Drawing upon assigned lectures, films, and course readings, answer the following question: How did the Civil Rights Movement, the New Left, and the Vietnam War change America?

Other Pages

Please only use this essay as a reference, any suspicious tutor only needs to search the net with a key sentence and will find this site immediately. You are more than welcome to quote passages, and use relevant referencing.

The 1960s were quite probably the most socially tumultuous decade of the 20^th century for the United States. Although it can be argued that not much political change occurred, it appears quite clear that the Civil Rights Movement, the New Left and the Vietnam War changed America at a much more fundamental basis: by changing the mentality of Americans. The Civil Rights Movement impacted on America at not only a political level, with the passing of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Bill in 1965, but also having a profound impact upon how African-Americans viewed themselves as part of society as well as how they were viewed. The development of a ‘distinct movement culture, which owed more to African origins and urban folkways than to the black church’ can be attributed to the social impact of the ‘Black Power’ movement which can be seen as one part of the Civil Rights Movement.[1] The New Left developed as a student based movement concerned with correcting the injustices and contradictions they saw in American society. Although the New Left only had a mixed success, as their aspirations for participatory democracy never came to fruition, ‘it is striking that while “nothing” was accomplished by the New Left in its short life, everything was different afterward.’[2] Conservative ideology had to be modified because of the impact of the new left, the public was no longer willing to automatically defer to their government as they were now suspicious of the motives and activities undertaken by their government. The effects of the Vietnam War highlight this suspicion as, for the first time in US history, a war was not being won and was not receiving unanimous support at home. As a result the US softened their foreign policy of containment as the American public became more sceptical about using force as an instrument of foreign policy. Throughout the 1960s the social change that took place can be viewed as a reaction to the constraints and consensus of the 1950s as the status quo was no longer blindly accepted.

The Civil Rights Movement can be divided into two main parts: the early freedom movement in the south which was based around the rejection of ‘Jim Crow’ and the abolition of legalised segregation; and later in the 1960s a more nationwide struggle for liberation through the ideology of ‘Black Power’. The Civil Rights Movement did not begin in the 1960s; in fact it had been present since the emancipation of African-American slaves nearly 100 years before. However the Brown vs. Board of Education ruling of 1954 has been viewed as the event which kick-started the ‘Civil Rights Movement’ as seen by historians today. The ruling, which stated that segregation in public schools was unconstitutional because it deprived African-Americans of the equal protection guaranteed by the 14^th amendment, had a huge impact on the US because it effectively ruled that all segregation was unconstitutional. The notion of ‘separate but equal’, the foundation of the ‘Jim Crow’ ideology in the south, was utterly rejected by the Supreme Court in this ruling on the basis that it creates a feeling of inferiority that runs in conflict with the US constitution.[3] Throughout the next ten years, various protests including the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1956, the lunch-bar sit-ins of 1960 and the freedom rides of 1961 brought the issue of Civil Rights to the attention of the federal government in the hope of getting a more wide-reaching ruling than that of Brown vs. Board of Education that would apply to all public places. Students became involved in the protest movement through the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), and their involvement would be mirrored in other protest movements in the 1960s.

Response from the Federal Government always came reluctantly, as many politicians were afraid of the white backlash that may occur as the result of a sympathetic attitude towards the Civil Rights Movement. However, as the protests became more widespread and increasingly effective at broadcasting the contradiction between America’s position as ‘the leader of the free world’ and the reality of segregation, the Federal Government finally resolved to pass the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Bill of 1965 which effectively prohibited segregation in the south. It seemed as though the Civil Rights Movement had achieved its objective, there had been major political change in the south with the abolition of ‘Jim Crow’ segregation.

However for many African-Americans the political change meant little as ‘informal’ segregation persisted not only in the South, but also throughout the US. Stokley Carmichael spoke for many when he declared that ‘the only way we gonna stop them white men from whuppin’ us is to take over. We been saying freedom for six years and we ain’t got nothin’. What we gonna start saying now is Black Power!’[4] This fundamental shift in the Civil Rights Movement was the result of African-Americans realising that political change was not enough to overcome the injustice and inequality that put them at a disadvantage. ‘The Southern-based freedom movement began to change into a broader nationwide struggle for black liberation’ in the mid-1960s as a result of the increasing rejection of ‘integration’ as the solution to the plight of African-Americans.[5] ‘Black Power’ rather than ‘Freedom Now’ became the slogan of the Civil Rights movement, as the focus of the movement shifted towards racial pride, racial identity and the ‘democratic aspirations for collective self-determination and political control of black communities.’[6] As the emphasis of the Civil Rights Movement moved towards black empowerment rather than legal equality the effects on America changed as well. Black Studies programmes, which are now offered in many colleges and universities around the US, are the result of the ‘Black Power’ movement as is the growth of African-American art, literature, music, drama and film. The culture of black liberation has created a rich heritage to take pride in, and a collective identity for African-Americans to celebrate – possibly just as important as the political implications of the freedom movement in the early 1960s.[7]

