Historical note: 50 years ago today/yesterday, civil rights events

[Craig234]

On June 11, 1963, Alambama Governor George Wallace infamously stood in the doorway to block the admission of black studen James Meredith as required by Federal Law.

That evening, President Kennedy gave what is in my opinion of of the better presidential speeches in history - the description I like of it is that it is the first time in American history that a President made the issue of equality in rights for blacks a moral issue for the country.

Again in my opinion, this was a crucial turning point in the civil rights movement that paved the way for the passage of civil rights laws the next couple of years.

I watched one of the members of the civil rights movement interview this week on that speech, and he called it a 'nuclear explosion' that fundamentally shifted national opinions.

The speech itself was almost spur of the moment - Kennedy had Theodore Sorensen begin drafting it a few hours before it was given, editing it until just before giving it.

But this was a central cause for Sorensen, since he was a high school student in Nebraska who, in a family who had progressive values, had fought for racial justice even then. He had many years or preparation for a speech like this one, and it showed and added greatly to the speech.

Remarkably, this speech was given one day after what may be Kennedy's greatest speech and in my opinion one of the few best ever - Kennedy's address on the cold war, in which he broke new ground in a 'peace speech' calling on Americans to stop considering Soviets only as enemies. That speech deserves its own thread.

President Kennedy did not plan for civil rights to be an important part of his presidency. He did not like the idea of Martin Luther King's 'I have a dream speech' in the capitol, he opposed the freedom riders. He grew and became the presidential champion the movement needed.

At the time, the south was a very uneasy ally with their fellow Democrats. They were passionately against civil rights changes. This was a time of white mobs regularly beating anyone who protested for civil rights. The President's personal representative visiting the South was beaten into unconsciousness by a mob. And Kennedy's entire legislative program was directly threatened by Southern Democrats - yet he led on the issue, eventually.

Of course, the passage of civil rights laws under LBJ did lead to the Republicans' 'souther strategy' that turned the South Republican after a century as Democrats, by pandering to their racism and giving them a welcoming home. But it was Kennedy who made that choice to put the right thing of fighting racism ahead even of the threat of losing the south - and, as Johnson noted, threatening their ability to win the White House, which the pretty much certainly lost in 1968 over the south's backlash, giving us Republicans starting with Nixon.

Hours after the speech, civil rights leader Medgar Evaes was assassinated outside his home, after midnight, gunned down in his driveway.

I'd suggest watching the Kennedy speech. I think it's better to watch than read.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/LH8F_0Mzv0e6Ro1yEm74Ng.aspx

The New York Times wrote about the speech:

JUNE 11, 1963, may not be a widely recognized date these days, but it might have been the single most important day in civil rights history...

The speech also set the tone for how presidents should address civil rights. No longer could they dance around the issue, qualifying it as a strictly regional or legal or economic issue (though many would later try to do so). The power of the White House, and of the federal government, was on the side of the struggle.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/opinion/kennedys-civil-rights-triumph.html?_r=0

Rachel Maddow once again did a good piece, focusing on the anniversary and espicially Medgar Evers.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/#52175143

 

[Anarchist420]

JFK merely did it for political reasons, because he ran to the right of Nixon in 1960 and the former voted with Southern Democrats (on racist privileges legislation anyway) while in the Senate.

 

[nanette1985]

Thanks for reminding me that I'm old.

 

[EagleKeeper]

JFK merely did it for political reasons, because he ran to the right of Nixon in 1960 and the former voted with Southern Democrats (on racist privileges legislation anyway) while in the Senate.

Evidence that he ran to the right of Nixon back in '60

 

[Craig234]

Evidence that he ran to the right of Nixon back in '60

He didn't run to the right of Nixon. Words mean different things to Anarchist.

However, at the time of the 1960 election - the last time this is true - the parties were more equal in sharing black support, with Democrats normally getting about 70%.

Of course by 1964, the Democrats took the lead with the black vote by supporting the end of segregation, while Republicans welcomed the backlash against civil rights voters.

There are a couple of areas it could be said Kennedy 'ran to the right'. The one it can really be argued to the right of Nixon was Cuba, where Kennedy called for stronger measures, while Nixon - who knew of the secret plan to support an invasion of Cuba - felt he could not publically endorse an invasion in light of that. He suspected Kennedy knew of the plan and was taking advantage of the situation, as I recall.

The second is with the 'missile gap', in which Kennedy said the US was behind the Soviets in nuclear missiles. The Soviets launching Sputnik increased the sense of being behind the Soviets. Whatever the reasons Kennedy had that view, he was incorrect as he quickly learned after becoming President - the US had hundreds of missiles to a handful for the Soviets as I recall.

Overall, though, Kennedy was to the left of Nixon on nearly every issue.

