aircraft over South Vietnam.
American policy was set out in a National Security Action Memorandum in May
1961 which committed the US to prevent Communist domination. Missions left for
Saigon to find out what was necessary including Johnson who referred to Diem as
‘the Winston Churchill of South East Asia’
Kennedy also introduced the policy of ‘strategic hamlets’ in an attempt to separate the
population from the Vietcong. This involved moving peasants into fortified villages,
guarded by troops. This backfired due to the forcible moving of peasants from their
land.
The US public was led to believe that each increase in US aid was bringing success in
the war between the north and south. Many in the US government ignored the real
situation in order to justify this step by step approach – that the Vietcong was
attracting more and more support in the south and the government of Diem less and
less. By 1963 Diem’s rule in South Vietnam was so corrupt that he was facing
continuous opposition. Several Buddhist monks burned themselves to death in protest.
61
Defend Democracy:
The US wanted to safeguard the principles upon which it was founded
A constant worry to the USA was the character of Diem. He was not an ideal
figurehead for the resistance to Communism in the name of democracy. In May 1963
Diem prohibited the use of Buddhist flags. Demonstrations followed which were fired
upon by government forces. Quang Duc (senior Buddhist monk) doused himself in
petrol and burned himself alive. Madame Nhu did not help the situation when she
referred to him as a ‘barbecued monk’
Diem refused US advice to compromise and some in the South Vietnamese army
began a coup. Despite knowledge of it the CIA chose not to warn Diem and he was
murdered.
Ideas and Policies of President Johnson:
Johnson looked for quick fix solutions so that he could concentrate on
implementing his ‘Great Society’
Johnson accepted the advice of his Defence Secretary, Robert McNamara, for a policy
of flexible response. In other words send even more military equipment and specialist
forces to Vietnam to increase policy options in the area.
After the fall of Diem, the position of the South Vietnamese government was
weakened by a series of short-lived military governments. By 1964, 35 per cent of
South Vietnam was in Vietcong hands. Johnson ignored negotiation and withdrawal.
Eventually Thieu emerged as the undisputed leader.
In 1965 he sanctioned ‘Operation Rolling Thunder’, the bombing of North Vietnam,
in retaliation to Vietcong attacks on US military bases in the South. He believed that
US superior technology would force North Vietnam to the negotiating table. There
was no planned escalation but a series of responses to a worsening situation; he hoped
that each move would force the enemy to arrive at the negotiating table.
Remember US commitment to South Vietnam had increased steadily since 1954 and,
at the time of Kennedy’s death, there were already 16,000 advisers in Vietnam.
Johnson also inherited a disintegrating regime in South Vietnam.
Johnson’s policy of gradual escalation was to avoid a damaging debate over the war.
His major aim was the creation of a ‘Great Society’, a policy of social and economic
support.
To achieve this he needed popular support especially as he had not been elected as
President. If he backed down over Vietnam then he would be seen as coward and lose
the support necessary for these reforms.
62
Johnson was seen as a man in a hurry, looking for quick fix-it solutions to most
problems. He had had two heart attacks and wanted the situation in Vietnam resolved
as quickly as possible.
Johnson certainly became fixated on Vietnam. He had models of the siege of Da Nang
built in a basement of the White House and is said to have prowled around it in the
small hours.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident:
This incident provided the justification for the sending of troops and the
bombing campaign against the north
Johnson, however, needed greater presidential powers to implement his policy. The
Gulf of Tonkin Incident, August 1964, when North Vietnamese troops attacked US
naval vessels, gave him the excuse to pass the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and the
power to wage war on Vietnam as he saw fit.
Operation Rolling Thunder failed to make any impact on the war. Strategic bombing
as ineffective against a mainly agricultural country with few specific industrial and
military targets. Many bombs did not explode; they provided explosives for North
Vietnamese booby traps and the Ho Chi Minh trail was not broken
At the same time Johnson sent the first combat troops into Vietnam with two
battalions of US marines arriving at Da Nang in March 1965. Johnson deliberately
played down this action to give Congress and the US public the impression that US
intervention remained limited.
As the USA took over the running of the war in the South, the number of troops
increased rapidly to 535,000 by 1968. These troops were under the command of
General William Westmoreland and employed a variety of strategies to root out the
Vietcong.
Policies such as search and destroy missions to find communist bases in the jungle
and eliminate them, air attacks to provide support for ground troops, and Operation
Ranch Hand which involved chemical warfare to strip the Vietcong of their jungle
cover.