The superheated ideological atmosphere of the 1950s, coupled with the demographic phenomenon of the ‘baby boom’ gave rise to a new political and social movement throughout the 1960s that has been termed the ‘New Left’. The ‘baby boomers’ grew up in an age of unprecedented prosperity and optimism, and did not have to worry about economic security as much as previous generations. A mood of conformity, ever-present throughout the 1950s, continued into the early 1960s marginalizing any left political action or critique of the Cold War, segregation in the South, or a lack of true political representation. In 1960 the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) emerged, and developed into the focal point of the New Left. Their political aspirations, outlined in the 1963 Port Huron Statement, were based around the idea of ‘participatory democracy’ and that the goal of humanity should be ‘a concern not with image or popularity, but with finding a meaning in life that is personally authentic.’[8]

The student base of the New Left was a continuation of the youth culture which was emerging in the 1960s. The Civil Rights Movement had a student perspective in the form of SNCC, and SDS was a continuation of a general trend throughout the 1960s where young, educated, white middle-class Americans became politically active and socially aware of the political and social situation in America. SDS was one of the main beneficiaries of an increase in anti-war protests following Lyndon Johnson’s escalation of the Vietnam War as its numbers grew immensely. However this was not a cohesive movement, and SDS became a way that activists could pursue their various goals on a national level, not an organisation that would convert non-protestors into activists: ‘students did not become activists because they joined SDS; they joined SDS because they were already activists.’[9] As the 1960s progressed the divisions became even more marked eventually leading to its demise in 1969. The non-cohesive nature of SDS was definitely a factor in the New Left’s lack of true political change, because they could not all agree on the specific political goals. However the wide appeal of SDS and the New Left as a whole meant that America was changed in a subtler, but perhaps equally important manner.

The New Left changed the political and social mentality of Americans; the critique of American society that emerged from the New Left has been continued by many with little notion of where these ideas originated. Although the aspirations of the Port Huron Statement were never fulfilled, the America which emerged from the 1960s was most definitely different to that of the 1950s by becoming more politically and culturally contentious, as well as more open, just and egalitarian.[10] More and more Americans began to question the status quo following the 1960s, racial and sexual discrimination became important political issues as the population began to question their own beliefs, as well as questioning the legitimacy of established institutions and authority. In response conservatives have had to modify their policies and ideas because the population was no longer willing to automatically defer to authority, the New Right has been prevented ‘from imposing its version of morality on law and society’ because of a vigorous libertarian spirit, which is a legacy of the 1960s.[11]

The legacy of the 1960s can be seen most clearly in intellectual life, perceptions of race and of gender, foreign policy and the language of politics itself.[12] As the result of being primarily a student movement, former New Left activists have gone on to become important and influential members of society. By expressing their opinions as academics, journalists and media specialists, New Left ideology has remained in the public eye and is still a force in American politics and society today. It is quite revealing that although the New Left was fiercely criticised by the establishment during the 1960s, many of their ideas have become mainstream and even ‘politically correct’ by the end of the 20^th century – a similar scenario to the legacy of the Civil Rights Movement.

The Vietnam War also had a substantial impact on the mentality of Americans: according to Arnold Isaacs ‘the Vietnam War lingers in the national memory hovering over our politics, our culture, and our long, unfinished debate over who we are and what we believe.’[13] Before Vietnam there was a general consensus about American foreign policy: few disagreed with the decision to enter World War II in 1941 and throughout the 1950s the population had been, by in large, supportive of the Cold War. Moreover, the attitude towards war of many Americans was based upon romantic notions of bravery and heroism that had been nurtured through the 1950s by John Wayne films and World War II reminiscence. Many Americans felt that ‘serving in the military was what was expected of me’[14] or that they ‘never imagined I would shirk my duty’[15]. In the aftermath of World War II there had been an ‘upsurge of energy’ that led to unprecedented prosperity and optimism which was reflected in foreign policy as America moved to the centre of the new international system. As the self-proclaimed ‘leader of the free world’ many Americans believed that they had a duty to protect other nations from Communism and oppression. It was with the belief that they were doing the right thing for themselves and the Vietnamese that America entered the Vietnam War on a large scale in 1965.