Things were 'less partisan' in those days, and both Nixon and Kennedy were somewhat centrists on many policies for their parties. Nixon was most famous for his anti-communist activities, which were pretty popular, while Kennedy wasn't especially identified with policies but made the theme of his campaign the need to get the country moving.

Kennedy helped himself with the black vote by calling Martin Luther King's wife while he was in jail. Nixon's running mate Lodge promised a black would be appointed to the cabinet, but reportedly that did not win favor with blacks, who viewed it as pandering and symbolic.

Kennedy had a broad liberal program, though he didn't run as a 'liberal', which was a different wing of the Democratic party. He supported anti-poverty measures - his promised first act was to increase food assistance in West Virginia - and labor, and while he was something of a cold warrior, peace through strength politician in his public image, he also happened to stealthily be a very pro-peace candidate generally, even fighting his own hawkish aides. Nixon was very much the pro-corporate militant.

There actually wasn't that large a gap between their campaigns - to the point that Arthur Schlesinger wrote a small book trying to point out the differences.

But I don't think it can be said Kennedy 'ran to the right of Nixon' except the exceptions above.

Civil rights were not a large part of Kennedy's campaign or agenda when he became President. He grew into the champion for that issue he was by 1963.

Most of the strongest racism in the country was in the south, which was the 'solid Democratic South' at the time, at odds with Republicans and non-southern Democrats.

Those southerners were able to threaten nearly all of Kennedy's legislatice agenda if he pushed them on civil rights - and he held back on it the first couple of years.

Nixon's 'true colors' on the issue were clear when he ran next time, and adopted the 'southern strategy' to embrace disaffected southerners angry over civil rights bills.

Those same politics were in effect for Reagan, who declared that Jefferson Davis was a hero of his and vetoed civil rights legislation (his veto was overridden).

 

[OGOC]

Of course by 1964, the Democrats took the lead with the black vote by supporting the end of segregation, while Republicans welcomed the backlash against civil rights voters.

Ah, good ol' Democrats. The party of slavery, founders of the KKK, and filibusters of the Civil Rights Act.

 

[Craig234]

Ah, good ol' Democrats. The party of slavery, founders of the KKK, and filibusters of the Civil Rights Act.

And of course, that's completely misleading, because it was about the south, not the party.

The same people who were racist as Democrats are now racist as Republicans.

You're right, the Democratic Party had the racist south for a century after the civil war - the part you left out to mislead is that the south then went Republican.

And of course, the entire Democratic party didn't have the same view.

Look at the votes for the civil rights bills - the group who voted for them most was non-southern Democrats, followed by Republicans.

Almost all of the no votes came from Southerners.

 

[OGOC]

The same people who were racist as Democrats are now racist as Republicans.

Like good ol' Robert Byrd. Exalted Cyclops of the KKK and Democrat hero until the year 2010.

http://www.black-and-right.com/the-democrat-race-lie/
http://www.black-and-right.com/2010/03/19/the-dixiecrat-myth/

 

[Craig234]

Like good ol' Robert Byrd. Exalted Cyclops of the KKK and Democrat hero until the year 2010.

http://www.black-and-right.com/the-democrat-race-lie/
http://www.black-and-right.com/2010/03/19/the-dixiecrat-myth/

Byrd was a terrible racist, several decades ago; positions he apologized for and repudiated, reflected in his later votes.

 

[Anarchist420]

Evidence that he ran to the right of Nixon back in '60

Promised tax cuts, was more hawkish/anti-communist than Richard "can't we just give peace a chance?" Nixon, and didn't support the Eisenhower Admin civil rights legislation when he was a U.S. Senator.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Promised tax cuts, was more hawkish/anti-communist than Richard "can't we just give peace a chance?" Nixon, and didn't support the Eisenhower Admin civil rights legislation when he was a U.S. Senator.

Yes, but Craig presented a number of other ways in which he was far to the left of Nixon; care to address those?

 

[Jaskalas]

President Kennedy did not plan for civil rights to be an important part of his presidency. He did not like the idea of Martin Luther King's 'I have a dream speech' in the capitol, he opposed the freedom riders. He grew and became the presidential champion the movement needed.

A heartwarming tale. A President with such honest moral convictions that when given the opportunity he stood for Civil Liberties. This country deserves, but sadly lacks, such a President today.

 

[Craig234]

A heartwarming tale. A President with such honest moral convictions that when given the opportunity he stood for Civil Liberties. This country deserves, but sadly lacks, such a President today.

The book 'Counselor' by Theodore Sorensen tells more of the story, including his family's of being a progressive family fignting for racial equality in Nebraska in earlier decades.

Sorensen, of course, was Kennedy's speechwriter and close advisor, who wrote the draft - on almost no notice - of that famous civil rights speech.

He'd been passionate on the issue since his teen years, and borrowed some of the same themes from his speech as a teen on the issue.

If you'd like to see an interview of Sorensen, I found an interesting one from this post:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/204799-1