Protect the world from Communism:
Johnson did not want to break the containment promise that Truman had made
There was an enormous self confidence in American economic and military power.
America was the ‘can-do’ country and in WWII she had shown this to the benefit of
humanity. American prestige could not be sacrificed nor did it need to be.
63
Johnson believed that the USA had made a pledge/promise to help those under attack
from communism and was duty bound to maintain that promise. He refused to
compromise seeing it as the same as Chamberlain and appeasement in the late 1930s.
Johnson inherited a situation where he knew that more American help was needed and
he realised that American prestige was at stake. In December 1964 he told the
columnist Walter Lippmann: ‘This is a commitment I inherited. I don’t like it, but
how can I pull out?’
When he first became president in 1963 Johnson was heavily reliant on his advisers
but they were divided. One, George Ball, advised withdrawal, McGeorge Bundy a
limited policy of step-by-step assistance to South Vietnam, but most, led by Robert
McNamara, favoured massive military deployment.
Which President was mainly responsible for the escalation of the Vietnam War?
Cold War:
In the context of the Cold War Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson could not be seen
to be losing
Personal concerns:
Kennedy needed to shake off the label that the Democrats were ‘soft on communism’
which led to his escalation. Kennedy also did not want to repeat the mistakes of
appeasement
Methods:
Eisenhower initiated political involvement, Kennedy initiated military involvement
which Johnson escalated
Problems with containment:
Each President inherited a worsening situation and thus escalated involvement to the
next level. Kennedy, though, started the military stage from which Johnson, despite
his desires to end it, could not turn back
Gulf of Tonkin:
This was the justification for President Johnson to send troops
64
UNIT 4: WITHDRAWAL OF TROOPS FROM VIETNAM (1969-1973)
Why did America fail to win and thus withdraw troops from Vietnam?
The Americans did not win the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people
The Americans could not defeat the Communists because they were unable to
win the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people. They could not win the
support of the very people they were supposedly fighting for and in many cases
the methodologies deployed actually reduced this support further
Lack of understanding of the Vietnamese
Firstly the Americans could not understand why the Vietnamese lived as they did; this
explains why they treated them as sub-human and thus unable to win them over to
their side. They lived in mud and bamboo houses surrounded by piles of stinking
human waste for fertilising the fields and with no running water or electricity.
Johnson did not understand what mattered to the Vietnamese; a united Communist
Vietnam and instead thought that the offering of economic aid to Ho Chi Minh would
stop the war. Finally the Americans did not understand the reasons for Communist
support. People were attracted to the communal approach of harvesting and the
Communists worked hard to win them over; in complete contrast to the army of the
south.
The circumstances tended to make the Americans dislike the Vietnamese
Secondly the circumstances of the war tended to make the Americans dislike the very
people that they were supposed to be helping; which made it difficult to win. This was
due to a loss of friends in battle. Thus all villagers were treated in the same way if
expected of supporting the Viet Cong. One marine recalled ‘if they weren’t pro Viet
Cong before we got there, they sure as well were by the time we left’. The most
famous example of hatred of the Vietnamese is the My Lai massacre. In March 1968
347 unarmed civilians were killed by American soldiers; including old men, women,
teenagers and babies. Women were beaten with rifles, raped and shot. Water buffalo,
pigs and chickens were shot and dumped in wells to poison the water. War also bred
brutality and ‘Operation Phoenix’ made torture the now from 1968.
Technology alienated supporters
Thirdly American technology alienated supporters. This technology created
formidable new fighting weapons such as ‘cluster bombs’ which after exploding in
mid-air released 350-600 baby bombs which exploded upon impact into thousands of
metal pellets. Fibreglass later replaced the metal; this could not be detected by x-ray
and thus was harder to remove. This bombing forced peasants to remove away from
their homes which meant so much to them. In their search for Viet Cong the
Americans killed and wounded tens of thousands of civilians who may or may not
have been Communist sympathisers. When asked about the problem Westmoreland
65
commented: ‘They are Asians who don’t think about death the way we do’. From
1962 Agent Orange was used to defoliate the jungle so that the enemy could be seen
and so that rice crops used to feed the VC would be destroyed. These methods
alienated friendly and neutral Vietnamese.