However as the Vietnam War progressed this mood began to change. Victory was not as forthcoming as many expected, just as the method of warfare was new to many American soldiers. Quite quickly, the attitudes of soldiers in Vietnam began to change: ‘what had begun [in March] as an adventurous expedition had turned into an exhausting, indecisive war of attrition in which we fought for no other cause than our own survival.’[16] Soldiers became alienated as the South Vietnamese peasants, for whom they were fighting, were often unfriendly or infiltrated by the Viet Cong. It was often impossible for the soldiers to tell who was friendly and who was not, because of the infiltration. As a result there were several massacres of civilians, which did not improve the morale of the American troops. Increasingly the troops began to question their involvement in Vietnam because of their hostile reception and the inability of military leaders to offer a conclusive reason why they were fighting this war.

The fall of Saigon in 1975 shocked the American population as they realised that they had lost the war. American expectations in 1965 were that a typically victorious war would unfold, that Communism would be defeated, and that freedom would be preserved. However as the conflict developed in unexpected ways many of the beliefs that Americans held about themselves began to be questioned: ‘it was some vital piece of America’s vision of itself – trust, self-confidence, social order, belief in the benevolence and ordained success of American power – which had disappeared in the mountain mists and vine-tangled jungles of Vietnam, and which so many Americans desperately wanted to get back.’[17] After Vietnam, many Americans believed that the nation entered a new era that had lost the optimism of the 1950s, instead replaced with divisions, uncertainties, and moral confusion.

As a result of the ‘Vietnam debacle’ important changes were made in American diplomacy that weakened the assumptions of the Cold War: that the United States was the best nation in the world. The foreign policy of containment was softened, to ensure that America did not become involved in another Vietnam War, while ‘Americans became sceptical about the use of force as an instrument of foreign policy and acquired a new sense of the limits of American power abroad.’[18] This distrust of war as a diplomatic tool had direct political consequences: ‘Congress moved from almost instinctive support of the president’s foreign policy before 1965 to aggressive scepticism by 1969’, in future diplomatic crises methods other than force became popular because of the legacy of Vietnam.[19] Even throughout the general population it became acceptable to criticise the use of force, and socially acceptable to be a pacifist – quite a different scenario to what had been the case in the 1950s.

The Civil Rights Movement, the New Left, and the Vietnam War all had a profound effect on America during the 1960s ensuring that the nation which emerged in 1970 was vastly different to that of 1960. Notions of ‘politically correct’ substantially changed: racism, sexism, militarism and authoritarianism were rejected by the American population in favour of a more egalitarian, just, free, and cynical society. The post-World War II optimism and prosperity of the 1950s was replaced by criticism of the status quo throughout the decade, and the revelation that America was not the perfect nation, as had been claimed the previous decade. In some ways America grew up in the 1960s, losing its childhood innocence but gaining a more informed view of the world.

Joshua Arbury

2522603

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Brown v. Board of Education Ruling, 1954.

Burns, Stewart. ‘We Shall All Be Free’, Social Movements of the 1960s: Searching for Democracy, Boston, 1990. pp.1-52.

Interviews with John, Mike, MM, Eugene, Helen, Nick, and Robyn.

Isserman, Maurice and Michael Kazin, ‘The Contradictory Legacy of the Sixties’, in Griffith and Baker, eds., Major Problems in American History since 1945, 2^nd ed., Boston, 2001, pp. 343-358.

King, Martin Luther Jr., ‘I have a dream’, 1963.

Neu, Charles E. ‘The Vietnam War and the Transformation of America’, in Neu, ed., After Vietnam: Legacies of a War, Baltimore, 2000, pp.1-23.

The Port Huron Statement, 1962.

[1] Stewart Burns, ‘We Shall All Be Free’, Social Movements of the 1960s: Searching for Democracy, Boston, 1990, p.50.

[2] Maurice Isserman and Michael Kazin, ‘The Contradictory Legacy of the Sixties’, in Griffith and Baker, eds., Major Problems in American History since 1945, 2^nd ed., Boston, 2001, p.345.

[13] Charles E. Neu, ‘The Vietnam War and the Transformation of America’, in Neu, ed., After Vietnam: Legacies of a War, Baltimore, 2000, p.2.