Negative effect on Saigon
Fourthly there was the effect on Saigon. Fighting and bombing drove a third of the
peasant population out of the countryside and into the cities. Many were put in camps
where primitive sanitation bred disease. Saigon was transformed into an unsavoury
city during the American war years; drugs were sold in bars, hotels became brothels,
beggars targeted rich Americans and limbless Vietnamese victims crawled along the
streets. American dollars also distorted the economy. Taxi drivers would only stop for
Americans, and doctors earned less than waiters who served big tipping Americans
Democracy was seen as meaningless
Fifthly the talk of bringing democracy was meaningless. Many of the Vietnamese
were politically apathetic and their only concern was their day to day existence. They
did not understand American-style political democracy and it was overshadowed by
the tradition of hating foreigners. Instead they were attracted to ideals, especially the
fairer distribution of wealth that would make their life a bit easier. This was especially
the case because the American supported Saigon government was corrupt and averse
to reform. A Buddhist nun who burned herself to death was blamed on Johnson
because he helped the repressive regime. Johnson insisted that elections were held but
Thieu only managed 37% of the vote.
The South Vietnamese Army was mismanaged
Finally the Army of the Republic of Vietnam was corrupt and mismanaged. Poor
results damaged morale and led to failure. Leaders were appointed for political rather
than military reasons and spent more times fighting amongst themselves than the
enemy. The officers did not get on well with the peasants in the lowest ranks and
wages were so low that many deserted to the Communists.
The Communists were difficult to defeat
The problem of a lack of support from the people they were supposedly ‘saving’
was made worse because it was also hard to defeat the Communists. This meant
they had to use more radical methods which reduced their support further
Determination
The Communists were extremely determined and actually won admiration from their
American foes. The Vietnamese had always struggled for their existence against
nature and hostile peoples and thus ensured unusual patience in the face of adversity.
66
They could not be beaten because their aim was not to drive out the Americans but to
break their will to continue. This was never taken into account by American strategy.
Ho Chi Minh Trail
The Ho Chi Minh trail was the supply route from the North, through Cambodia and
Laos to the south. Men and materials came south and the wounded went north. Porters
carried material along several branches; if bombing destroyed one branch than
another would be used. 50,000 women were employed at anyone time to repair the
road. It was camouflaged to such an extent that trucks melted into the landscape.
Bombers perpetually sought to obliterate the trail but failed; people triumphed over
technology.
Communist ingenuity
Communist ingenuity was vitally important. In many areas supposedly controlled by
the Saigon government, the Communist Party had a web of informers and an array of
social organisations which helped to comfort, control and motivate the people. They
had a network of tunnels in which the VC could hide; in 1967 the Americans found a
maze which was just like an underground city. In Hanoi the government made
excellent preparations against air raids. When the sirens sounded the population could
vanish into concrete bolt holes; the population vanished. Two million people were in
the ‘Shock Brigades’ which repaired the effects of damage to roads and railways.
American disunity
The American forces were disunited. The marines were linked with the navy and were
not keen to obey orders from Westmoreland’s army. The Americans distrusted the
army of South Vietnam and often deployed them in unimportant places.
The short term of service meant that units never attained the feeling of unity vital to
morale and performance. This disagreement led to indiscipline; the main examples
being in 1969 when an entire company sat down on the battlefield and one refused to
go down a dangerous trail (in full view of the TV cameras). Unpopular officers were
shot in the back in action (fragging); 83 officers were killed this way between 1969
and 1971.
Many soldiers became concerned as to why they were fighting, many felt that they
had no right to be there and many hated the mistreatment of civilians.
Problems with the American army
The American army was not good enough to ensure victory
A ‘comfortable war’
Ironically the desire to keep their soldiers as comfortable as possible helps explain
their defeat. Many soldiers never actually fought, they had to organise the American
67
lifestyle for everyone else. For example running clubs and cinema. Several thousand
were sent to Saigon and Japan every week for rest and relaxation. When the last
American soldier left Vietnam there were 159 basketball courts, 90 service clubs, 85
volleyball fields, 71 swimming pools, 40 ice-cream plants and two bowling alleys.
Sometimes cigarettes and iced bear were dropped by helicopter mid-siege and one
colonel got a Silver Star bravery award for delivering Turkeys by helicopter for
Thanksgiving. Nixon admitted that they were not hardened up enough for battle.
Lack of discipline
Frustration with the war led many soldiers to seek comfort elsewhere. Around a
quarter caught sexually transmitted diseases and drug abuse became common. In 1971
5000 needed treatment for combat wounds but 20,529 for serious drug abuse. It was
hard to win a war considering the lack of army discipline.
Problems faced by the American foot soldiers
Soldiers were so keen to get out that they often hoped for a small wound; often they
shot themselves in the foot. The average age was 19 and they could not see progress
being made. They never felt safe as 20% were wounded by booby traps. The VC
wired up dead bodies with mines in the hope that Americans would trigger them. The
VC camouflaged holes in trails so Americans would fall in on sharpened bamboo
stakes. They were positioned so that the victim could not get out without tearing off
flesh. They had to carry 20-30 kg of equipment and were plagued by heat, rain and
insects. Uniforms rotted because of the dampness. Finally not knowing who the
enemy was hugely demoralising.
American military strategy
Many strategies failed to achieve their aims
‘Search and Destroy’ methods failed because it was hard to find the guerrillas. A 1967
CIA report said that less than 1% of nearly two million small unit operations
conducted between 1965 and 1967 failed to find the enemy. Six civilians tended to be
killed for every VC soldier. The large scale use of helicopters was not conducive to
hunting out guerrillas who fled upon hearing the noise. US troops would often clear
an area of VC but the Communists would move back in as soon as they moved out.
The most famous example of this is the bloody battle for ‘Hamburger Hill’. In 1969
the Americans ‘won’ but the ground was quickly retaken when they left.
Bombing failed to damage North Vietnamese morale and to disrupt the Ho Chi Minh
trail. The Johnson ignored warning about both the lack of impact and the alienation of
‘supporters’
The 1969-1970 Cambodian offensive delayed the next Hanoi attack for two years and
allowed the South Vietnamese army (AVRN) to grow stronger. However COSVN
was not found and more worryingly it forced the Communists further inland where
68
they destabilised the Cambodian government. Furthermore bombing increased the
popularity of the Cambodian Communists.
The Tet Offensive
This was a military victory but a psychological defeat. It turned public opinion
firmly against the war and limited the options of the government. This meant
they were both restricted in their efforts to win and also had to publicise some
level of withdrawal
In January 1968 Hanoi launched an unprecedented offensive against South Vietnam;
tens of thousands of PAVN (North Vietnamese Army) and VC attacked cities and
military installations in the South. The aim was to cause the Saigon government to
collapse or demonstrate such strength that America would give up
Saigon, Washington and the US public were shocked that the Communists could
move so freely and effectively in the south; the American ambassador had to flee the
embassy in Saigon in his pyjamas. It took 11,000 American and ARVN troops three
weeks to clear Saigon of Communist forces at a cost of a great many lives and
incredible damage.
Tet did not rally the South Vietnamese to help the Communists or the Saigon regime.
Thus it seemed to show that the US could stop the overthrow of the Saigon
government but could not make it viable.
This was a turning point in public opinion. One famous photo of a Saigon general
shooting a captive in the head damaged America’s faith in their side as the ‘good’
guys. An anti-war newsman reported a soldier’s unforgettable phrase about one South
Vietnamese village: ‘We had to destroy the town to save it’. The administration had
been claiming that America was winning the war but the TV pictures suggested
failure; even the US embassy was unsafe. It can be considered a psychological rather
than military defeat as it was spun into a defeat by the media. Johnson’s approval
ratings plummeted and forced him to withdraw from the 1968 Presidential race. It
forced a massive re-evaluation of governmental policy. The Joint Chiefs of Staff
demanded 20,000 more troops but Johnson refused. Clifford (Johnson’s advisor)
questioned them about their plan for victory and concluded that they did not have one.
In 1967 presidential hopeful Nixon seemed the last man likely to advocate withdrawal
from Vietnam. However he was also shocked by the Tet Offensive and realised that
there would have to be changed in American foreign policy. Thus he started to call for
the increased use of South Vietnam soldiers; a policy known as Vietnamisation;
‘peace with honour’. Other causes included the Sino-Soviet split, thus shattering the
threat of a monolithic Communist bloc, and the appeal of being a world peacemaker.
Loss of support from the Senate and Congress
69
The Senate and Congress previously allowed the president to wage war how he
saw fit. This support from the Senate and Congress was retracted which also
limited the options for the President to win and made withdrawal inevitable
Privately the administration was pessimistic and its members disagreed over policy.
Most worryingly was Robert McNamara (Secretary of Defence) change of position in
January 1966. He has been vital in the formulation of Kennedy’s policies but now
became physically and mentally tortured by the ordeal. McNamara had to be replaced.
During 1966 public and congressional support dropped dramatically. The Democratic
Party suffered sharp defeats in the mid-term elections and Vietnam was blamed. They
urged Johnson to end the war before it damaged the Great Society; although
continued to provide funding so as not to betray the boys in the field.
Meanwhile in 1967 the Hawks (militant Cold war warriors) organised Senate hearings
to force Johnson to lift restrictions on the bombing of North Vietnam and the military
blamed McNamara and Johnson for tying the military hands behind their backs, by
limiting the bombing. However congressman put more pressure on Johnson
The ‘Wise Men’ (respected and experienced group of elder statesmen – hawkish
senators) started to change their minds in March 1968; Congress also now pressed
hard for retreat.
The Cambodian offensive (1969-1970) showed the power of the President over
Congress and it was inevitable that they wanted to reassert their power. Throughout
1970 and 1971 the Senate enthusiastically supported bills to stop Nixon waging war
in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam
Public opinion
Increasing anti-war attitudes limited the options available to the president to try
to win. Withdrawal had to be introduced to placate this negative opinion
Many believe that public opinion was the main reason why Johnson decided on
retreat. However opposition was a minority.
The protests began in February 1964 when 1000 students from Yale University staged
a protest march. However the Presidential election suggests that he had near
unanimous support at this stage.
During 1965 many lectures held anti-war lectures and thousands of other civilians
participated in protests; Johnson claimed that they were financed by Communist
governments. Thousands also signed pro-Johnson petitions. In 1965 TV networks
went to Vietnam in full force and people talked of the ‘living room war’. Johnson
became concerned about the negative nature of these reports but fewer than 25%
opposed the war.
70
During 1966 Johnson had to limit his public appearances to avoid chants of: ‘Hey,
hey, LBJ, how many boys have you killed today?’ However this did not affect
governmental policy
During 1967 opposition grew and tens of thousands protested in American cities.
Martin Luther King led the opposition as they resented the disproportionate number of
black casualties. Tax rises turned more Americans against the war and in October
draft cards were burned throughout the country. Many protestors just listened to
speeches but some extremists were involved in violence outside the Pentagon; costing
$1 million. 1967 was a crucial turning point because influential newspapers and TV
stations shifted from support to opposition. A poll from October shows that 46%
wanted withdrawal but a majority wanted to get tougher. A November public
relations offensive meant that considerable support was shown in January 1968
The 1968 media coverage of the Tet Offensive was the main turning point. Walter
Cronkite, the most respected TV journalist, had been strongly supportive until a
February 1968 visit when he concluded that the war could not be won. Johnson knew
the significance as he commented: ‘If I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost America’.
Johnson’s approval rating fell from 48 to 36%. The protestors now probably played a
part disproportionate to their numbers in bringing the war to an end; it led to a loss of
confidence amongst White house officials. 78% of Americans believed that America
was not making progress and 74% believed that Johnson was not handling it well.
Thus in March 1968 Johnson announced that ‘I am taking the first step to de-escalate
the conflict’. He offered to stop bombing if Hanoi agreed to talks. Hanoi was willing
to talk but they stalled over Communist participation in the Saigon government.
Nixon started troop withdrawals in 1969; citing that public opinion gave him no
choice. This decreased protests and led to a 71% approval rating. However the
bombing of Cambodia was leaked and in October the largest anti-war protest took
place. It was to such an extent that he had to drop the 1 November deadline to Hanoi
to accept the peace terms. His ‘silent majority’ speech in November shot his rating up
to 68% but between 14 and 16 November a quarter of a million protestors took over
Washington; 40,000 carried candles past the Whitehouse, each saying the name of a
dead soldier.
The 1970 invasion of Cambodia caused unrest within the US. The ‘pitiful, helpless
giant speech’ had short term success in defusing this; when he said that Vietnamese
Communists had vital bases there. However in May 1970 the invasion caused trouble
on campuses all over America. On the 5 May four students at Kent State University,
Ohio, were shot dead by the National Guard. Some had been participating in an antiwar rally and some had been changing classes. Student rioting increased and Nixon
was forced into saying that he would get American troops out of Cambodia by June.
Government policy was being made in the streets.
71
In 1971 Nixon’s approval rating dropped to 31%. Thieu’s decision to hold an election
in South Vietnam with only one candidate did not help; America could only respond
by saying that democracy took time to develop
Why did Nixon take so long to withdraw troops from Vietnam?
Desire for ‘peace with honour’
Nixon realised the need to withdraw troops but he did not want it to be seen as a
defeat for America
In 1967 presidential hopeful Nixon seemed the last man likely to advocate withdrawal
from Vietnam. However he was also shocked by the Tet Offensive and realised that
there would have to be changed in American foreign policy. Thus he started to call for
the increased use of South Vietnam soldiers; a policy known as Vietnamisation;
‘peace with honour’. Other causes included the Sino-Soviet split, thus shattering the
threat of a monolithic Communist bloc, and the appeal of being a world peacemaker.
Strength of American power
Nixon wanted to show the strength of American power
Nixon chose Kissinger as his national security advisor and both believed that foreign
policy should be dictated by national interest. (Realpolitik) Thus they had little regard
for moral implications and did not seem to worry about civilian deaths on both sides.
The main aim of their foreign policy was the strength of American power.
Nixon sought a peace settlement that would allow Thieu to stay in power in an
independent South Vietnam. This would be achieved through vietnamisation and
through pressure on the USSR and China. The Soviets would be tempted by promises
of arms agreements and trade and the Chinese would be appeased via the
normalisation of diplomatic relations (recognition of Chinese government). Nixon
also wanted Hanoi to think that he was capable of anything (Madman theory); in order
to frighten them into making peace.
Desire for better peace terms
Nixon wanted to withdraw having achieved the greatest success possible.
However as the methods failed concessions had to be eventually made
In 1969 Nixon tried a secret bombing offensive against the Ho Chi Minh trail in
Cambodia; the aim was to sever supply lines to encourage Hanoi to accept peace and
to destroy the supposed Communist Headquarters in Cambodia (COSVN). This was
intensified in April when the bombing failed. Diplomatically he staged secret talks
72
with Hanoi (excluding Saigon) which dropped Johnson’s insistence that American
troops would only withdraw six months after the PAVN; he said it could happen
simultaneously. However it was still insisted that Thieu, not a coalition, remain in
power. Nixon started troop withdrawals to keep the home front quiet.
150,000 troops were withdrawn by 1970 (to placate the home front) but in January
1970 he escalated the bombing of Laos and Cambodia; in order to gain better peace
terms. Nixon sent troops into Cambodia in February 1970.
In 1971 Nixon was still determined not to lose the war and to gain peace with honour
and thus initiated the Lam Son offensive. The aim was to attack the Ho Chi Minh
Trail in southern Laos. This failed. However diplomatically there was more success.
The policy towards the USSR and China seemed to be working and they both urged
Hanoi not to insist on Thieu’s removal from power. Nixon offered Hanoi another
concession which was to remove troops by a set date without demanding mutual
withdrawal. In return Hanoi would stop sending additional troops to South Vietnam.
Hanoi was not impressed because there was no pledge to stop the bombing.
Determination of the Communists
The American opposition did not give up and Nixon could not withdraw fully
following their perceived successes.
In 1972 Hanoi launched a spring offensive which crumbled the AVRN; this
discredited the policy of Vietnamisation in a presidential election year. Nixon
responded with bombing ‘like never before’. Nixon intended to get America out ‘with
honour’ by disguising concessions (the PAVN would be allowed to stay in the south)
with simultaneous shows of force. Thus the bombing continued throughout the May
1972 Moscow summit. Nixon’s combination of diplomatic and military pressure
seemed to be working and both sides agreed to compromise. Thieu tearfully had to
accept the Communists as a legitimate political force in South Vietnam. Nixon gave
Thieu his ‘absolute assurance’ that if Hanoi broke the peace he would take ‘swift and
severe retaliatory action’. In December the bombing started again; there was no public
explanation but it was probably to reassure Thieu.
In January 1973 the Paris Peace Accords declared a ceasefire throughout Vietnam.
Communists over run South Vietnam in 1975 with no help from America
73
Which were the main turning points in the Vietnam War?
1953:
Domino Theory is coined
March 1954:
Surrender of the French
1954:
Geneva Conference
1955:
Ngo Dinh Diem seizes power
1959:
Reactivation of the Ho Chi Minh trail
1960:
Formation of Viet Cong
1961:
Khrushchev’s ‘liberation movement’ speech
1964:
Gulf of Tonkin
1965:
Arrival of troops
1966:
McNamara’s change of position
1967:
Change of position by the influential media
1968:
Tet Offensive
1969:
Troop withdrawals begin
1969:
Secret bombing campaign against the Ho Chi Minh Trail
1970:
Shootings at Kent State University
1971:
Lam Son Offensive
1972:
Hanoi’s Spring Offensive
1973:
Paris Peace Accords
74